-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
hans
P631
..and the sunshade for the pano roof
..and WiFi
..and onboard storage for music
..and foglights
but I still trust that they will deliver.
Good point, I left out WiFi and onboard music. That's it though, right?:smile: It certainly is taking a long time. I'm hoping the massive update they've talked about sometime this year handles many of these issues but all we can do is wait I guess.
Re: the onward storage - heard from a tesla rep that the reason they are not releasing that yet is because they are using up all the space for enormous amounts of detailed data logging. Not really sure what the implication of that is....whether or not they are remotely collecting this data (which I thought shouldn't happen unless you are a reporter) or they are just logging everything locally and on the chance you have an issue all the data is there readily available to inspect. If the former, its possible this is why they are not making us pay for 3G yet (enormous data usage), if the latter (or rather in both cases) if the drive is mostly full of logs with low space and high amount of overwriting that could explain why the console seems sluggish. (Drives that are full run slower due to fragmentation as well as scattered reads/writes on the platter edges.). Random thoughts.
what's the holdup on wifi, anyone heard anything on this front?
also, quick data point. i'm out of town and my car is hanging in the garage, i had to remotely (my brother) install v4.5 so i could use the charge level slider to set the car to ~50%. that's done and i've been tracking the slow charge bleed as it gets down to 50 from its usual/former 93% standard charge, and i thought i'd point out that the drain i'm seeing isn't as bad as what it used to be. i was getting about a mile an hour in overnight drain, so close to 24 miles in a day -- the last three days i've checked it's doing about 8 miles in a 24 hour period. much better. i am in socal, so no temperature challenges to speak of, but even so.. a big difference from what i was seeing a month or two ago. do others have this experience?
also, quick data point. i'm out of town and my car is hanging in the garage, i had to remotely (my brother) install v4.5 so i could use the charge level slider to set the car to ~50%. that's done and i've been tracking the slow charge bleed as it gets down to 50 from its usual/former 93% standard charge, and i thought i'd point out that the drain i'm seeing isn't as bad as what it used to be. i was getting about a mile an hour in overnight drain, so close to 24 miles in a day -- the last three days i've checked it's doing about 8 miles in a 24 hour period. much better. i am in socal, so no temperature challenges to speak of, but even so.. a big difference from what i was seeing a month or two ago. do others have this experience?
8 miles per day seems about right. In steady state - when you get down to 50% - it will be, I think 8 or 10% higher than this because of losses from charging.
However your "old" numbers, 24 miles per day, seem very high to me. That would correspond to a loss of around 7.5 kwh per day, which is roughly twice what people with wall meters typically report.
I've had my car unplugged since Sunday night (replacing the concrete driveway). I've also lost about 8 miles per day. It's interesting that your car seems to be drawing down the battery at the same rate as my car even though yours is plugged in and mine is not. I thought one of the new features of 4.5 was that the car used power from the grid rather than the battery when plugged in.
I believe the release notes for 4.5 say that it will draw shore power for climate control and battery heating. My experience is that the car still wakes up to top off the main battery pack roughly once every 24 hours. But the OP set the slider to 50%, so his car isn't topping off, and won't until the SOC falls to 50%.
yes, i think it would but that it doesn't need any significant power at this point. until it charges it doesn't really care what the battery temp is, and i assume that the cellular data radio and minimal processors, running the same in both machines, constitute such a small drain as to not trigger shore power..? i think this is preferable behavior as i wouldn't want the car to take this minimum current necessary from the wall all the time and never deplete the battery. i'd rather a slow steady drain and then charge, than have it sit at some static soc. as far as my thinking goes...
Out of town 5 days and seeing 5-7 mi/drain per 24 hr period. I thought that was pretty bad as I just got my car last week, but it sounds like an improvement from several months ago.
3000 wasted miles. It has to be fixed.
My MS loses 3KW a day. I can get 3-4 miles from each kW. So, I use/lose a minimum of 1095 kW per year. Or 3200 to 4300 miles a year are lost from doing nothing more than just sitting. I only drive 6000-8000 miles a year. So half of my energy use is lost. Equal to charging my MS 12 times with nothing to show for it.
I am hopeful that TMC can fix this vampire loss sooner rather than later.
My MS loses 3KW a day. I can get 3-4 miles from each kW. So, I use/lose a minimum of 1095 kW per year. Or 3200 to 4300 miles a year are lost from doing nothing more than just sitting. I only drive 6000-8000 miles a year. So half of my energy use is lost. Equal to charging my MS 12 times with nothing to show for it.
I am hopeful that TMC can fix this vampire loss sooner rather than later.
3-4 kwh/day loss is what I reported 8 months and 500+ posts ago when I started this thread. So it isn't going to be fixed "sooner".
mitch672
Active Member
so with that loss you are out about $72 dollars a year on electricityDo you have a 60 or 85 ? Have you reached out to tesla service regarding this? If so what was there response?
At .15/KWh (loaded rate with transmission charges, generation charges, meter charge, customer charge etc), it's more like $164/year in my area. That's not the big issue though; the larger problem is, you park your Model S at long term airport parking, not plugged into an EVSE, you go away for a month, your car is nearly discharged, probably unable to get you home. That's not a great scenario, and it's one issue you don't have with an ICE. They need to get the vampire load reduced significantly for the Model S to be considered "as good as an ICE", so far, "fail" on this issue.
+1. I was on vacation for nearly 3 weeks. Just got back into the country. If i had driven the Model S, I'd have a no miles left to get me home. There's no guarantee in the airports I frequent that I'll get a charging spot. Now that the trip is over and done, time to get rid of our last ICE vehicle.
I agree with you that not being able to leave your car unplugged for long periods poses a practical problem. But the wastefulness of running the power hungry processors for the screen 24 hours day is also an environmental problem. The vampire drain significantly increases the total energy consumption of the Model S (accounting for about 25% of the total energy used if you drive 12k miles per year) and increases the carbon footprint by a corresponding amount. The "US grid average" carbon footprint of the S is quite good for a car its size but falls short of the Prius. A big part of the difference is the vampire drain.
so with that loss you are out about $72 dollars a year on electricity
it drops my miles per kw from 3 to 1.5 miles per kW. That is a bummer
I'm really curious. HOW MUCH is acceptable to you guys?
I mean, if you purchase a new TV for example - You would see that there is a value for active energy consumption and another value for standby energy consumption.
That standby consumption will be higher for more feature rich TVs that can accept other various commands or provide other services to a network etc while on standby versus the traditional TV who's standby mode can only accept one command: "Power on".
I would think "standby consumption" while plugged in would be treated differently from "vampire loss" while left unplugged.
So once again, HOW MUCH standby consumption and HOW MUCH vampire loss would be acceptable to you considering that Tesla has built you a car that can report its location, state of charge, temperature etc. continuously to you while on standby and also awaits your command to lock/unlock the car along with other commands as well as having to manage the thermal dynamics of the battery etc. and keep "start up time" to a minimum so that you can just hop in and go without waiting for a "Please wait..." message before you drive?
On top of that, would you be willing to sacrifice your app-link and reporting capabilities etc. for a much lower consumption? What other standby system/feature would you be willing sacrifice; to be 'shut down' while on standby/unplugged for a lower consumption/discharge?
Some of the recent posts just read like nobody seems to care about all these standby features and we just keep writing about how many miles we're losing while the car provides these features (so the features should be powered by thin air so we don't lose our miles? or sacrifice all standby features?)
I mean, if you purchase a new TV for example - You would see that there is a value for active energy consumption and another value for standby energy consumption.
That standby consumption will be higher for more feature rich TVs that can accept other various commands or provide other services to a network etc while on standby versus the traditional TV who's standby mode can only accept one command: "Power on".
I would think "standby consumption" while plugged in would be treated differently from "vampire loss" while left unplugged.
So once again, HOW MUCH standby consumption and HOW MUCH vampire loss would be acceptable to you considering that Tesla has built you a car that can report its location, state of charge, temperature etc. continuously to you while on standby and also awaits your command to lock/unlock the car along with other commands as well as having to manage the thermal dynamics of the battery etc. and keep "start up time" to a minimum so that you can just hop in and go without waiting for a "Please wait..." message before you drive?
On top of that, would you be willing to sacrifice your app-link and reporting capabilities etc. for a much lower consumption? What other standby system/feature would you be willing sacrifice; to be 'shut down' while on standby/unplugged for a lower consumption/discharge?
Some of the recent posts just read like nobody seems to care about all these standby features and we just keep writing about how many miles we're losing while the car provides these features (so the features should be powered by thin air so we don't lose our miles? or sacrifice all standby features?)
Similar threads
