Quite disappointment with my new Model 3's range. Should I be?

[Spacep0d]

Dear Forum Members,

I hope you can help. I'm more than a little disappointment with the range I'm getting from my new Model 3 Long Range Dual Motor. I suspect this is a topic that has been beaten to death, but I'm having a bit of a sulk about it this morning. I took delivery of the car at the end of December and have been driving it on my daily commute for the last 4 weeks. I have extrapolated at my average battery consumption vs. distance travelled and find that the car is only getting ~250 - 260 miles (or ~80% of estimate). I attach some behavioral and performance data below:

Daily Commute:

• Charge at work during the day to 80% (charge at 6.16kwh/h)
• Inbound journey (29.8 miles) @ c. 7pm so avoiding stop-start traffic
  • 2.3 miles of sub-urban driving to freeway
    
  • 24.0 miles of freeway driving (avg speed 65 - 70 mph on the 101)
  • 3.5 miles of urban driving, upward gradient
• Battery at 68% after inbound journey
• Batter at 67% at the start of outbound

• Outbound journey (31.0 miles) @ 5:45am so avoiding traffic again.

• 2.5 miles of urban driving (down hill)
• 26.3 miles of freeway driving (avg. speed 65 - 70 mph on the 101)
• 2.2 miles of sub-urban driving to work

• Battery at 57% at the end

Based on these numbers, that's 60.8 miles per day, consuming 23-24% of the battery pack. Grossing these numbers up, that implies a range of 253 to 264 miles, which is substantially less that what I was hoping for.

I've tried to root-cause the issue, and I imagine it is either:

• Driving style (but I'm driving between San Francisco and the Peninsula on the 101 - so pretty gentle driving at or around the speed limit.
• Battery pack not storing the energy it should
• Some sort of power leakage somewhere that is depleting the battery pack.

I have a service appointment booked, but should like to get the collective wisdom of the community. What do you think? Am I being realistic in my expectations?

Thank you for your help!

Charles

Could the fact that San Francisco is extremely hilly affect range at all?

 

[Spacep0d]

I don't even see 'range' as the issue with cars like the Tesla AWD Long-Range so much as the relative sparsity of Superchargers (compared to gas stations) and charge time. Safety could possibly be a concern, but I think Supercharger banks are way safer than gas stations (depending on the neighborhood).

We already know the V3 Superchargers will deliver 100 miles in 7 minutes. This puts it much closer to one's wait time at gas stations if one is in a hurry and just wants to make it back home after a quick 'top off'. If there were more charging stations and faster charge times even with existing ranges then there'd be less of an issue. Because of this, driving with an EV just takes more planning and it's helpful to have accurate expectations (which is why this forum is so helpful).

As relatively early adopters, I think this is just part of the downside of having an EV but it's what will make wider-EV adoption possible, and wider adoption means more charging infrastructure. Battery tech will continue to improve, but it's pretty darned good right now.

My sportbike only gets about 150 miles to a full tank. This means a lot more stops, but I benefit from an entrenched infrastructure of gas stations. Without this, I too would have serious range anxiety.

 

[G26okie]

It's right in line with what I get. My commute is a very similar setup to yours except 35-37ish miles each way (luckily only two days a week).

I usually do around 80mph on the highway portion and use 14% battery on each leg. This also about lines up with the range and "gas tank %" of my previous ice car.

 

[jfinephilly]

Hi OP. You're fine, as long as you're in a colder (less than room temperature basically) area right now.

Around freezing temps, both our previous gas vehicles did 20% worse for efficiency in Winter. The Model 3 is about 35% worse because the heat isn't free like in a gas car.

Below that and in deeper snow, gas was still about 30% at worst but I've got as bad 50% in the Model 3. Double energy usage. Poor conditions are a death sentence for EV range, just keep that in mind.

In addition, standby usage or preheating really adds up in the cold. I've learned that on days where I'm using the car for most of the day (not necessarily long range, hops here and there) it can be as bad as a third of the rated range. This is because of all the heating and then heat loss. Just something to be aware of.

In summer we get better (130 Wh/km) than rated (about 150 Wh/km) which is nice.



I'd like this sentiment to end in the community. Let me make a comparison to communicate why I think this is isn't a helpful argument.

"Efficiency doesn't matter because there are gas stations everywhere. I'll get the biggest jacked up V8 coal rollin' truck with 3000lbs of sand in the back because why not if I can make it anywhere with gas stations".​

Efficiency matters not just because of range. Due to all the extra electricity usage in Winter, we're getting dangerously close to a third rate tier (over $1/kWh... yeah) in which case I need to take a step back. I didn't even know that tier existed before. We're on hydroelectric so I'm less concerned about my electricity impacts, but financial impacts are looking real. And if we were somewhere else with dirtier power, honestly the inefficiency we've experienced wouldn't look enviable compared to an efficient gas hatchback anymore (what we were driving before).

Of course, I'm coming at this from wanting to drive a more "green" vehicle because our situations require a lot of driving. Those who just want a fancy techy fast car may not care about this.



This is nearly exactly what we do, except we're only going to 90% on weekends we expect to do more driving. Minimal range degradation after 25,000km, but it's still very early!

There are also plenty of chargers and the Nav makes it pretty easy to find and plan for Supercharging. Most can also charge at home - unless you have a gas station in your driveway this isn’t a luxury offered to ICE drivers.

I’ve slowly realized that I generally have more range in my M3 then we do in our ICE vehicle. I stand by my comment that range anxiety should be a non-factor if you live near any Metropolitan area. It’s a mindset that we must simply get used to.

 

[pl8dlikafiddle]

I think a different marketing scheme would help resolve all of this.

ICE vehicles are marketed as “X miles per gallon” and “XX gallon fuel tank”. From there, consumers that care can do the math and arrive at a range at the given EPA miles per gallon consumption.

The equivalent of this to EVs is advertising with the consumption in Wh per mile and the starting usable battery pack capacity in kWh.

I’m not sure if the “EPA Rated Miles” marketing was driven by the manufacturer or if the EPA is what’s requiring EVs to be marketed as such.

If this is truly going to be “the future”, people will need to get familiar with these metrics. These “I’m not getting 240/310/325 miles of range” threads are always going to pop up.

 

[North75]

I think another issue at play here is that the difference between highway and city mileage is different for ICE's vs EV's.
Generally you would get better mileage in an ICE on the highway, while an EV gets its best mileage in the city when driving relatively slow and starting and stopping because of regen.
In my old BMW I could easily get 300-400 miles range @29-30 mpg on long trips on the highway, but would barely make it to 200miles per tank @16mpg during my typical local roads commute and driving around town.
I think we mentally expect to easily get the rated range on the highway when in reality the EPA numbers assume a decent amount of city driving in the cycle.
Not to say that you can't drive long distances at the power output that would equate to rated range, but any number of factors (temperature, speed, elevation gain, wind) can increase your power usage and make it difficult.

 

[thefortunes]

I think another issue at play here is that the difference between highway and city mileage is different for ICE's vs EV's.
Generally you would get better mileage in an ICE on the highway, while an EV gets its best mileage in the city when driving relatively slow and starting and stopping because of regen.
In my old BMW I could easily get 300-400 miles range @29-30 mpg on long trips on the highway, but would barely make it to 200miles per tank @16mpg during my typical local roads commute and driving around town.
I think we mentally expect to easily get the rated range on the highway when in reality the EPA numbers assume a decent amount of city driving in the cycle.
Not to say that you can't drive long distances at the power output that would equate to rated range, but any number of factors (temperature, speed, elevation gain, wind) can increase your power usage and make it difficult.

The bolded is a fallacy that many seem to believe.

It is NOT because of starting and stopping. In fact you are significantly better to NOT stop/start or regen at all, but to coast.

EVs are (primarily) more efficient at lower speeds due to the nature of air resistance (drag) which goes up by velocity SQUARED. ICE cars mitigate this by gearing which allows them to cruise at highway speeds with lower RPMs.

 

[CrayZ1]

Could the fact that San Francisco is extremely hilly affect range at all?

Yes. You never recover all losses due to elevation changes:
When you use more power to climb a hill, the higher kW demand increases the resistance losses.
As you descend, regen only recovers ~80%, and sometimes friction braking is needed.
If you coast down a hill with no regen, the higher speed can cause higher aero losses.

IIRC, I was seeing about 85% of my level ground range when there were grades involved.

 

[Fresnel]

Hindsight really is 20/20 isn't it? This is my first EV and not having ventured on this website before I bought the SR+, and given the fact that when I did order mine, the Tesla order page showed a 240 mile range, not 240 EPA miles, or 240 estimated miles or 240 kw/miles, it said 240 miles, so I (incorrectly) assumed that 240 would be sufficient. Let me tell you, I drive 62 miles round trip to/from work. I barely get 2 days of travel from a 90% charge and no f'ing way I'd get 3 with a full charge, but you'd think, huh, 240 miles, 62 per day, that's 186 miles for 3 days, I should get 3 days per charge, and that's what I actually thought... NFW! What a mislead dope I was. If I had known then what I know now, I would have went for the 325 LR model, and there was a 325 at that time, and who knows, I may have gotten 3 days with the LR. If/when they get the 3 well over the 300 miles, I might trade mine in. Likely won't change the wife's mind, but at least I may get the 3 days I was after.

Hindsight is 20/20 for sure but I think the problem is more the lack of knowledge before buying the EV. Not getting EPA range is one of the most basic facts that comes with an EV, (and ICE too but I'm ignoring that for now since that's a separate topic). In my opinion sales should probably guide people a little better in what they'll get EPA vs Real range for first time EV buyers.
Before I got one I was so paranoid of the range reduction of winter and driving a long work commute. So for me I guess because I went in with so low expectations I was pleasantly surprised that it was more than enough.

 

[nogasbiker]

I drive 62 miles round trip to/from work. I barely get 2 days of travel from a 90% charge and no f'ing way I'd get 3 with a full charge, but you'd think, huh, 240 miles, 62 per day, that's 186 miles for 3 days, I should get 3 days per charge

If your tesla is garage, you might want to plug it in everyday, like a cellphone. That's not how people run gas cars, but electric is different. And it is easy to top off the charge.

 

[camalaio]

There are also plenty of chargers and the Nav makes it pretty easy to find and plan for Supercharging. Most can also charge at home - unless you have a gas station in your driveway this isn’t a luxury offered to ICE drivers.

I’ve slowly realized that I generally have more range in my M3 then we do in our ICE vehicle. I stand by my comment that range anxiety should be a non-factor if you live near any Metropolitan area. It’s a mindset that we must simply get used to.

I think you missed my point about efficiency still mattering, if for no reason other than cost. Especially if you're relying on Superchargers - that can get quite expensive!

And Superchargers still often require drivers to go far out of their way, using even more energy. Gas stations generally don't have this problem. I'd have to make a 1h30m "detour" if I wanted to stop at a Supercharger before heading east from my house.

I think another issue at play here is that the difference between highway and city mileage is different for ICE's vs EV's.
Generally you would get better mileage in an ICE on the highway, while an EV gets its best mileage in the city when driving relatively slow and starting and stopping because of regen.
In my old BMW I could easily get 300-400 miles range @29-30 mpg on long trips on the highway, but would barely make it to 200miles per tank @16mpg during my typical local roads commute and driving around town.
I think we mentally expect to easily get the rated range on the highway when in reality the EPA numbers assume a decent amount of city driving in the cycle.
Not to say that you can't drive long distances at the power output that would equate to rated range, but any number of factors (temperature, speed, elevation gain, wind) can increase your power usage and make it difficult.

Small caveat: Winter cold and city driving is a very inefficient combo for EVs. Highway travel is more efficient even in an EV if you have to be heating it.

 

[Fresnel]

Efficiency matters not just because of range. Due to all the extra electricity usage in Winter, we're getting dangerously close to a third rate tier (over $1/kWh... yeah) in which case I need to take a step back. I didn't even know that tier existed before. We're on hydroelectric so I'm less concerned about my electricity impacts, but financial impacts are looking real. And if we were somewhere else with dirtier power, honestly the inefficiency we've experienced wouldn't look enviable compared to an efficient gas hatchback anymore (what we were driving before).

I agree. Also, I hope that we at some point have some kind of battery recycle program or else sometime in the farish future we're going to be burying quite a lot of EV batteries in the ground.

 

[640k]

I think a different marketing scheme would help resolve all of this.

ICE vehicles are marketed as “X miles per gallon” and “XX gallon fuel tank”. From there, consumers that care can do the math and arrive at a range at the given EPA miles per gallon consumption.

The equivalent of this to EVs is advertising with the consumption in Wh per mile and the starting usable battery pack capacity in kWh.

I’m not sure if the “EPA Rated Miles” marketing was driven by the manufacturer or if the EPA is what’s requiring EVs to be marketed as such.

If this is truly going to be “the future”, people will need to get familiar with these metrics. These “I’m not getting 240/310/325 miles of range” threads are always going to pop up.

you... you hijacked my post?

I just think how BEVs are sold vs. how ICE vehicles are traditionally sold, it's an unfair comparison. I've never driven or owned an ICE vehicle where the range was "320 miles on a single tank". they provide you different numbers, based on driving, and recently added the "mixed" driving number, which was supposed to be more realistic. from there you could "guesstimate" the expected range of the tank and prepare accordingly. my tank is 16 gallons and i'm averaging 21 MPG, therefore I have 32 miles of "range" before I should think about filling up.

most of the ICE vehicles were somewhere in that high/low range. my STi could EASILY get 17 MPG if I ragged on it, but with my combined/average daily, i would have an expectation of how much "range" i was actually getting.

I think what might be more helpful for new buyers is some sort of rated range based on wh/mi and then demonstrate the differences based on the climates of the purchase. buying in Florida? your hi/low range will probably be 200-250wh/mi, which will provide x miles of range based on the battery you're buying. buying in Montreal? your hi/low range will probably be 300-350wh/mi...

i think the biggest problem is the blanket "this vehicle gets xxx range", which is bunk.

there was a decent video posted a while back where the guy demoed a bunch of BEVs and "tested" their real-world range. just about every vehicle only made 80% of their stated range (Tesla and Kia being in the top %).

 

[pl8dlikafiddle]

I suppose my reading is like my hearing - selective .

My apologies.