Range and cost calculator

[AnOutsider]

ouch @ having to say "210 miles" on the 85kwh pack

 

[onlinespending]

what sort of city driving range should we expect with the Model S? Be curious to hear what sort of range the Roadster gets with city driving vs. highway driving. Although there's the inefficiency of decelerating and accelerating, your average speed is considerably less than highway speeds. Then there's always back roads where there would be much less stop and go compared to a city, but with speed limits of 25 - 40mph. I'd imagine those driving conditions would be quite ideal.

 

[WhiteKnight]

I am hoping that we see the Range Calculator software that Tesla showed at the Model X reveal soon. I know that this quote from the 10-K published yesterday isn't new news, but it's still troubling that we don't have a better read on actual range:

We plan to offer Model S with a variety of battery pack options—40 kWh, 60 kWh and 85 kWh—which we estimate will offer a range on a single charge of 160 miles, 230 miles, and 300 miles, respectively, while traveling at a steady speed of 55 miles per hour. The EPA’s new fuel economy requirements will require us to label Model S utilizing new and different energy efficiency testing methodologies. These methodologies differ from the one we have used to estimate the range of the vehicles at a steady speed of 55 miles per hour and could reduce the range reported on the required labeling of our vehicles by up to 30% as compared to our current estimates.

It seems like there are two reasons for a reduction in range (1) the difference betweent the different EPA tests and/or the deifference between Tesla's static 55mph range number and the EPA test and (2) the difference between real-world highway speeds of 75 mph versus Tesla's stated 55 mph. And in a bit of coincedence the "hit" in both cases is about 30%.

The difference between 55mph and 75mph I understand fully but why would Tesla's Model S Range decline at a mix of speeds below 55 mph. I would think range would actually increase if you drove at say 30 mph for awhile. Does the EPA mileage test include speeds of 75 mph.

Here is the chart that shows the Roadster's range at various speeds [The Roadster has a stated range of 245 miles which can be achieved at 55 mph which should be considered 100%]:

 

[gg_got_a_tesla]

Given ^ from WK and this post from smorgasbord on another thread, I think real world ranges (without compromising current driving styles and patterns, that is) for the Model S would indeed be only 70%-ish of what has been advertised thus far.

smorgasbord: As a Roadster owner, let me insert some realism here. The Roadster is specced at 245 miles. That's the Ideal Range if you do a Range Charge on a new battery. The practical Actual Range is more like 180 miles - meaning accounting for speeds below 25 or above 50, plus stops/slow downs/hills. That's 74% of the claimed. I'll grant that 200 miles is do-able if you can keep your speeds down, but that's hard to do on the freeway, and there are other power drains if you're not on the freeway.

If you do a Standard Charge, the Ideal Range is typically under 190. I don't know off-hand what a practical Actual Range is because I haven't kept track, but I'd guess 145 miles is the comfortable upper end.

My calcs say the 85kWh battery will have a Standard Charge Ideal Range of 230 miles. The Standard Charge Actual Range will be more like 175 miles.

So, unless you're willing to make your first real drive start with a Range Charge, I'd suggest keeping your round trip to under 175 miles. And that's if you've got the big battery. And that's if you can resist testing out the 0-60 performance after every stop. If you're willing to do a Range Charge, then you might be able to do 230 miles.

 

[zachster]

This is why Tesla's upcoming interactive range tool needs to toggle up to 75 MPH and also allow for 2-3 industry standard ICE comparisons. People need to see the range decrease of "average ICE car" drop at faster speeds just like electric cars. We need to talk and see apples to apples. Range vs. MPG won't make sense to people, and this is how they will think. Show people how much more gas they burn at highway speed and the range impact and an EV becomes an easier jump.

 

[dsm363]

This is why Tesla's upcoming interactive range tool needs to toggle up to 75 MPH and also allow for 2-3 industry standard ICE comparisons. People need to see the range decrease of "average ICE car" drop at faster speeds just like electric cars. We need to talk and see apples to apples. Range vs. MPG won't make sense to people, and this is how they will think. Show people how much more gas they burn at highway speed and the range impact and an EV becomes an easier jump.

Excellent point. Showing the Model S range and 75 mph while not showing a similar car's mpg drop at same speed only makes the Model S look bad.

 

[ElSupreme]

It seems like there are two reasons for a reduction in range (1) the difference betweent the different EPA tests and/or the deifference between Tesla's static 55mph range number and the EPA test and (2) the difference between real-world highway speeds of 75 mph versus Tesla's stated 55 mph. And in a bit of coincedence the "hit" in both cases is about 30%.

The difference between 55mph and 75mph I understand fully but why would Tesla's Model S Range decline at a mix of speeds below 55 mph. I would think range would actually increase if you drove at say 30 mph for awhile. Does the EPA mileage test include speeds of 75 mph.

I can't remember where it is on these forums but it was brought up that the EPA takes their circuit number and then multiplies by 0.7. It is explained as this multiplier gives a better real world number. I personally think the Model S will get slightly better than its stated 55mph cruise range on the test, but it will have a multiplier. And for the Nissan Leaf the EPA circuit was roughly equal to its 55mph cruising number of 100 miles. Real world it gets about 70miles of range. I am personally using a 0.7 multiplier on range (and using 0.8 first to avoid 'range mode).

 

[NigelM]

Be curious to hear what sort of range the Roadster gets with city driving vs. highway driving.

There's lots of threads if you do a search. It also depends on the other variables (weather, roads, driving style, etc.). I've posted elsewhere but can't find it now, but I do most of my driving around the city and it's not unusual for me to start with a full charge that gives (more or less) 190 ideal miles and 210 estimated miles. On the other hand, I did a range charge last weekend for a long trip and started with 244 ideal miles and 258 estimated miles; my trip was 174 miles which I drove at 70-75mph on the interstate all the way and I finished with 19 ideal and 16 estimated on the clock.

(BTW, I knew I could do my long trip on a standard charge, but would have restricted myself to 55-60mph so I traded a higher charge for speed. Get used to thinking differently once you get your hands on that Model S. :wink

Although there's the inefficiency of decelerating and accelerating, your average speed is considerably less than highway speeds.

Don't forget regen braking. Decelerating a Tesla is much less inefficient than an ICE. The more city driving I do, the better mileage I get.

 

[onlinespending]

Don't forget regen braking. Decelerating a Tesla is much less inefficient than an ICE. The more city driving I do, the better mileage I get.

Sure. Regen just mitigates the inefficiency. But it's still an inefficiency to brake/decelerate. Seems the lower driving speeds for city driving more than offset the losses with stop-and-go. That's good to know and counter to how an ICE behaves.

 

[onlinespending]

This is why Tesla's upcoming interactive range tool needs to toggle up to 75 MPH and also allow for 2-3 industry standard ICE comparisons. People need to see the range decrease of "average ICE car" drop at faster speeds just like electric cars. We need to talk and see apples to apples. Range vs. MPG won't make sense to people, and this is how they will think. Show people how much more gas they burn at highway speed and the range impact and an EV becomes an easier jump.

Yes this is a great suggestion. They can focus on MPG of the ICE cars and how those numbers deteriorate with an increase in speed. And also show equivalent MPG for the Model S (using an assumed cost per gallon of gas, and cost of kWh of electricity) for varying speeds. The Model S will always look far better by comparison. If they instead focus on the "range" of an ICE, and the effect speed has on it, then it will always appear the ICE car will trump the Model S given that a full tank of gas can still provide a very large range. I suppose they could normalize the numbers and show the effect speed has on full range capacity (full range normalized at 55mph to be 100% range). If you increase speed (or dial other parameters) that full-range will drop by some % (both on the Model S and the ICEs). Drive more slowly and you'll see the full-range increase by a certain %.

 

[richkae]

Dont forget that Roadster standard mode has about 25 more miles than it tells you about because it hides the bottom 10% as reserve.
When I charge in standard, it says 189, but it really has 214.
I expect the 85kWh Model S to show 225-230 in Standard but that will really mean 255-260 ( ideal ) miles.
I think getting 190-200 real miles at highway speeds ( 70mph ) on a standard charge will be easy.
That said, if I ever plan to drive 190+ miles I will charge in range.

 

[Fredrik S]

Model S real range:

Hi!

New to this forum, but an enthusiast (had I just earned more money I would be waiting for a Model S) from the start.
The sales of electric cars is not what a lot of people dreamed about a couple of years ago. Leaf, Volt, Ford, all sells too few of them, they are too expensive, and gives you range anxiety. We all hope Tesla will put some fuel to the electric car, I mean they promise a car that can give you 48 km (300 miles) before recharging.
According to Tesla, these are the numbers:
The 40kW package will give you 0,155 kWh/km = 258 km (160 miles)
The 60kW package will give you 0,175 kWh/km = 342 km (230 miles)
The 85kW package will give you 0,177 kWh/km =480 km (300 miles)
In the biggest Newspaper in Sweden, Dagens Nyheter, journalists has driven both the Volvo C30 electric and Nissan Leaf. It was not a pleasant ride during winter in Stockholm. Nissan Leaf official figures are 160 km, but with heat turned on the reporter could squeeze out half of that. Many columnists here in Sweden have called the electric car a fiasco. Today one of them writes that car companies should stop lying about how far you can drive the ev.
According to him, the real numbers for Volvo and Nissan Leaf are 0,228 kWh per km, if you use the air condition in the summer, and heat in winter etc.
So using these numbers means this for Model S:
The 40kW package will give you 0,228 kWh/km = 175 km (108 miles)
The 60kW package will give you 0,228 kWh/km = 263 km (163 mles)
The 85kW package will give you 0,228 kWh/km =372 km (231 miles)
Considering that Model S is a much bigger and heavier car than both the Volvo and Nissan, and if you pack it with a couple of suitcases and your family and drive it faster then 55mph you´ll probably end up with half of the range Tesla says the car will drive.
Maybe Tesla Model S won't save the electric car after all. Or?

Mod edit by Wido: Merged two threads

 

[widodh]

The 480km/300mile of the biggest battery won't be a real world range. But, I have a Toyota Auris Hybrid, with the 40L tank Toyota claims I could get somewhere around a 1000km out of single tank. With the Prius they even claim 1200km. I'm happy if I reach 700km out of my tank.

With the Model S I think a real world range will be something like 300 ~ 350km, that is what I'm expecting of it to be a overall range without having to worry about anything.

"People want change, as long as nothing changes"

Tesla should really put that range calculator online!

 

[Todd Burch]

That's an awesome tool. Can you specify pano roof open/closed?

 

[widodh]

That's an awesome tool. Can you specify pano roof open/closed?

I don't know. I got these pictures from someone who attended the Model X reveiling in February.

Might be that the tool is in Santa Row now as well?

 

[Cobos]

Hi!

New to this forum, but an enthusiast (had I just earned more money I would be waiting for a Model S) from the start.
The sales of electric cars is not what a lot of people dreamed about a couple of years ago. Leaf, Volt, Ford, all sells too few of them, they are too expensive, and gives you range anxiety. We all hope Tesla will put some fuel to the electric car, I mean they promise a car that can give you 48 km (300 miles) before recharging.
According to Tesla, these are the numbers:
The 40kW package will give you 0,155 kWh/km = 258 km (160 miles)
The 60kW package will give you 0,175 kWh/km = 342 km (230 miles)
The 85kW package will give you 0,177 kWh/km =480 km (300 miles)
In the biggest Newspaper in Sweden, Dagens Nyheter, journalists has driven both the Volvo C30 electric and Nissan Leaf. It was not a pleasant ride during winter in Stockholm. Nissan Leaf official figures are 160 km, but with heat turned on the reporter could squeeze out half of that. Many columnists here in Sweden have called the electric car a fiasco. Today one of them writes that car companies should stop lying about how far you can drive the ev.
According to him, the real numbers for Volvo and Nissan Leaf are 0,228 kWh per km, if you use the air condition in the summer, and heat in winter etc.
So using these numbers means this for Model S:
The 40kW package will give you 0,228 kWh/km = 175 km (108 miles)
The 60kW package will give you 0,228 kWh/km = 263 km (163 mles)
The 85kW package will give you 0,228 kWh/km =372 km (231 miles)
Considering that Model S is a much bigger and heavier car than both the Volvo and Nissan, and if you pack it with a couple of suitcases and your family and drive it faster then 55mph you´ll probably end up with half of the range Tesla says the car will drive.
Maybe Tesla Model S won't save the electric car after all. Or?

Mod edit by Wido: Merged two threads

A few key points to keep in mind.
Motor journalists are generally horrible at getting full range out of electric cars.
The Leaf has ability to prewarm the cabin that will greatly reduce the need for spending battery energy in heating.
Gasoline and especially diesel engine cars have horrible milage starting with a cold soaked engine that you get in Sweden and Norway, though since their energy content is so huge that effect is partly masked. Not to mention their lack of efficiency helps heat the car in wintertime.

All that being said the Leaf is optimistic with it's stated range, and the Roadster has been slightly better with actual range compared to claimed range. Norway has generally 20-30km/h slower speed limits than Sweden so our ranges will be longer. Compared to similar gasoline cars the Leaf is a lot cheaper here in Norway.

Cobos

 

[jerry33]

The 480km/300mile of the biggest battery won't be a real world range. But, I have a Toyota Auris Hybrid, with the 40L tank Toyota claims I could get somewhere around a 1000km out of single tank. With the Prius they even claim 1200km. I'm happy if I reach 700km out of my tank.

2004 Prius MPG from my logbook. (Complete years only):
2003-2004 -- 50.8 mpg 17,628 miles
2005 -- 52.6 mpg 14,688 miles
2006 -- 56.3 mpg 16,174 miles
2007 -- 57.3 mpg 18,384 miles
2008 -- 59.9 mpg 21,755 miles
2009 -- 61.4 mpg 16,177 miles
2010 -- 65.2 mpg 12,134 miles
2011 -- 66.9 mpg 11,272 miles


DATE__________ODO____INC_____AVG
...
-- Cold weather starts here
01/04/11____117516____575____62.0 (3.8)
-- 23 F here
01/04/11____118047____530____62.3 (3.8)
-- 13 F here plus ice days and snow days
02/09/11____118508____461____55.6 (4.2)
-- 18 F here plus ice days and snow days
02/25/11____119029____520____64.8 (3.6)
03/15/11____119551____521____65.9 (3.6)
03/31/11____120138____587____68.1 (3.5)
04/21/11____120732____593____66.9 (3.5)
05/11/11____121347____614____67.6 (3.5)
05/31/11____121962____614____69.4 (3.4)
-- High temperatures start here
06/22/11____122606____643____67.7 (3.5)
07/17/11____123251____644____69.1 (3.4)
-- Flat tire here
08/10/11____123900____648____67.1 (3.5)
09/07/11____124533____633____70.2 (3.4)
-- 12V battery changed here
09/27/11____125180____647____70.6 (3.3)
10/18/11____125708____614____69.7 (3.4)
11/07/11____126389____594____68.6 (3.4)
-- Cold weather starts here
11/28/11____126991____601____67.3 (3.4)
-- 27F here
-- New commute route starts here
-- Flat tire here
12/12/11____127535____543____66.2 (3.6)
12/31/11____128012____586____67.8 (3.5)
--- Trip to NE starts here
01/07/12____128603____481____56.6 (4.2)
-- 13 F here
01/12/12____129042____438____52.7 (4.5)
01/15/12____129420____378____50.3 (4.7)
01/20/12____129094____481____56.2 (4.2)
--- Trip to NE ends here
01/31/12____130503____600____69.8 (3.4)
02/23/12____131050____546____69.4 (3.4)
03/07/12____131679____629____72.2 (3.3)
03/23/12____132319____638____71.3 (3.3)

 

[dpeilow]

The problem, as I have often pointed out here and to other critics, is that range figures published over this side of the pond (along with MPG and emissions figures for ICE) are based on the New European Driving Cycle test, which has been shown to be a pile of steaming horse poo for over a decade.

Many academics have called for it to be replaced by something more representative, but the entire industry is reluctant to take a 30% hit on their MPG and CO2 figures. It would move all these cars that qualify for 0 tax because they are under 100g/km CO2 into the next band. The entire eco-diesel thing is based on this lie.

So it's not the fault of the car companies per se, but the entire structure of the system that they are forced to work within. The possible exception is Vauxhall, who have steadfastly stuck to saying 25-40 miles EV range on the Ampera in their marketing, despite the NEDC range being 52 miles (in fact they blogged about this very topic).

 

[Discoducky]

Did anyone check how extremely cold temperatures affect range?

Yeah, Engle's original post from the SR event had several pic's with the temp at 32 degrees Celsius and it had no ill effect on range.

Does anyone know if the range estimator is active at the Bellevue store? I'd love to play around with it today.

 

[jerry33]

The real problem is that they used MPG or l/100km as the number rather than an index. The way the ratings are supposed to work is:

1. Get the rating for your current car.

2. Get the actual fuel usage from your logbook

3. Divide #2 by #1

4. Get the rating for the car you want to purchase.

5. Multiply #4 by #3 to get the fuel usage you should expect.

Because the tests are repeatable the answer derived from #5 should be pretty close to what you actually will get.

Had they used an index number rather than than MPG or l/100km there would be a lot less false expectations.