Range on Long Road Trips

[Puma2020]

It’s clear that the EPA needs to improve their testing protocols for EVs. I’d argue that EVs need both a winter and a summer rating, setting more realistic expectations in a variety of conditions.

The road you are traveling on and the weather (headwinds & temperature) make a big difference whether you are driving ICE or EV.
In the winter, cold air is more dense, requiring more energy to push through it. You also may be using stickier tires for better traction.

Speed makes a huge difference. A long time ago, I was moving from Boston to Maryland. I had made that trip many times in my RX-4. I always had to stop around Cherry Hill, NJ to refuel. The fact that Big John's (rated best Philly cheesesteak 10+ years in a row) was also there simply a bonus. When I drove the u-haul and my girlfriend followed in my RX-4, I made the usual stop. On this trip we averaged around 60 mph, instead of my usual 75 due to the u-haul truck. My car had over a 1/4 of a tank left. I was amazed. It was getting around 35 mpg instead of the usual 28mpg. Just from the reduced speed.

I found this chart that I think provides a good visual representation of what speed does to a model 3. The Y would have similar or maybe slightly worse values.

 

[Brian-MS90D]

@jsight and others, you understand that Tesla is legally not allowed to state or promote any range other than the EPA range, correct? You are asking them to do something that your elected legislature has outlawed.
Your complaint should be towards the US government, not Tesla.

 

[mk677]

First, I love my Y. I am sure Tesla fans will give me grief about this post, but here it goes.

I am writing this as I am in the midst of a long "ski bum" road trip that started in Orlando, FL and will hit Breckenridge, Vail, Jackson Hole, Park City, Wolf Creek, and Crested Butte before heading back. I am writing this as a means to help some avoid "buyers remorse" with respect to battery range. This drive covers a variety of terrain in mostly cold climates through long stretches with minimal inhabitants. This also means that charging stations can be few and far between.

I will start with the fact that I am sitting in Rock Springs, WY having had an unscheduled stop half way from Ft Collins, Co because I would not have made the range the car told me, or even come close. Even with an extra stop, I reached 4% charge. When I put this stop in navigation at the last stop, the car predicted I would have over 25% range at this stop. My next stop is Jackson, WY. It's a long stretch that I am not fully confident I will make though not making it is not an option.

For the prospective Tesla buyer, like you, I have watched the Tesla advertised ranges extend year over year, and model over model. When the Y reached 324 mile range, and my old car reached 130k miles, I made the plunge and bought the Y. My measure for range was to be able to reach my parents in Hilton Head, SC from home in Orlando on one charge. I learned on my first trip, that was not going to be possible; however, I am retired, so I adjusted my expectations and learned patience in my old age (62). But this trip took my expectations adjustments to another level entirely.

Out West, speed limits are 70 to 80 mph. You will not be able to go the speed limit in many/most cases. This will become less a source of anxiety as super charging stations proliferate. But, unless you want to stop every 150 miles for a charge, you will not be able to use the car's full capabilities to go fast in places with high speed limits. It's like hitching a race horse to a cart of rocks. If you ever see a Tesla going at or below speed limits, you can bet the driver is trying to stretch the range.

Adding just a bit of insult to this problem, the car will tell you when you connect to charge at 4% that for the sake of the life of the battery, you should not let the battery be drained to that level. It will also tell you that you should not routinely charge to over 90% or more for the sake of the battery. Believe me, I would like to avoid doing so, but on more than a couple of occasions, between the car and the paucity of charging stations, I don't have a choice!

Finally, given the technology Tesla is developing for fsd, do not assume that Tesla can predict your range with much accuracy at the time of completing a charge. Also, Tesla is not good at predicting the time needed to charge especially as it closes in on the desired range you set when starting the charge.

There, that feels better.

having made a similar trip in a model S all I can say is that you haven't grasped the nuances of driving an EV. first off forget about speed limits. the sweet spot between getting there faster and needing to charge longer for me is 70-75 MPH. then you have to account for the very long upgrades and headwinds going west towards the front range of the rockies. running the car down to 4% or charging to 100% is not an issue as long as you charge it up or run it down ASAP , letting it sit at that SOC level is a problem. enjoy your car, enjoy the road trips and as you gain experience with the car's nuances you will have less anxieties.

 

[jsight]

@jsight and others, you understand that Tesla is legally not allowed to state or promote any range other than the EPA range, correct? You are asking them to do something that your elected legislature has outlawed.
Your complaint should be towards the US government, not Tesla.

That's definitely not true. Tesla has even derated their own range estimates at times. But I don't even want them to do that, I'd just like to see the 3 & Y upgraded to have batteries as large as the Mach-E, and keep the estimates approximately the same. This whole issue would go away and the new mileages would be vastly higher than they are now.

They should seriously start working on new battery tech to do this right now. Maybe slightly increase cell length and more than double their diameter or something.

 

[VeganDiver]

Yeah, they are equivalent, but I feel like I hear more confusion from people (not you) that keep it on miles. There's a false sense of safety there, IMO. IMO, there should be a way to have miles remaining base itself on the last 5, 15, or 30 miles just like on the energy graph. I think a lot of these folks would actually have an easier time understanding it that way.

That seems to be closer to what some other EV makers have chosen as well.

This is the reason I’d choose to view percentage over miles. In my old car (clarity) it would estimate your range based on you past 30 miles of driving efficiency. This made the displayed range vary wildly and was completely useless in my opinion. I.e. To estimate how long till I needed to stop at a charger, I’d need to try to adjust for road conditions from miles I’d driven on previous days and what my expected conditions were ahead. Tesla has it right here... it just gives you the rated range and you adjust by your upcoming road conditions, no guessing involved. I like to display miles in the Tesla because you get an extra significant digit in the display.

 

[Big Earl]

This pretty much sums up how poor Tesla is in achieving their rated numbers in real world testing. These are tests done by Edmunds. If you search the web there are several other real world tests that come to the same conclusion.

I did some checks on EPA estimated efficiency * EPA estimated distance compared to measured efficiency * measured distance to come up with the EPA estimated battery capacities for each vehicle. As you can see from the cells highlighted in red, the EPA's estimate of Tesla's battery capacities far exceeds the advertised/known battery capacities by at least 10%. For example, using the EPA's numbers, the Model 3 Performance has a battery capacity of 89.9 kWh. The S & X have capacities of 114.1 and 114.8 kWh respectively.

So my question is: how does this happen? Some of the non-Teslas also have proud EPA capacities, but to a lesser extent.

 

[mark95476]

The only "real-life" test that I think is applicable for me is my own use. I've had a Tesla for ~7 months and I think it's getting the rated EPA range or better. I generally drive a bit faster than normal and on routes that should make an EV suffer (twisty mountain roads).

EPA (or whatever standard) range is a stick people can use to compare vehicles, but that's about it.

I watch Bjorn on YouTube. He performs many tests, including 90km/h and 120km/h range and efficiency tests. He generally needs to go out on remote freeways at off-hours so he doesn't get slowed down by traffic too badly. This is almost completely artificial and not real-life at all, but is the only way to get somewhat consistent results.

I live in an urban area and generally drive when others are driving, though I try to avoid rush hours. I can't avoid traffic, busy parking lots, surface streets, and there are intersections with stop signs and lights everywhere. I think I looked at this a long time ago with my gasser when traffic was heavier, but my average speed is ~25mp/h over a normal day.

I plan on traveling and taking long road trips in the future, but that's <1% of the driving I do now. I've taken maybe one day trip over 100 miles in a day in the past year. The Tesla might get bad range and efficiency when I'm going 85+ mp/h, but people have figure this out already and Superchargers are common and expanding so I'm not worried.

 

[Brian-MS90D]

That's definitely not true. Tesla has even derated their own range estimates at times. But I don't even want them to do that, I'd just like to see the 3 & Y upgraded to have batteries as large as the Mach-E, and keep the estimates approximately the same. This whole issue would go away and the new mileages would be vastly higher than they are now.

They should seriously start working on new battery tech to do this right now. Maybe slightly increase cell length and more than double their diameter or something.

When did Tesla do that?

In layman's terms, in almost all cases the auto manufacturers use EPA method for rating. And whether it's ICE or EV, everyone knows the EPA is not accurate. Again, I propose that the issue is not a Tesla (or EV) problem at all.

"In government and policy circles, it's well known that the EPA's fuel economy figures are too optimistic, but changing the system to more closely reflect real-world averages would mean lowering the bar on all the measurements of the current state of fuel efficiency on the American highway, and no one is eager to admit that we really haven't come as far in fuel-efficiency gains as it seems."
Here's Why Real-World MPG Doesn't Match EPA Ratings | Edmunds

 

[jsight]

When did Tesla do that?

In layman's terms, in almost all cases the auto manufacturers use EPA method for rating. And whether it's ICE or EV, everyone knows the EPA is not accurate. Again, I propose that the issue is not a Tesla (or EV) problem at all.

"In government and policy circles, it's well known that the EPA's fuel economy figures are too optimistic, but changing the system to more closely reflect real-world averages would mean lowering the bar on all the measurements of the current state of fuel efficiency on the American highway, and no one is eager to admit that we really haven't come as far in fuel-efficiency gains as it seems."
Here's Why Real-World MPG Doesn't Match EPA Ratings | Edmunds

The original Model 3 RWD was a bit understated. This table is somewhat helpful: Teslike.com
There were a number of articles about it at the time: Why Did Tesla Ask US EPA To Downgrade Model 3 Range Rating To 310 Miles (From 334 Miles)? Was It Due To Expected Power Draw Of Autonomous Driving System?

Porsche has done something similar.

Also, the EPA updates its standards from time to time. The most recent update was in 2017, but a larger one was back in 2008: 2017 Ratings Changes

 

[threeputts]

Here's another more "real world" test from about a year ago. They charge a bunch of EVs to full, let them sit overnight, then drive them on the highway until they are very low, then drive them literally until the come to a stop. None of the cars made it to their rated range under these conditions. A Kia came closest with a 90% result, followed by Nissan at 87% and Audi with 81%. The Tesla of the group, a LR M3, achieved only 78% of it's rated range - but the Jaguar (76%) and Benz (75%) did even worse. Remember they all lost about 4% overnight and unfortunately they didn't bother to charge them back to 100% before they set off.

It's actually an amusing video. Also informative as they find out how far each car can actually go with the displayed battery remaining reaches 0.

 

[mark95476]

I collected some "real world" data which has me driving to work, and up and down my local mountains. It doesn't include my drive back home, but that's slow so it only reduces average consumption (and increases range).

2020 EPA combined for MY LR AWD is 28 kWh/100 miles = 280 Wh/mi

- The first picture was taken at the top of my local mountains (after ~2500 ft climb over ~7 miles).
Stats: 943 Wh/mi avg over the previous 5 miles and 474 Wh/mi avg after 21.5 miles

- The second picture is at the bottom of the mountain (back to ~sea level). I gained about 3% SoC from regen.
Stats: 248 Wh/mi after 36.4 miles

 

[FatherTo1]

What bothers me most is Tesla milage figures are unachievable no matter how hard you try. Yet other companies are? Here is a good example of the new Mustang which they were able to achieve 34miles OVER the rated range. Looking at real world driving, the Mustang goes farther than a Y yet is rated to go less.

Here is a tidbit from Edmunds car test.

Tesla continues to be a range leader in virtually every EV segment. Owners also benefit from Tesla's exclusive Supercharger network, which is currently the most hassle-free network for fast charging. The Model Y has an EPA-estimated range between 244 miles and 326 miles.

However, Edmunds conducts its own real-world range testing on EVs and has found that Teslas, in most cases, don't achieve their range estimates. For example, a 2020 Model Y Performance that Edmunds tested had an EPA-estimated range of 291 miles but Edmunds managed only 263 miles.

Ford's Mustang Mach-E's EPA estimates range from 211 miles to 300 miles. Edmunds' real-world range test of an all-wheel-drive Mach-E, with an EPA-estimated range of 270 miles, resulted in an impressive 304 miles.

I haven’’t driven other EVs but I don’’t find Tesla’’s range estimates exaggerated at all. Back in 2019, MotorTrend confirmed the 370-mile Model S completed the 359-mile distance from Fremont to LA, with 11% (41 miles) of range remaining. They exceeded range estimates during the trip with two people in the car, AC on, and 65-70 MPH.

I also routinely exceed the EPA ratings on our Raven Model S Standard Range. With my 72.5 kWh usable capacity, I need to average 254 Wh/m to get rated range but I actually use 230 Wh/m at freeway speed and beat EPA range. Below is a snapshot two weeks ago where I travelled almost 90 miles and averaged better than EPA ratings, even at 65 MPH.

All that said, I don’t intend to drive down to zero but I have gone down as far as 4% and traveled 245 miles. This equates to 90% efficiency for my 285-mile rated range. That is plenty reasonable in the real world for me.

In cold weather, all EVs will experience significant range loss. If you’’re seeing or reading a disproportionate amount of Teslas missing range targets, I suspect the majority of them are also riding on larger wheels, which do incur a 10-12% hit to range. Our Model S came with 21s and my range immediately improved by 12.5% when I downsized to 19”” wheels. The Mach-e seems to use smaller wheel and tire combos and I’’m sure that’’s helping it hit range estimates, along with the larger reserve capacity.

Admittedly, I haven’t kept up with the Mach-e and other EV entries as I still don’’t see a truly compelling competitor to Tesla yet, in terms of style, performance, battery tech, and charging infrastructure. A lot of automakers are still playing catch up but competition is fierce and everyone is learning fast. It is great that other EV models are designed to consistently achieve their rated range, that only bodes well to lure in new buyers and increase adoption. From my experience, Tesla’’s range estimates have been pretty accurate (except in really cold temps).

 

[JAM3S]

It’s clear that the EPA needs to improve their testing protocols for EVs. I’d argue that EVs need both a winter and a summer rating, setting more realistic expectations in a variety of conditions.

THIS.

I think this is the most on point suggestion from my limited EV ownership experience to date (BMW i3). My ICE car (BMW M3) is a naturally aspirated V8 that is for an ICE car bad in the winter, losing about 25% of its range in the cold. She gets thirsty. But as we know a Canadian cold EV is likely to lose closer to 45% of its fair weather range.

An EPA duality rating for "Fair" vs "Cold" weather will be a great direction for the industry to go.

 

[kadify]

I just went on a road trip from CO to NY in my MYP. Going 80 mph using autopilot, we averaged around 195-203 miles on a full charge in roughly 10-20 degree weather. I think if it had been warmer we would have been able to go further but I'm also not upset with the range. After 200 miles (roughly 3 hours of driving) we were ready to get out and stretch our legs, let the dogs go to the bathroom, etc. We would have naturally stopped around every 200 miles anyway. The only inconvenience we experienced was having to charge 45 minutes to recharge. Our navigation was suggesting we do fewer stops but charge closer to full at each stop which meant we quickly were at 70% charge from ~4-10% charge but then we inched up to 90-95%. We got really good at beach buggy racing as a result xD

 

[Wannabeskibum]

To the OP. On the bright side that was a really good week in JH with a ton of snow. BTW did you have ski box on top?

I understand your frustration as I drive that stretch of I-80 quite a bit in the winter. Interstate speeds in EVs are tough and when you combine the constant 50 mph headwind and crosswind that Cheyenne to Rawlins gets in winter, it is horrible. That is really the worst stretch of road I know of in the US by far. We have a Model 3 and our ski car is a E400 wagon*. We used to have a big SUV but the headwind and crosswinds in that area made it crazy, even with winter tires.

I am holding out for the 500+ Cybertruck to replace our ski wagon, even then it can be tough as since that road closes so much in winter going the northern route is sparse of chargers.

*Frustrations abound as on the morning before we left on our trip (Feb 5th) I took our wagon in for a routine A service. They did some recall and apparently destroyed the electrical system in the car. They *graciously* offered us a car from Enterprise their only SUV smelled like a ashtray's A hole so the four of us drove up through a blizzard in a Ford Fusion, AWD with no snow tires and no ski box. 800 miles of the 940 mile trip was snow and ice covered. Still with a loaner and heading back west in a week /sigh.

 

[Wannabeskibum]

A little back up for worst road in the US, especially heading west.

7-Day Forecast for Latitude 41.71°N and Longitude 106.42°W (Elev. 7198 ft) (weather.gov)

 

[Uncle Paul]

How hard is it for owners to understand that above about 50 mph, the faster you drive the less range you can expect.

Head winds, elevation changes, snow, rain, heavy loads, pulling a trailer, not driving smoothly etc will all reduce range.

Your display has a constant usage display. You can easily see what range you can expect at any given condition. If you see you will not be making your next stop, then simply slow down until you learn what speed you need to maintain to make it.

Most of these range posts seem to come when someone else is a passenger and you do not want to deal with them complaining about stopping for juice.