Range or Percentage...a Simple Poll

[Petra]

So I guess it's good that Tesla gives each of us the option to see this information in whatever format makes the most sense.

From my perspective, percentage is exactly the most fundamental piece of information - it is the portion of energy remaining in the battery. To my mind, this is the important piece of data, how much "fuel is left in the tank".

Well, it's the "fuel in the tank" relative to an ever decreasing tank size. As I mentioned up thread, thinking of rated miles as an arbitrary unit rather than a measure of distance gives you a more absolute indication of the energy stored in the pack (better granularity, too). Using the old S70D as an example/hypothetical, your car starts life charging to 240rm and it takes 20% (48rm) to get to work. Now, let's say the car only charges to 211rm later in its life... that trip to work would still consume 48rm, but that would now work out to ~23%. For the car in question, the rated miles display is just calculated usable pack energy in Wh divided by 290 (X Wh/290 Wh/mi = Y mi).

 

[303JeffB]

Well, it's the "fuel in the tank" relative to an ever decreasing tank size. As I mentioned up thread, thinking of rated miles as an arbitrary unit rather than a measure of distance gives you a more absolute indication of the energy stored in the pack (better granularity, too). Using the old S70D as an example/hypothetical, your car starts life charging to 240rm and it takes 20% (48rm) to get to work. Now, let's say the car only charges to 211rm later in its life... that trip to work would still consume 48rm, but that would now work out to ~23%. For the car in question, the rated miles display is just calculated usable pack energy in Wh divided by 290 (X Wh/290 Wh/mi = Y mi).

True, it's an ever decreasing tank size - but the rate of decrease is very slow compared to the factors that impact range. That change in capacity takes place of a number of years, and many 10's of thousand of miles. Over that time period, the driver will have adjusted to that slow change.

thinking of rated miles as an arbitrary unit rather than a measure of distance gives you a more absolute indication of the energy stored in the pack (better granularity, too)

And all that's happening here is that you are doing a different mental arithmetic exercise. I just need to see what's left in the tank directly - whether it's a 70 KWh tank or 65 doesn't really matter to me, empty is still empty. I guess it's just a matter of different strokes for different folks...

 

[Petra]

True, it's an ever decreasing tank size - but the rate of decrease is very slow compared to the factors that impact range. That change in capacity takes place of a number of years, and many 10's of thousand of miles. Over that time period, the driver will have adjusted to that slow change.

My point was that there's no change to adjust to with rm, you get a more precise indication of the state of charge (more than double the number of 'graduations'), and the factors that impact range will do so in exactly the same way regardless of whether you're displaying SoC in rm or percent.

 

[d21mike]

The car's separate Energy App is a much better predictor of how far I can really go based on my last 5, 15 or 30 miles of driving.

Too bad we can not customize the IC for what we want.

Is this range referred to as Estimate Range or Calculate Range or ???? based on recent usage (5,15,30 miles).

Seems like we have this value and Rated and Ideal (this one seems useless to me).

 

[Duffer]

Percentage for me and I'm NOT a numbers guy.

Basically for the following reasons:
1. I know what the car's range at 100% is supposed to be (rounded down to the even number to simplify the math) from there I know both the 50% and the 25%.
2. The car's navigation system indicates the battery level in percent not miles (I don't have to do math in public).
3.I don't suffer range anxiety from watching the miles left to "empty" countdown.

 

[mknox]

Curious... and I'm serious here: Did any of you folks who do all this math in your head to figure out how far you can go ever do this when looking at the gas gauge in an ICE car? I certainly never did. And I find it even less critical with my Tesla as I start each morning with a "full tank" which is way and beyond what I ever would need in a day. On a road trip, I'm using my Nav and the Energy App anyway, so again... no head math.

 

[Duffer]

Curious... and I'm serious here: Did any of you folks who do all this math in your head to figure out how far you can go ever do this when looking at the gas gauge in an ICE car? I certainly never did. And I find it even less critical with my Tesla as I start each morning with a "full tank" which is way and beyond what I ever would need in a day. On a road trip, I'm using my Nav and the Energy App anyway, so again... no head math.

Not unless I was traveling and the road sign read "next gas 100 miles". However, at that time I was more worried about horsepower than mpg. Actually, now that I'm thinking of it, the only mileage that was important to me then was how long my rear M&H "street" tires would last on my 67 Chevelle.

 

[Mediocrates]

Yes, percentage is subject to fewer variables. But it doesn't account for the most fundamental piece of information that can be displayed to the driver, the amount of energy available for use in the battery. And that's what matters when deciding how far you can go.

And of course I realize range is just the number of kWh divided by a constant kWh/mi (for a given model). Yes it doesn't take into account speed, wind, elevation, etc. How could it? It doesn't know where you are going? That's what the trip planner is for.

But I stand by my assertion that range provides more useful information than does percentage. I am still trying to figure out what actionable information percentage is giving you.

So what you're saying is, you'd prefer to see a display of the kWh of energy currently in the battery. Do you calculate that on the fly based on the displayed range and the vehicle-specific fixed number energy usage?

 

[MorrisonHiker]

Curious... and I'm serious here: Did any of you folks who do all this math in your head to figure out how far you can go ever do this when looking at the gas gauge in an ICE car? I certainly never did. And I find it even less critical with my Tesla as I start each morning with a "full tank" which is way and beyond what I ever would need in a day. On a road trip, I'm using my Nav and the Energy App anyway, so again... no head math.

I actually did that for 20 years in my old CR-V. I tracked virtually every tank for those 20 years and knew how many miles I'd get in winter or summer driving. During those long drives across Kansas, I had to do something to entertain myself so I would do the math in my head, trying to figure out how far I could make it. My Low Fuel light went out about 15 years ago but I knew I still had 50 miles of range once the needle hit E.

Now that I have a car that displays range, I just use range.

 

[Dr. J]

During those long drives across Kansas, I had to do something to entertain myself so I would do the math in my head

And now you have more to entertain you in the car, I would think!

 

[The Duke]

The % is shown in the directions when you ask the car to navigate so I use miles.

 

[Frank T]

I set mine to range.

 

[Corsair]

Percentage ...... for I lack range anxiety

 

[Ofarlig]

Curious... and I'm serious here: Did any of you folks who do all this math in your head to figure out how far you can go ever do this when looking at the gas gauge in an ICE car? I certainly never did. And I find it even less critical with my Tesla as I start each morning with a "full tank" which is way and beyond what I ever would need in a day. On a road trip, I'm using my Nav and the Energy App anyway, so again... no head math.

My ICE car actually had a range estimation that was correct, it actually calibrated itself to how much usage had occurred for the past X km. The Tesla range estimation is wrong most of the time so it is more or less useless. The navigations arrival percentage is not though so percentages makes more sense to me as it keeps it together, same goes for charging where having percentage set means I can actually see how much the charger gives me.

If I am to choose an arbitrary measurement which both will require math, why not choose the one that will stay the same throughout the entire car and also all math is done with numbers under 100.

 

[SDRick]

Why is it that "Range" has the votes but the "Percentage" folks have the better arguments?

 

[MorrisonHiker]

Why is it that "Range" has the votes but the "Percentage" folks have the better arguments?

The range people don't need to make any excuses.

 

[cpa]

I used range for the first couple of years. I seem to recall that the early software only allowed for range.

Range was handy for me in being able to figure out the longer legs between charging stops. Once percentage became available, I switched over to percentage to give that reading a shot, and to compare it with range.

I have since stayed with percentage. For most of my tooling about, the argument is moot. When I depart on trips, percentage serves me better. I will occasionally switch back-and-forth on a longer leg that I have not traveled before in order to get that warm, fuzzy feeling that I will arrive at my destination with enough juice.

 

[dgpcolorado]

Curious... and I'm serious here: Did any of you folks who do all this math in your head to figure out how far you can go ever do this when looking at the gas gauge in an ICE car? I certainly never did. And I find it even less critical with my Tesla as I start each morning with a "full tank" which is way and beyond what I ever would need in a day. On a road trip, I'm using my Nav and the Energy App anyway, so again... no head math.

This is my view. For local driving range doesn't matter in the slightest so I am only concerned with approximate charge levels. For road trips nav gives me battery percentage at the next Supercharger stop and I watch it carefully when stretching the range (which happens a lot in my S60 with ~10% degradation).

I used to use range on long trip legs so that I could calibrate how many rated miles versus actual miles I had left when cutting it really close (am I gaining or losing?). However, since the April nav upgrade, the battery-at-destination estimate is so much better now that just watching the % battery at destination is good enough. If it gets below 5% I slow down a bit unless I know I've got it made from experience. Usually I don't get anywhere near that low on a trip leg, so it doesn't matter — I'm going to make it, what more do I need to know?

 

[mknox]

Percentage ...... for I lack range anxiety

As I've said, I use percentage too, but this reminded me that part of the reason for switching was that I was stressing too much about how many rated miles I was getting at 90%, 100% etc. and worrying about why I got more last time, and less this time and why someone with an identical car was getting more or less. And I'm talking just a couple of miles in either direction. LOTS less stress when all I see is the SOC in percent!

 

[E-Ryc]

I use range on dash (the estimate works quite well for me and at the end, distance is what matters). In case I want to see percentage as well, it's visible on energy graph (and navi).
Would be nice, if they squeeze both on dash (sth like % inside the battery, range next to it). And (as someone wrote above), option to see projected range could be even better.

EDIT: it doesn't matter at all, it's just linear transformation