-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Range?
- Thread starter epicshooter
- Start date
Travel speed? Wind? Other weather?
181 miles on 66% is 274 miles of real world driving range. 274 out of a rated 405 is 67% efficiency, which isn't totally out of the ordinary for cold weather and high speed.
The EPA rated range is notoriously optimistic in real world conditions, as the EPA test conditions do not account for today's high speed limits, nor do they account for significant inclement weather.
Lasttoy
Active Member
There will never be a good range estimate. There are too many variables. I'm over 200k, and thousands of super charges all over the USA. I got a reconditioned pack. Didn't change anything. Have fun, the new cars go so much farther than me and charge instantly. Enjoy.
Last edited:
About 50% of the 180 miles was at 70-80mph- the rest was below 70 but all highway. Wind was not bad, it was misting a bit. Unsure also on total elevation change which just occurred to me as a potential. On the way home- same path it did about 10% better.
Seems okay to me. 70-80 MPH will really chew through the electrons. If you want anywhere close to the EPA rated range, you need to keep it below 60 MPH and have favorable, warm weather. Summer time will treat you much better.
Good to know but with speed limits 65-70 I will not go below. Simply unsafe. As for the weather that plays a role as well. Tesla looked at my logs and blame Autopilot and sentry (while driving??)
Totally agree regarding speed. I’m always in the 70-80 MPH range unless I’m cutting it close on range. Adjust your expectations accordingly and you’ll be fine.
roblab
Active Member
As the ad says, "Age is just a number." And so is range. It's an estimate. All I know is that I have a bunch more range on my new S than I did on my first S, and about four times as much as I did on my first EV. Tesla has a very good range indicator on the dash, and they also have a best-in-class setup of superchargers all across the country, just about anywhere anyone might need them. Unlike my first car where there was only ONE supercharger in the whole country, we now have superchargers just about every hundred miles or less. I used to pull into RV parks to plug into a 220v outlet (for which we got charged), and wifey and I would take a hike to find a cup of coffee while we waited the FOUR HOURS needed to charge up. My first EV had a full range of 93 miles, and that was in dry, warm weather. Times have changed.
When I first purchased a Model S 75 back in 2017, we use to do several day trips out in the country. I was able to plan my range based off of the EPA rating very well. It wouldn't work out so well on the highway but that's when I use to plan each leg at the 80% efficiency. So, 100mile leg, times 1.2 would be 120 plus a 30 mile buffer. I would calculate a 100 mile leg needing rated range of 150. I would call that my launch number. Point is on the highway your efficiency drops. If you are interested, you can look at a subscription with Teslafi.com. Set up correctly, you can see how well your efficiency is doing between road trips and highway trips. With a fuel burning vehicle, the EPA rating is hardly ever achieve. Tesla comes close if driven under the conditions it was rated at.
Small screen shot of Teslafi showing the efficiency of our Model Y. Uh, the Y loves to eat through electrons on these Texas roads.
Small screen shot of Teslafi showing the efficiency of our Model Y. Uh, the Y loves to eat through electrons on these Texas roads.
No one is telling you you have to drive slower! That's not what was said. These discussions usually go this way:
1. I'm getting bad efficiency. Why?
2. You're driving fast.
3. But it's not safe to drive (low number) mph!
4. No one is telling you you have to. We are just informing you that's why the efficiency is bad.
You're welcome to drive 90 mph or 100 mph or whatever you want to. This is just information that the EPA efficiency ratings are calculated for lower speeds and are pretty optimistic, so if you go faster, you're not going to match that "rated miles" value 1-to-1. It'll be worse, and you may have to charge longer at stops when traveling, but that's fine.
Range on any EV is highly dependent on several factors. Environment temperature (which impacts battery temperature), tire roll resistance (tire design), over or under inflated tires, topography (hilly or flat), wind speed and lots of others. I have a 2016 90D Model S with an "EPA" range of 294 miles. I have just under 60,000 miles with an average 344 m/kWhr which means over the life of the car my average range is 269 miles (90,000 kWhr/344 m/kWhr). Now I live in western PA (hilly), drive mostly city/urban, put on snow tires from Dec-Apr (more roll resistance) and general charge to 90+%. So basically after 7 years (I got the car in March 2016) my lose of range is ~25 miles. Now the "experts" say to expect 1-2% battery degradation per year which means after 7 years I shoudl expect my range to have decreased between 20-40 miles. I know all of the current decease is not battery degradation given all of the other impacts. So what does this all mean? It means tracking you m/kWhr on a trip by trip basis is pretty much worthless unless you are also recording all of the environmental conditions, topography changes and exact speed and sped variations. Some days my trip mi/kWhr can be as high as 375 (cold, windy, lots of hills) and other days as low as 290 (warm, flat, calm winds).
I think the simple way to solve this is for Tesla to lower expectations. No one seems to be able to get the range indicated, in any situation. So my expectations were already low- I bought one that has 405 range, expecting 300 worst case, and got closer to 274. There is no way to fix disappointment, other than setting expectations properly. So far I love everything about the car except these things:
Compromise on driving style to get range (gas cars did not have this problem but most are slower)
Texting interface- simply garbage compared to android auto
Location of soft buttons behind the lower corner of the yoke- bad placement for anyone but especially me based on my size.
Everything else is great.
...except for the people who do. I've gotten it sometimes. People have gotten over 600 miles from certain tests, so that would fit within "in any situation".
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10228167/jbareham_180213_2301_0172.jpg)
Tesla Model 3 drives 606 miles on a single charge in hypermiling record
32 hours of low-speed driving
www.theverge.com
Hmm? This is interesting. Compromise on whose driving style? Oooohhh, right--yours! So it's your specific driving style (the guy who went for the super sports car Plaid version) that is causing not being able to meet EPA efficiency conditions. Mystery solved.
Ha! Oh yes they do. There have been multiple law suits against gas car companies for their exaggerated mpg figures.
Here is Ford's:
Ford F-150 Owners Are Suing Because of Fuel Economy
When it comes to trucks, Ford has given its fans a lot of reasons to love Ford trucks. The F-150 has been an American icon, and the recently revived
www.motorbiscuit.com
And here is GM's:
Lawsuit Claims GM Exaggerated Fuel Mileage On Some SUVs For Seven Years
General Motors announced last month that it would provide compensation to owners of their models of SUVs after admitting it had incorrectly calculated the fuel economy on the vehicles. But that apparently isn’t enough for some GM owners who have filed a potential class action against the...
www.consumerreports.org
And here is Hyundai/Kia's:
U.S. appeals court saves $210 million Hyundai-Kia fuel economy settlement
A U.S. appeals court restored a $210 million nationwide class-action settlement for hundreds of thousands of owners of Hyundai Motor Co and Kia Motors Corp vehicles whose fuel economy estimates were inflated.
www.reuters.com
Do I need to continue?
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
I think at least 50% of Tesla’s Model S/X EPA range increase in the last few years is attributed to them aggressively gaming the system vs. any actual efficiency or energy density increase.
The earlier cars got much closer to rated range. The 400 miles in the current S is a fantasy in anything resembling real world conditions.
Tesla has clearly decided that advertising bigger range numbers is more important than any sense of accuracy or honesty in those numbers. Other manufacturers have taken a different route.
The earlier cars got much closer to rated range. The 400 miles in the current S is a fantasy in anything resembling real world conditions.
Tesla has clearly decided that advertising bigger range numbers is more important than any sense of accuracy or honesty in those numbers. Other manufacturers have taken a different route.
Totally agree about the more recent efficiency games.
But also, OP has new car (assumption) and there is some break in. Especially tires.
And for sure 40 degrees is a big hit. And misting doesn't help - especially if that means he needed heat with little solar gain.
So will probably get closer to 320 real world in most conditions. Not 400 but over his expectations.
Many posters that complain of range have larger tires and don't adjust for it. Most forum folks are more car oriented and tend to upsize tires and get performance models. So while it was an incorrect assumption, it was a perfectly reasonable one.
The other issue is that range is all types of driving. But the reality is we generally only care about range on the highway. That isn't the way the numbers are designed. The EPA should change that but it isn't currently the system. So some downgrading will usually be needed.
Really we should have a winter 70 mph number and a summer 70 mph number. Say 30 degrees and 80 degrees. Force the manufacturer to game based on those numbers. Hard to test based on real world conditions since constant temperature never happens, and humidity matters too.
But also, OP has new car (assumption) and there is some break in. Especially tires.
And for sure 40 degrees is a big hit. And misting doesn't help - especially if that means he needed heat with little solar gain.
So will probably get closer to 320 real world in most conditions. Not 400 but over his expectations.
Many posters that complain of range have larger tires and don't adjust for it. Most forum folks are more car oriented and tend to upsize tires and get performance models. So while it was an incorrect assumption, it was a perfectly reasonable one.
The other issue is that range is all types of driving. But the reality is we generally only care about range on the highway. That isn't the way the numbers are designed. The EPA should change that but it isn't currently the system. So some downgrading will usually be needed.
Really we should have a winter 70 mph number and a summer 70 mph number. Say 30 degrees and 80 degrees. Force the manufacturer to game based on those numbers. Hard to test based on real world conditions since constant temperature never happens, and humidity matters too.
Drove about 140 miles this week and the temps were higher- upper 60's and 70's and ended up with closer to 350 miles range (extrapolated) without changing driving style at all. Bang on and I can live with that.
beatle
Active Member
That sounds about right. My best numbers are around 80 degrees ambient with the AC on.
Similar threads
