Rated (350) vs real (260) miles?

[AhwatukeeDad]

Bob,

Congrats on the X. We just got one last Friday. It’s a really cool car.

Tips that I have learned based on a year with Model 3
1. Arrive at the Supercharger with less than 10% charge to get the really fast charging with an “empty” battery.
2. Set your next destination at the supercharger so you just charge to what you need not your preset 90% home charging target. We made that mistake several times on our trip to San Diego from Phoenix last July.
3. Monitor the energy usage screen in the trip mode to see how you are doing. The car will recommend lower speed if it calculates that you might not make it.
4. Do road trips with a reward! An out and back across Arizona desert? Ick! There is a supercharger in Payson, Sedona, and on I-17 to and in Flagstaff.
5. The X is not as efficient as the 3, even my Performance version uses way less energy when I am hammering it vs the X just putting around the neighborhood.
6. Set the energy display to Percentage from miles! Way more relevant.

enjoy!
Also Bob

 

[Bob Denny]

Thank you @AhwatukeeDad I appreciate your taking the time to write that up. I understand more clearly now thanks to the inputs I got here.

PS the out and back was on a gorgeous day

 

[jerry33]

Need explanation or enlightenment - My new 2020 X LR+ 350 "rated" mi MX gets 260 miles really. See the TeslaFi info below. I am getting over 350 "rated" miles, whatever that means. So what does one need to do to get "rated" miles? What I learned from this trip (which was an out and back, Mesa AZ to Eherenberg AZ Supercharger and back) is that highway trips in the 2020 MX take about 35% more clock time than the same trip in an ICE vehicle (2 road hours and 45 min SC time). This was somewhat of a disappointment. So like everyone else on the road, in AZ I drive 80 (in a 75). Not much ascent/descent.

Rated range is based on the EPA numbers. 80 mph is significantly faster than EPA test speeds. Aerodynamic resistance goes up exponentially as speed increases. This is the same for every car ever made. The difference in aerodynamic resistance between 60 mph and 80 mph is around 180%.

 

[Ctein]

Need explanation or enlightenment - My new 2020 X LR+ 350 "rated" mi MX gets 260 miles really. ... like everyone else on the road, in AZ I drive 80 (in a 75). Not much ascent/descent.

View attachment 523218

Dear Bob,

I've got an end-of-2019 XLR and I see the same thing. It is — unfortunately — normal. In the rare cases where I'm in relatively heavy traffic, slow and go-ish, between 40 and 55 mph, I'm practically hypermiling, with consumption around 250 Wh/mi, which would be 400 miles on a charge. On my normal driving, which is mostly California freeway at 75 mph, not so much! In fact, my working estimate of the real range is almost exactly the same as yours — 260 miles.

The good news is that there's nothing wrong with your car and there's nothing to worry about, this is completely normal.

The bad news is... see above [ wry smile ].

It is what it is. I still looooove my Model X.

pax / Ctein

[ Please excuse any word-salad. Dragon Dictate in training! ]

 

[Bob Denny]

I'm there with you @Ctein. I love my X and just need to get used to the need to plan for charging and and the extra time for long road trips. Even using A Better Route Planner I end up with about 20% additional time for any long road trips.

 

[Ctein]

I'm there with you @Ctein. I love my X and just need to get used to the need to plan for charging and and the extra time for long road trips. Even using A Better Route Planner I end up with about 20% additional time for any long road trips.

Dear Bob,

Yup, very much the same situation for me. The EPA range of the car would have fit my local driving habits almost perfectly with no need for Supercharging (which is close by and free, but still...). I'm having to make mental adjustments.

Fortunately I always have a book or newspaper that needs reading. Or email that needs answering. It's never wasted time.

Based on previous rates of improvement, the Model X in four years should have a real (for me) range similar to the current EPA range. In which case, I will likely trade up.

- pax \ Ctein

[ Please excuse any word-salad. Dragon Dictate in training! ]

 

[forkee]

Also, you arrived at Supercharger with 28% remaining. There was no reason for you to hang around until you recharged to 89%. That is the main reason you experienced long charging time. 15 minutes should have been enough to get you home.

For me, I think the main reason was that he was at a slow charger. It should not have taken 45 minutes to get from 30% to 90%, more like 30 minutes on the most basic 72 kw supercharger. I agree, 15 minutes should have at least brought you to 60% so if you're looking to get the least amount of travel time, stay on the road until you're at 20% and only charge to 80% unless you need the extra range OR can't rely on the furthest supercharger to be working.

 

[Master Chief]

Old thread but I wanted to toss in my experience. I bought my MXLR December 15, 2020 and I have almost 10,000 miles on it. I have free supercharging, so that informs my decision on whether to top off with the Supercharger or limp home with 5% in the tank.

I calculate that I get about a 20% hit on my mileage. So, if it is a 200 mile journey, when the trip is over, it looks like I went 240 miles. My highway speed is typically 75-80 mph. I try to keep it at 77 mph to keep the troopers off of my case.

If I am going to my mountain cabin, I will usually slide the charger to Trip and let if fill up. If I have time to supercharge, I will leave it at the regular setting, stop halfway and supercharge, then finish my trip.

Before COVID-19, I would stop in the Panera Bread which is 50 yards from the SC. Now we have to order ahead and miss "hitting the head" when we stop. Hopefully this will all be behind us soon.

 

[Aston Martin]

I can't figure out how to start a new conversation so my apologies if this post is out of line. I would love a link or directions towards a page that instructs in the art of posting. I am trying to decide between a Performance and an Extended Range Model X. Is the Performance Model's 305 miles range captured in Ludicrous Mode? Can the Performance Model's Chill or Sport driving modes equal the millage performance of the Extended Range's advertised 351 miles?

 

[DCGOO]

I can't figure out how to start a new conversation so my apologies if this post is out of line. I would love a link or directions towards a page that instructs in the art of posting. I am trying to decide between a Performance and an Extended Range Model X. Is the Performance Model's 305 miles range captured in Ludicrous Mode? Can the Performance Model's Chill or Sport driving modes equal the millage performance of the Extended Range's advertised 351 miles?

to answer your opening question, there is a RED button at the top of a folder “post new thread”

Chill, Sport, or Ludicrous does not affect consumption/mileage at all. Your driving behavior does. If you drive it like a Prius, and stay below 55, you can easily reach (or exceed) the rated numbers. How many of us do that? The Performance X has a much larger and heavier rear motor, and 22-inch wheels. The Performance wheels suck watts like crazy. If range is important to you, you should skip the P.

 

[MXLRplus]

I can't figure out how to start a new conversation so my apologies if this post is out of line. I would love a link or directions towards a page that instructs in the art of posting. I am trying to decide between a Performance and an Extended Range Model X. Is the Performance Model's 305 miles range captured in Ludicrous Mode? Can the Performance Model's Chill or Sport driving modes equal the millage performance of the Extended Range's advertised 351 miles?

It's mostly the difference in tires and wheels. If you put the 22's on the Long Range +, it will have a very similar effect.

If you love big rims, you will get less range.

 

[Aston Martin]

It's mostly the difference in tires and wheels. If you put the 22's on the Long Range +, it will have a very similar effect.

If you love big rims, you will get less range.

I much prefer more rubber and less steel. I'll be getting the 20" rims regardless of whether I choose the Performance or the ER. According to Tesla the larger rims account for a drop of about 30 miles over a full charge. The underlying factor in my question is how much the larger rear motor affects the range. Although I agree with DCGOO that it is my driving style that will ultimately decide my range for the most part, both sport and chill in the P model have acceleration caps that limit my ability to suck the batteries at full speed. Do either of those modes limit my energy draw enough for the Performance to reach the extended range of the ER if conditions are equal? It would also be good information to learn if the 305 rated mile range of the P model was accomplished totally in ludicrous mode. If the P model gets 305 in Ludicrous, if driven the same does the millage in sport and chill go up from there?

 

[mswlogo]

to answer your opening question, there is a RED button at the top of a folder “post new thread”

Chill, Sport, or Ludicrous does not affect consumption/mileage at all. Your driving behavior does. If you drive it like a Prius, and stay below 55, you can easily reach (or exceed) the rated numbers. How many of us do that? The Performance X has a much larger and heavier rear motor, and 22-inch wheels. The Performance wheels suck watts like crazy. If range is important to you, you should skip the P.

This is a Raven LR (without the plus) 20” OEM wheels. Perfect weather, lots of hills.

Not driving it like a Prius nor at 55mph. But not driving it like but either. 99% one foot driving. 90% AutoPilot.

The Trip A was two round trips. Almost 500 miles. Mostly 65 mph some 70 mph. AC on about 1/4 the time.

348 miles range. I’ll take it. This is with 20” wheels.

My lifetime includes 4 months of winter.

 

[Master Chief]

When my ER is fully charged, it states that I have a 315 mile range. I have never come close to that in my 11,000 mile experience. Practically every weekend I make a 225 mile run to and from my cabin and it is almost all freeway driving. It always calculates to about a 15% to 20% deficit between the advertised miles on a charge (based upon the little battery gauge on the dash) and actual. My driving style is conservative, but I am not shy about exceeding the posted speed (but never "reckless").

I will say this, that if you punch in your destination on the big screen, the arrival time and battery capacity at arrival is extremely accurate. Usually within 1%, even on a 3 hour trip.

I realize that everyone wants a longer range (as do I) but the numbers they advertise are fantasy IMHO.

 

[Master Chief]

348 miles range. I’ll take it.

How did you calculate 348 miles range?

 

[MXLRplus]

How did you calculate 348 miles range?

Those are in 'Elon Miles' much like 'Elon Time'.

His range would be in the area of 275 miles assuming a battery capacity of 91 kWh usable and .331 kW/mi. That's what mine is ~showing. That's plenty of EV range for most applications except interstate towing.

That's the most true range of any EV SUV.

 

[Master Chief]

Those are in 'Elon Miles' much like 'Elon Time'.

His range would be in the area of 274 miles assuming a battery capacity of 91 kWh usable and .331 kW/mi. That's what mine is ~showing. That's plenty of EV range for most applications except towing.

OK. I know when I purchased my X, being able to make the 225 mile journey without arriving "on fumes" was important. I saw the 315 number and thought "No problemo". However, using the non-trip charging cap of 285 miles (we don't want to kill our battery do we?) and then subtract a 20% "normal" driver reduction factor, I end up with 228 miles of range on a vehicle which was touted as having a 315 mile range.

I can live with this by conveniently supercharging halfway there or bumping the pre-trip charge to full, but I am a bit disappointed by the range.

 

[MXLRplus]

OK. I know when I purchased my X, being able to make the 225 mile journey without arriving "on fumes" was important. I saw the 315 number and thought "No problemo". However, using the non-trip charging cap of 285 miles (we don't want to kill our battery do we?) and then subtract a 20% "normal" driver reduction factor, I end up with 228 miles of range on a vehicle which was touted as having a 315 mile range.

I can live with this by conveniently supercharging halfway there or bumping the pre-trip charge to full, but I am a bit disappointed by the range.

I really don't believe Elon is doing anybody a favor by listing such optimistic EPA numbers. Only experienced EV owners are going to understand. I believe it harms EVs more than helps them.

This is probably why Chevrolet invited a bunch of journalists to drive their new EV Bolt on a 235 mile trip. It's EPA rating is 238.
Nobody needed a tow truck. The same is true for the Porsche, and now the Jaguar. They will hit their advertised range, and you always charge them to 100% unless you live on a mountain.

 

[PJFW8]

OK. I know when I purchased my X, being able to make the 225 mile journey without arriving "on fumes" was important. I saw the 315 number and thought "No problemo". However, using the non-trip charging cap of 285 miles (we don't want to kill our battery do we?) and then subtract a 20% "normal" driver reduction factor, I end up with 228 miles of range on a vehicle which was touted as having a 315 mile range.

I can live with this by conveniently supercharging halfway there or bumping the pre-trip charge to full, but I am a bit disappointed by the range.

Why use the "non-trip charging cap" when commenting on trip range? Charging to 100% prior to a trip causes no harm. Use it when needed, I do agree with your point that 315 is not realistic!

 

[Master Chief]

They will hit their advertised range, and you always charge them to 100% unless you live on a mountain.

Do you charge to 100%? I usually leave mine at my 90% "safe" level unless taking a trip. Is there really that much harm to the batteries, especially if not supercharging to 100% levels?