Real World Range — 3LR vs. S100D?

[ForeverFree]

We know that Tesla-reduced range is 310 and 335, respectively. Actual EPA-tested was 334 and 344.

And, with early favorable indications of 3LR efficiency — especially with Aero 18s — there’s reason to suspect that the real-world range of the cars is fairly close, rather than 25 miles apart.

Would love to hear actual experience and opinions from folks who have both cars. (FWIW, we also have an S85D that still shows 265 rated range, and the real world gap between it and our 3LR seems more than 45 miles.)

 

[Troy]

Hi. The difference in EPA highway dyno test scores was less than 1 mile. Here are the numbers and data sources:

Model 3 LR, 18" 454.64 mi at 48 mph
Model S 100D 19" 455.37 mi at 48 mph

We could actually calculate the range if somebody could report the Wh/mi numbers but the problem is, the test needs to be done on the same road, at the same time, at the same speed while both cars are driving one after another with enough gap between them. Let's assume somebody reported these numbers:

Model S 100D, 19", 75 mph= 390 Wh/mi
Model 3 LR, 18", 75 mph= 311 Wh/mi

The range calculations would look like this:

Model S 100D, 19", 75 mph
Usable battery capacity= 98,400 Wh
Range= 98,400 Wh / 390 Wh/mi= 252.3 miles

Model 3 LR, 18", 75 mph
Usable battery capacity= 78,270 Wh
Range= 78,270 Wh / 311 Wh/mi= 251.7 miles

 

[ab26]

@Troy this is informative. Do you know what assumptions EPA make in terms of passenger weight of the car? Do they assume single person sitting or five passenger load?

Since the model 3 is lighter, I would think that every additional passenger loading into the car would have a more significant impact on range compared to the model s.

 

[ElecFan]

Hi. The difference in EPA highway dyno test scores was less than 1 mile. Here are the numbers and data sources:

Model 3 LR, 18" 454.64 mi at 48 mph
Model S 100D 19" 455.37 mi at 48 mph

We could actually calculate the range if somebody could report the Wh/mi numbers but the problem is, the test needs to be done on the same road, at the same time, at the same speed while both cars are driving one after another with enough gap between them.

Here's a post of an S and 3 energy consumption driving home together after delivery. Model 3 220Wh/mile vs P85 299Wh/mile on same 50 mlie trip
It was 220wh/mi for the 3 vs 299wh/mi for the S. Of course, not a 100D but a P85.

 

[gregincal]

The other problem is that you have to drive them until they stop. It looks to me like Tesla is hiding the range in the display (assuming it does exist).

 

[Zoomit]

@Troy this is informative. Do you know what assumptions EPA make in terms of passenger weight of the car? Do they assume single person sitting or five passenger load?

Since the model 3 is lighter, I would think that every additional passenger loading into the car would have a more significant impact on range compared to the model s.

I think the test assumes 300 lbs payload. That number was in a 1999 revision to the SAE J1634 standard that I've seen. I don’t know what the current SAE standard says.

However, steady-state highway cruise energy consumption is relatively insensitive to weight. Assuming 70mph, the increase in energy consumption between a single 170 lb passenger and 5 passengers (850 lbs) is about 4.3% in the Model S and 4.6% in the Model 3. These numbers are based on my models.

To put that in context, carrying the extra 690 lbs is increases consumption the same amount as a headwind of only 5 mph. And most people wouldn't even be aware of a 5 mph breeze and might think of it as a calm day.

 

[DanL3]

Car weight really has \very little effect on energy usage until you hit the brakes. Wind resistance and rolling resistance have bigger effects that car weight.

So the key is to not hit the brakes. That means take your foot off the gas sooner. Regen helps but is still less effective than coasting to a slower speed as you approach a stop.

Also 80% of braking capability is in the front wheels because that is where the weight goes during breaking. In the RWD cars that energy is lost. This is why AWD cars have a better range.

 

[stevezzzz]

Also 80% of braking capability is in the front wheels because that is where the weight goes during breaking. In the RWD cars that energy is lost. This is why AWD cars have a better range.

This is not true. In a RWD Model S, during regenerative braking (i.e., lifting off the accelerator rather than pressing the brake pedal) the front wheels are not subject to any braking: all regenerative braking is seen as ‘engine’ drag on the rear wheels, and the same amount of energy is recaptured by the system and stored in the battery pack as it would in an AWD Model S where both motors are involved.

AWD Model S have better range than their RWD siblings because Tesla uses two smaller, more efficient motors in the AWD setup than the single, larger motor in the RWD setup (I’m talking about non-Performance variants, though the P models have one of the smaller motors up front and a larger motor in back and still manage to get better range than the RWD cars): the control software can play games with how much torque is supplied by each motor at any given time and can even stop producing torque from the rear motor completely.

When the S P85D first hit the streets in late 2014, people were up in arms because initially its efficiency was significantly worse then a P85 or an 85. Over the next few months Tesla released new firmware that markedly improved the P85D’s range by implementing ever more sophisticated control algorithms. Search on ‘P85D’ and ‘torque sleep’ if you want to read some of the contemporaneous discussions.

 

[MikeBur]

This is not true. In a RWD Model S, during regenerative braking (i.e., lifting off the accelerator rather than pressing the brake pedal) the front wheels are not subject to any braking: all regenerative braking is seen as ‘engine’ drag on the rear wheels, and the same amount of energy is recaptured by the system and stored in the battery pack as it would in an AWD Model S where both motors are involved.

AWD Model S have better range than their RWD siblings because Tesla uses two smaller, more efficient motors in the AWD setup than the single, larger motor in the RWD setup (I’m talking about non-Performance variants, though the P models have one of the smaller motors up front and a larger motor in back and still manage to get better range than the RWD cars): the control software can play games with how much torque is supplied by each motor at any given time and can even stop producing torque from the rear motor completely.

When the S P85D first hit the streets in late 2014, people were up in arms because initially its efficiency was significantly worse then a P85 or an 85. Over the next few months Tesla released new firmware that markedly improved the P85D’s range by implementing ever more sophisticated control algorithms. Search on ‘P85D’ and ‘torque sleep’ if you want to read some of the contemporaneous discussions.

I would not say “up in arms” or “contemporaneous discussions”, rather heated debate that needed some data to help reinforce the changes required to meet the “promises” made by Elon

Also don’t forget, for P cars, the front and rear motors are both different sized and different gear ratios, so this was pretty sophisticated as you say. For anyone geeking for data, try Chassis CAN Logging To ASCII Text Plus Graphing (post 449)

Oh, and I’m still Patiently awaiting the 691HP

 

[TaoJones]

Be aware that in the real world, I get between 140-160 miles per full charge during a given week of local driving. That's in an S90D with 294 miles rated range. Yes, you read that right - it's about a 50% hit for those short, urban trips with varying elevation, not a lot of speed over 50mph, and a fairly temperate SoCal climate. Having said that, you can absolutely get every bit of 294 miles point to point on a flat highway in mild weather at a reasonable speed. Most people's driving, of course, will fall in between those two constraints, and most people have no idea of their actual efficiency since they just read the Wh/mile number off their screens.

While my next Tesla will be a Model S AP1 CPO RWD car (intended as a perfect bridge car to get through the next 3-ish years until a more feature-rich/any FSD is available), I've also deferred my Model 3 reservation in favor of the AWD variant and any interior choice other than black, among other things. But one option that will be an absolute must-have is that LR pack. With that pack, even the ill-fated Ozona to Van Horn run westbound in West Texas would be doable without creating a hazard by driving 30mph below the posted speed limit.

I'm not saying the base pack will be useless - but the LR pack is one of the most compelling reasons to own a Model 3.

 

[gregincal]

The Model 3 is way more efficient than the Model S in city driving, presumably because of the permanent magnet motor (as well as the lighter weight). For the EPA ratings the Model 3 is 12% more efficient than the Model S overall, but is 28% more efficient in city driving.

 

[TaoJones]

The Model 3 is way more efficient than the Model S in city driving, presumably because of the permanent magnet motor (as well as the lighter weight). For the EPA ratings the Model 3 is 12% more efficient than the Model S overall, but is 28% more efficient in city driving.

Sounds encouraging. Looking forward to real-world reports in support of any improvement whatsoever.

Noting that you've had your 3 for a month, do you notice a difference relative to any recollections related to the 2013 S?

 

[K-MTG]

On my 3 my average energy usage is 260 and it is 395 on the X. And I don't drive that efficiently.

 

[stevezzzz]

On my 3 my average energy usage is 260 and it is 395 on the X. And I don't drive that efficiently.

My numbers for the X and 3 are similar. It's still very much winter here and my average for the XP100D since November is 398 Wh/mi in 3200 miles; my average in the 3 since the Feb 2 delivery is 248 Wh/mi in just under 1000 miles.

 

[gregincal]

Sounds encouraging. Looking forward to real-world reports in support of any improvement whatsoever.

Noting that you've had your 3 for a month, do you notice a difference relative to any recollections related to the 2013 S?

Most of my driving is my commute. The problem with around town driving is that most of it is too short to notice or care how much of the battery is consumed. It does seem like the Model 3 does better around town, though.

 

[ForeverFree]

Still wondering if anyone has both an S100D and a 3 for which they can compare real-world range?

EPA test cycle suggests 10-mile difference. Published figures state 25. Wondering what truth is?

Put another way, in your regular usage, does your 3 come closer to achieving rated range than your S?

 

[CO2CLEAN]

The Model 3 LR gets 310 official (after Tesla lowered it from 334) and the Model S 100D gets 335 miles.
Looking at the "highway" range test the Model 3 LR gets about 293 miles official after lowering it from about 316 miles. The Model S 100D gets 337 miles "highway" range. I'm not sure how these will change if you drive faster than the average speed of the "highway" test which is about 48 mph.