Replaced Leaf (107 range) with Tesla 3 LR AWD..Observations

[p4594spa]

So I drove a Leaf SV with 107 range for 3 years. I always had max regen turned on. I used it (and the new Tesla) as a compute car for 30 miles each way (takes 50-90 minutes, SF Bay area traffic) during the weekdays. What I noticed, in general, is that the Leaf "consumed" less miles, the worse the traffic got.
* In light traffic @ 70mph, I would "consume" 40 miles of range
* In really bad traffic, with lots of stop and go, (my 90 minute experience), I would see consumption of as little 3 miles
used for the 30 miles driven. This seemed to me to be logical since I had lots of regen going

So now I have been drive the new Tesla 3 LR AWD for the 3 weeks now and the regen on the Tesla 3 is much much stronger the best case regen on the Leaf, so I was kind of expecting to see at least similar behavior. What I am finding is the car is consuming between 35-40 miles of range regardless of whether I am in light traffic or really bad traffic.
==>So what I missing here???

Don't get me wrong the Tesla 3 has 3x the range and 10x the features and I am happy with the new car, just can't logically understand this behavior

 

[mtndrew1]

So I drove a Leaf SV with 107 range for 3 years. I always had max regen turned on. I used it (and the new Tesla) as a compute car for 30 miles each way (takes 50-90 minutes, SF Bay area traffic) during the weekdays. What I noticed, in general, is that the Leaf "consumed" less miles, the worse the traffic got.
* In light traffic @ 70mph, I would "consume" 40 miles of range
* In really bad traffic, with lots of stop and go, (my 90 minute experience), I would see consumption of as little 3 miles
used for the 30 miles driven. This seemed to me to be logical since I had lots of regen going

So now I have been drive the new Tesla 3 LR AWD for the 3 weeks now and the regen on the Tesla 3 is much much stronger the best case regen on the Leaf, so I was kind of expecting to see at least similar behavior. What I am finding is the car is consuming between 35-40 miles of range regardless of whether I am in light traffic or really bad traffic.
==>So what I missing here???

Don't get me wrong the Tesla 3 has 3x the range and 10x the features and I am happy with the new car, just can't logically understand this behavior

The Leaf has a “guess o meter” that adjusts the predicted range based on recent behavior. This is why you saw very little change in the range meter during low consumption.

The Tesla does not have this. The range meter is merely the energy in the “tank” divided by the EPA Wh/mi rating.

The cars are using similar amounts of energy for the trip, the Leaf just has a different way of displaying it.

 

[maximizese]

* In really bad traffic, with lots of stop and go, (my 90 minute experience), I would see consumption of as little 3 miles
used for the 30 miles driven. This seemed to me to be logical since I had lots of regen going

Are you sure that's correct? You consumed 3 "guessometer" miles over the 30 miles driven? That seems extreme and perhaps a false metric. I doubt that you would be able to continue at such a pace to cover 900 miles on the same charge.

In addition to our Model S85, we have a Fiat 500e that gets impeccable efficiency in slow and go traffic on the freeway. Our S will do about 260Wh/mi by gingerly accelerating and coasting to a stop in traffic; our Fiat does it with only 160Wh/mi. I was stuck in some slow moving traffic the other day. It took me 50 minutes to go 12 miles but I got an impressive 6 mi/kWh in the Fiat...lifetime average is 4 mi/kWh. Our lifetime average in the S85 is 3.1 mi/kWh.

 

[nicholb]

Are you sure that's correct? You consumed 3 "guessometer" miles over the 30 miles driven? That seems extreme and perhaps a false metric. I doubt that you would be able to continue at such a pace to cover 900 miles on the same charge.

I imagine it worked like this. It starts with a guess of 107m range. When going slow it changes that estimate based on the current consumption to be 134m of range. After going 30m it is still using the lower consumption rate and displays 104m estimated range.

When going fast the consumption is higher so it changes the guessed range to 97m and after 30m it is still using the higher consumption estimate and displays 67m estimated range.

The big difference in range meter is it changing the estimated range rather then actual consumption.

As pointed out the Model 3 is using a straight battery charge remaining/EPA. It does not move the goal posts as you are driving.

 

[ewoodrick]

There definitely is a difference in consumption with speed in the Tesla. And the same with temp.

It seems as if the Leaf started seeing decreased range at a lower speed than the Tesla though.

 

[MrMassTransit]

I also had a Leaf prior to my Model 3 SR+. I notice the same behavior with both cars - slower speeds, including traffic, result in higher efficiency - particularly if I can minimize braking and creep along a steady speed without using brakes/regen. The Model 3 makes it much easier to track the efficiency compared to the Leaf. This assumes no climate control on - if I have climate control on, there comes a point where the efficiency of slower speeds is outweighed by the usage of the climate control.

Are you comparing against the same set of circumstances - i.e. driving yourself instead of using autopilot? Autopilot is a great convenience in traffic, but it stops and starts the car more than I would - I try to keep rolling for decent stretches at a slow pace, rather than speeding up and slowing down.

 

[Msjulie]

Also recall that stop and go is really still the worst kind of driving for range as regen can only capture so much of the energy used to get the car rolling and having to get moving again is costly. And a Tesla is a heavy car.

I find that stop and go in my 3 is often running at 330+ wh with 35-40mph average (but lots of stopping and waiting at lights grr) and that maintaining a moderate highway speed, level ground, can get me much closer to the rated 245

 

[Reeler]

The LEAF is much lighter so does better with stop and go. In the LEAF, I could get off the freeway if I wasn't going to make it home and see my range go way up. It saved me many times.

Luckily with the higher range EVs today, I rarely get those issues.

 

[ewoodrick]

The LEAF is much lighter so does better with stop and go. In the LEAF, I could get off the freeway if I wasn't going to make it home and see my range go way up. It saved me many times.

Luckily with the higher range EVs today, I rarely get those issues.

And you can see your range go up in the Tesla if you are looking at the energy graph. (Why don't they make that easier to see?????)

 

[ZOMGVTEK]

I had a 1st gen Leaf for a few years and noticed the same thing. I would get reasonable range at absurdly low speeds, driving gently in traffic. But at highway speeds or driving hard the range was maybe half what it said on the GOM. I assume it was due to the design of the car and age of the battery. Driving that car hard totally devastated range. Driving very gently would noticeably extend range. I don’t really see this much on the 3. So long as the battery is warm driving it hard makes surprisingly little difference. I assume the primary difference is the efficiency of the drive units under high power is much better on the 3, and the internal resistance of the battery is lower on the 3. One other factor making traffic range not as great is how much power the 3 consumes sitting ‘on’ but not moving. It’s a fair bit more than Leaf, so sitting in traffic sips a bit more juice than Leaf. Apparently these factors align to even out the range.

One big note, the Model 3 does not change it’s indicated range based on driving behavior. The Leaf does, so you will get an increase in stated range if you drive super efficiently. So for your highway traffic example, it’s not that you ‘used’ 3 miles to go 30, you just drove efficiently enough to almost boost the claimed remaining range to where it was before you started. Batteries hold energy, how far you can go on that energy depends on the conditions. Model 3 will always drop miles as you drive unless you’re going down a big hill and making energy. With Leaf, you can make the GOM show you way more range by driving very slow with the HVAC off. This does not mean in reality those claimed miles are achievable. They are really only for the exact conditions you recently drove in. Speed up again and the GOM starts to tank. I would regularly get ~4x fewer miles than initially indicated in my Leaf. I get maybe 20-50% worse than indicated in my 3 in similar conditions. I consume less energy in the 3 than the same trips in the Leaf.

 

[DickBlonov]

And you can see your range go up in the Tesla if you are looking at the energy graph. (Why don't they make that easier to see?????)

I would love to see a third estimated range meter display option instead of just % or rated miles. This could be based on whatever you select in the energy graph (distance, average, instantaneous).

In my neck of the woods where we see -20°C days, rated range display is rather useless.

Phil

 

[Reeler]

I have driven a bunch of different EVs. So far, I like the Bolt GOM the best. It gives Max/Min/GOM and adjusts as you drive.

 

[ZOMGVTEK]

I would love to see a third estimated range meter display option instead of just % or rated miles. This could be based on whatever you select in the energy graph (distance, average, instantaneous).

In my neck of the woods where we see -20°C days, rated range display is rather useless.

Phil

Yep. In cold weather the rated range display is totally useless. Some people still love it for some reason, claiming its easier to estimate range. It would be nice if they had an advanced mode with something like the 30 mile averaged estimated range, as well as the battery capacity remaining or something fancy like that.