[Speculation] The Model 3 may have > 220/310 miles of range

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Tesla may be using the 220/310 mile range figure (and .23 Cd) as a lower bound for cars equipped with the 19" Sport wheels/tires. If that's the case, I wouldn't be surprised if the range with the 18" Aero wheels/tires (I'm assuming the tires also have a smidge lower Crr) is over 215/320 miles. It may be that Tesla hit their design goal of .21 Cd with the aero wheels.

I know other manufacturers have used conservative estimates for early production cars. DW's first gen plug-in Prius initially had the same mpg rating as the hatch. INL testing and anecdotes pointed to the car getting better mileage on gas, and sure enough, Toyota bumped up the PiP's mpg rating after a couple years.

If they're as good as Chgd Up's wheel covers, and Motortrend's highway rating is correct, a long range 3 with Aero wheels might be able to do 330+ miles on the highway. Since I'm being super-speculative, if everything I've already posted turns out to be accurate, driving 100-150 feet behind a semi in said 3 might net 400+ miles of highway range.

Aero wheels

Of course, YR(ange)MV.

 

[No2DinosaurFuel]

Know how Elon routinely over promise and under deliver I doubt it would be that conservative. Expect that number or less.

 

[KarenRei]

Tesla may be using the 220/310 mile range figure (and .23 Cd) as a lower bound for cars equipped with the 19" Sport wheels/tires.

Optimism shines eternal

EPA ranges are calculated based on what comes standard on a vehicle. Not with options.

The range is what it is. If you want more, drive slowly.

 

[ChadS]

EPA ranges are indeed calculated with default equipment, but I think OMG is pointing out that the manufacturer can report numbers BELOW the EPA figure. Interesting theory; that would mean all customers could hit the numbers, but customers with aero wheels could do better. I like it.

That said, I'm going to have to agree with NO2's thoughts - Musk is just too fond of quoting the highest number possible to be holding back. And the numbers quoted are pretty impressive.

 

[brianman]

My gut reaction to the title, "No. Stop doing this to people."

My second reaction is to "Tesla may be using the 220/310 mile range figure (and .23 Cd) as a lower bound for cars equipped with the 19" Sport wheels/tires" to which I say "No. In all of Tesla's history, at least that I've been tracking, they give the numbers for the best combination and then people are 'disappointed' that when they add heavier wheels and options the numbers are 'worse'."

I really don't envy Tesla in dealing with customers that keeping setting themselves and others up for disappointment.

[Speculation] BrianMan is tired of "bad customers".

 

[omgwtfbyobbq]

It's up to the manufacturers to submit some form of vehicle road-load estimates, and some manufacturers, like Toyota, tend to underestimate their fuel economy ratings rather than overestimate (Ford and Hyundai) them.

https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=34102&flag=1

In addition, a manufacturer can only include equipment that decreases aerodynamic drag if they expect 67% or more of their test group to have that feature installed, or they're willing to add another category for that vehicle.

Optional equipment that decreases aerodynamic drag and which has a projected installation rate of less than 67 percent on a carline in a test group must not be installed on the test vehicle or accounted for if analytical methods are employed to determine the road-load force specification unless a manufacturer elects to further subdivide vehicles into a subconfiguration including only vehicles with these options installed.

Now here's the kicker, and why I think it's possible, if not likely, for Tesla's estimates to be based off of the Sport wheels.

If Tesla's fuel economy data differs by 7% or more from the EPA's coastdown audit, they either need to revise their estimates or provide other vehicles that are representative of their figures.

If a production vehicle’s city (FTP) energy loss due to road-load, calculated based on a production vehicle coastdown audit, is 10% greater than the city (FTP) energy loss due to road-load, calculated based on the road-load specification, then that road-load specification is substantially unrepresentative. If a production vehicle’s highway (HFET) or highway portion (bag 2) of the US06 energy loss due to road-load, calculated based on a production vehicle coastdown audit, is 7% greater than the highway energy loss due to road-load, calculated based on the road-load specification, then that road-load specification is substantially unrepresentative.

With Chgd Up's pie-pan wheel covers reducing drag by 6% at 60mph, my feeling is that the aero covers plus the lower rolling resistance 18" wheel/tire combo have a decent chance of differing from the stock fuel economy by 7%, which would trigger an audit on the EPA coastdown test. The easy way to avoid that, and any negative publicity associated with it, is to use a 3 with Sport rims for certification.

Sure, Elon's 310 mile EPA range might really be 290-300+ mile EPA range, but my bet is still on the Aero wheels providing better range than whatever the actual EPA rating is. If Tesla does use the Aero rims for certification, and doesn't create a different subcategory for them, which I doubt they would do, then they might be audited by the EPA.

 

[SageBrush]

Tesla may be using the 220/310 mile range figure (and .23 Cd) as a lower bound for cars equipped with the 19" Sport wheels/tires.

Or is testing with Aero, and then the 330 mile Model 3 is going to fare worse.

IIRC though, EPA requires the similar cars clause to have the same size tyres so perhaps Tesla is submitting consumption values for each of the two trims.

As an aside, it was exactly this EPA loophole that allowed Ford to manipulate their plug-in fuel economy ratings to values way beyond those when directly tested. I think Ford used the hybrid numbers for the plug-ins.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

Given Elon's penchant to overpromise and underdeliver, I'm thinking the quoted range is probably an overstatement.

 

[SageBrush]

Given Elon's penchant to overpromise and underdeliver, I'm thinking the quoted range is probably an overstatement.

You seem to be forgetting that the range number is submitted to the EPA.

 

[Thomas Edison]

It's up to the manufacturers to submit some form of vehicle road-load estimates, and some manufacturers, like Toyota, tend to underestimate their fuel economy ratings rather than overestimate (Ford and Hyundai) them.

https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=34102&flag=1

In addition, a manufacturer can only include equipment that decreases aerodynamic drag if they expect 67% or more of their test group to have that feature installed, or they're willing to add another category for that vehicle.



Now here's the kicker, and why I think it's possible, if not likely, for Tesla's estimates to be based off of the Sport wheels.

If Tesla's fuel economy data differs by 7% or more from the EPA's coastdown audit, they either need to revise their estimates or provide other vehicles that are representative of their figures.



With Chgd Up's pie-pan wheel covers reducing drag by 6% at 60mph, my feeling is that the aero covers plus the lower rolling resistance 18" wheel/tire combo have a decent chance of differing from the stock fuel economy by 7%, which would trigger an audit on the EPA coastdown test. The easy way to avoid that, and any negative publicity associated with it, is to use a 3 with Sport rims for certification.

Sure, Elon's 310 mile EPA range might really be 290-300+ mile EPA range, but my bet is still on the Aero wheels providing better range than whatever the actual EPA rating is. If Tesla does use the Aero rims for certification, and doesn't create a different subcategory for them, which I doubt they would do, then they might be audited by the EPA.

Since the 19" wheels are an upgrade and not standard one would think that Tesla's range is based off the aero wheels. So 310 and 220 would most definitely not be what you would get with the larger wheels.

 

[alseTrick]

People are still hoping for "surprises" even though the car is already being produced.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Or is testing with Aero, and then the 330 mile Model 3 is going to fare worse.

IIRC though, EPA requires the similar cars clause to have the same size tyres so perhaps Tesla is submitting consumption values for each of the two trims.

As an aside, it was exactly this EPA loophole that allowed Ford to manipulate their plug-in fuel economy ratings to values way beyond those when directly tested. I think Ford used the hybrid numbers for the plug-ins.

Ford used the Fusion Hybrid numbers for the C-max Hybrid by talking advantage of a loophole that allowed them to use the same numbers for cars with the same drivetrain and weight class.

Obviously this is wrong given the huge aero differences between the two. Ford said when the issue was brought up, their engineers were surprised at the differences, which I remember thinking was a load of BS (I find it hard to believe their engineers would not realize a Fusion is drastically more aerodynamic than the C-Max).

Ford C-Max Fuel Economy | EPA Loophole - Consumer Reports News
Ford: We didn't overstate C-Max Hybrid mpg, low numbers were a surprise

 

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Since the 19" wheels are an upgrade and not standard one would think that Tesla's range is based off the aero wheels. So 310 and 220 would most definitely not be what you would get with the larger wheels.

Or is testing with Aero, and then the 330 mile Model 3 is going to fare worse.

IIRC though, EPA requires the similar cars clause to have the same size tyres so perhaps Tesla is submitting consumption values for each of the two trims.

As an aside, it was exactly this EPA loophole that allowed Ford to manipulate their plug-in fuel economy ratings to values way beyond those when directly tested. I think Ford used the hybrid numbers for the plug-ins.

I initially thought that Tesla might have a way around the testing by having the Aero wheels installed on the base models too, but after rereading the guidelines, that's covered in another section.

Optional equipment that increases aerodynamic drag and which has a projected installation rate of over 33 percent on a carline in a test group must be installed on the test vehicle or accounted for if analytical methods are employed to determine the road-load force specification.

If more than one out of every three Model 3's sold this year has the Sport wheels, Tesla has to account for that in it's EPA rating. It's possible that less than a third of the Long Range/Premium package buyers will opt for the Sport wheels, but my guess is that the majority of purchases in 2017 will come with the Sport wheels.

Granted, Tesla can divide the 3s they make into an Aero/non-Aero wheel rating at some point this year, but if they do that I believe they'll need another Executive Order from the CA ARB with both cars included as opposed to the current one with only the one Long Range Model 3.

 

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Although... If they "knew", AKA "strongly encouraged" their employee orders to be < 33% Sport wheels, the current rating would be for the cars with Aero wheels. I guess we'll find out in a couple months when they start delivering cars to current owners. If they keep the same test group, then the 310 mile rating is for a 3 with Sport wheels.