Tesla Model Y Long Range Only Hits 220 miles in Real World Test

[NCC81701]

How hard one accelerates and decelerates can make a huge difference between in consumption; along with about a billion other things; yet this is unreported and doubt is standardized if they are just using human drivers instead of testing on a dyno. This is why EPA numbers are used even if they are more optimistic than real world.

A big diff between ICE and EV is how much energy is actually stored on board. A gas tank holds an order of magnitude more energy; it’s just not very efficient with it. But it has so much in excess and so inefficient that things like temperature, and acceleration profile doesn’t alter range much.

EVs stores precious little energy but it is extremely efficient with it. But if you start doing inefficient things like accelerating hard or driving 10mph faster it really starts to hit the range of the car.

it’s this kind of nuance that IMO most Car magazines and journalists doesn’t understand yet and it is how we are ending up with such weird results because their underlying science is bad. It just didn’t matter before when comparing ICE cars to ICE cars. The tests that most publication does simply doesn’t have the signal to noise ratio to provide meaningful results comparing EVs to EVs.

 

[Puma2020]

Go outside of CA and you care. Add cold weather, loads of rain or snow, and often 100+ miles between superchargers, or more stressful, ONE supercharger on a 200+ mile route. Sure it’s in the middle which makes it 100 miles to the supercharger and 100 miles after it... but what if that supercharger is damaged, the town doesn’t have power, or it’s offline for any other reason.

I live way outside CA.
I bought the LR Y for that reason. Most folks up here realize that winter changes the range of any car (ICE or EV).
Cold air is more dense, so it takes more energy to push through it.
We don't have superchargers (SC) everywhere (yet) but they are still expanding the SC sites.
Driving conditions and terrain make a huge difference regardless of whether it is an ICE or EV.

I believe, if I can do math correctly, that my range is in the low 300's.
I got the car at the very end of June, 2020. It's been on many highways and also many country sloping back roads here in NH. It's been through it's first winter here. Heated seats set to 1. Temps set to 70.
Also use Dog Mode a lot (summer and winter) which uses more energy.

Below is a real world value. YMMV.

Note: The image of the car is their rendering. In winter, my Y doesn't ever look that clean!

 

[pt19713]

I believe, if I can do math correctly, that my range is in the low 300's.

View attachment 641904
Note: The image of the car is their rendering. In winter, my Y doesn't ever look that clean!

75 kWh div .241 = 311 miles
Realistically it's 72 kWh div .241, or 299 miles since 72 kWh is approximately what you've used when the display is at 0% since there's a zero mile reserve.

 

[mark95476]

There's nothing more inefficient than going uphill at highway speeds. This is my typical drive now that I have my Tesla.

First pic: 943 Wh/mi avg over the past 5 miles, taken at the top of the mountain (~2500 ft)
- Estimated range is 52 mi @ 66% SoC
Second pic: 248 Wh/mi avg after 36.4 miles, taken at the bottom of the mountain (~sea level)
- Estimated range increases to 219 mi @ 67% SoC

How hard one accelerates and decelerates can make a huge difference between in consumption; along with about a billion other things; yet this is unreported and doubt is standardized if they are just using human drivers instead of testing on a dyno. This is why EPA numbers are used even if they are more optimistic than real world.

A big diff between ICE and EV is how much energy is actually stored on board. A gas tank holds an order of magnitude more energy; it’s just not very efficient with it. But it has so much in excess and so inefficient that things like temperature, and acceleration profile doesn’t alter range much.

EVs stores precious little energy but it is extremely efficient with it. But if you start doing inefficient things like accelerating hard or driving 10mph faster it really starts to hit the range of the car.

it’s this kind of nuance that IMO most Car magazines and journalists doesn’t understand yet and it is how we are ending up with such weird results because their underlying science is bad. It just didn’t matter before when comparing ICE cars to ICE cars. The tests that most publication does simply doesn’t have the signal to noise ratio to provide meaningful results comparing EVs to EVs.

 

[pt19713]

Yeah, going up a steep hill at 40 mph needs about 27-30 kW from the motors. That's the equivalent of driving at 75 mph.
My area is generally flat so I don't have a lot of long uphill locations I can go at 60+ mph to see how much energy is needed from the motor(s).

 

[bdwalters]

Anybody know why Tesla doesn’t just put a few more batteries in the SR Y to get the range up to 260 or so? This seems like an easy fix to me.

 

[Guvnah]

Anybody know why Tesla doesn’t just put a few more batteries in the SR Y to get the range up to 260 or so? This seems like an easy fix to me.

Cost! I think the margins on the SR are already a lot lower. The less batteries in a car the more cars can be made and sold. Also, I do think there will be a LR RWD eventually...so, don't want to get the SR RWD range too high...

 

[rxlawdude]

It’s a standardised test by them:

Note that one thing they DON'T apparently control is ambient temperature.

That's a critical omission.

 

[acarney]

Note that one thing they DON'T apparently control is ambient temperature.

That's a critical omission.

And wind speed, in fact they don’t even seem to record that and comment on it. I’m trying to come up with a good way to record air speed at the front of the Y to do a series of range tests; I suspect the Y is more sensitive to wind than the 3 is. However, ready made kits with data loggers appear to be like $1,000+, which I don’t really want to spend. Still researching this and hopefully will be able to record a lot of telemetry soon with it...

 

[NCC81701]

Anybody know why Tesla doesn’t just put a few more batteries in the SR Y to get the range up to 260 or so? This seems like an easy fix to me.

I'm guessing a SR Y only have 3 out of 4 battery modules. Math works out pretty neat if you assume each module have 20kWh, and you use 230wh/mi reference figure (230 wh/mi -> 326mi range with a 75kWh battery ).

 

[Pied]

I finally had a chance to do a longer trip.

I had fairly warm temperatures, around 65F and dropped to 50F towards the evening. 2 passengers, climate control off.
Car: 2021 Model Y LR AWD
Total Trip: 188 Miles
Charged to 90% - 292 displayed range
Miles left: 55
Efficiency: 295 wh/mi
Speed: Cruise set at 78mph. Occasional traffic making me reduce speed between 70-76mph. I would guess 90% of the time I was able to keep my set speed. Also did lots of spirited passing (I was trying to get home, not be efficient).

Route was from Fresno, CA to Bay Area, CA. Highway 99 North > 580 West > 880 South.

TLDR: I estimate I would be able to get 220 miles driving @ 78mph from a 90% charge. Of course YMMV.