Tesla rigged the dashboard readouts in its electric cars to provide “rosy” [range] projections

Tesla’s secret team to suppress thousands of driving range complaints

About a decade ago, Tesla rigged the dashboard readouts in its electric cars to provide “rosy” projections of how far owners can drive before needing to recharge, a source told Reuters.

www.reuters.com

Interesting.

TL;DR

1. Above 50% SOC the cars over state range, and under 50% they become more realistic.

2. Tesla had or has a team in Nevada and now moved to Utah solely dedicated to cancelling Service requests for range complaints, as they are deluged with them.

3. EPA ratings: Tesla aggressively uses all options to get the most rosy estimates (we knew that)

4. No comment from Tesla or any mfg on range for the story, some old comments.

So this feels about the same as almost every ICE car I've owned. The fuel gauge drops slower for the first 2/3 of a tank, then drops quicker at the end.

"Supercharging-Batterieanzeige auf dem Display, während der Elektroauto-Ladung an einer Tesla Supercharger Ladestation" by verchmarco is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
Admin note: Image added for Blog Feed thumbnail

 

[LostVector]

Agreed - and the answer is trivial - just default the battery display on the main screen to percent instead of EPA-miles. That's gonna work better for 90% of all customers.

Is that not the default already? It's so easy to change on the main screen that I don't even remember how the car was delivered per that setting.

Personally, I find EPA miles more useful than percent. I can mentally derate by some amount pretty quickly to compare against the distance I need to drive. With a percentage, I have to convert it to miles of some sort anyway in my head, so it takes longer to reason through.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

Is that not the default already? It's so easy to change on the main screen that I don't even remember how the car was delivered per that setting.

Personally, I find EPA miles more useful than percent. I can mentally derate by some amount pretty quickly to compare against the distance I need to drive. With a percentage, I have to convert it to miles of some sort anyway in my head, so it takes longer to reason through.

I believe it comes from the factory showing miles - it was the first thing I toggled to percent.

I like percent a lot - it exercises the iPhone mentality of just-keep-it-at-50-or-more part of the brain. If I want range, I'll use the nav to where I'm actually going and get a shockingly exact estimate that factors in elevation, traffic and everything.

 

[LostVector]

I believe it comes from the factory showing miles - it was the first thing I toggled to percent.

I like percent a lot - it exercises the iPhone mentality of just-keep-it-at-50-or-more part of the brain. If I want range, I'll use the nav to where I'm actually going and get a shockingly exact estimate that factors in elevation, traffic and everything.

The problem with that for me is I have to actually enter that into the nav. If I need a certain amount of range for the next leg of my trip or for a return home, I want to have some intuitive understanding of that prior to entering it into the nav at the time of travel.

 

[Mullermn]

You can just enter the entire trip in to the nav as multiple stops, even if some of those stops are long breaks. That will give you a calculated estimate for your final charge though it will not take in to account any changes in weather that happen in the mean time.

 

[alexgr]

I believe it comes from the factory showing miles - it was the first thing I toggled to percent.

I like percent a lot - it exercises the iPhone mentality of just-keep-it-at-50-or-more part of the brain. If I want range, I'll use the nav to where I'm actually going and get a shockingly exact estimate that factors in elevation, traffic and everything.

Now I understand it! I always keep it in miles (not percent) and I am an Android user (never Apple).
Regarding navigation predictions, has anyone noticed significant glitches in energy consumption predictions and supercharger routing in the past 5-6 months or so when traveling long distance? I had to basically manually route to superchargers that Tesla skipped initially because I knew the predictions (like 300 miles of highway driving) were totally unrealistic. These were not EPA numbers, but the navigation-based planner estimates. Another time, the car charger to some 250 miles (~75-80%) told me 10 minutes into a 150 miles drive that it will not reach the destination forcing me to drive well below speed limit and contemplate dying of a heart attack in the next 20 minutes or so only to tell me later that it is all clear and I will arrive with nearly 20% charge driving at normal speed. Frankly, it feels that Tesla software, both regular and FSD, is getting much less reliable in the past year.

 

[beatle]

I was just about to post something that amounted to what you have said in your first paragraph. Asking the car to predict range is asking it to speculate about how fast you're going to drive, how strong the headwinds will be, how much AC you're going to use, what the elevation of your destination will be, whether you'll have the windows rolled down, and other things the car can't possibly know. I changed the battery display to percentage the day I got the car.

The EPA mileage and range estimates have never been about predicting what mileage or range you're going to get (the way you drive your car), but for comparison between cars. I.e. you can expect to get more range out of a car rated at 300 miles than one rated at 250 miles.

In theory the EPA test could be used for comparison across brands, but we've seen (and is kind of the point of the thread, I think) is that some cars are better at hitting their EPA estimates than others when driven in the same manner.

If the tests were more representative of how people typically use an EV in the most demanding way (real highway speeds and varying temperatures, not the 60mph top speed seen in the EPA test) then people would be less surprised/disappointed when they set their cruise control at 78 mph in sub-freezing temperatures and they only get 60% of their rated range.

The fact that an EV can get its rated range with judicious use of regen on a rural 55mph highway without the use of any HVAC is of little surprise to most people. This testing methodology just sets people up for disappointment.

 

[LostVector]

In theory the EPA test could be used for comparison across brands, but we've seen (and is kind of the point of the thread, I think) is that some cars are better at hitting their EPA estimates than others when driven in the same manner.

If the tests were more representative of how people typically use an EV in the most demanding way (real highway speeds and varying temperatures, not the 60mph top speed seen in the EPA test) then people would be less surprised/disappointed when they set their cruise control at 78 mph in sub-freezing temperatures and they only get 60% of their rated range.

The fact that an EV can get its rated range with judicious use of regen on a rural 55mph highway without the use of any HVAC is of little surprise to most people. This testing methodology just sets people up for disappointment.

Yep. I think the EPA is mostly at fault here, but Tesla could voluntarily derate a bit here to manage expectations, and they choose not to.

 

[MP3Mike]

It's sounds like you're making a good argument for the EPA tests. That they can be used and can show that some cars are better than others. Isn't that what the rating is for?

That is the point, but it completely fails because they allow multiple different testing procedures that produce different results, and the manufacturer can derate on top of that. So you end up with numbers that aren't comparable.

 

[KenBlub]

Let’s not forget car & driver made the Ioniq 6 their EV of the year and it got 100 miles less than EPA advertised in their “real world” test

2024 Hyundai Ioniq 6 Review, Pricing, and Specs

The Ioniq 6 sedan is one of our favorite electric vehicles, with strong performance, a long driving range, and a fantastic design inside and out.

www.caranddriver.com

 

[beatle]

Yep. I think the EPA is mostly at fault here, but Tesla could voluntarily derate a bit here to manage expectations, and they choose not to.

I think "don't hate the player, hate the game" is the right line here.

 

[Justjim]

The "listed" range is correct. You just don't drive the car under the EPA conditions. That 30% difference will change perhaps from 40% to -10% sometimes depending on how you drive (highway/city), temperature (summer/winter), and other factors.

But, if the listed range has no relationship to how I drive, because I don't drive to the EPA standard (as has been pointed out, who drive 48mph on the hiway?), what use is it to me?
I have made another 200km trip (each way) and had put my destination in. The battery percentage remaining varied only +/- 1% during the drive and finished spot on. It seems to me that this is more valuable than knowing what the EPA says I should be getting. What am I missing?

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Let’s not forget car & driver made the Ioniq 6 their EV of the year and it got 100 miles less than EPA advertised in their “real world” test

2024 Hyundai Ioniq 6 Review, Pricing, and Specs

The Ioniq 6 sedan is one of our favorite electric vehicles, with strong performance, a long driving range, and a fantastic design inside and out.

www.caranddriver.com

That number wasn't from their real world test, it was from their 75mph range test.

Why We Test EVs the Way We Do

How our testing reveals the true performance and range of electric vehicles.

www.caranddriver.com

 

[alexgr]

But, if the listed range has no relationship to how I drive, because I don't drive to the EPA standard (as has been pointed out, who drive 48mph on the hiway?), what use is it to me?
I have made another 200km trip (each way) and had put my destination in. The battery percentage remaining varied only +/- 1% during the drive and finished spot on. It seems to me that this is more valuable than knowing what the EPA says I should be getting. What am I missing?

The listed EPA range in Tesla is the same to me as the gas tank fill indicator on an ICE car. Some prefer to display battery % left, which is probably a closer analogue to the gas tank fill indicator

 

[Olle]

EPA range is well defined and part of the cycle is very slow and wouldn’t correlate much with highway range overall. As the article says, EPA occasionally do their own to compare with the self reporting and found a 3% discrepancy for some Tesla Model. Not too shabby. As the low speed efficiency increases every year, so does the EPA range.

It‘s too bad that Tesla removed the “how far can I go“ page where you could see range at different speeds And temperatures. They definitely subscribe to the ‘Less is More‘ information model.

I actually found the “how far can I go“ page on Wayback Machine. As you can see, the page user could change speed, temp, AC and wheels to get range for each case. It demystified the type of repetitive and confused questions on range accuracy that we see in this thread as well as all over social and mainstream media on a daily basis.