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

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

because tesla followed epa criteria for testing and the germans didnt

Not true. Manufacturers _have_ to follow EPA rules for testing. They get fined if they don't.

Part of the issue is that the rules have some flexibility, and the manufacturer can choose from multiple approaches to calculate the results. They can also de-rate.
Some choose accuracy, others choose whatever approach gives the highest number.

Also, Tesla has a small top buffer, so don't hide the early degradation, while other manufacturers have larger top buffers that hide it.

YMMV(EIAT).

It's best to ignore EPA and search for other real-world test results that best match your situation.

 

[MP3Mike]

Some choose accuracy, others choose whatever approach gives the highest number.

Actually, Tesla chose accuracy, while others derated and gave much lower numbers than they could have been. (Porsche under-reported their actual range by ~60% in some cases.)

 

[LoL-Gas]

I'm really confused on what the issue is

 

[3sr+buyer]

If EPA tests are unrealistic, then all manufacturers range estimates should be equally off, but that's not the case. German car estimates are accurate.

So, why are Tesla's range estimates so bad compared to other makes?

Aren't car companies able to voluntarily derate the results? If so, then Porsche may be showing economy and range numbers significantly lower than the test results, because they assume that Porsche drivers drive significantly less economically than EPA drivers.

 

[Miata Head]

Since there are so many variables involved, IMHO actually doing a physical test seems time consuming, expensive and silly. I understand these are for news articles, so actually doing the physical test *seems* important to add legitimacy.

But you should be able to get a good idea of expected real world range just by doing math. For example, my M3 RWD has a 60kW battery, so to get the stated 272 mi, you'd need to average 221 Wh/mi. If I use my current average 233 wh/mi, I get 258 miles of range. Coincidentally or not, 258 is roughly what my car displays at 100% charge when on mileage. Both of these are probably generous though since all 60kW isn't available.

 

[3sr+buyer]

But you should be able to get a good idea of expected real world range just by doing math. For example, my M3 RWD has a 60kW battery, so to get the stated 272 mi, you'd need to average 221 Wh/mi. If I use my current average 233 wh/mi, I get 258 miles of range. Coincidentally or not, 258 is roughly what my car displays at 100% charge when on mileage. Both of these are probably generous though since all 60kW isn't available.

The range on top of the screen is rated range, not adaptive "guess-o-meter" range based on your driving habits (which can be seen on the consumption tab of the energy screen). (Many other EVs use adaptive "guess-o-meter" range as the primary range display.)

So 258 mile rated range at 100% suggests that your car has about 5% degradation from new, which seems reasonable if your car is an early 2022 model. But if you car is very new, that seems unusual.

 

[OxBrew]

I'm really confused on what the issue is

I don't think there is an issue. Some other EVs pad their advertised range with a buffer. Tesla seems to be more aggressive on the advertised range, and blends a buffer into the lower 50% of the SOC. I'm starting to track it, and every few % under 50 shows fewer miles per % of range. At 51%, it showed 3.16, but at 49 it showed 3.12. Now at 43 it shows 3.10. So it's already cached 6 miles to the buffer (310 compared to 316). I assume it will level off at some point.

NBD, just a different way of dealing with a buffer at 0%.

 

[OxBrew]

I don't think there is an issue. Some other EVs pad their advertised range with a buffer. Tesla seems to be more aggressive on the advertised range, and blends a buffer into the lower 50% of the SOC. I'm starting to track it, and every few % under 50 shows fewer miles per % of range. At 51%, it showed 3.16, but at 49 it showed 3.12. Now at 43 it shows 3.10. So it's already cached 6 miles to the buffer (310 compared to 316). I assume it will level off at some point.

NBD, just a different way of dealing with a buffer at 0%.

OK, this is all dead wrong. Miles vs % SOC is not static, depends where on the % you look at the miles, could show any of 3 different values for miles to go. I was tracking rounding errors in the above post.

I would delete that post if I could.

 

[Justjim]

I would agree with this. I spoke to a tesla moble tech, who seems to be the only honest/knowledgeable tesla person in Toronto. He told me to ignore the estimate and load my destination into navigate. Going 200km to my destination seems to be spot on! It even seemed to adjust for a strong headwind.

He also said to opt for % over distance on the guess-o-meter for local driving.

 

[alexgr]

I would agree with this. I spoke to a tesla moble tech, who seems to be the only honest/knowledgeable tesla person in Toronto. He told me to ignore the estimate and load my destination into navigate. Going 200km to my destination seems to be spot on! It even seemed to adjust for a strong headwind.

He also said to opt for % over distance on the guess-o-meter for local driving.

Tesla posts the EPA range on the screen all the time. There is absolutely nothing "rigged" or "rosy" about it. Ford Mach-E for example, gives you NO [easy] way to see your EPA range, and so you have no way to easily know your battery degradation in Mach-E. I don't ignore the EPA range as it gives a relatively good benchmark of my everyday driving.

The Tesla's new range/consumption estimations are impressive as they include wind, speed, temperature, etc. I believe Tesla even includes rain, which heavily impacts highway range, in the estimates. The down side of this is that the system is relatively new and it fails pretty often giving either too optimistic or too pessimistic predictions. That would be an okay if we had superchargers every 20 miles, but I had to drive slower somewhere in Texas because the predictions were [wrongly] way too pessimistic. I also tried to trust Tesla a couple times in Tennessee on charging to cover as much as 300 miles on a highway; surely, after spending extra 20 minutes charging, Tesla told me 'sorry, can't drive there' 5 minutes into the drive.

 

[Justjim]

Tesla posts the EPA range on the screen all the time. There is absolutely nothing "rigged" or "rosy" about it. Ford Mach-E for example, gives you NO [easy] way to see your EPA range, and so you have no way to easily know your battery degradation in Mach-E. I don't ignore the EPA range as it gives a relatively good benchmark of my everyday driving.

The Tesla's new range/consumption estimations are impressive as they include wind, speed, temperature, etc. I believe Tesla even includes rain, which heavily impacts highway range, in the estimates. The down side of this is that the system is relatively new and it fails pretty often giving either too optimistic or too pessimistic predictions. That would be an okay if we had superchargers every 20 miles, but I had to drive slower somewhere in Texas because the predictions were [wrongly] way too pessimistic. I also tried to trust Tesla a couple times in Tennessee on charging to cover as much as 300 miles on a highway; surely, after spending extra 20 minutes charging, Tesla told me 'sorry, can't drive there' 5 minutes into the drive.

I found the actual range was about 30% less than what the listed range told me. Using the navigate to destination has been very accurate....for me.

 

[3sr+buyer]

He also said to opt for % over distance on the guess-o-meter for local driving.

The miles/km display on the main screen is not a guess-o-meter that adjusts based on previous driving. It is the rated distance to empty, so it is basically the energy remaining in the pack multiplied by the rated miles/km per kWh. For most intents and purposes, it is a finer resolution version of the percentage display, but also can show you how much battery degradation there has been.

To see a guess-o-meter that adjusts based on previous driving, use the consumption tab on the energy screen.

 

[alexgr]

I found the actual range was about 30% less than what the listed range told me. Using the navigate to destination has been very accurate....for me.

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.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

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.

The whole outrage over "EPA range" would be fixed if the EPA made realistic tests. They use an average of 48 MPH for the "highway" number. Yes. Really.

 

[3sr+buyer]

The whole outrage over "EPA range" would be fixed if the EPA made realistic tests. They use an average of 48 MPH for the "highway" number. Yes. Really.

However, the results are derated (probably by around 30%) for reporting on window stickers.

Where the unadjusted results are used is in calculating CAFE numbers.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

However, the results are derated (probably by around 30%) for reporting on window stickers.

Where the unadjusted results are used is in calculating CAFE numbers.

The need for all these fudge-factors which inevitably distort reality depending on the details of the cars design GO AWAY if you just make a highway test that involves driving 65 mph.

Here are the two options:

1). Test all cars with a wildly unrealistic highway pattern that averages 48 MPH and then try to de-rate the resulting mileage to get it kinda-close to what real people who actually drive on real roads experience... maybe

2). Test all cars at an exact sample of what real world highway driving looks like - mostly involving following the car in front of you at between 60 and 80 MPH. Adjust nothing.

 

[Maxpilot]

The whole outrage over "EPA range" would be fixed if the EPA made realistic tests. They use an average of 48 MPH for the "highway" number. Yes. Really.

The 48mph average is based on using some city and highway driving speeds in their test. Not that they drive for the entire duration of the test at 48mph. I believe the trip information screen shows your average speed since a trip was reset. Look at yours, it's probably close to 48mph.

 

[RSpanner]

Look up controlled range tests on Youtube for Model 3, awd,lr. @ 70 mph on a flat highway, results show 300 miles on full charge.

2021 Tesla Model 3 Long Range

353 miles

345 miles

2.3% This should be changed to 15%

 

[MP3Mike]

The 48mph average is based on using some city and highway driving speeds in their test. Not that they drive for the entire duration of the test at 48mph. I believe the trip information screen shows your average speed since a trip was reset. Look at yours, it's probably close to 48mph.

No, the 48 MPH average is just for the highway portion of the test:

Even the "high speed" highway test that gets up to 80 MPH averages 48 MPH:

The city portion averages 21 MPH.

Here are all details for all 5 cycles of the EPA test:

 

[Maxpilot]

MP3Mike: Thanks for the graphs. Where did you find these? I think you proved my point. It looks like a graph from actual traffic. There are slow-downs and accelerations in those graphs. The spikes are showing braking and acceleration which would be normal in day to day driving over an 8 to 10 mile course.