-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
Has this article been debunked?
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
Do you have pointers?
Yes, it has been discussed already since the article is from July 27th. Rob Maurer responded to it at the time on Tesla Daily and there are various other YouTubers sharing their thoughts on it. Typical sensationalist Reuters rubbish.
I listened to that, and IMHO doesn't really debunk the crux of the matter. Aside EPA range and cold climate, with is noise, I think the issue at stake here is: is the dashboard "pumping" the range even when it's cold/you are on the highway? If it does, the algorithm of the dashboard is incorrect and should be fixed. That's all.
cliff harris
Member
I drove a model S from 2015 and a model Y from December 2022. In both cases, the range estimates given by the car were almost spookily accurate. I've never experienced any issue with the projected range being boosted, and thats in cold wet UK.
Its absolute FUD. EPA range is not real world range. Everyone knows that. This is true for ICE as well as EV. Blame the governments responsible for the test parameters, but don't blame the car companies for displaying the official range.
Its absolute FUD. EPA range is not real world range. Everyone knows that. This is true for ICE as well as EV. Blame the governments responsible for the test parameters, but don't blame the car companies for displaying the official range.
jeewee3000
Active Member
Indeed. This would only be newsworthy if Tesla was the only EV maker where EPA range does not match real world range. They are not.
Bjorn Nyland shares his thoughts here and explains that there are advantages to the way Tesla does it. Reuters singling them out is just pathetic and predictable Reuters, I don't think this matter deserves to be dragged out any more than it has.
My model Y range estimate works great in the UK when my speed maxes out at c.75mph but when driving it through France and sitting on c.85mph-90mph it consistently overestimates the distance it can travel.
The algorithm must not be able to factor in the higher speed - which is somewhat annoying as it plans for arrival at the next supercharger with 10%-15% charge and inevitably figures out that it can't reach this range and reroutes to another supercharger where I end up charging again starting at 30%-50% charge. This leads to unoptimised charging.
Sometimes I'll just ignore the Tesla charging recommendation and keep going on my intended route and hope that there are EV superchargers at the gas stations along the way but this adds stress to the trip as I'm driving a bit into the unknown and can cause issues. France appears to have excellent charging infrastructure as far as I can tell with most motorway gas stations and large supermarket chains having 150kw+ charging available.
That may well be why he's leaving. If Sandy has gotten a second wind in his career it may have derailed Corey's plans to move up. For a mid 30's guy with 15 years of experience under his belt and proven success on YouTube it seems like the perfect time to strike out on his own if he is ambitious and doesn't see a way to move up where he is.
Last edited:
I guess the algorithm is based on the maximum speed limit, which in France is 130kmph = 80mph, as air resistance squares with speed, anything above that is going to kill the range
I mean in all seriousness, how many drive a Tesla on or below the speed limit, it's a hard ask
However, when I do behave, drive carefully I can get the range indicated, and beat it too if I want/need to do so, in any Tesla
I fail to see how Tesla could possibly anticipate your's or anyone's desired driving speed. Going for the local (country) speed limit or recommendation (130 km/h in case of Germany) is quite reasonable, if you ask me.
I don't understand some of the recent comments regarding the range estimate brouhaha. I've always found the energy graph and predictive mileages to be very accurate, regardless of the speed I'm doing. Of course, if traffic/weather conditions/your speed varies a lot during a trip it's going to have to make adjustments to the prediction, that's obvious (isn't it?).
I use % instead of range when it comes to SoC, because IMO that makes a lot more sense and I can see how owners are confused when the battery gives a mileage estimate which doesn't turn out to be accurate later, but that's exactly the same as an ICE car's trip computer being just a best guess based on previous driving behaviour.
I've made several trips around 50-100 miles where the energy graph has told me I'll arrive with <10% and none of them have ended in tears. It's usually correct to within +or- 3-4% at worst IME.
I use % instead of range when it comes to SoC, because IMO that makes a lot more sense and I can see how owners are confused when the battery gives a mileage estimate which doesn't turn out to be accurate later, but that's exactly the same as an ICE car's trip computer being just a best guess based on previous driving behaviour.
I've made several trips around 50-100 miles where the energy graph has told me I'll arrive with <10% and none of them have ended in tears. It's usually correct to within +or- 3-4% at worst IME.
The early Superchargers used the same charger module as was in the car. As stack of 12 of them in a cabinet.
Subsequent Superchargers models (around the v3 timeframe, IIRC) were designed and built by Tesla Energy (rather than then the automotive side). As such I don't think the current Supercharger designs have much, if any, similarity with the in-vehicle components.
It would be quite easy to have either a manual estimate override or just use (e.g.) the speed Autopilot is set to (or some average), or build up a database of how fast people tend to drive in certain areas - I am by no means setting any speed records on the French motorway at 140kph. What's the point of having big data if you're not extracting info from it.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
It was a personal attack directed at Elon by roto-REUTERS. They claim that (over 10 years ago) he 'told' engineers to rig the range estimates for Model S. This is false of course. People should know better, Reuters is NOT paid to tell the truth, only to generate clicks and sponsored (paid) attacks on Elon personally. If both, all the better.
Instead, what the *cough* knowledgeable folks here should focus on is the discharge curve for lithium ion batteries showing Voltage vs. State of Charge. In the past (ie: 10-yrs ago), pack voltage was used to estimate state of charge. The challenge is that for lithium ion chemistry, there is a steep initial dropoff in voltage, then a long flat plateau where there is little difference in voltage, and a final quick voltage dropoff at the bottom:
Can yous see why (10 yrs ago) it was difficult to predict range based on pack voltage? Anybody do it better back then? How about now?
As Tesla owners and Investors, you should already know how this works. If you don't, then shame on Reuters, who's obvious purpose is to misinform you, the TSLA investor.
Let's not be Gullibulls.
Cheers!
It's standard procedure to pack extra costs into a government grant application as it's win-win for everyone involved (except the taxpayer) - The government gets to laud all the private investment being contributed and the grant receiver gets more money to invest. This would be especially true for a new product with limited price benchmarking availability like megacharger where they could justify higher costs due to extra R&D and low volume production - whereas (e.g.) supercharger costs are becoming well known and harder to price outside the existing range.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Instead of endless (non-empirical) speculation on 'lunky-ninety-nine', why not discuss the implications of BlackRock adding 2 million shares of TSLA in 2023 Q2, according to their SEC filing.
When the biggest of funds are steadily accumulating shares, and Tesla news is a steady drumbeat of blah, yuck, and personal attacks, then you know the big boys are accumulating. Mostly by picking up them shares on the cheap from momo-traders and ADHD-retail (who read way too much roto-REUTERS, and way too little Li-ion Voltage Analysis).
Cheers!
When the biggest of funds are steadily accumulating shares, and Tesla news is a steady drumbeat of blah, yuck, and personal attacks, then you know the big boys are accumulating. Mostly by picking up them shares on the cheap from momo-traders and ADHD-retail (who read way too much roto-REUTERS, and way too little Li-ion Voltage Analysis).
Cheers!
The graph you have posted isn't the best example in this case as it looks to be the curve for an LFP battery. Since virtually all earlier Teslas and all current long range models use a high Nickel chemistry they have a different charge curve. The greater slope on an NMC etc chemistry curve is a lot easier for Tesla to derive the state of charge from voltage than it is for LFP. The graph below taken from this paper (https://www.researchgate.net/public...tery_Powered_Applications_A_Comparative_Study) illustrates the difference in charge curve between the two chemistries. This is also a large part of the reason why Tesla recommends owners of LFP cars to charge to 100%, so that the BMS can correctly calibrate due to the very flat charge curve of LFP.
This is true but a bit misleading. Numerous vehicles are designed and built in. China but labeled with non-Chinese brands. of course there are many joint ventures. The Wiki tells the story succinctly:
As for Volvo, London Taxi, MG etc plus Jaguar Land Rover the “subtle but meaningful’ difference is primarily a concerted effort to appear as much as possible to preserve historical identity. Geely has done better than most to preserve Volvo identity, but the newest EC30 is being only made in China. Their four architectures are the foundation of all newer Volvo, Polestar and other Geely brands. Of course there is a devoted effort to preserve ‘Swedishness’ for Volvo and Polestar as well as ‘Englishness’ for LEVC and Lotus. Make no mistake, these are Chinese, albeit with some models and engineering staying in the traditional homes.
FWIW, as a former Volvo 144 owner and present XC40 Recharge owner I rate those changes as a Good Thing.
From the TSLA and Tesla perspective these nearly badge engineering approaches cannot approach the efficiency of Tesla, nor are they ever likely to have equal support quality. Still, they are trying very hard and improving quickly, even with OTA updates including far better integration than they displayed even two years ago.
For every major automotive player, except perhaps BYD, itself with only modest profitability, there are serious deficiencies in achieving Tesla-like efficiency. They will survive and thrive, but Tesla is displaying Apple-like ecosystem durability. Mostly we might be understating that character which affords durable superior margins while still growing almost exponentially.
Last edited:
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Indeed, I estimate that at a 50% duty cycle, each of those 12-unit Megacharger sites will draw an average of ~100MWh of electricity per day. Then there are seasonal variations in both supply (-100% to +30%) and demand (holiday rush for logistics could also be +100% as solar output is at it's lowest)
Stand-alone solar alone would require a giant array (on the order of 365 MW) to cover even the 95th percentile use-case. Given at least $1/watt for a solar farm, times 9 proposed sites and you're soon getting into the billion dollar range for stand-alone solar. Wind may help, but still...
Instead, Telsa may grid-tie a large megapack array at each megacharger site to offset (or eliminate) demand charges during peak hours by providing grid stabilizing services: (but don't expect to charge your Semi at dinner time, fleet managers...)
TL;dr I think Tesla *low-balled* their estimate of the capital costs for this megacharger network by depending upon the grid. Perhaps that what Elon meant last week when he told the electricity market 'whatever your estimate is for futher consumption, it's likely too low. Triple it.'
Cheers!
Last edited:
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Most current Tesla cars have an LFP battery now (as will more than 50% of the fleet going forward), but that isn't the relevant question for this REUTERS attack rag.
10 years ago, Model S used a NCA chemistry, and before silicon anode (which wasn't added to Panasonic 18650s until the Model S P90 was introduced).
So the discharge curve I presented is typical of the Model S cell which Tesla was shipping 10 years ago. Notice howI didn't even mention the additional complications for estimating total energy available in a multi-cell pack?
REUTERS lies whenever its absolutely convenient.
Cheers!
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
