Test drive impressions

[Shinden]

I am 2/3 through my self-imposed test drive programme having tried MX100 and Jaguar iPace, and here are a few thoughts from them. Please be aware they are personal opinions only so please, don't flame me for expressing them.
First thing is that MX cabin is more airy that iPace, although neither felt cramped.
Accessing either is good, but still don't like MX rear doors and I think the novelty would wear off fairly quickly.
My partner rode in back seat on both drives and she didn't like the MX as the seat base was too thin, and without door armrest or centre console (6-seater version) she didn't feel secure on turns and roundabouts.
Not much in it from the front seats as far as comfort is concerned but maybe the edge would go to the Jaguar.
The dash and switch layout is quite disorganised on the Jag, and I prefer the simplicity of the Tesla. I did like the heads-up display on the ipace though.
Both cars have air suspension and I felt the Jaguar was slightly smoother on the road.
Obviously both cars have the ev smoothness but the Tesla felt slightly smoother pulling away (I can't explain why that should be).
The fit and finish of the Jag was superior to the Tesla (no big surprise there I'm sure)
The ipace is well equipped (First Edition spec), as is MX, but the Tesla has more technology on board such as ap, more cameras etc.
I was surprised to find that you cannot set the Jag to charge to a percentage, timed duration setting only, which is a negative as far as I'm concerned.
Service interval for ipace is 21,000 miles, so almost double that of Tesla (important for me as a high mileage driver).
I get the impression that for Jaguar the ipace is just another car in their range alongside their ice cars, whereas tesla are (obviously) all-in with ev's and that's worth a bit.
Interestingly, Jaguar publish towing weights for ipace, but I thought on MX was type- approved for towing. Requires further clarification.
I couldn't really get a good range comparison because my ipace drive was fairly short and not representative. My target is to achieve 120 miles daily using 60-65% battery. My 30 mile MX drive used 17%, which equates to approx 1.75 miles per %. On this basis my 120 commute miles would be about 68%, but I'm pretty sure I could get within target with daily driving. The ipace drive was only about 8-10 miles and used 4%, i.e. about 2+ miles/% (spot on where I want to be), but I'm not sure I can put a lot of store in that without a longer run. I have yet to test MS75D but based on my MX findings I am a little concerned that it will not achieve my targets (I am fairly sure MX75 will not).

Conclusion: overall the technology and ev experience of Tesla probably shades it at the moment, but, in spec as tested, is it £20,000 better - I don't know. I genuinely don't know which way I would/will go, but I don't think I would be disappointed with either.
Maybe a Model S 75D test drive in the future will make things a bit clearer (or could confuse the matter even further).

 

[WannabeOwner]

Service interval for ipace is 21,000 miles, so almost double that of Tesla (important for me as a high mileage driver).

I service the MS annually (about 27,000 miles for me). No impact on Tesla Warranty ... but if you have Finance that will likely require "manufacturer's service interval". (I think I read that i-Pace service is free for 5 years or somesuch??)

I thought on MX was type- approved for towing

Yup. (But I don't know the towing weight; Bjorn has a video of his MX towing a jumbo jet (well, not quite, but something "hefty" ), but that's obviously outside the spec and just showing what you can do with Torque ...)

I couldn't really get a good range comparison because my ipace drive was fairly short and not representative

I've seen all sorts of figures, and the initial, poor efficiency ones, I put down to pre-production models.

I would say, as of now, what I am seeing (at 70-80 MPH rather than Urban) is the 90kWh i-Pace performing about the same range as the MX75. If you compare with an MS that is more frugal, and an M3 much more frugal still (about 20% better)

I think its disappointing because:

MS has been out for 5 years, so the competition has had time (but the Audi eTron is much the same as the i-Pace in that regard)
i-Pace is using more modern, energy-efficient, motors (as is the M3).

So basically I look at them and go "Is that your best shot"?

However, if you don't need the range I don't think it matters. Electricity is heaps cheaper than Petrol/Diesel, so 20,000 miles a year comparing i-Pace and Tesla is probably tens-of-pounds different on Electricity, maybe a hundred quid tops. Every morning you leave home with a full tank, so its only the out-of-range days where it will matter.

27,000 miles a year in my MS is about £700 for electricity; I use Superchargers for 12% of my miles, and half is at work (free) so I pay about £300 a year for 27,000 miles of motoring. If you are reimbursed for business mileage at "Inland Revenue per-mile rates" you'll be laughing.

Also I haven't seen anything yet about how i-Pace performs in Winter. It might will be that the heat-pump (and other heat-scavenging) will be more energy-efficient than Tesla.

My MS90 does 220 real-world motorway-speed miles on a nice Summers day. Knock of 20 miles for "just in case", and then 20% for February temperatures and I'm at 160 miles. I charge to 100% on any days (even in Summer - torrential rain will use up 20% too) that are 160+ miles. Bjorn got (from memory) 230 miles out of the i-Pace at a steady (cruise control) 56 MPH ...

I have yet to test MS75D but based on my MX findings I am a little concerned that it will not achieve my targets (I am fairly sure MX75 will not).

Suggest you put examples of your longer journeys into A Better Route Planner (choose model and driving style / temperature etc.)

Some thoughts:

If you have to charge on-the-road, and provided that Superchargers are placed conveniently, then forget all about CCS charging until that is a) rolled out (at 150+ KW) and b) i-Pace etc. are proven to charge quickly (Bjorn's tests suggest that even with Rapid CCS chargers the i-Pace is poor - both in terms of kW that it will charge at, but also because it uses more energy such that each kW added gets you a bit less distance than Tesla).

Note that the 100 charges faster than the 75 (all Tesla charge at about 10% every 5 minutes for 0% - 70~80%), so you will put on 1/3rd more miles in the same time in a 100, but also you will have driven 1/3rd further before you need to charge. and consequently are more likely to have a choice of Supercharger locations - and you only need to avoid a 10 minute detour once in a while for that to be worthwhile. But of course its only worth spending the money, for that saving, if you need the range. (last time I looked (recently) finance on the 100 was 25% cheaper than finance on the 75, so assuming the 100 is 25% more expensive it might be that monthly payments are "the same" ... )

If you need to do emails? then Supercharging may well be "time neutral" for you. Stop on the way home to Supercharge and get some emails done, or get home and immediately have to do the emails ...

If you can charge at destination (either work or Customer sites) then range may well be moot. However, if you are "travelling salesman" then in Winter if you stop for an hour the battery will be cold soaked and there will be a significant energy-penalty each time you set off. Even plugging into 13AMP will help with that. Again, i-Pace may perform better in Winter.

Nothing would induce me to buy an EV from a company new to them. Great bragging rights with mates, but lots and lots of unknowns. Don't buy a Tesla expecting whatever Elon is promising today will come to pass anytime soon, but other than that its a model that has been on the road for several years already and is well known and understood. Typical battery degradation at 150-200,000 miles is 6%-ish. i_pace unknown. With either of them you are unlikely to need a new set of brakes for 150,000 miles

OTA software updates. I think its a bit of a novelty, but no denying some things: there was a recent spate of thefts from key-fobs being "cloned" (other car brands too I expect). Within about a month Tesla had issued a "Pin-to-Drive" feature. Plenty of other similar stuff like that in the two years I've had mine, some of it "gimmicky", plenty of it useful (during my ownership: Summon, Self Park, improved Graphics Equaliser, "Chill" driving mode, Keys able to be associated with seat-profile, 0-60 time reduced from 5s to 4s for the whole non-Performance model fleet, and so on)

As a high mileage driver get the EAP. Its extraordinary how much less tiring AutoPilot is (and I think of myself as happy to drive anywhere, all day long, and I was properly sceptical before owning it and proving it for myself).. its not perfect, make sure you never - not ever - are tempted to "just do a text" or anything like that, so that you can take over if required. but that said, I've had AP react to slowing traffic ahead just at the point when I was looking down at the Dash, and quite possibly avoiding me rear-ending someone. Both dual-carriageway cruise control driving, and stop/start / bumper-to-bumper are hugely less tiring, and less stressful, than old fashioned "manual driving".

If you need to drive up a 1:1 dirt road ... then get the i-Pace

 

[Shinden]

Nothing would induce me to buy an EV from a company new to them. Great bragging rights with mates, but lots and lots of unknowns. Don't buy a Tesla expecting whatever Elon is promising today will come to pass anytime soon, but other than that its a model that has been on the road for several years already and is well known and understood. Typical battery degradation at 150-200,000 miles is 6%-ish

Yes,that's part of what concerned me about Jaguars potential lack of commitment to ev. For example, they quite willingly quote battery range degradation of 20%. That suggests to me that they either don't have a lot of confidence in their battery, or they don't really understand their own battery chemistry endurance capabilities and are hedging their bets against future possible warranty claims.

 

[ewoodrick]

Accessing either is good, but still don't like MX rear doors and I think the novelty would wear off fairly quickly.
There's more than novelty here. dependent on second row seats, they can make entry significantly easier. Think about getting to a car seat effectively as a mini-van as opposed to a car.

My partner rode in back seat on both drives and she didn't like the MX as the seat base was too thin, and without door armrest or centre console (6-seater version) she didn't feel secure on turns and roundabouts.
Don't forget that there are 4 seat configurations available in the second row. This may make a big difference.

Not much in it from the front seats as far as comfort is concerned but maybe the edge would go to the Jaguar.
The dash and switch layout is quite disorganised on the Jag, and I prefer the simplicity of the Tesla. I did like the heads-up display on the ipace though.
Both cars have air suspension and I felt the Jaguar was slightly smoother on the road.
Obviously both cars have the ev smoothness but the Tesla felt slightly smoother pulling away (I can't explain why that should be).
The fit and finish of the Jag was superior to the Tesla (no big surprise there I'm sure)
The ipace is well equipped (First Edition spec), as is MX, but the Tesla has more technology on board such as ap, more cameras etc.
I was surprised to find that you cannot set the Jag to charge to a percentage, timed duration setting only, which is a negative as far as I'm concerned.
Service interval for ipace is 21,000 miles, so almost double that of Tesla (important for me as a high mileage driver).

Before looking at raw service interval, also look at what is required for the service. I'm not sure of the requirement between these two vehicles. In my Model 3, the service is (aside from rotating tires)

• Brake fluid. Every 2 years or 25,000 miles (40,000 km), whichever comes first.
• Battery coolant. Every 4 years or 50,000 miles (80,000 km), whichever comes first.

That's it.


I get the impression that for Jaguar the ipace is just another car in their range alongside their ice cars, whereas tesla are (obviously) all-in with ev's and that's worth a bit.
Interestingly, Jaguar publish towing weights for ipace, but I thought on MX was type- approved for towing. Requires further clarification.
I couldn't really get a good range comparison because my ipace drive was fairly short and not representative. My target is to achieve 120 miles daily using 60-65% battery. My 30 mile MX drive used 17%, which equates to approx 1.75 miles per %. On this basis my 120 commute miles would be about 68%, but I'm pretty sure I could get within target with daily driving. The ipace drive was only about 8-10 miles and used 4%, i.e. about 2+ miles/% (spot on where I want to be), but I'm not sure I can put a lot of store in that without a longer run. I have yet to test MS75D but based on my MX findings I am a little concerned that it will not achieve my targets (I am fairly sure MX75 will not).

DO NOT use short range drive, especially test drives, to determine a vehicle's range. Use the manufacturers number for a rough estimate. To get 120 miles daily, and have 60% battery remaining, would require a vehicle rated for 300 miles. You can just about get that with the P100, but that iPace range is 234 miles, that puts you at 50% charge.
Now the reality is that you don't really need that much, there are charging options all over the place, maybe at work. You could probably live happily in the 2018 Leaf at 160 miles. Don't forget that most batteries, when at home tend to charge close to the same rate. Bigger ones just take longer.

Conclusion: overall the technology and ev experience of Tesla probably shades it at the moment, but, in spec as tested, is it £20,000 better - I don't know. I genuinely don't know which way I would/will go, but I don't think I would be disappointed with either.
Maybe a Model S 75D test drive in the future will make things a bit clearer (or could confuse the matter even further).

They are all great cars and a lot of people would be very jealous of either of them.

 

[arg]

I couldn't really get a good range comparison because my ipace drive was fairly short and not representative.

Note that for Tesla vehicles, a short drive definitely won't be representative (and of course for any EV a test drive now won't be representative of what will happen in deep winter).

Experience indicates that long journeys achieve better economy than short ones. A large part of this, particularly in winter, is temperature: the drivetrain/battery is most efficient at a given temperature which is hardly ever the same as ambient temperature while parked. In deep winter there's a big energy penalty as the car explicitly heats the battery out of the worst of the cold, but even in relatively mild temperatures when the heater doesn't run the car is working using waste heat from the motor and/or the radiators to get the temperature up or down to the ideal. There are similar effects with the cabin temperature - it takes a certain amount of heat to get the cabin to feel 'warm', but then it continues to take more energy to keep the air 'warm' until all the materials in the cabin have reached temperature and after that heating is only needed to offset loss to outside.

However, while temperature is a big factor, I'm not convinced it explains the whole of the effect - long trips are always better than short ones. Maybe it's psychological - I drive more smoothly after I've been going a while. Maybe the instrumentation is misleading (certainly there's a small effect of amortising some of the energy used while standing still over the first few miles of the trip).

But the bottom line is that if a trip is marginal, then you need a plan B, and the difference between the different cars isn't "can it do this or not?" but rather "on how many days in the year will I need to activate plan B?".

 

[Shinden]

I understand the effect temperatures (high and low) can have on range, and also how different chemistries and battery pack assembly have an impact on battery degradation and optimum charging cycles, which is why I am trying to ensure that my final choice can achieve 200 real world miles at least 80% of the time, giving me 120 miles of range between 20-80% SOC. I don't want to regularly charge to 100% or double my charging cycles by charging at home and work. I can live with it during extreme conditions but don't want to regard it as the norm.
I first got involved in ev's at work in 2012, and have been waiting since then for viable cars to be available to me. Now that the industry is pretty much at that point I just want to be sure my targets can be achieved. Otherwise I'll have to wait a bit longer for solid-state batteries, or whatever the next generation energy cell may be.

 

[.jg.]

My impression is that the iPace is closer in size to a Model S than a Model X.

Tesla's are sized for American roads - is the iPace easier to drive on the UK's narrower traffic lanes/roads?

Another important consideration that EV newcomers tend to overlook is Tesla's supercharger network. Tesla owners can simply drive to a supercharger, plug in and charge - and they will be finished in the time it takes to go to the toilet and get a coffee. Other EV makes don't have access to a similar fast charging network and owners have to rely on several regional networks, with varying availablity and charging speeds. For me, this gives Tesla a significant edge over other EV offerings, which to their respective manufacturers are (as stated above) just another model in a range of ICE, hybrids, PHEVs, etc.

 

[WannabeOwner]

they quite willingly quote battery range degradation of 20%.

That may well be true of Tesla too (i haven't checked). There will be some Fine Print to give them wiggle room on replacing stuff under warranty, and I'm sure there are Friday models , but there are Taxi firms (particularly those doing airport-runs) using Teslas that have been Rapid charging their cars to 100% and leaving them like that for some time (e.g. overnight) 365 days a year, clocking up 200,000 miles in under 2 years, and reporting 6% degradation ... the absence of that real-world data with i-Pace would bother me. Original Leaf had 50% degradation, current Leaf still doesn't have a sophisticated Battery Management System (and latest models suffer from "RapidGate" on repeat rapid charging on a trip), surprising that a model that has sold so many (i.e. engineers gained lots of experience) has not improved dramatically.

If Tesla didn't exist I would be happy to take the risk with i-Pace, I'm not at all risk-adverse ... but because Tesla is there, proven, it makes me shy about being an early adopter of any Marque's first EV.

In my Model 3, the service is (aside from rotating tires)

Dunno about M3 but MS is similar minimal requirement ... but extremely expensive to service ... plus around a 6 week wait for a service slot ... I think Tesla should increase service interval to relieve congestion at Service centres, and so that folk on Finance aren't forced to have to pay for that service interval

Use the manufacturers number for a rough estimate.

Manufacturers quote "official test" figures, such as WLTP which vary speed across a range of conditions are not representative of highway cruising at 70-80 MPH. On an urban trip, running around a bit, Tesla has loads of range, it only really matters on a "trip" and (for me at least ) that's never at 56 MPH or slower. So for me the Real World highway-speed mileage is far more important. A Better Route Planner has been pretty accurate in predicting consumption that matches my real-world experience (they have published graphs of both consumption and charging from the car-logging on which their predictions are based).

Coches.net comparison of various EVs against WLTP showed that actual range was anywhere from 80% to 118% of WLTP (and cars ran up to 30km after showing "0%" ...) but the i-Pace only scored 65% of WLTP. I personally think that was because it was a pre-production model ... but ... surprises me that Jaguar didn't either embargo publication of test results (if they knew a software improvement was coming), or make some sort of announcement when (if?) it was fixed.

, there are charging options all over the place

Not in the UK. We have a modest number of Superchargers, well placed on highway routes, and a lousy 3rd party, slow, often broken, fall-back.

long trips are always better than short ones

My explanation for that would be because on long trips I am on dual-carriageway cruise, so "nice and smooth"

"on how many days in the year will I need to activate plan B?"

+1 That is absolutely the point, and one I certainly didn't appreciate Before-EV.

I'm happy to plan routes when I travel out-of-range, but that might not be for everyone. I have very rarely resorted to 3rd party charging (i.e. Superchargers have been available, and first-choice), but when I have it has almost universally been disappointing; at best, on a trouble-free occasion, the connect/disconnect time has been a hassle, and at worst there hasn't been a working Post and nothing else within convenient walking distance of my destination (given that Type-2 is hours-of-charging). I have had better success with CHAdeMO, but only used it a couple of times, that, at least, is 50% of Supercharger performance.

double my charging cycles by charging at home and work

I'm no expert but I don't think that matters (assuming you are thinking of battery longevity?). My understanding is that N charges from 20% to 80% is the same [degradation] as 2xN charges from 50%-80%. On which Tesla says "Plug in at all times".

I want to be well charged at all times, as that means that if I have to do an unexpected detour I have range. All my kids friends arrive here and plug in their phones etc. immediately, without asking, and to them that is "normal" ... when I visit friend for the weekend they assume I want to plug in; its different to "before", but seems to be cool with everyone

Otherwise I'll have to wait a bit longer for solid-state batteries, or whatever the next generation energy cell may be.

Agree with that. If today's EV will only deliver you an experience with lifestyle-changes that you aren't comfortable with, then best to wait. Not everyone needs to be an early adopter You could consider an EV with a range extender?

Another important consideration that EV newcomers tend to overlook is Tesla's supercharger network
Tesla owners can simply drive to a supercharger, plug in and charge
Other EV makes don't have access to a similar fast charging network and owners have to rely on several regional networks, with varying availablity and charging speeds

This is SO true. I know folk know about the Supercharger network, but what they probably know less about is just how bad the 3rd party charging is.

Vince @ Ecotricity recently said that income is less than needed to run a good service, so they have cut back maintenance to 9-5 Mon-Fri only

My experience of 3rd party has been pretty much universally bad. Lots of APPs from different vendors, money "on account" to be able to use their service, often no network coverage at sites (RFID wins in that situation, but you have to pay annual SUB for those). Loads of different Vendors across the country, and I don't need their service until I am 200 miles from home, so that is "all over the place" rather than being able to "just use Brand-A". Phoning up is a fall back to get a charge started remotely, but that adds 10 minutes to an already relatively slow connection/disconnection process anyway.

3rd party sites are dotted around all over the place, but have relatively few stalls at each site. If they are busy its likely the cars will be there for ages (hours possibly). I don't know of APPs that indicate actual, realtime, availability (i.e. both" working" and "not in use"). By contrast Tesla has only built one site with 6 stalls since 2015, all the rest have more. Average dwell time is probably 30 minutes, so for an 8 stall site which is full that's someone leaving every 3 or 4 minutes. I have had to wait once, there was a car ahead of my in the queue, total wait was less than 10 minutes - and that was a 4 stall site.

Tesla experience: Park, plug in, walk away.

3rd party experience: Get cables out of boot, plug in to car, fiddle with APP to get Post to open - figuring out what location you are at, and which post it is (I've had them with absolutely no labels on each one, so had to use process of elimination and/or find a different one opens and then move the car to it ...). Not infrequently have to phone up to get the charge initiated. Then walk away!

 

[12Pack]

We have both an iPace and a Model S. The iPace is for the wife who drives around town. We charge 1-2x per week at home. I would never buy it if it was needed for out-of-town duties due to lack of a structural network - which Jag don't seem to care much about. And after being used to the simplicity and "connectedness" of the Tesla, the Jag's fussy button and touch screen combo is a nightmare. But the wife prefers its compact length around town.

 

[Peteski]

I am trying to ensure that my final choice can achieve 200 real world miles at least 80% of the time

That means an X 100D then. The 75D would fall a little short of that expectation. On a good day it can hit 200 miles, but it needs to be a very good day! I'm averaging around 430 Wh/mile in my X 75D so roughly 175 mile full range. But on a longer run in fair weather I often see consumption under 350 Wh/mile, so the full range then increases to 215 miles. On a bad day (cold, wet, miserable winters day) I can easily see over 500 Wh/mile, so full range reduces to 150 miles or less.

I'm struggling to understand why you have self-imposed a limit of using only 60-65% of your battery for the 120 mile commute? Is it because you want to charge daily on Superchargers rather than at home/work? Or is it because you need to use the remaining range for getting around in addition to your commute? My own philosophy was to get the X 75D and use the full battery as and when required. For me it only has to survive the 4 year PCP term!

 

[WannabeOwner]

I am trying to ensure that my final choice can achieve 200 real world miles at least 80% of the time

Is an MS an option? (You've mentioned Towing, so if you need that then its only MX - the MS is not type-approved for towing, and although some people have had tow-bar fitted I guess its a hassle with Insurance)

 

[Peteski]

Is an MS an option? (You've mentioned Towing, so if you need that then its only MX - the MS is not type-approved for towing, and although some people have had tow-bar fitted I guess its a hassle with Insurance)

Towing with the MS would be illegal in the UK. MX is okay though, even comes standard with a quick release towbar these days. iPace has a much lower towing capacity I believe.

 

[Shinden]

I'm struggling to understand why you have self-imposed a limit of using only 60-65% of your battery for the 120 mile commute? Is it because you want to charge daily on Superchargers rather than at home/work? Or is it because you need to use the remaining range for getting around in addition to your commute

Because I don't believe it is good practice to plan to go below 20% and charge above 80% every single day. Of course it is OK to do so when necessary but everything on the subject recommends only fully charging just before a long trip and setting off as soon as possible after charging is complete.
Also as I arrive home around 8:30 and leave just after 6:00 I'm not even sure I would have enough time to charge fully at home (certainly not during economy 7 hours).
If the car does 120 miles on 60% on an average day then it will still be well in range in extreme conditions.
If I have the car for 4 years I'm going to do well over 100,000 miles so excessive battery degradation would be a concern.
Supercharging would only be a plan C for me. There are no superchargers near my home, and the Newport Pagnell supercharger would mean a 20 minute diversion + charging time on the way to/from work, so not really a suitable daily plan when I already have a 14 hour day.
These are my reasons for setting the criteria that I have.

 

[DJP31]

Because I don't believe it is good practice to plan to go below 20% and charge above 80% every single day.

I understand where you are coming from but the car guides you to a selection between 70%-90% as a ‘daily’ charge level, and ‘trip’ from 90%-100%. The battery is there to be used and the huge miles that many of these cars have done should give you reassurance you’re not going to suffer excessive significant degradation.

Charging during E7 is obviously ideal, but the cost difference for a few additional kW’s at ‘day rate’ really doesn’t amount to much.

I’d hate to see you not buy one for this reason.

 

[Peteski]

Because I don't believe it is good practice to plan to go below 20% and charge above 80% every single day. Of course it is OK to do so when necessary but everything on the subject recommends only fully charging just before a long trip and setting off as soon as possible after charging is complete.
Also as I arrive home around 8:30 and leave just after 6:00 I'm not even sure I would have enough time to charge fully at home (certainly not during economy 7 hours).
If the car does 120 miles on 60% on an average day then it will still be well in range in extreme conditions.
If I have the car for 4 years I'm going to do well over 100,000 miles so excessive battery degradation would be a concern.
Supercharging would only be a plan C for me. There are no superchargers near my home, and the Newport Pagnell supercharger would mean a 20 minute diversion + charging time on the way to/from work, so not really a suitable daily plan when I already have a 14 hour day.
These are my reasons for setting the criteria that I have.

Your logic is sound, but the evidence piling up from long term owners suggests it is not actually very critical to "baby" these batteries as much as you think. Especially over a 4 year ownership period, even at 100,000 miles. There are plenty of people who Supercharge daily and regularly use the full battery range without issue over a long period of time.

Charging at home on a standard single phase 8 kW wall charger gives you roughly 10% charge per hour (on an X 75D) so even with a 10% starting charge you would be back up to 80% in 7 hours. The 100D is slightly less efficient due to the extra weight, so home charging is going to be a little bit slower (opposite to Supercharging).

Not trying to change your mind, it's your money, but if you really are only going to be driving 120 miles per day then an X 75D would do that comfortably, even in winter. It's pretty much what I do myself and it's never been an issue. I'm pretty sure you could work off a 10-90% charging regime over 100,000 miles with minimal increase in battery degradation. It's almost counter-productive using only 60% of your battery just to minimise long term battery degradation because you will simply never get to even see, never mind use, that few percent of saved capacity! Of course a 100D would make the whole thing effortless, but with a substantial cost and weight penalty (150 kg dead weight in your case).

Having said all that I do think 120 miles is right on the cusp of making that decision between 75 and 100 kWh batteries, because for sure in deepest, darkest winter you would be charging close to 100% every night and coming home with sub 15%. In the summer months it would be a doddle charging to say 85% overnight. Tesla's own recommendation is to stay below 90% charge on a daily basis and charge immediately on return when running down below 20%. Not Supercharging very often would obviously help preserve the battery too.

 

[WannabeOwner]

I don't believe it is good practice to plan to go below 20% and charge above 80% every single day.

I don't think that needs to be a concern, as @Peteski says there just isn't any empirical evidence that abused (Tesla) batteries are showing high degradation.

However, that said, if I arrive anywhere below 20% I charge immediately (e.g. not wait for E7)

I arrive home around 8:30 and leave just after 6:00 I'm not even sure I would have enough time to charge fully at home (certainly not during economy 7 hours)

My wall charger adds an actual 6.5 kWh / hour to the battery (the one at work gives me 7kWh/hour) - for me, Summer time, that's around 22 MPH, so 160-ish miles during E7

8:30PM to 6AM would get max of 9h30m = 61.75 kWh = 185 Summer miles, 150 Winter miles, certainly 120 worst-case miles.

(If it was tight, for a few cold days of the year, 13 AMP plug at work would give you 5 MPH for the 8 or 9 hours you are there)

If you set a scheduled charge time (ie.. for Home) the car will recognise location and do just that (actually it won't stop at the end of E7, it will just start at the appointed time and charge until "full"; it will start to charge even if you arrive home later (not sure what the wiggle-room is, but a couple of hours after the scheduled-start time for sure).

If you arrive home earlier, and want to charge, you can just override on the Dash, or using the APP, or you can use a 3rd party scheduler to do something more fancy - "If plugged in at 9PM and less than 30% then start charge" "If 10PM and less than 40% start charge" ... etc. to a) make sure you are sufficiently charged in the morning, and b) without you having to remember to do anything.

But, yeah, all that "stuff" is lifestyle-change, and different to ICE. I have an APP for Alexa, but it is certainly not smart enough for me just to say "Alexa, tell My Car that I need XXX miles of range tomorrow and I'm leaving at 6AM" and then for it to figure out what to do.

• Calculate how much charge is needed (based on recent data / Summer/Winter factor etc.)
• Use E7 as much as possible
• Charge to some minimum amount (e.g. 60% if below 50% and if no more than 50% needed)
• If weather is cold make sure to be charging during the last hour before departure (to warm battery)
• Turn on car climate 15 minutes before departure
• Turn all that stuff off if you haven't actually left by 6:15

I have something like that set up in TeslaFi, but its a bit cumbersome. I only use it for 100% charging - so that I can have the car ready, at 100%, at my departure time.

I also have TeslaFi schedules for Climate for both my normal departure and return-home times, but associated with location and weekdays only, and to remind me if battery is below various thresholds at various times during the day - e.g. if there is a power interruption or somesuch.

 

[Peteski]

I don't think that needs to be a concern, as @Peteski says there just isn't any empirical evidence that abused (Tesla) batteries are showing high degradation.

However, that said, if I arrive anywhere below 20% I charge immediately (e.g. not wait for E7)



My wall charger adds an actual 6.5 kWh / hour to the battery (the one at work gives me 7kWh/hour) - for me, Summer time, that's around 22 MPH, so 160-ish miles during E7

8:30PM to 6AM would get max of 9h30m = 61.75 kWh = 185 Summer miles, 150 Winter miles, certainly 120 worst-case miles.

(If it was tight, for a few cold days of the year, 13 AMP plug at work would give you 5 MPH for the 8 or 9 hours you are there)

If you set a scheduled charge time (ie.. for Home) the car will recognise location and do just that (actually it won't stop at the end of E7, it will just start at the appointed time and charge until "full"; it will start to charge even if you arrive home later (not sure what the wiggle-room is, but a couple of hours after the scheduled-start time for sure).

If you arrive home earlier, and want to charge, you can just override on the Dash, or using the APP, or you can use a 3rd party scheduler to do something more fancy - "If plugged in at 9PM and less than 30% then start charge" "If 10PM and less than 40% start charge" ... etc. to a) make sure you are sufficiently charged in the morning, and b) without you having to remember to do anything.

But, yeah, all that "stuff" is lifestyle-change, and different to ICE. I have an APP for Alexa, but it is certainly not smart enough for me just to say "Alexa, tell My Car that I need XXX miles of range tomorrow and I'm leaving at 6AM" and then for it to figure out what to do.

• Calculate how much charge is needed (based on recent data / Summer/Winter factor etc.)
• Use E7 as much as possible
• Charge to some minimum amount (e.g. 60% if below 50% and if no more than 50% needed)
• If weather is cold make sure to be charging during the last hour before departure (to warm battery)
• Turn on car climate 15 minutes before departure
• Turn all that stuff off if you haven't actually left by 6:15

I have something like that set up in TeslaFi, but its a bit cumbersome. I only use it for 100% charging - so that I can have the car ready, at 100%, at my departure time.

I also have TeslaFi schedules for Climate for both my normal departure and return-home times, but associated with location and weekdays only, and to remind me if battery is below various thresholds at various times during the day - e.g. if there is a power interruption or somesuch.

Blimey, that's a lot of thought! I just plug it in whenever I come home and charge immediately up to a default 70% charge. Then I top it up first thing in the morning to whatever charge I need for the day - usually 80% for daily driving, more if I'm planning a longer journey. Really requires very little thought, although some people simply enjoy the thought process!

 

[Shinden]

Yes, but isn’t it great that, if you choose, you can customise that technology at will? Unlike v9 update where it appears a significant amount of flexibility and choice appears to have been taken away from the biggest technology access point in the car.

 

[GeorgeSymonds]

I’m afraid I thInk you need the 100D if I understood your usage correctly. After your routine commute of 120 miles, in winter you’re down to only 50 miles, maybe less. Any extra driving, going out in the evening, going to a store on the way home, going to the dentist or doctors, etc,.. has to be covered by that spare range. You might be able to make it work, but when you need it, you’ll need it. It does however also rule out the competition.

If you can get workplace charging, then the problem goes away.

 

[WannabeOwner]

I just plug it in whenever I come home and charge immediately up to a default 70% charge

You not on E7 then? Tide (probably not suitable as it has TOU peak Rate charge in early evening) is 6p a unit overnight ...

In reality I'm much like you. Plug in at work, its free, and charge to 90%, only plug in at home if need extra charge for the next day, apart from weekends that's maybe once a month.. I use TeslaFi scheduler for turning climate on before my normal time for leaving Home / Work, but if working from home I don't bother to prevent it running that morning ... and all the scheduling stuff catches me out more often than it helps. For example, I have a "reset to 90%" if parked at home and charging overnight; but if I want a 100% charge in the morning that foxes me of course ...

But for trips, yeah, planning involved and things like trying to warm battery before departure in winter for max range and so on. 12% of my charging is at Supercharger, so I am out-and-about a bit (but maybe that's "normal", I dunno)