The DOJ Tesla probe has expanded to include EV driving ranges

[Macb00kemdanno]

So you went with the filet mignon instead of the hot dog.

It depends on the situation if it's a filet mignon or hot dog. If I lived in an apartment with no access to overnight charging, I'd go with a hybrid. Or if fuel pricing was overwhelmingly in favor of a hybrid (i.e. if electricity rates are sky-high). In that case, the Tesla would be a hot dog.

But it just so happens that the stars aligned for us. We have a garage at home, can do overnight charging, and our electricity rates are low. Saying that something is OUTRIGHT better/worse isn't a one-size-fits-all all approach.

 

[Macb00kemdanno]

You understand that the Prius Prime XLE is over 40k, right? Model 3 standard range is about $31k after tax credit now. Also, honestly, no. When I was shopping in 2019 I tested both Model 3 and Prius (not Prime though). Prius was feeling cheap-cheap-cheap and about 20-year old tech. Sorry,

1) Prius Prime SE starts at $33,000...
2) Not everyone qualifies for the full $7,500

 

[sleepydoc]

And I’ll say this again:
Does anyone have any evidence that Tesla lied or cheated on the EPA milage test? I’m not asking if you get the rated milage or not, just if you have evidence showing that Tesla (or any other manufacturer) lied about their results.

From everything I’ve read here, the issue is with the proscribed EPA testing methodology not reflecting driving conditions. Tesla didn’t make these rules, they just followed them. If you are mad you should direct your anger at the EPA, not Tesla.

 

[gt2690b]

It depends on the situation if it's a filet mignon or hot dog. If I lived in an apartment with no access to overnight charging, I'd go with a hybrid. Or if fuel pricing was overwhelmingly in favor of a hybrid (i.e. if electricity rates are sky-high). In that case, the Tesla would be a hot dog.

But it just so happens that the stars aligned for us. We have a garage at home, can do overnight charging, and our electricity rates are low. Saying that something is OUTRIGHT better/worse isn't a one-size-fits-all all approach.

If electricity is high gas is probably high too since you can make electricity from gas...

In other words gas has a much higher chance of inflation and volatility than electricity since it has many diverse sources vs gas that really only comes from gas

 

[E90alex]

And I’ll say this again:
Does anyone have any evidence that Tesla lied or cheated on the EPA milage test? I’m not asking if you get the rated milage or not, just if you have evidence showing that Tesla (or any other manufacturer) lied about their results.

From everything I’ve read here, the issue is with the proscribed EPA testing methodology not reflecting driving conditions. Tesla didn’t make these rules, they just followed them. If you are mad you should direct your anger at the EPA, not Tesla.

If such evidence was so readily available, it wouldn’t require a DOJ probe now would it?

 

[MP3Mike]

If such evidence was so readily available, it wouldn’t require a DOJ probe now would it?

And given that some of the tests were actually performed by the EPA, it wouldn't be Tesla cheating... (The EPA screwed up the procedure on one test and Tesla had to demand that they redo it correctly to get the more than 400 mile rating for the Model S.)

 

[zoomer0056]

If such evidence was so readily available, it wouldn’t require a DOJ probe now would it?

I would think the DOJ will conduct this probe with due diligence and include EPA. The EPA signed off on these numbers.

 

[3sr+buyer]

Agree. I think a 30-mile projected range can be good enough for those who can't or refuse to use the EPA rated range. I think Tesla may include it as a third option for the always-on range display (rated/%/projected). Problem solved

There is enough space up top to include all three of those numbers. For example:

50% | Rated 135 mi | Projected 130 mi

Seems like most other cars show only the equivalent of the projected number from the energy screen, commonly called a "guess-o-meter".

 

[alexgr]

There is enough space up top to include all three of those numbers. For example:

50% | Rated 135 mi | Projected 130 mi

Seems like most other cars show only the equivalent of the projected number from the energy screen, commonly called a "guess-o-meter".

And that's a bigger problem imho. Read any Mach-E forum, they don't know what to expect, and can't calculate the battery degradation.

 

[alexgr]

I would think the DOJ will conduct this probe with due diligence and include EPA. The EPA signed off on these numbers.

Again, on city streets, I have no, zero, zilch problem getting better range than the Tesla rated EPA provided weather is not too wet or cold. All the crying wolf about Tesla range is about driving on highway at relatively high speed.

 

[advocate8]

I'm sure it's similar to many. That's why they use it.
But it'll never be a true average for all. That's all I'm saying.
No one wants to do the research/work to get their own figures, so they just look at EPA and such. Then they get pissed when their experience doesn't match that figure.

The issue at hand isn’t really the sanity and rationality of the EPA. Bureaucracies are dysfunctional at a ration based on their size, just simple fact. The question here is about why / how Tesla numbers appear pretty inflated on the same test, rational or irrational, when compared with other EVs.
The playing field may be dumb but it’s level. And Tesla gamed it pretty hard for marketing purposes.
Or you could say, for example, Porsche shot themselves in the foot by not playing the game the same way Tesla did.

 

[Big Earl]

The issue at hand isn’t really the sanity and rationality of the EPA. Bureaucracies are dysfunctional at a ration based on their size, just simple fact. The question here is about why / how Tesla numbers appear pretty inflated on the same test, rational or irrational, when compared with other EVs.
The playing field may be dumb but it’s level. And Tesla gamed it pretty hard for marketing purposes.
Or you could say, for example, Porsche shot themselves in the foot by not playing the game the same way Tesla did.

Because other manufactures are choosing to follow a different test (2 cycle vs 5 cycle) and/or arbitrarily reducing their range to give a better idea of "real world" range. Doing this results in not comparing apples to apples, but it doesn't mean that Tesla is cheating or doing something wrong.

 

[mongo]

The issue at hand isn’t really the sanity and rationality of the EPA. Bureaucracies are dysfunctional at a ration based on their size, just simple fact. The question here is about why / how Tesla numbers appear pretty inflated on the same test, rational or irrational, when compared with other EVs.
The playing field may be dumb but it’s level. And Tesla gamed it pretty hard for marketing purposes.
Or you could say, for example, Porsche shot themselves in the foot by not playing the game the same way Tesla did.

How are they gaming it? EPA are the ones with separate range and economy tests.

The EPA has confirmed test results for some models. Tesla's submitted data is available on the EPA website and you can see the impact of different conditions, cold is the worst.

2022 Model 3 LR AWD (note, these are grid recharge AC numbers)
City:
Internal Test results (CVS-75 UDDS Ambient) for MY2022 Model 3 Long Range AWD. AC wh/mi @ 50 % SOC - Bag 1 - 184.7; Bag 2- 161.7; Bag 3 - 179.7; Bag 4 - 160.9

Highway:
Internal Test results (HWY 3) for MY2022 Model 3 Long Range AWD. The HFET result from the full discharge MCT is used for the 2-part and 5- part calculations. AC wh/mi - 176.

Aggressive:
Internal Test results (US 06) for MY2022 Model 3 Long Range AWD. US06 AC wh/mi @ 50% SOC - City:242.1; Hwy:232.4

Hot:
Internal Test results (SC 03) for MY2022 Model 3 Long Range AWD. AC wh/mi - 220.2 at 50% SOC

Cold:
Internal Test results(Cold UDDS) for MY2022 Model 3 Long Range AWD. END SOC is 76577 wh (System error limited to 4 digits) for full discharge. AC wh/mi - Bag 1 - 381.3; Bag 2 - 353.2; Bag 3 - 358.6; Bag 4 - 296.2 Tesla did not use external current measurement after the full cold discharge test, since AC energy is not used in any part of the 5-cycle consumption calculation. The stated recharge energy is an estimate using the DC energy from the cold discharge test and the round trip energy efficiency from the full discharge MCT.

Range (raw test results):
City: 505
Highway 475
Cold: 306
https://dis.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=54290&flag=1

 

[advocate8]

Because other manufactures are choosing to follow a different test (2 cycle vs 5 cycle) and/or arbitrarily reducing their range to give a better idea of "real world" range. Doing this results in not comparing apples to apples, but it doesn't mean that Tesla is cheating or doing something wrong.

I believe the phrase I used was “gaming it.” They spun to their advantage. Others didn’t. I made no allegation of illegal behavior or cheating. If someone want to interpret that level of spin as wrong, that’s on them. Maybe their moral sensibilities are too delicate.
To me, it’s just marketing spin, and pretty typically marketing spin.
But there is absolutely no way to deny its spin given the gap in real world results and range numbers Tesla is using to sell cars and method Tesla used to reach those numbers.
As I’ve said, I went into it with open eyes and am totally happy with mine and its range. Hell, I’d have taken 30 miles less. It’s still the best EV drivetrain made, period.

 

[LostVector]

Because other manufactures are choosing to follow a different test (2 cycle vs 5 cycle) and/or arbitrarily reducing their range to give a better idea of "real world" range. Doing this results in not comparing apples to apples, but it doesn't mean that Tesla is cheating or doing something wrong.

One thing I've gotten better about as I get older is not equating "legal" with "moral" or "correct". I think Tesla can do better here, even if they are currently within the letter of the law.

 

[gt2690b]

One thing I've gotten better about as I get older is not equating "legal" with "moral" or "correct". I think Tesla can do better here, even if they are currently within the letter of the law.

if your goal is to convert the world off of fossil fuels and sell as many cars as possible then they are doing more than "better"

 

[ionsphere]

if your goal is to convert the world off of fossil fuels and sell as many cars as possible then they are doing more than "better"

I'm not sure what the OP meant but I know I do feel there's been some trickery involved in getting me to purchase my recent MY. Not such lofty ideals, more about wanting to feel treated better as a consumer including taking features away such as the USS, without having a better or even equal system to replace it in the current brand new cars. They can do better.

 

[Big Earl]

A lot of people out there seem to believe that EPA rated range should reflect whatever their personal driving situation is. The car magazines and others seem to think it should mean steady state driving at 70 MPH on the highway, and they use that expectation to accuse Tesla of all kinds of things ranging from gaming the system to cheating like VW did with Dieselgate.

I think the EPA needs to tighten this process up so we don't end up with these large range disparities between manufacturers. Adding a range rating for continuous highway driving, including a cold weather rating, would be helpful.

Interesting note from the raw data posted above: cold cycle is 60% of the normal city cycle and 64% of the normal highway cycle. That information isn't presented to consumers without them having to dig through reports. It would probably be helpful to list that cold weather reduction on Monroney stickers.

 

[Marktm250]

My MYLR stats on a recent trip of mainly highway, with some inner city. Tires at about 45 psi. Temps averaging mid 80's. 65/70 max mph highway:
240 watts/mile => 78000/240=325 miles.

What's the "real" range? I question if I have 78 kWh available for any trip - even charging to 100%, there's no way I'd go to 0% SOC. I've owned both a gen1 and gen2 Nissan Leaf, so I'm fairly conservative on the e-pedal.

 

[Unobtanium]

if your goal is to convert the world off of fossil fuels and sell as many cars as possible then they are doing more than "better"

When the world pays my bills I'll care. I just want accurately represented products. Tesla needs to do that for me to consider them when I replace my Kia. If not, Ill buy another HMG product.