The DOJ Tesla probe has expanded to include EV driving ranges

[mongo]

I'm assuming the 5-cycle test:

Calculating Electric Vehicle Range with Simulation

Range anxiety is a common concern for electric vehicles (EV). See how simulation can streamline the EV range process.

www.gtisoft.com

So the best I can gather is that

1) Tesla was using the old 5-cycle test prior to 2024, which was overly optimistic
2) Tesla is now using the 2-cycle test with the 0.7 default adjustment factor like all the other EV manufacturers were using due to new EPA guidance

Someone, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Range doesn't use the five cycle test, that is for efficiency/ MPGe.

Range is either city to depletion and highway to depletion weighted average together multiplied by the adjustment factor
Or
City, highway, city 65 MPH, city, highway, city, 65 MPH until depleted multiplied by adjustment factor.

 

[EatsShoots]

The problem with "MPGe" is that there is no "G." It is an asinine, contrived metric to try to equate BEV efficiency into something familiar for legacy ICEV-minded people. They should have made a clean break and specified watt-hours/mile or watt-hours/km as the metric. That 33.7 equivalency factor is work of preschoolers. That constant isn't even true, because the energy varies greatly between types of gasoline and seasonal mix.

It is not scaled version of kWh/100mile, because they flipped the fraction with MPGe. Also, whomever created kWh/100mile should be spanked. That is a terrible unit of measure with an unneeded constant baked in. The no-brainer is simply Wh/mile. These idiots are just making society stupider. (I also dislike miles/kWh as a metric too, but that is a whole other rant.)

Yeah it's really meaningless crap. It's like polling a group of people and half say their favorite car color is red and the other half say it's white and you conclude that the average person's favorite color is pink.

 

[sleepydoc]

I'm guessing the EPA will be too busy testing all the other 2024 vehicles to bother going back and retesting older cars.
There are probably minor adjustments to their testing every year. We're just aware of them this time because it affected a Tesla.

If the EPA changed the testing methodologies and the 2024 MPG estimates changed on the F150 would anyone expect them to go back and change the numbers for the 2023 models or for the EPA to care? No. Nor should we expect anything different for Tesla.

 

[sleepydoc]

I'm kind of tongue-and-cheek on this. But at a summary level, it is terrible science and misleading. "Ge" is made up and fundamentally just wrong. It is literally not a "gasoline equivalent." A BEV has the same efficiency year round and because electricity does not change its energy density. Gasoline energy density is practically arbitrary based on when, where, and with what someone fills up, so 33.7 is el-stupido.

Pack size at Wh would be ridiculous. The metric system solves for this. kWh is the appropriate scaled metric for pack size. Due to scale, Wh is appropriate for efficiency.

That said, mixing pseudo-SI units with Imperial units is also pretty stupid. But that is another rant for another day. Could you imagine the mental chaos if carmakers were required to express efficiency in joules/mile? Or BTU/mile? Or calories/mile?

Do some research and educate yourself before posting. You’ll look smarter.

MPGe is not “made up.” It’s calculated by using the energy content of a gallon of gasoline then comparing that to the energy usage of the EV. It may not be perfect but it’s far from made up.

 

[exxxviii]

Do some research and educate yourself before posting. You’ll look smarter.

MPGe is not “made up.” It’s calculated by using the energy content of a gallon of gasoline then comparing that to the energy usage of the EV. It may not be perfect but it’s far from made up.

Ummmm. I would encourage you to do the same.

Exactly what type of gasoline do you think equates to 33.7 kWh/gallon? I will save you a minute and link to a wiki page on it... There isn't one.

Gasoline ranges from 32.7 to 38.0 depending on E10 gas blend to diesel. There is no gallon that is 33.7. It is absolutely made up to try to stuff something into legacy ICEV speak that should never be there.

If someone is comparing diesel car efficiency to a BEV, the 33.7 is mega wrong. If they are comparing regular gasoline, then it is in the ballpark but wrong by 3%. So, it is a really dumb equivalency.

Gasoline gallon equivalent - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[gt2690b]

Ummmm. I would encourage you to do the same.

Exactly what type of gasoline do you think equates to 33.7 kWh/gallon? I will save you a minute and link to a wiki page on it... There isn't one.

Gasoline ranges from 32.7 to 38.0 depending on E10 gas blend to diesel. There is no gallon that is 33.7. It is absolutely made up to try to stuff something into legacy ICEV speak that should never be there.

If someone is comparing diesel car efficiency to a BEV, the 33.7 is mega wrong. If they are comparing regular gasoline, then it is in the ballpark but wrong by 3%. So, it is a really dumb equivalency.

Gasoline gallon equivalent - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Per your link one gallon conventional is 0.9956 of 33.4 or 33.56 that seems closer than 3%

It is actually within less than half percent of 33.7 close enough for government work (apparently)

 

[Big Earl]

Ummmm. I would encourage you to do the same.

Exactly what type of gasoline do you think equates to 33.7 kWh/gallon? I will save you a minute and link to a wiki page on it... There isn't one.

Gasoline ranges from 32.7 to 38.0 depending on E10 gas blend to diesel. There is no gallon that is 33.7. It is absolutely made up to try to stuff something into legacy ICEV speak that should never be there.

If someone is comparing diesel car efficiency to a BEV, the 33.7 is mega wrong. If they are comparing regular gasoline, then it is in the ballpark but wrong by 3%. So, it is a really dumb equivalency.

Gasoline gallon equivalent - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Diesel is not gasoline. MPGe of diesel is 40.2 kWh (137,381 BTU) per gallon.

You can calculate the MPGe of your favorite fuel by referencing this table: https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec12_2.pdf

 

[sleepydoc]

Ummmm. I would encourage you to do the same.

Exactly what type of gasoline do you think equates to 33.7 kWh/gallon? I will save you a minute and link to a wiki page on it... There isn't one.

Gasoline ranges from 32.7 to 38.0 depending on E10 gas blend to diesel. There is no gallon that is 33.7. It is absolutely made up to try to stuff something into legacy ICEV speak that should never be there.

If someone is comparing diesel car efficiency to a BEV, the 33.7 is mega wrong. If they are comparing regular gasoline, then it is in the ballpark but wrong by 3%. So, it is a really dumb equivalency.

Gasoline gallon equivalent - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Lol - the other replies have pretty much said what needs to be said and I stand by my original advice to you.

 

[exxxviii]

Lol - the other replies have pretty much said what needs to be said and I stand by my original advice to you.

Go back and reread all my posts, and I promise you will be smarter. I don't think you understand the topic or measures or analytics here. Trust me, it is actually arbitrary and creates confusion because it is meaningless.

 

[zoomer0056]

Trust me, it is actually arbitrary and creates confusion because it is meaningless.

A confusing statement.

 

[GBMaryland]

The biggest thing I have an issue with is the ratings have to take into consideration all of the factors we commonly run into:

- Driving at 55
- Driving at 75
- Driving in <32F temperatures
- Etc

What are the things that pissed me off the most when I picked up my M3 back in the day was the whole “ oh, don’t charge your car over 80% on a daily basis.” And the other things that I was never told about by the sales team…

Don’t get me wrong, I totally enjoyed that vehicle… And I have a model Y now. That being said the fact that nobody told you how bad it would be during winter driving, and that you’d wear the battery out if you charged it more than 80%… That’s effectively dishonest.

EV’s need to be compared to ICE vehicles on a feature by feature basis.

And it needs to be an honest accounting… which today I think we actually have because of all the media, and the ability to find information, but six years ago, it wasn’t that cut and dry.

I’m astonished it took this long for the EPA to get off their ass and actually say it needs to be this way now…

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

The biggest thing I have an issue with is the ratings have to take into consideration all of the factors we commonly run into:

- Driving at 55
- Driving at 75
- Driving in <32F temperatures
- Etc

What are the things that pissed me off the most when I picked up my M3 back in the day was the whole “ oh, don’t charge your car over 80% on a daily basis.” And the other things that I was never told about by the sales team…

Don’t get me wrong, I totally enjoyed that vehicle… And I have a model Y now. That being said the fact that nobody told you how bad it would be during winter driving, and that you’d wear the battery out if you charged it more than 80%… That’s effectively dishonest.

EV’s need to be compared to ICE vehicles on a feature by feature basis.

And it needs to be an honest accounting… which today I think we actually have because of all the media, and the ability to find information, but six years ago, it wasn’t that cut and dry.

I’m astonished it took this long for the EPA to get off their ass and actually say it needs to be this way now…

It doesn't wear the battery out to charge it more than 80%. That's a simplified message.

The reason it's not mentioned up front is because people new to EVs (and some not new to EVs) would misunderstand, and it has no impact on utility for the vast majority of people.

It's not uncommon to read people writing that LFP can be charged to 100%, but LiNi can't, or that really you only have 80% of the normally quote range and that's a similar misunderstanding.

 

[EatsShoots]

The biggest thing I have an issue with is the ratings have to take into consideration all of the factors we commonly run into:

- Driving at 55
- Driving at 75
- Driving in <32F temperatures
- Etc

What are the things that pissed me off the most when I picked up my M3 back in the day was the whole “ oh, don’t charge your car over 80% on a daily basis.” And the other things that I was never told about by the sales team…

Don’t get me wrong, I totally enjoyed that vehicle… And I have a model Y now. That being said the fact that nobody told you how bad it would be during winter driving, and that you’d wear the battery out if you charged it more than 80%… That’s effectively dishonest.

EV’s need to be compared to ICE vehicles on a feature by feature basis.

And it needs to be an honest accounting… which today I think we actually have because of all the media, and the ability to find information, but six years ago, it wasn’t that cut and dry.

I’m astonished it took this long for the EPA to get off their ass and actually say it needs to be this way now…

I do bet a large percentage of people didn't realize that charging to 100% is often not advised.

The cold weather hit to EVs is the most glaring oversight in the EPA ratings. I had a Nissan Leaf rated at 72 or 73 miles--whatever the 2012 was--and I once took it from full charge down to turtle mode after 35 miles on a very cold day. This precipitous drop must be represented somehow. Even our 2020 Leaf on the highway in very cold weather would drop range by a spectacular amount.

The reason it's not mentioned up front is because people new to EVs (and some not new to EVs) would misunderstand, and it has no impact on utility for the vast majority of people.

Range of an EV is a cornerstone metric people use when deciding to buy one. Coming home and then figuring out that the number you actually have is 80% of what you were quoted is certainly impactful and would be for a great many people. The quite literally thousands of posts about 80% vs 100% on EV forums over the last decade supports this.

 

[drb3333]

I'm assuming the 5-cycle test:

Calculating Electric Vehicle Range with Simulation

Range anxiety is a common concern for electric vehicles (EV). See how simulation can streamline the EV range process.

www.gtisoft.com

So the best I can gather is that

1) Tesla was using the old 5-cycle test prior to 2024, which was overly optimistic
2) Tesla is now using the 2-cycle test with the 0.7 default adjustment factor like all the other EV manufacturers were using due to new EPA guidance

Someone, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Almost. The adjustment factor can be accepted as 0.7 which was apparently largely based upon prior Prius experience, or else a manufacturer can calculate their own by running the two-cycle three more times. Tesla is very good at meeting the letter of the law.

The Secret Adjustment Factor Tesla Uses to Get Its Big EPA Range Numbers

How Tesla puts distance between itself and the competition while still playing by the EPA's rules.

www.caranddriver.com

Something not mentioned (or else I didn't see it) is the buffer size. EPA tests run down the vehicle until it is unable to maintain the proper speed, whereas our real-world experience accepts 0% as dead, thus omitting the safety buffer which is present in the calculated range numbers.

 

[sleepydoc]

The biggest thing I have an issue with is the ratings have to take into consideration all of the factors we commonly run into:

- Driving at 55
- Driving at 75
- Driving in <32F temperatures
- Etc

What are the things that pissed me off the most when I picked up my M3 back in the day was the whole “ oh, don’t charge your car over 80% on a daily basis.” And the other things that I was never told about by the sales team…

Don’t get me wrong, I totally enjoyed that vehicle… And I have a model Y now. That being said the fact that nobody told you how bad it would be during winter driving, and that you’d wear the battery out if you charged it more than 80%… That’s effectively dishonest.

EV’s need to be compared to ICE vehicles on a feature by feature basis.

And it needs to be an honest accounting… which today I think we actually have because of all the media, and the ability to find information, but six years ago, it wasn’t that cut and dry.

I’m astonished it took this long for the EPA to get off their ass and actually say it needs to be this way now…

EVs are fundamentally different than ICE vehicles so it’s impossible to make a simple, blanket comparison, but the public wants everything to be dumbed down to 3 words or less.

Physics is physics. Every car gets worse economy at 75 MPH vs 55 MPH. That’s why they dropped the national speed limit to 55 back in the 70‘s. ‘Till people started whining that it was their God-given right to drive 100 MPH on the interstate and ‘what’s the point in having a car that can go 100 MPH if I can’t drive that fast?’ and other stupidities.

Every car does worse when cold and in the snow however the biggest drawback of ICE cars, their inefficiency, ends up being an asset during cold weather because that heat can be used to heat the cabin whereas EVs need to use extra power to compensate for their lack of inefficiency. If you’re comparing short trips while cold then ICE cars do worse because they’re operating in their most inefficient state, so it all depends.

The number one thing that people fail to consider is the simple fact that no one worries what the range is for an ICE car. When was the last time you complained that your ICE car only got 15 MPG rather than the advertised 25 MPG? Pumping gasoline is still a much quicker way of transferring energy to a car than charging and there are over 115,000 gas stations compared to around 10,000 DC charging stations in the US meaning you virtually never worry about being able to fill up.

Finally when purchasing a car one needs to consider his/her individual needs. I think some EV advocates do a disservice to both consumers and EVs when they try to argue that EVs are the best solution for everyone. There are many cases in which they excel and many cases in which they don’t. The overwhelming majority of people never drive more than 100-150 miles in a day so having an EV that they can plug in at night works well but If you routinely drive long distances in cold, rural areas and EV is not a good choice for you.

 

[Macb00kemdanno]

Part of Tesla’s email to customers (with pending orders) concerning the change:

The EPA also updated their range testing guidance to ensure sticker estimates for all manufacturers more closely reflect real-world range, impacting previous range estimates for all manufacturers, not just Tesla.”

The only discrepancy I see here is that the other manufacturers were already using the 0.7 adjustment factor.

Tesla asks customers with pending orders to reconfigure before deadline

After Tesla debuted new range estimates for its vehicles this week, the automaker has started emailing customers with pending orders to ask...

www.teslarati.com

 

[MP3Mike]

Part of Tesla’s email to customers (with pending orders) concerning the change:



The only discrepancy I see here is that the other manufacturers were already using the 0.7 adjustment factor.

Tesla asks customers with pending orders to reconfigure before deadline

After Tesla debuted new range estimates for its vehicles this week, the automaker has started emailing customers with pending orders to ask...

www.teslarati.com

But the adjustment factor didn't change. The actual testing procedures changed.

Try reading the EPA's notice about the changes: https://dis.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=55592&flag=1

 

[drb3333]

But the adjustment factor didn't change. The actual testing procedures changed.

Try reading the EPA's notice about the changes: https://dis.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=55592&flag=1

As I read it: AFAIK Teslas have always used default Drive mode since no other option is available. This is a transmission change only.

See my previous post about the adjustment options from Car & Driver.

The crux of the range issue seems to be the 0.7 adjustment reflects a completely different generation of drivers.

I use and enjoy the performance of my MY and can totally see how this was not an option for a Prius driver. Nor do I think they drive 80 mph, nor have a strong heat pump for HVAC loads.

But I appreciate the Tesla ranges do reflect what is possible. My biggest beef is the low state inaccuracy where the range drops precipitously.

 

[sleepydoc]

As I read it: AFAIK Teslas have always used default Drive mode since no other option is available.

What about chill mode?

 

[drb3333]

What about chill mode?

Hmmm. Good point; I didn't think of that.

I was thinking more along the lines of my older Ford Escape, which actually had D and L for the transmission. But since it was a CVT it did not change the gearing, but rather the algorithm to set the RPM for various road conditions.