Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

TM3 new range for LR AWD car: What about us with 3 months old cars?

Probably the new rating they're using with the 'updates to the motor control' they've discussed.

I doubt anything has changed.

If that's actually the case, I'm curious what the RWD-only model should update to. Unless the motor control only affects the induction FWD motor, it should improve RWD stuff as well.
 
Probably the new rating they're using with the 'updates to the motor control' they've discussed.

I doubt anything has changed.

If that's actually the case, I'm curious what the RWD-only model should update to. Unless the motor control only affects the induction FWD motor, it should improve RWD stuff as well.

The RWD was already recently updated to 250.
 

AlanSubie4Life

Efficiency Obsessed Member
Oct 22, 2018
14,925
19,271
San Diego
Two days ago mine showed 298 P3D- of rated range, which is higher than it has showed in months. Now today with 32% charge (not sure if that matters), it shows a rated range of 288. What the hell? I think I’m going to ignore this rated range silliness.

You are confusing rated range with projected range. The projected range is basically a random number generated by the formula:

Rated miles remaining * 245Wh/rmi / (Last 5/15/30 efficiency in Wh/mi)

I would just switch to miles instead of percentage if you want to see a more accurate estimate of your energy remaining (and ignore the Energy Consumption screen). But if you prefer % that is cool.


Regarding the OP - good that they did not update the Performance. Probably with a low take rate they technically could have. Good that the rated range improvements (which are presumably real) are coming to AWD vehicles. I would assume there will also be an increase in rated range with the Performance. Presumably this will be implemented as a change in the consumption constants, and a corresponding actual real improvement in efficiency. Energy available will presumably remain the same as always, but I guess we will see if they changed the discharge minimum/maximum voltages.
 
Last edited:

yerEVan

Active Member
Dec 29, 2018
1,603
2,735
Near Philly
You are confusing rated range with projected range. The projected range is basically a random number generated by the formula:

Rated miles remaining * 245Wh/rmi / (Last 5/15/30 efficiency in Wh/mi)

I would just switch to miles instead of percentage if you want to see a more accurate estimate of your energy remaining (and ignore the Energy Consumption screen). But if you prefer % that is cool.


Regarding the OP - good that they did not update the Performance. Probably with a low take rate they technically could have. Good that the rated range improvements (which are presumably real) are coming to AWD vehicles. I would assume there will also be an increase in rated range with the Performance. Presumably this will be implemented as a change in the consumption constants, and a corresponding actual real improvement in efficiency. Energy available will presumably remain the same as always, but I guess we will see if they changed the discharge minimum/maximum voltages.
I use Stats, and it has the calc just like teslafi of the rated range. I am aware of estimated, and that is not what I’m quoting above. My rated range fluctuates daily from 292 to 295. A couple days ago it finally went to 298 now 288.

344BA94C-5F6B-4579-92D3-44BE754638C0.jpeg


Holy crap that is a huge image. Sorry about that.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: Sherlo

yerEVan

Active Member
Dec 29, 2018
1,603
2,735
Near Philly
This is a big reason why I prefer the battery percent remaining showing instead of the mileage range.
Yep. I prefer percentage. I wish it were showing something like 32.9, 32.6, 32.3, 32.0. Just so we know where we are since 1% = 3.1 miles (rated). That would make it inline with when you have the miles showing, instead of % (I’m repeating myself from another post).

Like 287 miles showing should show 92.6% instead of just 92%.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beachmiles

AlanSubie4Life

Efficiency Obsessed Member
Oct 22, 2018
14,925
19,271
San Diego
I use Stats, and it has the calc just like teslafi of the rated range. I am aware of estimated, and that is not what I’m quoting above. My rated range fluctuates daily from 292 to 295. A couple days ago it finally went to 298 now 288.

View attachment 472070

Holy crap that is a huge image. Sorry about that.

Ah, I thought you were saying your estimated range was 288 miles at 32% (which is obviously possible).

The rated miles is just the best estimate of the BMS of your available energy and it will correlate well with how far you can go...when all other factors are held constant.

So it is just saying that it believes you have about 2kWh less energy available than you had before.
 

AlanSubie4Life

Efficiency Obsessed Member
Oct 22, 2018
14,925
19,271
San Diego
Just so we know where we are since 1% = 3.1 miles (rated).

This isn't true, BTW. For you, 1% = 2.88 rated miles, for example. The meaning of 1% is different for everyone.


Anyway, in regards to the original topic, I don't think there is any way they're going to be able to fudge the EPA numbers without an actual efficiency improvement. At some point they'll have to do a new EPA submission to support this change, I think. They are allowed to use a different formula than the 70% formula, apparently, with EPA approval, so I guess that is a possibility, but it seems doubtful they could get that much without an actual efficiency improvement. And I don't think the "'regen' to 0mph" change is likely to recapture NEARLY enough energy to result in such an improvement - there is nearly zero energy available from 6mph to 0mph (it's proportional to velocity squared!). I think it must have to do with the actual excitation of the motor and efficiency improvements there.

No new documents in the EPA system yet.
 
Last edited:

AlanSubie4Life

Efficiency Obsessed Member
Oct 22, 2018
14,925
19,271
San Diego
I see performance stayed at 310 miles. I hope my p3d- will get the bump and they kept performance at 310 due to tires and wheels.

Yeah, if there is an actual drive efficiency improvement I expect the Performance will see the actual effect as well. They probably are not changing the Performance version out of basic decency since obviously it was always way off (and maybe their take rate is high enough on it now that they actually have to call it out differently - but I doubt it).

For all vehicles, it should be interesting to see the step function in the Stats data though it will be difficult to distinguish from the overall seasonal plunge in efficiency.
 

yerEVan

Active Member
Dec 29, 2018
1,603
2,735
Near Philly
This isn't true, BTW. For you, 1% = 2.88 rated miles, for example. The meaning of 1% is different for everyone.


Anyway, in regards to the original topic, I don't think there is any way they're going to be able to fudge the EPA numbers without an actual efficiency improvement. At some point they'll have to do a new EPA submission to support this change, I think. They are allowed to use a different formula than the 70% formula, apparently, with EPA approval, so I guess that is a possibility, but it seems doubtful they could get that much without an actual efficiency improvement. And I don't think the "'regen' to 0mph" change is likely to recapture NEARLY enough energy to result in such an improvement - there is nearly zero energy available from 6mph to 0mph (it's proportional to velocity squared!). I think it must have to do with the actual excitation of the motor and efficiency improvements there.

No new documents in the EPA system yet.
I mean 1% rated range based on their site. Clearly my “mileage” varies. I’m using it as an example.
 

yerEVan

Active Member
Dec 29, 2018
1,603
2,735
Near Philly
Two days ago mine showed 298 P3D- of rated range, which is higher than it has showed in months. Now today with 32% charge (not sure if that matters), it shows a rated range of 288. What the hell? I think I’m going to ignore this rated range silliness.
So without moving the car, sitting in the garage, it’s now down to 30% and rated range is 282 (at 100%), so i will charge it up sometime this wknd, and see what the rated range shows at 90% or 100%, just to see if the percentage has an effect on how the batteries are able to report, or are read, to/from the BMS.
 

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top