Told sudden permanent 15 mile loss of range is "normal"

[cinergi]

Mine is also different. Range charge now maxes at 250.
And related to bluetinc's info, I don't actually get rated range unless I am averaging 290 Wh/mile. That is, if I subtract miles traveled (trip meter) from starting rated range, it doesn't match rated range remaining unless I'm at 290 whpm.

 

[aviators99]

Mine is also different. Range charge now maxes at 250.
And related to bluetinc's info, I don't actually get rated range unless I am averaging 290 Wh/mile. That is, if I subtract miles traveled (trip meter) from starting rated range, it doesn't match rated range remaining unless I'm at 290 whpm.

That's about the same as mine (both numbers). However, some earlier threads claimed that the trip meter does not take into account draw from things other than the KW draw you see in the speedometer, and I think I believe that.

 

[mknox]

That's about the same as mine (both numbers). However, some earlier threads claimed that the trip meter does not take into account draw from things other than the KW draw you see in the speedometer, and I think I believe that.

The Wh/mi that the car's trip meter reports is a good value for telling you how efficient your driving is and to project your range while underway. It seems to include everything the car is using (motor, lights, HVAC etc.) while the car is on and underway.

What comes out of the wall and in to your car will be greater than what the car reports because of things like charger inefficiencies and standby power that is not accounted for when the car is idle.

 

[qwk]

Despite all the eloquent arguments, the experience is that a given percentage will see less and less range over time until a range charge is done and then brings the rated range for that percentage back up.

Not at all my experience.

 

[aviators99]

The Wh/mi that the car's trip meter reports is a good value for telling you how efficient your driving is and to project your range while underway. It seems to include everything the car is using (motor, lights, HVAC etc.) while the car is on and underway.

What comes out of the wall and in to your car will be greater than what the car reports because of things like charger inefficiencies and standby power that is not accounted for when the car is idle.

Why do you believe that the trip meter includes lights, HVAC, etc.? I've been told otherwise by engineering. Also, do you believe that the energy graph does *not* include this stuff?

 

[cinergi]

Let me add to my 290 statement. It matches my graph, too - which we know includes HVAC. And our trip meters were much higher in the winter so it includes heat. And I'm pretty sure a/c as well.

 

[bluetinc]

While I don't have any hard data proving definitively that the trip meter includes everything, I have seen trip meter totals that are up to 79.4 kWh for a single long, non-stop drive in the middle of December, with the heat running on hours of driving. I can't see how that number wouldn't include the HVAC system.

While lights themselves would be very hard to show (~100 W would add ~3 Wh/mi at 30 miles an hour) I think it would be fair to note that it's a 12V system, and that all 12V systems would only show up if the HVDC-12VDC system power usage is included. This energy draw would be only temporary during top-up of the 12V system. While I think that this is also included, I'll have to think about the easiest way to show that this is, or isn't, included.


Peter

Why do you believe that the trip meter includes lights, HVAC, etc.? I've been told otherwise by engineering. Also, do you believe that the energy graph does *not* include this stuff?

 

[mknox]

Why do you believe that the trip meter includes lights, HVAC, etc.? I've been told otherwise by engineering. Also, do you believe that the energy graph does *not* include this stuff?

Easy. When it was very cold, I could turn on the heat and see the energy meter (orange) go up to 5 kW or more when the car was standing still. Turn it off and the graph drops back down. It is also reflected by extremely high Wh/mi readings for the first few miles that eventually settles down, but the average in cold weather remains much higher than in warmer months. The car's energy graph absolutely reflects this added load when the car is on and you're driving.

 

[mnx]

You guys probably already know this but it definitely doesn't include battery/motor cooling/heating, at least while the car is off. When I've tracked the car in the past, my trip meter reads ~66 kWh since last charge while using ~95% of an available charge on my 85kWh Model S.

 

[aviators99]

Easy. When it was very cold, I could turn on the heat and see the energy meter (orange) go up to 5 kW or more when the car was standing still. Turn it off and the graph drops back down. It is also reflected by extremely high Wh/mi readings for the first few miles that eventually settles down, but the average in cold weather remains much higher than in warmer months. The car's energy graph absolutely reflects this added load when the car is on and you're driving.

Yes, this agrees with what I was told--that the graph *does* include this stuff. It is the trip meter that I was told does not.

 

[mknox]

Yes, this agrees with what I was told--that the graph *does* include this stuff. It is the trip meter that I was told does not.

It sure does for me, or my Wh/mi wouldn't be so much higher in the cold months. I am averaging right around 300 Wh/mi (according to my trip meter which I reset monthly) while in the winter I was almost 500. My driving patterns are pretty consistent so the only variable would be the pack and cabin heating.

- - - Updated - - -

You guys probably already know this but it definitely doesn't include battery/motor cooling/heating, at least while the car is off. When I've tracked the car in the past, my trip meter reads ~66 kWh since last charge while using ~95% of an available charge on my 85kWh Model S.

Right. It seems to only track when the car is on. That is kinda my point: the power from the wall is a fair bit higher than what the car's trip meters report.

 

[aviators99]

My driving patterns are pretty consistent so the only variable would be the pack and cabin heating.

I think you mean "the only variable would be the pack and/or the cabin heating". Or you might mean "the only variables would be the pack and cabin heating".

Tesla engineering has led us/me astray before, but if it includes the pack heating but not the cabin heating, it could still be somewhat consistent with what they say. There is certainly some difference between what they measure.

In addition, I've had this theory for a while that the regen is not even close to being measured correctly on the trip computer. I think it's way off.

 

[mknox]

I think you mean "the only variable would be the pack and/or the cabin heating". Or you might mean "the only variables would be the pack and cabin heating".

Yes, that's what I meant. In other words, in the summer I'm not using the cabin heat and presumably the pack isn't being heated either, but in the winter, one or both certainly are on.

I think the a/c gives a bit of a hit too, but not nearly as much as the cabin heater does.

 

[jerry33]

I think the a/c gives a bit of a hit too, but not nearly as much as the cabin heater does.

I can tell the difference in the Wh/mi with the a/c on and off. It's not dramatic but it's consistently higher when the a/c is on.

 

[brianman]

I can tell the difference in the Wh/mi with the a/c on and off. It's not dramatic but it's consistently higher when the a/c is on.

This I believe.

Followup question: Do you think average drivers will see a noticeable difference or just experienced hypermilers?

 

[Banahogg]

Followup question: Do you think average drivers will see a noticeable difference or just experienced hypermilers?

I can see a difference from even light A/C on my city streets commute as long as I'm driving reasonably (too sleepy to drive aggressively on the morning commute). If I have the climate control off and the windows open, I've seen as low at 250 Wh/mi on a 5 mi commute.

 

[mknox]

Followup question: Do you think average drivers will see a noticeable difference or just experienced hypermilers?

I'm a pretty conservative driver by nature, but certainly not a hypermiler. I can't really tell the difference on days when I have a/c on or off (and I do turn it off when I don't need it), but I sure can tell when I'm using heat!

 

[JRP3]

While lights themselves would be very hard to show (~100 W would add ~3 Wh/mi at 30 miles an hour) I think it would be fair to note that it's a 12V system, and that all 12V systems would only show up if the HVDC-12VDC system power usage is included. This energy draw would be only temporary during top-up of the 12V system.

Peter

The DC/DC should be operating all the time when the vehicle is in use. I believe Tesla uses a 2 channel DC/DC, one keeps the 12V battery charged up at all times and the other operates all the 12V accessory loads during vehicle operation. I assume Tesla is measuring all draw from the main pack, which includes the DC/DC converter, so all loads should be measured, though very small drains may not show up.

 

[jerry33]

Followup question: Do you think average drivers will see a noticeable difference or just experienced hypermilers?

I suspect they might notice it more because they might not take care to use the a/c in the most efficient manner.