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

Torque sleep not functioning properly on some cars?

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Lol

.....long pause for thought...is....

sorry was a left over sentence fragment. No new thoughts.

Heh. OK.



One thing I noticed as a quick nugget is that my efficiency was closest to EV Trip planner on the last leg of my trip.

So when you say "closest to EV Trip Planner" am I inferring correctly that the other legs were significantly less efficient, and that the best leg was approaching EV Trip Planner numbers, or perhaps even about equal to EV Trip Planner numbers, but certainly not 8-12% better than EV Trip Planner numbers?

I ask because some of the people who are seeing improved efficiency are beating EV Trip planner by that 8-12%.
 
Note that Cottonwood's route involves several major climbs and descents, as well as a middle section through the San Luis Valley that is both high and flat.

Since he and I have both been able to achieve relatively low average consumption numbers on several long cross-country drives, I wonder how much it has to do with the high average altitude at which those trips were driven. My hypothesis is that torque sleep is ineffective above some power drain close to 30kW (these are all made-up numbers to make a point), and that because of the lower aero drag at a given speed at higher altitudes, driving 60 mph at altitude puts us in torque sleep a much higher percentage of the time than driving 60 mph at sea level. Since above the threshold it appears torque sleep cuts off pretty abruptly, you'd have to drive 50 mph (or whatever the real value is) to see the advantages, and very few people have the desire or discipline to drive that slowly on the open highway.

Like I said, it's just a hypothesis.
 
Since he and I have both been able to achieve relatively low average consumption numbers on several long cross-country drives, I wonder how much it has to do with the high average altitude at which those trips were driven. My hypothesis is that torque sleep is ineffective above some power drain close to 30kW (these are all made-up numbers to make a point), and that because of the lower aero drag at a given speed at higher altitudes, driving 60 mph at altitude puts us in torque sleep a much higher percentage of the time than driving 60 mph at sea level. Since above the threshold it appears torque sleep cuts off pretty abruptly, you'd have to drive 50 mph (or whatever the real value is) to see the advantages, and very few people have the desire or discipline to drive that slowly on the open highway.

Like I said, it's just a hypothesis.

That's essentially the same theory I suggested here: Torque sleep not functioning properly on some cars? - Page 4

I definitely think we're on to something.
 
Heh. OK.





So when you say "closest to EV Trip Planner" am I inferring correctly that the other legs were significantly less efficient, and that the best leg was approaching EV Trip Planner numbers, or perhaps even about equal to EV Trip Planner numbers, but certainly not 8-12% better than EV Trip Planner numbers?

I ask because some of the people who are seeing improved efficiency are beating EV Trip planner by that 8-12%.

Yes, that is correct. I have only done a quick check so far but it appears most of my legs were worse by a fair margin.

- - - Updated - - -

Note that Cottonwood's route involves several major climbs and descents, as well as a middle section through the San Luis Valley that is both high and flat.

Since he and I have both been able to achieve relatively low average consumption numbers on several long cross-country drives, I wonder how much it has to do with the high average altitude at which those trips were driven. My hypothesis is that torque sleep is ineffective above some power drain close to 30kW (these are all made-up numbers to make a point), and that because of the lower aero drag at a given speed at higher altitudes, driving 60 mph at altitude puts us in torque sleep a much higher percentage of the time than driving 60 mph at sea level. Since above the threshold it appears torque sleep cuts off pretty abruptly, you'd have to drive 50 mph (or whatever the real value is) to see the advantages, and very few people have the desire or discipline to drive that slowly on the open highway.

Like I said, it's just a hypothesis.

My recent drive was at very high altitudes but for much of it (the parts that were poor efficiency) there were many ups and downs. I'm assuming that for most of the ups, both motors were required and thus no torque sleep.