Trip Range and Consumption 2020 Model Y

[RoBoRaT]

Here is a baseline range and consumption under the following condition:

2020 Performance Model Y Built: 3/20
Odometer: 85 miles
21" Überturbines
Driver only. No cargo.

Outside Temp: 50-60°
Dry roads; No head/tailwind; Daylight
HVAC: Off
Westbound I-60/I-10 SoCal
No Traffic on Highway; Few in City
Mostly flat roads, some small hills
TP: 43-45 PSI
Highway: 90% on AutoPilot cruising@~77mph

95 mile trip
Start Trip SoC: 90% / 252 miles
End Trip SoC: 52.3% / 149 miles
3/21/2020

Mile 1-30: City/Highway Speed: 30-60 mph
Mile 30-90: Highway Speed: 75-80 mph
Mile 90-95: Highway/City Speed: 70-30mph

@ Mile: Ave Wh/mi: EPA Range (mi):
32.6 296 215
46.3 300 199
60.0 293 185
75.7 292 167
89.4 288 153
95.2 280 149

There you go.
As always YMMV OYMY.

 

[RoBoRaT]

Return trip:

@ 95.2 mile. Ave: 302 Wh/mi. 31 miles range left.

Total Trip: 190.8 miles
Consumption: 56 kWh
Ave: 292 Wh/mi
End SoC: 11% @ 31 mile EPA range

 

[MY-Y]

I, for one, really appreciate folks like you taking the time to share info like this with the forum!

 

[Uncle Paul]

That is very impressive for cruising 77 mph on a coolish 55º day. Model Y does much better than most expected at higher speeds like that.

 

[israndy]

As always YMMV

HA!

Interesting, I have the LR RWD TM3 with the Aero caps removed and I averaged 247 lifetime. I think this is the same metric that ABRP uses for my car, so I must not be the only one. My car gets 310 miles on a full charge still, so I am curious how the TMY gets 315 miles on a charge if it has the same pack I have and you are getting those closer to 300 wh/mi readings.

 

[RoBoRaT]

That is very impressive for cruising 77 mph on a coolish 55º day. Model Y does much better than most expected at higher speeds like that.

And that is on 21" wheels with staggered 275/255 280 UTQG (ugh) summer tires - imagine lighter 19" wheels with all-season 255s.

And, I had the Fan On on the return trip....

 

[RoBoRaT]

I, for one, really appreciate folks like you taking the time to share info like this with the forum!

No problem. I gain as much, if not more info from others in here.

 

[TimothyHW3]

Here is another video from today. They did slightly better than you at 273Wh/m at 70mph.

What I am a bit astonished by your screenshots and the video I see is that the rated consumption of the PY is 280Wh/m (or whereabouts)
This is the constant Tesla uses to calculate the range.

This doesn't make any sense at all, those are rated 275 miles and not the 300miles the website is advertising. And this is very strange, because the math on the Model 3 comes up perfectly, but not for the Y?

Interesting, I have the LR RWD TM3 with the Aero caps removed and I averaged 247 lifetime. I think this is the same metric that ABRP uses for my car, so I must not be the only one. My car gets 310 miles on a full charge still, so I am curious how the TMY gets 315 miles on a charge if it has the same pack I have and you are getting those closer to 300 wh/mi readings.

Exactly, it can't. I think Tesla are going to get a lot of angry customers with this move and overpromising. It is clearly that the car can't get anywehre near the 300miles (this is with the P upgrade), let alone 315 miles they advertise.

I can't really understand this. The way Tesla does the calculations - they hide 3.5kWh below 0% - if you drive @ 300Wh/m you will get 245miles from 0%-100% and come some degradation time around 235 miles.

At 275Wh/m you are looking at 275 miles or 265 miles after degradation.

This is 220-240 miles real world range @ 90% usable in the best and perfect conditions of little drag due to high temperature!

I mean don't get me wrong - from what I hear around these forums, most people just drive between 50% and 90% and don't care about their full range at all, but I am sure some folks will go down the 100%-10% route and be very dissapointed when they can only get about 220-240 miles...

While the consumption is still ok compared to other cars in its class (etron) and the car seems very well build, this is way beyond the 5%-10% Elon Musk advertised...

 

[DDrawer]

The Tesla rated range for the performance with the performance package upgrade (21" wheels, lowered, etc) is 280 miles. The 315 is only with the "standard" performance model.

 

[TimothyHW3]

The Tesla rated range for the performance with the performance package upgrade (21" wheels, lowered, etc) is 280 miles. The 315 is only with the "standard" performance model.

Funny, it said 300miles a minute ago. And it offered me 20" not 21". No idea.

Anyways, 280 miles. That is closer to the 280Wh/km than 300 miles, but still you have to use 78kWh as total and you end up short with 278 miles. On the 3 they use 76.5 as a calculation. Maybe they went overboard with the total capacity, just to make sure the YP has some decent range on the website...
This is also yet another proof that the "added" capacity on the 3 and Y is just math - instead of using 76.5kWh they use a total of 78kWh. Which is kind a sad, because the 78kWh is a fugazi - it is just there for a few miles and then drops to 76-77kWh...

My math is correct though. From 0-100% or about 74kWh you can expect 245miles to 265 miles on a ful charge.

And I highly doubt it that the Y can be as efficient as the 3 as the website is trying to make it. But we will have to wait and see - are there any AWD tests with 18"?

 

[DDrawer]

Maybe they were factoring the efficiencies the heat pump should give to range in certain circumstances?

There will be soon, Out of Spec motoring and i1tesla should be putting up a video using 18's, 19's, 20's, and 21's on the MY performance.

 

[TimothyHW3]

Maybe they were factoring the efficiencies the heat pump should give to range in certain circumstances?

I think you misunderstood me. They are factoring less efficiency than the 3, not more.

They are calculating with 280Wh/m, the 3P is around 245Wh/m. That is almost 15% or more over the 3P. I doubt this can be attributed to 1" bigger wheels. But let's wait and see.

 

[DDrawer]

And I highly doubt it that the Y can be as efficient as the 3 as the website is trying to make it. But we will have to wait and see - are there any AWD tests with 18"?

Sorry I was referring to this statement. Maybe the Y can be as efficient as the 3 in certain circumstances due to the heat pump.We'll see.

 

[EVDRVN]

So I have to wonder if one purchased the performance version and swapped the wheels with the 19" Y wheels how the car would perform? Would this result in a lowered performance version with better efficiency than the LR version as it would be lower and have the same exact wheels and tires? I have no desire to have the 21" wheels and the hit but I also don't want to pay for performance and not have the brakes.

 

[TimothyHW3]

Are you going to drive at higher speeds than 80mph? If not and mostly city then it will not make much of a difference if you lower the car. I have seen some tests of lowered 3s where they had 5% better efficiency at high speeds. But how low is it on default? They had the suspension lowered at 4cm, I doubt Tesla does that much?
Other than that the tyres do make a difference especially in the city. I remember Bjørn Nyland using 18" on his M3P and it improved a lot.

By the way, I saw the i1Tesla Video today with the 18". So unless you lower the car another 10cm I don't see these small tyres working on a Y - just too small. No wonder Tesla offers 19" lowest, 18" look crazy on this high car.

This further makes the case that Tesla is pushing the marketing on the Y to beyond the usual "let's feed them some random range numbers"...
They expect us to believe that a 200kg heavier car with 19" can do the same consumption as a 200kg less car with 18" aeros... This is not happening, Tesla is just playing with numbers again...

 

[MY-Y]

...

This further makes the case that Tesla is pushing the marketing on the Y to beyond the usual "let's feed them some random range numbers"...
They expect us to believe that a 200kg heavier car with 19" can do the same consumption as a 200kg less car with 18" aeros... This is not happening, Tesla is just playing with numbers again...

I'm new to the whole Tesla thing, so help me understand... If the 316 mile rating is an EPA rating, how can Tesla play with the numbers?(I too am puzzled how the MY has about the same range as the M3.)

 

[poohBoo2]

Here is a baseline range and consumption under the following condition:

2020 Performance Model Y Built: 3/20
Odometer: 85 miles
21" Überturbines
Driver only. No cargo.

Outside Temp: 50-60°
Dry roads; No head/tailwind; Daylight
HVAC: Off
Westbound I-60/I-10 SoCal
No Traffic on Highway; Few in City
Mostly flat roads, some small hills
TP: 43-45 PSI
Highway: 90% on AutoPilot cruising@~77mph

95 mile trip
Start Trip SoC: 90% / 252 miles
End Trip SoC: 52.3% / 149 miles
3/21/2020

Mile 1-30: City/Highway Speed: 30-60 mph
Mile 30-90: Highway Speed: 75-80 mph
Mile 90-95: Highway/City Speed: 70-30mph

@ Mile: Ave Wh/mi: EPA Range (mi):
32.6 296 215
46.3 300 199
60.0 293 185
75.7 292 167
89.4 288 153
95.2 280 149

There you go.
As always YMMV OYMY.

View attachment 524087 View attachment 524088 View attachment 524089 View attachment 524090 View attachment 524091 View attachment 524092

From the screenshots, it looks like the HVAC might not have been off (the fan icon not grayed out) and the temp setting is on LO (lowest possible temp). OP if you have time, can you possibly validate and test again?

 

[EVDRVN]

Are you going to drive at higher speeds than 80mph? If not and mostly city then it will not make much of a difference if you lower the car. I have seen some tests of lowered 3s where they had 5% better efficiency at high speeds. But how low is it on default? They had the suspension lowered at 4cm, I doubt Tesla does that much?
Other than that the tyres do make a difference especially in the city. I remember Bjørn Nyland using 18" on his M3P and it improved a lot.

By the way, I saw the i1Tesla Video today with the 18". So unless you lower the car another 10cm I don't see these small tyres working on a Y - just too small. No wonder Tesla offers 19" lowest, 18" look crazy on this high car.

This further makes the case that Tesla is pushing the marketing on the Y to beyond the usual "let's feed them some random range numbers"...
They expect us to believe that a 200kg heavier car with 19" can do the same consumption as a 200kg less car with 18" aeros... This is not happening, Tesla is just playing with numbers again...

I'm not going to lower the car. The performance model is lowered per Tesla. I don't even want it lower. Look at the options on the Y, if you do not take the performance package on the Y you pay the same price but remove the brake, wheels, pedals, spoiler, etc. I want the P with the package and to swap the wheels for the 19 with someone else. If you want the 19's from the factory you pay the same but loose everything else. Tesla give no discount if you remove the package which is just stupid.

 

[TimothyHW3]

I'm new to the whole Tesla thing, so help me understand... If the 316 mile rating is an EPA rating, how can Tesla play with the numbers?(I too am puzzled how the MY has about the same range as the M3.)

Sure, it is fairly easy to explain.

Let me take the original LR RWD M3.
When it came out it had about 310 miles then it "magically" added 15 miles.

What they did is they just decreased the constant they use to calculate the range via OTA Update and thus "giving" more range. They just played with numbers.

Here is how that works on the YP. From what I can see they use 280Wh/m to calculate the range. The math is
(78kWh/280Wh/m)*1000 = 278 miles which they round up to about 280.
Now, on the 3 the math is with 76.5kWh that would work to about 273miles. You see how you can add 5-6 miles just by playing with the constant.

When the RWD LR M3 update came, a lot of people said "they never saw the increase" simply because their capacity was already below 76,5kWh (which happens pretty fast by the way, on some cars within the first 10,000miles).

By the way, 280 is insanily high consumption. Some people say, yeah it is 21". Sure, but still, that is a 20% increase in consumption.

As for the AWD Y vs AWD 3.
If you go to the website they actually say EPA est. vs Range on Model 3. So I am not quite sure wether the EPA did a test there.

The 2020 AWD 3 also got an "upgrade" to the 322 miles range, but we still don't know how. I asked a few people to post their energy graph so that we can see the constant, but nobody replied so I am not quite sure. It could be a little more efficient DU, but it could just be numbers game.

But if we take the 322 to 316 miles, that is less than 2% difference. For a car that has about 200kg more and 19". So what I can imagine happening is Tesla is calculating the 3 with something like 77kWh and the Y with something like 78kWh.

Once you get your Y it would be great if you can post your energy graph and try to match the straight line to the dotted line so that we can see the constant Tesla uses for the Y. Then we can know how big the numbers game really is.

If you want to understand how that buffer thing works and why the 100% range you see in miles on a Tesla is only available if you go to 104% you can watch this

 

[TimothyHW3]

By the way, if we play that same game using weight and rims - the Model 3 SR+ RWD vs LR AWD is roughly 200kg leighter.
The Front Motor doesn't kick in at low speeds and constant speeds so the difference is just weight and tires.
In real world range the SR+ is about 10-15%+ more efficient than the AWD using the same 18".

And Tesla is trying to tell us that the AWD MY 19", 150-200kg more weight, is only 2% less efficient than a AWD M3 with 18"?!

This ain't happening. People should expect way less in real world. My estimation is about 240-250 miles real range from 0-90% on the AWD 19" Model.