Watt/Mile to rated range

[UrsS]

Her is some empirical data:
For the 611 miles I have drive so far the consumption is 300 watts per mile as per the screen display (Trip A).
We get 330 Wh/m for our Model S 85.

 

[Troy]

@UrsS, 300 Wh/mi seems high considering that you have the 18" wheels with aero covers. Do you drive with the roof rack attached, shown in this picture? Can you answer the question in the next message in that thread?

 

[moridin2002]

The EPA doesn't assume anything for charging losses. Tesla tests the car according to an SAE spec and provides that data to the EPA. The test involves filling the battery, driving on a dyno until it can no longer maintain the directed profile, then measuring the amount of energy required to refill the battery. In that data submission to the EPA for the 3 LR, Tesla also happened to include a comment that the usable capacity was 78,270 Wh.

So the empirical data for rated consumption (~235-237 Wh/mi based on the 2 data points mentioned above) disagrees with the rated range (310-313mi) and the expected usable capacity (78,270). One of three possibilities is correct:

1. The empirical data is in error or otherwise biased and the rated consumption is actually 250 Wh/mi [78270/313]. See @Troy above. More empirical data would prove or disprove this.
2. The usable capacity is less than 78,270Wh, and more like ~73000Wh [310*236], and the EPA data submission was incorrect or our interpretation of the comment is wrong.
3. The actual usable range is greater than the indicated 310-313 rated miles. This would only be possible if there was a significant buffer below 0 rated miles that was accessible to the driver. Here I estimated that buffer would need to be about 7%. Driving the car until it's depleted and noting the energy used after the rated range was zero would help prove or disprove this.

Actually, it does take into account charging losses from my understanding, because the range calculation is based on the amount of energy that is delivered to the vehicle after the range cycle testing is completed, as measured at the wall (A/C Input).

 

[run-the-joules]

Some more data for y'all:

Model 3 from Bay Area to Tahoe: Ski trip report • r/teslamotors

 

[Zoomit]

Actually, it does take into account charging losses from my understanding, because the range calculation is based on the amount of energy that is delivered to the vehicle after the range cycle testing is completed, as measured at the wall (A/C Input).

Correct, just like I said. There are no assumptions for charging losses. They’re part of the test. “The test involves filling the battery, driving on a dyno until it can no longer maintain the directed profile, then measuring the amount of energy required to refill the battery.”

 

[gene]

Over 3,000 miles@236 wh/mi. Mixture of around town and a few road trips at 65 to 75 mph.

@UrsS: nice Kermode bear. I've spent a fair amount of time in that area of BC. I still have not seen a kermode, but I have plenty of grizzly videos.

 

[SesameCrunch]

Just over 2,000 miles on our Model 3, and we're getting 227 wh/mi lifetime. Normal driving, not hypermiling. We also go over a 900 ft hill on every time, so there's at least 2,000 ft of elevation each trip.

Best efficiency of the 4 EVs we've owned, even though it's the most powerful. Amazing...

 

[Vern Padgett]

Go SesameCrunch.

I've been waiting for my Blue Star since 2003.

I passed on configuring my Model 3 before Christmas because I want AWD and the standard battery.

I want the MOST EFFICIENT production passenger car ever!

With RWD Model S rated at 87 mpg(e) and AWD S90D at 103 mpg(e) and RWD Model 3 rated at 126 mpg(e), might I expect the AWD Model 3 to be around 140 or 150 mpg(e)?

 

[taraquin]

I want the MOST EFFICIENT production passenger car ever!

Then Hyundai Ioniq is your choice, no EVs can match that nowadays