Wh/km (or mi) / range grossly mis-advertised, if not fraudulent... srsly.

[appleguru]

THAT is exactly what i am talking about. But i've been blasted here countless time for being stupid and uneducated and yet the smartest car alive, Musk's tesla is so f^&* dumb (AND STUBBORNLY MISLEADING!) << more heat coming for this comment, I can already see.

ALSO, I have stated the same and was also blasted: Why should winter be a problem at all since i though (and read??) that battery preconditioning means battery gets nice and warm from my L2 wall charger and then gives me summer-like performance. Oh no.. then I was "educated" in this thread that pre-conditioning by heat pump only means cabin heat and winter equals range drop to 50%. Confused as hell TBH. I ALWAYS precondition before i leave, for about 10-15 minutes and still get shitty range. Does that mean i need to run some "battery warmer" tool (not even sure what to call it since it doesnt work) for ONE HOUR before i leave in order to get summer like range during the drive? Just beyond confused here srsly. I accepted the fact winter = massive range drop.

The real answer here is “you’re using it wrong”.

Tesla’s built in range estimation is phenomenal and the best in the industry by a long shot. But to use it, you have to use the built in navigation. It will tell you precisely how much battery you will have left at the end of your planned trip, and even route you to charging stations if needed. It factors in everything: temperature, speed limits and incline along the route, recent driving habits, etc.

You can’t just look at the “range indicator” (which is just a battery % gauge) and expect to get that.

 

[Supcom]

I ALWAYS precondition before i leave, for about 10-15 minutes and still get shitty range.

I suspect that 10-15 minutes is not enough time to sufficiently warm up a 1000 lb battery. Consider that it likely takes five minutes, or more, just to get an appreciable warming in the motor stators and battery coolant. Since you have only one motor, the ability to heat the battery coolant will be reduced over a dual motor model, which may increase preconditioning time.

Perhaps someone with a LFP battery who lives in similar temps and has Scan My Tesla could monitor their battery temp while preconditioning manually. It might be interesting to see how much a freezing battery warms up in 15 minutes and how long it takes to fully precondition.

 

[Chris55555]

Basically I am learning that spirited driving costs dearly in an EV.

He knows what the problem is, already went over this in a thread last month where he repeatedly admits to speeding, his typical speed being 150 km/hr (93mph). /thread

 

[dafish]

Yogi
You reported, I think 63 mph. FWIW drag isn't much a real factor at that speed. Some, but remember this is an exponential relationship. The power difference between 45mpg and 60 isn't that big of deal. 60 to 75 is substantial, 75 to 90 is a bunch. Point: 63mph is not a problem. Heck, it's pretty conservative.

 

[yogi799]

Thanks guys. Good to see some sympathy and understanding LOL.

Yes (batt), i have long switched to percentage display over KM. i did that on day 2 of ownership!

And oldrocky, yes i totally hear what you are saying, but as stated in my OP, i drive it like i stole it AND YET the wh/km consumption is only around 200 WHICH SHOULD yield a pretty damn good range!!! Cabin heat was reported as using only a tiny amount of charge. It was the phantom/unexplained/winter/over-advertised-preconditioning-idea that i was seeking help with.

Either way, thanks again guys. I have since watched many other winter driving videos and 2 other makes suffer from similar range drop so i have understood that Elon will not be sending me a refund anytime soon LOL LOL. I have just come to understand that tesla battery tech is not out of the ordinary and their pre-conditioning does not really do what it should in theory (replace winter with summer in the eyes of the battery). No worries, as long as i can get 300-350km range in summer i am game. Let's wait and see (advertised range is 438 km....). Hoping for 75% of that number. (Winter gets me ONLY 45% of it...)

 

[yogi799]

He knows what the problem is, already went over this in a thread last month where he repeatedly admits to speeding, his typical speed being 150 km/hr (93mph). /thread

Thanks for the answer but i have stated about a million times already, including my reply just above, SPEED/Acceleration/Fun-factor is not the issue since i am getting 200 wh/km consumption which is not very high by any standards and to me completely acceptable. UNLESS the computer is wrong about my wh/km and simply cannot accurately calculate power-draw. if that is the case, then i rest my case completely. In which case, the onboard computer should learn how much power is consumed by me on avg AND what the ambient temp is and accurately predict range.... As discussed with the guys above.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

I just got back from a ~500 mile round trip in southern california - highway miles, moderate temperatures, speeds varying from 80 mph to stop-and-go traffic. Overall efficiency 235 wh/mi - or about 350 miles per "tank". The car works perfectly fine, no lawsuit from irked arctic 100 mph owners required

And no, it's not a computer error. I drove over 300 miles from 90% to 15%

 

[Supcom]

Although unlikely, there is always a possibility that you have a battery issue. It is possible to run a battery health check from the service menu. Do a search and you'll find instructions on how this works. As I recall, it takes some hours as it requires discharging and charging the battery completely, so best done overnight. I've never run it myself, but have seen YT videos showing it.

 

[BitJam]

Here in the US, the range given by manufacturers is controlled by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I imagine there are similar regulations in Canada. Jason, from Engineering Explained, does a good job of explaining the intricacies in this video:

Also, the Canadian company EVinsulate sells products that can cut your wintertime range loss in half.

 

[Need]

Thanks for the answer but i have stated about a million times already, including my reply just above, SPEED/Acceleration/Fun-factor is not the issue since i am getting 200 wh/km consumption which is not very high by any standards and to me completely acceptable. UNLESS the computer is wrong about my wh/km and simply cannot accurately calculate power-draw. if that is the case, then i rest my case completely. In which case, the onboard computer should learn how much power is consumed by me on avg AND what the ambient temp is and accurately predict range.... As discussed with the guys above.

The energy consumption number is not accurate. We have 2 Tesla for 4 years and whatever the energy consumption shows, if reverse calculate it with the battery size, we get a range is about 25% more than what we actual get for the car. In your case, you think you are going to get 60kwh/0.2kwh/km = 300km, you are more likely get 300km*0.75 = 225km

I don't know what information is missing in the calculation, but it is definitely optimistic. The range display for the computer is also optimistic. After 4 years, my Model 3 full display range when from 310 miles to 272 miles. There is no way I could get 272 miles even here in SoCal driving 65 miles/hr on a flat freeway. When I used to drive 140 miles commute, the range is actually better. Now with working from home, my trips are like 5 to 10 miles local drive. I lost about 100 miles for every 60 miles I drove.

My niece on the East Coast (where they have actual winter) wants to get a Tesla. I told her to expect her range in the winter to be about 50% of the EPA estimate.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

Here in the US, the range given by manufacturers is controlled by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I imagine there are similar regulations in Canada. Jason, from Engineering Explained, does a good job of explaining the intricacies in this video:

Also, the Canadian company EVinsulate sells products that can cut your wintertime range loss in half.

like... a heated garage?

 

[Ther0ck]

Here in the US, the range given by manufacturers is controlled by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I imagine there are similar regulations in Canada. Jason, from Engineering Explained, does a good job of explaining the intricacies in this video:

Also, the Canadian company EVinsulate sells products that can cut your wintertime range loss in half.

NRCAN equivalent of EPA, uses EPA numbers lol. They don't do any testing in Canada as far as I know.

 

[Tessaract]

OK guys, sorry if anyone considers this a rant but I've finally concluded that Tesla is hiding info and mis-advertises the range of the car. It is truly crazy. We're not talking 10-20 percent as you might see on EPA estimates for ICE cars. We are talking 50%+ overestimate on range, near criminal if you ask me.

Quick intro, then some data. I bought the car seeing range estimate of 434 km (don't worry if you use miles, who cares, just look at the raw numbers, they will make sense).
Winter has been mild here and I am lucky to get HALF that as my real life range (not gonna engage here in discussion on driving habits as this should not make a 50% difference on energy consumption and it does not on ICE cars.., PLUS i am provding my avg consumption below).

So: advertised: 434 km. Real: 200 km. I mean, SRSLY???

Insane. I was estimating 330-350 km range when i ordered the car (30% off the posted numbers "to be safe" , oh boy was i wrong) - of course i never believed the official estimates. But to mis-represent it by over 50%? I can hardly do my usual trips now without having to plug the darn car in into friends' outlets. Embarrassing as hell. I need to explain to them that it will only cost pennies to charge but i need that extra 10% to make it to my next stop. Sucks. I also have an option of super-charging but that costs me as much as gas, so.. no , thanks. I bought tesla to save on gas.

And some data:

60 kwh battery, LFP - M3 delivered Nov 2022, charged to 100% before leaving. Mild winter, Temps around freezing mark.

Consumption on the display shows roughly 200 wh/km, meaning my range should be 300 km (and i would be happy with that!).

Oh wait, there is the cabin heat and phantom power draw which tesla conveniently hides from all promotional materials, especially the range estimate which is by far the most visible number out there.

So, forget the 200 wh/km consumption. Since i am getting only 200km range on 60 kwh battery, 60/200 yields 300 wh/km total overall power draw for my 3 day trip with 2 overnights. Sentry disabled.

300 wh/km instead of 200 wh/km posted on the display. Get it?

That means driving takes 200 wh/km and everything else another 100 wh/km. SRSLY? 50% of driving power is used by cabin heat? You have to be kidding me. Crazy and fraudulent . srsly. <<< THIS IS my biggest beef. Not the 200 wh/km driving consumption itself, the 100 wh/km extra!

Anyone see my point here? Does Elon give a ___? Srsly, if i knew i would only get 200 km range, i might not have gotten the car which i love otherwise. I mean, just be honest with folks shelling out 60k CAD for a small (but fun) car. Too much to ask?

For our MPG friends 300 wh/km use with cabin heat = 480 wh/mi. AGAIN, 1/3 of that is NOT used for driving, unless the car lies.

1) EPA consumption/range numbers are NOT guarantees of consumption /range for every driving condiiton. EPA consumption/range numbers are weighted averages which include SOME cold weather driving (20˚F), but more than 80% of the driving cycles are at 75˚F. These driving cycles and calculations are enshrined in law, and are the same for all manufacturers, and not an Elon or Tesla invention.
2) Consumption at low temperatures is for sure going to be higher for a number of reasons, for every car, but more so for very efficient cars, like EVs (and hybrids).
3) The amount of consumption increase is highly dependent on temperature, road conditions (like plowing through snowy/slushy/slippery roads), heater settings, etc. I have seen temporary consumption on my 2018 Model 3 as high as 400Wh/km under severe conditions.
4) Expecting a single EPA number (NOT Elon's number, by the way) to apply in every weather condition, road condition, speed, etc. is just a gross misunderstanding of the EPA consumption/range number and the meaning of a "weighted average".

Other commentaries are more kind, but ripping Elon/Tesla for following the law to measure the EPA number he didn't define, is merely trying to shift the blame of your own misunderstanding onto a third party.

 

[yogi799]

I just got back from a ~500 mile round trip in southern california - highway miles, moderate temperatures, speeds varying from 80 mph to stop-and-go traffic. Overall efficiency 235 wh/mi - or about 350 miles per "tank". The car works perfectly fine, no lawsuit from irked arctic 100 mph owners required

And no, it's not a computer error. I drove over 300 miles from 90% to 15%

OK this makes no sense but i am happy for you LOL. Standard range is NOT 350miles even by Tesla numbers. You must be talking LR model LOL. And i bet moderate temperatures are "nice and warm" in your definition, not around freezing....

Although unlikely, there is always a possibility that you have a battery issue. It is possible to run a battery health check from the service menu. Do a search and you'll find instructions on how this works. As I recall, it takes some hours as it requires discharging and charging the battery completely, so best done overnight. I've never run it myself, but have seen YT videos showing it.

I checked on that bud. Likely not as another friend of mine with 2019 M3 also gets shitty winter mileage. She gets 180-200 km in Winter. Even worse than mine but mine will surely degrade a bit too soon.

The energy consumption number is not accurate. We have 2 Tesla for 4 years and whatever the energy consumption shows, if reverse calculate it with the battery size, we get a range is about 25% more than what we actual get for the car. In your case, you think you are going to get 60kwh/0.2kwh/km = 300km, you are more likely get 300km*0.75 = 225km

I don't know what information is missing in the calculation, but it is definitely optimistic. The range display for the computer is also optimistic. After 4 years, my Model 3 full display range when from 310 miles to 272 miles. There is no way I could get 272 miles even here in SoCal driving 65 miles/hr on a flat freeway. When I used to drive 140 miles commute, the range is actually better. Now with working from home, my trips are like 5 to 10 miles local drive. I lost about 100 miles for every 60 miles I drove.

My niece on the East Coast (where they have actual winter) wants to get a Tesla. I told her to expect her range in the winter to be about 50% of the EPA estimate.

OK thanks for confirming brother. YES you are 1000% correct as my range is about 225km. Yes, I am at ease now knowing that others are getting the same *sugar* in Winter weather. As I have been saying , it would have been NICE of tesla to simply state that (Tesla and other EV makers) right there on the order page (hate when people advise me: you should have done your research... Why Can't tesla Canada just be honest instead?). No need for gotcha's and fooling people who shell out 60k on a car. Oh yes, it takes $60k PLUS 25 hours of "research".. :shakehead:. Insane to think that. 60k + honesty from a reputable brand sounds a lot more reasonable to me.

 

[yogi799]

The real answer here is “you’re using it wrong”.

Tesla’s built in range estimation is phenomenal and the best in the industry by a long shot. But to use it, you have to use the built in navigation. It will tell you precisely how much battery you will have left at the end of your planned trip, and even route you to charging stations if needed. It factors in everything: temperature, speed limits and incline along the route, recent driving habits, etc.

You can’t just look at the “range indicator” (which is just a battery % gauge) and expect to get that.

So maybe it just takes time but there was something odd about the navigation estimate too. In the first 3 months of ownership, the car already knew HOW I DRIVE and it certainly knows the temperature, yet the range estimates were in the toilet. I drove about 75km to my GF house with the mileage already at 5000 km (enough for the car to know how i drive - IF it gives a damn) and it was off by a lot when I used Nav - by about 5% on battery indicator! I assure you i could NOT trust the nav estimator in the first 3 months. it was usually off by 5% on a trip that would consume about 25% (so i lost 30% not 25% as it said i would). That is a gross miscalculation! I think it has gotten better since... Not a 100% sure yet, still watching it... I took a 145km trip on a windy day on Monday and the computer said i would arrive at 43% and it was reducing it down every 15 minutes! Finally it told me it will be 38% after half of the trip was done. Again, that is *sugar* estimation and i am not sure why it does that since, as i've said, if it wanted to, it should know exactly how i drive (google maps does. it gives me perfect arrival times knowing me quite well) and it supposedly knows weather so it should have known there was a strong NW wind, but i have a feeling it just truly doesn't give a *sugar* and sticks to "perfect estimates" (or at least somewhere in that range) which is not that smart.

Yes, to my point above... if google maps which i have used for the last 10 years guiding me everywhere in north America can estimate my arrival time to 1-2 minutes, why can't tesla "learn" that "I can't drive 55" ....

 

[yogi799]

BTW, today was much warmer and my range increased significantly already. It was about 6C / 43F and it seemed i burned 22% to go 75km which would suggest a range of 300 km... (up from 220). so... it is getting better and hopefully 350 km in summer is a possibility. Which would only expose the winter issues are plain extreme and the need to be open about it with the customers who cannot walk into the dealership to ask plain and simple about winter range.

 

[TunaBug]

I read the first 1.4(ish) pages, then started skimming. Hopefully the things I'm mentioning here are new:

ICE cars have a lot of the same issues: most of the issues that kill efficiency of an EV have the same impact on your ICE vehicle (wind, drag related to speed, extra load from HVAC to cool the car, wet roads). With an ICE car we tend to not notice because the next gas station is half a mile away and filling is fast. Sure, we'll rant about the $/gallon, but did you actually pay attention to whether the mileage matched the advertised number? TLDR: most of us have had these problems all our life and never paid enough attention to notice.

The energy app is unintuitive if you have your battery showing "%" instead of miles or km. If the energy app said you used 10% and that this was 4% more than it predicted, I would assume they meant that they predicted 9.62% and that it took 10% (i.e. 9.62*1.04=10). But that's not what they are saying: it means they predicted 6% and you used 10 (i.e. 6% predicted + 4% extra = 10% total): that's actually a 66% increase over the predicted number. Without getting into whether you should be upset about it being 66% over the predicted value, it's important to know how to interpret the numbers before investigating the causes (or getting upset). I prefer to keep my battery icon showing %, but if I'm in the energy app I'll switch it to showing distance since numbers are more intuitive.

Lastly, physics doesn't care what city you live in; the effect of 0C weather on the battery is the same, whether you think that's mild t-shirt weather, or freezing your buns off. I would think that in the future there might be options for EVs that are more common in cold weather climates, similar to how for ICE cars block heaters might be common in high latitudes, but unheard of lower latitudes. Maybe there will be battery chemistries that are overall less efficient but also less effected by the cold, or maybe larger battery options will be more common, or maybe small battery options won't be available. I do think it would be reasonable, though, for the Monroney sticker to evolve to say something about this; maybe it's fine for it to say you have a 60kWh battery, but also have it say "...but only 30kWh in Toronto".

 

[primedive]

The car does NOT include charging losses, either in the car itself or in the Tesla app. In cold weather consumption at the wall (and what I pay on my electricity bill) can be as high as 16 kwh for every 10 that the car pulls. My average usage for January was close to 1000 Wh/km.

It’s still more efficient than a gas car, and I keep the climate running a lot longer where I would turn off a gas engine, but the stats are really not representative of the true consumption.

 

[Spuzzz]

And yes, i will be happy to report what happens at 13 degrees, sure... but then... is that to say that in hot July when i want make family trips to the lakes 150km away, i will once again be disappointed because now the car is going to run AC? Yes, I get it, battery will be warm and happy, but quietly hoping here that AC will not cut into my range too much and i can finally expect 350 out of the 430 km as advertised...

AC doesn’t hit nearly as hard as heat does so I don’t think you’ll be too bummed in July. Let us know what you see. Spring is around the corner.

 

[TesslaBull]

The car does NOT include charging losses, either in the car itself or in the Tesla app. In cold weather consumption at the wall (and what I pay on my electricity bill) can be as high as 16 kwh for every 10 that the car pulls. My average usage for January was close to 1000 Wh/km.

It’s still more efficient than a gas car, and I keep the climate running a lot longer where I would turn off a gas engine, but the stats are really not representative of the true consumption.

38% charging loss??? Wow that's crazy. A 38% charging loss equates to a 60% increase in consumption. I bought a dumb charger for our EV's(first a Kia Niro, now a Tesla), so I don't have a method for showing actually energy used to charge our cars. I suppose I can purchase a doohickey that will show energy used on that circuit. I intentionally purchased a dumb charger to reduce complexity and improve quality. But it would be really interesting to see actual electricity used for driving.

I'm pretty happy with my Tesla's efficiency so far...my stated efficiency seems to match with my actual range though. I have averaged 258Wh/mile(161Wh/km) for the 2500 miles I've driven since late December purchase. So all winter driving in Pennsylvania. Efficiency seems to be around 30% better than our Kia Niro, which does fairly well at 278Wh/mile lifetime efficiency. Winter seems closer to 333.