The Tesla Model S is not the most efficient of cars on the market. What miles/Kwh should should Tesla aim for the Model III? Musk has previously claimed that the Model III target CD is .20. The Model S currently gets around 3.5Miles/Kwh and is one of the most inefficient ev's on the market do to it's size. Also Tesla currently rates efficiency by WH/miles. However i think Kw/mile is a much better way to compare energy consumption and overall efficiency in ev's. For example to go 219.7 miles on my volt I used 45.4KWh. So i got 4.84miles/Kwh, knowing that i know that to go 2,000 miles on my daily commute. Will take 413 Kwh and will cost me @ .16/Kwh 66 dollars. So to me miles/Wh makes no sense to me, since it is harder to determine cost and efficiency of the Ev. What are your guys opinions on the subjects.

Supposedly the Model 3 will be lighter,smaller and a better .cd, thus more efficient in terms of miles per Kw I do hope that you will get at least 4.5 miles per kw, making it a 225 miles with a 50kw pack, and a 315 miles with a 70kw pack

I always have a hard time wrapping my head around the efficiency numbers. It doesn't help that different companies use different standards. My Onstar diagnostics reports in KWh/100 miles, Tesla reports Wh/mile, etc. I would love for the mile/KWh to become the equivalent of a MPG rating for EVs. Way easier to compare apples to apples when shopping rather than that equivalent mpg number the EPA is using now. I am am also hoping for something north of 4 miles/KWH for the Model 3.

While that is good for nearly all situations (one car vs another), miles/X makes it harder to compare different situations, and the US should go to gal/100 mile and kWh/100 miles. Be base our driving off of miles anyway (work is 10 miles away, not .3 gallons away). But an example, let's say EV's get more efficient soon, and you're choosing between replacing your 2.5 mi/kWh car with a 3.33 mi/kWh. Or, you can replace your 5 mi/kWh with a 8 mi/kWh car. Most people would think the second trade is better and will save you more money. But in fact there's more savings by replacing the first car with the 3.33 mi/kWh car. Because in terms of consumption you're going from 40 kWh/100mi to 30 kWh/100mi (a savings of 10 kWh/100mi) vs the other trade is from 20 to 12.5: 7.5 kWh/100mi.

mpge is a **** way to compare since it doesnt compare anything.... Best thing is imho miles/km per Kw.

4 miles / kWh or 250 wh/mile would be 240 miles on a 60kWh capacity (would need to be 60kWh usable capacity). I'd say Model 3 will need to be around there at a minimum to meet its performance vs efficiency vs cost goals. I don't have any problem with 4 miles / kWh vs 250 wh/mile. Both make sense to me. The miles / kWh would need to have 2 digits after the decimal to provide useful precision.

Yes, but wh/mile only work on numbers that are even, correct me if im wrong. But to me 350 or 144 wh/mile does not make any sense. I know there are 1000wh in a Kwh, seems like needless math to use wh/mile. I dont care how much energy it takes to go a mile, just like people dont care how much gas they need to go a mile. They care about MPG, miles/Kwh is the equivalent and people pay electricity by the Kwh. On efficiency i think 5 miles/Kwh @ 65 MPH, and 4 Mile/Kwh @75 would be ideal. That in my opinion would be the holly grail in terms of efficiency for a long range ev.

Right but you can compare gas powered vehicles with electricity powered ones based on fuel tank size and how much fuel is used per 100 miles. For example, the Golf R has a 14.5 gallon tank and uses 4.5 gallons to go 100 miles. The Model S has a, depending on model, 90 kWh tank and uses 38 kWh of it to go 100 miles. I know it isn't exactly the same but it does give us something other than MPGe.

One way the Model 3 will be more efficient is in the wheels/tires. David99 got something like 6% more efficiency with his pizza pan wheels (buy 4 pizza pans instead of getting the 90 upgrade). Keep in mind the pizza pans made the wheels heavier and more efficient on the hwy. I'd bet the 3's wheels could look normal and make the car 6% more efficient, at least, than the S's wheel offerings. 6% is about 18wh/mile, 280ish right out of the gate. I know Elon is against a, "weirdmobile" but if he was willing to go pizza pan or close to it on the wheels, while also having them be lighter, narrower, and wrapped in LRR tires, I am going to throw out 10% more efficient. Now you are a 270ish wh/mile and you have saved money getting there (smaller, cheaper everything, $ saved). The wheels/tires are low hanging fruit in the Model 3's mission. My suggestion is 230wh/mile for Tesla's target. (50kwh / 230wh/m = 217 miles...assuming no buffer)

There needs to be an agreed-upon standard measurement used to indetify a car's specs in this regard. Without this, the customers are practically in the dark, as there is no clear comparison available from one item to another. I would probably prefer M/KWH to be the standard, as the car's battery is measured in KWH. However, I can also see great value in having the opposite information available too, since I occassionally wonder my MPG and my GPM.

hmm having read more into MPGe, I see how it was meant to normalize energy per distance traveled. Personally I tend to just go based on distance till empty in my TDI, but I can see how that depends on energy usage as I drive.

I think MPGe is a good standard. If the Model 3 can get 90 -100 MPGe and a distance of 225 miles, it's a win!

They should be aiming for at least 100 MPGe. It's hard to believe some newer Model S's have a lower MPGe than my Volt.

As the Model S gets ~100MPGe, I'd like to see the Model ≡ get 10%/20% [City/Highway] better efficiency (just like the BMW 3 Series gets 10%/20% better MPG than the BMW 7 Series ). So, please make the Model ≡ have 110MPGe/120MPGe. Wishful thinking, I know. But what fun is speculation if we aren't a little extra positive.