If you have a formula/equation/algorithum and change the variables 5/20/30 you would expect the results to change, right?
I like how you're not an owner, but you disagree. Yet basically I agree with what you are saying.
There is a formula. It's well known. If the instantaneous result in the three different instantaneous windows (what does instantaneous mean for 5/15/30 miles, anyway???) were the same, the formula result WOULD be the same. Because the input to the formula would be the same.
The inputs to the formula are:
Constant for the vehicle.
Rated miles remaining.
Recent efficiency. **** <= This changes.
Projected range = Constant * Rated Miles Remaining / Recent Efficiency
The recent efficiency is all that changes when you change this setting. Because "instantaneous" does not give the same point efficiency value for all three settings, it gives different results. This is because it's not truly instantaneous; it's an average over a very short window (not 5/15/30 miles) of your recent efficiency. But the length of that window varies depending on your setting.
Furthermore, the car shows you, with a dot (not labeled but you can easily estimate its position), exactly what value this "Recent Efficiency" is. Just watch that dot as you change the instantaneous window. Then plug it into the formula, and it will exactly match what the car is telling you. You can't though, since you don't own the car.
I guess this 2-year-old thread was resurrected just to be disagreeable.
By the way, the video you linked is wrong in many ways. He says the line is at 225Wh/mi (with no evidence). It's not. You can tell he has an LR RWD from the results. The line is at 239Wh/mi. And the calculations on that screen show that the constant is 234Wh/rmi (that's what it is for the LR RWD!). It's easy to verify if you don't believe me. Just do the math. The video is also completely illegible even in HD mode so you can't read the numbers.