Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Why not show estimated range (based on recent driving trends) instead of rated range?

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.

OCJeff

Active Member
Feb 18, 2021
1,376
1,474
SoCal (RSM)
I never understood why Tesla always insists on showing the RATED range on the main screen (next to battery) when almost no one is ever capable of attaining those ranges (unless they drive like a grandma in comfort mode)? This is why most people use % on the display, since the rated range is just a fairy tale figure.

Why not let the owner select "Rated Range" versus "Estimate Range" in the settings? It just makes no sense to me that this isn't something I can select, and hence why I never have it set to miles and always have it on %. Even ICE vehicles use recent fuel consumption to estimate distance to empty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nurusz and KentheJ
None of this is perfect. Even estimated will be based on your 20-30-50 previous kms/miles. Your following trip might be completely different. Rated range attempts to show the total energy contained in the pack using a unit that people understand. It should probably show kWh (the real energy unit) but no one would know what that means. Percentage is like current gas gauges so I guess no one argues that one.
You do have estimated range in your Tesla. It's not far away, it's in the energy graph. Bonus: you get different values for 10-25-50 kilometer averages.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MP3Mike and Kimmi
While I routinely exceed EPA rated range on most driving, save for high speeds on road trips, the problem with the rated range number is that many people have a tendency to assume that it is how far the car can go, but that's only true if driving at EPA efficiency. Rather, rated range is a measure of battery capacity or SOC [State Of Charge], that is, it is a fuel gauge. That's why it is best to just switch to displaying %SOC and skip rated range, unless trying to measure current battery capacity, a way to track battery degradation (my car battery is down 20%, based on rated range at 100%, over 127,000 miles since new).

Your suggestion to have the car "estimate range" would be difficult to implement usefully, unless a navigation route is set, at which point nav already does that very well by giving the real-time estimated battery percentage at destination, a hugely useful number for road trip legs.

"Estimate range" based on current or recent usage numbers isn't useful because it won't help with changes in terrain or changes in speed. A number based on traveling at the same speed on a road at the same slope is scarcely useful and would be even more misleading than rated range as a fuel gauge if you changed speed or the road's pitch changed. Nissan tried to do this with the original LEAF and it became known as the "guess-o-meter" and had mostly entertainment value.

Consider, for example, this plot of energy consumption for the last thirty miles of driving:

Model S energy use profile1609cropsf 3-16-16.jpg

^ The estimated range of 219 miles is based on a usage of 211 Wh/mile, versus the 300 Wh/mile EPA standard for my car (a 2014 Model S-60). Is that a useful number to know? The only way I can get 219 more miles out of that SOC is if I continued to go mostly downhill for that distance, which is impossible where I live (and anywhere else in the USA, so far as I am aware). Is that estimate of range, based on the last thirty miles of usage, a useful number to know? I don't think so.

Regardless, if you really want your car to estimate range based on recent usage, all you have to do is turn on the energy consumption screen and set it to your preference of 5, 15 or 30 miles. Have fun with it!
 
Last edited:
You end up having another problem as evidenced by the basically daily posts and questions on chevybolt.org and Bolt FB groups about its guess-o-meter. The queries are like "hey, I can only charge up to nnn miles. Shouldn't it be/why isn't it yyy?" "After, I got ____ done, I can only charge up to nnn miles. What's wrong w/my car?"

The same type of crap went on in Leaf-land too, although Leaf US sales are so low, we don't see as many queries on that now. The above also is happening in Bolt-land because folks are getting replacement battery packs (due to the recall). '17 to '19 Bolt drivers are getting new packs w/8% more capacity than original, so there's bound to be questions of why their GOM isn't 8% higher or 259 miles (238 * 1.08).

And, Leafs aren't going thru a battery recall either.

The people asking of course don't realize it's a GOM (that efficiency is worse in the cold, having to run the heater or defogger, made worse by snow or rain on the ground, etc.) And, some people who I and others have tried to explain to them over and over just ignore our explanations about recent history, etc. and don't want to listen, insisting there's something wrong w/their car, it's conspiracy, we're making things up, etc. :(

It's so frequent and frustrating, I don't have the time nor energy to respond to the queries any longer. I end up having to let others waste their time to answer, which is sometimes futile.

Of course, it's also seasonal and always picks up as the weather gets colder.
 
Last edited:
I never understood why Tesla always insists on showing the RATED range on the main screen (next to battery) when almost no one is ever capable of attaining those ranges (unless they drive like a grandma in comfort mode)? This is why most people use % on the display, since the rated range is just a fairy tale figure.

Why not let the owner select "Rated Range" versus "Estimate Range" in the settings? It just makes no sense to me that this isn't something I can select, and hence why I never have it set to miles and always have it on %. Even ICE vehicles use recent fuel consumption to estimate distance to empty.

Actually, it is quite possible to get the rated range if you drive reasonably economically.

If you want a range estimate based on your recent driving, just bring up the energy screen and notice the projected range number.
 
It's been several years ago, but I read where someone asked Elon Musk about that. He said he initially didn't want any mileage - only show % to avoid all these discussions about miles. He said the minute you put a miles figure in, people will focus on that. However, his design team talked him into putting the mileage estimate we now have.

Until the last 20-25 years, cars only had a gas gauge and somehow people still were able to drive. I tend to side with Elon on this; set to % and forget mileage. I've driven mine enough to get a good feel about how far I can go before I need to charge.
 
Until the last 20-25 years, cars only had a gas gauge and somehow people still were able to drive. I tend to side with Elon on this; set to % and forget mileage. I've driven mine enough to get a good feel about how far I can go before I need to charge.
However, until distance-to-empty displays showed up in ICEVs, fuel gauges were fairly low resolution. Some would point to E even when there were a few gallons left, so it was not always obvious whether it was "you should think about refueling" or "you must refuel now or run out in a few miles".

If you think of the battery percentage as a high resolution (in 1/100 increments) "fuel gauge", and the remaining rated distance setting as an even higher resolution (e.g. in 1/272 increments for a new 2022 Model 3 RWD with 18" wheels) version (rather than remaining range based on your recent driving), then you may be more satisfied with it.

For remaining range based on your recent driving (like ICEVs' distance-to-empty displays or remaining range displays on some other EVs), use the energy screen's projected range.
 
While I routinely exceed EPA rated range on most driving, save for high speeds on road trips, the problem with the rated range number is that many people have a tendency to assume that it is how far the car can go, but that's only true if driving at EPA efficiency. Rather, rated range is a measure of battery capacity or SOC [State Of Charge], that is, it is a fuel gauge. That's why it is best to just switch to displaying %SOC and skip rated range, unless trying to measure current battery capacity, a way to track battery degradation (my car battery is down 20%, based on rated range at 100%, over 127,000 miles since new).

Your suggestion to have the car "estimate range" would be difficult to implement usefully, unless a navigation route is set, at which point nav already does that very well by giving the real-time estimated battery percentage at destination, a hugely useful number for road trip legs.

If by "well", you mean very poorly, then yes.

Last weekend, I took a drive up to the top of Kings Canyon from the Traver supercharger. At the start of the trip, it said that after a round trip I would arrive back with 12% SoC. By halfway up to the park entrance, it said I would arrive with -14%. By the park entrance, I was up into positive territory again, but barely. It continued to act this way until the top.

On the way back down, the car got to the point where the MCU shut itself off at a literal thirty-second photo stop (okay, maybe 90) and the nav system lost my route, so I have no idea what it thought my final SoC would be until I got out of the park and back into cellular range, because apparently Tesla's offline routing is mostly fiction. I was consistently unable to plot a route back to that supercharger from within the park without data service, and there is no cell service in the park from any of the three major carriers. You would think Tesla would at least test offline routing to superchargers from popular tourist destinations. 🤬

When I arrived at the supercharger, I had something like 26% SoC. So the initial estimate was excessively conservative, and the estimates all along the way were less than useless. Had I actually been able to trust its routing, and had offline navigation worked correctly, we probably could have seen more of Sequoia National Park the day before, but I got severe range anxiety by the time we reached the General Sherman Tree, so we turned back.

Ignoring the obvious problem that Tesla should have a supercharger near the entrance to both of these parks, rather than an hour and a half away, the nav system and power estimation both failed really badly for me on this trip — embarrassingly so. (I won't even get into the bit where we drove for more than an hour to go to a restaurant that turned out to be under construction until July because Tesla doesn't show that information in its UI.)

So when I see Musk talking about layoffs, I wonder how he could even think about cutting staff when the existing staffing level is so badly failing to provide adequate results. I'm still holding some Tesla stock for now, but I'm starting to have serious doubts about the direction the company is heading. But I digress.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cal1
It's been several years ago, but I read where someone asked Elon Musk about that. He said he initially didn't want any mileage - only show % to avoid all these discussions about miles. He said the minute you put a miles figure in, people will focus on that. However, his design team talked him into putting the mileage estimate we now have.

Until the last 20-25 years, cars only had a gas gauge and somehow people still were able to drive. I tend to side with Elon on this; set to % and forget mileage. I've driven mine enough to get a good feel about how far I can go before I need to charge.
i hate the percentage. i'd much rather just use the miles estimated and know i'm not going to get that much unless i slow down and drive easier.
 
Just bring up energy graph trip which will factor in conditions. It also displays miles to empty based on last 5, 15, 30 miles.

I like the rated number. I like to monitor battery is behaving as expected.

It was nice when we had the mini energy graph in the instrument cluster. I hope that comes back.
 
If people want it, they should add it as an option. Elon votes with the people, right? Very simple. We have 20 different games, they can certainly add one simple display change. I prefer seeing a miles estimate. The EPA one is a total waste. I would pull up the energy screen, but it takes the WHOLE screen, which is silly. Maybe add a small energy bar on the left that you swipe to, like tire pressure, trips, etc.
 
Maybe add a small energy bar on the left that you swipe to, like tire pressure, trips, etc.
There is enough space at the top to show "__% | Rated ___ mi/km | Estimated ___ mi/km" -- i.e. all three of what people want to see, while distinguishing between rated and estimated.

Most other EVs show estimated but not rated remaining range, perhaps because they want to hide any battery degradation from being too easily visible. But it does mean that estimated remaining range may deceive the driver if the recent driving was more or less economical than the upcoming part of the drive.
 
There is enough space at the top to show "__% | Rated ___ mi/km | Estimated ___ mi/km" -- i.e. all three of what people want to see, while distinguishing between rated and estimated.

Most other EVs show estimated but not rated remaining range, perhaps because they want to hide any battery degradation from being too easily visible. But it does mean that estimated remaining range may deceive the driver if the recent driving was more or less economical than the upcoming part of the drive.

i used to do lots of semi hypermiling as the charging infrastructure used to be very poor in australia and rated range was always very useful. when you start skimming towards 0% youd basically either a) slow down to 90kmh and hit rated range or b) observe the shrinking rated range vs range to destination. if it shrank too fast you had to slow down. Much more useful than estimate range which kinda varies.
 
Ford's attempt at estimated range is so bad that Lightning owners call it GOM for guess o meter. It actually increases range anxiety. Not even close to accurate.There are tons of reasons Lightning owners decide to dump their truck quickly and at the top of the list is the confusion Ford's estimated range creates. And connecting anything to the trailer connections range drops to less than half of the original display. Doesn't matter whether you are connecting a 12k load or a unloaded 1500 lb utility trailer. Same result. Less than half of the previous range estimate. And my actual energy consumption was nothing like the GOM's estimate. Much, much less. Oh and when you remove the trailer, the display tries to go back to a "unloaded estimate" sometimes. That's when you realize that that towing estimate was so wrong. Clearly I had much more range than the GOM indicated.

God it kills me to say Elon was right but he was. Should have never gone down the range estimating road. ICE settles for telling you how much fuel you have in your tank They don't try to tell you how far you're gonna go on that tankful. I've been a Tesla owner for over 10 years and always resisted the SOC focus and I was wrong. I should be focusing on how much energy I have and do my own estimate based on my conditions, speed, towing, cold, large elevation changes, wind, etc. Gee just like everyone does with an ICE vehicle.
 
Should have never gone down the range estimating road. ICE settles for telling you how much fuel you have in your tank They don't try to tell you how far you're gonna go on that tankful.
Actually, lots of ICEVs now have a distance-to-empty display, which estimates remaining miles on the remaining fuel based on recent fuel economy. The guess-o-meter range displays found on many EVs are essentially the same concept. Of course, in both ICEVs and EVs, the remaining miles on these displays can be inaccurate if the recent past economy is different from the upcoming economy.