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

Model S Speedometer/Energy consumption scales

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I am not a Tesla owner yet but being a User Experience Designer I could not help but notice that Tesla is using "unconventionnal" scales for the speedometer and the energy consumption indicator.As I finished writing my thoughts on this subject (http://www.pierreroberge.com/new-blog/2014/3/20/thoughts-on-tesla-model-...), Tesla has just released version 5.9 that seems to fix the non-linear Speedometer scale while leaving untouched the arguably less conventional Energy consumption scales.I would be very interested in hearing the opinion of Tesla owners on this.Thanks a lot!
 
I am not a Tesla owner yet but being a User Experience Designer I could not help but notice that Tesla is using "unconventionnal" scales for the speedometer and the energy consumption indicator.As I finished writing my thoughts on this subject (http://www.pierreroberge.com/new-blog/2014/3/20/thoughts-on-tesla-model-...), Tesla has just released version 5.9 that seems to fix the non-linear Speedometer scale while leaving untouched the arguably less conventional Energy consumption scales.I would be very interested in hearing the opinion of Tesla owners on this.Thanks a lot!


The speedometer no longer looks like that as of 5.9 on the software as ou mentioned. Do the same "issues" apply? I don't know because the huge white numbers are what I look at when I am deteriming if the popo is about to pay me a visit. In any case the presentation of your blog is very nice.
 
Last edited:
I totally disagree with your assessment of how the energy meter should behave. As you haven't driven the car, I can understand why you might think your approach is better, but if you actually drive the car, you will see that the way the meter is currently design makes a lot of sense. You spend much of your time around 40 kW, so if you actually had the display go up in 60 kW increments like you propose, you'd hardly ever see anything on the graph. If you are trying to get good range, you typically try to keep things below 40 which would be very hard to do with your design as it's hard to tell where 40 is. Also, the time I use the energy graph the most is actually when doing regen braking and I want to see high precision near the zero mark as well as the range of regen. This is far more important information than if I'm using 120 kW or 240 kW. If I'm using more than 100 kW, it's probably because I'm flooring it and I don't care what the energy usage actually is (and I'm probably not even looking at the display anyway). I would suggest going on a test drive at your nearest Tesla store to experience yourself.
 
I am not a Tesla owner yet but being a User Experience Designer I could not help but notice that Tesla is using "unconventionnal" scales for the speedometer and the energy consumption indicator.As I finished writing my thoughts on this subject (http://www.pierreroberge.com/new-blog/2014/3/20/thoughts-on-tesla-model-...), Tesla has just released version 5.9 that seems to fix the non-linear Speedometer scale while leaving untouched the arguably less conventional Energy consumption scales.I would be very interested in hearing the opinion of Tesla owners on this.Thanks a lot!
As for the speedometer, the original attempt appeared to highlight the range that most driving will take place by making that area more spread out. Then it showed the speed at the top end, but more condensed. After 5.9, we now have a lot of top end that is never used (and actually unusable). It was better the old way. You don't need the speedometer to see acceleration in this car ;).

A similar (but opposite) concept is used in a lot of airspeed indicators in aircraft. Spread the scale out at the most important range of speeds so you can see it.

plus, I doubt anyone looks at the bar for speed anyway. The bar for power is way more helpful.


Power = mass *acceleration * velocity = mass * time * acceleration ^2
Because it increases at a squared rate they put the power on a scale that could show it linearly by having the scale increase at a squared rate. Also, and I can't figure out the math, but if you dug far enough into it you probably would be able to figure out acceleration by watching that graph because it has been put on that scale. Further, since power = mav! as velocity increases more power will be necessary to get the same acceleration. Having it on this scale allows you to see both a similar rate of change at both a high and low velocity.
 
I don't see the reason for breaking the speedometer in 5.9. Logarithmic works just fine for me, and when I want to know the actual speed, I look at the big number. Hopefully, they won't mess with the power side.
 
Anyone have a picture of 5.9's speedometer? I'm not super-clear on the difference; if it's linear now, does it go up to as high a speed, and does this mean that it's tougher to see the speed from the "dial"? Granted, I look at the actual number (but it's tough to stop paying attention to the "dial" on the left, even though I know it's redundant). If I understand this right, it does sound silly. (And another thing that should be an option.)
 
Anyone have a picture of 5.9's speedometer? I'm not super-clear on the difference; if it's linear now, does it go up to as high a speed, and does this mean that it's tougher to see the speed from the "dial"? Granted, I look at the actual number (but it's tough to stop paying attention to the "dial" on the left, even though I know it's redundant). If I understand this right, it does sound silly. (And another thing that should be an option.)

There's one in the 5.9 firmware thread. Goes up to 140 (not sure if that's variant dependent ... P vs 85 vs 60) and is a linear scale.
 
I'll just comment on one thing - I almost never look at the blue speedometer graph - it takes longer to interpret (just as it does on any ICE car) than just reading the numbers directly. I think for speed, the number display is important, not the graph.
 
I'll just comment on one thing - I almost never look at the blue speedometer graph - it takes longer to interpret (just as it does on any ICE car) than just reading the numbers directly. I think for speed, the number display is important, not the graph.

I always used 'straight up' as a cruising speed on the interstate in my other vehicles. So 80 in my Jetta, or 90 in my GTI. :biggrin: It was much faster than trying to get a 'number' and compare it to the much lower numbers on the big white signs on the side of the road!

The Tesla broke my convention, because I have been unable to have the speedo point directly up. I also just look at the very large numeral display, and ignore the fake dial on the left.
 
US version in MPH

attachment.php?attachmentid=45806&d=1395810938.jpg


Metric version
attachment.php?attachmentid=45834&stc=1&d=1395830307.jpg
 
I like the pretty blue bar. It adds symmetry to the display. But I never actually look at it. Numbers in the middle are much easier to quickly interpret.

Concerning the energy meter. I agree with those who say keep it the way it is. On long trips I need to keep below 20kW to make range. So I need the granularity the current meter offers.