Real World Range Questions (Winter)

[MikeK]

I confess that I was a little disappointed in the EPA and Motor Trend numbers. I had hoped that the 300 was going to be the equivalent of the EPA number, and that careful driving would allow exceeding it, while inattentive driving would yield more like 265.

I'm going to be watching the Supercharger announcement closely. I chose the 60kWh pack because I thought that with modest driving, I could expect 230 miles of range from it in good but not perfect conditions when new. But if that's the 55-on-a-flat-windless-road number, and if the Superchargers are not in the locations I require, or there's some unforeseen limitation in their use, then I might opt to bump up to 85.

[dsm363]

I confess that I was a little disappointed in the EPA and Motor Trend numbers. I had hoped that the 300 was going to be the equivalent of the EPA number, and that careful driving would allow exceeding it, while inattentive driving would yield more like 265.

I'm going to be watching the Supercharger announcement closely. I chose the 60kWh pack because I thought that with modest driving, I could expect 230 miles of range from it in good but not perfect conditions when new. But if that's the 55-on-a-flat-windless-road number, and if the Superchargers are not in the locations I require, or there's some unforeseen limitation in their use, then I might opt to bump up to 85.

The 85 kWh pack is probably want you want if 230 miles with reasonable highway driving (65-70mph with AC on) is your goal. The EPA number includes many different cycles other than driving a constant speed at 55mph so the number was actually better than some thought (many were thinking around 210 or 70%). The charging infrastructure on the west coast is much better than most places so you should have many reasonable options.

[CapitalistOppressor]

I confess that I was a little disappointed in the EPA and Motor Trend numbers. I had hoped that the 300 was going to be the equivalent of the EPA number, and that careful driving would allow exceeding it, while inattentive driving would yield more like 265.

I'm going to be watching the Supercharger announcement closely. I chose the 60kWh pack because I thought that with modest driving, I could expect 230 miles of range from it in good but not perfect conditions when new. But if that's the 55-on-a-flat-windless-road number, and if the Superchargers are not in the locations I require, or there's some unforeseen limitation in their use, then I might opt to bump up to 85.

I "need" the 60. But I have already made the decision to get the 85 for greater durability/pack life and the ability to drive ~200 miles without having to hypermile.

For those of you worried about the MT test, keep in mind that the range chart Tesla published in June showed that at a continuous 65mph with 1 passenger under ideal conditions the expected range was ~260 miles.

Motor Trend had 2 people in the car and averaged 65 over less than ideal conditions. The drive from Fontana to San Diego on the I15 is very mountainous (if not quite the Grapevine), and the drive up Pacific Coast highway has a large number of stoplights on portions of it and there was stop and go traffic at points. They still managed ~240 miles of range which isn't that far off the expected ideal considering the extra passenger and other deviations from the best case scenario.

In extreme cold and with a degraded battery in 8-10 years I'd still expect you could drive using otherwise identical conditions and get 150+ miles of range (though if you are experiencing snowy conditions on Pacific Coast Highway between San Diego and Los Angeles, you have a far bigger problem in that the world has likely experienced a massive nuclear war).

[kcveins]

I "need" the 60. But I have already made the decision to get the 85 for greater durability/pack life and the ability to drive ~200 miles without having to hypermile.

For those of you worried about the MT test, keep in mind that the range chart Tesla published in June showed that at a continuous 65mph with 1 passenger under ideal conditions the expected range was ~260 miles.

Motor Trend had 2 people in the car and averaged 65 over less than ideal conditions. The drive from Fontana to San Diego on the I15 is very mountainous (if not quite the Grapevine), and the drive up Pacific Coast highway has a large number of stoplights on portions of it and there was stop and go traffic at points. They still managed ~240 miles of range which isn't that far off the expected ideal considering the extra passenger and other deviations from the best case scenario.

In extreme cold and with a degraded battery in 8-10 years I'd still expect you could drive using otherwise identical conditions and get 150+ miles of range (though if you are experiencing snowy conditions on Pacific Coast Highway between San Diego and Los Angeles, you have a far bigger problem in that the world has likely experienced a massive nuclear war).

But wouldn't the stop and go traffic on the PCH actually help your mileage? I need to drive from Chicago to Detroit several times a year (288 miles door to door) and though there are a few hills, was hoping that going 55mph would be enough to get me there. Not so sure now....

[ddruz]

• Tesla says they expect the battery to retain 70% of its capacity after 7 years.

Variations of this stat have been floating about the forums. However, when I checked with my rep he would not confirm it. Battery degradation is not addressed at all in the battery warranty. My impression is no one knows with certainty how much battery degradation there will be. This may be one of those stats that has taken a life of its own without ever having direct, in writing, confirmation. If anyone can point me to an official, in writing, Tesla statement confirming this stat I'd appreciate it very much.

In the meantime I have personally been using a 30% degradation in battery capacity as a conservative guess for estimating a relatively worse case scenario at the end of 8 years or 125,000 miles. A number of Roadster owners who have had their cars for 3 or more years report only a few percent degradation, others somewhat more. I suspect that in real life the degradation will be much, much less than 30% at 7 or 8 years if you drive and charge smart. But because this is such a big unknown it contributes to making the selection of battery size difficult for many people.

[dsm363]

But wouldn't the stop and go traffic on the PCH actually help your mileage? I need to drive from Chicago to Detroit several times a year (288 miles door to door) and though there are a few hills, was hoping that going 55mph would be enough to get me there. Not so sure now....

You could probably do it taking state highways but you'll have a much better time making one stop of maybe 90 min at a campground and charging at 40A. That would allow you to drive slightly faster and take some of the stress of range away.

[jerry33]

But wouldn't the stop and go traffic on the PCH actually help your mileage? I need to drive from Chicago to Detroit several times a year (288 miles door to door) and though there are a few hills, was hoping that going 55mph would be enough to get me there. Not so sure now....

As I recall MT also got only 45 mpg on the 2004 Prius (going from memory). I'm not particularly concerned about what they get.

2004 Prius MPG from the logbook. (Complete years only):
2003-2004 -- 50.8 mpg 17,628 miles
2005 -- 52.6 mpg 14,688 miles
2006 -- 56.3 mpg 16,174 miles
2007 -- 57.3 mpg 18,384 miles
2008 -- 59.9 mpg 21,755 miles
2009 -- 61.4 mpg 16,177 miles
2010 -- 65.2 mpg 12,134 miles
2011 -- 66.9 mpg 11,272 miles

DATE__________ODO____INC_____AVG
--- Trip to NE starts here
01/07/12____128603____481____56.6 (4.2)
-- 13 F here
01/12/12____129042____438____52.7 (4.5)
01/15/12____129420____378____50.3 (4.7)
01/20/12____129094____481____56.2 (4.2)
--- Trip to NE ends here
01/31/12____130503____600____69.8 (3.4)
02/23/12____131050____546____69.4 (3.4)
03/07/12____131679____629____72.2 (3.3)
03/23/12____132319____638____71.3 (3.3)
04/12/12____132987____668____74.0 (3.2)
05/02/12____133647____659____74.3 (3.2)
05/18/12____134272____624____73.4 (3.2)
--- Flat tire here
--- High temperatures start here
06/06/12____134907____634____74.1 (3.2)
06/22/12____135557____650____74.2 (3.2)
07/11/12____136210____652____74.3 (3.2)
08/02/12____136901____690____75.8 (3.1)
--- Trip to NE starts here
08/03/12____137499____597____57.8 (4.1)
08/04/12____138145____645____61.7 (3.8)
08/11/12____138646____601____58.8 (4.0)
08/12/12____139286____539____59.5 (4.0)
08/22/12____139881____595____64.1 (3.7)
--- Trip to NE ends here

[aviators99]

MT also did not have the A/C on. I will probably have it on Max Cool for 100% of my driving, all year.

[NigelM]

MT also did not have the A/C on. I will probably have it on Max Cool for 100% of my driving, all year.

FWIW, I've had my A/C on 100% this entire summer and the impact on my Roadster range could be classified as a little more than marginal. It certainly hasn't bothered or worried me one bit. If I was driving close to the range limit I would have been concerned, but like most EV owners I try not to do that.

[aviators99]

FWIW, I've had my A/C on 100% this entire summer and the impact on my Roadster range could be classified as a little more than marginal. It certainly hasn't bothered or worried me one bit. If I was driving close to the range limit I would have been concerned, but like most EV owners I try not to do that.

I'm not a Roadster owner, but I think I've read that the A/C works totally differently than the Model S. And with the "range limit" getting lower and lower as I get closer to delivery, it's something I'm worried about. IMO, it's just passed below my Miami-Orlando comfort limit.