Changing to 21" wheels shows 320 miles at 100% so the EPA constant appears to only be incorrect for the 19" wheel config.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
2024 Plaid rated range displayed is 347 vs EPA 359
- Thread starter sorka
- Start date
Changing to 21" wheels shows 320 miles at 100% so the EPA constant appears to only be incorrect for the 19" wheel config.
that’s a 39 mile difference - a switch from 21 to 19 even with different tires shouldn’t account for so much range in any real world scenario all else equal. If memory serves me well used to be under 30 miles of difference on the old ratings. More like 27? Regardless, these ratings are fake anyways. Drive the car in realistic conditions and tells us the real range.
Sure seems like something Tesla should be able to easily clear up, doesn't it? Instead, "battery is within specifications."
Either the EPA range really is 247 and it's a mistake on their site OR it's just a bug. At some point, one of them will have to change so they match up.
But somehow the difference on the LR was 27 and now only 22. Makes zero sense for it to be magically 39, let alone 48 on a Plaid. Tells me how much of a BS rating those 390+ miles were before.
It seems like if it was a mistake or bug they would have fixed it right away. If your window sticker says 359 that is most likely correct.
Maybe Tesla just made the displayed miles more in line with what typical owners would experience driving.
I don't think Tesla has to make the display match EPA values, although they seemed to always do that before. It doesn't affect the car's performance in any way.
But who knows, you might get a software update soon, and magically have 359 miles at 100%.
aerodyne
2 of 3 EV's - Defect Free!
A few general comments.
The Tesla SoC on the IC cheats a bit by rounding. 24.6 will display as 25%. You can get more sig figs by using SMT or the energy graph.
SMT shows ideal and rated the same for the US car I have. Ideal was useless info anyway.
Highly doubtful that cycling the Model S pack will improve capacity. It may show a little more, but some of that is due to higher pack temp.
Based on 4 years of Teslafi data on two MS , as long as the car goes from 50-70% the difference going higher is not more than a few miles. I believe the pack is being calibrated all the time by the BMS. Even being stored at 50% or so for MONTHS, multiple times, RR does not change more than a mile or three than normal.
SMT shows that the buffer is indeed 4.5% of nominal full pack. Above a certain capacity, the RR stays the same at the EPA RR. Much thanks to other posters for finding this.
I still struggle a bit with EPA consumption. You could see it on the old cars displayed on the Tool box screen. I believe it is 238 wh/mi as that is what you get when calculating, nominal full pack divided by RR. (405 in my case) Others suggest it is much lower, say 221 wh/mi.
I just turned 13k miles and am at 238 wh/mi lifetime. No way could get my RR without going well below zero. I consider my car to have a 210 mile range between charges.
The Tesla SoC on the IC cheats a bit by rounding. 24.6 will display as 25%. You can get more sig figs by using SMT or the energy graph.
SMT shows ideal and rated the same for the US car I have. Ideal was useless info anyway.
Highly doubtful that cycling the Model S pack will improve capacity. It may show a little more, but some of that is due to higher pack temp.
Based on 4 years of Teslafi data on two MS , as long as the car goes from 50-70% the difference going higher is not more than a few miles. I believe the pack is being calibrated all the time by the BMS. Even being stored at 50% or so for MONTHS, multiple times, RR does not change more than a mile or three than normal.
SMT shows that the buffer is indeed 4.5% of nominal full pack. Above a certain capacity, the RR stays the same at the EPA RR. Much thanks to other posters for finding this.
I still struggle a bit with EPA consumption. You could see it on the old cars displayed on the Tool box screen. I believe it is 238 wh/mi as that is what you get when calculating, nominal full pack divided by RR. (405 in my case) Others suggest it is much lower, say 221 wh/mi.
I just turned 13k miles and am at 238 wh/mi lifetime. No way could get my RR without going well below zero. I consider my car to have a 210 mile range between charges.
Last edited:
The range display is the rated range only decreased by degradation. I can't imagine how it would be legal to display anything else. They not once in the past changed the wh/mile constant to something different than what is EPA rated. Yes they've decreased range by limiting batteries maximum charge in order to decrease battery failures and warranty claims one the 85 kwh battery. This prompted a class action lawsuit which resulted in Tesla fairly quickly undoing the cap for most and then those few they didn't, replaced the battery.
Since nobody else has done this, figured I'd charge to 100% (take a hit for the team) and post screenshots.
100% charged.
Changed over to 21" config which shows the full 320 EPA rated miles which matches Tesla's "EPA Est" rating on their website
Switching back to 19" config, we see 347 rated miles rather than the 359 miles that we should be seeing based on their EPA Est claim. Again, these are taken at the same time at 100% charge. There is no way to explain this away as anything other than the wrong constant being used....in this case 279 vs the 270 that their using for the official EPA rating.
100% charged.
Changed over to 21" config which shows the full 320 EPA rated miles which matches Tesla's "EPA Est" rating on their website
Switching back to 19" config, we see 347 rated miles rather than the 359 miles that we should be seeing based on their EPA Est claim. Again, these are taken at the same time at 100% charge. There is no way to explain this away as anything other than the wrong constant being used....in this case 279 vs the 270 that their using for the official EPA rating.
The range is great. Averaged 255 wh/mile over 131 miles driving from Merced to TiVo Service in Fremont.
Temperature started out at 45F and ended at 58F so it was cold. The car warned me that I lost 1.4% due to headwinds. I checked windfinder and confirmed I was driving mostly into 4 mph winds. Route was over Pacheco Pass which is a high altitude mountain range. So not optimal conditions. My driving style was sedate but I kept up with traffic. I wasn't the fastest or the slowest.
Adjusting for the wind, it would have been 245 wh / mile with 0 mph winds.
I used 35% of the battery to drive 131 miles which equates to 374 miles from 100% down to 0%. Obviously this will improve a lot once it warms up. It's still mid 40s at 7 am where I live which is when I started the trip.
Temperature started out at 45F and ended at 58F so it was cold. The car warned me that I lost 1.4% due to headwinds. I checked windfinder and confirmed I was driving mostly into 4 mph winds. Route was over Pacheco Pass which is a high altitude mountain range. So not optimal conditions. My driving style was sedate but I kept up with traffic. I wasn't the fastest or the slowest.
Adjusting for the wind, it would have been 245 wh / mile with 0 mph winds.
I used 35% of the battery to drive 131 miles which equates to 374 miles from 100% down to 0%. Obviously this will improve a lot once it warms up. It's still mid 40s at 7 am where I live which is when I started the trip.
5 mph above the speed limit. The first 3rd of that were 2 lane highways with 55 mph speed limits and the rest 65 mph speed limits. If they were using the right constant, the graph wouldn't look nearly as impressive.
The degradation threshold seems to be 96-96.2kWh (at least with the older EPA of 396 /348 mi).
My 23 MSP started at 95.7 kWh, and increased the nominal full pack during ~1 -1.5 month(s) to 98.4kWh.
One week from one year since the build date and at 97.3-97.4kWh today (16K km).
I would guess there is a software issue or maybe a fix waiting with a software update to adjust the range to the correct?
What wheels ”mounted” via the display? 19 or 21”
Similar threads
