250wh per pile to get performance rated range of 315 miles

[gottagofast]

As speed decreases the efficiency will dramatically increase especially with really efficient tires.

Yea when I first got the performance the first thing I said I was going to do was get 18 inch wheels, but when I started driving I really like how the 20 inch handled turns, feels really glued to the road when turning and I like how they look

I still need to do an interstate test to see if I’m happy with the efficiency, I might wait until I get the hankook evos before I test that though, the day I got the car the summer tires had 37 psi that was probably the main problem of my initial high energy work commute

 

[mpgxsvcd]

Yea when I first got the performance the first thing I said I was going to do was get 18 inch wheels, but when I started driving I really like how the 20 inch handled turns, feels really glued to the road when turning and I like how they look

I still need to do an interstate test to see if I’m happy with the efficiency, I might wait until I get the hankook evos before I test that though, the day I got the car the summer tires had 37 psi that was probably the main problem of my initial high energy work commute

From the testing I have done I really believe both going down in diameter and using an efficient tire makes a significant difference in efficiency.

The efficiency gain has almost nothing to do with weight either. I think the stretched 20” tires are less efficient than the equivalent 18” tire.

I have done controlled testing with both the 20” Pirelli PZ4 and the 18” PZ4. The 18” was close to 13% more efficient than the 20” PZ4.

 

[Zcd1]

Yea when I first got the performance the first thing I said I was going to do was get 18 inch wheels, but when I started driving I really like how the 20 inch handled turns, feels really glued to the road when turning and I like how they look

I still need to do an interstate test to see if I’m happy with the efficiency, I might wait until I get the hankook evos before I test that though, the day I got the car the summer tires had 37 psi that was probably the main problem of my initial high energy work commute

44 psi is 1-3% more efficient (2-6 miles of actual range) than 37 psi, according to the car's Efficiency screen.

That meager range improvement isn't nearly worth the tradeoff in ride impact harshness and quality, IMHO.

 

[gottagofast]

44 psi is 1-3% more efficient (2-6 miles of actual range) than 37 psi, according to the car's Efficiency screen.

That meager range improvement isn't nearly worth the tradeoff in ride impact harshness and quality, IMHO.

Not sure how my efficiency has improved so much then, I was at 260-270 wh/mile when I first got the car during the same commute

Or maybe I was simply reading the graph wrong when i first got it

Like maybe I was looking at the 5 mile distance instead of 30 miles

 

[gottagofast]

Here’s the graph

 

[Zcd1]

Not sure how my efficiency has improved so much then, I was at 260-270 wh/mile when I first got the car during the same commute

Or maybe I was simply reading the graph wrong when i first got it

Like maybe I was looking at the 5 mile distance instead of 30 miles

Too many variables to be able to point to a specific cause.

Check the car's Efficiency screen to see the things that affect efficiency vs. the EPA average.

 

[N54TT]

@gottagofast I tried reading through the thread to see the reason why you need to hit the rated range…but got lazy lol. What’s the reason why you’re trying to hit it? Do you have a trip that’s 300-315 miles that you need to make that doesn’t offer a supercharger along the way? Otherwise I say stay stop trying to find a specific wheel/tire, psi, driving habit etc, or focusing on how to achieve it. There are way too many variables that will have an impact on efficiency. Just plug her in, swipe down on the efficiency screen, enjoy the car and acceleration. Especially with your screen name. If fast is what you like…..you need to throw efficiency out the window .

 

[gottagofast]

@gottagofast I tried reading through the thread to see the reason why you need to hit the rated range…but got lazy lol. What’s the reason why you’re trying to hit it? Do you have a trip that’s 300-315 miles that you need to make that doesn’t offer a supercharger along the way? Otherwise I say stay stop trying to find a specific wheel/tire, psi, driving habit etc, or focusing on how to achieve it. There are way too many variables that will have an impact on efficiency. Just plug her in, swipe down on the efficiency screen, enjoy the car and acceleration. Especially with your screen name. If fast is what you like…..you need to throw efficiency out the window .

It’s not only about the distance I may drive but also the more miles I use the more cycles my battery goes through and I want to see the car last a long time

I also would like to take some trips and I want to be able to take those trips even after the battery has degraded 20% or more

 

[N54TT]

It’s not only about the distance I may drive but also the more miles I use the more cycles my battery goes through and I want to see the car last a long time

I also would like to take some trips and I want to be able to take those trips even after the battery has degraded 20% or more

If that’s the case I think you’re worrying about it too much. I’m just one data point but my 2018 performance has 76k miles on it, 323wh/mile lifetime average, current max charge is 296. I’ve driven a round trip from NY-Chicago, take numerous 200-400 mile(round trip) ski trips in the winter that are 400+ wh/mile, annual 350mile(round trip) from NY-Hershey. I still stop at the same superchargers that I did when the car was brand new. Actually I lied…some have changed because they’ve added a bunch more superchargers along the routes…and I try to shoot for a v3 if possible lol.

I think you’re better off focusing on charging behaviors for battery longevity than driving efficiency. Daily driving….just enjoy the car…drive it like you stole it…gotta go fast!

 

[Zcd1]

It’s not only about the distance I may drive but also the more miles I use the more cycles my battery goes through and I want to see the car last a long time

I also would like to take some trips and I want to be able to take those trips even after the battery has degraded 20% or more

Now it seems like you’re just trolling, honestly…

 

[gottagofast]

If that’s the case I think you’re worrying about it too much. I’m just one data point but my 2018 performance has 76k miles on it, 323wh/mile lifetime average, current max charge is 296. I’ve driven a round trip from NY-Chicago, take numerous 200-400 mile(round trip) ski trips in the winter that are 400+ wh/mile, annual 350mile(round trip) from NY-Hershey. I still stop at the same superchargers that I did when the car was brand new. Actually I lied…some have changed because they’ve added a bunch more superchargers along the routes…and I try to shoot for a v3 if possible lol.

I think you’re better off focusing on charging behaviors for battery longevity than driving efficiency. Daily driving….just enjoy the car…drive it like you stole it…gotta go fast!

Your full charge is higher than mine, I’m 286, I’m guessing you have 18 inch wheels though since it 2018

I may be higher than that though I might need to do one of those below 10% then to 100% charges that Tessie app recommends

 

[N54TT]

Your full charge is higher than mine, I’m 286, I’m guessing you have 18 inch wheels though since it 2018

I may be higher than that though I might need to do one of those below 10% then to 100% charges that Tessie app recommends

It was 310 when new. I have the P3D+ aka 20” summers. But I never really ran them. I’ve been running 20” staggered PS4S in the summer and 19” with Blizzaks in the winter. Neither of which are “efficient” setups lol.

 

[gottagofast]

It was 310 when new. I have the P3D+ aka 20” summers. But I never really ran them. I’ve been running 20” staggered PS4S in the summer and 19” with Blizzaks in the winter. Neither of which are “efficient” setups lol.

View attachment 1018991

View attachment 1018992

Amazing how much battery degradation varies when everyone has the same batteries

I mean your car is almost 6 years old with 76k miles and has only lost a little over 10 miles while mine is 1.5 years old with 27k miles and has lost almost 30

Your way above the average going by the Tessie app, I’m slightly below the average by like .5%

 

[KenC]

Amazing how much battery degradation varies when everyone has the same batteries

I mean your car is almost 6 years old with 76k miles and has only lost a little over 10 miles while mine is 1.5 years old with 27k miles and has lost almost 30

Your way above the average going by the Tessie app, I’m slightly below the average by like .5%

As @N54TT mentioned, you should think about "focusing on charging behaviors for battery longevity than driving efficiency". Remember, shallow cycles are far better than deep cycles.

 

[gottagofast]

As @N54TT mentioned, you should think about "focusing on charging behaviors for battery longevity than driving efficiency". Remember, shallow cycles are far better than deep cycles.

Yes I’ve been doing shallow cycles, I see other people that charge to 100% on a regular basis and they have less degradation than me

 

[Tronguy]

Amazing how much battery degradation varies when everyone has the same batteries

I mean your car is almost 6 years old with 76k miles and has only lost a little over 10 miles while mine is 1.5 years old with 27k miles and has lost almost 30

Your way above the average going by the Tessie app, I’m slightly below the average by like .5%

Ha. And there's more to this than you might think.

Back in the day the SO and I had a 2018 M3 LR RWD that, over the year and a half since we had it, had gone from about 320 mile range (figured by dividing the displayed mileage by the %charge) to about 290 miles or so. And I was sad.

At that time, we decided to take a lengthy trip from NJ down to Savannah, GA, to check out the birthplace of the Girl Scouts in the US. This involved, more or less, getting on I-95 southbound and hitting Superchargers as we went, staying overnight in the middle somewhere. We left with a full charge (recommended for this kind of thing) and were, more or less, following the NAV, charging roughly three times on the way down. Note that this resulted in some relatively rapid, deep discharges of the battery.

And, wonder of wonders, the max range crept right back up into the 320's. And stayed up there for the next three or four months, then started creeping back down again.

And that got to be a generally observed process. Don't drive long distances; charge the car when it hit 30% or so to 80% or so; and, over time, the indicated max range would creep down into the 290's. Go on a longish trip with multiple deep discharges; and the indicated range would go right back up again. The car was sold in 9/2023 and had a max range, at the time, of 308-310 miles, which was pretty good for a five year old Tesla.

The issue is that the BMS tries to figure out how much energy is stuffed into the battery. Compared to an ICE, it does a decent job; but it does accumulate some error in there.

There are occasional threads around the TMC (and other places) where people hit upon this-method-or-that to "recover" those lost miles; most of those methods involve stuff like discharging the car down to 2%, then back to 95%, and lather, rinse, repeat, say, 3 times. Which is like a thousand miles of driving.. to recover "lost" mileage of 20 or 30 miles or so. I figure it's not worth the effort.

So, don't take that "battery degradation" as gospel. Yeah, some people do get batteries that go down for the count; but with most, it's probably just BMS inaccuracy.

 

[gottagofast]

Ha. And there's more to this than you might think.

Back in the day the SO and I had a 2018 M3 LR RWD that, over the year and a half since we had it, had gone from about 320 mile range (figured by dividing the displayed mileage by the %charge) to about 290 miles or so. And I was sad.

At that time, we decided to take a lengthy trip from NJ down to Savannah, GA, to check out the birthplace of the Girl Scouts in the US. This involved, more or less, getting on I-95 southbound and hitting Superchargers as we went, staying overnight in the middle somewhere. We left with a full charge (recommended for this kind of thing) and were, more or less, following the NAV, charging roughly three times on the way down. Note that this resulted in some relatively rapid, deep discharges of the battery.

And, wonder of wonders, the max range crept right back up into the 320's. And stayed up there for the next three or four months, then started creeping back down again.

And that got to be a generally observed process. Don't drive long distances; charge the car when it hit 30% or so to 80% or so; and, over time, the indicated max range would creep down into the 290's. Go on a longish trip with multiple deep discharges; and the indicated range would go right back up again. The car was sold in 9/2023 and had a max range, at the time, of 308-310 miles, which was pretty good for a five year old Tesla.

The issue is that the BMS tries to figure out how much energy is stuffed into the battery. Compared to an ICE, it does a decent job; but it does accumulate some error in there.

There are occasional threads around the TMC (and other places) where people hit upon this-method-or-that to "recover" those lost miles; most of those methods involve stuff like discharging the car down to 2%, then back to 95%, and lather, rinse, repeat, say, 3 times. Which is like a thousand miles of driving.. to recover "lost" mileage of 20 or 30 miles or so. I figure it's not worth the effort.

So, don't take that "battery degradation" as gospel. Yeah, some people do get batteries that go down for the count; but with most, it's probably just BMS inaccuracy.

K that makes me feel better, it’s impossible to know what your actually degradation is then just by looking at your range

How does Tesla know if you lost 30% or not then for warranty purposes

 

[N54TT]

Yes I’ve been doing shallow cycles, I see other people that charge to 100% on a regular basis and they have less degradation than me

K that makes me feel better, it’s impossible to know what your actually degradation is then just by looking at your range

How does Tesla know if you lost 30% or not then for warranty purposes

Battery degradation is a whole other can of worms. I have several led flashlights that use 18650’s and there are variations in every single cell I have. Considering a Tesla battery pack uses thousands of individual cells…..There will be variations in packs. Now add in BMS calculations…and the variations that come along with that. My full charge has ranged from 286 to 296… most recent being 296. There is definitely some degradation but It hasn’t changed my road trips from day 1.

FYI I always charged my car to 90% on a daily basis (until Tesla dropped it to 80) even though my daily commute is only 45miles/day….because I want max acceleration whenever I want to floor it. Partly why my wh/mile is 323 lol.

At the end of the day….follow Tesla recommended charge limits for max charge limit, drive the car however you want, and don’t harp on trying to get the rated range or wh/mile. Unless there’s a trip you have to do that doesn’t have any supercharges along the route and can’t make it without getting 225 wh/mile or whatever you’re trying to get.

 

[gottagofast]

Dang, 218 today, ready to see what I get with the hankooks

Are we sure psi doesn’t make a bigger difference than 1%?

I’m beating the long range model’s range with 20 inch summer tires

 

[Tronguy]

K that makes me feel better, it’s impossible to know what your actually degradation is then just by looking at your range

How does Tesla know if you lost 30% or not then for warranty purposes

Well, consider the case I just described. A degradation of (320-290)/320 = 9%, well below Tesla's 30% threshold. If the rough estimated range gets down by (320 - 0.3*320) = 224 miles, and the car is under warranty, then ding them. They've got additional tests they can run.

As I said, when I sold the car, the range was around 309 miles, starting from 320. (320-309)/320 = 3.4%. As I said, pretty good for a five year old car.