Going back to San Diego from Atlanta tomorrow and thought I'd give this a try. Saw the expected route (I-20 to Dallas, I-35 to OKC, I-40 to Flagstaff, then to Phoenix and San Diego before changing any settings. Noticed the default was S85 and tried both S60 and NEW S60 and both showed a route deviating at Tucumcari, NM to Denver and I-70 for an additional ~20hours. Nothing in the other settings seems to get it back to what I believe is the correct route (the first one).
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Thanks for the report! This is actually due to the distance (and speed) between Albuquerque and Gallup. If you allow your S60 to go down to 2% charge at the charger and 0% degradation, it will just barely make it. Otherwise, you have to drive slower there.
The planner should, if it was possible, tell you things like this. But it is hard to tell a computer to tell you which rule to break
The planner should, if it was possible, tell you things like this. But it is hard to tell a computer to tell you which rule to break
Thanks for the report! This is actually due to the distance (and speed) between Albuquerque and Gallup. If you allow your S60 to go down to 2% charge at the charger and 0% degradation, it will just barely make it. Otherwise, you have to drive slower there.
The planner should, if it was possible, tell you things like this. But it is hard to tell a computer to tell you which rule to break
Well we just did that leg yesterday and, even in 22-25 degree weather all the way, drove at 70-75mph and made it with 11% left. Left Albuquerque with 100% and even left the heater on most of the way. Usage varied from 325Wh/mi to 380Wh/mi.
Good to hear that you made it
The Google average speed on that leg is about 67 mph, which is pretty high. Also, Gallup is about 1200 ft higher than Albuquerque, and just that will add about 5% battery consumption on an S60. So, depeding on your actual speed and all the other factors, the consumption on that leg will be at least 90% with an S60.
Good to hear that you made it
The Google average speed on that leg is about 67 mph, which is pretty high. Also, Gallup is about 1200 ft higher than Albuquerque, and just that will add about 5% battery consumption on an S60. So, depeding on your actual speed and all the other factors, the consumption on that leg will be at least 90% with an S60.
What's the best way to know what speed to use over a long trip? You mention the average speed on sections of the highway...but they aren't displayed anywhere so how do I know if I'm actually doing 99% or 101% of the average?
One last question. How often do you update the list of Superchargers? I noticed a few new Superchargers were added last week but none of them show up yet in calculated routes on your site.
Last edited:
I don't know what it is, but all the trip planners (except the car's) exhibit some bizarre problem with a simple trip from Duncan SC to Martinsburg WV. They either take me hundreds of miles out of the way, select absurdly long/short charging times, or a in the case of better route planner just give up. Here I put in New S60, 100% speed, 100% start charge, 10% charger arrival, 20% goal arrival, max charge 95%, consumption 287 wH/mi and 5 minutes to open charge port (whatever that means). The result was "No route found." The route is simple, and superchargers are easily found all along the way. I just made the trip, so I know it works.
The only trip planner that really works is Ben's. the others punted getting a 60 from Long Beach Ca to Richmond Va. Ben's will show me the route(s) and flag the problem legs. They are no problem in real life- just range charge and slow down 10 mph. I have contacted the people at evtripping and they are looking at it.
XX minutes to open charge port appears to be additional driving/overhead time for stopping to charge. It's added to the drive time for each supercharger stop. Additional time driving slow in the parking lot, backing in, plugging in, etc.
(experimentally determined)
WannabeOwner
Well-Known Member
I get this (with no indication of what the problem is) on most of the Google-backed route planner tools, whereas if I use Google Maps itself it adequately understands my Start location and Destination. It seems to me that the problem is getting them to understand the address / location of the Start / End of the journey (hence why some feedback as to what is not understood would help). Where there is a drop-down with predictive text of the location I always select it, even it is spelled exactly the same as what I have typed - that does seem to help, so presumably the drop-down actually had some extra behind-the-scenes detail that was useful). In the UK our Postcodes are geographically small areas, and when I put something into Google Maps it usually converts my text to include the Postcode, so I then cut & paste that into whatever route planned I'm having trouble with - its "close enough" for route planning purposes. I guess in USA that ZIP code is a too large an area?
Perhaps if you can't get a route to "take" at all then Lat / Long might be an option to ensure that understanding your Start / End points is not the problem?
My car seems to ramp-up to full-speed kWs over the first couple of minutes, so I allow for some "loss" of efficiency at the start of each charging stop.
DiamondHands
Member
I'm really looking forward to seeing how your route planner pans out- thanks for taking the initiative!
One last question. How often do you update the list of Superchargers? I noticed a few new Superchargers were added last week but none of them show up yet in calculated routes on your site.
Sorry for the delayed answer! The list of superchargers is fetched from supercharge.info every day, so if you notice any specific delays let me know.
Right. It was originally named "Charge Overhead" but that was also misunderstood so I renamed it to the very Tesla-specific "Time to Open Charge Port"
Since I want users to be able to follow up actual plugged-in charge times, I add that overhead to the drive time to the charger.
It will actually allow most everything that Google understands in the address field. The problem is most often not that it cannot find the address, but that it cannot find a working route between the addresses due to distance, initial charge, arrival charge or something else. Of course, the planner should point out simple errors like "Address not found", I will add that.
When it comes to pointing out problematic legs or input parameters, this is far trickier. I need to think more about that.
It still isn't showing Ogallala, Nebraska and Gothenburg Nebraska. Those locations both went live on December 2nd.
I noticed the buttons to clear out previous destinations. Very useful. Thanks!
Xenius
Active Member
Ahhh! That turned out to be a bug introduced when changing the database structure. Thanks, now fixed!
It sees them now and correctly routes the trip when going from Denver to Kearney...but on the reverse trip from Kearney to Denver, it routes through Kansas. I tried adding Ogallala as a waypoint and then it tries to route me through Cheyenne as well.
Maybe the uphill leg is too much, even for an S90D? Hopefully Brush, Colorado comes online soon as it will break that leg up.
Last edited:
HumanGenome
Member
Would love to pay for this to self host. I do not trust entering MyTesla credentials on a third party website.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Question
