Disappointing range on new Tesla 3

[David_Cary]

OP - I haven't seen it mentioned.
You are driving on winter tires. That can be a pretty big hit.
I am curious why in Shoreham you would need winter tires. I grew up in Port Jeff and that was 30 years ago when temps were lower.
When I went to school in Buffalo, I got Blizzaks for my RX-7. I was one of a tiny percentage on snows in Buffalo.

As has been said, short trips in winter are terrible.
I have 70k miles on my S. I can destroy the rated range in the summer on the highway if I try. My consumption for last 15 miles down in NC is 20% worse than EPA. Short trips - winter.

Don't fret. Road trips are usually summer.

Try and finish charging right when you leave. Battery has warmed up.

Winter driving is not about running heat alone. There is more tire and air resistance. So even driving around with teeth chattering, your mileage will suffer greatly.

Insulate your garage if easy. Most importantly (usually) is to seal up the gaskets around your garage door.

Winter short trips - 20%; Winter tires - 10%. You will be fine.

 

[E-Lectric]

I’m looking for comments. In San Diego I drove my almost new Tesla 3 (long range) at moderate speeds over to Encinitas and back a trip of 37 miles confirmed by the odometer. The range started at 202 and ended at at 150, indicating that I had driven 52 miles. Something is not right! Any ideas?

So, if the weather is decent (so breaks will fully regenerate), and I drive in Chill mode, and I keep off the accelerator, and I keep climate control off—miles used is pretty close to advertised range. That’s a lot of ifs. But yes the top 3 things that improve range seem to be warmer weather bc again it affects regen and the need for heat, heated air, and chill mode.

 

[E-Lectric]

So, if the weather is decent (so breaks will fully regenerate), and I drive in Chill mode, and I keep off the accelerator, and I keep climate control off—miles used is pretty close to advertised range. That’s a lot of ifs. But yes the top 3 things that improve range seem to be warmer weather bc again it affects regen and the need for heat, heated air, and chill mode.

*Sorry. I mean heated air off improves range—and this seems to be a bigger deal than AC in summer!

 

[Dana1]

By the way I followed Tesla for years before purchasing this but I'm not a geek or a nerd and if this is going to be a mass market car then it should be somewhat near what it proportions to be.

There’s a lot of threads on this. How fast were you going? How much energy were you consuming? Were there elevation changes? All the same questions you’d ask in a gasoline car with a 310 mile range you only got 220 miles from. The energy consumption graph will tell you how you’re doing. An average of 70 doesn’t mean the times you were going 50 exactly offsets the times you were going 90...energy consumption graphs tend to be exponential in nature.

 

[Rwatters549]

Ever buy a pound of expensive chocolate and then find out they gave you 1/2 or 2/3 of a pound? Something is not righ here. The navigation know the range and calculates it correctly, the fuel range is on another scale, they dont jive. When on a road trip the navigation tells you where to charge and how much left, this totally contradicts the fuel gage.

Yes, My Prius got the kind of mileage and range advertized on a regular basis. Same with my Sequoia (gasp), not the Tesla, it has two different ranges.

Cold weather 50% or worse. On a road trip from
Boston to Orlando, 25 to 30%.

This is bad news for Tesla as the word gets out that the model 3’s range isnt anywhere near its advertized range. Like many of you, I paid the $18k extra for long range, dual motor.

 

[SigNC]

Ever buy a pound of expensive chocolate and then find out they gave you 1/2 or 2/3 of a pound? Something is not righ here. The navigation know the range and calculates it correctly, the fuel range is on another scale, they dont jive. When on a road trip the navigation tells you where to charge and how much left, this totally contradicts the fuel gage.

Yes, My Prius got the kind of mileage and range advertized on a regular basis. Same with my Sequoia (gasp), not the Tesla, it has two different ranges.

Cold weather 50% or worse. On a road trip from
Boston to Orlando, 25 to 30%.

This is bad news for Tesla as the word gets out that the model 3’s range isnt anywhere near its advertized range. Like many of you, I paid the $18k extra for long range, dual motor.

It's just physics. There is no secret that is going to get out.

 

[dfwatt]

Ever buy a pound of expensive chocolate and then find out they gave you 1/2 or 2/3 of a pound? Something is not righ here. The navigation know the range and calculates it correctly, the fuel range is on another scale, they dont jive. When on a road trip the navigation tells you where to charge and how much left, this totally contradicts the fuel gage.

Yes, My Prius got the kind of mileage and range advertized on a regular basis. Same with my Sequoia (gasp), not the Tesla, it has two different ranges.

Cold weather 50% or worse. On a road trip from
Boston to Orlando, 25 to 30%.

This is bad news for Tesla as the word gets out that the model 3’s range isnt anywhere near its advertized range. Like many of you, I paid the $18k extra for long range, dual motor.

You clearly need to get more experience than the use of the Energy tab it's within the main Sub menu of the drivers screen. This tab allows you to see your expected as well as instant range at your current Watt hours per mile consumption. I suspect you've never seen this tab but you might get familiar with it and then see if you can square things up.

As for the notion that cars not hitting their range which is another way of talking about mileage relative to EPA numbers is any kind of news, well that's not news at all. If you've got a gas engine car that gets 25 miles per gallon overall when you include the warm-up cycle and then going at 75 to 80 on the highway you'll be lucky if you get 20 miles per gallon. You should read the other threads on this. In case you're not aware of this your energy consumption varies with the square of your speed. This basically means that your energy consumption at 80 miles an hour is going to be four times what it is at 40 miles an hour. Since you're going twice as fast this means you're going to get half the range. This is true whether you're in an internal combustion engine car or an electric vehicle. It is magnified by the fact that electric vehicles have shorter range then ICE's, and further obscured by the fact that internal combustion engines are only efficient in their tallest gears. There's lots of other material on this and you should probably read up before you post so you don't expose your ignorance. No one complains that around town they might get 450 miles of range rather than the advertised 310. Again this is all just physics and like I said there are dozens of threads on this. Read up and learn

 

[Dana1]

Ever buy a pound of expensive chocolate and then find out they gave you 1/2 or 2/3 of a pound? Something is not righ here. The navigation know the range and calculates it correctly, the fuel range is on another scale, they dont jive. When on a road trip the navigation tells you where to charge and how much left, this totally contradicts the fuel gage.

Yes, My Prius got the kind of mileage and range advertized on a regular basis. Same with my Sequoia (gasp), not the Tesla, it has two different ranges.

Cold weather 50% or worse. On a road trip from
Boston to Orlando, 25 to 30%.

This is bad news for Tesla as the word gets out that the model 3’s range isnt anywhere near its advertized range. Like many of you, I paid the $18k extra for long range, dual motor.

What is your energy consumption graph show? What is your wh/mile? Ever taken your phone off the charger and it says 100%? If you’re just doing text messages your battery life will be practically forever. If you’re streaming video it might only be three hours. The phone manufacturer probably advertises an 8 or 10 hour battery, with an asterisk with a lot of fine print. Think of your car like this. The battery percentage is accurate. The miles are an estimate. It doesn’t know if you’re going to drive 85 mph for the next two hours, go up a mountainside, go down a mountainside, etc., etc. watch your energy consumption graph and drive around 242 wh/mile. A 75 kw battery that is estimated to get 310 mile is 4.13 miles/kw. Invert the fraction, keeping in mind 1000 w= 1 kw. 1000/4.13= 242.1 wh/ mile. My battery is estimating 234 miles of range because I’m averaging 224 wh/mile, energy consumption graph attached. But it can be wrong if I drive differently than I have been or drive into a blizzard.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

This is bad news for Tesla as the word gets out that the model 3’s range isnt anywhere near its advertized range.

It's just physics. There is no secret that is going to get out.

I agree that there is no secret here - obviously it's just physics that you won't do as well in the cold. I do think that Tesla could do a better job of preparing owners for this. But it's certainly an odd first post on TMC, quoted above.

As for the notion that cars not hitting their range which is another way of talking about mileage relative to EPA numbers is any kind of news, well that's not news at all. If you've got a gas engine car that gets 25 miles per gallon overall when you include the warm-up cycle and then going at 75 to 80 on the highway you'll be lucky if you get 20 miles per gallon.

I understand what you're saying, and you're right than an ICE car driven at 80-85 will not hit the EPA numbers. Just like the Tesla. The exact scaling is driven by physics and the details of how efficient the particular ICE engine is vs. the load. Totally agree.

However, I think this analysis does ignore the very real, very significant fact that in winter time, the EV will be much worse than the ICE vehicle, because the ICE vehicle produces heat which is very nearly free. That cabin heat is the primary reason people get poor efficiency in winter with EVs. There are other reasons as well which may be common to ICE & EVs - obviously driving through thick snow and icy roads is going to hurt both types of vehicle. But when it's just cold with clear roads (which is most of the time for most people), the EV will do much worse vs. an ICE, relative to the stated EPA mileage. That's just the way it works. It's physics!

I'm not saying ICE vehicles won't do worse than their stated mileage in winter - in general they will. But the % hit will be nowhere near an EV % hit, when road conditions are good, and it's just cold. This obviously assumes you're warming the cabin in the EV, which I think is a reasonable assumption for this comparison.

No one complains that around town they might get 450 miles of range rather than the advertised 310.

Unless the person is an Uber or Lyft or Tesloop driver and puts all that mileage on the vehicle in one day in city driving, in the spring/fall when no HVAC is needed, this will never happen. Getting back to winter conditions, which I think is what the post above was most concerned about, there's no way you're going to get 450 miles of range out of a Tesla driving around town with the heat on in the winter. In addition, the parasitic losses of the Tesla are so high that a typical city driver (let's say they do 20 miles of city driving a day) will lose at least 45 miles of rated range due to parasitic losses over the approximately 15-day recharge interval. So getting 450 miles of real world range out of 310-45 = 270 rated miles in the winter seems highly improbable. I understand this analysis is not the same as useful "range". Range really only matters if you're going to discharge the battery completely on a road trip in one relatively quick event. But most people coming from an ICE think about how far they can go between refuels. So it's inflating the EV argument a bit to say that somehow you're going to get 450 miles of range out of the battery. If you hypermile it, sure, but I guarantee that those hypermilers aren't running the heat.

Again, I agree with the overall argument that it's largely silly to be upset by EV range in the winter time (everyone should know it isn't going to be great). But I think we have to be careful to not do the same thing as Tesla and not mention the issue, or paint a rosy picture of the thing, or deny that EVs are way worse than ICE vehicles in this specific respect (driving in winter with the heat on). Does it MATTER? Not really, for most people, in most situations - because you just recharge every night. But it matters for people who want to budget their energy usage, or "expect" a certain result. So it's good to get those expectations properly aligned with reality up front. It's part of the learning curve of switching over to EV transportation. My feeling is that if people are educated about the way it will work, most of them will still be happy to buy the vehicle. Because it usually just doesn't matter.

 

[dfwatt]

I agree that there is no secret here - obviously it's just physics that you won't do as well in the cold. I do think that Tesla could do a better job of preparing owners for this. But it's certainly an odd first post on TMC, quoted above.

I understand what you're saying, and you're right than an ICE car driven at 80-85 will not hit the EPA numbers. Just like the Tesla. The exact scaling is driven by physics and the details of how efficient the particular ICE engine is vs. the load. Totally agree.

However, I think this analysis does ignore the very real, very significant fact that in winter time, the EV will be much worse than the ICE vehicle, because the ICE vehicle produces heat which is very nearly free. That cabin heat is the primary reason people get poor efficiency in winter with EVs. There are other reasons as well which may be common to ICE & EVs - obviously driving through thick snow and icy roads is going to hurt both types of vehicle. But when it's just cold with clear roads (which is most of the time for most people), the EV will do much worse vs. an ICE, relative to the stated EPA mileage. That's just the way it works. It's physics!

I'm not saying ICE vehicles won't do worse than their stated mileage in winter - in general they will. But the % hit will be nowhere near an EV % hit, when road conditions are good, and it's just cold. This obviously assumes you're warming the cabin in the EV, which I think is a reasonable assumption for this comparison.

Unless the person is an Uber or Lyft or Tesloop driver and puts all that mileage on the vehicle in one day in city driving, in the spring/fall when no HVAC is needed, this will never happen. Getting back to winter conditions, which I think is what the post above was most concerned about, there's no way you're going to get 450 miles of range out of a Tesla driving around town with the heat on in the winter. In addition, the parasitic losses of the Tesla are so high that a typical city driver (let's say they do 20 miles of city driving a day) will lose at least 45 miles of rated range due to parasitic losses over the approximately 15-day recharge interval. So getting 450 miles of real world range out of 310-45 = 270 rated miles in the winter seems highly improbable. I understand this analysis is not the same as useful "range". Range really only matters if you're going to discharge the battery completely on a road trip in one relatively quick event. But most people coming from an ICE think about how far they can go between refuels. So it's inflating the EV argument a bit to say that somehow you're going to get 450 miles of range out of the battery. If you hypermile it, sure, but I guarantee that those hypermilers aren't running the heat.

Again, I agree with the overall argument that it's largely silly to be upset by EV range in the winter time (everyone should know it isn't going to be great). But I think we have to be careful to not do the same thing as Tesla and not mention the issue, or paint a rosy picture of the thing, or deny that EVs are way worse than ICE vehicles in this specific respect (driving in winter with the heat on). Does it MATTER? Not really, for most people, in most situations - because you just recharge every night. But it matters for people who want to budget their energy usage, or "expect" a certain result. So it's good to get those expectations properly aligned with reality up front. It's part of the learning curve of switching over to EV transportation. My feeling is that if people are educated about the way it will work, most of them will still be happy to buy the vehicle. Because it usually just doesn't matter.

I agree with you on these finer details, I'm just painting in broader brushstrokes, And we have gotten the equivalent of 425 miles around town down in Florida – of course no heat turned on but I can easily get 180 Watt hours per mile if I drive gently.

As for your suggestion about range crashing badly under Winter driving see con #2 in my overall review of the model 3 here.

 

[stickman]

Tesla could definitely be more clear in the owner's manual. Maybe at least on the "getting maximum range" page. It took me a while to figure out by looking at the energy tab that the reason the 'range' displayed on the main screen was always way off was because it was based on the rated watt hour/mile. But once I realized that I relaxed.
Oh and I'm a new owner of a P3D+ in winter so my average wh/mile is appalling.....and I don't care

 

[stickman]

so due to what I learned in this thread and others I decided to turn off the cabin heater yesterday, as it was reasonably warm here (mid 40s). The effect on range was not subtle. Here is a my graph after a day of short trips around hilly seattle. Bet you can tell which half I turned the heater off for. It got cold later in the day but I left the heater off and once my old trips dropped off the 30 miles tab, my average was right in line with rated- and the projected range was right in line with the range icon on the main screen. And I was in no way hyper-miling.

 

[electrictorque]

Not sure if mentioned here, but I'm pretty sure a car with a bad wheel alignment affects range, specially for electric car.

I use the string method all the time to check if my cars are aligned every so often.

Here is a video of some guy showing how to check.

Believe it or not, this method is more accurate than some alignment machines.

 

[Big Earl]

Not sure if mentioned here, but I'm pretty sure a car with a bad wheel alignment affects range, specially for electric car.

I use the string method all the time to check if my cars are aligned every so often.

Here is a video of some guy showing how to check.

Believe it or not, this method is more accurate than some alignment machines.

Helpful video, but I feel like one thing should be mentioned: never put duct tape on car paint unless it’s a beater and you don’t care about it.

 

[electrictorque]

Helpful video, but I feel like one thing should be mentioned: never put duct tape on car paint unless it’s a beater and you don’t care about it.

Yeah, definitely skip the duck tape.

 

[EVDRVN]

By the way I followed Tesla for years before purchasing this but I'm not a geek or a nerd and if this is going to be a mass market car then it should be somewhat near what it proportions to be.

There are articles all over for years about the draw backs of EVs. Your issue is pack temp, cold air, road conditions and heater. In the summer this will change. EVs 101.

 

[EVDRVN]

Not sure if mentioned here, but I'm pretty sure a car with a bad wheel alignment affects range, specially for electric car.

I use the string method all the time to check if my cars are aligned every so often.

Here is a video of some guy showing how to check.

[\

Believe it or not, this method is more accurate than some alignment machines.

Using a bumper as a gauge, there are so may things to skew that way off it is not even funny. You can have a panel way off changing your point of reference.

 

[electrictorque]

Using a bumper as a gauge, there are so may things to skew that way off it is not even funny. You can have a panel way off changing your point of reference.

You don't use the bumper as a gauge, you use only the wheels/tires

 

[SWUtah]

OK so I drove my model 3 today in New York in 45ﾟ weather. My actual mileage was approximately 32 miles but I used 45 miles of the battery. I used the seat heater and kept the heat down to 66, occasionaly using the defroster. Is this to be expected ,and I should expect 190 miles per full charge not 310?

I've got a trip I make periodically that is 32 actual road miles one-way, but with an elevation difference of nearly 4000 vertical feet. It takes my M3 about 70-72 miles of "battery range" to make the trip in the uphill direction but only about 7 miles of "battery range" going the downhill direction. This at 65-55 mph with no A/C or cabin heat on, but sometimes 1 or 2 bars of seat heat on the two front seats. There are lots of variables in the actual range you'll get, and after a while you'll learn how to interpret how your car is actually doing.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I've got a trip I make periodically that is 32 actual road miles one-way, but with an elevation difference of nearly 4000 vertical feet. It takes my M3 about 70-72 miles of "battery range" to make the trip in the uphill direction but only about 7 miles of "battery range" going the downhill direction. This at 65-55 mph with no A/C or cabin heat on, but sometimes 1 or 2 bars of seat heat on the two front seats. There are lots of variables in the actual range you'll get, and after a while you'll learn how to interpret how your car is actually doing.

Yes, it is a minimum of 1.6kWh/1000ft, or ~7 rated miles per 1000ft of elevation gain, for the AWD vehicles (proportionately less for the lighter vehicles). It's non-negotiable, and can only be worse than that in reality.

You do get a lot back on the downhill though!