-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
As has been pointed out before, 200 miles of range is not always 200 miles of range. Bad weather, hills, for whatever reason you didn't get a full charge at the last opportunity, and your 200 mile range is now closer to 100.
Why would you expect test mules more than 2 years before the M3 due (based on your 2017 estimate) when mules for the Model X due this year have only been out testing for a relatively short time?
But one does take occasional long trips. 200 miles allows you to use the supercharger network to make road trips, less doesn't. How is that "psychological" and not a huge difference in capabilities. Sure I could rent a sucky ICE, but road trips is exactly when I want to be driving my Tesla.
Trev Page
Member
Absolutely true however there's still a psychological barrier of acceptance and a mindset from people considering an EV coming a gasoline car that a car should be able to do "anything" regardless of it's features. The issue of range never comes up with a gasoline vehicle because we've been conditioned that the fuel is available anywhere and conveniently. Car purchases are based on wants and features, never range. An EV changes that metric so it's a uphill battle from a sales front. This is why Tesla didn't cut corners here and did a high-range vehicle regardless of the cost.
That's one barrier removed.
The other barrier is how fast can you charge it for long-distance travel. Most people are pretty accepting of charging at home overnight but it's the long-distance travel aspect that worries them. We're fortunate that Tesla is building out the Supercharger network. That's barrier number two removed.
As far as the competition is concerned, long-distance travel is the number 1 thing they really haven't tackled properly.
I'll give you an example:
I'm intrigued by the BMW i3. It has decent looks, I know, I know... a great interior, great build quality. RANGE is the problem. Why would I buy a $55,000 CAD BMW i3 that only gets at best 140KM range when I can buy a Tesla Model 3 for the same price that does at least DOUBLE that range, with options to go higher, AND can do long-distance travel with the Supercharger network????
Game over BMW, Nissan, Chevy etc.... Their "announced" future products are dead in the water without long-distance fast charging that is prevalent and worry free. Tesla has the upper hand not only with the ever increasing SC deployment but also their OTA software updates that improve the vehicles and nav/maps.
But I digress. When you think about it slowly and carefully you'll understand that Tesla has the best EV business plan in history. They've figured out everything.
Vger
Active Member
Both Elon and JB have hinted that they think that the 30% cost reduction of the cells is the minimum they will achieve with the Gigafactory. This is the driving factor behind both overall affordability and sufficient range. I think this is how they get from the 200 mile minimum to the 240 mile desirable range for Model 3.
Anyone who thinks that 200 miles is not important does not use their EV as a primary vehicle and take 500-1000+ mile road trips, which we do more than monthly. The critical factory is sufficient range to comfortably use less that 80% capacity (due to high-speed charging ramp), and the ratio of drive time to charge time, which Elon specs at 6:1 or better— absolutely our experience!
Anyone who thinks that 200 miles is not important does not use their EV as a primary vehicle and take 500-1000+ mile road trips, which we do more than monthly. The critical factory is sufficient range to comfortably use less that 80% capacity (due to high-speed charging ramp), and the ratio of drive time to charge time, which Elon specs at 6:1 or better— absolutely our experience!
BrianC
Member
with the 340-350Wh/mi draw for the MS would the smaller 221hp they use in the front for the D have a smaller energy draw? If so using a 40-50kWh battery would be enough to get that kind of range.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Lowered, but not removed. ICE divers expect a 5-10 minute stop for 300+ miles of driving range, SC's are not even close yet.
Marginally depending on its efficiency, but a 200 bhp peak motor and a 500 bhp peak motor use roughly the same energy moving the car at constant speed.
adiggs
Well-Known Member
As JRP says and to pile on - then there's aging of the vehicle and the "oops - I forgot to plug in last night", and other life factors beyond the influence on the drive of the moment. And the fact that the lower total % of battery you're using on a daily basis, the more healthy it is for the battery, you don't need 200 miles of range because the routine daily drive takes 200 miles to complete.
You need the car to go 200 miles so you can drive 120 miles without thinking about it at all, so that the car fits into your life today without thinking about it, and it has enough buffer so that in 10 years or 150k miles, it still has enough range that it fits into your daily life without thinking about it.
I disagree with that assessment.
During 2014 (or at least from 27 Dec 2013 to 5 Jan 2015, dates on which I bought gas and recorded the mileage), I drove 8760 miles in my Saturn. That averages about 24 miles a day. That doesn't mean that 30 miles of range would have been sufficient for my needs.
My median driving day is probably less than 15 miles. 95% of the time, a Nissan Leaf would meet my needs. However, once a month, I do a 120 mile round trip (60 miles one way) up to Denver (from Colorado Springs). Any car I own will have to be able to meet that requirement to meet my needs. Additionally, I also occasionally do a longer road trip that goes beyond the range of even what my Saturn can do on a single tank of gas (it gets about 350 miles between fillups if I push the limit). During 2014, that included a 2000 mile road trip out to Tennessee.
Superchargers meet that long-distance road trip requirement. However, for the monthly trip up to Denver and back, I need a car that can make the trip on a single charge without worrying about it. While I could always stop at the Park Meadows supercharger, I don't want to be required to in order to make the trip.
In short, a car that has range for 95% of my days, or even 99% of my days is not sufficient. I need a car that meets my needs 100% of the time. Even with superchargers, I don't want to have to stop every 50 miles when doing a long road trip. In truth, I feel that even 200 miles is too short - I'd like the real world range to be closer to 300 (my first stop on the way out to Tennessee was in Hays, KS - a distance that is out of range of a Model S, but was comfortably within range of my Saturn).
That said, if the Model 3 lives up to the claims that have been made so far, I'll be in line to get one.
Breezy
Member
This is why the Volt exists. Enough electric range for me 80% of the time, with on onboard reserve to take me up to 500 km to the next gas station if I need it.
But my wife has decided she wants a Tesla so I'm not going to argue with her.
But my wife has decided she wants a Tesla so I'm not going to argue with her.
This is why the Volt exists. Enough electric range for me 80% of the time, with on onboard reserve to take me up to 500 km to the next gas station if I need it.
But my wife has decided she wants a Tesla so I'm not going to argue with her.
Smart boy!
On average we do a 105 mile round trip every other weekend. If I want a car that can do that in bad weather, after 9 years of battery degradation, I want a 200 mile EPA rated range at least.
I see it as a statement of intent and it should be clear what they're aiming for with the future vehicles. It's possible that a base Model 3 could be more limited than that, but at the very least I expect a 200 mile EPA rating.
Many people could be satisfied with less, and just have a BEV as a 2nd car, but that's not what Tesla's trying to do. Tesla's trying to move the world to long-distance BEVs and in order to do that not only do you need to build cheaper BEVs but you need to build long-range BEVs because of the limits of charging speed.
In the USA only 1% of trips are 100 miles or more but they constitute 15% of household VMT. So if you want to be able to eliminate ICEs and have lots of BEVs on the road you need to work to lower trip time and lower charger contention. You do that by reducing the percentage of miles that use public charging, and by increasing charging speed. The most effective way to do that is to have a decent battery capacity which gives you more range, faster charging, greater performance potential, and lower C rate while driving.
Short range cannot scale without miraculous improvements. Tesla isn't crossing fingers, it's pursuing the only viable path to mass electrification.
Last edited:
Thanks, I thought about that too. In hind sight he probably had the 70d in mind moreso than the Model 3, but you have to believe that the 3 will also have the 240+ range, even if the battery is smaller (lighter weight to make up for the capacity).
Red Sage
The Cybernetic Samurai
I have been telling people for nearly a year that Tesla Model ≡ absolutely must have no less than 200 miles range. I have noted that due to finicky EPA standards for testing, Tesla cannot afford to build a car that ought to, just barely, in the best possible conditions, achieve a 200 mile range. If they were to build a car that with maybe a ~53 kWh battery pack, and limited to perhaps 240 Wh per mile energy consumption, that should make it to a 200 mile range... There would be nothing to stop the EPA from changing to a nine cycle testing regimen instead of five, resulting in a worse range rating than expected.
It is better to look at it from the opposite end of the telescope. Assume you will have a certain capacity in reserve for pack protection, and more in reserve as a buffer, so that you may smash the 200 mile barrier, and still have around 10% usable energy left 'in the tank' to reach a destination. Thus, I believe that given the size, shape, and expected weight of Model ≡, a 60 kWh battery pack should fit the bill, allowing for a 225-250 mile EPA rated range.
Depending upon how you look at it... You'd either need a very efficient drivetrain, allowing around 194 Wh per mile... Or you'd need an enormous capacity that allowed you to use as much as 450 Wh per mile over the full length of your intended range goal.
It sure would be nice to have a 125 kWh battery pack or better to work with.
It is better to look at it from the opposite end of the telescope. Assume you will have a certain capacity in reserve for pack protection, and more in reserve as a buffer, so that you may smash the 200 mile barrier, and still have around 10% usable energy left 'in the tank' to reach a destination. Thus, I believe that given the size, shape, and expected weight of Model ≡, a 60 kWh battery pack should fit the bill, allowing for a 225-250 mile EPA rated range.
Depending upon how you look at it... You'd either need a very efficient drivetrain, allowing around 194 Wh per mile... Or you'd need an enormous capacity that allowed you to use as much as 450 Wh per mile over the full length of your intended range goal.
It sure would be nice to have a 125 kWh battery pack or better to work with.
pjfranks1509
Member
I don't think he was saying "forget all other EV manufactures". I think he is talking about a legitimate 200 mile range than a car starting out with a battery that has 100 miles of range. To get to 200 mile range, you will need a battery around the 240 mile range mark, hint the Model S 70. So look for the 70KWh battery as a test for the Model 3. I bet if they go with a 70KWh battery in the Model 3, the Model S base will be a 85KWh battery and maybe see a 105KWh battery in the Model S down the road. These are just my thoughts.
Tedkidd
Member
I think the 240 mile range is important in it allows capacity to charge from near flat to the magical 150+ in under 20 minutes.
On long trips I like the enforced break to pee and stretch, but I don't want it to be much more than 20 minutes.
On long trips I like the enforced break to pee and stretch, but I don't want it to be much more than 20 minutes.
Thats the big thing that is often missed about battery capacity and range.
The fastest charge is to 70 or 80 %, then it really slows down. So you real range is only 70-80% of maximum unless you plan on spending hours charging.
Similar threads
