Motor Trend: World Exclusive! 2012 Tesla Model S Test and Range Verification

[chrisn]

Long story short, 300 mile ideal range is meaningless if those driving conditions would never be practical for a 300 mile uninterrupted trip. You really only care about the range under long distance driving conditions.

You bring up a great point. For me (in the SF Bay Area) a typical "very long trip" involves either the I-5 (70MPH speed limit, traffic flowing at 85MPH) or climbing up to Lake Tahoe (~7000 net altitude change when many 75MPH cruising zones). I'd like to see some real world driving (with the flow of traffic in the fast lane) tests.

With DC fast charging, I still think such trips are viable, but I agree 100% that few are likely to see anywhere near 300 miles on long trips in the wild.

 

[rolosrevenge]

True, plus they only used 78.5 kWh of 85 kWh. They should have been able to make their destination easily.

 

[mnx]

I think they understand regen just fine. The article mentions it here:

"Benson frequently asks if I'm braking. No, I'm doing lift-throttle regen, but it's a strong enough tug to make him wonder if I'm touching the brake pedal.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/alternative/1208_2012_tesla_model_s_test_and_range_verification/viewall.html#ixzz24lycYDE9"

My reading of the range testing: these guys didn't understand how to use the car. "Time and again I had to override the cruise control and punch the brakes because of a lane-changing car or sharply accelerate to get around somebody who seemed to suddenly fall asleep directly in front of us." Maybe life is different in California, but I just drove 120 miles on I-95 and can only recall applying my brakes twice -- and that would have been zero if I had regenerative slowing. The fact that this review never discusses the effect of the regen suggests that they weren't using "one-pedal driving" to good advantage.

 

[SCW-Greg]

... or climbing up to Lake Tahoe (~7000 net altitude change when many 75MPH cruising zones).

Think about the regen on the return trip!

 

[Jeeps17]

One bit I liked:

"The Model S is either dominant -- or at least thoroughly competitive -- in two diametrically opposite automotive worlds. It embarrasses its high-efficiency, electric car peers with one hand, while happily trading steel-knuckle punches with Germany's mightiest warp-speed heavyweights with the other."

I agree that they did not seem to make optimal use of regen, but even then this is further confirming my leaning towards the perf S.

The only thing that bugged me a little was their comment on the seats not being comfortable for long drives...

 

[Cobos]

My reading of the range testing: these guys didn't understand how to use the car. "Time and again I had to override the cruise control and punch the brakes because of a lane-changing car or sharply accelerate to get around somebody who seemed to suddenly fall asleep directly in front of us." Maybe life is different in California, but I just drove 120 miles on I-95 and can only recall applying my brakes twice -- and that would have been zero if I had regenerative slowing. The fact that this review never discusses the effect of the regen suggests that they weren't using "one-pedal driving" to good advantage.

The fact that they kept short enough distances between the car and the car in front of them implies that they are not very used to defensive driving. That's standard fare for the modest hypermiling, don't use the accellerator or the brakes. I'm guessing someone that are used to the egg-shell driving will easily get well past 300 miles from the model S even on the highway.

Cobos

 

[Zythryn]

While what you say is true, for EVs to become mainstream there will be a lot of people that don't understand how to get the most out of the cars. I think is good to get some real life ranges. Although I am still curious if it was charged in standard or range mode.

 

[AnOutsider]

Then you'll find this interesting via twitter:

Twitter / EdLoh: .@Kcirselarom @TeslaMotors ...

Well that's certainly good to hear

 

[Robert.Boston]

You bring up a great point. For me (in the SF Bay Area) a typical "very long trip" involves either the I-5 (70MPH speed limit, traffic flowing at 85MPH) or climbing up to Lake Tahoe (~7000 net altitude change when many 75MPH cruising zones). I'd like to see some real world driving (with the flow of traffic in the fast lane) tests.

With DC fast charging, I still think such trips are viable, but I agree 100% that few are likely to see anywhere near 300 miles on long trips in the wild.

In contrast to your experience, last weekend I spent over 7 hours driving 325 miles, for an average speed of 45 mph. That included about two hours on I-95 and I-90 at 72mph, but a lot of time on state roads at 50-60 mph and a non-trivial amount of time on tertiary roads and in-town driving at or below 35mph. My guess is that I might have been able to make that trip on a single range charge (which would have been good, because the charging options were very limited).

 

[Todd Burch]

I agree that the range could probably have been improved some through less regen and better speed control on the highway.

I'd also state that if your trip is approaching 250-300 miles...and you have no supercharger access along your route, you might instead take rural roads with speed limits around 50-55MPH. Sure it might take you a little longer to get to your destination, but the route will surely be more scenic. Not always an option, but something to consider.

Overall this article paints the S in a really good light. Speaking of painting in a good light...Did anyone catch the photo gallery? There's a sunset picture of the Model S approaching the Port of Los Angeles. It looks SOOO nice (and is now my desktop wallpaper)!

 

[contaygious]

My reading of the range testing: these guys didn't understand how to use the car. "Time and again I had to override the cruise control and punch the brakes because of a lane-changing car or sharply accelerate to get around somebody who seemed to suddenly fall asleep directly in front of us." Maybe life is different in California, but I just drove 120 miles on I-95 and can only recall applying my brakes twice -- and that would have been zero if I had regenerative slowing. The fact that this review never discusses the effect of the regen suggests that they weren't using "one-pedal driving" to good advantage.

I thought it was a fair drive. I've used cruise control across country, but highly doubt I would ever rely entirely on it with this car. This is a fun car to drive after all so why not test it with a few break and pass moments like a regular driver? Also, they did mention using regen in the article. The passenger kept commenting that it felt as though they were breaking when the driver was only using regen.

 

[favo]

I wonder how much range having a passenger cost. Presumably the EPA test is with just a driver. Anyone know?

 

[MikeK]

Overall this article paints the S in a really good light. Speaking of painting in a good light...Did anyone catch the photo gallery? There's a sunset picture of the Model S approaching the Port of Los Angeles. It looks SOOO nice (and is now my desktop wallpaper)!

I did check out the photo gallery. Elon. Elon, Elon, Elon. You put the wrong HOV sticker on the back of the car, and didn't put the side stickers on at all! Otherwise, very pretty!

 

[daxz]

A couple of the pictures with the car on the highway show the windows partially rolled down. That could contribute to some aerodynamic drag (they weren't smoking in Elon's car were they?). And one was leaning on the window with door open :crying:

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

True, plus they only used 78.5 kWh of 85 kWh. They should have been able to make their destination easily.

They probably didn't use Range Mode.

 

[ckessel]

They probably didn't use Range Mode.

I was wondering about that, but then I've never been sure if the 85kwh meant usable or total since a certain amount is left unusable for driving to avoid a super low state of charge.

 

[MikeK]

Did anybody else notice the photo where there was a nice chart of the Wh/mile numbers for various speeds taped up next to the 17" display? I saved that one off for future reference.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

You bring up a great point. For me (in the SF Bay Area) a typical "very long trip" involves either the I-5 (70MPH speed limit, traffic flowing at 85MPH) or climbing up to Lake Tahoe (~7000 net altitude change when many 75MPH cruising zones). I'd like to see some real world driving (with the flow of traffic in the fast lane) tests.

With DC fast charging, I still think such trips are viable, but I agree 100% that few are likely to see anywhere near 300 miles on long trips in the wild.

If you are doing 85 in the Model S with the A/C or heater on you will get Jalopnik type numbers of ~150-170 miles on a charge. If you are driving long distance you get a huge boost just by cutting your speed to the 70mph limit so you still get 200+ miles of range. The problem is that air resistance increases exponentially the faster you go.

There is a good chart on range at different speeds at the Tesla blogs. Also you should read the link in the post to the Roadster data because it helps flesh out range estimates.

Model S Efficiency and Range | Blog | Tesla Motors

- - - Updated - - -

While what you say is true, for EVs to become mainstream there will be a lot of people that don't understand how to get the most out of the cars. I think is good to get some real life ranges. Although I am still curious if it was charged in standard or range mode.

They only used 78.5kWh of the battery, yet the system was telling them they were empty. They HAD to have charged in standard mode.

- - - Updated - - -

I wonder how much range having a passenger cost. Presumably the EPA test is with just a driver. Anyone know?

EPA was likely 1 passenger. Still though, if you have your whole family you would definitely want a SuperCharger in Barstow if you are making the 200+ mile Los Angeles to Vegas trip.

 

[MikeK]

They only used 78.5kWh of the battery, yet the system was telling them they were empty. They HAD to have charged in standard mode.

If that's the case, Tesla should be able to verify that from the car's data logs. I would hope they would then seek a clarification from the magazine.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

I was wondering about that, but then I've never been sure if the 85kwh meant usable or total since a certain amount is left unusable for driving to avoid a super low state of charge.

(Warning: Everything about to be written might be wrong. Roadster owners know the issues much better than I)

My understanding of Range Mode charging is that it allows you to fully charge the battery and give you some extra range. It's not recommended to always charge your battery like that, which is why its not the default. Once the battery "dies" you still have a slight charge, but the big difference between Model S and Roadster is that Model S can cut off all residual draw on the battery under those conditions while entering a kind of safe mode.

If you left it with a "dead" battery without plugging in you would still brick it in a month or so, whereas the Roadster would rapidly become bricked under those conditions because there was still a substantial draw on the battery when the car shut down.

Regardless, there is no real excuse for not plugging in after discharging your battery (and you should avoid total discharge in the first place). You might as well drain the oil on your car and then hop on the interstate to drive cross country.