P85D range and highway battery performance

[zzzzdoc]

I did my first round trip today using the new firmware. It's the same round trip to work I take every day.

Almost like clockwork, I have averaged 395 Wh/mile for the first 1100 miles I've had the P85D. My round trip to work is always between 398 and 403 Wh/mi

Today, my round trip used 328 Wh/mi, or 17.6% less than my normal commute. I've never gone anywhere with the usage below about 385 - 390, so this is uncharted territory for me. In a really good way.

This was in range mode, using TACC as much as possible. Pretty level ground (it's Florida), and about 60 degrees. About 50/50 mix of city traffic with lights and highway driving.

All in all, I'm quite pleased. I'll have to see what it calculates the car's new range to, but it's substantially more than it was before yesterday.

 

[MarcG]

Ok guys, here is the data for my afternoon commute runs pre-2.2.140 (up to yesterday).

In case you're wondering, the distance is longer than morning data because at the time I commute home, the bay bridge has much less traffic than in the morning.
So I've included that extra distance in my afternoon data, but not in the morning data.

Date	Distance	Time	Avg Speed	RM Used	kWh Used	Wh/mi	Avg Temp	Cabin	Roads	Weather	SW Version
1/26/15	17.2 mi	15m59s	64.57 mph	20	5.6	324	18ºC/64ºF	None	Dry	Clear	6.1 (2.2.113)
1/27/15	17.1 mi	16m15s	63.14 mph	20	5.6	339	20ºC/68ºF	None	Dry	Clear	6.1 (2.2.113)
1/29/15	16.9 mi	17m39s	57.45 mph	20	5.8	344	21ºC/70ºF	20ºC/68ºF	Dry	Clear	6.1 (2.2.113)
1/30/15	17.1 mi	21m25s	47.91 mph	21	6.0	367	17ºC/63ºF	20ºC/68ºF	Dry	Clear	6.1 (2.2.113)
2/4/15	17.1 mi	15m36s	65.77 mph	18	5.2	305	15ºC/59ºF	None	Dry	Clear	6.1 (2.2.139)

So even with higher average speed over the same distance, there is a lot less energy consumed with 2.2.139.
This weekend, I'm taking a longer trip and will add it to the Google doc. I'm pretty optimistic at this point that there are definite improvements in 2.2.139/140 :biggrin:

 

[breser]

while I dont like his answer either, it does seem to follow logic. Moreover, its consistent with what we know about the guidance that TM provided the EPA in terms of battery optimization (they told the EPA that it should be measured against a 100% charge vs the suggested 90% charge in the manual).

I don't see how it's consistent. The standard says that the State of Charge used for the tests is based on manufacturer recommendation. Tesla says they recommend 100% to the EPA. The standard says nothing about driving modes. But EPA has dealt with them on a lot of ICE cars in the manner I describe. Range mode is almost exactly like the various eco modes on a lot of ICE vehicles. So I don't see how it matters what Tesla told them to do about SOC nor do I see how it makes any sense to deal with range mode in this manner.

 

[Andyw2100]

I did my first round trip today using the new firmware. It's the same round trip to work I take every day.

Almost like clockwork, I have averaged 395 Wh/mile for the first 1100 miles I've had the P85D. My round trip to work is always between 398 and 403 Wh/mi

Today, my round trip used 328 Wh/mi, or 17.6% less than my normal commute. I've never gone anywhere with the usage below about 385 - 390, so this is uncharted territory for me. In a really good way.

This was in range mode, using TACC as much as possible. Pretty level ground (it's Florida), and about 60 degrees. About 50/50 mix of city traffic with lights and highway driving.

All in all, I'm quite pleased. I'll have to see what it calculates the car's new range to, but it's substantially more than it was before yesterday.

Please tell us that when you say "the new firmware" you mean .140 and not .139. Please?

 

[skilly]

Please tell us that when you say "the new firmware" you mean .140 and not .139. Please?

is .140 a guarantee at this stage? I dont have a notification yet...Im on .139

- - - Updated - - -

I don't see how it's consistent. The standard says that the State of Charge used for the tests is based on manufacturer recommendation. Tesla says they recommend 100% to the EPA. The standard says nothing about driving modes. But EPA has dealt with them on a lot of ICE cars in the manner I describe. Range mode is almost exactly like the various eco modes on a lot of ICE vehicles. So I don't see how it matters what Tesla told them to do about SOC nor do I see how it makes any sense to deal with range mode in this manner.

I understand everything that you are saying - I agree. That said, there is a big article on this subject around that very topic (I think I found the article on this forum - Ill post if I can find it again). They claimed the same thing you are claiming as the standard; however, in the case of Tesla two things happened during the test that is inconsistent with EPA noted practices:

1 - they used a full charge battery
2 - it was in range mode.

The justified answer (that seems to be the theme of Jeromes response) was that those seeking range would invoke these two features. Which, as I said, does hold logic albeit its counter to the known practices of the test. It has now put into question a number of other tests on other electric vehicles and their own test results. The theme of the article was how inconsistent the testing was around vehicle efficient reporting for electric vehicles.

- - - Updated - - -

here it is...

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1096028_tesla-p85d-highlights-why-epa-range-ratings-are-inconsistent-confusing-for-electric-cars

 

[lolachampcar]

cross posting from another thread.....

This is a very small sample but my D is definitely performing better at sub-highway speeds. I just saw similar numbers to my P+ on a very well know trip for me (picking my daughter up from school) where I travel at most 45 mph. There is a very distinct movement in the control firmware from an acceleration or transient mode to a steady state mode. I can feel the car "hunt" just a bit shortly after making the transition and I can also see the power usage drop. This is the first time I have seen less than 300 WHr/mile on this particular trip with my D but routinely would get between 250 and 275 with my P+. I was right at 270 today.

I believe torque sleep is used for any sustained steady state condition. The definition of sustained in this instance is establishing a speed for more than a few seconds. Any meaningful traffic requiring throttle modulation likely excludes torque sleep which is, I suspect, is why it is described as a highway feature. My trip just now has sustained periods at 45 mph and thus allowed the use of torque sleep.

I suspect that attempting to completely remove any perceivable hunting during the transition from non to torque sleep is what has delayed deployment. I've done a good bit of real time control and the work Tesla has done to allow seamless acceleration to regen in fine enough increments as to be imperceptible is nothing short of amazing. I am 100% confident they will get there with TS as well and will likely increase its usage though out all traffic patterns.


BTW
I've not touched a configuration button in the car so it is still on normal (not range) driving mode and Insane for acceleration.

 

[Pollux]

Does Torque Idle perhaps work better with cruise control (more opportunities for "sustained steady state condition") than without?

Alan

 

[BerTX]

Does Torque Idle perhaps work better with cruise control (more opportunities for "sustained steady state condition") than without?

Alan

Haha, I was just about to ask the OPPOSITE question! From what I have seen of reports on the tuning on the TACC, it does it's darndest to maintain exactly the set speed, even to doing a pretty fast acceleration when conditions change. It seems like those intermittent "punches" of the accelerator would make staying in torque sleep less likely. On a very flat, empty road, I can see it getting to a steady throttle position, but maybe it doesn't help as much with even small hills or light traffic.

 

[Pollux]

That's why I said "cruise control" instead of TACC. Sorry, I'm an old P85+ dinosaur, lacking Autopilot and TACC. I thought it was still possible to specify cruise control behaviors as, "maintain X speed", without also having to get involved in the Autopilot-like behaviors.

Haha, I was just about to ask the OPPOSITE question! From what I have seen of reports on the tuning on the TACC, it does it's darndest to maintain exactly the set speed, even to doing a pretty fast acceleration when conditions change. It seems like those intermittent "punches" of the accelerator would make staying in torque sleep less likely. On a very flat, empty road, I can see it getting to a steady throttle position, but maybe it doesn't help as much with even small hills or light traffic.

 

[Saghost]

That's why I said "cruise control" instead of TACC. Sorry, I'm an old P85+ dinosaur, lacking Autopilot and TACC. I thought it was still possible to specify cruise control behaviors as, "maintain X speed", without also having to get involved in the Autopilot-like behaviors.

You do still tell it "maintain X speed." The car just now throws in a caveat "unless there's a slower car in front."

As far as I know, no car equipped with any form of adaptive cruise control allows you to engage a non-adaptive cruise - presumably for safety since thinking the cruise was set to adaptive when it wasn't is a quick way to have an accident.
Walter

 

[Andyw2100]

That's why I said "cruise control" instead of TACC. Sorry, I'm an old P85+ dinosaur, lacking Autopilot and TACC. I thought it was still possible to specify cruise control behaviors as, "maintain X speed", without also having to get involved in the Autopilot-like behaviors.

It's not.

The auto-pilot enabled cars that have TACC have lost basic cruise control function. It's now all or nothing, with TACC. There is talk of whether this may change in the future, but this is the situation for now.

- - - Updated - - -

is .140 a guarantee at this stage? I dont have a notification yet...Im on .139

I'm not sure what you mean by that.

If you're asking is .140 guaranteed to improve the range, I'd say no. NOLA_Mike is on .140, and so far has not seen an improvement. But I believe he is the only person so far reporting that. There have been at least a few others, like me, on .139 reporting little or no improvement. The people reporting huge improvement have all been on .140, so since the poster above was reporting huge improvement, I was hoping he was on .140.

 

[anxman]

I'm on .139 and not seeing any substantial performance increase.

 

[skilly]

If you're asking is .140 guaranteed to improve the range, I'd say no. NOLA_Mike is on .140, and so far has not seen an improvement. But I believe he is the only person so far reporting that. There have been at least a few others, like me, on .139 reporting little or no improvement. The people reporting huge improvement have all been on .140, so since the poster above was reporting huge improvement, I was hoping he was on .140.

You read my mind Andy. Im not seeing the improvements either - hoping that .140 is going to resolve this saga for me.

 

[skilly]

You do still tell it "maintain X speed." The car just now throws in a caveat "unless there's a slower car in front."

As far as I know, no car equipped with any form of adaptive cruise control allows you to engage a non-adaptive cruise - presumably for safety since thinking the cruise was set to adaptive when it wasn't is a quick way to have an accident.
Walter

its a draw back...great concept but the length in between cars it leaves and the typical California driver seeing enough room to wedge in 13 busses, 4 cars and a motorcycle....or that dude cutting across 3 lanes using that gap and the TACC function sees the "obstacle and panic brakes. It would be great to toggle off the function....we are a thankless bunch arent we??

 

[Footbag]

As far as I know, no car equipped with any form of adaptive cruise control allows you to engage a non-adaptive cruise - presumably for safety since thinking the cruise was set to adaptive when it wasn't is a quick way to have an accident.
Walter

Infiniti, for one, absolutely lets you override adaptive cruise... just by holding down the cruise-on button. Their sensor (G37 & EX35) gets dirty very easily and thus they tell their customers about this as a way to work around the calls of "my cruise is unavailable".

 

[breser]

I understand everything that you are saying - I agree. That said, there is a big article on this subject around that very topic (I think I found the article on this forum - Ill post if I can find it again). They claimed the same thing you are claiming as the standard; however, in the case of Tesla two things happened during the test that is inconsistent with EPA noted practices:

1 - they used a full charge battery
2 - it was in range mode.

The justified answer (that seems to be the theme of Jeromes response) was that those seeking range would invoke these two features. Which, as I said, does hold logic albeit its counter to the known practices of the test. It has now put into question a number of other tests on other electric vehicles and their own test results. The theme of the article was how inconsistent the testing was around vehicle efficient reporting for electric vehicles.

- - - Updated - - -

here it is...

Tesla P85D Highlights Why EPA Range Ratings Are Inconsistent Confusing For Electric Cars

I'm aware of that article. I don't think charging to 100% is inconsistent with the SAE standard. Standard is very fuzzy to begin with but ultimately whatever manufacturer recommends is what is used. Tesla told the EPA they recommend 100%. Other manufacturers have said other things and thus gotten different results.

The article doesn't say anything about range mode and the first we've heard about it is from Jerome. Like I said before, if they did test range in range mode then I'm betting they didn't use the same tests for MPGe. Which seems to be inconsistent with the SAE standard.

For what it's worth that article seems wrong to me on one point. It suggests that the Leaf when introduced used the 1993 version of the SAE standard and then was tested under the 2012 version that triggered them to reduce the range for the 2013 model. The truth is that prior to the 2013 model year the EPA had no standards for testing electric vehicles, manufacturers were left to their own devices to report economy/range. I'm sure Nissan used the SAE standard, but they were on their own as far as the state of charge.

 

[Denarius]

It's not.

The auto-pilot enabled cars that have TACC have lost basic cruise control function. It's now all or nothing, with TACC. There is talk of whether this may change in the future, but this is the situation for now.

- - - Updated - - -



I'm not sure what you mean by that.

If you're asking is .140 guaranteed to improve the range, I'd say no. NOLA_Mike is on .140, and so far has not seen an improvement. But I believe he is the only person so far reporting that. There have been at least a few others, like me, on .139 reporting little or no improvement. The people reporting huge improvement have all been on .140, so since the poster above was reporting huge improvement, I was hoping he was on .140.

I had a massive improvement on .139. I got even better numbers on .140 but it was 10 degrees warmer so not a valid comparison. Regardless, on both versions I've hit numbers I couldn't hit in my P85+. One difference it's my commute is 90% freeway. Based off of the sticker, the P85D should be worse than the P85 in city driving.

 

[skilly]

I'm aware of that article. I don't think charging to 100% is inconsistent with the SAE standard. Standard is very fuzzy to begin with but ultimately whatever manufacturer recommends is what is used. Tesla told the EPA they recommend 100%. Other manufacturers have said other things and thus gotten different results.

The article doesn't say anything about range mode and the first we've heard about it is from Jerome. Like I said before, if they did test range in range mode then I'm betting they didn't use the same tests for MPGe. Which seems to be inconsistent with the SAE standard.

For what it's worth that article seems wrong to me on one point. It suggests that the Leaf when introduced used the 1993 version of the SAE standard and then was tested under the 2012 version that triggered them to reduce the range for the 2013 model. The truth is that prior to the 2013 model year the EPA had no standards for testing electric vehicles, manufacturers were left to their own devices to report economy/range. I'm sure Nissan used the SAE standard, but they were on their own as far as the state of charge.

Im lost - you seem to be switching views. First you said that testing is done against manufacturers recommendations and claim that its ok to have Tesla recommend 100% battery charge; however range mode crosses the line.

In fact, charging to 100% is completely inconsistent with their published practice. They claim that testing is done to manufacturers recommendations = meaning those recommendations for consumer practices. If that is the case, every single piece of documentation from Tesla says charge to a max of 90%; not 100% or you risk battery life..save that for when you need it. All things being equal, and the EPA testing against the standards that you originally put forward, that test would be 90% and range mode off...probably sport mode, but really that involves yet another variable because the P85D is showcased as insane. From there the test would be performed and those results would clearly be different from what we have posted on the EPA results today.

If they are able to make the claim that those seeking maximum range set the range to 100%, and have that be the EPA testing standard, then why not also add regen in there? I actually dont care except to know how I can get maximum range - if it was done with regen; range mode; 100% charge thats awesome - now we know...and really, that is logical. Day to day, why would someone need 265 miles of charge? There is always an exception; however, to know its there with a couple of selectors put in the right spot because I am about to road trip gives me a good level set and complete piece of mind.

 

[dennis]

while I dont like his answer either, it does seem to follow logic. Moreover, its consistent with what we know about the guidance that TM provided the EPA in terms of battery optimization (they told the EPA that it should be measured against a 100% charge vs the suggested 90% charge in the manual).

I always thought this was the case since Tesla advises owners to use 100% charge for trips.

 

[breser]

Im lost - you seem to be switching views. First you said that testing is done against manufacturers recommendations and claim that its ok to have Tesla recommend 100% battery charge; however range mode crosses the line.

I'm not switching views. I think that the testing should be done at 100% state of charge. Testing at 100% doesn't change the efficiency of the vehicle much (in vehicles with regen it actually hurts the efficiency). It does increase the range. Range isn't tested for all vehicles. It's only tested for EVs and only because EVs take quite a bit of time to recharge and so it's more important to buyers. At current the SAE standard is rather vague about what state of charge should be used. Tesla gets around this by simply saying they recommend 100%. As dennis points out Tesla does tell you to charge to 100% if you need it. The standard doesn't say under what circumstances the recommendation should be. Maybe Tesla is subverting the intention of the standard, but they're certainly following the letter of the standard. But I think the standard is busted and should just be fixed to charge to 100%.

However, I don't think the manufacturers should get to put every car in the most favorable driving mode(s). The EPA clearly doesn't let ICE vehicles do this based on how they've handled driving modes with them. They're trying to capture what most people will do with the car. It's much more important in my view for the efficiency ratings to match how most people would drive the car most of the time than it is for range. That view is probably titled a bit since Tesla's range is enough not to worry about the range on day to day basis. Other EVs don't have enough range that I would feel the same way. However, even if you're only going to charge to 80% or 90% on a day to day basis it's relatively easy to calculate the percentage of the range you have available to you.

What is not easy to calculate is the efficiency of the car under various driving modes. Unless they reported every configuration of all the different driving modes you can't just pull out a calculator and do some math. People like us on forums like this might be able to test the various modes and figure out how they impact driving and be able to figure it out, but your average car buyer can't do that. So that means the car should be setup according to whatever the majority of people are likely to use and when you can't determine that at a minimum the average of the best and worst settings.

What I've said above presumes that the range and the efficiency (MPGe) numbers are calculated from the same test data (i.e. the car setup the same way). It's my understanding that's what the SAE standard is suggesting you do. I don't believe the CFR specifies this. So it's a grey area. If they want to test range with the most favorable setup that you would likely be using on a long trip and efficiency on the most likely everyday setup then I'm fine with that. It's just not clear that they should be doing that from the standard or the regulations.

If they are able to make the claim that those seeking maximum range set the range to 100%, and have that be the EPA testing standard, then why not also add regen in there? I actually dont care except to know how I can get maximum range - if it was done with regen; range mode; 100% charge thats awesome - now we know...and really, that is logical. Day to day, why would someone need 265 miles of charge? There is always an exception; however, to know its there with a couple of selectors put in the right spot because I am about to road trip gives me a good level set and complete piece of mind.

I didn't mention regen but I think regen should be set to standard because that's what I believe most owners are doing and it's the default setting on the car. Based on what I've seen here I rather doubt very many owners driving around with it on low and a number of people wish that there was heavier regen.

Range mode is a different matter. It comes with it at least some degree of inconvenience as mentioned in the various threads. Limitations on climate controls (i.e. fan speed) and apparently not heating the battery as much (even when on shore power). As such most people won't run around with range mode on most of the time (no need for a handful of people to chime in and say they do).

You knowing how to get maximum range has nothing to do with how the test is completed. Regardless of what modes the test is completed in you can still be told how to get the maximum range. The purpose of this testing is really to provide metrics to be able to compare cars.