Tesla definitely advertised improved range for P85+ over P85 still even this summer, on their website, when I was researching the Model S purchase. I remember making special note of it, but in the end deciding I don't want the + personally. Now, I believe it was advertised as a combination of things, not simply a reference to tires.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
-
On today's TMC Podcast, we ask the question "What is the Tesla Cybercab?". Join us on YouTube live at 1PM and participate in the chat.
Tesla definitely advertised improved range for P85+ over P85 still even this summer, on their website, when I was researching the Model S purchase. I remember making special note of it, but in the end deciding I don't want the + personally. Now, I believe it was advertised as a combination of things, not simply a reference to tires.
Compared to his P85, wk057's test showed his P85D used (365-313)/313 = 17% more energy on the same highway route.
Today's blog post by JB Straubel includes:
Sounds like the 17% energy consumption increase for a P85D versus a P85 that wk057 measured in highway driving is pretty close to what JB says is expected because the torque sleep software isn't yet installed in his P85D, and his P85D has new tires compared to the P85 he tested with 10K miles.
Thanks for conducting these tests wk057.
NigelM
Recovering Member
Discussion on the new blog is over here ---> New-Blog-Driving-Range-for-Model-S-Family
Sounds to me like comparative tests are going to be made redundant until the end of next month.
Sounds to me like comparative tests are going to be made redundant until the end of next month.
This is the current reality and that matters to people driving today and for the next month or so. Who knows if the month will be one month anyway, or more. The comparisons are not pointless at all. Most things matter only for a while and that's life.
A lot of nice effort has gone into documenting this for us. I for one thank wk057 for those efforts and look forward to the video. Now he can document the improvements as well then, if he wants, and we have this historical data to compare it to. One more chapter documented in the Tesla story.
Good stuff.
So, wk057, please continue your good work - it is interesting stuff the things you do, beyond this topic too of course.
Were tire pressures identical?
Wind or lack thereof identical?
Was the ambient temperature identical?
Was the alignment identical (performed on the same "rack" by the same tech)?
alignment was HUGE for me in obtaining high-efficiency numbers and reduced tire wear
wk057 said he'd check tire pressures to be equal. If he stuck to his plan, the cars also drove at the same time, P85D behind the P85. The cars were not completely identical in spec, but both were 21" and pretty close - it is all documented in the beginning of the thread.
In any case, effort gone far beyond the level we could reasonably ask of him. This is very good info and considering Tesla's own blog post and all, quite likely very near the current "truth" as well. There was also wk057's previous experience with his own former Tesla to compare to, so as far as experience goes, he has compared the P85D to two cars, not just one.
Looking forward to the video and possible write-up from wk057.
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
scottf200
Well-Known Member
scottf200: Then again, that 5% doesn't explain the full 17% difference - and the tires are "just under 1,000 meter" already. It is possible wk057's tires on the P85D have already been worn in by the time of this test, which might explain why his previous experience felt that there was even a larger discrepancy than 17% between P85 and P85D range?
Edit: The Elephant in the room, of course, remains how the P85(+) and P85D ranges compare when not driven on a high-way - even after the update. Interesting to see, because it probably matters to Model X as well.
Edit: The Elephant in the room, of course, remains how the P85(+) and P85D ranges compare when not driven on a high-way - even after the update. Interesting to see, because it probably matters to Model X as well.
Last edited:
scottf200
Well-Known Member
I understand my future Model X cousin. (BTW, I appreciate many of your level headed post on different threads).
I would be suspicious of the difference in tires as another example. Testing two cars with the same tires would make much more sense. Not sure of the statistical difference of 265s vs 245s as one thing but they likely have different roll resistance as well with just the compound, tread pattern, and alignments.
Still I love his efforts. Very very impressive for the good of the community.
Sure, clearly some level of discrepancy in this test results from the specification differences in the car. That is a fact and pointing it out is good. It is just probably a bit much to ask the guy to add to his test a rotation of tires as well from car to car. Then again, he seems so active that he might actually do something like that.
Kudos to wk057 in any case.
Figures Tesla would put out a blog post while I did my test. lol.
Anyway, back from the trip. Both GoPros died right near the end of the trip. Mine died as I got off the highway, my fiance's died as she turned into our development. Dash cams were on 12V power, so, have that video anyway.
Going to take me a bit to sync up the videos and do a full showing of the data that way, but, here is the money shot:
P85D:
P85:
352 Wh/mi on the P85D, 306 Wh/mi on the P85. So round trip roughly 15% more energy used by the P85D. Better than I expected, honestly.
Here are starting shots. We took about a 90 minute lunch/dinner stop at the turnaround point.
P85:
P85D:
Anyway, back from the trip. Both GoPros died right near the end of the trip. Mine died as I got off the highway, my fiance's died as she turned into our development. Dash cams were on 12V power, so, have that video anyway.
Going to take me a bit to sync up the videos and do a full showing of the data that way, but, here is the money shot:
P85D:
P85:
352 Wh/mi on the P85D, 306 Wh/mi on the P85. So round trip roughly 15% more energy used by the P85D. Better than I expected, honestly.
Here are starting shots. We took about a 90 minute lunch/dinner stop at the turnaround point.
P85:
P85D:
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
I almost posted, in the wee hours of the morning, some time after my baseball post, that Tesla would probably come out with a blog post on this while you were out doing your test. Now I really wish I had. You all would be calling me Nostradamus or something.
Thanks again for all the work you did, WK057!
Last edited:
Are they both 21"? Oh yea, the yellow car. Sorry. OK 21s on both. I see the D is almost at 1000 miles, so we can't throw in 5% for new tires. Still looking for 5% somewhere. However, if we calculate it the other way: 306/252, it is 13%, so 3%. Still some tire break in?
Last edited:
Yep, it's in the first post. I was actually wrong, her car only had just under 8000 miles on it. Not sure why I was thinking 9000.
- - - Updated - - -
Also, due to traffic, I wasn't able to do a coasting test. I'll have to try that some other time.
- - - Updated - - -
Have roughly 60 GB of video to go through... yay...
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
I'm definitely no expert, but I doubt the 5% due to new tires would be exactly 5% right up until 1000 miles, and then nothing right after that. The tires on the P85D are a lot newer than the tires on the P85. I think it's fair to assume that that does account for at least some of the difference, even if we can't quantify it precisely based on the blog post.
CHG-ON
Still in love after all these miles
I chose more than two in order to see if there is an outlier. Two won't give you that. The more you do, the more accurate the data. But you're right, picking any number of runs is pretty much a guess as to what would give the best results, unless doing a truly scientific study, where lots of work would go into determining all the parameters to a fine degree.
Thanks for running the test WK057. At 352 Wh/mi usage you probably are close to the "cruising range" of 240 miles for the P85D that JB posted in todays blog. I would guess that the torque sleep control software will give you some improvement if you run the test again.
Did you follow the same exact path in both cars? If so, then the OD readings are odd as they show a difference of 1 mile between the 2 cars.
Did you follow the same exact path in both cars? If so, then the OD readings are odd as they show a difference of 1 mile between the 2 cars.
Well, was hard enough to convince my fiance to freeze for a couple of hours in the name of science. Doubt there will be another side by side like this unless I get another driver, or it gets warmer. hehe.
Working on pulling some numbers from the video now. I'm going to pull the Wh/mi and energy usage numbers from the videos and put them into a spreadsheet first, post that, then I'll work on a nice video (probably something like 4x timelapse since it was ~2.5 hours of driving).
There was a 0.7% discrepancy between the P85 and P85D trip meters. At 100 miles on the P85 the P85D showed 100.7 miles traveled. Same exact route, parked in the same places, etc. No real 0.7 mile difference, so, this is something slightly different with the tires maybe? Also explains the P85 slowly losing the P85D while set at the same cruise setting. You'll see in the video later that the cars were never very far apart. On the last leg we had the cruise set to 70 for a while, and over ~30 miles the P85 ended up ahead by maybe 1/8th mile.
Doubt there will be another side by side like this unless I get another driver, or it gets warmer. hehe.Working on pulling some numbers from the video now. I'm going to pull the Wh/mi and energy usage numbers from the videos and put them into a spreadsheet first, post that, then I'll work on a nice video (probably something like 4x timelapse since it was ~2.5 hours of driving).
There was a 0.7% discrepancy between the P85 and P85D trip meters. At 100 miles on the P85 the P85D showed 100.7 miles traveled. Same exact route, parked in the same places, etc. No real 0.7 mile difference, so, this is something slightly different with the tires maybe? Also explains the P85 slowly losing the P85D while set at the same cruise setting. You'll see in the video later that the cars were never very far apart. On the last leg we had the cruise set to 70 for a while, and over ~30 miles the P85 ended up ahead by maybe 1/8th mile.
Tire circumference is variable! Including factors like the rated size, pressure, wear level, current speed, current weight, current tire temperature.
It's amazing they were as close as you got them. 0.7% is tiny.
If it isn't obvious, you could have a tire that's larger in circumference, travel a longer distance, yet have the car measure more Wh/mile, when it may have been actually less!
- - - Updated - - -
YMMV. :tongue:
Similar threads
- Article
