Refresh Model X & S Waiting Room - AUSTRALIA (Orders cancelled by Tesla May2023)

[paulp]

I would say that the entire EQE range isn't competitive on price when you take into account real world range and performance. But I guess in Australia we're no extremely limited for good premium EVs. The Y and 3 have pretty crappy interiors, but I'd argue that as a car the Model Y performance is a better car and certainly a better value proposition than the EQE53, which has less room, similar performance, less range, but cost more than twice as much.

Just a small matter of the quality and luxury difference. I never use all my range and only fill with excess solar, so range and efficiency mean zero to me. So when you look at everything else that does matter to me, the eqe range is vastly superior. Suggest you take an eqe for a drive to really understand it.
Premium cars are rarely as efficient as mass-market cars, and I get that many do not see the value in premium cars, juist as many do not see the value in nice houses, or nice furniture

 

[paulp]

That's quite a testimonial for the EQE, I will go have a look at one.
I still would have preferred a new S, I will miss the convenience of superchargers and the touchscreen.

The eqe has an equal size touch screen

 

[paulp]

Love to know the other reasons, may be a arm twister for me re boss

I doubt my reason will sway anyone…although the wife did fall in love with the interior style of the hyperscreen so it made her agreeing quite easy.

 

[Vostok]

EQE is way superior for my requirements to my model S, so I ordered one. Will have it in a few weeks

Did you get any options? AMG carbon-fibre trim? Ceramic composite brakes? Dynamic Plus Package? 22 kW AC charging?

Hyperscreen?

 

[Vostok]

when Merc says it gets 435km's it gets 435km's

Well, unless Mercedes has found a way to defy the laws of physics, or tells you you have run out of range when you haven’t, this isn’t possible.

I’ve found the Tesla range estimates to be very good. Maybe overestimates when you have AC on, underestimates when not, but on average pretty bang on.

 

[paulp]

Did you get any options? AMG carbon-fibre trim? Ceramic composite brakes? Dynamic Plus Package? 22 kW AC charging?

Hyperscreen?

I didnt get the race pack or the ceramic brakes. I was advised by merc that the ceramic brakes are not as good for city only driving, and I don’t do track days in my car. I also didn’t get the additional charging as its pointless for my solar charge only strategy. Yes got the hyperscreen, which is the same mbux UI as the non hyperscreen. But yes to carbon fibre trim and blacked chrome. There are not a lot of options other than colours as the amg includes near everything.
It comes with mobile charger and various cables for public charging.

 

[EcoCloudIT]

Well, unless Mercedes has found a way to defy the laws of physics, or tells you you have run out of range when you haven’t, this isn’t possible.

I’ve found the Tesla range estimates to be very good. Maybe overestimates when you have AC on, underestimates when not, but on average pretty bang on.

The X is terrible and no where near bang on (lucky if one get 70% of advertised km's...often only 60%)....the 3 is vastly better but it is on average 12% less than advertised (which agreed is excellent)...but what I have been told, seen on YouTube etc. is the Merc's are getting bang on what they advertise in real world driving...they're not defying the laws of physical sure (however they do have the most slippy car on the market (EQE/EQS)), so maybe they have some hidden KWs...don't care...it gets really good range overall and if I have to lug around 10KW more battery to get the same range as a 3 I am happy to do so given the extra space/luxury of the EQE over the 3 (no use comparing to the S as we can't buy them anymore)....I don't care about the cost to charge the extra 10KW for the same range as I've not paid for electricity in 3 years (large solar array and PW2 etc.)....

 

[meloccom]

I think you may be arguing about 2 different things, claimed range versus accuracy of navigation estimates. But don’t mind me.

 

[EcoCloudIT]

I think you may be arguing about 2 different things, claimed range versus accuracy of navigation estimates. But don’t mind me.

My X was advertised to get 417km’s if range, it is lucky to get 275km’s of range around town, on the highway it will do 320km’s….Tesla refuse to budge to help on that….so yeah…nothing like bang on.

On and that’s driving slowly, power range mode on, 20inch (not 22inch) wheels on…

 

[[Zombie]]

My X was advertised to get 417km’s if range

Likely using the NEDC standard, as per the rules at the time.

All cars in Australia were tested the same way, so there's no point complaining to Tesla about it.

And if you drive it like this, you will get that range too.

But as Meloccom says, that's not the same thing as the estimate the car gives you when you use the built in navigation.

 

[moa999]

Yep all the tests NEDC, WLTP and EPA are combined city/highway tests with a mix of speeds and stop/start traffic.

I can't imagine any car hitting those number on the usual 110kmh roadtrip which is when we care about range.

 

[Vostok]

I think you may be arguing about 2 different things, claimed range versus accuracy of navigation estimates. But don’t mind me.

I’m talking about fully charged range. NEDC/EPA/WLTP are not the “claimed range” but a standardised comparison metric between different vehicles. The sticker on my Model 3 said 620 km, at no point did I think that was the actual vehicle range in “normal“ driving (especially not at 209 Wh/km efficiency - that’s way off - my lifetime is 156 Wh/km).



I’m talking about the 499 km which the battery icon on the Tesla console screen showed as the fully charged range when the car was new. From my experience, I would say that range has been pretty bang on. More with few or no accessories on, and less with AC on or driving above 110 or with headwind etc.

 

[EcoCloudIT]

Likely using the NEDC standard, as per the rules at the time.

All cars in Australia were tested the same way, so there's no point complaining to Tesla about it.

And if you drive it like this, you will get that range too.



View attachment 943475



But as Meloccom says, that's not the same thing as the estimate the car gives you when you use the built in navigation.

I’m saying Tesla said my X would do 417km…does 275km REAL world KMs at absolutely best when driven around town….10-15% better at a constant 100km/hr.

No SatNAV here…just real world KMs…

 

[paulp]

I’m saying Tesla said my X would do 417km…does 275km REAL world KMs at absolutely best when driven around town….10-15% better at a constant 100km/hr.

No SatNAV here…just real world KMs…

75D model S quoted range 490km, real range on dash states 350km at 100%, reality is more like 280km city driving. If that drive is done over say a week without plugging in, its more like 240km with the phantom losses of the 75D.
Efficiency though…I don’t know. Never checked because I don’t care. I don’t drive it in a manner to maximise efficiency.
I have a suspicion that a large percentage (so not all) of owners of high end vehicles, especially performance variants, don’t overy concern themself with efficiency

 

[[Zombie]]

I’m saying Tesla said my X would do 417km

And it will, if you drive it the way it was tested.

 

[ZeeDoktor]

I still (3 years on) hold a top ten position in the longest drives on Teslafi... 656.8km in my 2020 S Performance. When driving conservatively, not stopping to pee, and without climate, it can be done.

In normal use, the estimated range is always a little higher than actual range, but not dramatically so: When driving to Melbourne at normal highway speeds (i.e. driving the speed limit) and with climate in normal mode, I drive to Gundagai Supercharger from the Sydney CBD using 417km of rated range with the real distance being 375km. Rated range overestimates by ~11%. I'd call that close enough for comfort and it's within the final reserve of the battery: With battery indicating 0%, I can do at least another 50km (=10% of the advertised range).

 

[EcoCloudIT]

And it will, if you drive it the way it was tested.

This isn’t my point or beef, I am pointing out that Tesla say 417 and one gets 275, however Merc say 626 (EQE300) however many are reporting higher than 550km range.

So 1, has really good range to start and 2, get much closed to stated range than other manufacturers…

 

[[Zombie]]

This isn’t my point or beef

Because you're still missing the point.

Using the various testing standards to compare cars is only useful if you intend to drive those cars the way they were tested.

You're complaining that Teslas don't get the advertised range in your style of driving when Tesla don't set the testing rules

 

[Onshore]

This isn’t my point or beef, I am pointing out that Tesla say 417 and one gets 275, however Merc say 626 (EQE300) however many are reporting higher than 550km range.

So 1, has really good range to start and 2, get much closed to stated range than other manufacturers…

I think the Aus govt switched from the NEDC to WLTP test cycle at some point between those two models.

WLTP produces lowe range estimate and is considered more accurate than the NEDC (sometimes referred to as the Not Even Damned Close standard!).

US EPA test cycle appears to be the most "real world" accurate of the common test cycles.

From most to least accurate, my understanding is it goes as follows:

EPA, WLTP, NEDC, CLTC (China)

 

[paulp]

This isn’t my point or beef, I am pointing out that Tesla say 417 and one gets 275, however Merc say 626 (EQE300) however many are reporting higher than 550km range.

So 1, has really good range to start and 2, get much closed to stated range than other manufacturers…

I’ll let you know in a few weeks how accurate the eqe actual vs advertised range is compared to the same for tesla for city driving