# Let's figure out why MP3's Model 3 has such poor range



## MP3

General mileage/charging question here. I traveled from Seattle to Portland, which is 174 miles. I have a supposed 310 mile range, but I couldn't even get close to making the whole trip on a full charge. It seems a bit odd that my mileage is cut in HALF simply for driving 70mph instead of 60mph. My question is "what the heck?!"


----------



## garsh

MP3 said:


> General mileage/charging question here. I traveled from Seattle to Portland, which is 174 miles. I have a supposed 310 mile range, but I couldn't even get close to making the whole trip on a full charge. It seems a bit odd that my mileage is cut in HALF simply for driving 70mph instead of 60mph. My question is "what the heck?!"


Mileage depends on many factors. As I posted in another thread:


garsh said:


> Real-world, 70 mph usable range of my Performance Model 3 with OEM 20" wheels & tires is going to be about 245 miles. This was in about 80° F weather.
> ...
> Remember folks, the 310 mile advertised range applies at about 60 mph - driving faster reduces that range.


Can you think back and see if there was anything else that might help explain why you only got 174 miles?

Did you actually begin the trip with a 100% charge?
Did you charge because the car said that you needed to? It tries to have you arrive with 5% battery remaining.
Was it cold?
Was it raining?
Was there a headwind?
Was it hilly?


----------



## MP3

garsh said:


> Mileage depends on many factors. As I posted in another thread:
> 
> Can you think back and see if there was anything else that might help explain why you only got 174 miles?
> 
> Did you actually begin the trip with a 100% charge?
> Did you charge because the car said that you needed to? It tries to have you arrive with 5% battery remaining.
> Was it cold?
> Was it raining?
> Was there a headwind?
> Was it hilly?


I didn't even make it Portland. I had to stop and get a charge in order to make it the full 174 miles. The warning message popped up, "Please reduce speed to 60 in order to reach destination" or something along those lines. The elevation change is insignificant from Seattle to Portland and there aren't a lot of hills. It is a pretty straight shot down I5. Temperature was probably 60-65º. Wind was minimal. I did start with a 100% charge and it projected me (by the time I stopped to charge) to arrive with negative 15% battery life.


----------



## Taxed2Death

MP3 said:


> I didn't even make it Portland. I had to stop and get a charge in order to make it the full 174 miles. The warning message popped up, "Please reduce speed to 60 in order to reach destination" or something along those lines. The elevation change is insignificant from Seattle to Portland and there aren't a lot of hills. It is a pretty straight shot down I5. Temperature was probably 60-65º. Wind was minimal. I did start with a 100% charge and it projected me (by the time I stopped to charge) to arrive with negative 15% battery life.


Hmm. As previously said, conditions can have a huge impact. In this case, it sounds like conditions were fairly favorable. I know I've had drives where my range is cut in half, and also where I've hit the rated range, entirely dependent on current conditions and speed. 174 seems really low for the conditions you drove in though.
What wheels/tires do you have? That can suck a good percentage if you're not using 18's with aeros.


----------



## MelindaV

MP3 said:


> I didn't even make it Portland. I had to stop and get a charge in order to make it the full 174 miles. The warning message popped up, "Please reduce speed to 60 in order to reach destination" or something along those lines. The elevation change is insignificant from Seattle to Portland and there aren't a lot of hills. It is a pretty straight shot down I5. Temperature was probably 60-65º. Wind was minimal. I did start with a 100% charge and it projected me (by the time I stopped to charge) to arrive with negative 15% battery life.


did you have the heat on?


----------



## Needsdecaf

That's pretty extreme consumption.

I have a LRAWD which isn't quite the same as yours (you have a Performance?) and I've done a 200 plus mile trip and the first leg from my house to the charger is 160 miles. The worst, ever, battery I used in that stretch was 87%. That was cold (30's) with a 3-5 MPH wind and pretty much 80 MPH the whole way, with a net elevation gain of 293 ft.

For perspective, on the way back, it was in the 60's and I only used 73% of battery.

In the summertime, in 70 degree weather, I did the drive North (going there) using only 68% battery.

So with those temps, without many hills, I'm surprised that you ran out of juice before getting to 180 miles.

Did you use Autopilot / TACC?



MelindaV said:


> did you have the heat on?


Shouldn't really have mattered. As I said I did a 160 mile run in 30 degree weather, heat set to 70 / Auto, using 87% of battery. I could have made the 180 miles starting from 100.


----------



## MelindaV

Needsdecaf said:


> That's pretty extreme consumption.
> 
> I have a LRAWD which isn't quite the same as yours (you have a Performance?) and I've done a 200 plus mile trip and the first leg from my house to the charger is 160 miles. The worst, ever, battery I used in that stretch was 87%. That was cold (30's) with a 3-5 MPH wind and pretty much 80 MPH the whole way, with a net elevation gain of 293 ft.
> 
> For perspective, on the way back, it was in the 60's and I only used 73% of battery.
> 
> In the summertime, in 70 degree weather, I did the drive North (going there) using only 68% battery.
> 
> So with those temps, without many hills, I'm surprised that you ran out of juice before getting to 180 miles.
> 
> Did you use Autopilot / TACC?
> 
> Shouldn't really have mattered. As I said I did a 160 mile run in 30 degree weather, heat set to 70 / Auto, using 87% of battery. I could have made the 180 miles starting from 100.


just for comparison, in November I drove from Portland at sea-level, across Mt Hood at a little over 4,000ft, and to Bend, OR with multiple ups and downs with lows about 1500ft and back up to 3800ft. So pretty brutal on efficiency. Heat was on around 70 most of the drive. speeds would have been approx 55
total drive there was 170 miles, left home with the battery at 96% and arrived at 29%. so used approx 47% of the total capacity.

my last trip from Seattle to Portland (max elev change is about 500ft), left downtown seattle with 82% and arrived home at 15%. This was with about 300lbs of extra passengers and the heat on the entire time and freeway speeds of around 72-ish. that trip took 67% of the capacity and about 165 miles.


----------



## garsh

MelindaV said:


> did you have the heat on?





Needsdecaf said:


> Shouldn't really have mattered.


The heater is about the only thing I can think of that would cause that large of a difference in range.
ABRP thinks that I would have arrived with 4% battery, in freezing temps with 400 Wh/mile consumption

@MP3, do you know what your average consumption was for that trip?

https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=94f3a5a1-16ef-424b-8ec9-d7fe118c589c


----------



## MP3

MelindaV said:


> just for comparison, in November I drove from Portland at sea-level, across Mt Hood at a little over 4,000ft, and to Bend, OR with multiple ups and downs with lows about 1500ft and back up to 3800ft. So pretty brutal on efficiency. Heat was on around 70 most of the drive. speeds would have been approx 55
> total drive there was 170 miles, left home with the battery at 96% and arrived at 29%. so used approx 47% of the total capacity.
> 
> my last trip from Seattle to Portland (max elev change is about 500ft), left downtown seattle with 82% and arrived home at 15%. This was with about 300lbs of extra passengers and the heat on the entire time and freeway speeds of around 72-ish. that trip took 67% of the capacity and about 165 miles.


This seems crazy! The heat was probably at 68-70º the whole time. My wheels and tires are both aftermarket, which im sure plays into a bit. I have 20" Vossen Wheels and Michelin Pilot A/S Plus tires. I did use autopilot most the way and as previously mentioned was at about 70 mph the whole trip. I didn't track the efficiency.


----------



## garsh

MP3 said:


> I have 20" Vossen Wheels and Michelin Pilot A/S Plus tires.


How wide are the wheels & tires? As I quoted above, I got 245 miles at 70 mph on OEM 20" wheels w. Michelin Pilot Sport 4S, 235/35-20. Perhaps the A/S Plus have much higher rolling resistance?

When I added much larger/wider/heavier/stickier wheels/tires to my Nissan Leaf, I lost 10-15% of my range, so it could be the difference.


----------



## MP3

garsh said:


> How wide are the wheels & tires? As I quoted above, I got 245 miles at 70 mph on OEM 20" wheels w. Michelin Pilot Sport 4S, 235/35-20. Perhaps the A/S Plus have much higher rolling resistance?
> 
> When I added much larger/wider/heavier/stickier wheels/tires to my Nissan Leaf, I lost 10-15% of my range, so it could be the difference.


I have 245/35ZR20XL 95Y Tires, and 20x9 ET38 Wheels.


----------



## garsh

MP3 said:


> I have 245/35ZR20XL 95Y Tires, and 20x9 ET38 Wheels.



OEM Tesla 20" wheels weigh 28.75 lbs
OEM Michelin Pilot Sport 4S, 235/35-20 weigh 24 lbs
I can't find a weight for the Vossen VFS-5 20x9 wheels. Best I found was some random buyer's post that had 26-27 lbs for 20x9.5.
The Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 3+ 245/35ZR20XL 95Y weigh 25 lbs
So weight shouldn't be the issue. The wider wheel & tire will add more aerodynamic resistance, but I can't imagine that a half-inch difference will result in the huge efficiency drop that you're seeing.

The next time you make this drive, try to do the following:

Once you've charged to 100%, switch your battery display to miles (at least temporarily), and see what it says. I want to make sure you don't have a case of severe battery degradation.
During your trip, take a quick picture (or write down) your trip odometer readings, both right after you arrive at your destination, as well as just before all supercharging stops you make. That way we can see your exact miles traveled and efficiency.
Take note of your heater settings, as well as outside temperature, excessive winds, rain/snow.
I really want to figure out why you're seeing such worse range than the rest of us. 

Would you mind if I split out these posts into a separate thread?


----------



## Ed Woodrick

MP3 said:


> General mileage/charging question here. I traveled from Seattle to Portland, which is 174 miles. I have a supposed 310 mile range, but I couldn't even get close to making the whole trip on a full charge. It seems a bit odd that my mileage is cut in HALF simply for driving 70mph instead of 60mph. My question is "what the heck?!"


In cooler temperatures, you can expect range to drop about 30%. 
Yes, speed kills (the battery) 5 mph can have significant impact, as the air resistance increases exponentially with speed.
Watch the energy graph, it's the closest thing to right and will tell you your current average usage and real estimated range of the battery.

Especially once summer is back, take a road trip and try varying your speed while on cruise. By watching the energy screen, you can see the impact. 
Also, you start to see where the "it's just 5%" of putting the Aero covers on makes a lot more difference than one may think.

It's part of the range anxiety issue, or more importantly range reality. You tend to need to know what the car can do and what your options are. After a little bit, it's not hard to judge, but I always stay aware (and hate winter in general)


----------



## MP3

garsh said:


> OEM Tesla 20" wheels weigh 28.75 lbs
> OEM Michelin Pilot Sport 4S, 235/35-20 weigh 24 lbs
> I can't find a weight for the Vossen VFS-5 20x9 wheels. Best I found was some random buyer's post that had 26-27 lbs for 20x9.5.
> The Michelin Pilot Sport A/S 3+ 245/35ZR20XL 95Y weigh 25 lbs
> So weight shouldn't be the issue. The wider wheel & tire will add more aerodynamic resistance, but I can't imagine that a half-inch difference will result in the huge efficiency drop that you're seeing.
> 
> The next time you make this drive, try to do the following:
> 
> Once you've charged to 100%, switch your battery display to miles (at least temporarily), and see what it says. I want to make sure you don't have a case of severe battery degradation.
> During your trip, take a quick picture (or write down) your trip odometer readings, both right after you arrive at your destination, as well as just before all supercharging stops you make. That way we can see your exact miles traveled and efficiency.
> Take note of your heater settings, as well as outside temperature, excessive winds, rain/snow.
> I really want to figure out why you're seeing such worse range than the rest of us.
> 
> Would you mind if I split out these posts into a separate thread?


Feel free to move to a separate thread. I will follow those instructions the next time I take a trip. Thank you!


----------



## Needsdecaf

Ed Woodrick said:


> In cooler temperatures, you can expect range to drop about 30%.
> Yes, speed kills (the battery) 5 mph can have significant impact, as the air resistance increases exponentially with speed.
> Watch the energy graph, it's the closest thing to right and will tell you your current average usage and real estimated range of the battery.
> 
> Especially once summer is back, take a road trip and try varying your speed while on cruise. By watching the energy screen, you can see the impact.
> Also, you start to see where the "it's just 5%" of putting the Aero covers on makes a lot more difference than one may think.
> 
> It's part of the range anxiety issue, or more importantly range reality. You tend to need to know what the car can do and what your options are. After a little bit, it's not hard to judge, but I always stay aware (and hate winter in general)


Agreed, but he did the trip in 55-60 degree weather. I just did a similar trip (160 miles) in 30-35 degree weather and was able to easily make it.


----------



## Ed Woodrick

Needsdecaf said:


> Agreed, but he did the trip in 55-60 degree weather. I just did a similar trip (160 miles) in 30-35 degree weather and was able to easily make it.


I'm going to take a guess that "as reported" isn't quite what "actually happened"
We all know that the car can make the trip with the right parameters.


----------



## garsh

Ed Woodrick said:


> I'm going to take a guess that "as reported" isn't quite what "actually happened"


Could be. But MP3 will be paying more attention the next time he makes the trip, so hopefully we'll gather more information and be able to figure out what happened, assuming he can reproduce the results.

Besides, who doesn't enjoy a good mystery.


----------



## Bokonon

garsh said:


> The next time you make this drive, try to do the following:





MP3 said:


> I will follow those instructions the next time I take a trip. Thank you!


One other thing you could try (assuming your destination is entered into the navigation system) is periodically check the Energy screen and see how your expected energy consumption (gray line) compares to your actual energy consumption (green line). With the heat on at ~70 mph, I'd expect the green line to slope downward a little more sharply than the gray line (which assumes you're going the speed limit with some constant amount of power draw for HVAC, possibly as a function of ambient temperature).

If you come up way short on range again, and the green line slopes a LOT more sharply downward than the green line, then your battery is likely fine, but your car is drawing a lot more power than the car estimated (likely some combination of heat and headwind). If, however, your range seems diminished and the green line is close to the gray line, then either the car's range estimate is much more pessimistic than I recall, or your battery may have some unexpected degradation worth investigating further.

All of the above assumes that you don't get stuck in traffic, of course. Crawling along at 5 mph with the heat on will likely increase energy consumption to something like 500 Wh/mi, or twice as high as the car's rated consumption. That consumption rate works out to 155 miles of range on a full charge.

The nice thing about PDX to Seattle as a test route, though, is that it's fairly flat, so you don't have to worry about fighting gravity.

BTW, the Energy screen will also give you a decent estimate of "actual" range remaining if you set the time frame to "last 30 miles" and the estimate type to "average".


----------



## msjulie

FWIW my car shows a noticeable increase in consumption over 65mph and also when hauling a lot of weight (300pounds of floor tiles in my case)

Also running the heat.. also be sure tires are properly inflated. Most of this is increase in energy requirements unique to an EV, though waste heat to a degree is available in an ICE car. Certainly more noticeable because the total amount of energy generally onboard is like 2-3gallons of gas total vs 10-20 or more.


----------



## potatoee

Personally I liken driving efficiently as "a game" that I play where I try to get the most out of the kWh that are put into the car. It's not a real cost thing since driving my M3 is so cheap. There are multiple factors when thinking about energy consumption

1) drag goes up with the cube of speed so there's a big difference between 55mph and 75mph 
2) putting drag aside if you look at energy consumption of the car at, say 60mph and the rated efficiency of the vehicle being 250wh/mi:
.25kWh/mi * 60mph = 15kW (the equivalent of 10-15 hairdryers). That is incredibly efficient!​3) Noting that the climate control itself can consume 6kW, you can see how your efficiency can go down the toilet pretty quick (note that I am not claiming that you use that peak power just because you have the heater on but I am simply saying that climate control is a big impact depending on how you use it).
4) Yeah, temperature has an effect. I live in New England and despite keeping my speed down and minimizing use of climate control, efficiency of the battery system over temp will always have an effect. Here's what my driving has looked like over the past several months according to TeslaFi (stats heavily shifted to lower temps due to the weather over that period of time):









for various reasons 100% efficiency in my case = 220Wh/mi

Bottom line: lots of variables. I'll spare you from the math involved in looking at the energy it takes to lift a 4000lb BEV up 1000 feet on a drive ;-)


----------



## John

Here's the best table I've found for Range vs Speed, for every model of Tesla.
By Troy of Teslike:

https://teslike.com/range

P3D is supposed to do 274 miles at 70 mph, in standard conditions. Also notice that the different Model 3s may have similar EPA ratings, but in reality they share values (Troy has a note about this at the bottom of the page). P3D on 20" wheels should say 280 miles according to real world results.


----------



## potatoee

John said:


> Here's the best table I've found for Range vs Speed, for every model of Tesla.
> By Troy of Teslike:
> 
> https://teslike.com/range
> 
> P3D is supposed to do 274 miles at 70 mph, in standard conditions. Also notice that the different Model 3s may have similar EPA ratings, but in reality they share values (Troy has a note about this at the bottom of the page). P3D on 20" wheels should say 280 miles according to real world results.


This is a great table. I'm curious as to whether others achieve these results regularly. In my case, I do significantly better than the table most of the time but then, I tend to drive my car without heat, use the "charge to depart at" feature, etc. I freely admit that I'm OCD when it comes to efficiency ;-)


----------



## Ed Woodrick

potatoee said:


> This is a great table. I'm curious as to whether others achieve these results regularly. In my case, I do significantly better than the table most of the time but then, I tend to drive my car without heat, use the "charge to depart at" feature, etc. I freely admit that I'm OCD when it comes to efficiency ;-)


I don't worry about heat, I keep it on auto. I never set to charge at a time. It's pretty easy to get the numbers (in summer). Start going above 70 and the numbers drop quickly.

Keep the car at around 35 and you can look forward to 600 miles.


----------



## John

potatoee said:


> This is a great table. I'm curious as to whether others achieve these results regularly. In my case, I do significantly better than the table most of the time but then, I tend to drive my car without heat, use the "charge to depart at" feature, etc. I freely admit that I'm OCD when it comes to efficiency ;-)


To be able to compare, you'll need to know:

Where the person lives (big winters?)
How they drive (mix of highway miles, average highway speed)
Model and wheel type
For instance, I live in California and have Model 3 LR RWD 19". I'm about 60% highway at 73 mph.
Over 36K miles, the car says it consumes 253 Wh/mile on average.
You can estimate my average achieved range of *296 miles* from that if you use 75 kWh as the nominal battery size.


----------



## Mike

Bokonon said:


> One other thing you could try (assuming your destination is entered into the navigation system) is periodically check the Energy screen and see how your expected energy consumption (gray line) compares to your actual energy consumption (green line).


Side bar observation: this is why I was disappointed when V9.x came along and eliminated the "estimated % battery SOC at destination" icon always being displayed next to the ETA.

Under that old setup, all one had to do was note the estimate alongside the ETA at departure...and if that (%SOC) estimate began to drop, you knew you had to slow down...


----------



## Mike

John said:


> Over 36K miles, the car says it consumes 253 Wh/mile on average.


With 42,500 km (about 26.2K miles), my odometer says 153 Wh/km (248 Wh/mile).

Now mid way into my second winter with the car here in eastern Ontario, the car has (on average over 20 months) drawn 25% more energy from the grid than what shows on the car odometer.

@John have you tracked what you have pulled from the grid over that distance? Thanks.


----------



## bwilson4web

This is my Std. Rng. Plus Model 3 performance curve:








To get 165 mi range, I'd drive between 70 and 75 mph. Per EPA metrics, 55-60 mph gives the rated range. Of course temperature, rain, winds, and tire inflation have a significant effect. When the weather turns cold, I fully inflate my tires to maximum sidewall, ~51 PSI, and this helps with the cold weather loss of range with a slightly higher noise and and rougher ride.

Having completed a 6 day, 1,980 trip, dealing with winter weather and storms, my approach:

charge to get an indicated range of +30 miles beyond the destination
from the very beginning, adjust speed to maintain that remaining range
use the primary GOM next to the indicated speed
or use the more accurate energy graph over the last 30 minutes

as the remaining battery range approaches the distance to drive, go faster
Try to charge when the battery SOC is 5-10% to get the maximum SuperCharger rate and lowest cost per kWh. Many short segments at higher charge rates leads to the fastest block-to-block time.

GOOD LUCK!
Bob Wilson


----------



## MP3

Most Recent "Trip".








Thoughts?


----------



## garsh

MP3 said:


> Thoughts?


421 Wh/mile is ridiculously high.

A lot of that will be the heater. But I keep my temp at 66 F, and my resulting efficiency is closer to 300 Wh/mile. So there's still something else going on here.

Is this a lot of stop & go driving? Do you have regen set to low? Is the terrain very hilly? Were you routing to a supercharger, and the car decided to preheat the battery?


----------



## Bigriver

garsh said:


> 421 Wh/mile is ridiculously high.


I would note that Teslafi's Wh/mile value is not directly taken from the Tesla raw data, it is a calculated number which a user could tune. For me, that Teslafi Wh/mile value is notably higher than the Tesla Wh/mile.

What is notable to me is the 70% efficiency which means it is going 0.7 actual miles for every rated mile it uses. A Tesla value of about 240 Wh/mile is what I see for 100% efficiency. So my estimate is that about 343 Wh/mile (240/.7) is what was shown on Tesla's trip meter for this drive segment. Still pretty high, but not as ridiculous as 421.

I searched through a number of my Teslafi logs to try to find a trip of about the same length, temperature and speed. No exact match popped up, but several similar but with lower max speed.... they were in the 80% to 90% efficiency range. I have AWD with 18" wheels.


----------



## garsh

Bigriver said:


> I would note that Teslafi's Wh/mile value is not directly taken from the Tesla raw data, it is a calculated number which a user could tune


So that was a TeslaFi screenshot?
@MP3, can you also take a photo of the car's trip odometer?


----------



## Long Ranger

MP3 said:


> Thoughts?


Was it raining? The numbers don't look too far off to me if it was.

How long were you at 76mph? Average speed can be misleading if it's a mix of very fast and very slow speeds.

What's your tire pressure? I think much of this is due to tires and wheels, but that doesn't explain it all.

I'm always suspicious of the heater in the winter, but it doesn't look like you had it very high. What was your temperature setting? Auto or Manual? Try it completely off for a test if you can stand it, or at least put it on manual with AC off. AC in winter is sometimes needed for defrost, but it means that you're using energy to cool the air and then even more energy to heat it back up.


----------



## MP3

Hey all. 
1. Heater was likely set to 70-72º on the lowest fan setting. AC On.
2. Trip is 75% freeway, traveling at approx. 68-70mph. The remaining 25% is relatively hilly back roads with stoplights and stop signs.
3. Tire pressure is at 39-40 for each wheel
4. Raining... I don't recall but probably.
5. Regen is set to Standard. I rarely use the breaks.

The interesting part is that when I think back to a previous trip from Seattle to Lake Chelan (roughly 200 miles), I was able to make it on a full (100%) charge. This was in August with temps between 75º and 90º.


----------



## garsh

MP3 said:


> 1. Heater was likely set to 70-72º on the lowest fan setting. AC On.


Ok, that's higher than what TeslaFi was reporting. That will use a lot more juice.


> 3. Tire pressure is at 39-40 for each wheel


That's a little low, but not terrible, unless they were already warm at the time.. Bring them all up to 42 when cold.


> The interesting part is that when I think back to a previous trip from Seattle to Lake Chelan (roughly 200 miles), I was able to make it on a full (100%) charge. This was in August with temps between 75º and 90º.


Which means you wouldn't have been running the heater. The heater makes a BIG difference. If you had it set to 72, then I'm guessing that's the main issue.


----------



## MP3

I took a recent drive and decided to get my tires filled, kept heat to a minimum, drove like a normal human (I tend to accelerate pretty fast), here are the results:

Tire Air Pressure: 42-43 for each tire (I was at 37 when I went in... pretty low)
Outside Temp: 52º
Inside Temp Set: 67º 
Battery % Start: 98%
Battery % End: 77%
*Battery Used: 21%*

Odometer Start: 5,514
Odometer End: 5,575
*Miles Driven: 61*

21% should be equal to 65 miles driven. 61 is darn close and these results are much more favorable.

Anyone know how to calculate the watt hours per mile based on this info?


----------



## garsh

MP3 said:


> Anyone know how to calculate the watt hours per mile based on this info?


The car calculates that for you - bring up the odometer card and look at the most recent trip info.


----------



## garsh

Trevor and I just finished cannonballing back home from EVs and Tea. During one stretch, we were driving 70-75 mph in ~40° weather through the mountains in Virginia. We had the heater at 68° F, two of us in the car, and a good bit of luggage. Our final average for that portion of the trip turned out to be about 380 Wh/mile.

So I'm still having trouble figuring out how you're getting over 400. Trevor's car does have 18" FastWheels EV01's with the covers on, so that helps efficiency, but he's running snow tires which should hurt efficiency.


----------



## MP3

garsh said:


> The car calculates that for you - bring up the odometer card and look at the most recent trip info.


It wasn't my latest trip. I have driven to the store a few times since then.


----------



## garsh

MP3 said:


> It wasn't my latest trip. I have driven to the store a few times since then.


A _very_ rough estimate would be:

21% of 75kWh ~ 16kWh
16 kWh/ 61 miles ~ 260 Wh/mile
The percentage difference is ±2%, the battery size is an estimate, (battery degradation could mean it's less), and the mileage is ±2%, so it could have been anywhere from 210-275 Wh/mile.


----------



## JasonF

MP3 said:


> 1. Heater was likely set to 70-72º on the lowest fan setting. AC On.


I might be able to solve this mystery for you from something that happened by accident.

I'm in Florida, and most of the time it's not cold enough to run the heat full blast. Usually I set it to 65-68 and use the seat heaters for the rest, and it barely makes a dent in my power consumption. In that scenario, it uses up about the same amount of extra battery as leaving Sentry Mode on all day. I have about a 30-ish mile daily commute (including both ways to/from work plus a lunch run), and I charge to 90% daily. Usually I leave with about 283 miles, and return home with about 240-260, but with the heater on it drops to 220-230.

But one day it was particularly cold, cloudy, and windy, with a morning temp in the 30's. I pre-heated the car at 8 am to 68 because I had a mobile service appointment, and wanted the plastics for the dashboard to be less brittle just in case. The tech was happy I did that, because it was a miserably cold morning.

After he left, I accidentally left the heat running in the car until I left at 10 am. When I left home, instead of the usual 283 miles, I started the day with 165! Two hours with the heat running was enough to make 120 miles of range disappear (admittedly having the door open for nearly an hour of it probably didn't help).

So from observation, I believe the resistive heater has a high/low setting. If it's temperature is set far enough above the inside temperature, it will go into "high" setting to blow hotter air and bring the temperature up faster. In most resistive heaters, "high" is double the wattage (usually something like 750 for low, and 1500 for high).

What's funny is, turning _down_ the fan will actually run the heater at the higher setting for longer. What you want to do is let the fan go to Auto, let it bring the temperature up quickly. And then turn the seat heaters on full, and bring the ambient heater temperature down as low as you can tolerate (like 65 or so). That should make the heater cycle off as much as possible, and when it comes on, it should be using the low heat setting.


----------



## bwilson4web

From my Prius days, here are images from various sources showing the relationship between tire pressure and rolling drag along with speed effects on tire drag:
























My BMW i3-REx reports both tire pressure and temperature. What we find is a cold tire soon reaches a steady state in about 10 minutes. There is no way to avoid tire heating primarily from the flex but at higher speeds, harmonics.

Using a non-contact thermometer, I ran a series of benchmarks to measure tire tread pressure effects vs inflation pressure:








Unexpected, higher tire pressures reduced the temperature bias of tire misalignment. Expected, tire temperatures were significantly reduced by higher tire pressures. So I got a life-time, wheel alignment. The front wheels have both toe and camber adjustments but I used shims for the unadjustable, rear wheels to achieve near perfect toe and camber.

I was trying to improve the straight-line stability of a 2003 Prius. Perfect alignment, at best, brought it to neutral stability. It wasn't until I used slightly larger diameter tires on the front steering and drive wheels that I got a significant stability improvement. My speculation is a higher moment of inertia improved the gyroscopic effect leading to a car that didn't dart or wander to either side.

Bob Wilson


----------



## gaduser

I logged the actual vs. indicated mileage, on my M3P, for a bit over the first 5,000 miles. I actually drove 79.1% of the indicated battery depletion. On a 305 mile charge, I would therefore expect to be able to drive about 241 miles to "empty".

I used the car as I would any: radio, air, heat, whatever. My driving style is normal to spirited, once in awhile. I live in a semi-rural area - 50 mph at the end of my driveway. Based on previous experience, I expect my average speed to have been 35 - 40 mph.

The graph is published somewhere on this forum. 

Range, for me, is not an issue. I have yet to be short on charge and have only plugged in to the 240 VAC line in my garage.


----------



## PDXTESLA

I regularly make the trip from Portland to Bellevue. Typically in the summer time i have seen it took about 67%-68% for the trip. Lately with the rainy weather and colder temperatures in the 40deg's, the battery consumption has increased to almost 80%. I can make the trip on a full charge but instead of 33% charge remaining its now around 20% remaining. I am attributing this increase (or range drop) to weather.
Any thoughts?


----------



## M3 Owner #27

Ole mister potatoee has a good detailed answer. There's another gent who is a Tesla spec fanatic, who made a very helpful set of charts for all models and configurations that shows expected ranges on a flat surface in NO wind conditions. It shows that 'speed' is the 'killer' of range. He does not factor in vent heat, window heaters, lighting, wipers, which all shorten expected range.

It's located at https://teslike.com/range/ He occasionally updates it.

My own personal experience of 'poor' range at a constant speed (~60 mph) was driving north towards Medford Oregon on I-5, while going continually uphill near Mt. Shasta in a snow storm with the vent heat, both window heaters & wipers full ON. My range 'margin' to the next super charger fell from 100 miles to 20 miles.


----------



## JasonF

From what I understand about batteries, they behave more like loading a spring with energy in a wind-up toy than like actual fuel. EV batteries tend to drain much faster at heavier loads and when the battery is low, which is what makes them seem unpredictable at times. Fueled vehicles also use fuel faster under heavy load, but don't degrade quite as fast because of the higher energy density of fuel.


----------



## JeffC

421 watt hours per mile in a Model 3 is very unusually high for relatively level driving and speeds below 70 MPH. I would be willing to bet the price of the aftermarket wheels and tires that they are the cause. If you don't have a Performance model with the big brakes, try Aero wheels with the stock energy efficient tires and see what you get.

Tires make a major difference in all aspects of performance, including energy efficiency. Tesla worked with Michelin on lots of engineering details of the specific energy efficient and performance tire designs they made for Model 3. I'd generally recommend using those Model 3 specific tires on a Model 3, except for race track use.


----------



## JeffC

Wheels and tires turn out to make a large difference in efficiency and range. Here's one anecdote:





Basically he went from about 360+ watt hours per mile for 80 MPH highway driving a Model 3 Performance with the original 20 inch wheels to under 300 due to a wheel and tire change.

He got aftermarket 18 x 7.5 inch forged wheels and 225/45-18 tires. Stock Tesla wheels are all 8.5 inches wide and stock tires are all 235 mm nominal width, so his wheel is 1 inch narrower and tire 10 mm narrower. Smaller frontal area for wheel and tire means less drag, though the shape of the wheel also matters a lot. The particular wheel design he used is 7/14 spoke.

It was not a scientific test, but may be somewhat indicative of the effect of wheels and tires on energy use and range.


----------



## bwilson4web

The "80 MPH" (128 kph) reminded me of this graph:









The graph shows a distinct 'knee in the curve' at that speed for radial tires. The challenge is how to instrument our cars to monitor the vibrational modes that might be involved. Also, tire temperature as this is a direct metric of tire drag, the waste heat.

Bob Wilson


----------



## JeffC

One way to reduce tire temperature is to keep tires properly inflated. EVs like Teslas usually specify relatively high tire pressures for greater energy efficiency. Be sure to keep tires properly inflated.


----------

