Maybe not, but I expected them to be better than this. At an estimated 270 they were already well behind, this just puts them further behind. As others have said, we need to wait to see actual EPA numbers, but if they hold true, this is a big disappointment.
You can if their management is getting press published directly saying they consider it to be the first real contender to the Model Y.
Remember, the original model S with 85kWh battery pack had an EPA range of 265mi. A few years later, the 100kWh version came out with 315mi. That's roughly the same efficiency (3.1 mi/kWh vs 3.2 mi/kWh, respectively) despite a weight increase. Now, the 100kWh version is rated at 402mi, which is a more than 27% increase in efficiency (4 mi/kWh).
I wonder if the author is a participant here or just a reader.
I don't know, but I wish they would do real journalism instead of just copy/pasting from a forum for more clicks.
Yes. It's explained in the Car & Driver article posted earlier in this thread. Tesla used a 24.4% correction factor in one of their models.
100%, but if he's a participant it's less objectionable than just skimming forums for content.
That's a nice relief. Let's all go back to just waiting on the official numbers now
