Tesla suppresses thousands of driving range complaints

[eleven24]

A lie is a lie in my books. Doesn't matter which lie is bigger they are equally wrong. I'm not defending Tesla at all, but I don't distinguish between size of lies. I've never seen anything close to 260 mi freeway range in my GTPE, therefore Ford lied, just like they all do.

Perhaps, but I bought a Tesla in 2021 because their range was listed at 330 and the Mach-E was at 260. So yes, it did matter which lie was bigger.

My range in the Tesla never came close to 330 miles (4.4 miles/kwh). Real world put it at 280 or so in ideal conditions.

If Tesla used the same EPA testing that Ford does, there's no chance I would've chose it over the Mach-E back in 2021.

Sponsored

 

[DevSecOps]

Perhaps, but I bought a Tesla in 2021 because their range was listed at 330 and the Mach-E was at 260. So yes, it did matter which lie was bigger.

My range in the Tesla never came close to 330 miles (4.4 miles/kwh). Real world put it at 280 or so in ideal conditions.

If Tesla used the same EPA testing that Ford does, there's no chance I would've chose it over the Mach-E back in 2021.

Look, 260 in a GTPE is not possible at moderate freeway speeds. I travel every week from Sacramento to Monterey and back (here's the route). In my GTPE I can't make it without stopping for a charge and it's less than 200 miles. So, to say that the range is accurate is just not at all true.

I think what we see a lot of on this forum is people who mostly travel in the city, then every once in a while they travel on the freeway. Their adjusted GOM (if they are lucky to have that) shows a reflection of the combined values. For those of us who travel mostly all freeway miles we don't get anywhere near to the 260 promised. I put 30k miles a year on vehicles due to work travel, all freeway miles. Other trims appear to be more accurate, but again I don't think there's a lot of people here who travel purely highway/freeway miles like I do. Even going into my office it's 20 miles from home, all 55mph+ the entire way.

I drove the crap out of the MME. At 17 months I had 41k miles on it. I have plenty of real world experience with range on this car for long distance traveling. I have no problem sharing drive routes or vehicle data with anyone to prove my claims. I'm not making numbers up out of thin air. I base my assertions on many many hours and miles driving and logging data.

Here's my range @ 6 months old based on collected data:

View attachment 104759

 

[ATL]

Here's some anecdotal for y'all.

2 Days ago I took a 1.5 hour trip with 4 occupants in the pony on rural highways, a/c on low auto but hot (27 C) outside.

I uncharacteristically charged to 100%. The GOM predicted 466 km range based on 5 months and 5000 km of driving history (not more than 15% expressway). I think EPA range is 443 km or so.

20% consumption was predicted by the nav and when I rolled in the driveway, the battery clicked over to 80%. PD Accurate, I think, and I drove normally, at 15-20% over the posted 80 km/h limit.

As you might guess, I have no complaints --and I do expect this range prediction to be radically different in 5 months at -20 with the heat on full.

 

[VegasWeezy]

And? You realize that there's places where 85 is the speed limit. I'll say this for the hundredth time, range in an EV is only used for traveling. We travel on freeways. It's also illegal to go under the speed limit. EPA numbers for EVs should be based on freeway speeds and there should be temperature curves. I don't see why people take issue with honesty and clarity.

I'm not trying to argue with you, and I'm not challenging any of the information you have provided in your previous posts (i.e. your real world range, your GOM read outs, etc.). However...

I believe Ford (for most individuals) provides a far more accurate EPA and GOM estimate. My lifetime (almost exactly one year of driving my MME) implied range, average across all mixtures of driving and seasons is 288 miles on 100% charge. The vehicle was rated 303 city/highway combined by the EPA when I bought it. I do more highway than city driving so I find it pretty accurate.

Additionally, I have the "adjusted GOM" and again have found it to be pretty accurate. Obviously, not everyone has the same experiences but I feel Ford has been doing a decent job.

I agree with your summation that range on long trips is the most important figure for and the EPA should base its range estimates more closely to the expectations at 100% freeway speeds. However...

This will never be a perfect science. For one, as you brought up, there are places where the speed limit is 85mph. But there are also many more places where this is 65 or 70. And then there are places where 55 is the limit for a "freeway". And then of course, there is the temperature factor. Climates across the country vary dramatically and then you have the season effects. So no matter what number or formula the EPA puts out, someone somewhere will have the range inaccuracy complaint.

The only potential way I see around this, which will just be information overload for most consumers, is to have several specific ratings in a grid system that has ranges at several different temperatures for 45, 55, 65, 75 and 85mph

 

[superdave80]

I've never seen anything close to 260 mi freeway range in my GTPE, therefore Ford lied, just like they all do.

Both the Ford website ( Targeted EPA-Est. Range ) and the vehicle sticker (Driving Range, When fully fueled, vehicle can travel about...), state nothing about 'freeway', nor the speed that this range was tested at. How can they lie about 'freeway range' when they never mentioned a 'freeway range'?

I know you think we need a better EPA range estimate system (we do), but Ford is following the guidelines set out by the proper governing bodies. And using the more conservative guidelines, I might add.

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

Hey, can we hire them on the forum to delete all the seasonal "why did my range go down" posts? It's going to be that time of year soon...

Nah, that’s overkill. They just need to add automated responses for these common questions people ask. For the “Why did my range go down?” and “Why is my range so low?” questions I’d suggest a stock answer of “You got the wrong size battery.” Problem solved.

 

[superdave80]

Look, 260 in a GTPE is not possible at moderate freeway speeds.

What is a moderate freeway speed? Because ever MACH-E range test I've seen online does a range test at a steady 70MPH, and every one I've seen comes in at (or slightly above) the EPA estimate.

 

[DevSecOps]

I agree with your summation that range on long trips is the most important figure for and the EPA should base its range estimates more closely to the expectations at 100% freeway speeds. However...

This will never be a perfect science. For one, as you brought up, there are places where the speed limit is 85mph. But there are also many more places where this is 65 or 70. And then there are places where 55 is the limit for a "freeway". And then of course, there is the temperature factor. Climates across the country vary dramatically and then you have the season effects. So no matter what number or formula the EPA puts out, someone somewhere will have the range inaccuracy complaint.

The only potential way I see around this, which will just be information overload for most consumers, is to have several specific ratings in a grid system that has ranges at several different temperatures for 45, 55, 65, 75 and 85mph

In the link that I posted to this thread, I go into more details about what I think is fair. I think the EPA should use the average freeway speed across the entire US. I think that's the only realistic option. I also think that there should be some sort of temperature adjustments shown. I don't think, personally, that it needs to be at every 10 degrees, but if we show freezing, the best temp for range and 100 then someone should be able to figure out the differences to a rough estimate for anything in between. Lastly, I think it should be broken into City/Freeway range numbers so that both are given. I don't think it should be a blend at all. No one cares what the blend is when you are attempting to plan charging stops on a long trip. Those numbers are completely useless.

Both the Ford website ( Targeted EPA-Est. Range ) and the vehicle sticker (Driving Range, When fully fueled, vehicle can travel about...), state nothing about 'freeway', nor the speed that this range was tested at. How can they lie about 'freeway range' when they never mentioned a 'freeway range'?

EPA range wasn't designed for EVs. I know and have never disputed that they use EPA numbers. As I've said so many times, no one cares about range unless it's for distance travel in an EV. When you charge at home and there's L2/L3 abundantly placed in every city, we have no worry about charging in the Urban areas and therefore range is almost pointless in Urban environments.

So if we consider what I believe, and apparently other people don't, that range is only for long distance highway/freeway traveling then the EPA numbers are just incorrect. Leaving the word "lie" to the side (which I only used to prove a point) and calling them incorrect might be better. True, Ford doesn't have a say in the EPA numbers, and neither does Tesla. There's a lot of things in life where we have multiples of the same. Have you ever looked at your credit report and seen how many different ratings there are. Do you complain to the bank when they use Auto2 vs Auto8? Will they change their mind because Auto8 is better for you and worse for them? No they won't. Tesla picked the one that's better for them, that's a good business choice apparently because they sell over 10x more electric vehicles than Ford does. I can't say that's all attributed to range, but they are doing something right.

There are plenty of 3rd party analytics for these vehicles that show actual, accurate range numbers based on history of your vehicle. Ford, for some reason, doesn't want us to know these accurate numbers and locks the accounts of those who attempt to use them under the guise of improper API access. Believe what you want, but for those who collected data on the car we saw numbers that never matched what Ford sold us. Also, Car and Driver has come to the same conclusion, but then people just attack C&D for being unfair for using freeway speeds.

 

[Deleted member 16048]

Absolutely. I understand wanting to cancel service appointments if they're only to check under performing range compared to the GoM, but ideally, that should be a phone discussion explaining why there's nothing wrong with the car, and how to better plan based on the car's shown data. But poor communication isn't just a problem with Tesla. It's also Toyota, and Ford (though their presence in forums still is surprising to me, and awesome), and probably most if not all the car companies. A big part of good customer service is listening to the customer and making sure they know they have been heard. Ideally, it would be good if they can fix whatever the customer's concern is, and sometimes the fix is education. That will save a lot of repeat calls a d frustration on everyone's part.

This... 100% Communication is one of the hardest things to do for not only companies but people. Words mater!

 

[superdave80]

but it's someone who I believe and trust at corporate.

Too bad they didn't give you the low-down on the whole 'range' thing BEFORE you purchased your Mach-E.

 

[superdave80]

There are plenty of 3rd party analytics for these vehicles that show actual, accurate range numbers based on history of your vehicle. Ford, for some reason, doesn't want us to know these accurate numbers and locks the accounts of those who attempt to use them under the guise of improper API access.

Nobody needs API access to gather range data on their cars. It's easy enough to do manually. Ford just hates giving us ANY info about ANYTHING related to our car.

 

[DevSecOps]

What is a moderate freeway speed? Because ever MACH-E range test I've seen online does a range test at a steady 70MPH, and every one I've seen comes in at (or slightly above) the EPA estimate.

On the route I showed I travel the first 35 minutes at 75mph, the next hour at 80, the next 30 minutes at 73 and the remaining hour at less than 55mph. The total combined I consider to be moderate.

You obviously haven't seen all the articles out there.

https://www.caranddriver.com/review...ch-e4x-gt-performance-edition-by-the-numbers/

Quoting from the above:
" What doesn't line up is range across the Mach-E lineup. This GT's 220 miles at 75 mph is 30 less than the version that won our EV of the Year (the EPA reckons 260 miles with the Performance option). "

 

[DevSecOps]

Nobody needs API access to gather range data on their cars. It's easy enough to do manually. Ford just hates giving us ANY info about ANYTHING related to our car.

Ford locked the accounts of many people who used API access and 3rd party tools to get accurate range and battery information. Calculating every drive manually and all the data behind that would be very time consuming. Using the vehicle data collected by machines and analyzed is going to be much more accurate.

Just to be clear, I'm not bashing on Ford. I have been 1 of 3 people, that I know of, who have worked with Ford to open up the API for access again. I'm critical of Ford when they deserve it, but I'm always going to champion whatever is in the best interest of owners.

 

[superdave80]

You obviously haven't seen all the articles out there.

C/D FUEL ECONOMY
75-mph Highway Driving: 74 MPGe

EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 82/88/75 MPGe

Driving at 75MPH, they observed an MPGe that was almost dead-on the EPA estimate. Sounds pretty good to me. What was your complaint about these results?

On the route I showed I travel the first 35 minutes at 75mph, the next hour at 80, the next 30 minutes at 73 and the remaining hour at less than 55mph. The total combined I consider to be moderate.

Spending 2/3rds of your trip exceeding the maximum state speed limit by 3-10 MPH, and you consider that 'moderate'?

 

[DevSecOps]

C/D FUEL ECONOMY
75-mph Highway Driving: 74 MPGe

EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 82/88/75 MPGe

Driving at 75MPH, they observed an MPGe that was almost dead-on the EPA estimate. Sounds pretty good to me. What was your complaint about these results?



Spending 2/3rds of your trip exceeding the maximum state speed limit by 3-10 MPH, and you consider that 'moderate'?

You just conveniently leave out the highway range at 220 right? Also here.

You also just conveniently leave out that my entire drive from Casa De Fruita, through Hollister into Monterey (last hour) is under the speed limit 5-20mph and anyone who drives through there would attest to that. Averaging them out I would consider to be moderate.

You seem to have excuses for everything without any proof and use attempts to mislead using data that you find convenient to your argument. You have any comment about my collected data in post 47 provided by recurrent? When I provide real world data you just leave it out. Heck if you want come to Sacramento and I'll drive you to Monterey next week and you can experience it yourself. I have absolutely no reason to make any of this data up.

I've always said that different trims perform better. The GTPE at highway speeds doesn't come close to the EPA numbers. I understand that the EPA isn't based on highway speeds, but it should be because no one cares about range unless traveling.

Back when BC was first released to us I did a trip while using it and I documented my range disappointment then. This was when the car was less than a month old. I stay true to my beliefs based on real world data, lots of it.

Sponsored