Tesla suppresses thousands of driving range complaints

[superdave80]

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

Given that the article did not list what the EPA range was... what exactly did you want me to do with the 220 mile number? C&D listed 75MPGe as the EPA highway efficiency, and that's what I compared their data (74 MPGe) to.

You seem to have excuses for everything without any proof and use attempts to mislead using data that you find convenient to your argument.

I quoted real world test and EPA efficiency DIRECTLY from the article you posted.

Sponsored

 

[Mirak]

The article states the opposite:
" Recurrent tested other automakers’ in-dash range meters – including the Ford Mustang Mach-E, the Chevrolet Bolt and the Hyundai Kona – and found them to be more accurate. "

"More accurate" isn't the same as accurate. Ford significantly overestimates range at highway speeds, and much more so in winter temps. You can argue that we need a more sophisticated speed/temp matrix for range (I have), but the point remains that all the mfgs are overestimating range.

 

[superdave80]

but the point remains that all the mfgs are the EPA is overestimating range.

There, fixed that for you. And they aren't actually overestimating anything, they are just estimating the wrong thing (mixed/city range vs. highway speed range).

 

[VegasWeezy]

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

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

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

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.

If the EPA says the GTPE should experience 75 MPGe at highway speeds (however they define this), that equates to 91.46% of the combined range of 82 MPGe (75/82). So logically, if you take 91.46% of the 260 quoted EPA range of the GTPE, you get 237.8 miles (260*0.9146) at purely highway speeds.

So 220 isn't terribly far off from the 237.8 quoted by the EPA (220/237.8 = 92.5%) as you're only coming in 7.5% less than expected. Now I would hope to hit the actual EPA estimate or maybe even a little better. But 220 doesn't seem terrible when you break it down this way.

Overall though, I absolutely agree with your point about the EPA needing to put the emphasis on range solely at highway speeds. I couldn't care less about the range around town (even though I would like to see efficiency). I do care about range when I'm planning road trips. This is absolutely what matters.

 

[Blue highway]

If the EPA says the GTPE should experience 75 MPGe at highway speeds (however they define this), that equates to 91.46% of the combined range of 82 MPGe (75/82). So logically, if you take 91.46% of the 260 quoted EPA range of the GTPE, you get 237.8 miles (260*0.9146) at purely highway speeds.

So 220 isn't terribly far off from the 237.8 quoted by the EPA (220/237.8 = 92.5%) as you're only coming in 7.5% less than expected. Now I would hope to hit the actual EPA estimate or maybe even a little better. But 220 doesn't seem terrible when you break it down this way.

Overall though, I absolutely agree with your point about the EPA needing to put the emphasis on range solely at highway speeds. I couldn't care less about the range around town (even though I would like to see efficiency). I do care about range when I'm planning road trips. This is absolutely what matters.

Assuming that Google knows everything, the EPA defines highway speed as 60mph... not real world for anybody I know.

 

[DevSecOps]

If the EPA says the GTPE should experience 75 MPGe at highway speeds (however they define this), that equates to 91.46% of the combined range of 82 MPGe (75/82). So logically, if you take 91.46% of the 260 quoted EPA range of the GTPE, you get 237.8 miles (260*0.9146) at purely highway speeds.

So 220 isn't terribly far off from the 237.8 quoted by the EPA (220/237.8 = 92.5%) as you're only coming in 7.5% less than expected. Now I would hope to hit the actual EPA estimate or maybe even a little better. But 220 doesn't seem terrible when you break it down this way.

Overall though, I absolutely agree with your point about the EPA needing to put the emphasis on range solely at highway speeds. I couldn't care less about the range around town (even though I would like to see efficiency). I do care about range when I'm planning road trips. This is absolutely what matters.

The problem, as we both agree is the EPA. The “highway” portion of the EPA's mileage testing is only 765 seconds long, or just under 13 minutes of operation. Called the Highway Fuel Economy Driving Schedule (HWFET), it's much more complicated than maintaining a steady cruising speed. Its average speed is 48.3 mph, it calls for acceleration and braking across a distance of 10.26 miles.

Most of us, when we travel, aren't doing so at an average of 48.3 mph. That's where the problem starts and why tests like those that C&D perform are more accurate in my opinion.

@Blue highway yes 60mph is the max, but not the average speed.

 

[Mach-Lee]

Assuming that Google knows everything, the EPA defines highway speed as 60mph... not real world for anybody I know.

The steady state speed during the tests is typically 65 MPH. The EPA range tests for EVs includes city, highway, and constant speed portions at 65 MPH which are averaged together.

You guys are also forgetting that a 70% factor is applied to the results to compensate for the lower speeds in the test cycles. For example, if you got a range of 400 mi from doing the tests, a 70% factor would be applied and that results in a 280 mile reported range being used on the sticker, which ends up being close to reality. In most cases, driving at a steady 68 MPH should get you really close to the EPA range.

There is an alternative certification process called the 5-cycle test which is much more involved that avoids use of the 70% factor. That is what Tesla uses (I think they are the only major EV that uses it). You could argue that's a big factor in why their range figures are inflated.

Here is a little more about the EV test cycles used: https://www.gtisoft.com/blog-post/calculating-electric-vehicle-range-with-simulation/

 

[DevSecOps]

The steady state speed during the tests is typically 65 MPH. The EPA range tests for EVs includes city, highway, and constant speed portions at 65 MPH which are averaged together.

Where are you getting that number for highway speed testing? Everything I've ever read says that the EPA uses HWFET testing on EVs for highway range calculations. HWFET cycles are done at 48.3mph and are anything but steady.

 

[Scarpia]

It's also illegal to go under the speed limit.

This is utter nonsense. If that were the case it would be called the speed minimum.

The word limit in this case means "no faster than". We could theoretically get a ticket for going one MPH over the maximum speed limit, but of course that is not accepted or practical in the real world.

Good reference:
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/vehicle-code/22400/

 

[Eric_C_Boston]

In my mind the EPA rating should be a standardized set of tests so you can compare like vehicles. I remember discussions about EPA ratings of my past ICE vehicles not being "real world" either. Stuff like the pressure on the accelerator petal being too light.

I found the videos of cars' range over the same course and speed useful. I would not expect it to match the EPA range, but they should all roughly track together due to conditions. Even then I can see a heavier car having a higher penalty when traveling at 80 MPH.

Driving on a relatively flat coast plain, I find I get and sometimes exceed the EPA rating during good weather. I would not expect this if I lived in a more mountainous area and I did see a decrease with the 75 or 80 MPH speed limits and elevation changes out west.

 

[Logal727]

Wonder how much $TSLA shareholders have gained or $F shareholders have lost as a result of this approach (not that I own any F stock), or current MachE owners with resale value. In my personal opinion I would have appreciated Ford eking out as much EPA range as possible for the rating (fairly, like Tesla). Same with the 5 second limiter, leaving much more reserve capacity than T, etc.

In reality I’m fairly skeptical of how much of this comes from the goodness of their hearts (of which there is a lot, been a lifelong Ford owner), and how much is physical limitations that T overcame over their 10+ years of EV experience. Such that they can afford to be less conservative without being buried under warranty claims.

So you’d rather be lied to or be given realistic expectations?

 

[DevSecOps]

This is utter nonsense. If that were the case it would be called the speed minimum.

The word limit in this case means "no faster than". We could theoretically get a ticket for going one MPH over the maximum speed limit, but of course that is not accepted or practical in the real world.

Good reference:
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/vehicle-code/22400/

It's illegal to travel under the limit, at the limit or even over the limit if impeding traffic. Most of the time this is done by going too slow. California has Vehicle Code 22400, the minimum speed law, to prohibit drivers from driving so slowly that they “impede the normal flow of traffic.”

And if you need some videos to help you understand how utterly nonsensical this is here you go. If you see someone tailgating you in a MachE or Rivian, I might just be in SoCal ... Please move over or speed up.










Should I keep going? There's hundreds of these videos from all over the country. I support 1000000x law enforcement doing their job with left lane campers. I don't support speeding tickets as much, you know, I purchased a GTPE for a reason.

 

[Tampamike]

It’s not the crime, … it’s the cover-up.

 

[Mach-Lee]

Where are you getting that number for highway speed testing? Everything I've ever read says that the EPA uses HWFET testing on EVs for highway range calculations. HWFET cycles are done at 48.3mph and are anything but steady.

Look at that link in my post. It's called the Multi Cycle Test (MCT) and it combines the UDDS, HWFET, and constant speed cycles.

Highway range = (Usable battery Wh / HWFET Wh/mi) * 0.7
City range = (Usable battery Wh / UDDS Wh/mi) * 0.7

Combined range = (Highway range * 0.45) + (City range * 0.55)

The MPGe numbers on the sticker include charging losses, they use the raw results from the tests with the 70% factor to calculate the range.

 

[Scarpia]

It's illegal to travel under the limit, at the limit or even over the limit if impeding traffic. Most of the time this is done by going too slow. California has Vehicle Code 22400, the minimum speed law, to prohibit drivers from driving so slowly that they “impede the normal flow of traffic.”

Should I keep going?

You can add all the conditions you want now, but your original statement "It's also illegal to go under the speed limit" is categorically false. It isn't illegal to go under the speed limit, it's illegal to impede the normal flow of traffic. The fact that impeding the normal flow of traffic can be accomplished by going under the speed limit doesn't make your statement true, and I'm not going to argue it further.

Sponsored