I have a model 3 (from 2023), that is rated 270 miles. I can get at max 120 miles, more like 90 miles from it. My drive to work involves going steeply uphill, not very cold. The only reason I don’t care is I have free office charging. If I didn’t I would be pissed by the range I observe.
Also Tesla servicing is famously bad, and the way the employees treat service requests (as described in the article) explains a lot
Slightly more nuanced: the "range"/battery level listed constantly is always bunk. When I enter a destination the final battery level is very accurate. This counts in cold weather or hot, with terrain effects or not. Sometimes even weather. It's quite good and I imagine there's some data driven process from past performance of the vehicle.
So, if you plan to test drive a Tesla, evaluate its range this way. If you're curious for me the listed range is often around 300, and the effective drive range tends to be around 250 200, seldom less except in cold weather.
Getting only 30% of the advertised range would be very unlikely unless you always drive uphill and in the cold. I've had a Model 3 and a Model Y, and would get at least 80-85% of the advertised range in average California weather.
If the gradient is steep enough then you would not be recouping most of the energy going back downhill because your brakes will be burning off the energy. Uphill and downhills is a combination where the estimated range might be thrown off entirely, depending on situation.
Regardless, even with a small gradient, the kinetic energy can never need 100% converted back into stored energy into the battery. There will always be a loss.
I don't own a Tesla, let alone a car. What is "servicing" for a car? You go to the dealer when something is wrong/broken? Or do you call Tesla?
Also, can you give a specific example of how Tesla servicing is "famously bad"? (I'm not doubting, but it will help me to better understand your comment.)
I have a model 3 from 2019 that is not quite as extreme, but gets similar issues. It should have 350 km of range. I see some people posting insane wh/km numbers, but I think I'm doing a pretty decent job (130-140 wh/km or ~225.31 wh/mile average outside of the winter); I barely get 270-280km, max.
The issue isn't the driving range, but rather the unexplained loss of range. I'm talking about losses of 7.5% if I leave it parked in front of my house for an hour or two. I have photos too; if you reach out to Tesla, they curtly tell me the battery is fine.
A vague "you need to keep your car plugged in" is frankly insane, what if I went on a 100km trip, left my car outside for an hour or two, and came back without enough range to go home? I've heard people say to disable the app on my phone, but that frankly seems like a Tesla problem, not a "me" problem.
I still enjoy driving the car. I just wouldn't trust it for long range driving. I probably will buy Hyundai or BYD (if Canada lets them in) next time.
> I have a model 3 (from 2023), that is rated 270 miles. I can get at max 120 miles, more like 90 miles from it. My drive to work involves going steeply uphill, not very cold. The only reason I don’t care is I have free office charging. If I didn’t I would be pissed by the range I observe.
Were you mislead about or unaware of the range claims when you bought the car?
I don't own an EV or have any real interest in them, but I know the range is highly dependent on driving conditions and automobile condition (often to a much greater degree than ICE vehicles) and I'd assumed that was made pretty clear in advertising materials and sales pitch. I could easily see unscrupulous companies and salesmen or just unaware 2nd hand buyers being caught out by the range claims though.
My Polestar 2 range is not great in the cold and on hills, but the real gotcha is charging it to 80% and then plugging in around 30%. Using about 42 kW / 100 U.S. mile that means 50% of a roughly 75 kW battery only gives me 89 miles between charges. (But some of that is self imposed.)
Still 180 mile range would be well under the advertised 260.
Now if I use 100% and I get closer to 35 kW / 100 miles in the summer, the range is about 215 miles. Curious how much better it'll be in the summer though.
Sorry, but this is hard to believe unless your specific Model 3 has a problem.
I have a Model Y, several friends have Teslas, one uses his Model 3 for Uber. Everyone can get the expected range when doing 90 km/h in the summer, and at least half of the range on the highway in the winter, but usually more than that.
Maybe your consumption is that much when going steeply uphill, but then you will have to come back down and your consumption will be negative as it will recharge your battery.
From a company that sell "full self-driving" cars that don't, you now, "self drive fully", I was kinda already expecting that whatever advertised range was, to put it nicely, a "large exageration".
The bit of code in the dashboard to exaggerate even more is a nice touch. I wonder what the commit message was for that PR ? (Or maybe Tesla does not do PRs or commits, and just let anyone build anything on their laptop and put the binaries in the car. I mean, all that "software engineering" process sounds like so much useless efforts, right ?)
Also, the author of the article takes a lot of pleasure in mentioning the EPA dozens of time - too bad the days of the agency are numbered.
Having road tripped from Florida to Washington and back in a big circle around the country, it is my firm belief that every single person complaining about the range estimates in a Tesla is speeding.
By altering my driving style, I can get more range than the estimate. It's extremely predictable and accurate, to the point where I can notice the power drain from the self driving computers/cameras, arrive at the next supercharger at exactly the 3% I aim for, etc.
There was a point in my road trip when I was on top of a mountain, and it said I would reach the next charger 100km away with 20km of range remaining, but I was only at 90km at the time. I made it with 17km of range remaining.
The estimates are really good and useful if you don't speed.
Tesla advertises 350+ miles on its cars. I’d bet money that the cars can’t do 300 in normal weather, normal driving conditions without the AC/heater on, on a straight road with no elevation gain.
These are the things they blame when they say EPA estimates are different becase blah blah…
How can Tesla advertise a “more accurate” number if they are required by regulation to use EPA estimate?
EPA range estimates being inaccurate is a real problem. They do not, and are not designed to, give actual expected range. It’s meant to be an “average” of “mixed” driving.
Take latest Model Y as example. If you compare EPA range vs WLTP (commonly used in EU)
327mi EPA est. (526km) US version (long range) /
586km WLTP est. (364mi) EU version (long range)
The WLTP is “average” as well, so which of these is more accurate?
This problem is not unique to Teslas, and actually not unique to EVs either. It’s just more noticeable, as ICE vehicles usually advertise MPG and tank size, not total range. So EVs suffer from their own advertisement highlighting numbers that will never be accurate.
You can review claims from some YTers here[0]. But I've copied the params and results over for the Model 3. They also have tons of other cars tested in similar params[1].
Testing procedure:
- Tire pressure set to manufacturer recommendation
- DCFC to 100% SoC to ensure optimal battery temperature
- Most energy efficient drive setting
- Climate control set between 68-72 on most eco-friendly mode that still allows A/C, on lowest auto fan setting
- 70 mph constant GPS-verified speed with gentle acceleration to reach speed
- Avoid drafting trucks or other vehicles
- Stay on highway at 70 mph constant for as long as possible, until power is cut or low single digit SoC
- Use frontage roads at low SoC, try to maintain 55+ mph until stated remaining range depleted
- Arrive at charger just as car crosses 0-1 miles remaining and 0% SoC
Route:
- Drive from Wellington, CO up I-25 to Cheyenne, WY. Then east on I-80 into Nebraska
- Route ensures minimal elevation impact, and any wind is documented. Wind typically blows easterly, so the long stretch along I-80 allows for headwind to become tailwind at turnaround.
Tesla Model 3 Performance:
EPA: 303 mi
Actual: 288 mi / 265 Wh/mi
Tesla Model 3 LR AWD Panasonic:
EPA: 341 mi
Actual: 365 mi / 215 Wh/mi
Tesla Model 3 SR RWD LFP:
EPA: 272 mi
Actual: 277 mi / 213 Wh/mi
Tesla Model 3 LR AWD LG:
EPA: 305 mi
Actual: 308 mi / 249 Wh/mi
Tesla Model 3 LR RWD:
EPA: 363 mi
Actual: 386 mi / 206 Wh/mi
> in normal weather, normal driving conditions without the AC/heater on, on a straight road with no elevation gain.
Another aspect of this debate from my own experience, Tesla's range estimates from the navigation system are much more accurate (which should be obvious because otherwise people would constantly get stranded when taking a road trip). Tesla would probably argue that is because all those factors you listed that impact range stop being assumptions when a defined time and route are known. But it is still no excuse for assuming the absolute best case scenario when defining the range used in marketing or displayed on the equivalent of the car's fuel gauge. If anything, the accuracy of those navigation estimates makes the other inaccuracies seem even more nefarious.
No different than fuel range numbers (fuel tank capacity x mpg) for ICE vehicles. They are under perfect conditions in a lab with no accessories.
It might not be realistic but it’s absolutely the best way to compare it to other vehicles.
Dont cancel the appointment, insist they repair it, do 3-4 attempts even if they close it as “expected characteristic” or “education”, then request a lemon law buy back for failure to honor the warranty. Check your purchase agreement for where to send the lemon law request. Demand incident compensation during the buyback if they failed to provide loaners.
The article really focusses on range loss when cold, but as far as I can see that isn't really true.
The reality is there is lots of range loss when using the cabin heater, which obviously one is most likely to do when cold. All modern Tesla's use heat pumps for cabin heating, which ~halves the range loss, but it's still substantial.
Considering this, plus the fact that it's just annoying, it's strange that they don't let you turn the heated steering wheel or seat on without turning the heater on. It's literally not permitted. I have to work around it by setting the fan to 1 manually every time.
I have a 2017 Bolt, resistive heater no heat pump. I take a -minimum- of 25% range hit in the winter (midwest, garaged but frequent long drives in sub-freezing temperatures) with minimal usage of heat. I've trialed no-heater days, but most of the time I only run a low level for window defogging.
I have a 150 mile round-trip commute when I need to go in to the office. My "summer range" (really more "not-winter range") is 240+ miles. I stick to posted speed limits for efficiency, 60-65 MPH. This winter I've been getting back home with 30 miles of range to spare. I haven't done the math or recall what power draw my gauge cluster reports when I toggle heat on/off, but I do remember it reduces my range estimate by ~5 miles when I turn the heat on.
Does the heater really use all that much energy? A home space heater is something on the order of 1 kW, which is a fraction of a percent of what is needed to move the car.
EPA is a cycle of speeds with a max of about 60 MPH. The EPA range is accurate if you drive the EPA cycle in your car - which obviously no one does. I feel like everyone knows this by now.
kind of odd article to post, just feels like rage bait
My 2022 EV6 comes pretty close to its advertised range: advertised as 310 miles, and I regularly get 240 out of an 80% charge (assuming I'm driving responsibly lol)
Driving range can be estimated well: my VW ID.4 is pretty good at it, and the range estimate that it shows can be relied upon after correcting for things like headwind or driving uphill.
The max range I get is pretty close to the advertised one, too.
So do not believe when somebody says it can't be done.
The fact is that WLTP is useless. I can do 2/3 WLTP range in summer and 1/3 WLTP range in winter on highway with long range Model Y. That’s bad joke. Luckily I drive long distances extremely seldom. Crawling at 60 mph all the time is not an option for me.
> Managers told the employees that they were saving Tesla about $1,000 for every canceled appointment, the people said. Another goal was to ease the pressure on service centers, some of which had long waits for appointments.
Isnt the rated range always more than the actual you get? I have a friend who has a BYD Atto 3, rated range is 260 miles. Actual is 200 for city/town driving, 170 miles for motorway/highway driving.
Porsche loves to underpromise and overdeliver on their stats. The Taycan's EPA range is 318 mi, but Out of Spec tested one [0] to 367 mi @ 70mph in chilly weather.
I flew by a Cybertruck on the highway the other day like it was sitting still. It really should have had its hazards on, but I assume the additional power draw would have compounded the problem. Imagine spending all that money to compensate for your dominance anxiety, only to add range anxiety to your list of problems.
i own a tesla and range is very annoying, though some of the comments here are a bit sensationalist. for me, fsd more than makes up for it. if i had to buy a car today, i'd have to get another tesla because there's no alternative to fsd.
If you're not familiar with this story, the headline misses what seems to me like the bigger scandal, of Tesla rigging a dashboard instrument to lie:
> Tesla years ago began exaggerating its vehicles’ potential driving distance – by rigging their range-estimating software. The company decided about a decade ago, for marketing purposes, to write algorithms for its range meter that would show drivers “rosy” projections for the distance it could travel on a full battery, according to a person familiar with an early design of the software for its in-dash readouts.
> Then, when the battery fell below 50% of its maximum charge, the algorithm would show drivers more realistic projections for their remaining driving range, this person said.
IIUC, when many individual drivers were realizing that the rigged instrument didn't agree with reality of their car, they assumed their car was broken, and initiated service requests.
To reduce the costs of being caught in a lie, Tesla then created a team to again lie to customers, but this time it's humans lying one-on-one, rather than lying via rigged instruments.
Also consider things like Full Sell Driving misrepresentations, mishandling sensitive video surveillance from the cars, quality problems, and occasional 'retaliations' against those who complain, and it looks like Tesla might have a culture of dishonesty.
Hopefully other Musk-controlled companies have better cultures, since some of them are being put into positions of trust for the broader country and world. (Broader than safety of occupants of Teslas and any innocent bystander the car might crash into or harm with fire.)
[+] [-] sashank_1509|1 year ago|reply
Also Tesla servicing is famously bad, and the way the employees treat service requests (as described in the article) explains a lot
[+] [-] jvanderbot|1 year ago|reply
So, if you plan to test drive a Tesla, evaluate its range this way. If you're curious for me the listed range is often around 300, and the effective drive range tends to be around 250 200, seldom less except in cold weather.
[+] [-] rockinghigh|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] acchow|1 year ago|reply
Regardless, even with a small gradient, the kinetic energy can never need 100% converted back into stored energy into the battery. There will always be a loss.
[+] [-] throwaway2037|1 year ago|reply
Also, can you give a specific example of how Tesla servicing is "famously bad"? (I'm not doubting, but it will help me to better understand your comment.)
[+] [-] jbm|1 year ago|reply
The issue isn't the driving range, but rather the unexplained loss of range. I'm talking about losses of 7.5% if I leave it parked in front of my house for an hour or two. I have photos too; if you reach out to Tesla, they curtly tell me the battery is fine.
A vague "you need to keep your car plugged in" is frankly insane, what if I went on a 100km trip, left my car outside for an hour or two, and came back without enough range to go home? I've heard people say to disable the app on my phone, but that frankly seems like a Tesla problem, not a "me" problem.
I still enjoy driving the car. I just wouldn't trust it for long range driving. I probably will buy Hyundai or BYD (if Canada lets them in) next time.
[+] [-] Rebelgecko|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] starspangled|1 year ago|reply
Were you mislead about or unaware of the range claims when you bought the car?
I don't own an EV or have any real interest in them, but I know the range is highly dependent on driving conditions and automobile condition (often to a much greater degree than ICE vehicles) and I'd assumed that was made pretty clear in advertising materials and sales pitch. I could easily see unscrupulous companies and salesmen or just unaware 2nd hand buyers being caught out by the range claims though.
[+] [-] neogodless|1 year ago|reply
My Polestar 2 range is not great in the cold and on hills, but the real gotcha is charging it to 80% and then plugging in around 30%. Using about 42 kW / 100 U.S. mile that means 50% of a roughly 75 kW battery only gives me 89 miles between charges. (But some of that is self imposed.)
Still 180 mile range would be well under the advertised 260.
Now if I use 100% and I get closer to 35 kW / 100 miles in the summer, the range is about 215 miles. Curious how much better it'll be in the summer though.
[+] [-] peterisza|1 year ago|reply
I have a Model Y, several friends have Teslas, one uses his Model 3 for Uber. Everyone can get the expected range when doing 90 km/h in the summer, and at least half of the range on the highway in the winter, but usually more than that.
Maybe your consumption is that much when going steeply uphill, but then you will have to come back down and your consumption will be negative as it will recharge your battery.
[+] [-] misiti3780|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] colordrops|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] corey_moncure|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] 1oooqooq|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] roflchoppa|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] phtrivier|1 year ago|reply
The bit of code in the dashboard to exaggerate even more is a nice touch. I wonder what the commit message was for that PR ? (Or maybe Tesla does not do PRs or commits, and just let anyone build anything on their laptop and put the binaries in the car. I mean, all that "software engineering" process sounds like so much useless efforts, right ?)
Also, the author of the article takes a lot of pleasure in mentioning the EPA dozens of time - too bad the days of the agency are numbered.
[+] [-] libertine|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] MisterSandman|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] blitzar|1 year ago|reply
They "trust me". Dumb fucks.
[+] [-] elif|1 year ago|reply
By altering my driving style, I can get more range than the estimate. It's extremely predictable and accurate, to the point where I can notice the power drain from the self driving computers/cameras, arrive at the next supercharger at exactly the 3% I aim for, etc.
There was a point in my road trip when I was on top of a mountain, and it said I would reach the next charger 100km away with 20km of range remaining, but I was only at 90km at the time. I made it with 17km of range remaining.
The estimates are really good and useful if you don't speed.
[+] [-] darth_avocado|1 year ago|reply
These are the things they blame when they say EPA estimates are different becase blah blah…
(I own a Tesla)
[+] [-] BluSyn|1 year ago|reply
EPA range estimates being inaccurate is a real problem. They do not, and are not designed to, give actual expected range. It’s meant to be an “average” of “mixed” driving.
Take latest Model Y as example. If you compare EPA range vs WLTP (commonly used in EU)
327mi EPA est. (526km) US version (long range) / 586km WLTP est. (364mi) EU version (long range)
The WLTP is “average” as well, so which of these is more accurate?
This problem is not unique to Teslas, and actually not unique to EVs either. It’s just more noticeable, as ICE vehicles usually advertise MPG and tank size, not total range. So EVs suffer from their own advertisement highlighting numbers that will never be accurate.
[+] [-] flutas|1 year ago|reply
[1]: https://outofspecstudios.com/70-mph-range
[+] [-] slg|1 year ago|reply
Another aspect of this debate from my own experience, Tesla's range estimates from the navigation system are much more accurate (which should be obvious because otherwise people would constantly get stranded when taking a road trip). Tesla would probably argue that is because all those factors you listed that impact range stop being assumptions when a defined time and route are known. But it is still no excuse for assuming the absolute best case scenario when defining the range used in marketing or displayed on the equivalent of the car's fuel gauge. If anything, the accuracy of those navigation estimates makes the other inaccuracies seem even more nefarious.
[+] [-] 486sx33|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] joshribakoff|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] NaOH|1 year ago|reply
Tesla created secret team to suppress thousands of driving range complaints - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36891642 - July 2023 (746 comments)
[+] [-] londons_explore|1 year ago|reply
The reality is there is lots of range loss when using the cabin heater, which obviously one is most likely to do when cold. All modern Tesla's use heat pumps for cabin heating, which ~halves the range loss, but it's still substantial.
[+] [-] DecentShoes|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] bluesquared|1 year ago|reply
I have a 150 mile round-trip commute when I need to go in to the office. My "summer range" (really more "not-winter range") is 240+ miles. I stick to posted speed limits for efficiency, 60-65 MPH. This winter I've been getting back home with 30 miles of range to spare. I haven't done the math or recall what power draw my gauge cluster reports when I toggle heat on/off, but I do remember it reduces my range estimate by ~5 miles when I turn the heat on.
[+] [-] jfengel|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] pshirshov|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] dghlsakjg|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] openmarmot|1 year ago|reply
kind of odd article to post, just feels like rage bait
[+] [-] bdcravens|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] _ea1k|1 year ago|reply
And the EPA standards have changed since then, so that newer Teslas are much closer to their rated ranges than they were back then.
Kind of weird to see this here now.
[+] [-] jwr|1 year ago|reply
The max range I get is pretty close to the advertised one, too.
So do not believe when somebody says it can't be done.
[+] [-] lnsru|1 year ago|reply
The fact is that WLTP is useless. I can do 2/3 WLTP range in summer and 1/3 WLTP range in winter on highway with long range Model Y. That’s bad joke. Luckily I drive long distances extremely seldom. Crawling at 60 mph all the time is not an option for me.
[+] [-] rrr_oh_man|1 year ago|reply
That’s such a VW sentence.
[+] [-] aaroninsf|1 year ago|reply
Foreshadowing.
[+] [-] meekaaku|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] randerson|1 year ago|reply
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAccv8Wuoys
[+] [-] bagacrap|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] jnsie|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] mindslight|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] IceHegel|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] neilv|1 year ago|reply
> Tesla years ago began exaggerating its vehicles’ potential driving distance – by rigging their range-estimating software. The company decided about a decade ago, for marketing purposes, to write algorithms for its range meter that would show drivers “rosy” projections for the distance it could travel on a full battery, according to a person familiar with an early design of the software for its in-dash readouts.
> Then, when the battery fell below 50% of its maximum charge, the algorithm would show drivers more realistic projections for their remaining driving range, this person said.
IIUC, when many individual drivers were realizing that the rigged instrument didn't agree with reality of their car, they assumed their car was broken, and initiated service requests.
To reduce the costs of being caught in a lie, Tesla then created a team to again lie to customers, but this time it's humans lying one-on-one, rather than lying via rigged instruments.
Also consider things like Full Sell Driving misrepresentations, mishandling sensitive video surveillance from the cars, quality problems, and occasional 'retaliations' against those who complain, and it looks like Tesla might have a culture of dishonesty.
Hopefully other Musk-controlled companies have better cultures, since some of them are being put into positions of trust for the broader country and world. (Broader than safety of occupants of Teslas and any innocent bystander the car might crash into or harm with fire.)
[+] [-] wnevets|1 year ago|reply
[1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sens...