Tesla Model 3 actually has 334 miles of range according to EPA data

Discussion in 'Model 3' started by gene, Sep 19, 2017.

  1. gene

    gene Moderator

    Joined:
    May 19, 2016
    Messages:
    506
    #1 gene, Sep 19, 2017
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 20, 2017
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Tesla states that its Long Range Model 3 is capable of 310 miles of driving range per single charge, but the company might be voluntarily under reporting its true driving range according to data revealed in the official EPA certification summary report for the vehicle.

    First it’s important to understand how the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) calculates electric vehicle driving range using a 5-cycle procedure to determine its MPGe rating. The EPA multiplies an electric vehicle’s ideal city and highway range value by a 0.7 factor to account for real world environmental conditions such as wind resistance and other variables that contribute to increased energy consumption. Both city and highway range values are then weighted by 55% and 45% respectively, before being added together and arriving at the vehicle’s true EPA-rated range.

    In the instance of Tesla’s Long Range Model 3 that reportedly uses an 80kWh battery pack, the EPA’s multi-cycle test procedure yields 495.04 actual miles attained in city driving conditions and 454.64 miles in highway testing. Using the EPA’s .7 factor and weighted formula, we can arrive at the following Model 3 city and highway true driving range.

    Long Range Tesla Model 3 City/Hwy range

    • 495.04 miles x .7 = 346.528 miles (~557.68 kilometers)
    • 454.64 miles x .7 = 318.248 miles (~512.17 kilometers)

    Model 3 EPA-Rated Combined Range

    • (346.528 x .55) + (318.248 * .45) = 333.8 miles (537.2 kilometers)

    [​IMG]

    The Long Range Model 3’s EPA-rated 334 miles of driving range is a far departure from the company’s stated 310-mile range. Why?

    According to discussion taking place on the Model 3 Owners Club forum, it’s believed that Tesla is voluntarily reducing the vehicle’s combined range from 334 miles to 310 miles - something that automakers are able to do according to EPA guidelines.

    Tesla is voluntarily under reporting Model 3’s driving range likely to further differentiate it from the company’s Model S 100D that has a stated EPA driving range of 335 miles per single charge, but at a price point that’s roughly double that of Model 3. Incidentally, EPA data for Model S suggests that Tesla has also voluntarily lowered the vehicle’s EPA-rated range. The Model S 100D has a true range of 341 miles (~549 kilometers) but under reported at 335 miles (539 kilometers), according to the EPA’s Certification Information Summary Report for Model S.

    We’ve embedded the Model 3 EPA report below. Why do you think Tesla is under reporting Model 3’s true range?

    Tesla-Model-3-EPA-CSI-HTSLV00.0L13

    Article: Tesla Model 3 actually has 334 miles of range according to EPA data
     
  2. J.Taylor

    J.Taylor Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2017
    Messages:
    196
    Location:
    Canada
    Why do you think Tesla is under reporting Model 3’s true range?
    This one has a VERY obvious answer ... it's because people will drive on the highway with the AC or heater running and expect to get the advertised range despite having very very poor driving techniques.

    The lower advertised range means that NO ONE will be able to launch a successful lawsuit claiming the car fails to achieve the advertised range.
     
  3. JeffreyR

    JeffreyR New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2017
    Messages:
    21
    Location:
    NorCal and Carcinogenic Coast
    Home Page:
    As J.Taylor points out there is a bit of Under Promise, Over Deliver going on. Also, there are 500K reservations and climbing. So there may be a bit of anti-selling going on too.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  4. Kipp S.

    Kipp S. New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2017
    Messages:
    14
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    It's interesting how this Model 3 appears to not include a cost for the premium trim features? I thought you could not opt out of that at this time.
     
  5. Elt Inc

    Elt Inc New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1
    Location:
    Boston
    The reason for the understatement: a little less than 7.7%. Why? ;)
    On March 24, Musk answered a question regarding the range comparison with the Bolt with "Oh so little faith". Some cautioned he meant that wrt the big battery but for many the comparison was only relevant if it was meant to be the same price class, that is Bolt vs base Model 3.
    333.8 is about 7.7% more than 310 miles.
    Now, what is 220 (base Model 3 range) plus 7.7%?
    237!!! Which is exactly one mile less range than the Bolt (its range was calculated as described in the article above, so no understatement from GM).
    Still hurts him. :)
     
  6. bcsteeve

    bcsteeve Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2017
    Messages:
    31
    Location:
    Kelowna, BC Canada
    Curious... who would these people sue if their car didn't get the "advertised range"? The EPA? The car manufacturers simply say what the EPA test results are. You can't be sued for telling the truth. If they're under-reporting, it isn't to avoid law suits, imo.
    Good catch.
     
  7. fusionpowerEV

    fusionpowerEV New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2017
    Messages:
    5
    Location:
    Canberra, Australia
    Under promising leaves room for Model 3 range increases once Model S and Model X get 2170 battery packs. Watch this space ... :cool:
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. fusionpowerEV

    fusionpowerEV New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2017
    Messages:
    5
    Location:
    Canberra, Australia
    "Why no change to 2170? Our guess is that most all 2170 cells will be accounted for in the coming years with Model 3 production ramping up and Powerwall and Powerpack installations taking off.
    We still think the transition will happen, mainly to leverage mass production to drive costs down even further, just not anytime in the near future."
    I agree with that assessment. It won't happen this year but once Gigafactory bed-down is complete and there is spare capacity.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Aaron S

    Aaron S New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1
    Location:
    California
    Teslas still have aprox 14 miles more than the gauge shows. This is so you don't run the batteries all the way down. So once your gauge says 0 miles you still have about 14 miles left to limp to a charger. I don't think they advertise anything below 0 miles on the gauge.
     
  10. bcsteeve

    bcsteeve Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2017
    Messages:
    31
    Location:
    Kelowna, BC Canada
    Well, according to Mr. Nyland that's not true. His X showed some positive number when it just shut down.

    The "gauge" is just an estimate. it can be off positive or negative. I don't think there's any programmed in buffer, at least not that you can rely on.
     
  11. Robert T.

    Robert T. New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2017
    Messages:
    10
    Location:
    Cypress, CA
    So....minus the EPA 's "495.04 miles x .7 = " formula, the range is actually 450 miles or greater?? Is this actually possible?
     
  12. Dan Paulson

    Dan Paulson New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2017
    Messages:
    2
    Location:
    Hamilton
    "Well, according to Mr. Nyland that's not true. His X showed some positive number when it just shut down.

    The "gauge" is just an estimate. it can be off positive or negative. I don't think there's any programmed in buffer, at least not that you can rely on."

    The range estimator can easily be wrong. The BMS and estimator are not exact, and relying on them 100% is a mistake. It is important to calibrate the battery pack occasionally to keep the estimator and BMS more accurate. Failure to do so can leave you stranded when the car is reporting miles available and simply shuts down on you.

    You used to be able to go into negative miles with the software limited 60kWh batteries, but I believe that has been changed in the software.
     
  13. Not_Mandatory

    Not_Mandatory Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2017
    Messages:
    32
    Sure. In completely unrealistic but ideal conditions such as driving at a steady speed of 23 mph (or whatever is the ideal speed for the Model 3) on flat terrain at 76 degrees F. Or the like.

    After all, people have achieved 400+ miles on 1 charge with the Model S (85)...so I'm sure the smaller, more efficient M3 (80) could hit 450 or so. Just not with "normal" conditions.
     
  14. Robert T.

    Robert T. New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2017
    Messages:
    10
    Location:
    Cypress, CA
    That's great news! I usually drive about 23 mph, and its very flat and usually mid 70s here in So Calif. Thanks!
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. Johnny04

    Johnny04 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2017
    Messages:
    27
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    I think it just means 5 years from now your car still has a 310 mile range and people would say the battery holds up really well.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Kelly Folse

    Kelly Folse New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2017
    Messages:
    1
    Location:
    baton Rouge, LA
    I've been pointing out for weeks that some stickers are not showing Premium Pkg. I've messaged Model 3 Owner's Club, still no reply. I've wondered if it's a free bonus for employees, and maybe..maybe early reservation holders? (wishful thinking)
     
  17. Rob1234

    Rob1234 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2017
    Messages:
    1
    Location:
    Ontario
    The other option with posting the lower range would be based on the normal charge range vs the 100% charge range. The 310 miles maybe the range of a normal charge top up. Selling to the masses, the new end customer may not understand that Tesla vehicles don't go to 100% unless you go into a special mode. This lower limit would eliminate the expected complaints about this feature after the sale of the car. If this is the case, it explains why the EPA and Tesla use different numbers and a very smart move by Tesla.
     
  18. J.Taylor

    J.Taylor Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2017
    Messages:
    196
    Location:
    Canada
    Tesla was sued in Norway because the SD was advertised (on their web page) as having a combined horsepower of both motors and people discovered the battery would not let the full HP of both motors be use at the same time. I think that sort of negative reaction would introduce an abundance of caution. The corporate web page advert now is quite clear about the HP and expected acceleration.

    Under promising and over delivering is a good corporate strategy.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Dan Edmunds

    Dan Edmunds New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2017
    Messages:
    1
    Location:
    Santa Ana, Ca.
    These Model 3 mpge, kWh numbers are exactly what I came up with when I first analyzed the data sheet when it first came out - the 70% factor works perfectly. And I also saw that this 334 number would eventually come out.

    But the 0.7 factor does not work for any Model S or Model X. Why? I think it has to do with their induction motors. The EPA guidlines allow a manufacturer to use an alternate method with prior approval, and none of their numbers are predictable if you use 0.7. The range numbers tend to be optimisitc, and their MPGe number pessimisitic, so they would have to get approval to deviate in such an inconsistent way. The Model 3, on the other hand, uses 0.7 straight up -- except for range, which is being under-reported using a 0.65 factor, I think, merely to avoid having their entry-level car out-ranging the top dog P100D, as others have mentioned -- because it has a PM lmotor like everyone else. The standard methond was probably developed assuming PM technology, so that method applies to the Model 3.

    My two cents
     
    • Informative Informative x 1

Share This Page