Tesla Developments

JKenH

Tesla Owners Get Only 64% Of EPA Range After Just Three Years: Study (Updated)

The EPA's flawed testing makes this seem much worse than it actually is.

The data from Recurrent shows that after approximately three years (right around the 1,100-day mark), the average Tesla Model 3 and Model Y are achieving just 64% of their original EPA-rated range.

This isn't a problem unique to Tesla. As Recurrent says, "The basic EPA testing protocol gets it wrong for all EVs." It doesn't factor in temperature changes or driving above 60 miles per hour, plus it allows for manufacturer adjustments.

The relevant factor to consider here is the delta between the range achieved by a new car with a fresh battery and how much range it still has after three years, agnostic of overall vehicle mileage as this point isn't plotted in the above charts. This figure appears to be between 6% and 8.5% before leveling off at the three-year mark—not too shabby, if you ask us.

https://insideevs.com/news/720899/tesla-64-epa-max-range/

1961Nick

JKenH said:

Tesla Owners Get Only 64% Of EPA Range After Just Three Years: Study (Updated)

The EPA's flawed testing makes this seem much worse than it actually is.

The data from Recurrent shows that after approximately three years (right around the 1,100-day mark), the average Tesla Model 3 and Model Y are achieving just 64% of their original EPA-rated range.

This isn't a problem unique to Tesla. As Recurrent says, "The basic EPA testing protocol gets it wrong for all EVs." It doesn't factor in temperature changes or driving above 60 miles per hour, plus it allows for manufacturer adjustments.

The relevant factor to consider here is the delta between the range achieved by a new car with a fresh battery and how much range it still has after three years, agnostic of overall vehicle mileage as this point isn't plotted in the above charts. This figure appears to be between 6% and 8.5% before leveling off at the three-year mark—not too shabby, if you ask us.

https://insideevs.com/news/720899/tesla-64-epa-max-range/

Mine is 3 years old next month & the range has dropped by 4.9% since new (307>292). Most of that drop occurred in the first year with almost no degradation in the 3rd year. The car has done 33,233 miles.

I think the EPA range was 315 but the most I ever saw on screen in the first couple of months was 307 after a 100% charge.

The car calculates range based on 250Wh/mile & has a achieved a long term average of 277Wh/mile. This can be broken down further into pre-retirement commuting & post retirement recreational driving.

Pre-retirement (18000 miles): 305Wh/mile
Post retirement (13000 miles): 243Wh/mile

michaels

Can't quote but surely the percent reductions should be expressed as a proportion of the original range not the EPA range so the M3 has lost about 11% and the Y about 8%

Grumpy_chap

1961Nick said:

achieved a long term average of 277Wh/mile. This can be broken down further into pre-retirement commuting & post retirement recreational driving.

Pre-retirement (18000 miles): 305Wh/mile
Post retirement (13000 miles): 243Wh/mile

Are those figures car-calculated or plug measured?

Over the year, I have 3.56 miles / kWh which I make as 280 Wh / mile.  That is very similar to your 277 Wh / mile long term average.

I have the TM3-LR and, IIRC, you have the TM3-P.  There is a big difference in the official figures, but I understand the hardware is almost the same between the two versions so, driven in like manner, both would give similar real-world outcomes.  That seems to be the case.

JKenH

michaels said:

Can't quote but surely the percent reductions should be expressed as a proportion of the original range not the EPA range so the M3 has lost about 11% and the Y about 8%

The article points out that the  inflated EPA figure is the problem and:

The relevant factor to consider here is the delta between the range achieved by a new car with a fresh battery and how much range it still has after three years, agnostic of overall vehicle mileage as this point isn't plotted in the above charts. This figure appears to be between 6% and 8.5% before leveling off at the three-year mark—not too shabby, if you ask us.

EPA figures only add fuel to the fire - that EVs rapidly lose range. They don’t but using EPA figures makes it look like they do. All the figures we see quoted for new Teslas are based on EPA or WLTP figures not real life figures. Daily Mail reader buys a Tesla claiming to do X miles and only gets 0.7X miles - cue story that my Tesla has lost 30% of its range.

The EV industry can’t have it both ways. 

1961Nick

Grumpy_chap said:

1961Nick said:

achieved a long term average of 277Wh/mile. This can be broken down further into pre-retirement commuting & post retirement recreational driving.

Pre-retirement (18000 miles): 305Wh/mile
Post retirement (13000 miles): 243Wh/mile

Are those figures car-calculated or plug measured?

Over the year, I have 3.56 miles / kWh which I make as 280 Wh / mile.  That is very similar to your 277 Wh / mile long term average.

I have the TM3-LR and, IIRC, you have the TM3-P.  There is a big difference in the official figures, but I understand the hardware is almost the same between the two versions so, driven in like manner, both would give similar real-world outcomes.  That seems to be the case.

Those are all car measured.

I have a mate with a TM3LR (18" wheels with the covers removed) & his car is about 7% more economical than mine on the same journey. Yesterday we drove in convoy & his recorded 228Wh/mile whereas mine did 246Wh/mile.

Now that summer is here (allegedly), you'll probably find a marked improvement in your average consumption.

1961Nick

JKenH said:

michaels said:

Can't quote but surely the percent reductions should be expressed as a proportion of the original range not the EPA range so the M3 has lost about 11% and the Y about 8%

The article points out that the  inflated EPA figure is the problem and:

The relevant factor to consider here is the delta between the range achieved by a new car with a fresh battery and how much range it still has after three years, agnostic of overall vehicle mileage as this point isn't plotted in the above charts. This figure appears to be between 6% and 8.5% before leveling off at the three-year mark—not too shabby, if you ask us.

EPA figures only add fuel to the fire - that EVs rapidly lose range. They don’t but using EPA figures makes it look like they do. All the figures we see quoted for new Teslas are based on EPA or WLTP figures not real life figures. Daily Mail reader buys a Tesla claiming to do X miles and only gets 0.7X miles - cue story that my Tesla has lost 30% of its range.

The EV industry can’t have it both ways. 

I must be one of the few people happy with both the quoted range & the battery degradation. I can easily achieve the 250Wh/mile used by Tesla for range calculations unless conditions are excessively adverse. 5% battery degradation after 3 years/33K miles is better than I expected. The fact that degradation has slowed down in the past 12 months is a bonus. 

michaels

JKenH said:

michaels said:

Can't quote but surely the percent reductions should be expressed as a proportion of the original range not the EPA range so the M3 has lost about 11% and the Y about 8%

The article points out that the  inflated EPA figure is the problem and:

The relevant factor to consider here is the delta between the range achieved by a new car with a fresh battery and how much range it still has after three years, agnostic of overall vehicle mileage as this point isn't plotted in the above charts. This figure appears to be between 6% and 8.5% before leveling off at the three-year mark—not too shabby, if you ask us.

EPA figures only add fuel to the fire - that EVs rapidly lose range. They don’t but using EPA figures makes it look like they do. All the figures we see quoted for new Teslas are based on EPA or WLTP figures not real life figures. Daily Mail reader buys a Tesla claiming to do X miles and only gets 0.7X miles - cue story that my Tesla has lost 30% of its range.

The EV industry can’t have it both ways. 

Don't think my point was clear - the article suggests a reduction from 72.5% of EPA when new to 64% is an 8.5% reduction.  I think more relevant is that range has reduced by 8.5/72.5 = 11.7% from what was achieved when new.

JKenH

michaels said:

JKenH said:

michaels said:

Can't quote but surely the percent reductions should be expressed as a proportion of the original range not the EPA range so the M3 has lost about 11% and the Y about 8%

The article points out that the  inflated EPA figure is the problem and:

The relevant factor to consider here is the delta between the range achieved by a new car with a fresh battery and how much range it still has after three years, agnostic of overall vehicle mileage as this point isn't plotted in the above charts. This figure appears to be between 6% and 8.5% before leveling off at the three-year mark—not too shabby, if you ask us.

EPA figures only add fuel to the fire - that EVs rapidly lose range. They don’t but using EPA figures makes it look like they do. All the figures we see quoted for new Teslas are based on EPA or WLTP figures not real life figures. Daily Mail reader buys a Tesla claiming to do X miles and only gets 0.7X miles - cue story that my Tesla has lost 30% of its range.

The EV industry can’t have it both ways. 

Don't think my point was clear - the article suggests a reduction from 72.5% of EPA when new to 64% is an 8.5% reduction.  I think more relevant is that range has reduced by 8.5/72.5 = 11.7% from what was achieved when new.

Ah yes, I see your point. 

Martyn1981

Quite impressed with little TiMmY our Y yesterday. Drove about 140 miles each way, with a stop at the services for a coffee on the way back, and got two surprises.

Firstly, TiMmY managed 278 miles with 5% remaining when I got home. I thought I might get away without a charge stop, but expected to have to lift off. Was also planning to 'test' the claimed ~25 miles of range after zero (squeaky bum time), but neither were necessary. Average speed was probably about 70mph, with most driving at 70-75, but about 15 miles each way at speed camera 50mph sections (for roadworks or emissions).

But the bigger surprise for me, was the accuracy of the projections, which I thought would be highly dodgy ..... but I was totally wrong. Set off (at 100% charge) with a projection that I'd arrive with 51%, and arrived with 52%. Projection to service stop was 35% remaining and got there with 36%. Projection to home was 6% and got home with 5%. Maybe one of the software updates has polished the calculations.

To be fair everything was 'fine', no strong winds, dry roads, temp moderate, but goes to show what is possible, and a round trip consumption of ~255Wh/mile.