7 ms·

Tesla's EPA Driving Ranges Didn't Hold Up to Testing

74 points by samizdis 6y ago

hpoe 6y ago
So I didn't see any actual numbers or precentages about how far the Tesla fell short, did it fall short by like 2% of 25% because that would be a very big difference which the article seems to go to great lengths to avoid. In fact there is only one vehicle that we get what the EPA estimates were for it and it's not a Tesla. This seems to me like someone is going to great lengths to avoid putting in actual numbers and is instead just using this as a hit piece on Teslas.
- jarbus 6y ago
  The data is linked on the page: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons... It seems like it falls just short, not anything worth writing about imo Model 3 Long Range: 353 claimed, 345 actual for an example
  - stcredzero 6y ago
    Before people called them out on it, Edmunds only measured to when the Teslas displayed "zero range." Later, it turned out that the Teslas went further that the other EVs while reading "zero range."
- jmisavage 6y ago
  The edmunds article is probably the best source, but this is the article that I saw yesterday with some of the numbers. Some are quite noticeable in their drops like the 2018 S Performance went from 310 mi to 256 mi. All the non-Teslas got higher than their EPA rating. With the Porsche Taycan 203 mi to 323 mi. https://insideevs.com/news/496740/tesla-disputed-edmunds-tests-results/ https://insideevs.com/news/496740/tesla-disputed-edmunds-tes...
  - stcredzero 6y ago
    That's an article too early. (Though they seem to address later objections in their edit.) It turns out that Teslas display more of their capacity under "zero range," giving more of a warning/buffer to drivers at low battery. The Teslas turned out to drive farther than the other cars when displaying "zero range." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wa_wf4EzLgY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wa_wf4EzLgY
    - t-writescode 6y ago
      The "zero range" tends to be a safety buffer for gas engines and electric motors alike and should not be included in the official range statements, imo.
      - stcredzero 6y ago
        The way I use my Model 3, I intend to almost never go below 20% and almost never go above 80%. I'm just fine with including the buffer in the stated range. Given how batteries actually work, I can understand Tesla's approach to the buffer, and in the long run, that's what's actually better for vehicle longevity, fleet-wide.
- blakesterz 6y ago
  Looks like the numbers are here: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html#chart https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons... They range from -2% for the S to -17% for the 2018 Model 3.
- PragmaticPulp 6y ago
  > So I didn't see any actual numbers or precentages about how far the Tesla fell short > This seems to me like someone is going to great lengths to avoid putting in actual numbers The first sentence of the article includes a link to one of the tests, with graphs and comparisons to other vehicles: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons... The rest of the article has a lot of specific numbers: > For the other Teslas tested, however, things didn't go as "well." The 2018 Model 3 Performance was off by 54 miles—this might not look that notable on a couple-year-old model—but when the testing is performed in such friendly conditions that the 2020 Mini Cooper SE, with an EPA range of 110 miles, is exceeding that by 40 miles, then it just doesn't paint a pretty picture for the Tesla cars.
cobookman 6y ago
Sounds like they were driving at consistent 65 mph. Where-as optimal speed for maximizing range is likely closer to 45-55mph. They also ran the AC/heat with cabin set at 72F. With them doing the driving not on a track but real life (stop & starting). Technically speaking the EPA numbers aren't necessarily "real life". Its a repeatable test environment: https://cleantechnica.com/2020/08/18/how-does-epa-calculate-electric-car-range https://cleantechnica.com/2020/08/18/how-does-epa-calculate-...
- PragmaticPulp 6y ago
  EPA testing is a specific, defined drive cycle that is meant to reflect actual real-world use cases. The goal isn't to maximize range in artificial conditions. The goal is to estimate how it might perform in standardized scenarios that can be repeated across different cars.
  - xeromal 6y ago
    Yup, it's just an objective way to get a single number you can put on a window.
robbmorganf 6y ago
Seems like the cars didn't fall that far short, but I think the implied grievance is that Tesla is systematically optimistic about the range of their cars where other automakers (Mini Cooper, Porsche, etc) make very conservative estimates. The "surprise" being that published specifications like driving range are really marketing tools, and some companies are more aggressive than others.
- cool_dude85 6y ago
  If I was a butcher selling you a pound of meat, and "surprisingly" was shorting you 10% on a consistent basis, would you say I was just doing more aggressive marketing than my competitors?
  - tlb 6y ago
    Different industries have different standards. Hard disks are several % under advertised capacity. Audio amplifiers ratings are completely disconnected from reality. Packaged meat at places like Wal-Mart contain between 6 and 12% injected saline solution, so what you describe is already common practice.
  - xeromal 6y ago
    EPA estimates are in no way equivalent to weight. lol. Bad analogy. Edit: Yeah, I messed up my point. I was just responding to OP that getting less meat than what you paid for at a store is not equivalent to not getting the EPA rated mileage on your car. No one can really reproduce the EPA range without going to the EPA's test area.
    - jsight 6y ago
      In some ways they are. Run the test in one exact way and those are the results that you'd expect. Run it differently and the results will vary in fairly predictable ways too.
      - xeromal 6y ago
thrower123 6y ago
Has anyone ever gotten the EPA mpg estimates for their vehicle? I don't drive very aggressively, and I've never gotten even 80% of the mileage that the dealership sticker advertises.
- tagx 6y ago
  I exceed the EPA highway MPG when using cruise control for 100s of miles w/ little traffic. When driving manually or being a bit more aggressive with passing, MPG falls below the MPG estimates.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  Yes I get almost exactly the EPA estimate on fleet of ~25yo cars, trucks and minivans. The car is almost always on the high end. I'm supposed to get 22. I get 21.something or 22.something or 23.something from week to week with 22 being most common. The vans and the trucks I don't drive enough to have a good feel for if they're less than an mpg high or low but they are definitely within +/-1mpg. My commute is pretty much exclusively 70-90mph highway driving with approx four pulls (stoplights) from 0 to 50/70 (traffic speed in that area, depending on conditions) and am not shy about using all of 2nd gear.
- quitethelogic 6y ago
  I only approach EPA estimates when the tank nears empty and my right foot changes its behavior dramatically due to anxiety. I don't doubt that it is possible, but I find the kind of driving it requires to be unenjoyable. I don't have a lead foot and I enjoy spending less money to travel a given number of miles, but I do not often reach the optimal MPGs.
- t-writescode 6y ago
  You may need to drive less in the cities (where gas engines are weakest), and be more conscious of braking and accelerating. From what I understand, the EPA changed their measuring method many, many years ago, to include using the air conditioner, etc; and, from what I can see, mine is well within that range. In fact, I believe it regularly does better than its estimated EPA or right on it. Subaru WRX.
- 6y ago
11thEarlOfMar 6y ago
Using the full battery (below zero) the 2021 Model 3 went 345+26 = 371 miles. Base price plus long range battery: $46,500. The 2nd highest range among the cars tested was the Taycan at 323 miles (no adjustment for past zero was offered in the article). Base price for Taycan 4S: $104,000. The story I'd like to understand is: Does the EPA actually publish results with one car underrated by 60% (Taycan 4S) and another overrated by 2% (2021 Model 3 LR)?
- dragontamer 6y ago
  > The story I'd like to understand is: Does the EPA actually publish results with one car underrated by 60% (Taycan 4S) and another overrated by 2% (2021 Model 3 LR)? My understanding is that in the USA: the manufacturers do the test and then report them to the EPA. So the Taycan numbers were tested and reported by Porche. In contrast, the Tesla numbers were tested and reported by Tesla. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml > Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a laboratory using a series of tests specified by federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles—usually pre-production prototypes—and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 15%–20% of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory. Note: EPA only reviews the tests, not conduct them. The manufacturers self-test.
  - avs733 6y ago
    or has certified labs test it. Interestingly, the tests are required to use a real human driver in a controlled test cell (a dynamometer). The driver has to keep the speed between two narrowly spaced lines ( a min and max - see their video) for something like 20 minutes. There is still a 3-5% fuel economy between the 'bad' and 'good' drivers or at least there was in 2003 when I toured one of these labs as an undergrad.
  - 11thEarlOfMar 6y ago
    Any theory on why Porche would under-report by such a huge margin?
Pfhreak 6y ago
The range estimates my 2014 Tesla provides are, at best, very generous. It is frequently generous to the tune of 50 miles on a 200 mile range. Sometimes it's dead on. Yes, I might not always be driving the most efficiently, but even when I set the cruise and drive on a flat, constant speed I can see swings of 40 miles. I'm generally a conservative, relaxed driver and rarely exceed the speed limit, happily just cruising along in the slow lane on the right. I no longer trust Tesla to accurately measure mileage and assume the I'll get 70-80% of the car says I will.
- moistbar 6y ago
  My 2019 Model 3 is pretty good at estimating the range remaining, but it drops significantly overnight to the tune of 40-50 MPH in the dead of winter. That's not as big of a problem for me since I have a home charger, but it's definitely led to a few close calls getting home from work.
  - toomuchtodo 6y ago
    Have you considered asking your employer to install EV charging stations for employee use? There are metered solutions if they’re not comfortable providing the power for free. A client installed ChargePoint chargers for myself (Model S) and their full time employees with EVs (Plug in Prius, Bolts, various Teslas) when I provided them with incentive information and helped them through the process gratis (EVs and electrical infra are my jam).
    - moistbar 6y ago
      My employer refused to remove a wasp nest that had formed in the NOC room. I was told that $10/month for offsite backup was too expensive. There's no way they'd install a multi-thousand-dollar charger for one employee's car.
      - toomuchtodo 6y ago
        I wish you the best in your job search when the time comes.
justina1 6y ago
"Testing" implies the Edmunds report is in some way scientific while it is anything but. They drove the Tesla cars in temperatures as much as 20 degrees colder than the other cars. The EPA ranges are derived by testing in a controlled environment to ensure cars are treated in the same manner. There is variability in range when driving an EV, but this report is deeply skewed and unscientific.
- stcredzero 6y ago
  Also, the 1st version of the Edmunds report didn't account for the buffer all batteries have while showing "zero range." Turns out the Teslas have more of that buffer. (Though Tesla itself is kinda coy about how big that buffer is, for obvious reasons.)
  - xeromal 6y ago
    Yeah, running an EV battery completely dead can be catastrophic to the battery so they try to scare the driver into recharging early. I think the Model 3 LR has about 25 miles of buffer.
- apercu 6y ago
  Hey man, you try getting headlines (clicks) with the truth all the time.
- sho_hn 6y ago
  On the other hand, just seeing the headline I can't say I found it hard to believe - among the major car manufacturers, Tesla seems particularly prone to tweaking the performance numbers they put out. 0-60 figures measured from a rolling start instead of dead stop (that no one seems to be able to reproduce either way), hp figures that are a "peak system power" calculated by adding things up in weird ways and which can't be sustained for any length of time, range figures no one hits in the real world, ... they're very aggressive at this, and it'd be a mistake to think everyone does it this way - for example professional testers regularly exceed 0-60 figures Porsche releases officially. I've seen a fair amount of professional testers/journalists reprimand them along the lines of "every manufacturer is guilty of this to some extent, but Tesla really ought to tone it down" (e.g. Alexander Bloch, who is generally very positive on the brand). As EV tech is commodifying swiftly and the competition closing in, I expect this to become a larger discussion.
yumraj 6y ago
Edmunds direct link with data: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons...
matt-attack 6y ago
I’d be curious to know how “range” is computed for ICE vehicles. Do you end when the gas gauge reaches “e” or until the engine stops? Seems to be perfectly analogous to the two possibilities with the Tesla. Either when the cars says it’s out, or when it actually stops. Granted folks don’t seem to obsess over the range metric when it comes to ICE cars so the point may be moot.
- xeromal 6y ago
  Most cars keep a little gas under 0 miles left in order to preserve the fuel pump. If you run a car out of gas completely in a modern car, you can cause a lot of damage to the fuel system.
- neogodless 6y ago
  I was surprised how much of a buffer modern Mazdas keep. The "range" is based on 2 gallons hidden. At 3 gallons remaining, it appears as if you have 1 gallon remaining (i.e. 25-35 miles depending on your average gas mileage since the last reset.) So "0 miles remaining" happens when you really could go another 50-70 miles. This is based on the total gas tank size compared to how much it takes to fill, but also because I'm stubborn and have pushed it several miles past "0" out of curiosity (but not regularly, as I have no wish to overheat my fuel pump or run out of gas!)
  - elihu 6y ago
    I have a Honda Element. The fuel light comes on when it still has about 3 or 4 gallons left.
- bluGill 6y ago
  People don't obsess over ICE range because it is hard for the average person to get more than 20 miles from a gas pump which can then fill the car to full in 5 minutes. As such the only time you run out of fuel is when you don't refuel despite multiple opportunities. Today if you buy an electric car you are mostly fine for in town - the 95% of trips. However that last 5% is a real problem: there are not many places to charge, not all of them actually work, and even if you find a place you need to wait a fairly long time someplace where you don't wish to be for it to recharge. Some of this will change as electric cars become more popular, but for now if you are looking at an electric car it either needs to be a second car (use the ICE for long trips), or you need to obsess about range. For electric cars with the least range the average commute in the US couldn't make it there, eat lunch, and back home on a cold day.
paxys 6y ago
Has any car ever produced lived up to its advertised EPA range under regular use?
- jsight 6y ago
  Yes, the Taycan does. Some of the other EVs are closer too.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- avs733 6y ago
  From the article, the Porsche EV was well above its EPA range.
- t-writescode 6y ago
  Yes. Ever since they changed the design to include using the AC, etc, they have or have been better than it for gas-powered cars under conscientious driving.
- leetcrew 6y ago
  depends how you drive. if I try, I find it pretty easy to beat the epa highway rating on most cars. if you're not paying attention, it's also really easy to get poor efficiency out of the turbocharged low-displacement engines that are common today. efficiency tends to drop off pretty rapidly when you get into the turbo.
legohead 6y ago
There is a pretty humorous video of some guys testing how far past empty an ICE vehicle can go. They were guessing 10-15km. It ended up being over 100! [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpU72eM8vCo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpU72eM8vCo
Bob_LaBLahh 6y ago
I think this is a bit misleading. Edmunds and the EPA ran two very different tests. For instance, Edmunds drives the car until it indicates it's empty. However, in the EPA test, "the vehicle is driven over successive city cycles until the battery becomes discharged" [1]. Tesla vehicles, like many others, have a not so insignificant buffer of "extra" miles that you can still use after the vehicle indicates that its "empty". Furthermore, Edmunds tested the Teslas at temperatures that are roughly 14F lower than the 68F used by the EPA. This can make a big difference in the range you get. My point is that these articles are acting like they are comparing apples to apples--the EPA test vs the Edmunds test--but they're not. I admit that I'm a Tesla fan and shareholder. But my first loyalty is to the truth. Ding Tesla and Elon when they mess up. Nobody is above reproach or constructive criticism. So let's not pretend that Edmunds (or The Drive for that matter) are either. Edmunds ran what appears to be a not very scientific test, and came to a highly debatable conclusion that Tesla vehicles don't meet the EPA mileage guidelines. I think the tests are not comparable. Maybe that's just me. [1] https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/EPA%20test%20procedure%20for%20EVs-PHEVs-11-14-2017.pdf https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/EPA%20test%20procedure%...
- bluGill 6y ago
  There are only two temperatures it is valid to test range at: -50c, and +50c (120f). The extremes matter because the 1% of the time when you are in the extreme you need to know real numbers, not ideal ones. When the weather is potentially deadly if you run out of power you need to plan to ensure that you have enough range to safely make it to the recharge station. Hopefully you never have to deal with the above extremes, but if you do the car better be there for you.
  - kevinob11 6y ago
    While this would certainly be good information I'm not sure they are the _only valid_ temps to test range at. Surely what would be most reasonable to report would be your day-to-day environment. That being said electric cars do seem to have their range affected by temp a lot more than IC cars, and as someone who lives in the Pacific Northwest I do feel like their ranges should be quoted regionally, though that does seem like a lot of work for something that was pretty easily researchable going in. That all being said, it would have been nice to know that my average in WA would be about 5% below the Southern California average. Full disclosure - I own a model 3 and love it
BooneJS 6y ago
My 2021 Model Y hasn’t hit 325 miles. Ever. I drove 306 miles yesterday and I needed 47 minutes of >60kW charging and 9 minutes of <60kW at superchargers. I left home at 90%, and returned home with 23% battery, so I could have cut it closer. I wish Tesla SuperCharger history would tell me exactly the kWh per charge. And honestly, I wish the on-board miles remaining estimate were based on the energy used over the last 30 miles and not EPA rating.
kjksf 6y ago
If you want to dig more: this is just a re-hash of Edmunds article describing their test: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/testing-teslas-range-anxiety.html https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/testing-teslas-range-anxiet... Here's a Tesla Daily podcast where Rob Mauer interviews head of Edmunds about the test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rb1toreNTrU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rb1toreNTrU You can form your own opinion but Edmunds is roasted in the comments of this interview. If you ask me Edmunds goes to great length to not report actual numbers. In the article they only tell you how many miles Teslas have driven after the car shows 0 range. This is to account for safety buffer. They were criticized for an earlier test where they didn't account for this. But instead of just telling what are the new numbers, they apparently want you to add number from earlier test (which was done in different conditions like outside temperature and driving style) and this delta from new test to arrive at total number. It's almost as if the new test mostly invalidated their previous result but they're going out of their way to not admit that. Reeks of dishonesty.
yalogin 6y ago
Yep, this was not an issue with free charging previously. But with free charging gone now, the range will be noticed more and will become an issue. I also see lot of Musk fans believing him over other agencies when the discussion eventually happens though.
dawnerd 6y ago
The problem with these range tests is no one is driving 100% to 0%. People are more likely going 80% - 15% on road trips. Charging to 100% takes forever past 80% and getting under 20% starts making people nervous. Under 10% the car starts to cut power. I'd like ranges also listed as the common range you'd expect. Maybe it can be standardized as an 80-20 test. For those on freeway driving I'm getting more like 150-200 miles on a M3LR. Quick edit: I know some people might think 150-200 is low. Really could get more but I drive like it's a normal car and stopped caring about trying to optimize my efficiency. As long as I can get to the next supercharger that's all I care about.

74 points by samizdis 6y ago

hpoe 6y ago

So I didn't see any actual numbers or precentages about how far the Tesla fell short, did it fall short by like 2% of 25% because that would be a very big difference which the article seems to go to great lengths to avoid. In fact there is only one vehicle that we get what the EPA estimates were for it and it's not a Tesla. This seems to me like someone is going to great lengths to avoid putting in actual numbers and is instead just using this as a hit piece on Teslas.

jarbus 6y ago
The data is linked on the page: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons... It seems like it falls just short, not anything worth writing about imo Model 3 Long Range: 353 claimed, 345 actual for an example
- stcredzero 6y ago
  Before people called them out on it, Edmunds only measured to when the Teslas displayed "zero range." Later, it turned out that the Teslas went further that the other EVs while reading "zero range."
jmisavage 6y ago
The edmunds article is probably the best source, but this is the article that I saw yesterday with some of the numbers. Some are quite noticeable in their drops like the 2018 S Performance went from 310 mi to 256 mi. All the non-Teslas got higher than their EPA rating. With the Porsche Taycan 203 mi to 323 mi. https://insideevs.com/news/496740/tesla-disputed-edmunds-tests-results/ https://insideevs.com/news/496740/tesla-disputed-edmunds-tes...
- stcredzero 6y ago
  That's an article too early. (Though they seem to address later objections in their edit.) It turns out that Teslas display more of their capacity under "zero range," giving more of a warning/buffer to drivers at low battery. The Teslas turned out to drive farther than the other cars when displaying "zero range." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wa_wf4EzLgY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wa_wf4EzLgY
  - t-writescode 6y ago
    The "zero range" tends to be a safety buffer for gas engines and electric motors alike and should not be included in the official range statements, imo.
    - stcredzero 6y ago
      The way I use my Model 3, I intend to almost never go below 20% and almost never go above 80%. I'm just fine with including the buffer in the stated range. Given how batteries actually work, I can understand Tesla's approach to the buffer, and in the long run, that's what's actually better for vehicle longevity, fleet-wide.
blakesterz 6y ago
Looks like the numbers are here: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html#chart https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons... They range from -2% for the S to -17% for the 2018 Model 3.
PragmaticPulp 6y ago
> So I didn't see any actual numbers or precentages about how far the Tesla fell short > This seems to me like someone is going to great lengths to avoid putting in actual numbers The first sentence of the article includes a link to one of the tests, with graphs and comparisons to other vehicles: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons... The rest of the article has a lot of specific numbers: > For the other Teslas tested, however, things didn't go as "well." The 2018 Model 3 Performance was off by 54 miles—this might not look that notable on a couple-year-old model—but when the testing is performed in such friendly conditions that the 2020 Mini Cooper SE, with an EPA range of 110 miles, is exceeding that by 40 miles, then it just doesn't paint a pretty picture for the Tesla cars.

cobookman 6y ago

Sounds like they were driving at consistent 65 mph. Where-as optimal speed for maximizing range is likely closer to 45-55mph. They also ran the AC/heat with cabin set at 72F. With them doing the driving not on a track but real life (stop & starting). Technically speaking the EPA numbers aren't necessarily "real life". Its a repeatable test environment: https://cleantechnica.com/2020/08/18/how-does-epa-calculate-electric-car-range https://cleantechnica.com/2020/08/18/how-does-epa-calculate-...

PragmaticPulp 6y ago
EPA testing is a specific, defined drive cycle that is meant to reflect actual real-world use cases. The goal isn't to maximize range in artificial conditions. The goal is to estimate how it might perform in standardized scenarios that can be repeated across different cars.
- xeromal 6y ago
  Yup, it's just an objective way to get a single number you can put on a window.

robbmorganf 6y ago

Seems like the cars didn't fall that far short, but I think the implied grievance is that Tesla is systematically optimistic about the range of their cars where other automakers (Mini Cooper, Porsche, etc) make very conservative estimates. The "surprise" being that published specifications like driving range are really marketing tools, and some companies are more aggressive than others.

cool_dude85 6y ago
If I was a butcher selling you a pound of meat, and "surprisingly" was shorting you 10% on a consistent basis, would you say I was just doing more aggressive marketing than my competitors?
- tlb 6y ago
  Different industries have different standards. Hard disks are several % under advertised capacity. Audio amplifiers ratings are completely disconnected from reality. Packaged meat at places like Wal-Mart contain between 6 and 12% injected saline solution, so what you describe is already common practice.
- xeromal 6y ago
  EPA estimates are in no way equivalent to weight. lol. Bad analogy. Edit: Yeah, I messed up my point. I was just responding to OP that getting less meat than what you paid for at a store is not equivalent to not getting the EPA rated mileage on your car. No one can really reproduce the EPA range without going to the EPA's test area.
  - jsight 6y ago
    In some ways they are. Run the test in one exact way and those are the results that you'd expect. Run it differently and the results will vary in fairly predictable ways too.
    - xeromal 6y ago

thrower123 6y ago

Has anyone ever gotten the EPA mpg estimates for their vehicle? I don't drive very aggressively, and I've never gotten even 80% of the mileage that the dealership sticker advertises.

tagx 6y ago
I exceed the EPA highway MPG when using cruise control for 100s of miles w/ little traffic. When driving manually or being a bit more aggressive with passing, MPG falls below the MPG estimates.
throwaway0a5e 6y ago
Yes I get almost exactly the EPA estimate on fleet of ~25yo cars, trucks and minivans. The car is almost always on the high end. I'm supposed to get 22. I get 21.something or 22.something or 23.something from week to week with 22 being most common. The vans and the trucks I don't drive enough to have a good feel for if they're less than an mpg high or low but they are definitely within +/-1mpg. My commute is pretty much exclusively 70-90mph highway driving with approx four pulls (stoplights) from 0 to 50/70 (traffic speed in that area, depending on conditions) and am not shy about using all of 2nd gear.
quitethelogic 6y ago
I only approach EPA estimates when the tank nears empty and my right foot changes its behavior dramatically due to anxiety. I don't doubt that it is possible, but I find the kind of driving it requires to be unenjoyable. I don't have a lead foot and I enjoy spending less money to travel a given number of miles, but I do not often reach the optimal MPGs.
t-writescode 6y ago
You may need to drive less in the cities (where gas engines are weakest), and be more conscious of braking and accelerating. From what I understand, the EPA changed their measuring method many, many years ago, to include using the air conditioner, etc; and, from what I can see, mine is well within that range. In fact, I believe it regularly does better than its estimated EPA or right on it. Subaru WRX.
6y ago

11thEarlOfMar 6y ago

Using the full battery (below zero) the 2021 Model 3 went 345+26 = 371 miles. Base price plus long range battery: $46,500. The 2nd highest range among the cars tested was the Taycan at 323 miles (no adjustment for past zero was offered in the article). Base price for Taycan 4S: $104,000. The story I'd like to understand is: Does the EPA actually publish results with one car underrated by 60% (Taycan 4S) and another overrated by 2% (2021 Model 3 LR)?

dragontamer 6y ago
> The story I'd like to understand is: Does the EPA actually publish results with one car underrated by 60% (Taycan 4S) and another overrated by 2% (2021 Model 3 LR)? My understanding is that in the USA: the manufacturers do the test and then report them to the EPA. So the Taycan numbers were tested and reported by Porche. In contrast, the Tesla numbers were tested and reported by Tesla. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml > Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a laboratory using a series of tests specified by federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles—usually pre-production prototypes—and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 15%–20% of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory. Note: EPA only reviews the tests, not conduct them. The manufacturers self-test.
- avs733 6y ago
  or has certified labs test it. Interestingly, the tests are required to use a real human driver in a controlled test cell (a dynamometer). The driver has to keep the speed between two narrowly spaced lines ( a min and max - see their video) for something like 20 minutes. There is still a 3-5% fuel economy between the 'bad' and 'good' drivers or at least there was in 2003 when I toured one of these labs as an undergrad.
- 11thEarlOfMar 6y ago
  Any theory on why Porche would under-report by such a huge margin?

Pfhreak 6y ago

The range estimates my 2014 Tesla provides are, at best, very generous. It is frequently generous to the tune of 50 miles on a 200 mile range. Sometimes it's dead on. Yes, I might not always be driving the most efficiently, but even when I set the cruise and drive on a flat, constant speed I can see swings of 40 miles. I'm generally a conservative, relaxed driver and rarely exceed the speed limit, happily just cruising along in the slow lane on the right. I no longer trust Tesla to accurately measure mileage and assume the I'll get 70-80% of the car says I will.

moistbar 6y ago
My 2019 Model 3 is pretty good at estimating the range remaining, but it drops significantly overnight to the tune of 40-50 MPH in the dead of winter. That's not as big of a problem for me since I have a home charger, but it's definitely led to a few close calls getting home from work.
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  Have you considered asking your employer to install EV charging stations for employee use? There are metered solutions if they’re not comfortable providing the power for free. A client installed ChargePoint chargers for myself (Model S) and their full time employees with EVs (Plug in Prius, Bolts, various Teslas) when I provided them with incentive information and helped them through the process gratis (EVs and electrical infra are my jam).
  - moistbar 6y ago
    My employer refused to remove a wasp nest that had formed in the NOC room. I was told that $10/month for offsite backup was too expensive. There's no way they'd install a multi-thousand-dollar charger for one employee's car.
    - toomuchtodo 6y ago
      I wish you the best in your job search when the time comes.

justina1 6y ago

"Testing" implies the Edmunds report is in some way scientific while it is anything but. They drove the Tesla cars in temperatures as much as 20 degrees colder than the other cars. The EPA ranges are derived by testing in a controlled environment to ensure cars are treated in the same manner. There is variability in range when driving an EV, but this report is deeply skewed and unscientific.

stcredzero 6y ago
Also, the 1st version of the Edmunds report didn't account for the buffer all batteries have while showing "zero range." Turns out the Teslas have more of that buffer. (Though Tesla itself is kinda coy about how big that buffer is, for obvious reasons.)
- xeromal 6y ago
  Yeah, running an EV battery completely dead can be catastrophic to the battery so they try to scare the driver into recharging early. I think the Model 3 LR has about 25 miles of buffer.
apercu 6y ago
Hey man, you try getting headlines (clicks) with the truth all the time.
sho_hn 6y ago
On the other hand, just seeing the headline I can't say I found it hard to believe - among the major car manufacturers, Tesla seems particularly prone to tweaking the performance numbers they put out. 0-60 figures measured from a rolling start instead of dead stop (that no one seems to be able to reproduce either way), hp figures that are a "peak system power" calculated by adding things up in weird ways and which can't be sustained for any length of time, range figures no one hits in the real world, ... they're very aggressive at this, and it'd be a mistake to think everyone does it this way - for example professional testers regularly exceed 0-60 figures Porsche releases officially. I've seen a fair amount of professional testers/journalists reprimand them along the lines of "every manufacturer is guilty of this to some extent, but Tesla really ought to tone it down" (e.g. Alexander Bloch, who is generally very positive on the brand). As EV tech is commodifying swiftly and the competition closing in, I expect this to become a larger discussion.

yumraj 6y ago

Edmunds direct link with data: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons...

matt-attack 6y ago

I’d be curious to know how “range” is computed for ICE vehicles. Do you end when the gas gauge reaches “e” or until the engine stops? Seems to be perfectly analogous to the two possibilities with the Tesla. Either when the cars says it’s out, or when it actually stops. Granted folks don’t seem to obsess over the range metric when it comes to ICE cars so the point may be moot.

xeromal 6y ago
Most cars keep a little gas under 0 miles left in order to preserve the fuel pump. If you run a car out of gas completely in a modern car, you can cause a lot of damage to the fuel system.
neogodless 6y ago
I was surprised how much of a buffer modern Mazdas keep. The "range" is based on 2 gallons hidden. At 3 gallons remaining, it appears as if you have 1 gallon remaining (i.e. 25-35 miles depending on your average gas mileage since the last reset.) So "0 miles remaining" happens when you really could go another 50-70 miles. This is based on the total gas tank size compared to how much it takes to fill, but also because I'm stubborn and have pushed it several miles past "0" out of curiosity (but not regularly, as I have no wish to overheat my fuel pump or run out of gas!)
- elihu 6y ago
  I have a Honda Element. The fuel light comes on when it still has about 3 or 4 gallons left.
bluGill 6y ago
People don't obsess over ICE range because it is hard for the average person to get more than 20 miles from a gas pump which can then fill the car to full in 5 minutes. As such the only time you run out of fuel is when you don't refuel despite multiple opportunities. Today if you buy an electric car you are mostly fine for in town - the 95% of trips. However that last 5% is a real problem: there are not many places to charge, not all of them actually work, and even if you find a place you need to wait a fairly long time someplace where you don't wish to be for it to recharge. Some of this will change as electric cars become more popular, but for now if you are looking at an electric car it either needs to be a second car (use the ICE for long trips), or you need to obsess about range. For electric cars with the least range the average commute in the US couldn't make it there, eat lunch, and back home on a cold day.

paxys 6y ago

Has any car ever produced lived up to its advertised EPA range under regular use?

jsight 6y ago
Yes, the Taycan does. Some of the other EVs are closer too.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
avs733 6y ago
From the article, the Porsche EV was well above its EPA range.
t-writescode 6y ago
Yes. Ever since they changed the design to include using the AC, etc, they have or have been better than it for gas-powered cars under conscientious driving.
leetcrew 6y ago
depends how you drive. if I try, I find it pretty easy to beat the epa highway rating on most cars. if you're not paying attention, it's also really easy to get poor efficiency out of the turbocharged low-displacement engines that are common today. efficiency tends to drop off pretty rapidly when you get into the turbo.

legohead 6y ago

There is a pretty humorous video of some guys testing how far past empty an ICE vehicle can go. They were guessing 10-15km. It ended up being over 100! [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpU72eM8vCo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpU72eM8vCo

Bob_LaBLahh 6y ago

I think this is a bit misleading. Edmunds and the EPA ran two very different tests. For instance, Edmunds drives the car until it indicates it's empty. However, in the EPA test, "the vehicle is driven over successive city cycles until the battery becomes discharged" [1]. Tesla vehicles, like many others, have a not so insignificant buffer of "extra" miles that you can still use after the vehicle indicates that its "empty". Furthermore, Edmunds tested the Teslas at temperatures that are roughly 14F lower than the 68F used by the EPA. This can make a big difference in the range you get. My point is that these articles are acting like they are comparing apples to apples--the EPA test vs the Edmunds test--but they're not. I admit that I'm a Tesla fan and shareholder. But my first loyalty is to the truth. Ding Tesla and Elon when they mess up. Nobody is above reproach or constructive criticism. So let's not pretend that Edmunds (or The Drive for that matter) are either. Edmunds ran what appears to be a not very scientific test, and came to a highly debatable conclusion that Tesla vehicles don't meet the EPA mileage guidelines. I think the tests are not comparable. Maybe that's just me. [1] https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/EPA%20test%20procedure%20for%20EVs-PHEVs-11-14-2017.pdf https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/EPA%20test%20procedure%...

bluGill 6y ago
There are only two temperatures it is valid to test range at: -50c, and +50c (120f). The extremes matter because the 1% of the time when you are in the extreme you need to know real numbers, not ideal ones. When the weather is potentially deadly if you run out of power you need to plan to ensure that you have enough range to safely make it to the recharge station. Hopefully you never have to deal with the above extremes, but if you do the car better be there for you.
- kevinob11 6y ago
  While this would certainly be good information I'm not sure they are the _only valid_ temps to test range at. Surely what would be most reasonable to report would be your day-to-day environment. That being said electric cars do seem to have their range affected by temp a lot more than IC cars, and as someone who lives in the Pacific Northwest I do feel like their ranges should be quoted regionally, though that does seem like a lot of work for something that was pretty easily researchable going in. That all being said, it would have been nice to know that my average in WA would be about 5% below the Southern California average. Full disclosure - I own a model 3 and love it

BooneJS 6y ago

My 2021 Model Y hasn’t hit 325 miles. Ever. I drove 306 miles yesterday and I needed 47 minutes of >60kW charging and 9 minutes of <60kW at superchargers. I left home at 90%, and returned home with 23% battery, so I could have cut it closer. I wish Tesla SuperCharger history would tell me exactly the kWh per charge. And honestly, I wish the on-board miles remaining estimate were based on the energy used over the last 30 miles and not EPA rating.

kjksf 6y ago

If you want to dig more: this is just a re-hash of Edmunds article describing their test: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/testing-teslas-range-anxiety.html https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/testing-teslas-range-anxiet... Here's a Tesla Daily podcast where Rob Mauer interviews head of Edmunds about the test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rb1toreNTrU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rb1toreNTrU You can form your own opinion but Edmunds is roasted in the comments of this interview. If you ask me Edmunds goes to great length to not report actual numbers. In the article they only tell you how many miles Teslas have driven after the car shows 0 range. This is to account for safety buffer. They were criticized for an earlier test where they didn't account for this. But instead of just telling what are the new numbers, they apparently want you to add number from earlier test (which was done in different conditions like outside temperature and driving style) and this delta from new test to arrive at total number. It's almost as if the new test mostly invalidated their previous result but they're going out of their way to not admit that. Reeks of dishonesty.

yalogin 6y ago

Yep, this was not an issue with free charging previously. But with free charging gone now, the range will be noticed more and will become an issue. I also see lot of Musk fans believing him over other agencies when the discussion eventually happens though.

dawnerd 6y ago

The problem with these range tests is no one is driving 100% to 0%. People are more likely going 80% - 15% on road trips. Charging to 100% takes forever past 80% and getting under 20% starts making people nervous. Under 10% the car starts to cut power. I'd like ranges also listed as the common range you'd expect. Maybe it can be standardized as an 80-20 test. For those on freeway driving I'm getting more like 150-200 miles on a M3LR. Quick edit: I know some people might think 150-200 is low. Really could get more but I drive like it's a normal car and stopped caring about trying to optimize my efficiency. As long as I can get to the next supercharger that's all I care about.