4 ms·

The Nexo is much less aerodynamic than the Model 3. One is an SUV/CUV, the other is a low sedan which looks like wet poop. The Nexo has more frontal area and

The Nexo is much less aerodynamic than the Model 3. One is an SUV/CUV, the other is a low sedan which looks like wet poop. The Nexo has more frontal area and a higher CD. And the Tesla is known for rigging its EPA tests for higher, but illusory, numbers.

JPKab 5y ago
I own a model 3 and I laughed pretty hard at your comment regarding it looking like wet poop.
SigmundA 5y ago
Ok so go to the Model Y which is slightly heavier (Actually closer to the Nexo) and the worse aerodynamics than the Model 3 should have minimal effect if hypermiling at low speed, which also helps the Nexo vs Model 3. Model Y will blow the doors off the Nexo in performance due to much larger electric motors.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
usrusr 5y ago
Pretty much everything is aerodynamic at 25mph when comparing to something else at 40mph...
vardump 5y ago
> And the Tesla is known for rigging its EPA tests for higher, but illusory, numbers. By that you must mean Tesla bothers to do the full suite of EPA tests instead of accepting a somewhat penalizing multiplier, like how other manufacturers do? There's no rigging whatsoever and the same option is available for other manufacturers as well. If they bother to do the longer and more demanding test cycle, that is.
- sfblah 5y ago
  Nobody cares exactly how a company gets unrealistically high numbers. What matters is as a consumer your experience won’t match the company’s claims. Best would be for companies just to tell the truth. C.f. the “full self driving” falsehood.
  - vkou 5y ago
    Anyone who has bought a car in the last 50 years is already well aware of how much EPA mileage differs from actual mileage. My old 2010 Prius was EPA-rated for 50 MPG. If I drove it with kid gloves over flat terrain, I could hit that mileage. If I drove it in a way that doesn't piss other road users off, I would get closer to 46 MPG. If I was doing 80+ MPH over the Rockies on the Trans-Canada, I'd be getting a cool 35 MPG, because air resistance is very high at those speeds, and because most of my braking was exceeding the regenerative capacity of the car.
ajross 5y ago
> Tesla is known for rigging its EPA tests for higher, but illusory, numbers. The Tesla numbers are correct and verifiable, actually. The problem is that the EPA "highway" test is designed to capture the "average highway mile" driven by a US vehicle (which makes sense, it was designed to inform purchasers of aggregate fuel use). Here's the driving schedule: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/hwfetdds.gif https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/hwfetdds.... Note that it never goes above 60mph, and spends most of its time between 40 and 50. This isn't wrong, but it corresponds to an urban highway commute (again, which is pretty much the "average highway mile"). The problem is that this does NOT match what typical consumers think of as "highway driving", meaning blasting 75mph+ down an open road. So people get in their Model 3's and measure their consumption at those speeds and it doesn't match. And it's true that other EV manufacturers (Ford, especially -- the Mach E actually does somewhat better than sticker consumption on the highway) chose not to run the full test and used other methods that put a higher number on their stickers. And in context that's probably more informative. But nothing was "rigged". In fact Teslas in stop-and-go urban commute traffic really do get close to their sticker mileage. It's just that no one cares because one's battery doesn't run out on an urban commute before you get home to charge it. Ironically, EV owners in this case care LESS about efficiency than gas owners.
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  > The Tesla numbers are correct and verifiable There are caveats. The lower end Model 3s hit their estimates pretty reliably. The Performance trim usually misses by a pretty big margin for most people. There are exceptions to every rule, but I owned a P3D and hung out with other P3D owners as well, and this was a commonly shared experience.
  - ajross 5y ago
    I have to wonder how much of that is down to the way the driving habits of people who buy a car labeled "long range" differ from those who buy one that calls itself "performance". It doesn't really refute the notion that the difference between measured and claimed performance is due to the different driving conditions being tested. IIRC there was some youtube video a year or two back that tested a few variants on a track using what they claimed to be a replica of the EPA highway test, and the cars came out almost dead on.

JPKab 5y ago

I own a model 3 and I laughed pretty hard at your comment regarding it looking like wet poop.

SigmundA 5y ago

Ok so go to the Model Y which is slightly heavier (Actually closer to the Nexo) and the worse aerodynamics than the Model 3 should have minimal effect if hypermiling at low speed, which also helps the Nexo vs Model 3. Model Y will blow the doors off the Nexo in performance due to much larger electric motors.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

usrusr 5y ago

Pretty much everything is aerodynamic at 25mph when comparing to something else at 40mph...

vardump 5y ago

> And the Tesla is known for rigging its EPA tests for higher, but illusory, numbers. By that you must mean Tesla bothers to do the full suite of EPA tests instead of accepting a somewhat penalizing multiplier, like how other manufacturers do? There's no rigging whatsoever and the same option is available for other manufacturers as well. If they bother to do the longer and more demanding test cycle, that is.

sfblah 5y ago
Nobody cares exactly how a company gets unrealistically high numbers. What matters is as a consumer your experience won’t match the company’s claims. Best would be for companies just to tell the truth. C.f. the “full self driving” falsehood.
- vkou 5y ago
  Anyone who has bought a car in the last 50 years is already well aware of how much EPA mileage differs from actual mileage. My old 2010 Prius was EPA-rated for 50 MPG. If I drove it with kid gloves over flat terrain, I could hit that mileage. If I drove it in a way that doesn't piss other road users off, I would get closer to 46 MPG. If I was doing 80+ MPH over the Rockies on the Trans-Canada, I'd be getting a cool 35 MPG, because air resistance is very high at those speeds, and because most of my braking was exceeding the regenerative capacity of the car.

ajross 5y ago

> Tesla is known for rigging its EPA tests for higher, but illusory, numbers. The Tesla numbers are correct and verifiable, actually. The problem is that the EPA "highway" test is designed to capture the "average highway mile" driven by a US vehicle (which makes sense, it was designed to inform purchasers of aggregate fuel use). Here's the driving schedule: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/hwfetdds.gif https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/hwfetdds.... Note that it never goes above 60mph, and spends most of its time between 40 and 50. This isn't wrong, but it corresponds to an urban highway commute (again, which is pretty much the "average highway mile"). The problem is that this does NOT match what typical consumers think of as "highway driving", meaning blasting 75mph+ down an open road. So people get in their Model 3's and measure their consumption at those speeds and it doesn't match. And it's true that other EV manufacturers (Ford, especially -- the Mach E actually does somewhat better than sticker consumption on the highway) chose not to run the full test and used other methods that put a higher number on their stickers. And in context that's probably more informative. But nothing was "rigged". In fact Teslas in stop-and-go urban commute traffic really do get close to their sticker mileage. It's just that no one cares because one's battery doesn't run out on an urban commute before you get home to charge it. Ironically, EV owners in this case care LESS about efficiency than gas owners.

rootusrootus 5y ago
> The Tesla numbers are correct and verifiable There are caveats. The lower end Model 3s hit their estimates pretty reliably. The Performance trim usually misses by a pretty big margin for most people. There are exceptions to every rule, but I owned a P3D and hung out with other P3D owners as well, and this was a commonly shared experience.
- ajross 5y ago
  I have to wonder how much of that is down to the way the driving habits of people who buy a car labeled "long range" differ from those who buy one that calls itself "performance". It doesn't really refute the notion that the difference between measured and claimed performance is due to the different driving conditions being tested. IIRC there was some youtube video a year or two back that tested a few variants on a track using what they claimed to be a replica of the EPA highway test, and the cars came out almost dead on.