3 ms·
Important to note that many tesla models under-perform their EPA estimates when tested in more real world conditions while most other manufacturers tie or outpe
by enragedcacti 4y ago
Important to note that many tesla models under-perform their EPA estimates when tested in more real world conditions while most other manufacturers tie or outperform them, sometimes substantially [1].
The Mach-E for instance has a -48 mile EPA range compared to an M3LR but only a -4 mile range in the edmund's test.
Same for Taycan, EPA rating of 203, edmunds got 323.
Tesla M3P EPA is 310 but edmunds got only 256.
When you factor in actual expected range and price (especially the federal tax credit) Tesla's range advantage is rapidly disappearing and as far as I'm aware there isn't anything coming down the pipe that will radically change that (4680s maybe, but we haven't seen any of the touted benefits proved out yet).
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...
- _ea1k 4y agoI tend to prefer the insideevs 70 mph test, as its closer to a practical test, but yes, the range in the real world is different from the rated range to varying degrees. Teslas tend to come pretty close to their EPA highway rating when tested on the highway under similar circumstances. But the EPA highway rating isn't the one that gets advertised. :sigh
- enragedcacti 4y agoThat makes a lot of sense, most people talking about range don't care about commuting range but care a lot about # of recharges to travel some long distance so it stands to reason that highway numbers are more valuable than a combined metric. Although for me traveling up and down 95 is so slow that I end up hitting the city number on my hybrid :)