Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Model S Long Range Plus: Building the First 400-Mile Electric Vehicle

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 358 posts

Re: Model S Long Range Plus: Building the First 400-Mile Electric Vehicle

#31

Post by Someone1234 »

steelframe wrote: post #18

I've been following a multi-month discussion over in the r/electricvehicles subreddit about EPA range. There's a growing consensus that something is very wrong with it. Here are a couple of the articles that got some discussion in that sub: https://insideevs.com/news/407807/eletric-car-real-world-ran... https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a30874032/porsche-tayca... As someone who has owned both a Tesla Model X and o…

I'm surprised Tesla fans haven't crowd sourced accurate data by now.

Re: Model S Long Range Plus: Building the First 400-Mile Electric Vehicle

#32

Post by Joky »

steelframe wrote: post #18

I've been following a multi-month discussion over in the r/electricvehicles subreddit about EPA range. There's a growing consensus that something is very wrong with it. Here are a couple of the articles that got some discussion in that sub: https://insideevs.com/news/407807/eletric-car-real-world-ran... https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a30874032/porsche-tayca... As someone who has owned both a Tesla Model X and o…

In my experience: I manage to roughly match the EPA rating on the freeway driving at 65mph (it depends on the road, on the temperature, on how much stuff/people are in the car, etc.), but it goes down quickly as you drive faster. This table illustrates it fairly well: https://teslike.com/

Re: Model S Long Range Plus: Building the First 400-Mile Electric Vehicle

#33

Post by twblalock »

new_realist wrote: post #9

The Hyundai Nexo EV is already at 380 miles, and it’s a real SUV, not a flat-as-a-pancake Model S. It refuels in five minutes, to boot, but is only practical in California. If they increased tank volume by 5% it’d be at 400 miles EPA.

I don't think very many people would cross-shop a hydrogen-powered Hyundai and a Tesla Model S.

Re: Model S Long Range Plus: Building the First 400-Mile Electric Vehicle

#34

Post by pengaru »

steelframe wrote: post #18

I've been following a multi-month discussion over in the r/electricvehicles subreddit about EPA range. There's a growing consensus that something is very wrong with it. Here are a couple of the articles that got some discussion in that sub: https://insideevs.com/news/407807/eletric-car-real-world-ran... https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a30874032/porsche-tayca... As someone who has owned both a Tesla Model X and o…

Do you live somewhere flat or hilly/mountainous?

Re: Model S Long Range Plus: Building the First 400-Mile Electric Vehicle

#35

Post by serf »

fumar wrote: post #15
dmitrygr wrote: post #2

"a new custom tire" sounds expensive to replace when you drive over a nail

You can patch a tire with up to a 1/4 inch puncture.

Some exclusions may apply. May not be available at a retailer near you.

(you can patch a tire with a quarter inch puncture as long as that puncture is further than 16 inches away from a previous repair, on a 'square' landing of the tire away from the gradual shoulder or side-wall, and the puncture must not have resulted in an internal or external layer delamination)

And those exclusions aren't considering exotic tire compounds, treads, models, or run-flat styles.

P.S. Most economy-oriented MPG-centric hybrid-car tires have a far-less square design, meaning more shoulder , meaning less repairable area. This is in order to reduce road tire-patch in the interest of reducing rolling resistance. I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla is adopting something similar.

Re: Model S Long Range Plus: Building the First 400-Mile Electric Vehicle

#36

Post by cloudwalking »

pkulak wrote: post #29

Wow, they are doing brake blending now? I'd be interested to know how good their implementation is. I always assumed they refused to do it because it's so damn hard to perfect.

Quite good, in my experience. I would describe it as "seamless." I use it every day (or I did, before lockdown) in my Model 3.

Re: Model S Long Range Plus: Building the First 400-Mile Electric Vehicle

#37

Post by rootusrootus »

dmitrygr wrote: post #2

"a new custom tire" sounds expensive to replace when you drive over a nail

This is not uncommon. Many performance cars over the years have had tires custom spec'd for them. An example that comes to mind is the Bridgestone RE070, which for a while only came in exactly one size, because it was for the mid-2000s STI. It did come in another size a bit later when the GT-R started using it as the factory tire.

I want to say that the sixth generation Camaro SS 1LE also had a custom tire, though I think it comes in more sizes now.

Re: Model S Long Range Plus: Building the First 400-Mile Electric Vehicle

#38

Post by mrfusion »

steelframe wrote: post #18

I've been following a multi-month discussion over in the r/electricvehicles subreddit about EPA range. There's a growing consensus that something is very wrong with it. Here are a couple of the articles that got some discussion in that sub: https://insideevs.com/news/407807/eletric-car-real-world-ran... https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a30874032/porsche-tayca... As someone who has owned both a Tesla Model X and o…

Maybe offtopic but I think a huge issue could be if gas cars are tested with ethanol free gasoline whereas in real life you’re mostly buying 10% ethanol.

Re: Model S Long Range Plus: Building the First 400-Mile Electric Vehicle

#39

Post by systemBuilder »

So it used to be rated at about 335mpc (miles per charge)? And 20% yanks it up to 402? That must be an incredible mass savings something like 10% I'm guessing, on a car that is already built on an all-aluminum unibody. I hope the NHTSA crash ratings are not affected!

Re: Model S Long Range Plus: Building the First 400-Mile Electric Vehicle

#40

Post by elihu »

They mention "significant weight reduction" but don't mention how much weight they saved. Considering how heavy Model S's are, this seems like it could be a productive approach, though on the other hand if there were easy/obvious ways to reduce unnecessary weight, it would have been done by now. On some level it's a trade-off between being too heavy and being unsafe, though reducing the weight also means it doesn't have to be as strong.
Post reply on HN