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

171–180 of 358 posts

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

#171

Post by refurb »

leesec wrote: post #122

Man do I love Hackernews. Everyone is pro-innovation, pro-future, pro-forward thinking until literally anything new happens, in which case everyone shows up with a "well, ackshually", to tell you why the new idea is dumb. It's amazing to me that Tesla continues to increase State Of The Art range and EV efficiency, at scale, for cars that already smoke the competition. I hope their fervor to improve the technology nev…

Can you really blame people for skepticism?

How many articles get posted each day about some incredible new breakthrough? Then "poof" you never hear about it again. And the article said the new product would hit the market next year.

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

#172

Post by 10-1-100 »

justapassenger wrote: post #170
10-1-100 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure faking results counts as optimizing cars /shrug

They were not faked. Cars were optimized to behave in a certain way under exact test scenario. They were not producing any fake output data from the sensors, just "optimizing" engine behavior.

Ah interesting - I stand corrected. Thanks for explaining!

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

#173

Post by m463 »

kenhwang wrote: post #10

I wonder how much of this will translate to real world driving. Teslas have generally significantly underperformed in real world range compared to EPA. This reads very much like they're optimizing more towards a benchmark.

In my experience:

- teslas have a big battery, range anxiety is not a problem

- it is possible and even easy to drive inefficiently

Other electric cars have small batteries, and small motors which combine to reward frugal driving.

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

#174

Post by sgc »

laurencerowe wrote: post #103
sgc wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes and no. Older cars were far heavier and far less safe. They could make incremental safety design improvements that allow to reduce weight incrementally without compromise.

I’m not sure whether you mean older teslas or older cars generally here. Small cars in the 70s and 80s weighed just over half as much as they do now. The Golf Mk 1 was 795kg while a Mk 8 is 1255kg. Much of that increase in weight is safety equipment and they are much safer for it.

I was thinking older than that, of the 50s and 60s, and early 70s. But regardless of the exact timeline, it's pretty well known than engineering trumps raw weight, even if quantity is a quality all it's own, as they say. Thus comparing apples to apples (names don't matter, size and weight and features do), the same weight car today is far safer than it was in the decades you referenced, and the average weight across all models has remained relatively stable during the same period as well other than the dip in late 70s early 80s due to the oil embargo crisis.

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

#175

Post by clouddrover »

SEJeff wrote: post #163
clouddrover wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’ll note that the total range of the Model 3 LR is 322 miles and the Max range of the larger Model Y is 316 miles. That's a function of battery size. The maximum battery size of the current Kona, Niro, and Soul is 64 kWh. Batteries cost money. The Kona, Niro, and Soul are all less expensive than the top end Teslas. > This compares to the 111 miles of all electric miles in the Kia Soul EV Not the current model. > T…

> That's a function of battery size. The maximum battery size of the current Kona, Niro, and Soul is 64 kWh. Batteries cost money. The Kona, Niro, and Soul are all less expensive than the top end Teslas. The Model 3 LR battery size is 75 kWh. Are you telling me a 9 kWh difference say ~15% is the sole reason for an almost 25% increase in range? If it is only a matter of the battery size, the range would be linear. It…

> The Model 3 LR battery size is 75 kWh. Are you telling me a 9 kWh difference say ~15% is the sole reason for an almost 25% increase in range?

No, I'm telling you you're comparing paper miles instead of real world miles. Here's a real world range test of the Kia Niro 64 kWh and the Model 3 LR:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH7V2tU3iFc

The Model 3's extra 11 kWh only bought it an extra 15 miles. It achieved 78% of its WLTP range. The Niro delivered 90% of its WLTP range.

> By being less ambitious, it is not as efficient overall

All you've really said is that Tesla's heat pump is a different design, not demonstrated that it's actually better than Hyundai's. You should take Tesla's claims with a grain of salt.

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

#176

Post by burlesona »

zaroth wrote: post #26
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.

For those wondering this is a Hydrogen fuel cell car, only available for sale in CA because that’s the only place you can fill it. It appears they sold about 270 units in the US last year.

One parks on my street in SF. It looks pretty sweet. :)

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

#177

Post by tlb »

btilly wrote: post #155
davidwhodge wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I make an app (called Nikola, not the truck company) for Tesla owners that has seen over 5 MM miles driven on it. I did some quick queries to validate actual range vs. EPA range for those curious. My general takeaway is to see the EPA range as a useful, albeit unrealistic, indicator. Essentially nobody gets the EPA range, either because they choose not to go the speed limit, they accelerate harder than the EPA test f…

What's most striking to me as someone who has heard over and over again about how air resistance is a X^2 property, is the extent to which short (and presumably slow) trips punch above their weight in terms of range consumed per mile. From what I can tell, the actual cost here is the fixed cost of booting up some systems and electronics, and the variable costs of running them over fewer miles can make the MPGe drop.…

That's incorrect. Power consumption is proportional to drag * speed, and drag is speed^2, so power is speed^3, and energy per mile is speed^2.

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

#178

Post by burlesona »

kylecordes wrote: post #157

It's great that Tesla keeps increasing the range, but the EPA numbers are ridiculous. I would love to see the EPA range claims for electric vehicles re-standardized to measure: * at the median driving speed on free-flowing US interstate highways * during cold weather * with some hills * using a medium level typical of drivers of cars of the price range A car manufacturer particularly focused on realism could publish…

The EPA tests are interesting. They do simulate stop and go driving, and that’s why on a gas car the city number is worse, but the steadier highway test shows better numbers. One of the weird things with an EV is that the highway numbers are actually worse (as other posters have commented).

The tests definitely trade off realism for consistent reproducibility though. This article describes it in detail, it’s really interesting: https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15388892/the-truth-ab...

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

#179

Post by mohaine »

caf wrote: post #160
01100011 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shower thought: It would be nice if the vehicle 'docked' to the charger at home so you could power everything up and get the climate control working before you disconnected from the grid. It's not going to make a noticable difference in mileage I'm sure, but if there is a surge at power-up I'd rather take the juice from the grid.

It kinds of does that, because if you start the climate control while plugged in, it'll start drawing from the charger even if charging has already finished. This is most often seen if you remotely turn on the climate control to warm the car up in the morning, when the car is still plugged in after overnight charging.

And with scheduled charging you don't even have to manually do this, it just does it based on your departure time. My Model 3 is always warm and toasty by 8:30 AM M-F all winter. As someone with an unheated detached garage this is very nice. At least it was before I quit driving anywhere.

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

#180

Post by bagacrap »

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.

The website for that car points out that it can get from San Francisco to LA on one tank but that's blatantly false unless you start and finish at the edges of those metroplexes while driving extremely efficiently, with no detours or a/c.
Post reply on HN