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

191–200 of 358 posts

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

#191

Post by fiddlerwoaroof »

mohaine wrote: post #179
caf wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I really need to get my wall charger installed, this would be completely infeasible with the Level 1. COVID-19 sort of messed with my plans here

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

#192

Post by D_Alex »

tlb wrote: post #177
btilly wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Or: Work = Force * Distance, so the energy spent per mile will be proportional to drag force, which is proportional to speed^2.

Either way, its 21% increase in energy consumed per mile in this case.

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

#193

Post by r00fus »

davidwhodge wrote: post #92
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 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…

> The data: For the hundreds of Nikola trips with an average speed of 60 mph, the actual MPGe was about 102. Once you get up to a 75 MPH average trip speed, the MPGe drops to 94. And by 80 MPH the MPGe drops to 77. (avg over all Tesla types)

My (non-Tesla) EV only gives me trip watt-hour per mile (Wh/mi)

Using an mpge to Wh/mi converter [1], 102 mgpe = about 330 Wh/mi, 94 = 385 Wh/mi and 77 = 437 Wh/mi.

My car (Ford Focus EV) gives about 275 (conservative driving) to 350 Wh/mi. It usually gives me about 80 - 130 miles range, and the stated average is 110. I get the 80 during the colder months in a warmer clime. When I was commuting into the office (pre-COVID) I was usually doing about 70-80mph.

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

#194

Post by reitzensteinm »

kemiller wrote: post #183
reitzensteinm wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that the Taycan was seriously screwed by having its track modes, which are genuinely very inefficient, blended equally in to the test. It's a bit of a shame to see so many Tesla fans point to its supposed inefficiency based on the EPA range. It feels like the tables have turned 180 since the Top Gear scripted test days; it was shitty when Tesla was attacked with FUD back then and it's shitty when…

That’s really weird. Is it normal to blend in sport modes? Do you have a link to more info?

Unfortunately I'm struggling to find a source, so take it with a grain of salt. My memory is that the highway speed test for one of the modes had it running in first gear (of two).

But regardless of the reason, its EPA range proportional to WLTP and real world driving is very low compared to other EVs. It doesn't point to poor efficiency, just a corner case of EPA testing.

While extrapolated from 100 miles, this Car and Driver test [1] puts a 6% gap between the 2020 Model S and Taycan, compared to a 70% difference in EPA range. Extrapolation sucks as a method, but there's no way it would mask a true 70% range difference - the Porsche would be close to empty at the end of the test.

Considering the Tesla costs just over half as much, it's still a home run for Tesla. They're the ones to beat and by all accounts are likely to stay that way.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison-test/a307994...

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

#195

Post by NiekvdMaas »

sidcool wrote: post #182

This is impressive. Almost 650 Km. Conservatively, let's say 600 Km, it's very very impressive. My daily commute is 30 KM, I can go 20 days without charging. Back of the napkin suggests that if I charge overnight in my garage, I can go without super charger charging for more than a month and a half. This is no small feat.

If you charge overnight on your garage, you never need to visit a supercharger unless you take road trips. Last time I visited a supercharger was 4 months ago.

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

#196

Post by chemmail »

m463 wrote: post #164
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 can compare a leaf and a tesla, both of which I have had direct experience with. The leaf did lots better around town, but it was a relatively small and light car. The battery was charged significantly higher and drained significantly lower than tesla batteries. There was degradation. At highway speeds it was significantly less efficient and range anxiety became a real problem. On trips usable range was much less t…

Oh yeah, The leaf was scarey on the freeway. It would burn so much battery and was pretty loud. I try to keep it below 60MPH in which things get uncomfortable. In the city it was very compliant and very efficient. I could go through two weeks without charging my now half degraded battery. In the Tesla it loves going to about 70mph. After that you start getting wind noise. Two very different animals. But both great cars. Never going back to ICE.

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

#197

Post by kenhwang »

burlesona wrote: post #178
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 i…

The test is absolutely insane and it totally makes sense why EPA estimates can vary so much from real world numbers. It would practically ignore the effects of aerodynamics and I'm not even sure weight plays a role given both of those are supposedly accounted for by a simulated drag on the rollers.

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

#198

Post by r00fus »

TwoBit wrote: post #190
gok wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EPA range is city+highway combined, which isn't really what any most car buyers care about. Range during city driving is irrelevant beyond a point; you're never going to go more than 100 miles per charge. Then the highway test is easy; it never breaks 60 MPH and averages 48 MPH. What most people probably care about is how far you can go between charges when road-tripping, which is really a much more complicated formu…

If I drove my Tesla S on the freeway at 48 mph then I would easily match the EPA rating.

48mph was easily doable during moderate traffic on my commutes back home. Some days I'd be lucky to get that.

So it's a bit more honest in that regard... Those days where I got to go 80mph the entire freeway segment and get home really quickly my mpge suffered a lot.

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

#199

Post by secabeen »

kemiller wrote: post #183
reitzensteinm wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that the Taycan was seriously screwed by having its track modes, which are genuinely very inefficient, blended equally in to the test. It's a bit of a shame to see so many Tesla fans point to its supposed inefficiency based on the EPA range. It feels like the tables have turned 180 since the Top Gear scripted test days; it was shitty when Tesla was attacked with FUD back then and it's shitty when…

That’s really weird. Is it normal to blend in sport modes? Do you have a link to more info?

My memory (and I don't have a citation for this) is that if the manufacturer gives you multiple range modes (like Eco and Sport) EPA tests in both, then averages them together somehow.

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

#200

Post by r00fus »

anonymousiam wrote: post #66
pengaru wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you live somewhere flat or hilly/mountainous?

Hills shouldn't make much of a difference. The car has regenerative braking so hilly or flat, it should have similar range.

Disagree strongly. Hills most definitely impact mpg/mpge. If you're going near speed limit (due to flow of traffic) then your regen isn't going to recapture as much as if you let it coast.
Post reply on HN