The vehicles tested originally got about 70% of their EPA estimated range in highway driving. After 3 years that was down to 64%. Since they clearly were never at 100%, the actual drop in range was much smaller than the 64% would suggest.
Saying that they lost 8% over 3 years doesn’t sound as dramatic as saying that they only had 64% remaining.
Exactly this. The biggest takeaway to me is that Tesla never delivered on their range estimates. I would not be happy if I only ever got 70% of what was promised.
If an electric car can travel 70mph and beat it's EPA range then the manufacturer did a terrible job of designing the car.
Wind resistance should be the major determining factor with an EV. Low speed regenerative breaking is such an efficient process that if your car gets bad mileage in "stop and go" traffic it's probably designed by a committee of fools.
EPA range is a defined value based on published metrics and measurement principles.
The idea that a manufacturer should under report range is a bit strange. Are there examples of ICE manufacturers under reporting their gad mileage? I doubt it.
There are two different EPA test cycles. One is more generous than the other. Manufacturers can choose which one to use.
Additionally, the cars will typically have multiple driving profiles to select between more performance or more efficiency.
Porsche, for example, uses the least generous test cycle with the most performant (least efficient) car settings. It makes their EPA numbers look bad but they are honest numbers.
An underquote is more customer friendly than an overquote.
Because you get what you pay for and then some. With fairy tale numbers you don't get what you thought you were paying for.
How many numbers do you want them to quote? For the Porsche Taycan there's a 35% difference between the performance settings and the eco settings. It also depends on the wheels you choose. Smaller wheels are more efficient.
It isn't an artificially low range number. It's the worst case number.
More drag I see as a valid reason, but less regenerative breaking? There would be less breaking, period, and I don’t see why breaking on highways couldn’t typically be regenerative. Can you explain?
The title states that Teslas have 64% of rated EPA range after 3 years.
The data in the article shows that after 3 years, Teslas were measured as having 64% of their rated EPA range.
The title is 100% accurate. You're just being insanely pedantic to dismiss the data in a, quite frankly, completely ridiculous way.
Whatever rating they achieved when they were initially delivered makes no difference. They were officially rated at a certain amount. After 3 years they make 64% of their rated amount. This is what the title says.
New study proves 100% of people who consume Oxidane (water) die within one week of consuming it.
A title which is accurate, but very misleading.
100% of people drink water, and not drinking water (or something with water in it) for more than a week or so will kill you. How I've phrased it implies the water kills you, when it's exactly the opposite.
im a diesel engine mechanic by trade here, and I empathize with Tesla owners.
We get all sorts of big shiny new trucks in our shop, and ever one of them touts jaw-dropping mileage figures. Customers typically come pounding down our door after a year or two demanding we overhaul their expensive new Mack or Peterbuilt because "the mileage aint there." We cannot do anything to fix it most of the time.
The problem starts between your foot and the pedal, at least in the good ole USA.
Most americans rarely follow the speed limit, they dont use their cruise control, and they dont practice defensive driving at all. Jackrabbit starts at the red light, hard braking, acceleration to overtake instead of "underpassing" to enter a lane, and insisting they can maintain speed at any grade and at any elevation, mileage be damned. flooring it up a hill, for example. oh, and dont forget lots and lots of climate control...that cabin is 65 degrees in the summer or they just wont drive.
Id be really shocked if any of these 3 year tesla owners could pass a CDL course, remembered their turn signals, or even bothered to check their blind spots or tire pressure and wear.
Just to clarify, are you saying these are relatively new BEV trucks coming into your shop? If so, do the mileage issues usually boil to battery degradation due to driver behavior as you’re suggesting, or is it because the EPA rated mileage was unrealistic in the first place? Or both?
why would you expect a tesla owner to pass a CDL? or why would they even want one. and what does diesel owners and tesla owners have anything to do with each other lol. and wouldnt having a ev then make it more comfortable or more efficient to drive if americans have tendencies that youre describing?
My own experience was different: I was getting 89% of EPA range after 175K miles. I wonder if they are doing an apples to apples comparison: comparing EPA miles with EPA miles or are they talking about real miles? Actual mileage varies a lot depending upon driving conditions e.g., doing 75 mph with AC at full blast will dramatically reduce mileage. I think that the real issue is the EPA methodology. My wife has a Hyundai Kona EV, it has the same issue that real life mileage is worse than EPA mileage.
EPA range is tested on a dynamometer in a lab and not outside! (0)
It’s data from their fleet in their area of usage.
They want to nitpick the EPA range as not being as relevant to them or well anyone. EPA range versus average personal car usage is a different topic.
It’s good to have this relevant ‘not my car’ driving style range available for company fleets to take into consideration. My company tracks many vehicle statistics and is particularly interested in idling hours as its rough on vehicles but necessary for the job.
Also, in the article they list 73% for model 3 performance. 230/315 miles range.
There is a list of things that work vehicles are used as that don’t conform to the EPA testing standards. Each vehicle could be fully loaded with passengers and equipment driving to remote mountain equipment sites in any conditions with the worst rolling resistance wheel/tire combination.
Some take the electric vehicle or well any of their vehicles much too personally.
That’s 10% degradation. How does it compare with other cars?
Don’t floor it so much and it will not degrade like that. Plus indicator on dashboard is pointless as it’s highly subjective to weather and other conditions.
It's 15% degradation at the very least, and the maximum mileage itself is completely unreliable. If it says 270 miles, it seems like it's actually 230-240.
Thats close to warrantied limit. You could trivially test actual degradation via service menu.
5% degradation is normal for all batteries. For performance car, esp if you supercharge lots and keep it full at 100% lots - I wouldn't be surprised for higher degradation.
A new tesla won't even get it's EPA range on first drive. It's a well known marketing fraud tesla does that other brands haven't yet begun to participate in.
My Y was advertised at ~280 miles (the iron battery), which is precisely what I'd get F-E. I generally drive only the middle 60%: about 160–170 miles. This aligns with the experience of the 20 or so people I quizzed at work, before purchasing. Mind you, these were all S/X/Y & roadsters — no idea about the 3d.
> The basic EPA testing protocol gets it wrong for all EVs.
> It doesn't factor in temperature changes or driving above 60 miles per hour
Well, there's the problem, drag increases with the square of speed and temperature affects battery capacity. Maybe they tested with the AC turned off too.
Doesn’t this effect happen with EVs generally, not just Teslas? (I don’t particularly mean to defend Tesla here, but I wonder if this might be misleading)
The vehicles tested originally got about 70% of their EPA estimated range in highway driving. After 3 years that was down to 64%. Since they clearly were never at 100%, the actual drop in range was much smaller than the 64% would suggest.
Saying that they lost 8% over 3 years doesn’t sound as dramatic as saying that they only had 64% remaining.
Gotta get those click.