Don't worry about lower ranges your first few charging cycles! Estimated range will increase

dandor · Feb 26, 2024

The first time I charged to 80% I got 234 miles, which corresponds to 293 miles. This worried me since it was supposed to be 318 miles with the AT tires. The second charge was 240 miles, then it got up to 245. I then charged to 100% and got 307 to see what was happening. Charged again to 100% for a road trip and got 311 miles for the range. I then got back with well under 10% for my road trip and decided to charge to 100% to see how the range would be with a full Tesla recommended "calibration." Below is what my truck charged to this morning after 1255 miles.

Tesla Cybertruck Don't worry about lower ranges your first few charging cycles! Estimated range will increase 53554213948_e106ee7125_c

Bkb13 · Feb 26, 2024

That’s really interesting. Makes sense that there would be a larger calibration period.

what type of driver are you, cautious, aggressive, hyper Miler, average?

dandor · Feb 26, 2024

Bkb13 said:
That’s really interesting. Makes sense that there would be a larger calibration period.

what type of driver are you, cautious, aggressive, hyper Miler, average?

I drive with traffic. If I am buy myself I stay within 7 mph of the speed limit. If traffic is going 80 mph plus, I will go with that.

Celiboy · Feb 26, 2024

Thanks for experimenting and sharing your findings. It’ll be nice to know when the math ain’t mathing just to give it more time, miles and charging cycles.

cgladue · Feb 26, 2024

Bkb13 said:
That’s really interesting. Makes sense that there would be a larger calibration period.

what type of driver are you, cautious, aggressive, hyper Miler, average?

this number is the rated range and has nothing to do with what type of style the driver is, it uses a fixed efficiency number like all other teslas do. the estimated range in the energy app will vary based on driving style.

the BMS just needs to learn what the capacity of the pack is by charging and discharging cycles. and its

Ward L · Feb 26, 2024

How does the actual miles driven on the odometer compare to the change in battery miles? For example, after a charge to 250 miles, you drive 100 miles by the odometer, how many battery miles do you have left? I've seen where driving 100 actual miles can consume 150 battery miles.

HaulingAss · Feb 26, 2024

Ward L said:
How does the actual miles driven on the odometer compare to the change in battery miles? For example, after a charge to 250 miles, you drive 100 miles by the odometer, how many battery miles do you have left? I've seen where driving 100 actual miles can consume 150 battery miles.

It's like all other Teslas, if you consume more than the EPA rated efficiency it will show that you consumed more than EPA rated efficiency. If you consume less than the EPA rated efficiency, it will reflect that too.

It depends upon how fast you are going, how hard the climate control is working, your tire pressure, whether you have a headwind or a tailwind, whether you have mounted drag inducing accessories, whether the 100 miles were uphill or downhill, etc.

Ward L · Feb 26, 2024

HaulingAss said:
It's like all other Teslas, if you consume more than the EPA rated efficiency it will show that you consumed more than EPA rated efficiency. If you consume less than the EPA rated efficiency, it will reflect that too.

It depends upon how fast you are going, how hard the climate control is working, your tire pressure, whether you have a headwind or a tailwind, whether you have mounted drag inducing accessories, whether the 100 miles were uphill or downhill, etc.

It runs about 85% actual to battery on my M3. I’ve seen CT numbers around 65%. And really, do u mind, I’m just running a science experiment. LOL

Beer_and_salami · Feb 26, 2024

I actually just replied to one of your older responses on a diff post. Glad to see you got the 318 miles at 100% as well!

Agassi · Feb 26, 2024

Does anybody run cyberbeast real world range?

HaulingAss · Feb 27, 2024

Agassi said:
Does anybody run cyberbeast real world range?

There is no such thing as "real world range" because the real world is not a single thing.

QuantMech · Feb 27, 2024

With todays tech in the vehicle we really should not need an app to more accurately get an estimate of what kind of mileage the actual vehicle gets which should also be based on historical actual values that the driver(s) of the vehicle obtained. If it is some sort of storage issue for data using a USB connected drive should take care of that. If it is a programming issue that seems like a relatively easy over the air fix. I have an ‘18 MX and even after that long i never get the estimated mileage which seems odd given the vehicles potential for accuracy. I understand that there are a variety of variables to get a more accurate estimate however the data seems right at hand even the head wind or tailwind you can get from a variety of weather data services which may not be a great estimate but a good ballpark, the tire wear again can have a good ballpark estimate if the data (when tire is changed, what type of tire, estimated wear…). My point is, it appears to me that each vehicle should be able to get a good estimate within plus or minus 5 percent of its estimated miles based on its own local data with some external data without much effort and very little if any ‘cost’ although i am sure someone somewhere could find a way to do it with maximum expense, LOL.

agordon117 · Feb 27, 2024

QuantMech said:
With todays tech in the vehicle we really should not need an app to more accurately get an estimate of what kind of mileage the actual vehicle gets which should also be based on historical actual values that the driver(s) of the vehicle obtained. If it is some sort of storage issue for data using a USB connected drive should take care of that. If it is a programming issue that seems like a relatively easy over the air fix. I have an ‘18 MX and even after that long i never get the estimated mileage which seems odd given the vehicles potential for accuracy. I understand that there are a variety of variables to get a more accurate estimate however the data seems right at hand even the head wind or tailwind you can get from a variety of weather data services which may not be a great estimate but a good ballpark, the tire wear again can have a good ballpark estimate if the data (when tire is changed, what type of tire, estimated wear…). My point is, it appears to me that each vehicle should be able to get a good estimate within plus or minus 5 percent of its estimated miles based on its own local data with some external data without much effort and very little if any ‘cost’ although i am sure someone somewhere could find a way to do it with maximum expense, LOL.

They know this data, but do not want to tell the driver. Meaning, if you punch a destination into the nav, it knows with very high confidence where you will need to charge to get there, even accounting for lost range at various speeds, elevation, weather, etc. But tesla has (so far) not allowed that information to be present to the driver. They could very easily update the mileage on the display to reflect the average Wh/mi.

I suspect the reason they don't do this, is because people would get into their cars and see that they have 150 miles of range in the middle of winter at 80% recommended charge vs the 318 EPA estimate, and assume they have a major problem with their vehicle. It's for this reason I stopped using the mileage display, and switched to %. I just assume I get 2 miles per battery % since only the very worst cases would be worse than that.

In my jeep, if it tells me I will get 320 miles, I sure as hell get 320 miles no matter how cold it is, or how fast (within reason) I drive. Highway + 9 mph I'll always see that 320 miles. That's what people are used to.

You can argue whether people do or don't need 300+ miles in any conditions available to them at all times. And that's certainly a discussion that can be had. But Tesla knows that 318 miles x 80% charge x 60% highway/winter range would show a person 152 miles on their dash, and they would assume they must have a defective vehicle.

HaulingAss · Feb 27, 2024

agordon117 said:
They know this data, but do not want to tell the driver. Meaning, if you punch a destination into the nav, it knows with very high confidence where you will need to charge to get there, even accounting for lost range at various speeds, elevation, weather, etc. But tesla has (so far) not allowed that information to be present to the driver. They could very easily update the mileage on the display to reflect the average Wh/mi.

I suspect the reason they don't do this, is because people would get into their cars and see that they have 150 miles of range in the middle of winter at 80% recommended charge vs the 318 EPA estimate, and assume they have a major problem with their vehicle. It's for this reason I stopped using the mileage display, and switched to %. I just assume I get 2 miles per battery % since only the very worst cases would be worse than that.

In my jeep, if it tells me I will get 320 miles, I sure as hell get 320 miles no matter how cold it is, or how fast (within reason) I drive. Highway + 9 mph I'll always see that 320 miles. That's what people are used to.

You can argue whether people do or don't need 300+ miles in any conditions available to them at all times. And that's certainly a discussion that can be had. But Tesla knows that 318 miles x 80% charge x 60% highway/winter range would show a person 152 miles on their dash, and they would assume they must have a defective vehicle.

False. Not even worth arguing about it. Tesla has the best range estimations in the industry, amazingly accurate using local weather data and a whole host of other information. The fact that the basic state of charge displays in EPA efficiency miles is that way for consistency. If you don't like it, just switch it to battery percentage (instead of remaining EPA miles).

agordon117 · Feb 27, 2024

HaulingAss said:
False. Not even worth arguing about it. Tesla has the best range estimations in the industry, amazingly accurate using local weather data and a whole host of other information. The fact that the basic state of charge displays in EPA efficiency miles is that way for consistency. If you don't like it, just switch it to battery percentage (instead of remaining EPA miles).

literally everything you just said was in my post, including that I use battery percentage. It doesn't change the fact that they will not update dashboard range to reflect any version of reality, despite the navigation having excellent data for charging stop estimates. But even if I wanted to specifically go out of my way, into a menu, and enable some weirdly named setting that would tell me truth instead of best case, I can't. For me, I can deal with it now that I know. But I didn't inherently know that EVs were so insanely more sensitive to temp, speed, wind, and elevation than an ICE vehicle. I had to learn that as I went. So yes, I will assert that it would be really nice if I didn't have to set the battery to percentage, and instead could be given a real world range display without covering up my map with the energy display.

Don't worry about lower ranges your first few charging cycles! Estimated range will increase

dandor

Well-known member

Bkb13

Well-known member

dandor

Well-known member

Celiboy

Well-known member

cgladue

Well-known member

Ward L

Well-known member

HaulingAss

Well-known member

Ward L

Well-known member

Beer_and_salami

Active member

Agassi

Well-known member

HaulingAss

Well-known member

QuantMech

Member

agordon117

Well-known member

HaulingAss

Well-known member

agordon117

Well-known member

Similar threads