Tesla: "First Cybertruck Built at Giga Texas! 🤠"

[jerhenderson]

I'm happy where I live. I cannot make that much of a sacrifice just to please Elon Musk. I will follow this topic and if I don't hear anything that improves this issue, I will sell my Model 3 and cancel my CT order. I lost my trust after reading this article. No wonder I've been dissatisfied with my 2021 model 3 LR range since I bought it. Instead of 330 miles, I'm lucky to get 220 miles. Hard to stomach the difference.

please cancel your CT order if you're ahead of me. BTW ICE efficiency estimates are also based not considering how you drive.

Sponsored

 

[kbolt]

I'm happy where I live. I cannot make that much of a sacrifice just to please Elon Musk. I will follow this topic and if I don't hear anything that improves this issue, I will sell my Model 3 and cancel my CT order. I lost my trust after reading this article. No wonder I've been dissatisfied with my 2021 model 3 LR range since I bought it. Instead of 330 miles, I'm lucky to get 220 miles. Hard to stomach the difference.

I mean I'm in my local Tesla group on Facebook and I see some people that talk about replacing their tires every 15k miles. I just changed my first set after 44k miles and that was only because I was moving to Cali and didn't want to pay extra in an expensive state.

The same people who complain about replacing tires all the time are the same people who complain about not getting good range. If you accelerate quickly to start and stop at intersections you're causing your own frustration.

 

[PilotPete]

I'm happy where I live. I cannot make that much of a sacrifice just to please Elon Musk. I will follow this topic and if I don't hear anything that improves this issue, I will sell my Model 3 and cancel my CT order. I lost my trust after reading this article. No wonder I've been dissatisfied with my 2021 model 3 LR range since I bought it. Instead of 330 miles, I'm lucky to get 220 miles. Hard to stomach the difference.

As they say, the devil is in the details. Please allow me to quote a couple of those "details"

At the time Tesla programmed in the rosy range projections, it was selling only two models: the two-door Roadster, its first vehicle, which was later discontinued; and the Model S,

Reuters could not determine whether Tesla still uses algorithms that boost in-dash range estimates.

Yep, this is BREAKING NEWS from some 10 years ago... Oh, and they can't confirm jack squat about todays cars. Oh, and most of this is from someone who "used to work there".

Look, if the car doesn't do what you want it to do, get rid of it. I don't see people being nearly this harsh about MPG in ICE cars. Nobody gets this upset when their 30mpg on their window sticker (which would give you a 360 mile range on 12 gallons of gas) only gets 24mpg in their daily drive to the office (giving them only 288 miles of range). Everyone laughs and says "Oh those overly optimistic EPA guys... Hahahaha"

 

[cvalue13]

Yep, this is BREAKING NEWS from some 10 years ago... Oh, and they can't confirm jack squat about todays cars.

to be fair, it was only last year Tesla was purportedly “so inundated with driving-range complaints that it created a special team to cancel owners’ service appointments.”

What they couldn’t confirm about today’s cars was only the part about the software programming that juiced the dashboard figures.

But todays cars are still widely confirmed to have uniquely optimistic ranges still, and the story walks through that, though only partially.

still, it’s the sort of facts that if true one might expect to convert to a state AG’s investigation, so it’ll bubble up or not

 

[Gurule92]

I'm happy where I live. I cannot make that much of a sacrifice just to please Elon Musk. I will follow this topic and if I don't hear anything that improves this issue, I will sell my Model 3 and cancel my CT order. I lost my trust after reading this article. No wonder I've been dissatisfied with my 2021 model 3 LR range since I bought it. Instead of 330 miles, I'm lucky to get 220 miles. Hard to stomach the difference.

Any chance it could be your driving habits? Or terrain you drive on? Cause I dont hit my rated range but I am thinking its because my foot is made of lead

 

[Gurule92]

to be fair, it was only last year Tesla was purportedly “so inundated with driving-range complaints that it created a special team to cancel owners’ service appointments.”

What they couldn’t confirm about today’s cars was only the part about the software programming that juiced the dashboard figures.

But todays cars are still widely confirmed to have uniquely optimistic ranges still, and the story walks through that, though only partially.

still, it’s the sort of facts that if true one might expect to convert to a state AG’s investigation, so it’ll bubble up or not

I do think a lot of it is lack of understanding EVs and hyper vigilance due to range anxiety. People don't think to watch their gas mileage or rated range in a gas car because there is no range anxiety. Although they likely wouldn't be meeting ratings.

Too many variables to consider imo. Cold/heat, speed, tire pressure, alignment, lead foot, modifications, etc.

Most average drivers don't have the level of knowledge that the people here might or the people who follow out of spec would.

To be fair though, if you were a company, who saw a problem, i.e. we have so many people who are complaining about range and there is nothing wrong with their cars, they just dont understand them. You would want to minimize the number of service appointments dedicated to that. Why wouldnt you?

We need some EV education campaigns.

Or maybe Tesla should just start using more buffer in the batteries like the other OEMs to help ensure that you hit your number. Ah, youll only get 300 miles (but secretly your buffer can take you to 350), then when your car is performing less efficiently, they can just tap into some of that buffer and give you a little boost so you never notice a difference (or less of one)

 

[RVAC]

The displayed range isn't "rigged", as the intentionally misleading article would suggest. It's simply showing a range projection based on the vehicle's EPA rated consumption. Below 50% it starts showing range based on actual consumption.

 

[Coolbreeze704]

I'm happy where I live. I cannot make that much of a sacrifice just to please Elon Musk. I will follow this topic and if I don't hear anything that improves this issue, I will sell my Model 3 and cancel my CT order. I lost my trust after reading this article. No wonder I've been dissatisfied with my 2021 model 3 LR range since I bought it. Instead of 330 miles, I'm lucky to get 220 miles. Hard to stomach the difference.

How in the world do you get 220 miles of range on your 3 LR? I just don't see how that can consistently be your range if not for some factor outside the norm.

My wife's Y LR has been spot on with range expectations. Even my Lightning exceeds expectations other than cold winter driving. What is your long term miles per kwh?

 

[cvalue13]

Or maybe Tesla should just start using more buffer in the batteries like the other OEMs to help ensure that you hit your number.

thanks for good thoughts

this last bit quoted, though - isnt accurate and misrepresent what Tesla does different

my Lightning, just like all ICE vehicles, have reserve tankage. What’s different is the reserve tankage is excluded from the car’s EPA stated range because it’s reserve.

how Tesla gets to it’s strange assertions about *its* reserve, summarized:

• EPA tests run in cycles until battery is unable to maintain test speeds, which comes up with a range - lets say it’s 100 miles

• EPA recognizes its 100mi test results don’t reflect real world range conditions, so it applies a standard 30% deduct factor to its test results to arrive at the EPA-reported range - so 70mi becomes the range eg on the Monrone sticker of the car

• every OEM but Tesla and VW uses the EPA standard 30% deduct

• EPA allows a company to essentially override the 30% deduct and provide a different % based on additional manufacturer-supplied data; Tesla has reported as little as say 20% deduct factor, so the Tesla Monrone reads 80mi (instead of 70mi) because of Tesla supplying data to permit it to alter the EPA range reported on the Munrone

• when pressed publically about widespread data of Tesla disproportionately not living up to its EPA states ranges, it came out and said “unlike other manufacturers our EPA-stated range includes the reserve tankage”

• which is just a bizarre way to say, “unlike other manufacturers, we apply a different deduct % to the EPA calculation”

So back to the up top quote: Tesla doesn’t “use less buffer than other OEMs” - it actively tweaks the EPA Munrone figures upwards, where other OEM’s use the EPA’s more conservative deduct factor

 

[Cyberostachu]

please cancel your CT order if you're ahead of me. BTW ICE efficiency estimates are also based not considering how you drive.

You'd be dismayed that if I don't cancel, you're still ahead of me. ? ?
I really understand how the range go down compared to EPA. I turned 79 and drove since 15 and had a dozen ICE cars. My BMW was only off by 5 to 7% and I drive that for 13 yrs like a maniac compared to this model 3 that I'm off 35% on average and I drive gingerly. I'm flexible for 15 to 20% difference due to different driving habits and driving conditions. I'm not looking for perfect results. But, I still love to have the CT. I wished Tesla were more forthright and honest regarding their mileage rating so we could make the right decisions on what variants to choose. Maybe, I didn't read enough info before I bought my first EV that's why my expectations were high. My mistake!
While I'm unhappy with the range of my EV, my friend who bought my BMW is happy and teased me if I'd buy it back $10K more than he paid me (everytime we met). ? ? ? To be fair to Tesla, it's only the range that I don't like being overly exaggerated. I like the other features of Tesla in general especially the Cybertruck.

 

[Cyberostachu]

thanks for good thoughts

this last bit quoted, though - isnt accurate and misrepresent what Tesla does different

my Lightning, just like all ICE vehicles, have reserve tankage. What’s different is the reserve tankage is excluded from the car’s EPA stated range because it’s reserve.

how Tesla gets to it’s strange assertions about *its* reserve, summarized:

• EPA tests run in cycles until battery is unable to maintain test speeds, which comes up with a range - lets say it’s 100 miles

• EPA recognizes its 100mi test results don’t reflect real world range conditions, so it applies a standard 30% deduct factor to its test results to arrive at the EPA-reported range - so 70mi becomes the range eg on the Monrone sticker of the car

• every OEM but Tesla and VW uses the EPA standard 30% deduct

• EPA allows a company to essentially override the 30% deduct and provide a different % based on additional manufacturer-supplied data; Tesla has reported as little as say 20% deduct factor, so the Tesla Monrone reads 80mi (instead of 70mi) because of Tesla supplying data to permit it to alter the EPA range reported on the Munrone

• when pressed publically about widespread data of Tesla disproportionately not living up to its EPA states ranges, it came out and said “unlike other manufacturers our EPA-stated range includes the reserve tankage”

• which is just a bizarre way to say, “unlike other manufacturers, we apply a different deduct % to the EPA calculation”

So back to the up top quote: Tesla doesn’t “use less buffer than other OEMs” - it actively tweaks the EPA Munrone figures upwards, where other OEM’s use the EPA’s more conservative deduct factor

I appreciate your explanations. I wish Tesla declared that a certain amt of energy reserved was included in the calculations and specified how much energy are reserved for every model and variant.
I still wonder if their rating would be close to the real world driving.

 

[Cyberostachu]

thanks for good thoughts

this last bit quoted, though - isnt accurate and misrepresent what Tesla does different

my Lightning, just like all ICE vehicles, have reserve tankage. What’s different is the reserve tankage is excluded from the car’s EPA stated range because it’s reserve.

how Tesla gets to it’s strange assertions about *its* reserve, summarized:

• EPA tests run in cycles until battery is unable to maintain test speeds, which comes up with a range - lets say it’s 100 miles

• EPA recognizes its 100mi test results don’t reflect real world range conditions, so it applies a standard 30% deduct factor to its test results to arrive at the EPA-reported range - so 70mi becomes the range eg on the Monrone sticker of the car

• every OEM but Tesla and VW uses the EPA standard 30% deduct

• EPA allows a company to essentially override the 30% deduct and provide a different % based on additional manufacturer-supplied data; Tesla has reported as little as say 20% deduct factor, so the Tesla Monrone reads 80mi (instead of 70mi) because of Tesla supplying data to permit it to alter the EPA range reported on the Munrone

• when pressed publically about widespread data of Tesla disproportionately not living up to its EPA states ranges, it came out and said “unlike other manufacturers our EPA-stated range includes the reserve tankage”

• which is just a bizarre way to say, “unlike other manufacturers, we apply a different deduct % to the EPA calculation”

So back to the up top quote: Tesla doesn’t “use less buffer than other OEMs” - it actively tweaks the EPA Munrone figures upwards, where other OEM’s use the EPA’s more conservative deduct factor

I appreciate your explanations. I wish Tesla declared that a certain amt of energy reserved was included in the calculations and specified how much energy are reserved for every model and variant.
I still wonder if their rating would be close to the real world driving.

 

[Cyberostachu]

I

How in the world do you get 220 miles of range on your 3 LR? I just don't see how that can consistently be your range if not for some factor outside the norm.

My wife's Y LR has been spot on with range expectations. Even my Lightning exceeds expectations other than cold winter driving. What is your long term miles per kwh?

I went personally to Tesla Service managers and gave them my written factors and they told me it's my driving. I changed my driving habit and tried driving 70 to 75 mph in a 75 mph speed limit like a fool because most drivers do 85 mph. I increased my A/C temperature to 72 deg F. The only thing I cannot change is the road terrain and wind speed. As far as road terrain, there's a difference of 2% efficiency leaving my house to 90 miles away to coming home. Still the average is what I'm telling you. I did not dare emptying the energy reserves to find how many more miles I could add as my wife is too old to push the car to super chargers many miles away. ? ? ?. People don't believe this is all I get but I challenged the service manager to give me his best driver at Tesla and I would donate to his favorite charity $1,000 if he can get at least 300 miles. He wouldn't take the bet. I'm frustrated. I must have posted this many times. I'm just letting out my frustration.

 

[TyPope]

EV mileage should be discussed with 3 variables:
1. Watts per mile. This is the efficiency, really. It takes 282 Watts to drive my Model Y one mile.
2. Available Watts to the driver... Basically, available battery size.
3. Total battery size for "reserve"
4. Bonus one for our European friends, watts per 100 Kilometers. This makes it easier to compare two cars.

I asked someone what kind of mileage she got and she replied with "I get about 350 miles per tank." I said "Wow. That's pretty good for a 3 gallon tank!... or it sucks if you have a 100 gallon tank. Which is it?"

But, that's what we do with EVs... The Model Y gets 330 miles per tank... We SHOULD be saying "My Model Y uses 282 watts per mile". (or, I suppose, 'My Model Y uses 28.2 per 100 miles'')

The Hummer EV can go 329 miles on a full battery but does that with a 212.7 KwH battery! Holy inefficiency, Batman!

Fun math:
Model Y - 282 Watts/mile (2.8 cents per mile here or $2.80 per 100 miles)
Hummer - 625 Watts/mile (6.3 cents per mile here or $6.30 per 100 miles)
My F-150 - 0.055 Gallons/mile (18 mpg) (16.7 cents per mile here or $16.70 per 100 miles)
Bonus, just for me: My incoming Maverick ~ 40mpg - 0.025 gallons/mile (40mpg) (7.5 cents per mile here or $7.50 per 100 miles)

In the other forums, people talk about hypermiling... They'll say "I got 51 mpg on this trip out and back". Do any of you do that... try to maximize your efficiency? Got any tricks? I would like to hear your average watts per mile.

I'll start. My wife has averaged 282 watts per mile over 27,000 miles. Her car is going to be for sale in about a week when we pick up the new one, btw.

 

[Cyberostachu]

How in the world do you get 220 miles of range on your 3 LR? I just don't see how that can consistently be your range if not for some factor outside the norm.

My wife's Y LR has been spot on with range expectations. Even my Lightning exceeds expectations other than cold winter driving. What is your long term miles per kwh?

The best I could muster for a long drive, is 3.5 miles average per kwh. I understand (if I'm correct) that I have a 72 kwh battery capacity but not all the 72 kwh is usable for driving. Also, from my house to a golf course I play going downhill most of the 5 miles one way I use 1 kwh but when I go back home, which total 10 miles, it registers 3 kwh. This is a short drive at 3.33 kwh average. I have not driven anywhere where I got close to 4 miles per kwh. I wish I was wrong. I wish someone much smarter than this old man can tell me what I have not mentioned in this thread.

Sponsored