350 mile range Quad Motor rumored to be 1st trim launched

[Cyberostachu]

It sounds like you haven't bothered to search the map.

We need more, not just one or two in a town center but a dozen. So many it doesn't matter if some are ICEd.

But they are practically everywhere, and it's stupid not to use them to skip a Supercharger stop.

-Crissa

Between my home and the city that I shop for seafood is 85 miles of no supercharger, no population enough to justify a prioritized installation of a supercharger, for now, unlike most Tesla owners live. I'll repeat, leaving home fully charged has enough energy round trip if I don't add more than 10 miles of driving around the city, so I could retain about 10% reaching home. More than 10 miles of driving around the city, would force me to find a supercharger far and not on my way, going home. I don't like to reach home with close to zero%, to conserve the health of the battery. I'm stubborn and I'm annoyed adding charge to the battery for driving only 200 miles with a Long Range (of 330 mi). It would not have annoyed me if the car was a Standard Range of 260 miles. I rest my case on this topic because I feel someone has to be in my shoes to understand my situation.

Sponsored

 

[Crissa]

Between my home and the city that I shop for seafood is 85 miles of no supercharger,
...

If you can't do an 85-mile trip in a Tesla, you're doing something wrong.

-Crissa

 

[SentinelOne]

Can you tell where i passed the cop?

Yeah, I drive from a bit more north (Windsor CO) to Denver 2x per week - it's pretty much between 80-90mph on average and it sucks the electrons in my m3p...did Windsor to Colorado Springs last week approx 120mi each way...needed to be charged for return trip (left at 98%)...

 

[Cyberostachu]

If you can't do an 85-mile trip in a Tesla, you're doing something wrong.

-Crissa

Never said I can't. Did I? Nothing wrong from this side. 10-4. Over and out.

 

[scottf200]

Between my home and the city that I shop for seafood is 85 miles of no supercharger, no population enough to justify a prioritized installation of a supercharger, for now, unlike most Tesla owners live. I'll repeat, leaving home fully charged has enough energy round trip if I don't add more than 10 miles of driving around the city, so I could retain about 10% reaching home. More than 10 miles of driving around the city, would force me to find a supercharger far and not on my way, going home. I don't like to reach home with close to zero%, to conserve the health of the battery. I'm stubborn and I'm annoyed adding charge to the battery for driving only 200 miles with a Long Range (of 330 mi). It would not have annoyed me if the car was a Standard Range of 260 miles. I rest my case on this topic because I feel someone has to be in my shoes to understand my situation.

Similar to my kids car. He has a trip like that he takes regularly but only chargers 80% nightly.

If I were you'd, on those days I'd change to 90% overnight and then add 5+% just before you leave on that trip. You just don't want to leave your car at a high SOC (90%+) for many hours.

63 mile buffer = (270 * 90%) - ((85*2)+10)

His TeslaFI.COM 2018 TM3 below (blue) and the 'fleet' in green.

 

[Crissa]

If I were you'd, on those days I'd change to 90% overnight and then add 5+% just before you leave on that trip. You just don't want to leave your car at a high SOC (90%+) for many hours.

If you program a leave time into a trip, the car will calculate when it needs to turn on the charger to get to full before the trip.

-Crissa

 

[HaulingAss]

Yeah, I drive from a bit more north (Windsor CO) to Denver 2x per week - it's pretty much between 80-90mph on average and it sucks the electrons in my m3p...did Windsor to Colorado Springs last week approx 120mi each way...needed to be charged for return trip (left at 98%)...

You should have bought the Stealth Performance Model 3 with the Aero wheels. They make a HUGE difference in range at 90 mph! Night and day difference. I forgot to put them back on for one fast trip and couldn't figure out why my range was dropping faster than expected because there was no wind. Then I remembered I didn't have the Aero covers on! And the 18" wheels are more efficient than the larger rims, even without the Aero covers.

People who care about long-distance highway range care about creating good aero. When I see people write aero off as inconsequential, I assume they either don't know what they are talking about, or they only use their car around town for shorter trips.

I have an Aero rooftop rack but would never take it on a long trip because, even with no accessories clamped to it, it drops highway range a significant amount. Great aero is magical, which is why I don't own a Model Y. Don't get me wrong, Model Y is a great car, and if you really need all that space it's a no-brainer, but sometimes less is so much more! Never underestimate the benefits of great aero for long, fast trips!

 

[SentinelOne]

You should have bought the Stealth Performance Model 3 with the Aero wheels. They make a HUGE difference in range at 90 mph! Night and day difference. I forgot to put them back on for one fast trip and couldn't figure out why my range was dropping faster than expected because there was no wind. Then I remembered I didn't have the Aero covers on! And the 18" wheels are more efficient than the larger rims, even without the Aero covers.

People who care about long-distance highway range care about creating good aero. When I see people write aero off as inconsequential, I assume they either don't know what they are talking about, or they only use their car around town for shorter trips.

I have an Aero rooftop rack but would never take it on a long trip because, even with no accessories clamped to it, it drops highway range a significant amount. Great aero is magical, which is why I don't own a Model Y. Don't get me wrong, Model Y is a great car, and if you really need all that space it's a no-brainer, but sometimes less is so much more! Never underestimate the benefits of great aero for long, fast trips!

My car is lowered on KW Coil overs so have a bit of aero help (I think)...but regardless, I have multiple other cars and bikes so I just use the M3P as my 100mi or less Hoon Car / commuter! Just trying to contribute to the thread that the i25 in Colorado doesn't provide EPA numbers! Also, why I want a 500mi cyber truck - so I dont have to think about it, except when towing the toy hauler!

 

[Crissa]

Just trying to contribute to the thread that the i25 in Colorado doesn't provide EPA numbers! Also, why I want a 500mi cyber truck - so I dont have to think about it, except when towing the toy hauler!

Yeah, that makes sense. You're usually either in a headwind or going uphill. Reminds me of I 17 in Arizona but at least that one you can just coast from Prescott to Phoenix if you really wanted to.

-Crissa

 

[SentinelOne]

Yeah, that makes sense. You're usually either in a headwind or going uphill. Reminds me of I 17 in Arizona but at least that one you can just coast from Prescott to Phoenix if you really wanted to.

-Crissa

100% agree if going downhill - but it would suck heading up the i17 with trailer to go camping for a few days...

There's always a way, but still hoping for 500mi to make the way easier!

 

[JBee]

Don’t forget the model variants that have identical pack sizes but were/are software locked to differentiate range

Feels like the sort of thing that, if Tesla *werent* doing it but another OEM did, the fanbois would rain hell upon

Not to mention they do the same thing with the MY LR DM and the Performance motors. You can at least "buy" the software performance upgrade, but both motor setups are the same.

There is one other variable here, and that is how they grade batteries for their packs. I strongly suspect lower graded cells end up in slower cars to avoid warranty issues. In that lower grade batteries typically heat up more which is the primary catalyst for cell fatigue.

It's a bit like CPU/GPU overclocking, where they are all graded according to how hot they get, and sold accordingly as faster/slower versions at a given TDP.

 

[HaulingAss]

My car is lowered on KW Coil overs so have a bit of aero help (I think)...but regardless, I have multiple other cars and bikes so I just use the M3P as my 100mi or less Hoon Car / commuter! Just trying to contribute to the thread that the i25 in Colorado doesn't provide EPA numbers! Also, why I want a 500mi cyber truck - so I dont have to think about it, except when towing the toy hauler!

Lowering is not always good for efficiency; aerodynamics is tricky business. Based upon your earlier comments about surprisingly poor efficiency at high speed, I'm guessing there is a lot that is suboptimal with your car compared to a stock AWD or RWD Long Range (besides the lack of the 18" Aero wheels). When a car is lowered, you can mess up the aerodynamics if the correct attitude of the body to the ground is not maintained. Additionally, the aerodynamically optimal attitude (front to back) can change as the car is lowered. Also, the lower to the ground a cars underfairing is to the road, the more sensitive the car's efficiency becomes to small changes in attitude. A low car can change efficiency dramatically with very small changes to the front or rear ride height to reduce turbulence and pressure differentials under and around the bottom of the car and in the wheel wells.

It's also possible that the alignment of your car feels good and tight, drives straight and corners well, but is suboptimal for efficiency. It can make a big difference. While Model 3 holds alignment very well over time, not all were perfectly aligned to begin with and a hard enough impact or heavy torque against a curb could also tweek it from perfect alignment. One sign that your alignment is not optimal for efficiency is faster than expected tire wear (regardless of whether the wear is even across the tread or not). This condition will result in unexpectedly poor efficiency at all speeds, more noticeable at speeds that should return optimal efficiency, right around 35-40 mph. The tires need to roll freely and not fight each other if you want to roll far on little energy. It makes a big difference.

The non-Performance Model 3's with 18" Aero wheels are the king of high speed efficiency when in stock form. That's why I got a Performance without the Performance brakes and bigger wheels. Since they were designed with efficiency in mind, right down to the front and rear ride height and 18" Aero wheels, any change you make will likely lower efficiency unless done with a lot of testing/tweaking for efficiency.

None of this is to suggest that consumption does not increase quickly with speed, but harmonious aero can limit the impact this has on range. These small changes in aero don't have nearly as much impact at 60 mph, even though it can be noticeable, but those impacts grow rapidly towards 85-90 mph. At those speeds, even the way you pack your luggage can make noticeable changes in efficiency. I always try to spread out any cargo weight between the frunk and the trunk. Just keep it balanced. If you have heavy things in the trunk, make sure to put something heavy in the frunk too, to spread the weight out.

 

[Cyberostachu]

Similar to my kids car. He has a trip like that he takes regularly but only chargers 80% nightly.

If I were you'd, on those days I'd change to 90% overnight and then add 5+% just before you leave on that trip. You just don't want to leave your car at a high SOC (90%+) for many hours.

63 mile buffer = (270 * 90%) - ((85*2)+10)

His TeslaFI.COM 2018 TM3 below (blue) and the 'fleet' in green.

With all due respect to those who tried to help, I already did what you suggested for me to try or do. I'm an engineer and I understood those things. Although I'm appreciative, let's stop beating this dead horse. This topic is over and done. Move on. Bye.

 

[FutureBoy]

Is it though?
I know we have MPG vs MPGe but that seems to only be used for comparison between ICE and EV.

In the ICE world, the main measure seems to be MPG (that's per gallon) which is pretty portable between ICE vehicles for comparison. No one focuses on the gallon capacity of the fuel tank. Probably because getting a fill up is relatively painless and not worth taking into account most of the time.

In the EV world, everyone seems to be using range on a full charge and possibly total kWh as the measure to look for.

So I guess in the EV world we could use YMeMV, but more practically it should probably be YRMV.

Am I getting too literal here?

So I just saw this from epa.gov

Note that the EPA is using YOUR RANGE WILL VARY for EVs instead of Your Mileage May Vary.

So the EPA is moving from mileage to range. Cool, that was my instinct too. But on top of that, they moved from MAY to WILL. Seems like they are pretty certain that you are not going to get the stated EPA estimated range. I wonder if that change is intentional.

Anyway, following the EPA lead (like that’s a good thing?) the acronym should be YRWV for EVs instead of YMMV. What are the chances this takes hold over time?

 

[Cyberostachu]

Lowering is not always good for efficiency; aerodynamics is tricky business. Based upon your earlier comments about surprisingly poor efficiency at high speed, I'm guessing there is a lot that is suboptimal with your car compared to a stock AWD or RWD Long Range (besides the lack of the 18" Aero wheels). When a car is lowered, you can mess up the aerodynamics if the correct attitude of the body to the ground is not maintained. Additionally, the aerodynamically optimal attitude (front to back) can change as the car is lowered. Also, the lower to the ground a cars underfairing is to the road, the more sensitive the car's efficiency becomes to small changes in attitude. A low car can change efficiency dramatically with very small changes to the front or rear ride height to reduce turbulence and pressure differentials under and around the bottom of the car and in the wheel wells.

It's also possible that the alignment of your car feels good and tight, drives straight and corners well, but is suboptimal for efficiency. It can make a big difference. While Model 3 holds alignment very well over time, not all were perfectly aligned to begin with and a hard enough impact or heavy torque against a curb could also tweek it from perfect alignment. One sign that your alignment is not optimal for efficiency is faster than expected tire wear (regardless of whether the wear is even across the tread or not). This condition will result in unexpectedly poor efficiency at all speeds, more noticeable at speeds that should return optimal efficiency, right around 35-40 mph. The tires need to roll freely and not fight each other if you want to roll far on little energy. It makes a big difference.

The non-Performance Model 3's with 18" Aero wheels are the king of high speed efficiency when in stock form. That's why I got a Performance without the Performance brakes and bigger wheels. Since they were designed with efficiency in mind, right down to the front and rear ride height and 18" Aero wheels, any change you make will likely lower efficiency unless done with a lot of testing/tweaking for efficiency.

None of this is to suggest that consumption does not increase quickly with speed, but harmonious aero can limit the impact this has on range. These small changes in aero don't have nearly as much impact at 60 mph, even though it can be noticeable, but those impacts grow rapidly towards 85-90 mph. At those speeds, even the way you pack your luggage can make noticeable changes in efficiency. I always try to spread out any cargo weight between the frunk and the trunk. Just keep it balanced. If you have heavy things in the trunk, make sure to put something heavy in the frunk too, to spread the weight out.

This M3 LR inefficiency was like this since day one it was delivered. Thanks heartily for you advice. Let's move on.
BTW, I have 19-inch wheels, not 18 in.

Sponsored