Apr 1, 2013
Jeff Miller I've never noticed any noises from my car when it's parked, in contrast to the Volt which was occasionally quite noisy.�
Apr 1, 2013
JRP3 Could the noise be a coolant pump for the pack?�
Apr 1, 2013
mknox I have heard the pump noise, both when charging and when sitting idle, but it is certainly not on all of the time.�
Apr 1, 2013
Larry Chanin Same here.
I was wondering in cold climates in future firmware upgrades dealing with "Vampire" load there might be an advantage to having the option of limiting the amount of battery heating until such time as the car is expected to be driven. For example, on a cold Canadian evening while you are asleep does the battery pack have to be continuously heated? Say you set your timer to have the car charged by 7:00AM the software could also preheat the battery pack only before you need to drive.
My understanding is that, within reason, cooling a battery preserves the life so in addition to reducing Vampire load such a firmware upgrade might also slightly improve battery life.
Larry�
Apr 1, 2013
qwk I have found that temperature is the biggest factor, and powering off the car via the screen just powers it down a few minutes faster than just parking it. Very little difference there. Temps below 45-50 F is what really suck the juice down.�
Apr 1, 2013
mnx I recently left my S sitting at home for 8 days in the garage unplugged. The dash said 217km rated. I took it for a spirited ~15 minute drive, consumed 2.8kWh and the display read 219km rated when I got back. This is the first time I've seen range "come back", but it's also the first time I've let the car sit for any amount of time...�
Apr 1, 2013
ShortArc Same here. Mostly the car is quiet.
Also the last 8 days my static load is down to about 2.9KWh from 3.6kWh. Garage temp must be going up...�
Apr 2, 2013
RichardC I am increasingly certain that is the case. The seems to be emanating from the front of the car. I would very much like to get a shop manual so that it would be possible to better understand what is going on under the covers.�
Apr 4, 2013
Jeff Miller Is the battery continuously heated (or cooled)?
From what I understand, the battery temperature must be warmed to above
freezing in order to charge.
But if the battery is already charged, or if temperatures are above freezing, will the battery heater turn on?
It would be very strange if it did, given that, as you note, cold temperatures are actually good for the battery.
I think most of the vampire loss is from the electronics and not from heating the battery, but I don't have good data to back this up.�
Apr 4, 2013
CaptDaveHowe Energy used while in park?
I just took delivery of my Model S and charged for the first time last night. Started out with 180 rated miles. An update took place around 11 am for 2 hours and at 2 pm the rated miles was down to 171. What is the normal energy use for the car when not in use? Is there a way to turn systems off?�
Apr 4, 2013
jerry33 Well, the update would have taken a lot of energy. During updating the car starts and stops a few times. There is a video of an update here. See the Vampire thread for discussion on energy used while parked.�
Apr 4, 2013
CaptDaveHowe Thanks Jerry. Vampire thread?�
Apr 4, 2013
rabar10 Here: (posts merged into thread, link removed)�
Apr 23, 2013
pbrulott @RichardC, your observations are similar to mine i.e.:
- loss of 20km+ per day (my garage these days is at 11C (52F))=> which looks like it corresponds to Vampire load
reported in this thread
- car gets noisy towards the front when I approach the car with the keyfob. I noticed 2 use cases 1) when my climate control is on (it's off most of the times these days) I hear funny noises in towards the front and 2) when climate control is off, a compressor noise coming from the front that I assume to be the battery heater�
Apr 24, 2013
tezco I'm still on v1.25.35, and still collecting data. I also started plotting the power loss vs my garage temp 1 hour prior to beginning charging (thought perhaps that this would better correlate with the actual temperature of the battery vs using the average between charge temperature [that could stretch over several days at times], but the plots don't seem to look any different.)
�
Apr 25, 2013
brianman Nonscientific data point...
While the weather has been rising (and is potentially the real cause), it's worth noting that my morning charge was 232-233 miles (consistently) on 4.3 and has been 237+ miles (consistently) with 4.4 firmware.�
Apr 26, 2013
RichardC Further long term energy loss test
As a follow up to the test performed in February which found an average vampire loss of 5.3 KWHr per day (measured over a four week period), I have tested the power loss over a 12 day period in April. The differences from the earlier test are as follows:
February Test: Software v.4.2, car left plugged in and recharging daily, car not manually powered off, temperature 40 to 50 F - Result - Average energy loss 5.3 KWHrs/day over 28 days
April Test: Software v.4.3, car left unplugged and recharged at end of period, car was manually powered off, temperature 50 to 60 F - Result - Average energy loss 3.9 KWHrs/day over 12 days - This rate of energy loss corresponds to an average loss of approximately 16 KM (10 miles) in rated range per day and about 163 Watts of continuous energy consumption.�
Apr 26, 2013
Jeff Miller I had a dedicated meter installed on April 4th. Yesterday, I looked at the totals. Over the 21 days, I drove 278 miles. The car says I used 92kwh, for an average of 331 wh per mile. My wall meter says I used 160kwh total. So 68 went to charge the battery (I'm guessing around 8 or so of the total), power the electronics, and manage whatever battery heating and cooling occurs (over this range of temperatures, I don't know if there should be any battery thermal management). This works out to about 3.2kwh per day, a bit lower than RichardC's but in the same ball park. So overall, more than 40% of my power consumption is unrelated to driving. Temperatures ranged from low thirties to maybe 70, with the median probably in the 40's and software is 4.3. Car was not powered off. Car was plugged in every night.
Bottom line: Tesla needs to make restoring sleep mode a high priority.�
Apr 26, 2013
Seegem I agree. My math works out to be about 4.7 kWh per day. thats... crazy! I've taken to charging and then unplugging the car..just in protest
�
Apr 26, 2013
mknox That really won't help. This issue is akin to having a leaky gas tank. If you simply stop topping the tank up, at some point you're eventually going to have to replenish the loss.�
Apr 26, 2013
Seegem Thats not true. Once the batts are charged, any incremental current draw, particularly at those levels, go beyond float charging and are used unnecessarily�
Apr 26, 2013
SFOTurtle I am also awaiting the software release with the sleep mode restored, although my vampire losses here in NorCal have declined substantially the past couple of weeks with warmer temps. Yesterday I parked my car outside at the office and lost only one rated mile in 8.5 hours and only lost 3 at night. That is far less than two months ago when I seemed to be losing 1 rated mile/hour overnight.�
Apr 26, 2013
gregincal I'm not sure what current draw you are referring to. Certainly for my Model S if left undisturbed it will top up the battery once every 24 hours (in my case the battery needs a 3kWh top up), but there is no current drawn at any other time.�
Apr 26, 2013
4sevens.com Heres another data point... I'm in asia on a business trip. Watching my car parked at the airport plugged in. When I left it I had it charged up in max mode. I noted it's charge after it finished. two days (exactly 48 hours later) it has 20 miles less.
I'm on 4.4, in Atlanta with ambient weather ranging between 65-80, in a covered parking area. So about 10 miles a day plugged in (not charging) in nice weather.�
Apr 26, 2013
JRP3 I'm not sure what you mean. There is no float charge for lithium ion, so it's the car systems that are continuing to drain the battery. It doesn't matter if you are plugged in or not.�
Apr 26, 2013
mknox In my experience (with a separately metered outlet for my Model S), once the car is charged, current draw from the wall drops to zero, but the range numbers will begin to fall over time. This says to me the energy is "leaking" from the car and not the wall. Eventually the car will begin charging again after something like 24 hours to make up for these losses, but having the car unplugged in the interim is not going to make any difference.�
Apr 27, 2013
RichardC In my experience leaving the car unplugged for longer periods, rather than allowing it to top itself up each day, may result in some modest savings. I have measured 10% higher losses over the first day, after the car is charged and about 5% higher losses over the first three or four days, after which the per day losses stabilize. However, this is based on a single observation and should be repeated to confirm that this result was not affected by other factors.�
Apr 27, 2013
markb1 I've been use the REST API to log data from my car. I checked the log from yesterday, while it was parked at work unplugged, and it lost about half a mile of rated range per hour. The outside temperature, as reported by the car, was about 20 C, or 68 F, for the whole time, which seems about right.�
Apr 30, 2013
mattjn For a company that is supposedly "green", these loses are really staggering when you think about the numbers. 4+ kW loss per day, that's potentially 1500 kW per year for every Tesla that has currently been sold. With a goal of 20K plus Model S, that's potentially 30 million kW per year for all the Model S, just from sitting around doing nothing.�
Apr 30, 2013
dsm363 The plan is for this to only be a temporary problem. Like the auto extending handles, hopefully they will deliver with an update.�
Apr 30, 2013
markb1 Unlike the door handles, though, this one is costing us money.�
Apr 30, 2013
dsm363 I agree it's costing about 40-80 cents a day and that's not ideal but I'd rather Tesla get it done right than implement it incorrectly. They ready tried once and had issues so I'd guess they are working on getting it right this time.�
Apr 30, 2013
montgom626 I agree that they need to get it right.�
May 1, 2013
neroden Yes, and I very much would like to see it fixed ASAP. From an environmental perspective, it's absurd.
However, for me it's about 33 cents a day, and frankly, I'm saving more than that on gas, even though I drive under 8000 miles a year. So I can wait.
Unlike some things, Tesla didn't advertise that the car wouldn't use energy while parked, nor did they advertise a specific amount of energy use. (Well... until the really poorly thought out calculator which they recently put on the site. Which was a big mistake.)�
May 2, 2013
pbrulott Well they say on their web site 1% per day parked. We are far from it.�
May 2, 2013
mattjn I really think any energy use while parked is ridiculous. My ICE car doesn't use any gas while it is parked.�
May 2, 2013
Chregu Nor does my new Ampera aka. Volt...�
May 2, 2013
markb1 Any? You probably want to keep the clock running. And note that any energy that your ICE car uses from the battery while it's parked will need to be made up for by the engine when you're driving. (Granted, if the vampire load on your ICE car isn't really tiny, something is wrong.)�
May 5, 2013
nleggatt I could almost cry at how much loss I'm getting on standby (idle hmm... edited this out). So I charged up to 330km, then drove to our cabin, got there with 290, let the car sit over night and came back to it at 280, drove 2km the next day and had air conditioning on, and then let it sit over night again. Just checked on the car. Went from 260 ish to 240 in 24 hours. Temperature outside is 25 degrees celcius. I had charged up to 330km so I could just straight shot home today, but I lost 30km in 2 nights do due vampire loss. That's alot, and if I were an every day normal user like my parents, I'd not be impressed, and would be suprised to get in the car and realize that I don't have enough to get back to town (potentially).�
May 5, 2013
brianman Nitpicker's corner: If you're going to use the term "idle" here, I think the Model S has a nice edge on an ICE vehicle.�
May 5, 2013
nleggatt When I read this I was like, "What the heck is brianman talking about!?" then I re-read what I wrote, what was I smoking?! I can't even think what word I meant to type, must have been kids in the background making me loose train of thought... hmm. what I meant though was "standby"�
May 5, 2013
tezco This is not borne out by my data. Fortunately we had some heavy snow around here last month that caused me to leave the car in the garage for some protracted periods so that I could test out this hypothesis.
�
May 5, 2013
brianman Heh. I don't smoke but sometimes people think I'm on something (when I'm not).
�
May 6, 2013
JRP3 Nitpicker redux, the thread title is "Power drain while idle", and idle does mean inactive, so...�
May 6, 2013
CarGuy1340 Idle Losses = 'Dirty' car
Anyone see the report on WhatsupWiththat about the idle losses making the Model S emit more CO2 than a ICE? Tesla needs to fix this.�
May 7, 2013
brianman Titles can be wrong and confusing too.
For every vehicle I've ever owned, driven or ridden in the term "idle" has never referred to sitting in the garage with no human nearby for hours. (Except if somebody leaves a running vehicle unattended, I suppose.)
But you're right. YMMV. I'll start using the term "idle" to mean "regenning down the face of a mountain" just to keep it interesting.�
May 7, 2013
JRP3 Since a moving car of any type is not "idle" of course that would be a misuse of the word "idle", which predated automobiles. Maybe with the advent of EV's the term will eventually cease to be associated with a car that is running but not moving. An ICE that is parked with the motor running is "idling", a parked EV is "idle".�
May 8, 2013
Todd Burch Yes..."WhatsupWiththat"...the world's source for accurate technical information. That's utter nonsense.�
May 8, 2013
brianman I think you'd be hard pressed to find any car on planet earth that is strictly "not moving".�
May 8, 2013
JRP3 The final nit has been picked. :biggrin: Well done.�
May 8, 2013
brianman /hug
Current terminology preferences aside, my original point was/is that terminology matters in this space. Part of the compelling nature of EVs is when you're stuck in traffic at a standstill or rolling at like 5mph. I think the "vampire load" name fits better than "idle" does for the "overnight in a garage" losses.�
May 9, 2013
RichardC Thanks Tezco, while the rate of power loss is clearly not primarily controlled by the duration of the time unplugged, the wide variance apparent in your measurements begs the question of why your losses over a couple of days would be 50% higher in some instances than in others? Was your car subject to wide variations in temperature?�
May 9, 2013
neroden Rrrrrgh. Again, they didn't used to say that. This is a big error on the part of the marketing division... they need to stop advertising things they can't deliver yet.�
May 9, 2013
EarlyAdopter Keep the faith. 1% per day is absolutely real, as anyone who had v4.1 with sleep mode enabled knows, or still knows if they ignored the firmware upgrades since and kept sleep mode. It'll be back for all soon enough, I'm certain.�
May 10, 2013
artsci I lost less than 5 percent while parked for 24 hours at the airport. Not at all a concern.�
May 10, 2013
jweinstein Richard,
Were you ever able to silence the vampire? I am having the same pump noise from the front of my car, charging or not. It seems to run constantly.
Josh�
May 11, 2013
apacheguy I, too, experience a pump noise coming from the front half of the car. Although it is more intermittent and does not run constantly.
Just heard it this morning while the car was off and not charging. Ambient temp was 70 F. Any ideas on what it could be? Is it circulating the battery coolant even though it isn't warm enough?�
May 11, 2013
jerry33 There are several possibilities:
1. Brake actuator pump. This one should be intermittent.
2. Battery coolant pump. Could be continuous depending upon the charging level.
3. Inverter/motor coolant pump. Shouldn't really happen when the car has been off for a while.�
May 11, 2013
markb1 For the parking break? Such a design seems flawed, to me. If the battery gets too low to support this, the car will start to roll.�
May 11, 2013
JRP3 Not the parking brake, the vacuum assist for the power brakes.�
May 12, 2013
jerry33 ^^^ This.�
May 12, 2013
markb1 Ok, but why would that run when the car is parked?�
May 12, 2013
jerry33 It likely starts up when the fob is near the car in anticipation of a drive--similar to the why the door handles are presented. All the times it's been heard the owner is near the car. If the fob stays near the car it will run every time the pressure gets a bit low. It's not likely to run when the fob is absent. I have yet to hear it run on my car, but that probably says more about my hearing or attention span than it does about the car.�
May 12, 2013
JRP3 I don't think it would.
Edit: Good point about the fob.�
May 12, 2013
markb1 I've definitely heard the pump sound coming from the front of my car when the fob was not nearby. I think your theory about the battery coolant pump is the most likely. Perhaps that takes longer to ramp up, so they keep the battery at operational temperature all the time.�
May 13, 2013
mknox My theory is it used to, but since 4.4 it doesn't any longer. I've noticed since roughly when I got 4.4 that the brake pedal is "hard" in the morning after sitting over night (i.e. vacuum assist is gone) whereas before the pedal still had power assist in the morning when I tapped it to turn the car on. I wondered if this was a little power savings technique.
- - - Updated - - -
I was looking at my energy logs for last Friday, and noticed something odd:
I started out with 241 miles and ended with 130 which means I "burned" 111 miles of range, yet the "Since Last Charge" meter shows only 102.3 miles driven. Since my Energy Use was actually under Rated (295 Wh/mi), I would have expected the trip meter's distance and the before minus after Rated Range numbers to be pretty much the same. The car sat for about 8 hours at work, so I'm assuming the 9 or so mile difference is the "vampire" losses, and these losses are not reflected in the Trip Meter.�
May 13, 2013
sjm Forgive me being new to this thread and not taking the time to read through all 47 pages. Just took delivery of my P85 on the 4th and promptly left for a week of business travel on the 5th. Decided to see what sort of vampire losses I could expect so fully charged the car and left it sitting in the garage (heated) while I was gone. In one week it went from a rated milage of 270 to 195 which is roughly a 35% loss or 5% per day. Will check the battery level tonight as well as see how much it takes to fully charge it.
Is this the usual level of vampire loss? Insanely high in my opinion and understand that Tesla is working on this (my car is V4.4). My Leaf that I have had for over 2 years only exhibits vampire loss in the range of 0.5% per day parked. Granted it take a few seconds to boot up and be ready to drive but if Nissan is able to eliminate most of these losses, Tesla should be able to as well I hope. Will get expensive feeding that vampire!�
May 13, 2013
jerry33 For now, yes. Tesla is working on it. They released it once but rolled it back.
The Model S will always have more vampire drain than the Leaf because of the liquid cooled battery thermal management system. Once Tesla gets it working it should be in the 1% to 1.5% range.�
May 13, 2013
dhrivnak I find this interesting and a little sad as I only lose about. 5% or 1 - 2 miles a day in my Roadster and it has thermal management of its battery. Then again maybe that is we do not have a battery guarantee.�
May 13, 2013
apacheguy I believe the 1 - 1.5% per day mentioned by jerry33 above only holds true when thermal management is active. Hence, on most days in mild climates, the loss should be comparable to what you observe in your roadster.
Obviously this is all speculation, but I hope that the final product will achieve these results.�
May 13, 2013
drees But the vampire loss currently on the Model S isn't due to TMS, it's due to onboard computers which are running 24x7. In mild weather there's no reason a car with TMS couldn't match the LEAF in vampire draw - in fact the GM Volt and Focus EV do it.�
May 14, 2013
shokunin It's 5% on an 85KW pack, soon the 40's will be 10% vampire loss per day. Tesla needs to update this. I have 16 day trip and I have to keep our ICE vehicle for an extra month because neither our 40 or 85 will last that long unplugged. Plus I cannot guarantee that i'll be able to get a charging spot at the airport.
- - - Updated - - -
Yup the car does not reflect vampire losses in the trip meters. Those that have been metering wall to battery power see the delta between the trip meter, vampire losses and charging efficiency losses. That 30.1kw + 4KW vampire + 85-90% charging efficiency could use 38-40kw to replenish the battery.�
May 14, 2013
SFOTurtle Not sure if someone has reported on this, but JB apparently spoke with reporters today including at least one from the SJ Mercury News. Among other topics discussed, this issue and said that the next (big) release sometime this summer would address the vampire loss. There are other driver safety features that are being worked on as well.
http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_23242007/future-tesla-model-s-features-sleep-mode-and�
May 14, 2013
SFOTurtle That's quite a bit of loss on your second night, much more than I would expect in temperatures that warm. I'm only losing about 5 rated miles over 10 hours or so in the evening and sometimes only 1 rated mile in the daytime over 8-9 hours when I'm at work. Daytime temps have been in the mid-20s C where I work.�
May 14, 2013
RichardC Josh, I have put it to sleep for short periods by manually powering the car off, but most of the time it seems to start up again at some point (especially after charging). I took the car in to Tesla and was told that the pump noise is normal. I certainly hope that it is shut down by a future software revision (it bothers me that the pump is constantly running, wasting power, wearing mechanical components and making noise unnecessarily).�
May 15, 2013
dsmith2189 if you consider Hawaii as a mild climate, I loose about 13 to 15 miles per day. the Vampire losses are not due to cold weather.
I had 4.1 for a week, and losses during that time were much less that they are now. I hope they bring back the sleep mode soon.�
May 17, 2013
Iz I loose ~ 10 miles/day. Not much of a difference with the warmer weather here. Noticed however that it appears to charge faster compared to mid-March.�
May 22, 2013
jweinstein Richard - A ranger came to work on my car this week. One of the three coolant pumps wasn't "plugged in", so the other two were working overtime, hence the nonstop humming noise. After investigating, he seated the cables/pins properly, and the car is back to its quiet self. Bravo to Dylan from Seattle!�
May 23, 2013
tezco Occasionally when I'm out in the garage I hear a relay click and right after that I hear a fan or pump turn on. I wonder if this noise is cooling for the DC/DC converter, which may be topping off the 12V battery.�
May 24, 2013
Larry Hutchinson For my 40 (running 4.5 with latest update) I lost 6 miles in 20 Hours. Pretty much the same as others, it seems.�
May 29, 2013
SFOTurtle Is that better or the same compared to 4.4 assuming the same ambient temps?�
May 30, 2013
Merrill I lose about 10 miles is 24 hours, this is in the garage which has been around 75 degrees. It would be nice if
Tesla could shut down everything when not in use.�
Jun 3, 2013
Discoducky This article sites significant reduction by summer (5.0?) and nearly eliminated by winter: Does The Tesla Model S Electric Car Pollute More Than An SUV? (Page 3)
�
Jun 3, 2013
drees I would be very surprised if they were able to get that far without a hardware change, so early adopters may be left out of the highest reduction in vampire loads.�
Jun 6, 2013
brianman Some data from the REST API:
Apologies for the garish styling. I was trying out a few different Excel formatting options to see which ones I like.�
Jun 7, 2013
dsmith2189 ...and this was the one you liked?
looks like about 10 miles range (range 234-224) lost in 12 hours (between 6/4 @20:24 and 6/5 @08:24)
mmmmm... I loose about 15 in 24 hours. (I don't have a nice graph. Well neither of us do, but at least you have "a" graph.)�
Jun 7, 2013
brianman Haha. Nah, didn't really like any of 'em. But then I'm fickle about such things.�
Jun 8, 2013
RichardC I have been repeatedly monitoring standby losses over the past few weeks for periods of up to a couple or three days at a time and have seen the losses averaging out to approximately 9.4 miles or 15 km per day (about 0.4 miles or 0.6 km per hour) in rated range under both v. 4.4 and v. 4.5 software. I have found the range readings under v. 4.5 have, paradoxically, become more erratic than under any of the previous versions (in one case with the car actually showing greater range, after losing range, while being stored at a stable temperature in an insulated garage). Unfortunately there is no evidence that v. 4.5 is at all better (or worse) than v. 4.4. All of these tests were performed with the car unplugged, in an insulated garage at room temperature (around 70 degrees F), and in most cases the car had been turned off from the main screen when parked. When plugged in, the standby losses average out to approximately 130 watts of continuous power loss, or about 3.2 kWHrs/Day.�
Jun 9, 2013
hans @brianman I like your graph. Looks like real graph paper.�
Jun 10, 2013
brianman Heh, thanks. That part turned out well. The rest... well I'll try to improve next round.�
Jun 10, 2013
montgom626 3.2 kWHrs/Day
Your results agree with mine. I would love the option to stop the loss. I charge on 120 V and it takes awhile to make up for the vampire loss.�
Jun 10, 2013
dhrivnak Wow 3.2 KW/day? The Roadster only uses about .25 KW or about 250watts per day.�
Jun 10, 2013
montgom626 I wonder why TMC cannot "fix" the power loss.�
Jun 10, 2013
brianman We don't have access to the source, or a means to push our own updates.�
Jun 10, 2013
Merrill Personally the vampire drain should be the priority on the next update, there should be away to eliminate at least 90% of it. Hopefully someone at TM is working on this, I know they said some of it will be gone by the update this summer.�
Jun 10, 2013
FlasherZ Elon made comments in Europe that sleep mode was coming back, that vampire loss was an important topic to address, and that it would be in the next major release.�
Jun 17, 2013
Ddowns2050 When the car is plugged in how much vampire load will happen before the car starts charging again?�
Jun 17, 2013
apacheguy So I guess we are talking 5.0 here? That update has been due out for quite some time. I remember when we TMCers could be quoted as saying it would be out by May at the latest.�
Jun 18, 2013
montgom626 AKA the "check is in the mail".
AKA the "check is in the mail".�
Jun 19, 2013
dsm363 It may take them awhile but so far, they've delivered on all promised items except for the lighted vanity mirror. Center Console is coming soon, auto-extending handles were added with a software update...etc. If Elon says it is coming, I have no reason to doubt it until they say otherwise. I think after the last update with sleep mode and the problems it had, they want to get it right.�
Jun 19, 2013
montgom626 You are right. I must be patient.�
Jun 19, 2013
hans ..and the sunshade for the pano roof
..and WiFi
..and onboard storage for music
..and foglights
but I still trust that they will deliver.�
Jun 19, 2013
dsm363 Good point, I left out WiFi and onboard music. That's it though, right?:smile: It certainly is taking a long time. I'm hoping the massive update they've talked about sometime this year handles many of these issues but all we can do is wait I guess.�
Jun 19, 2013
yobigd20 Re: the onward storage - heard from a tesla rep that the reason they are not releasing that yet is because they are using up all the space for enormous amounts of detailed data logging. Not really sure what the implication of that is....whether or not they are remotely collecting this data (which I thought shouldn't happen unless you are a reporter) or they are just logging everything locally and on the chance you have an issue all the data is there readily available to inspect. If the former, its possible this is why they are not making us pay for 3G yet (enormous data usage), if the latter (or rather in both cases) if the drive is mostly full of logs with low space and high amount of overwriting that could explain why the console seems sluggish. (Drives that are full run slower due to fragmentation as well as scattered reads/writes on the platter edges.). Random thoughts.�
Jun 19, 2013
brianman - SDK�
Jun 20, 2013
dtich what's the holdup on wifi, anyone heard anything on this front?
also, quick data point. i'm out of town and my car is hanging in the garage, i had to remotely (my brother) install v4.5 so i could use the charge level slider to set the car to ~50%. that's done and i've been tracking the slow charge bleed as it gets down to 50 from its usual/former 93% standard charge, and i thought i'd point out that the drain i'm seeing isn't as bad as what it used to be. i was getting about a mile an hour in overnight drain, so close to 24 miles in a day -- the last three days i've checked it's doing about 8 miles in a 24 hour period. much better. i am in socal, so no temperature challenges to speak of, but even so.. a big difference from what i was seeing a month or two ago. do others have this experience?
�
Jun 20, 2013
Jeff Miller 8 miles per day seems about right. In steady state - when you get down to 50% - it will be, I think 8 or 10% higher than this because of losses from charging.
However your "old" numbers, 24 miles per day, seem very high to me. That would correspond to a loss of around 7.5 kwh per day, which is roughly twice what people with wall meters typically report.�
Jun 20, 2013
dtich hm. i do also remember seeing a note from telsa way back that a mile an hour was the expected drain rate. i may be misremembering. in any case, it's better now on all fronts. the charge rate i see in the telemetry varies between about -.4 and -1 mile/hr. so that corresponds.�
Jun 20, 2013
Jeff Miller I've had my car unplugged since Sunday night (replacing the concrete driveway). I've also lost about 8 miles per day. It's interesting that your car seems to be drawing down the battery at the same rate as my car even though yours is plugged in and mine is not. I thought one of the new features of 4.5 was that the car used power from the grid rather than the battery when plugged in.�
Jun 20, 2013
stevezzzz I believe the release notes for 4.5 say that it will draw shore power for climate control and battery heating. My experience is that the car still wakes up to top off the main battery pack roughly once every 24 hours. But the OP set the slider to 50%, so his car isn't topping off, and won't until the SOC falls to 50%.�
Jun 20, 2013
dtich yes, i think it would but that it doesn't need any significant power at this point. until it charges it doesn't really care what the battery temp is, and i assume that the cellular data radio and minimal processors, running the same in both machines, constitute such a small drain as to not trigger shore power..? i think this is preferable behavior as i wouldn't want the car to take this minimum current necessary from the wall all the time and never deplete the battery. i'd rather a slow steady drain and then charge, than have it sit at some static soc. as far as my thinking goes...�
Jun 26, 2013
B-Chicago
Out of town 5 days and seeing 5-7 mi/drain per 24 hr period. I thought that was pretty bad as I just got my car last week, but it sounds like an improvement from several months ago.�
Jul 2, 2013
montgom626 3000 wasted miles. It has to be fixed.
My MS loses 3KW a day. I can get 3-4 miles from each kW. So, I use/lose a minimum of 1095 kW per year. Or 3200 to 4300 miles a year are lost from doing nothing more than just sitting. I only drive 6000-8000 miles a year. So half of my energy use is lost. Equal to charging my MS 12 times with nothing to show for it.
I am hopeful that TMC can fix this vampire loss sooner rather than later.�
Jul 2, 2013
Majerus so with that loss you are out about $72 dollars a year on electricity�
Jul 2, 2013
dennis 3-4 kwh/day loss is what I reported 8 months and 500+ posts ago when I started this thread. So it isn't going to be fixed "sooner".�
Jul 2, 2013
mitch672 At .15/KWh (loaded rate with transmission charges, generation charges, meter charge, customer charge etc), it's more like $164/year in my area. That's not the big issue though; the larger problem is, you park your Model S at long term airport parking, not plugged into an EVSE, you go away for a month, your car is nearly discharged, probably unable to get you home. That's not a great scenario, and it's one issue you don't have with an ICE. They need to get the vampire load reduced significantly for the Model S to be considered "as good as an ICE", so far, "fail" on this issue.�
Jul 2, 2013
shokunin +1. I was on vacation for nearly 3 weeks. Just got back into the country. If i had driven the Model S, I'd have a no miles left to get me home. There's no guarantee in the airports I frequent that I'll get a charging spot. Now that the trip is over and done, time to get rid of our last ICE vehicle.�
Jul 3, 2013
Jeff Miller I agree with you that not being able to leave your car unplugged for long periods poses a practical problem. But the wastefulness of running the power hungry processors for the screen 24 hours day is also an environmental problem. The vampire drain significantly increases the total energy consumption of the Model S (accounting for about 25% of the total energy used if you drive 12k miles per year) and increases the carbon footprint by a corresponding amount. The "US grid average" carbon footprint of the S is quite good for a car its size but falls short of the Prius. A big part of the difference is the vampire drain.�
Jul 3, 2013
montgom626
it drops my miles per kw from 3 to 1.5 miles per kW. That is a bummer�
Jul 3, 2013
twinklejet I'm really curious. HOW MUCH is acceptable to you guys?
I mean, if you purchase a new TV for example - You would see that there is a value for active energy consumption and another value for standby energy consumption.
That standby consumption will be higher for more feature rich TVs that can accept other various commands or provide other services to a network etc while on standby versus the traditional TV who's standby mode can only accept one command: "Power on".
I would think "standby consumption" while plugged in would be treated differently from "vampire loss" while left unplugged.
So once again, HOW MUCH standby consumption and HOW MUCH vampire loss would be acceptable to you considering that Tesla has built you a car that can report its location, state of charge, temperature etc. continuously to you while on standby and also awaits your command to lock/unlock the car along with other commands as well as having to manage the thermal dynamics of the battery etc. and keep "start up time" to a minimum so that you can just hop in and go without waiting for a "Please wait..." message before you drive?
On top of that, would you be willing to sacrifice your app-link and reporting capabilities etc. for a much lower consumption? What other standby system/feature would you be willing sacrifice; to be 'shut down' while on standby/unplugged for a lower consumption/discharge?
Some of the recent posts just read like nobody seems to care about all these standby features and we just keep writing about how many miles we're losing while the car provides these features (so the features should be powered by thin air so we don't lose our miles? or sacrifice all standby features?)�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét