Nov 6, 2014
DJ Frustration I've been thinking about this since the Dual Motor versions of the Model S were announced in October. Here goes.
I would argue that the realistic range of the Model S D configuration is actually LESS than the non-D.
Here's my reasoning:
For those of us who were around when the Model S was first released in 2012 you can remember that Tesla and Elon first said the car would have a range of 300 miles. Then they got into some heat with that claim when the EPA came out with their 265 "Rated" range. However, the 300 mile range came with assumptions like "ideal" driving conditions. I can't recall what those assumptions are, but I bet they were pretty similar to what Tesla is now assuming when they state the range for the Dual Motor configs as "295 miles at 65 mph". To anyone who recalls the 300 mile claim of the non-D config, this represents a reduction of 5 miles for the S85D and 15 miles for the P85D.
So my question is, are we getting tricked into believing that the D configs have added range when the reality is that they have a decrease? Is Tesla advertising "ideal" range on their website for the D configs? Please discuss.�
Nov 6, 2014
wycolo Consider that the front motor is geared higher thus offering greater efficiency at faster ground speeds. At those speeds the front does more of the work. At lower ground speeds the rear motor does more of the work befitting its lower gearing. The D can offer more than just the sum of its parts, so to speak.
--�
Nov 6, 2014
Saghost If you remember, the 300 miles was at 55 miles per hour.
I don't know how accurate it is, but the calculator on the Tesla homepage shows 261 miles for the 85 kWh RWD model S at 65 mph - a very close match for its EPA rating, and ten percent less than they are promising for the 85D.
Walter�
Nov 6, 2014
jgs In addition, it's been suggested the dual motors may offer more effective regen.�
Nov 6, 2014
jerry33 Depending upon how much usable energy the battery has there is somewhere between
74000/251 = 295 miles
and
81000/251 = 322 miles
based on my usage. Seems pretty close to me. The EPA numbers can be spun in any number of ways.�
Nov 6, 2014
ckessel You're a bit mistaken there. 300 was based on the old EPA test, which was the standard back when the S was announced and in testing. EPA then changed their test and the S got 265 on the new test.
There was no "heat with that claim", the test simply changed and Tesla changed their number accordingly.
If Tesla says more range with the dual motor, it has more range. They aren't gaming the number dual motor number.�
Dec 4, 2014
breser The exact quote and your characterization don't really match. There's a difference from not having the information and not being willing to share it. I'd say the person you're talking with sounds willing to share it if they had it.
That said, I find it hard to believe they wouldn't have distributed that information to delivery if it was available since you know people are going to be asking these sorts of questions at delivery.
It would be interesting to see if the other vehicles had a surge in build starts recently, but we can't really see that because there's not very many cars on the order tracker.�
Dec 4, 2014
Andyw2100 This would be quite an issue, and I, for one, would be very disappointed.�
Dec 4, 2014
flyboyzz1 Agree completely. Might have been a huge factor in my decision to switch from the P85 to the D. Depends on how much of a decrease.�
Dec 4, 2014
dennis From the epa.gov website:
Auto manufacturers are responsible for testing vehicles in their laboratories according to EPA test specifications and reporting fuel economy values to EPA.
Since Tesla determined the numbers I doubt there is disagreement over them.�
Dec 4, 2014
gpetti Sadly, this is probably true but as I said earlier this fact has been obscured a bit. Many discussions of the"D" tend to use the range of the 85D and the performance of the P85D as if it were one car. The reality appears to be different. If you look at the design studio (on the US site) the 85D shows 265 miles range (EPA) and 285 miles range at 65 mph. The P85D mentions the 285 miles range at 65 mph but does not mention the EPA range. I think that originally it showed the EPA as being about 10 miles less but that figure is no longer in evidence. The motor trend review says of the range: (about 4 percent better for non-Performance versions, 3.5 percent less for the P85D). Obviously magazine articles can be wrong but I'm pretty sure this information is sound. I guess the reassuring thing is that the current numbers suggest that is we drive a consistent 65 mph we will get the same range as the 85D.�
Dec 4, 2014
Andyw2100
In that first message above, which was the one I had been responding to, you made it sound like you didn't think there was any change in how Tesla was actually producing the P85D, but rather just a change in how they were displaying the status on the dashboard. That's what I had responded to by pointing out the fewer cars that seemed to be going into production (which we now agree on.)
I could definitely be mistaken on this but at some point didn't the P85D show a range of 295 miles in the design studio? I'm pretty sure either the P85D did or the 85D did or maybe even both did.�
Dec 4, 2014
MarcG The 85D still shows 295 miles "ideal" range (at 65 mph). P85D is at 285 miles:
�
Dec 4, 2014
EarlyAdopter As I recall it, the 85D showed a range of 295 miles at 65mph and the P85D showed a range of 275 miles at 65mph at one point.�
Dec 4, 2014
MarcG Model S 65 range: 215 (ideal), 208 (EPA)
Model S 85 range: 285 (ideal), 265 (EPA)
Model S 85D range: 295 (ideal), no EPA yet
Model S P85D range: 285 (ideal), no EPA yet�
Dec 4, 2014
gpetti I hadn't selected the AWD version of the 85 so I was seeing the old version. I guess it makes sense that the EPA range isn't on there as per the many comments above. So in summary, at 65 mph, the P85D is listed as the same as the S85 but the 85D is listed as 10 miles higher.�
Dec 4, 2014
MarcG WHOA!!! 242 miles range??? No wonder they're delaying release...
Thanks a bunch for posting such a nice quality photo
�
Dec 4, 2014
commasign Re: 242 miles range. That may factor in the 21" wheels. Maybe cars with 19" wheels will have more range.�
Dec 4, 2014
JBrown4390 Rather significant decrease in range.... That's not good.�
Dec 4, 2014
rays427 The epa rating on the P85D shows 242 what is it on the s85 and s60. I assume they are also lower than what Tesla shows at 65 under ideal conditions.�
Dec 4, 2014
andrewket Tracking P85D delivery thread
Yep. Maybe a demo car? 38 kW per 100 miles. 380 wH/mile.
Edit: ah I see everyone else saw the 242 range. I saw the energy use first. So I'm really confused. What happened to more efficient??�
Dec 4, 2014
pdx
I was just going to ask that...�
Dec 4, 2014
MarcG Check my post on the previous page. Or check Tesla's design site.
Here you go:
242 is considerably lower than 285..�
Dec 4, 2014
DJ Frustration I ruminated and ultimately posted about the reduced range of the dual compared to non-dual motor configs, but it was explained away. I had a feeling I was right.
Take a look:
Range Reduced on Dual Motor Configs?�
Dec 4, 2014
crazybrit You should be comparing it to the 265 range. In reality, when you need the range, most of it will be highway driving, where it is more efficient. It will be interesting to see what the real world range looks like. Anyone know the EPA of the P85+ with 21s?�
Dec 4, 2014
NOLA_Mike 
�
Dec 4, 2014
Rice390 Another tidbit - Motor Trend estimated 40/39 kWh/100 miles during their review. I thought that was just a mistake.
But ya... This is a bit concerning.�
Dec 4, 2014
MarcG That's weird, P85D's mpg-e is the same overall, slightly worse in city and better highway, yet total range is a lot worse...�
Dec 4, 2014
403portside All of us owners who have sold/traded in cars with the expectation of 285. Wow. This is hard to believe. I will have a BIG problem with Tesla if this was mis-represented.�
Dec 4, 2014
drsaab The s85 on fueleconomy.gov shows
No difference for 19 or 21" wheels.
Electricity [TR="class: cons"]
Combined MPG:89 MPGe City MPGe:88 Highway MPGe:90 combined
city/highwaycity highway 38 kWh/100 mi [/TR][TR="class: valignTop nobottomborder"][/TR] 265 miles
Total Range
And doesn't the manufacturer give the EPA the numbers. That is why KIA and Hyundai had to give owners back like $250 each because they reported too high numbers on the fuel economy for the EPA sticker and when finally epa tested after complaints etc it was a lot lower. Same with the Ford hybrids. Ford lowered the EPA numbers after complaints, the EPA did not lower them.
So then would Tesla not also give the EPA the data like all other manufactures, until the epa gets around to testing itself.
with the same batty pack size and same combined 89 mpge the range Should be the same.. quite strange it is.�
Dec 4, 2014
uselesslogin I had read Mercedes running into this with the B class electric as well. EPA range number is for standard mode I think now and in 2012 it used range mode. Notice the MPGe is the same and actually quite a bit better on the highway. I'm sure you will all be happy with it in the real world.
Edit, here is an article that mentions EPA range measurement for 2013 changed and averages standard and range modes. If I assume they used 90% of the range setting then the 2012 EPA measurement would be 269 miles.
2013 Nissan Leaf Real-World Range: Is It Any Higher?�
Dec 4, 2014
techmaven EPA tests, including the highway portion have a lot of start stop in it. As we know, YMMV and the long distance range has more to do with steady driving and the EPA rating may not be representative.�
Dec 4, 2014
DJ Frustration An interesting development over at the P85D delivery thread.
Tracking P85D delivery thread - Page 127
�
Dec 4, 2014
Cottonwood Here is an enlargement from that post. 242 EPA miles for the P85D.
�
Dec 4, 2014
breser Found the thread where someone had the call from the DS about reduced range and there's a statement from Jerome about the range.
�
Dec 4, 2014
DJ Frustration The thing that jumps out to me is the City, Highway are different between the D and non-D but the Combined is the same as is the 38 kWh/100 miles. But why does the D version only go 242 vs. 265 for the non-D?
�
Dec 4, 2014
commasign Guess I'll be using auto-pilot at the posted speed limit.�
Dec 4, 2014
anticitizen13.7 I know people are concerned, but let's wait to see real-world results rather than the EPA cycle results. The EPA cycle is only a rough estimate.
My Honda Civic is rated at 34 MPG highway and 29 MPG overall (manual transmission), but it easily achieves 40 MPG highway when fully loaded, which is a huge difference.�
Dec 4, 2014
ItsNotAboutTheMoney Although, the difference in range numbers can't be accounted for using EPA efficieny ratings.
Maybe there's been a testing cycle change.�
Dec 4, 2014
Denarius I'm perfectly happy with the new range. When I'm doing a lot of city driving, I don't need the range. When I do need the range I'm on the interstate, and I'll get more range there.�
Dec 4, 2014
crazybrit It makes no sense that the P85+ with 21s would have the same EPA rating as an S85. Isn't it well established that the 21s reduce range? Also, a high performance car always consumes more energy, I have to believe the same is true for electric power trains.�
Dec 4, 2014
uselesslogin Yes, essentially the testing starting for 2013 models uses a 90% battery charge to calculate range. The testing procedures in May of 2012 when the Model S was tested was from a 100% charge.
2013 Nissan Leaf Real-World Range: Is It Any Higher?�
Dec 4, 2014
AlMc I agree that this will have minimal affect on my enjoyment of the car. However, it is unfortunate that at the D event and on the website we were all given not only the impression but at the D event, Elon's word, that through the efficient shifting of electrons to one or both of the motors under different driving conditions that the car would have an increase in range. I did not expect to have a better range than a P85+ in the 'insane' mode.
I do hope that when we all actually get our vehicles that we will see an increase in highway range when driven appropriately.�
Dec 4, 2014
MarcG I don't think anyone here should have expected 285 miles of range out of the P85D on the EPA cycle, but the gap between 285 @ 65 mph and the supposed 242 on EPA is much larger than 285 to 265 on the S85...�
Dec 4, 2014
felixtb Yes I think we will looking at the highway milage of the EPA rating. where the D is considerably more efficient than the RWD models.�
Dec 4, 2014
Eclectic Interesting...if you scan that QR code it takes you to the fueleconomy.gov page for the 2012 Model S. Not the 2013, not the 2014. Either they have been using an outdated QR code for a long time or this sticker may have been cobbled together from parts of an older sticker.�
Dec 4, 2014
anticitizen13.7 RWD Model S85 is rated 88 City, 90 Highway, 89 Combined
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=34775
Hmm... -2 City, but +4 Highway, and stays 89 Combined.�
Dec 4, 2014
uselesslogin I'll just keep repeating that the range calculation done in 2012 for the original Model S was from a 100% charge and 2013 and later it was revised to 90%. So the EPA rating if the same cycle were run is 269.
- - - Updated - - -
They did not test the "2013" or "2014" Model S. The original EPA test was announced in May of 2012.�
Dec 4, 2014
Eclectic But in the 2013 sticker that was posted in this thread the QR code takes you to a 2013 model. So they were updating the QR codes in 2013, if not 2014...odd that they would have gone all the way back to 2012 QR codes if this is a legit P85D sticker.�
Dec 4, 2014
Saghost This.
The testing protocol changed in an attempt to handle the difference between a typical charge and a range type charge. Honestly, I think the new system is screwed up and makes cars look worse without good reason, but that's the way the EPA went.
Since they are messing with the available battery aspects of the test, focus on the other pieces instead. 88 MPGe city and 90 MPGe highway turned into 86 city and 94 highway - meaning the P85D picked up almost 5% on the EPA highway test, but lost a few on the city test due to the higher weight. That's more or less what we expected, and in line with Tesla's guidance about range at a constant 65 mph.
I'm confident that folks driving cross country with the Dual Motor cars will get more range than the older cars do in comparable circumstances, even though the EPA muddied the waters.
Walter�
Dec 4, 2014
Cottonwood If that is the case, then 244/90%=271 miles range. That looks a little better.
Because I ordered my P85D with 19's, I wonder if I will see better numbers...�
Dec 4, 2014
Arb1ter It looks like the EPA numbers are based off of 19" wheels, as 21" wheels would increase energy consumption considerably.
For highway conditions, the EPA numbers are in good agreement with Tesla's.
(242 miles_combined * (94 MPGe_highway / 89 MPGe_combined)) / 90% (full charge) = 284 miles highway range
The design page gives a range of "285 miles at 65 mph".�
Dec 4, 2014
dennis I do not believe that is true for the Model S. As reported previously in many threads, Tesla put the charge slider in specifically so that the EPA number would NOT be an average of the 93% and 100% charge levels previously selectable when charging. AFAIK all Model S EPA ratings are for a full charge.�
Dec 5, 2014
WarpedOne You are accusing Tesla of deceit. Very nice of you.�
Dec 5, 2014
MartinAustin That's a 1 mile difference! I am very disappointed in Tesla for this.
:tongue:�
Dec 5, 2014
David_Cary This is right. The Leaf got penalized in 2013 at a 90% charge level. The efficiency went up with that model year but the range went down. In 2014, Nissan removed the 80% option and the EPA range returned to 100% level. The Leaf got set at 90% because it was an average of the 80% and 100%. Tesla came out with the slider at the time of the rule change and the thought was it was to work around that ruling. I have a 2013 Leaf.
It is certainly possible that the D is a "new model" and the EPA had another rule change to penalize the slider. But until now, the rule was an average of charging settings. The slider was exempt. If it wasn't, then you would have seen some change with the 2013 rule change and you did not.�
Dec 5, 2014
andrewket I think Walter nailed it, and I'll take this trade-off. Around town the slight loss in range won't matter as a single charge will be more than enough for my daily use. When range really matters - highway driving on trips, the P85D gains 5%. Let's not forget we also gained AWD and a insanely fast car.
(Now if Tesla would just start delivering!)
A�
Dec 5, 2014
uselesslogin Well I don't know but the P85D has 89 MPGe and uses 38 kwh per 100 miles right from the sticker and the standard P85 is the same. So unless the battery packs are different sizes the 242 number doesn't make sense any other way.�
Dec 5, 2014
vgrinshpun I have an alternate explanation for the reduced range number. Reposting from the short-term thread:
There is a reason why P85D has three modes: NORMAL, SPORT, INSANE.
After Elon's presentation on D I was wondering why these buttons are required at all? The answer IMO lies with the fact that tuning two motors for efficiency (NORMAL mode) will not result in best acceleration, while using two torque curves of drive units to achieve fastest acceleration (INSANE mode) might not result in the best efficiency. This is actually what Elon alluded to in his presentation.
The problem with EPA sticker is that it allows only for one range number. So the question is what number should go on the EPA sticker? Clearly the sticker will show the lowest number, not the highest. So my conclusion is that we are trying to start a storm in a bath tub.
NORMAL = EPA range 265 miles
SPORT = EPA range ??? miles
INSANE = EPA range 242 miles
I bet that delay might be because Tesla is negotiating with EPA on some way to put both highest and lowest number on the sticker in order to fully represent capability of the car.
BTW, it is absolutely insane that EPA range in INSANE mode drops only to 242 miles. ?�
Dec 5, 2014
3s-a-charm I saw only Sport and Insane mode - no "normal"...?�
Dec 5, 2014
andrewket Or report the middle, or an average.�
Dec 5, 2014
vgrinshpun I am going with three because Elon mention them during the D presentation. I did not see the car, so not 100% sure on whether it has three or two modes. Either way I really think that lower EPA range figure is for "INSANE" mode. The range for another mode (whether it is "NORMAL" or "SPORT") has to be higher, because acceleration is not a priority for this more "pedestrian" mode.
- - - Updated - - -
If my theory is indeed the correct one, I do not believe that EPA would go with the middle or average number. I think that their preoccupation is that number they show should be true regardless of what mode the car is in. Therefore they would insist IMO on the most conservative range number (for an "INSANE" mode) to be prominently displayed on the sticker.�
Dec 5, 2014
Andyw2100 It would be great if this, or something close to this winds up being correct.
But this brings up an interesting point that I had not thought about in this way before.
I guess I had assumed that when we talked about the maximum range of the car, that was under best conditions, and with the car's HVAC's range mode on. Is this not the case? In other words, under best conditions, and with the HVAC's range mode on, is the range actually better than stated?�
Dec 5, 2014
vgrinshpun I do not know details about the EPA test, but am sure that all of these details, including the HVAC settings are prescribed. I do notice that when charging my car while in range mode I consistently get about 3 miles more of range. Charging to 90% I get 231 miles when range mode is of and 234 when it is on. It would be interesting to see what this difference is for a brand new car...�
Dec 5, 2014
Drron I agree with the others who posted here that the reduced miles makes little difference to my real world driving. I commute 10 miles round trip to work and drive maybe 100 miles at most on the weekends. If I take a trip it will be along the interstate and I will happily take a break every 2 hours and stop at a supercharger. A 20 minute break every 2 hour is a good thing with respect to safety and fatigue. Tesla seems to be putting the Superchargers along the interstates 2 hours apart. As long as I can drive 80 with the air conditioning on for two hours at a stretch while listening to music on my upgraded audio system I will be quite happy. I wish they would finish the I-10 stretch from Florida to Texas though as I have family all along that stretch and there are some big gaps that are over 300 miles. Our first trip will be in February from Tampa to Charleston as the necessary chargers are in place. That assumes that Vin 63966 arrives in late December as they are still stating on my Dashboard. Dr Ron�
Dec 5, 2014
vgrinshpun i generally agree with this, but there will be always situations when some extra range would be helpful...
BTW, regarding the fatigue, you will discover that Model S is an excellent car for long trips because driving it is significantly less tiring than for any other car. The combination of effortless immediately available power, quiet cabin, excellent cruise control (which works for any, even very hilly terrain) and one pedal driving all contribute to a more relaxed, less strained driving experience. Each of these things seem trivial, but taken together they do make a significant difference.�
Dec 5, 2014
Andyw2100 I don't think any of us would be at all concerned about the range if we had the option of stopping at superchargers every two hours. But for some of us there are no superchargers yet any where along any of the routes we ever plan to travel. And I imagine that for a great number of us there are at least some routes with limited superchargers and gaps, like the one you reference between Florida and Texas.
That being said, now that the difference between the highway mileage and the local mileage impacts' on the EPA estimates have been clarified, I too am satisfied that Tesla did not mislead us with respect to the range. As others have pointed out, the EPA estimate for highway is actually better than before, and that's when we're most going to need the range.�
Dec 5, 2014
dennis Most ICE cars with automatic transmissions have a button to switch between Economy mode which provides better fuel economy and Sport mode which provides better acceleration. According to your theory, the EPA would require all ICE mpg numbers to be reported with the Sport mode setting. That is extremely unlikely IMO.
As others have said, the lower range reported for the P85D (in Normal mode) is because the heavier weight of the car yields worse range in the city driving portion of the EPA test.�
Dec 5, 2014
Saghost If that were the case, why isn't it affecting the city/highway/combined numbers or the kWh per hundred miles?
To my mind, the fact that those have remained more or less unchanged (with minor differences that match our expectations,) while the all electric range number went down sharply is proof that the change we know the EPA mandated for the charge level is affecting the range number.
If something were actually affecting the car's efficiency, it would be reflected in the MPGe and kWh/mile numbers.
Walter�
Dec 5, 2014
RAW84 This seems like a reasonable explanation. Tesla needs to provide an official explanation, tho.
I disagree that the EPA is wrong for using the most conservative. Seems to be the most prudent thing
Up to individual mfgs to explain the caveats.�
Dec 5, 2014
crazybrit Take a look at this link. If it is correct, then it doesn't lend credence to your theory. http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2013/06/do-all-those-driving-modes-affect-a-cars-epa-gas-mileage.html
Our range will be better on the highway, worse in town. Average will be the same. This is the perfect combination. We want range on the highway, and we want to kick ass in town. We get to have our cake AND eat it. :biggrin:
�
Dec 5, 2014
AlMc thanks. Interesting and informative.�
Dec 5, 2014
gpetti +1
To everyone that has made this point.�
Dec 5, 2014
RAW84 Thanks for the link�
Dec 5, 2014
Lloyd Perhaps we will find that Tesla has adjusted these estimates to more accurately reflect real world driving experiences as we have noted from our use!!
- - - Updated - - -
That said, Elon at the D release was very explicit that the dual motor configuration was 3% more efficient than the rear wheel drive version.�
Dec 5, 2014
Thud No, EPA changed the testing methodology since 2012. In 2012, the range was based on a 100% charge.
In 2013+, the range is based on a blend of once cycle at 100% charge, and a second cycle at 80% charge. So roughly speaking the EPA range dropped by about 10 percent just due to the difference in testing, even though MPGe remains unchanged.
Same thing happened to the Leaf:
2013 Nissan Leaf gets 75-mile range (actually 84) in new EPA test�
Dec 5, 2014
TexasEV Last year when Tesla firmware update changed from the two charging settings to having a slider, EPA continued to report range at 100% charge as there wasn't a second fixed setting to average it with as they did on the Leaf. Now the "slider loophole" to their changed methodology seems to have gone away. I doubt the average car shopper would know the EPA range number is the average of 100% and 80% charge, so it's really misleading to do that. I understand they want to report a lower number than 100%, as that is not a typical charge, but they should report range for both charges rather than a number that no one realizes is an average.�
Dec 5, 2014
Arb1ter Model S Design Studio | Tesla Motors shows the "at 65 mph" ranges for all models.
If the EPA quotes a range of 242 miles for the P85D, and it has the same actual range as a 265-mile Model S 85, I think Tesla should take action to avoid misunderstandings. For example:
Model S Range at 65 mph EPA Range 60 215 208 85 285 265 85D 295 N/A P85D 285 242?
- Post "at 65 mph" ranges at the top to make comparison between models easy
- Make a blog post extolling the virtues of consistent range measurement
- Put information next to the EPA ranges in some fashion giving a brief explanation and a link to the blog post
�
Dec 5, 2014
ArtInCT I find this thread very interesting... being a cautious type with new tech, I am not in the middle of the fray as many of you are
who are awaiting their new P85D... sooner vs later.
However, there were enough new tech variables in the P85D equation for me to hold off pulling the trigger for a while.
And not enough answers regarding my questions.... coupled with some limitations that I did not enjoy.... (Remember the Black Only Interior?)
that said, from what I gather there is a 15% reduction in distance with the P85D (if we can believe that window sticker)...
But... we do not know what "mode" or "modes" that reduction was calculated in.
In fact, until one of us takes delivery.... we do not know how many "modes" there really are... (although as a good listener I heard 3).
One word of advice for those of you who are just entering the 0-60 in 3 second area......
The stopping distance needed from 60 to zero is probably the same as the model S you are used to.....
So please please, leave enough runway to stop.... Know this from experience in the Cobra. A few close calls.... ahem.
(Come to think of it... this may be the reason WHY Tesla is limiting test drives in the P85D to "Rides")�
Dec 5, 2014
breser That's not new today, it's been there for several weeks if not almost a month. I don't recall the exact date but it was after Telsa dropped the 60D/colors/black roof. The range at 65mph has bounced around on the P85D as well.�
Dec 5, 2014
EarlyAdopter Happy to answer all of your questions Art just as soon as Tesla ships me my car! (been stuck "In Production" for two weeks now)�
Dec 5, 2014
Arb1ter Really? I could've sworn I didn't see it yesterday. Oh well. The rest still applies.�
Dec 5, 2014
ArtInCT Thanks, and that is somewhat OK that Tesla wants to get the end product "Right". We all do as owners.
And for all of you who are anxiously waiting for your new P85D, we all sympathize and share your moments....
I do look forward to all your reports ... and how you peel back the Onion of the P85D. It will be great fun.
The changes I saw revealed in the P85D and to some extent also in 85D were large... to somewhat trivial but when taken
as a whole are formidable..
1) new Skateboard design for front motor (which is also new in and of itself).
2) probably a new battery layout for feeds to front and rear motor, but possibly not.
3) new brakes with servos vs pump
4) new software, especially to control the dual motors seemlessly
5) new front end geometry for motor and steering
6) new rear doors or actually hinges to the rear doors
7) new seats
8) new TPMS sensors, really a nit but a software change perhaps
9) new soundproofing for front motor
10) new paintshop (i have heard this but am not sure about it)
11) training service technicians in SC's on all the above
and last but not least (I know this all too darned well having worked at Sikorsky Aircraft).....
Production Line Changes to build all the above RIGHT the FIRST TIME....�
Dec 5, 2014
breser I've been doing some digging trying to find the test procedures that the EPA requires for electric vehicles. I've been doing so because there have been several posts pointing to articles [1][2] about the Leaf saying that the test procedures changed in 2013. I find it really strange that if the test procedures changed for the Leaf in 2013 that we didn't see changes to Tesla's numbers prior to the new P85D window sticker that we've seen.
One long standing idea is that the change from the Normal and Range charging modes on the Tesla to a slider where you could choose a specific value was to avoid the range being decreased like with the Leaf (apparently range averaged between the Normal and Range modes). Nissan resolved this with the 2014 Leaf by simply removing the 80% charge mode entirely [3]. Given that Nissan's solution was to make a UI change it doesn't seem that implausible to believe that Tesla did the same thing. Tesla is in the unique position to update all the cars to new software that effectively makes that UI change retroactively. Nissan appears not to have been in the same position.
The presumptions of many posters pointing to the situation with the Leaf has been that there was a uniform change to the testing procedures in 2013 that is now catching up to Tesla. However, I believe there is another plausible explanation. That the EPA decided that the charge modes were similar to optional driving modes. Someone else linked an article talking about how driving modes were dealt with during testing by the EPA [4]. The article stated that if there was not a predominant mode that the EPA would use the average of the best and worst modes. This sounds very similar to how what was said about the Leaf in the previously mentioned articles (that the 80% and 100% charges were averaged). The article also mentions that this would be handled on a case by case basis and that manufacturers would submit information to try and determine the predominant mode. This leaves things open to the EPA having decided to deal with Tesla in a different fashion than the Leaf, especially since Tesla made a change to their UI allowing a large number of possible charge rates.
So now let's go look at the EPA test procedures and what they say [5]. The final rules for the 2013 model year are published here (PDF). Electric and Plug-In Hybrid Electric Test Procedures are covered on page 24 of that document, where the EPA says they will use the SAE J1634 test procedures (from the October 2002 revision). That is the most current information that the EPA has published on their website as far as the test procedures go. But maybe the EPA just hasn't been very good at updating their regulations on their own website and maybe they really have updated that information. So let's go look in the Code of Federal Regulations. That previous documents references 40 CFR Parts 85, 86 and 600. The Government Printing Office publishes the eCFR which is updated on a daily basis (at this time updated to December 3, 2014). 40 CFR �600.116-12 provides the exact testing procedures for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles, specifically is mentions SAE J1634 again. It also mentions that SAE J1634 is included by reference and in 40 CFR �600.011, and says that it was revised in October, 2012. That's obviously a newer revision than the October 2002 version mentioned before. So at some point between 2011 and now they have updated to a newer version of the SAE J1634 test procedures.
So what does SAE J1634 say? SAE has a page about the standard on their website. You have to pay to read the whole thing and I'm not willing to pay $70 to fulfill my curiosity in this case. However, you can read a preview of the document and it talks about what has changed, specifically is says that the old standard used a Single Cycle Test and that the new standard allows for Multi Cycle Tests. Meaning in the past you had to charge the car up, and then run it down in a single run to determine the range for each driving cycle. The new test allows them to do multiple driving cycles in a single test while keeping track of the energy usage during the test and then extrapolating this out to the entire useful charge of the battery. This method has been tested to be consistent with the already existing Single Cycle Test and new technologies would have to reprove the faster test procedure stays consistent or use the Single Cycle Test procedure. As far as I can tell that's the only change to the test procedure, though I can't be entirely sure without buying the procedures.
I believe there has been no change to the testing procedures with respect to the state of charge of the battery. However, the EPA may have started considering the battery charge modes as driving modes and then dealt with them on a case by case basis as described above. It's possible that the EPA has now decided that using a 100% charge on the Tesla is inappropriate. There are a couple of reasons why this view may have changed. First the Tesla will revert form range mode after a few days. The language in that one article mentioned reverting to a specific mode on engine start, but perhaps the EPA has determined that range mode is not the predominant mode since it reverts after a few days. Secondly, the EPA may have asked Tesla for data on what the most used charge point is on vehicles. Given that the car reports this information for use by the smart phone app, Tesla should have this information. The EPA may have determined that the predominant mode is not the 100% charge, but some other value.
I'm not sure what the real situation is but I don't think you can just point at the Nissan Leaf articles and say that the standards changed. Once P85D owners take delivery of their vehicles we'll get some real world numbers regarding range. I'd also expect Tesla to make a statement since I'm sure media will pick this up and run with it, especially if the S85 range goes down as well. Until either of those things happen all of this is just very educated speculation.�
Dec 5, 2014
breser The other possibility is that the insane mode gets much worse mileage and that Tesla is having to report the range as the average between the best and worst modes. That would seem to be more plausable given the state of the standards. The car we have seen a window sticker for was made in November, 2014. If there was a range reduction for the S85 and other vehicles as a test procedure would imply then I would expect that people taking deliveries now would see this range reduction on their stickers.
Let's presume for a bit that the best mode of the P85D still gets 265 rated range. So if you assume the 242 is the average of the 265 and whatever it gets in the insane mode then you can find out the insane mode mileage by solving for x in this equation (x + 265) / 2 = 242. Which comes out to 219.
If that's the case that the P85D does 219 miles in insane mode and still does 265 in whatever the best mode is then this whole thing is a whole lot of fuss over nothing.
That's my educated speculation at this point.
So who's going to drive their P85D in insane mode for 219 miles to find out for me?�
Dec 5, 2014
liuping Does Insane Mode really change the efficiency if driven in a normal fashion? I assume EPA testing does not require the driver to floor the pedal from each stop, etc�
Dec 5, 2014
breser We don't even know what Insane mode actually does yet. So I can't answer that question.�
Dec 5, 2014
30seconds My assumption is that the power to the motor is limited in other modes and it would be much easier to modulate energy use. Insane probably is hard to drive efficiently as just a bit of pedal sends lots more juice�
Dec 5, 2014
dennis Here is a summary of the test segments that comprise the EPA mileage test:
As you can see, the max acceleration (and speed and acceleration profiles) are specified by the test. So the acceleration rate would be the same in Normal and Insane modes.�
Dec 5, 2014
breser I'm not sure you can rely on that information since that's not the test procedure for electric vehicles. There's even a note to that effect in the screenshot you posted. Though I suspect that the electric vehicle tests are not substantially different in this respect.
The assumption that just because the speed and acceleration rates are the same that insane mode can't change energy usage doesn't really work for me. I'd guess that insane mode probably changes how the car uses the two motors. If it changes the points it switches between motors or runs both for more of the range you may still have increased energy usage even with fixed acceleration rates.
But again without actually knowing what it does we can't really say for sure. I'm inclined to believe the P85D has worse mileage than other vehicles, that is what Jerome said in his email to expect.�
Dec 5, 2014
Johann Koeber 
Can someone help me with the math?
38 kWh for 100 mi
242 mi range
Battery needs 2.42*38 = 91,96 kWh capacity
We all know it is 85 kWh of which not all are accessible.
Much worse here:
265 mi * 38 kWh/100 mi = 100.7�
Dec 5, 2014
dennis The P85D is about 275 lbs. heavier. More force is required to move it. So all other things being equal (battery capacity, motor efficiency) it will have less range, as you have stated.�
Dec 6, 2014
David_Cary The MPGe number is from the wall. So 100 kwh in from the wall may equal 80 kwh to the battery. That is why the math doesn't work.
It is nearly impossible for a 5% weight increase to account to a 8.5% decrease in range. Weight is a negative but never 1 to 1. More like a 5% increase is a 2% decrease. This should be even more (or less) dramatic for an EV that regens.
We maybe seeing the effect of 21 inch rims and weight. Typically the manufacturer can put in the most common tire for the testing. They may have lumped S85 and P85. But now EPA is saying P85D needs to test with 21s
And then there is the slider question.
The P85D is a new model and may have been hit with new testing rules or just a different interpretation of old rules. The 85D should also have to be retested since AWD vehicles historically have a hit to mileage.�
Dec 6, 2014
MartinAustin Just throwing this in, not responding to any particular post, but it looks like there is more and more reason for the EPA to test at 80mph -
Montana legislators pushing for 85 mph speed limit - Autoblog�
Dec 6, 2014
TexasEV Or at least for the range calculator on the Tesla web site to go beyond 70 mph!
- - - Updated - - -
The fine print on these EPA stickers says "when fully charged vehicle can travel about..." So I it's even more confusing than I thought, because the new EPA rules calculates range as the average of 100% charge and 80% charge. Did they change the methodology without changing the wording on the sticker?�
Dec 6, 2014
AMPUP Isn't every 4 wheel drive vehicle less efficient than 2? There are two drives requiring power, no matter if the software balances this somehow, I find it hard to believe that it's not going to consume more power and thus reduce overall range.�
Dec 6, 2014
David_Cary An electric motor offers nearly zero resistance when spinning. So 2 motors don't really hurt compared to one. When cruising, you might use 20 hp. 2 motors producing 10 hp each uses nearly identical energy as 20 from a single motor. The extra motor requires a tiny amount of extra energy - so small as to be zero in any calculation.
Now - extra weight is worth something but 2% comes to mind (far more in city, close to zero in highway). Then you have the improved efficiency by gearing the 2 motors differently so one is optimal at 30 mph and one is optimal at 60 mph. This is perhaps worth 5% in overall efficiency.
So net is +3% give or take - with up to 5% in highway and 1% in city. Just rough numbers. Remember the new EPA sticker probably has 21 inch rims instead of 19 with the efficiency numbers.
So it isn't just software, it is optimizing 2 systems for 2 different speeds. This trumps any loses in efficiency.
An ICE system is a totally different beast as it just adds weight and extra resistance with no improvements to counter it.
The whole concept of 2 motors is like having a 2 speed transmission instead of one. In an ICE world, that would represent 20% improved efficiency (if not more).�
Dec 6, 2014
ArtInCT No matter what you do to alter the acceleration rate, the overall weight of a vehicle and its total payload is
very important to MPG or MPGe, acceleration and stopping distance. I do believe that I read that the P85D may be a couple of hundred pounds
heavier than the P85+, mostly due to the second engine and differential and some other odd bits like the seats.
Of note is the EV Trip Planner software wants to know the added payload of the car (total passenger weight and luggage, etc)
in order to do its calculations as "accurate" as possible.
Last time I looked the Tesla model S spec sheet did not really differentiate the various model S variants well at all, perhaps
that will be updated soon. Well I just check the Tesla Motors Design Studio and the online spec sheet is indeed still
out of date. It does not mention the dual motors in the Powertrain sub-section.�
Dec 6, 2014
dennis Can you please cite a reference that states that range is now calculated as the average of 100% and 80% charges? I don't remember seeing any such citation, including @breser's thorough search for the definition of the current test procedures.�
Dec 6, 2014
Saghost Those numbers are measured from the wall, and therefore include charging losses.
The fact that the totals are so different even though the efficiency numbers are the same is a big clue to what is going on here - quite clearly the new rating is based on having less energy on the battery pack - which since the pack is the same size must be a product of the rules about 'normal' and 'range' charging.
Walter�
Dec 6, 2014
AMPUP Source ? Or speculation?�
Dec 6, 2014
jweinstein 242/265 = 91%, which is pretty close to averaging the 100% and 80% charge states. Just a thought...�
Dec 6, 2014
gpetti The different gearing is speculation but what is self evidently true is that AWD on an ICE requires a mechanical connection between front and rear wheels with all the weight and drag that implies. i know there are various clever technologies to optimize this but the spec sheets always show less efficiency for the same level of power. The tesla situation only needs an electrical connection and then pure electrical signaling to tell the motor what to do and when. What Elon referred to as digital versus analog - an expression that I initially disagreed with but I've warmed to now. If you compare like with like, I.e. The 85D with the 85 I think you'll see that the numbers reflect this efficiency in that the AWD is actually more efficient (which is why we are speculating about gearing). In the case of the P85D we have over 200 HP more performance so the numbers can't be used to evaluate electric AWD efficiency as easily. Nonetheless I think early indications are that our highway range will be equivalent or better which is remarkable.
- - - Updated - - -
Just a thought... We are doing much speculation based on a window sticker that was posted in a demo car. Is it possible that the numbers are not fully fleshed out yet?
- - - Updated - - -
I think youre right, the fact that these totals don't line up indicates there is some variable that has changed here that we are not privvy to. These stickers don't make sense if the same range formula was used and the same level of charge. There isn't much more we can do with this information, until we see a real sticker and try these cars in the wild.�
Dec 6, 2014
breser It's in the document I posted before, energy usage numbers include charging losses. I could go find it again but I remember reading that the energy usage needed to measured in a place where it would include charging losses.�
Dec 6, 2014
David_Cary Obviously some of that is educated guesses.
Some things are obvious of course and so well established that sources would be hard to come by. Elon gave the 3% number and it makes sense to me. The weight one is pretty easy to find and you can of course use EVtripplanner and add in the weight of the 2nd motor/inverter. The weight change is speculation but 250 pounds has been thrown around and it sounds a bit high but reasonable.
2 motors at different gear ratios is common sense. It is true that EVs have a very flar efficiency curve over a broad range but if you look at the curves, there is an optimum - and the difference is up to 5% between optimum and worst. But of course, I don't have the efficiency curve for the Model S motor - so it is speculation that it is similar to other electric motors.
Is it speculation that a 2 speed transmission is more efficient than one? On an ICE vehicle - that is pretty common sense. It is true on an EV that the tranny losses balance the efficiency gains (if we were talking in fact about a transmission) but given those loses don't exist - it is a well established fact that EV motors still have optimal RPMs.
So sure - some speculation. Mostly well established fact.�
Dec 6, 2014
CalDreamin The P85 and P85D are both EPA rated at 89 MPGe (combined city/highway). So the AWD penalty is insignificant as Tesla said, and there's no significant weight or tire efficiency penalty either. They also have the same battery. Seems like the EPA range of these cars should be the same within rounding error -- 1% percent or so. Yet the EPA range is 265 miles for the P85 and 242 miles for the P85D. That doesn't add up.�
Dec 6, 2014
breser Sure it does. Please go back and look at the labels you just reposted. The P85+ is rated at 88 city, 90 highway, 89 combined. The P85D is rated at 86 city, 94 highway, 89 combined. A significant portion of the testing is at lower speeds (as has been pointed out here previously). The P85D does worse in the city and better at highway speeds speeds. They both happen to have the same combined ratings, but that doesn't mean they should have the same range.�
Dec 6, 2014
dennis From SAE document J1634 OCT2012 "Battery Electric Vehicle Energy Consumption and Range Test Procedure" (thanks to breser for finding this document):
Full charge is to be established using the manufacturer�s recommended charging procedure and appropriate equipment. If the vehicle is equipped with a charger, that charger shall be used. Otherwise, the vehicle shall be charged using an external charger recommended by the vehicle manufacturer. If multiple charging power levels are available, the vehicle shall be recharged at the power level recommended by the manufacturer. If not specified by the manufacturer, the recharging power level expected to be most widely utilized by end users shall be selected.
Note that there is no mention of 80% and 100% and averaging them. But there is a requirement to recharge to the manufacturer recommended or most widely used level. So the loss in range in the P85D could be explained by Tesla now using 90% (the most widely used charge level and where the slider is set on delivery). But if that is the case, why is the 2014 Model S 85 rated at 265 miles? This new version of the spec applies to all MY 2013 and later cars.
I believe Tesla could justify that 100% is the manufacturer recommended charge level for long distance travel. So that would get us back to there being an 8.5% drop in range for the P85D when driven under the EPA 5-cycle test, with its heavy emphasis on city driving where the P85D does worse as explained above.
I had hoped that reading the SAE spec was going to clear this up for all of us. It didn't.�
Dec 6, 2014
gpetti i guess if one assumes that they estimate the range using the combined number or the KWh per 100 miles then it doesn't add up. The bottom line is that we are missing some piece of information. If their testing used a different combined or consumption number that would explain it, or if they are using a different SOC than was used on the earlier sticker, either of those would explain it so we will have to wait and see what a real sticker says, and if that is the same the hopefully at some point Tesla can explain this.�
Dec 6, 2014
breser I'm not sure what the method for calculating the combined number but I'm pretty sure the combined number is not used to calculate the range.
- - - Updated - - -
I'm not surprised. Based on reading a lot of these documents, there are things that the EPA has clearly said are just handled on a case by case basis. The EPA clearly wants to get rid of these ambiguities but it's hard because of the changing nature of technology. If you look back at the CFR link I provided there is a whole series of things that are done differently than the SAE spec. I didn't point this out because none of them seemed relevant to the situation.
I'm much more inclined to believe the range loss is just because the P85D is significantly worse in the city. Probably because it's been geared for performance. I'd bet that the 85D will have improved city performance and highway performance and has something like 275 rated range.�
Dec 6, 2014
Saghost Even if you assume the EPA range was based on 100% city driving, that's only reduce the range from 265 to 259 miles. Any other combination is more favorable to the P85D - and with the same energy available and an all highway basis, it'd be 277 miles.
The differences in efficiency as provided by the MPGe results can not explain the change in rated electric range, no matter how you mix them together. There must be a change in the assumptions/rules about the battery SoC range.
Walter�
Dec 6, 2014
David_Cary I believe the range is 55% city and 45% highway.�
Dec 6, 2014
breser How are you doing the math to come up with 277 miles?
Trying to reverse the math on the window sticker is a pain. First the biggest problem is the energy numbers are wall to wheel. So without knowing the charging losses they used you can't reverse the math. If you do the simplistic assumption of 85 kWh / 33.7 kWh (assumed electrical equivalent to a gallon of gasoline) then the Model S has about 2.5 (that's rounded down the exact number is slightly higher) gallons of gasoline equivalent in energy. The P85+ would then have 221 miles (2.5*88) of city range and the P85D would have 216 miles (2.5*86) of range. This calculation is obviously wrong because the 85 kWH is not the right number since we need to include the charge losses.
I have no idea what number they're using for energy losses. But let's say it's 20%, which brings up the energy up to 102 kWh. 102 kWh / 33.7 kWh = ~3 gallons of gas (again this result is rounded down). So then the P85+ would have 266 miles (3*88) of range and the P85D would have 260 miles (3*88) of range. So I'm guessing this is roughly what you're doing for the math. My numbers are slightly higher because I'm using the exact number from the MPGe calculation.
If you do the same calculations with a 10% energy loss during charging you come out with 93.5 kWh and then you end up with 244 miles of city range for the P85+ and 238 for the P85D.
If you do it based on the 38 kWh / 100 miles then you come up with 223 miles of range out of 85 kWH or 268 out of 102 kWh or 246 out of 93.5 kWh.
Let's say you try to use the combined numbers and the range to solve for the charge loss. (85 x (1+x))/33.7 * 89 = 242 (or 265 in the case of the P85+). x solves for about 7% for the P85D or 18% for the P85+. But that's not necessarily right because I don't think they calculate the range but rather test it.
You can say this looks fairly ok (the P85D numbers still look a bit weird) but the other numbers could be close depending on what efficiency you're assuming. But there's still an assumption that we're making that's not accurate. We're assuming that you can run the car down to 0 energy in the battery. That's not the case so even if it's an 85 kWh pack you won't be allowed to use the full 85 kWh.
Another factor that nobody has discussed is that the testing for the S85/P85/etc may have been done back before changes to the firmware on the car. If the newer firmwares restrict more of the battery pack then that could also explain the difference. Without any sort of change to the test procedure. That of course would mean that Tesla had effectively reduced the range of their car themselves.
More than likely the reduced number is not a single thing. Probably a combination of several of these issues. But I'm pretty sure this theory that the EPA changed their testing rules is bogus.�
Dec 6, 2014
TexasEV It is neither a theory nor bogus. Here is a Nissan spokesman explaining how the Leaf range was calculated differently last year:
2013 Nissan Leafs EPA-Estimated Range and MPGe Significantly Improved - HybridCars.com
"It was not Nissan�s choice to list the new model�s range estimate based on a 90-percent charge, but rather, this average was stipulated by the EPA. �For 2013, the EPA elected to use an average of Leaf�s two charging modes to generate the range calculation for the window label an 80 percent �Long Life Battery Mode� and a 100 percent �Long Distance Mode.�� wrote Brockman. �In the past, the Monroney label displayed range based only on a fully charged battery.�
The 75 miles based on a �90-percent charge� is thus a mid-point between the Leaf�s two default charge modes of 80 or 100-percent.
This, wrote Brockman, effectively means not only is it difficult to compare the 2013 Leaf to previous Leafs, it also muddies the comparison between 2013 Leafs and other electric cars measured under the old methodology."
Note the Leaf stickers say "When fully charged, vehicle travels about..." but gives the average 90% value!
Tesla avoided this last year because of the firmware update changing to a slider rather than the fixed "normal" setting that could be averaged with 100% range setting. The question is, with Tesla having a new model did EPA require it to calculate range on the average of 80% charge and 100% charge as they do for the Leaf and i3?�
Dec 6, 2014
breser My comment is in relation to Tesla. As long as Tesla has had an EPA rated mileage there has been no change to the testing procedure. The Leaf was out before the electric vehicle regulations had been finalized (2011). Tesla had the final regulations when they came up with their range. It's clear that the EPA took a different interpretation of manufacturer recommended charging level than Nissan. But that's not a change in testing procedure. That's just a matter of the EPA interpreting the testing procedure differently than Nissan did and Nissan having to adjust what they were displaying.
I agree, Tesla avoided the problem by using a different UI.
Dennis posted the exact text about the battery charge level in the test procedures. It says full or at the manufacturer recommended level. I'd assume that Tesla had some sort of discussion with the EPA about this based on the UI change. I've already said in my past posts it's possible the EPA has changed their position on Tesla's workaround. Possibly because there's new data available. But that would apply to all the Model S vehicles, not just the P85D.
I just can't buy that there's some new test procedure that applied to the P85D and not the other vehicles Tesla is already delivering. The whole point of the test procedures is to provide a uniform measure that people can compare to get an idea about the comparitive efficiency of various vehicles, including vehicles of the same make. If the EPA changed their position on Tesla's 100% charge for the tests then it would apply to all the vehicles and we'd be seeing the changes across the board. So far that hasn't happened.
If there had been a large, applicable to everyone, change in the test procedure you'd see that in the SAE standard or in the CFR.�
Dec 6, 2014
uselesslogin The regulations finalized in 2011 were not mandatory until the 2013 model year. Tesla announced the results of the EPA test in May of 2012 for the 2012 Model S. We know the 2012 LEAF had a 73 mile mile range and the 2013 LEAF has a 15% better range but the 2013 model has a 75 mile range and then they removed the long life mode and it now has an 84 mile range for the 2014 model year. So, I don't know when the test has to repeated, but Tesla has been using the same numbers since 2012.
EPA Downshifts Its Electric Car Range Formula | PluginCars.com
Fuel Economy and Environment Labels Regulations | OTAQ | US EPA
Model S Efficiency and Range | Blog | Tesla Motors
To me this says that is the issue at hand. I don't get how it is bogus. I'll just leave the EPA quote about the regulations here:
�
Dec 6, 2014
RiverBrick An Engineer directly involved in designing the dual motors was at the Montreal grand opening today and he will be there again Sunday. Anyone interested in the area should attend his presentations and ask him questions.
From today:
For the P85D, emphasis was on performance for what he called the gen 2 motors. For the standard D, the emphasis was on efficiency. On the standard D the motors are not geared differently. New challenges were to make sure no vibrations from the forward motor be felt in the cabin and that the motor not be shoved into the cabin or the battery in case of collision.�
Dec 6, 2014
dennis The fact that the Model S numbers are the same in 2014 leads me to believe that they were not required to rerun the test since the hardware configuration had not changed, or they ran it with the same charge level (100%). As I stated previously, Tesla could claim that 100% is the manufacturer's suggested charging level for long distance driving, which is where range matters.
Here is another theory to possibly explain the 8.5% reduction in P85D range:
The P85 sticker range is the same as the 85. But we all know that the 21" tires on the P85 are less efficient. So either the P85 was considered to be a variant of the S 85 that did not require a separate test or the range on the 2012 and later stickers is some blending of 85 and P85 based on expected sales volume. Then along comes the P85D, which is clearly a different model and needs a new test. The P85D range (as compared to the 85) suffers both the rolling resistance penalty of the 21" tires and the weight penalty in the City portions of the test. This could account for the unexpectedly large discrepancy.�
Dec 6, 2014
breser The idea that a regulation taking effect in 2013 (that was available to Tesla when they did the first Model S testing) is the reason for changes to just the P85D's window sticker seems absurd to me. I'd think you'd have to retest mileage for at least every model year but let me go dig around and find out how often the tests have to be performed.
I will admit it's possible the EPA has decided that Tesla needs to use a charge level based on real world charge preferences of owners. But I'd expect to see all the window sticker values to be adjusted as a result not just the P85D.�
Dec 6, 2014
Andyw2100 I say this with all sincerity, and in admiration for those of you who have been discussing this in great depth: there is little doubt in my mind that if those in charge of testing at the EPA put as much thought into designing fair and accurate testing as you guys have put into trying to figure out just what has been done here with the new Tesla EPA ratings for the P85D, etc. and what this all means, we'd have much better standards and much more transparent and meaningful EPA ratings.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét