Zythryn
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:49 am

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:18 am

scottf200 wrote:
It seems all the manufacturers are fairly steady except BMW. Them and Tesla are going opposite directions. There must be an explanation. Are there really that many BMW drivers changing their alliance?

Image


The 3 series has been referred to as market Tesla is shooting for.
However, correlation does not prove causality.

Right now I would suggest this is an interesting short term trend, which supports the hypothesis Model 3 sales are having an impact on other similar cars, especially the 3 series.

A further analysis of which companies had been offering incentives, sales, etc would be useful and may show other factors. Or, may just strengthen the hypothesis even more.
Last edited by Zythryn on Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Previous owner of Prius, Volt, Leaf & Model S
Current owner of Model 3
http://www.netzeromn.com

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:54 am

scottf200 wrote:Image
...It seems all the manufacturers are fairly steady except BMW. Them and Tesla are going opposite directions. There must be an explanation. Are there really that many BMW drivers changing their alliance?

Yes they are, mostly from from BMW cars to BMW SUVs...

http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/bmw/

The chart you reposted above primarily illustrates the tiny total demand currently existing for "mid-sized premium sedans" in the USA.

Obviously, TSLA will have to figure out how to somehow dramatically expand demand for this class of vehicles, if it ever reaches its projected model 3 production rates.

Meanwhile, TSLA claims that it is about two years behind Jaguar and all the major German manufactures with its first BEV entry in the "mid-sized premium SUV" class, the fabled Y model.
no condition is permanent

SageBrush
Posts: 2676
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 9:59 am

edatoakrun wrote:Yes they are, mostly from from BMW cars to BMW SUVs...
http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/bmw/

No, they are not.

Image
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
3/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

User avatar
lpickup
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 2:14 pm
Delivery Date: 09 Dec 2011
Leaf Number: 16138
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact: Website

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 12:43 pm

edatoakrun wrote:Meanwhile, TSLA claims that it is about two years behind Jaguar and all the major German manufactures with its first BEV entry in the "mid-sized premium SUV" class, the fabled Y model.


Jaguar, maybe. German manufacturers? Can you be more specific? Which German manufacturers are producing BEV SUVs today?
...Lance

Deep Blue Metallic 2018 Tesla Model 3 (31849) (delivered: 7/13/18)
Coulis Red 2016 SV (312310) (bought: 12/23/16 sold: 7/5/18)
Glacier Pearl 2012 SL (016138) (delivered: 12/9/11; traded in 12/23/16)
NOGA$4ME Blog

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:16 pm

Tesla representatives apparently told the drivers on the ~606 mile range/capacity test that the deficiencies of ~70 miles and ~nine available kWh from expected results were both due to the energy required to supply the 3 LR pack's cooling requirements.

Surprising to me, both in the very large amount of energy wasted by the model 3's ATM, and in Tesla's willingness to admit it.

Since you clearly cannot rely on TSLA's model 3 certification submission to the EPA for real-world efficiency and range, I'd suggest model 3 owners test their own 3s to find the actual efficiency/range capabilities.

edatoakrun wrote:(page 261)... since the 3 probably requires a significant amount of energy for battery cooling during a full discharge (AND during the recharge) on a warm day, the optimum efficiency and range would certainly be achieved under cooler conditions, and higher speeds than for a BEV with a conductively cooled pack like a LEAF's, where the rule for both capacity and efficiency is simply, the hotter the better.

Hopefully, model 3 owners will eventually test for that.

I'd be willing to bet that the temperatures were close to optimum, whatever that is, for the discharge/recharge cycle the certification documents TSLA submitted to the EPA...

Skip to ~six minutes into the video for the nine missing kWh discussion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IChR1dcw7dQ
Last edited by edatoakrun on Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
no condition is permanent

User avatar
lpickup
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 2:14 pm
Delivery Date: 09 Dec 2011
Leaf Number: 16138
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact: Website

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:23 pm

edatoakrun wrote:Since you clearly cannot rely on TSLA's model 3 certification submission to the EPA for real-world efficiency and range, I'd suggest model 3 owners test their own 3s to find the actual efficiency/range capabilities.


I would recommend ANY vehicle owner (regardless of make, model or even drivetrain) do this. EPA efficiency/range numbers are only an attempt at providing a relative benchmark to be able to compare cars. Nothing more. Obviously ones own driving habits, terrain and use models will dictate range better than any EPA or WLTP or take your pick what standards body range estimate says.
...Lance

Deep Blue Metallic 2018 Tesla Model 3 (31849) (delivered: 7/13/18)
Coulis Red 2016 SV (312310) (bought: 12/23/16 sold: 7/5/18)
Glacier Pearl 2012 SL (016138) (delivered: 12/9/11; traded in 12/23/16)
NOGA$4ME Blog

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:35 pm

lpickup wrote:
edatoakrun wrote:Since you clearly cannot rely on TSLA's model 3 certification submission to the EPA for real-world efficiency and range, I'd suggest model 3 owners test their own 3s to find the actual efficiency/range capabilities.


I would recommend ANY vehicle owner (regardless of make, model or even drivetrain) do this. EPA efficiency/range numbers are only an attempt at providing a relative benchmark to be able to compare cars. Nothing more...

Well, something more, in that the manufacturer's certification is the source of the EPA ratings for range and efficiency shown on the Monroney stickers, when you shop for any electric vehicle.

What we know should suspect (absent more data on test standards) is that these numbers may be so susceptible to manipulation by unscrupulous manufactures (of both passively and actively thermally managed packs) that these numbers may be quite misleading.
no condition is permanent

User avatar
lpickup
Posts: 1139
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 2:14 pm
Delivery Date: 09 Dec 2011
Leaf Number: 16138
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact: Website

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:58 pm

edatoakrun wrote:What we know should suspect (absent more data on test standards) is that these numbers may be so susceptible to manipulation by unscrupulous manufactures (of both passively and actively thermally managed packs) that these numbers may be quite misleading.


True. Although let me point out that the farther you diverge from the simulated norms of any of those test cycles (which are meant to mimic average behavior), the less accurate they become. The hypermiling example is a good case in point. It would appear that you are upset that the predicted range/capacity during the hypermiling test did not live up to the extrapolated estimate that the EPA test would have predicted, when actually there is a perfectly reasonable explanation. Nothing nefarious took place, just a higher than expected overhead due to the cooling system.

While it's a true statement that the numbers are "misleading" if you are using them to rely on predicting range/capacity for a highly atypical usage pattern (such as a hypermile run), but I would argue that it's more of a misuse of that data, which carries the disclaimer right on the label itself, that:

EPA wrote:Actual results with vary for many reasons, including driving conditions and how you drive and maintain your vehicle.


As you said, it is up to the end user to determine their own actual range for their own vehicle and not to rely on the Monroney sticker. But you don't have to assume that the numbers of being manipulated (although it is good to have a healthy skepticism). In Tesla's case, under NORMAL driving patterns, for example, the numbers were manipulated, but the consensus is that Tesla actually sandbagged the numbers (to keep a separation between the Model 3 and Model S) and that reported ranges actually exceed the Monroney value.
...Lance

Deep Blue Metallic 2018 Tesla Model 3 (31849) (delivered: 7/13/18)
Coulis Red 2016 SV (312310) (bought: 12/23/16 sold: 7/5/18)
Glacier Pearl 2012 SL (016138) (delivered: 12/9/11; traded in 12/23/16)
NOGA$4ME Blog

SageBrush
Posts: 2676
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 3:21 pm

First of all, the "answer" the hypermilers received was a MAYBE, and I doubt it was someone at Tesla with any particular insight.
Second, the intimation was that allowing the cabin to overheat lead to unintended consequences.

Left unanswered was why the Wh/mile meter was discordant.
There is still much to understand here, and I suspect that future attempts will make more sense and probably return better results.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
3/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

User avatar
EVDRIVER
Moderator
Posts: 6442
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:51 am

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 4:00 pm

SageBrush wrote:First of all, the "answer" the hypermilers received was a MAYBE, and I doubt it was someone at Tesla with any particular insight.
Second, the intimation was that allowing the cabin to overheat lead to unintended consequences.

Left unanswered was why the Wh/mile meter was discordant.
There is still much to understand here, and I suspect that future attempts will make more sense and probably return better results.



True, and what do EPA numbers have to do with driving at low speeds for that long, any EV would suck more power due to parasitic loads and I doubt it's cooling for the obvious reasons. If you park a LEAF in a lot and leave it on as long as they drove watch how much energy is consumed without even driving it for 32 hours. Besides, everyone I know with a 3 is exceeding the EPA numbers. Lastly, who cares about this nonsense as no one drives like this and it's as stupid as asking why it could not charge after being drained down to zero. Since most Tesla drivers are getting fantastic range and high instrument accuracy they really don't care. Obscure crap like this is troll food and bait click.

300 Watts of parasitic load on an EV would be almost 10Kwh alone for that time period.

Return to “Other Electric Cars & Plug-In Hybrids”