Official Tesla Model 3 thread

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
DougWantsALeaf said:
Model 3 drivers on the forum.

Realistically, how far can you drive at 65-70 on a normal 60-70F day when not using any AC/Heat?
~ EPA, with AC in the summer. About 5 - 10% less in the winter.

Are you familiar with Superchargers ? 140+ kW in the widely deployed network, and upwards of 200+ kW* with the V3 rolling out. This works out to ~ 450 miles of range if the day starts with a full charge and a 10 minute stop is included en-route. The real point here is that you are extrapolating your LEAF experience to Tesla. It does not work the same in a Tesla due to the vastly superior charging network. In a Tesla you get in the car and drive, and if needed you stop for 10 - 15 minutes to add miles. Tesla cars have outstanding navigation aids you can rely on to tell you when and where to charge based on your destination. The days of having to calculate and plan are over (unless you enjoy the exercise or are trying to optimize the last couple mph.)

Check out abetterrouteplanner.com
It is a quite accurate simulation tool

* presuming 125 miles added, starting from a low SoC
 
DougWantsALeaf said:
Model 3 drivers on the forum.

Realistically, how far can you drive at 65-70 on a normal 60-70F day when not using any AC/Heat? I am asking as we may be looking for another car to dump our last ICE vehicle (2007 Kia Sedona with only 60K miles for anyone interested), and looking at a number of options.
...

Thanks in advance.

I’ve owned a 3 for about a year and a half now, here is my real world advice...
First, get the LR RWD if range is important. It is the most efficient model if you need range (this is the Model I own).
Get the standard wheels, don’t upgrade to the 19 inch wheels. For trips, use the aero wheels will increase your range. Consensus seems to be about 5%.

Fair warning, I don’t pay that close attention to full range in miles when driving trips.
What I do watch is the Wh/mile reported by the car. My typical commute is a mix of highway and city streets.
Lifetime I am averaging about 4.2miles/kWh. If that were constant, my range would be a bit higher than the 325 miles.

If you feel you need AWD the hit to efficiency is fairly small. Less than the wheel upgrade or performance upgrade.

Oh, there is also a “chill” setting, which recaps the accelerator. I do have that enabled. I don’t know that it makes any difference in efficiency.
 
DougWantsALeaf said:
Model 3 drivers on the forum.

Realistically, how far can you drive at 65-70 on a normal 60-70F day when not using any AC/Heat? I am asking as we may be looking for another car to dump our last ICE vehicle (2007 Kia Sedona with only 60K miles for anyone interested), and looking at a number of options.
Just my experience but with my LR RWD Model 3 I have no problem getting to 270+ miles on a “tank” of electrons. Starting with 100% and going to 6% works very easily. By the way, that is with the A/C on Auto during a 650-mile trip from North Carolina to Michigan through the mountains in West Virginia. I drive at speed limits and not aggressively but in no way am I hypermiling. I’ve done this several times, in both directions. Now in winter with heat...different story. Did that once and got about 240 miles of range on the same route. And of course, YMMV.

My Model 3 was the vehicle that finally eliminated my 2nd-to-last ICE vehicle in the fleet. Still have my 38-mile-range (100% to VLBW) 2012 LEAF and my 1964 T-Bird.

If you’re not in a hurry, you might want to look at the Model Y for your family; it’s not likely to be delivered in quantity until 1Q2021 or so. Also by that time Rivian could be delivering its pickup trucks in quantity with a 400-mile advertised range. BYTON too could be a contender by then in North America. If BYTON actually delivers what their website promises, it’ll be a pretty awesome pair of vehicles seemingly aimed at the Models 3 and Y. And you better learn to like the 49” wide screen, yup, 49”.
 
DougWantsALeaf said:
Thanks for the post on the X. I will X it off my list :)
On the other hand, my X now has 12000 miles in 10 months. We've had one minor issue with it, and that was taken car of with a ranger visit (they serviced it in my driveway).

I really don't like the FW doors all that much (too slow) and I think they detract from the usefulness of the car. We infrequently use them so they don't bother us that much. If I still had kids and the doors were used a dozen or more times a day, I could imagine they'd develop issues.
 
DougWantsALeaf said:
Model 3 drivers on the forum.

Realistically, how far can you drive at 65-70 on a normal 60-70F day when not using any AC/Heat? I am asking as we may be looking for another car to dump our last ICE vehicle (2007 Kia Sedona with only 60K miles for anyone interested), and looking at a number of options.

In some (not all reviews and you tubers), it looks like the SR+ will do a realistic 200 miles and the LR about 260-270 at a shot(assuming I am running the car down to 5%, but not sub 1%). Now I am a conservative driver (hence my longer Leaf Plus runs), so would hope to do a little better than those numbers, but trying to get a feel for what you are experiencing. My colleague has an X, but claims significantly less than the EPA for the car, but I know also has a heavy foot, so not too surprising. She calls the miles on the dash "electric miles" which are less than real miles, do discount 3 for 2 or 2 for 1 in winter. They have a 3 LR as well, and say it can go farther (maybe 250..which sounds pretty low given EPA), but again heavier feet is my guess.

I did see one Illinois you tuber (Tech Forum), show recently that his runs from Chicago to Springfield ~210 miles) would take him down from 318 (LR RWD) down to 20 miles, but I don't know at what speed.

As we have 3 kids, I might consider a used X (I can't all 5 of us in the Plus for 200 miles..though I have done 4 for extended trips in the Leaf). Not sure we want 2 5 seaters, but as the oldest is off to college soon, it might not be too much of an issue, and it seems the 3 has fewer potential for problems. I would like to look at the Niro, and EQC/M but don't think any of those are coming to the midwest anytime soon.

Thanks in advance.

I have the model 3 LR-rwd and two young boys. The boys need to stop well before I need to charge. So I end up speeding to cover as much ground as possible to make more effective use of the charging times. I can't tell you what the 70mph consumption is, but on my most recent trip - at 80mph, with AC, level ground, and 90F ambient, about 250wh/mile.

But then the supercharger network is extensive enough that you shouldn't need to do any significant planning unless heading into the Midwest.
 
Even in my Leaf Plus, when I have taken the kids on long drives, we stop well before range issues.

Electrify America has really enabled the interstate travel on the car, so still a bit too single point of failure in areas. I am debating whether it is catching up fast enough.

The minivan still moves, but would like to sell before a significant mechanical issue.
 
DougWantsALeaf said:
Even in my Leaf Plus, when I have taken the kids on long drives, we stop well before range issues.

Electrify America has really enabled the interstate travel on the car, so still a bit too single point of failure in areas. I am debating whether it is catching up fast enough.

The minivan still moves, but would like to sell before a significant mechanical issue.

Electrify America is a far cry from where it needs to be, even after they complete it (precisely because of insufficient chargers per site).

The fact that you still consider the minivan to be a viable alternative means you're not convinced of the supercharger network yet. I sold my minivan to pay for my model 3, and have only regretted it once, when I was unable to haul 7 people to visit family. :(
 
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
The fact that you still consider the minivan to be a viable alternative means you're not convinced of the supercharger network yet. I sold my minivan to pay for my model 3, and have only regretted it once, when I was unable to haul 7 people to visit family. :(
To date, no electric has encroached upon minivan territory in any serious way. The minivan was and remains the gold standard for hauling family stuff any distance, where “family” means lots of people, pets, things, and outsized cargo. While less popular today than previously, the minivan is still pretty unbeatable for what it does and does in comfort, safety, and relative efficiency. And it can tow a pretty substantial weight as well. Yes, it is an ICE vehicle, but functionally one of the best for its intended purpose(s). If it meets your needs, not much else will do. End of minivan defense. Now, did my Model 3 get a new software update? Have to check.
 
SalisburySam said:
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
The fact that you still consider the minivan to be a viable alternative means you're not convinced of the supercharger network yet. I sold my minivan to pay for my model 3, and have only regretted it once, when I was unable to haul 7 people to visit family. :(
To date, no electric has encroached upon minivan territory in any serious way. The minivan was and remains the gold standard for hauling family stuff any distance, where “family” means lots of people, pets, things, and outsized cargo. While less popular today than previously, the minivan is still pretty unbeatable for what it does and does in comfort, safety, and relative efficiency. And it can tow a pretty substantial weight as well. Yes, it is an ICE vehicle, but functionally one of the best for its intended purpose(s). If it meets your needs, not much else will do. End of minivan defense. Now, did my Model 3 get a new software update? Have to check.

I get the functionality component of a minivan, but I figured dougWantsALeaf probably can have his needs met by a sedan if he was considering it and asking about road trips in a model3?

I bought my minivan when my first was born, thinking to haul everyone in it. And over the four years of leaf ownership, I realised that I only needed the minivan to take road trips and haul the occasional sheets of plywood. It proved to be more vehicle than I really needed (except for that one 7-passengers time), and was costing my $500/year (registration, insurance, maintenance, but not including depreciation) just to keep it "on standby".
 
DougWantsALeaf said:
Model 3 drivers on the forum.

Realistically, how far can you drive at 65-70 on a normal 60-70F day when not using any AC/Heat? I am asking as we may be looking for another car to dump our last ICE vehicle (2007 Kia Sedona with only 60K miles for anyone interested), and looking at a number of options.

In some (not all reviews and you tubers), it looks like the SR+ will do a realistic 200 miles and the LR about 260-270 at a shot(assuming I am running the car down to 5%, but not sub 1%). Now I am a conservative driver (hence my longer Leaf Plus runs), so would hope to do a little better than those numbers, but trying to get a feel for what you are experiencing. My colleague has an X, but claims significantly less than the EPA for the car, but I know also has a heavy foot, so not too surprising. She calls the miles on the dash "electric miles" which are less than real miles, do discount 3 for 2 or 2 for 1 in winter. They have a 3 LR as well, and say it can go farther (maybe 250..which sounds pretty low given EPA), but again heavier feet is my guess.

I did see one Illinois you tuber (Tech Forum), show recently that his runs from Chicago to Springfield ~210 miles) would take him down from 318 (LR RWD) down to 20 miles, but I don't know at what speed.

As we have 3 kids, I might consider a used X (I can't all 5 of us in the Plus for 200 miles..though I have done 4 for extended trips in the Leaf). Not sure we want 2 5 seaters, but as the oldest is off to college soon, it might not be too much of an issue, and it seems the 3 has fewer potential for problems. I would like to look at the Niro, and EQC/M but don't think any of those are coming to the midwest anytime soon.

Thanks in advance.


My LR RWD has no problem hitting 300 miles or more but, to be honest, I pay it very little attention.

On my leaf and soul I spent every driving moment fussing about total range and efficiency and whatnot. But the model 3 has so much range and such a robust integrated charge network that I just get in the car and go.

I set the cruise at 85 with the HVAC at 72 and the radio blaring and hit the road. The lack of friction that comes with 300 miles of range coupled with the supercharger network cannot be overstated.

I’ve started at home in Gardena CA, entered Portland OR into the nav, and set off with no further planning and no hiccups along the way. The car does it all and quite accurately. It knows when and where to charge, for how long, and then seamlessly bills the account via the car. No keycards, no hotlines, no clunky CHAdeMO with one stall and a broken RFID.

You can truly use the Model 3 like any conventional automobile and forget the futzing. It’s really wonderful.

BTW, my penalty for cruising with the high end of the traffic flow with no regards to consumption on my 19” wheels? That would be nearly 4.1 mi/KWh over the last 30k miles, quite similar to my consumption on my leaf and soul.
 
mtndrew1 said:
BTW, my penalty for cruising with the high end of the traffic flow with no regards to consumption on my 19” wheels? That would be nearly 4.1 mi/KWh over the last 30k miles, quite similar to my consumption on my leaf and soul.
.
I imagine 4.1 miles/kWh overall, not 4.1 miles/kWh at 85 mph.
However, I entirely agree with your post. Tesla ownership is hassle free.
 
That’s correct, I’ve averaged 4.1 over 30k miles.

Point being is that I just drive like I would in a gas car and don’t even bother with any of the formerly nail biting EV planning. It’s liberating.
 
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
Electrify America is a far cry from where it needs to be, even after they complete it (precisely because of insufficient chargers per site).


I agree they're insufficient for CHAdeMO-equipped cars, but not for CCS. EA has built sites with as many as 9 CCS-only chargers (plus 1 CCS-CHAdeMO, so 10 total), the number varying from as few as 3+1 in rural areas unlikely to see much traffic, on up. There's a much smaller number of CCS cars compared to Teslas at the moment, and IIRR it was at least three years and probably longer before Tesla built the first SC site with more than 10 chargers, as larger sites simply weren't needed until then.
 
With 3 kids, having a 6th seat for grandma or a friend is a big difference. Mercedes has the EQM, but that’s a year or two from coming to the US. I am getting more X horror stories as I ask around.

While I agree that supercharger network is nice, EA with Evgo combined has started to balance things, even if still behind. Multistate travel is now fairly doable, where I would say was not the case 2 years ago. A number of state fast charger networks are going in this coming year which will balance further.

Europe is even farther ahead on the alternative networks.
 
DougWantsALeaf said:
EA with Evgo combined has started to balance things,
Better every month this year
Yet still pitiful, and pitiful it will remain for CHAdeMO ... until it gets completely ignored and dies on the vine.
 
GRA said:
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
Electrify America is a far cry from where it needs to be, even after they complete it (precisely because of insufficient chargers per site).


I agree they're insufficient for CHAdeMO-equipped cars, but not for CCS. EA has built sites with as many as 9 CCS-only chargers (plus 1 CCS-CHAdeMO, so 10 total), the number varying from as few as 3+1 in rural areas unlikely to see much traffic, on up. There's a much smaller number of CCS cars compared to Teslas at the moment, and IIRR it was at least three years and probably longer before Tesla built the first SC site with more than 10 chargers, as larger sites simply weren't needed until then.

Let's see how many CCS enabled cars on the road does it take before EA realizes that 10 chargers on their busiest sites won't be enough? Even 3 at their less traveled sites is barely enough ... especially due to ICEing
 
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
Let's see how many CCS enabled cars on the road does it take before EA realizes that 10 chargers on their busiest sites won't be enough? Even 3 at their less traveled sites is barely enough ... especially due to ICEing


As some of the CCS cars can (and most eventually will) charge faster than was possible with SCs up until now, I suspect the time when nine or ten chargers per site won't be enough will be put back some years compared to Tesla, even assuming that CCS-equipped car sales equal Tesla's recent rates. I'd love for this to be an issue.

Of course, there's always another option to adding more chargers per site, and that's more sites. As it is, the large number of EA QCs built at Walmarts and Targets provides plenty of room for expanding the number of chargers at a particular site.
 
Rode in an X today with its owner. I concur with the board here that it’s a complete no go. 2nd row seating has almost no foot room, and row 3 is all but 0. Really 0 leg room. The 5’2” passenger in 3rd row had to put her feet in the middle. Maybe an absolute pinch you could do 5 for a short ride. Falcon doors are cool, but not more than a novelty after a week. The owner said the navigation was substantially substandard compared to Apple CarPlay or android auto, and in watching i would have to agree. I understand though, as that would give Apple and Google the Tesla location data. Data is king. The screen size was nice. The X was a 90D and the owner was not confident would do Chicago - Iowa, which suggests sub 3 miles kWh.. ouch.

They have a 3 LR as well and say it would do the distance (200-220 miles) but they don’t take the X for those sorts of distances.

I know this sounds like a rant, but was very unimpressed in my first X drive.
 
^^
Interesting video. I'm looking forward to more information.
A car test requires a test run from full to empty followed by a full charge. I'll pass for now

My completely unfounded WAG is that if this does turn out to be a case of Tesla quietly fiddling with the battery it will be limited to cars like Bjorn's that are used to charge frequently at ~ 200 kW. I have never really believed that current battery tech can put up with that level of power on a frequent basis, so I am primed to find out that I am right.

If this turns out to be the story then Tesla is pulling an e-tron-like trick and shifting the voltage curve to the left. I think Bjorn suspects the same because he has already realized that given a choice between more range and faster charging, he prefers the latter.
 
Back
Top