62kwh Leaf Plus Efficiency Posting

frontrangeleaf said:

The purpose of a test like this is to create a comparable metric across cars under repeatable conditions, not to find what any given owner’s experience would be.

It’s a fair test that achieves its intent.

Playing Captain Obvious here, but I don’t understand your objection.

Click to expand...

I already acknowledged that it creates a baseline for comparison under the one condition. But its quite obvious due to the HUGE discrepancy in actual user data (which can be and usually is biased) that the test conditions do not treat each vehicle equally. What we are doing is eliminating the advantages each manufacturer designed into the car to create this range result.

This should be obvious.

So you’re suggesting varying the baseline conditions to explore the advantages and disadvantages of each design?

That would be ambitious and far beyond the scope or purview of mass market media firms.

frontrangeleaf said:

So you’re suggesting varying the baseline conditions to explore the advantages and disadvantages of each design?

That would be ambitious and far beyond the scope or purview of mass market media firms.

Click to expand...

Hmmm? Is it? Because other than "range only" articles, it seems to me that "most" articles do exactly that. We accept them less because they seem filled with more opinion than fact. This does require digesting the information with a critical "stomach?"

So my digesting this article in the same critical vein seems to really perplex you and I find that strange. BTW; have we determined which model of E Plus was tested?

It’s just one set of data points among many. And in terms of quality, among the better ones.

What’s not to like?

A critical eye is fine. No qualms with that. So far I haven’t heard a criticism of yours that seems well-founded to me.

My expectations are simply different. I don’t expect to be able to extrapolate from any one data set no matter the quality to my specific circumstances. You seem to if I’m following you.

As to their purview in conducting the test, conducting broad scale highly variable tests such as you suggest is not their business in my view. I’m glad they took the care they did. Many don’t.

My understanding is that they tested the SL model. I don’t have anything beyond user comments to back that. I haven’t actually seen a media range test in an S yet.

If you know of one, please post.

Everyone is aware the Leaf SV+ has 58/62 limited/nominal kWh of capacity vs the 47/50 kWh available in the 3 SR+, right? 23% more capacity should give you about 20% more range, or 36 miles, and they measured a difference of 36.

Anecdotally, I've seen a ton of posts about the SR+ not reaching 200 miles in various forums. The same complaint about the e+ Leaf seems relatively rare.

https://forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/180-miles-reasonable-range-m3-sr

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/sr-range-seems-to-be-200-miles.178091/

https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaModel3/comments/bs8m2s/claims_about_sr_real_world_range_of_192_miles/

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/sr-range.168616/

I have seen some articles suggesting the SR+ is 54-55 total size, and the SR is 50.

In town, driving like I always have, our Leaf plus routinely got 240 miles or so to a full charge last summer. Closer to 200 on 80%. Purchased in July. Manufacturers date in April. Tires at 40 psi.

We swapped to lighter after market wheels for the factory tires, and put snows on our factory wheels. No noticeable changes in range with the new wheels and stock tires before it got cold.

So our experience is in line with their test. Most of our miles are suburban point to point trips. Very little highway. Very little stop and go. It’s actually been remarkably consistent so far in warm weather.

Winter range has been all over the map, mostly due to weather as far as I can tell.

DougWantsALeaf said:

I have seen some articles suggesting the SR+ is 54-55 total size, and the SR is 50.

Click to expand...

SR 55
SR+ 62 but who "really" knows?

DaveinOlyWA said:

DougWantsALeaf said:

I have seen some articles suggesting the SR+ is 54-55 total size, and the SR is 50.

Click to expand...

SR 55
SR+ 62 but who "really" knows?

Click to expand...

SR and SR+ are the same 50 or 55. Based on tax forms filed in various states, it's probably only 50. MR is 62, LR is 75.

Wikipedia and EV specification put the SR at 50 kWh and the SR+ at 54 kWh.

I know this has been a continual point of question. It’s probably better to use relative charging figures from the UDDS testing.

Here are some efficiency numbers for my SL+:
Last charge: 204.5 miles; 4.0 mi/kWh dash display; 60.17 kWh from wall; 204.5/60.17=3.399 mi/kWh wall-to-wheels

Since delivery: 14134 miles driven; 4568.03 kWh; 14134/4568.03=3.094 mi/kWh wall-to-wheels

Tires are still OEM Michelin Energy Saver A/S which I generally keep inflated to 44 psi cold.

Thanks Gerry

How do you feel the 2 cars (Leaf and SR+) compare in efficiency overall? (Highway/city/combined)

The 60 kWh from the wall with 10% loss suggest that 54 (give or take) is the usable capacity.

I would like a car show/magazine to do a few side by side range tests with Leaf+, SR+, Bolt, and maybe Niro. Carwow was close.

I suspect the Teslas would have lower wall-to-wheels efficiency in my climate due to energy used by battery thermal management system and higher power-off residual energy use. I would like to have an opportunity to drive and charge a Tesla for a week to compare using my AeroVironment EVSE and meter.

There was some energy left in my battery when I started the last charge cycle so the 60.17 kWh is not the full capacity. Also, I don't know where you came up with 10% loss for you calculations.

I have 3 full discharge tests:
7/7/2019 1149 miles; 204.4 miles driven; 65.95 kWh from wall
11/10/2019 5656 miles; 165.1 miles driven; 66.64 kWh from wall
2/8/2020 11167 miles; 183.8 miles driven; 65.51 kWh from wall

February 2020
3.5 mi/kWh
1147.64 miles

March 2020 (COVID19, self quarantine, ultra light miles for us)
4.0 mi/kWh
397.8 miles

Still have not made it up to 4 M/KWH this Spring, even with summer Ecopias and no heat- averaging 3.6 with lots of dirt road/ dirt driveway miles. (well, not lots, due to COVID, but most of the miles are dirt).

Dirt roads are not particularly efficient.

So far this April, 227 Miles and averaging 4.7 miles/kWh.

Limited driving since shelter are home.

We have had more warmer days (50F-55F) which makes a big difference. I have done half the driving and the other half are my 2 teenagers doing driving practice on their permit.

LeftieBiker said:

The only other thing I do is drive in B mode the majority of the time I'm on the road and try to "coast" as much as possible when needing to slow down.

Click to expand...

B Mode (and ePedal when available) work great for city driving, but Eco alone or D alone are better for highway use because it's so much easier to coast.

Click to expand...

Older post but it reminded me of the concepts I use.
All these modes are tools. Like the gears on a standard transmission car. We are free to swap around with them depending on driving conditions.

For example if you're on a long gradual down slope dropping to D only will allow great coasting without much regeneration (braking). Gain some charge when you have to slow down is great but as it has been said slowing down to gain some power just to use that power and more to climb the next hill for example isn't worth it.

E-Pedal is really and around town tool. I find it too aggressive on any road that i'm not actually stopping often on.
B Mode for decent or sharp turn roads where you want some braking before corners. Otherwise it's ECO-D for me. I don't do rapid starts or rally driving that would need the short pedal response of just D.
I have found also the E-Pedal over rides B mode. It is affected by ECO though.

These operating methods might be too much for some. To each their own. I've always had manual trans cars and liked the options they provide. I think the use of these modes is really a personal preference. If you want a zippy sportyish drive then you likely won't be that worried about the best range. Those two never really go hand in hand in any car.

My Leafs have always taken me where I needed to go and worked as planned. I find I just have to honest about what I plan to do for that particular drive. I fond that part fun. Not everyone will.

Today I plan a fast run to the next L3 south of me with a 70% start charge to see how that battery responds to a fast charge at a lower percentage. I'm also testing the latest updates to ABRP ( A Better Route Planner). To see how the LeafSpy link actually works. I tried it yesterday but the app froze. I think it needs a constant data connection to work. That is a rare thing in Vermont so that feature likely won't be that useful here. It was however spot on with the whole trip estimate.

Greg

You must know of the L3 right in Montpelier Greg? All of your feedback sounds exactly right to me.... not crazy about epedal except in the city.

dmacarthur said:

You must know of the L3 right in Montpelier Greg? All of your feedback sounds exactly right to me.... not crazy about epedal except in the city.

Click to expand...

Yes I know that one. There is another on the hill in Berlin along with all the Tesla Superchargers.
I wanted on this occasion to start with a charge that would have me arrive at the Hampton Inn WRJ one with a reasonably low charge. 34% in this case. I also wanted to run at 70 mph for the whole trip. I did indeed arrive at 34% as predicted. The charge time was a bit longer to 61% ( what I needed to return with 30% at home). The prediction was 17 min and it took 24. I didn't get 50 kWh rate. 48 was the max and it took a bit to get to that. ABRP allows editing that parameter at each stop so lowering that will give a better time estimate.
Running LeafSpy linked Live data to ABRP worked well this time. The prediction was 30% arriving home,e and actual was 29%. ABRP actually accounted for the regen from descending the hill into town. It did do well however when I took the exit before the one it wanted me to take. Told me I was off route and gave up. The phone app is still a bit buggy. Great tool for planning though.

Is the 62kWh Leaf a long trip machine? I would say no. Functional yes for the occasional trip but the slow charging and likely further reduction for a warmer battery from multiple charges would really not allow a quick long voyage. I plan to test this when the weather warms up a bit more.

If you stop easy night at a L2 and don't mind waiting then it would surely make it. ABRP says the 62 can cross the country. There are enough Chademo units with in its range hops.

I have 2 years on this lease and have to decide what's next. Maybe Nissan will get it sorted. I hope so. I like the Leaf. They are quite reliable as well. Bite the bullet for a Model 3 long range may be. I would likely keep that for a long time.

Time to go for a bike ride

Hope everyone is well,

Greg