Tesla Range Scandal Isn't A Scandal... Because You Shouldn't Have Believed It In The First Place...
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 июн 2024
- When I said our Model 3 SR+ had a real world range of 192 miles +/- about 10 miles, y'all lost your minds, but it wasn't a scandal then and it isn't now. Instead it's just a textbook example of why the "EPA range" is not a "real world" number. Newsflash: the EPA testing designed in 1978 isn't a great real world example for ANY new car, truck or SUV in America today. Join me as I pick apart the scandal and talk about how fuel economy works. What it's good for and why you should ignore that range number if you're not willing to look deep enough to know what it is really telling you.
EV Tax Credits Explained: alexonautos.com/2022-ev-tax-c...
The Mountain Garden: / themountaingarden
Buy Merch! aoamerch.com
Follow AoA on Facebook: alexonautos/
0:00 - Introduction
1:49 - The "Scandal"
3:37 - My Model 3 story
5:45 - Nothing gets the numbers
7:39 - How the EPA cycles work
11:22 - EV range calculation is bonkers
15:50 - You're thinking about range wrong
20:39 - Some hard truths, aka blame the EPA 
Авто/Мото
For the record, the real scandal might be Tesla's customer service handling, but at the same time: how is this different than anyone taking any car into a dealer and trying to get a service appointment for your Silverado 1500 not getting the rated fuel economy...
The Silverado branding doesn't center on its superior fuel economy. Tesla brand is all about their superior range.
I think one of the issues with giving the epa range instead of GOM range, is how much data Tesla has. They would easily be able to factor in climate alone into that number just using the current temperature and UV index, and the high or low for the day. If you include a hill elevation change factor for the area, the GOM would be even better.
I don't think you've seen some of Ford and GM's marketing pushing pickup truck fuel economy LOL
@@manthony225but what if their range is still superior? That's possible if all of the estimates are equally inaccurate.
I think Tesla would be better served by quoting range closer to what is realistic driving range in the real world. I’m an engineer and it drives me crazy how far off my Model 3’s range display is compared to the number of miles driven. So I switched to charge percent instead. 😂 Car and Driver has done quite a few range tests on the highway in various electric vehicles and the Tesla’s range is actually pretty close to other manufacturers claims which are much more realistic.
Just FYI, Consumer Report did a range test side by side with the most popular EVs in the US market, and find out that the Tesla was the one farther away from the EPA rating. The Mustang Mach-E, the VW id4 and the Ioniq 5 were all very close to the EPA rating, while the Model Y, rated at 326 managed a maximum of 274 miles in the best temperature and conditions possible, while the Id4 in the same test over achieved the EPA rating. It seems like Tesla is really over optimistic in the numbers they report to the EPA, not with one model, but ALL and each model they sale.
If they are cheating, EPA should be after them.
...They didn't run them to when they stopped, but that's what the EPA's terms are. They ran them until they range was zero.
‘…furthest away…’
@@yidingzhou5344 It's addressed in the video. It's due to Tesla using the 5-test cycle instead of the 2-test one. The former gives higher range estimates.
@@Narcissist86 Not to the discrepancy Tesla provides. not 70 to 55% less range (as CR, Recurrent, others are reporting across thousands of models). No, it's akin to diesel-gate. Like with VW, Tesla gets to report their numbers to the EPA. We've seen tons of stories break on this, from allegations musk likes to see bigger range numbers so he feels better to tesla setting up call centers to refute their own customers noticing massive (50-100 mile) discrepancies on range. It's not simply the 5 cycle test. It's tesla rigging the GOM software to lie to their customers about range above 50%.
As we see with CR, Recurrent, all these reports, most automakers are within 5-10% of their stated range in ideal conditions. Tesla tends to be off 20-40%. That's not simply the five cycle test. Somethings rotten in the state of Austin :).
Tesla vehicles do definitely fall short of their EPA numbers to a greater degree than other brands. In Edmunds testing, a lot of EVs get really close or exceed their EPA numbers, but Teslas always fall short.
Yeah. No reason to defend Tesla in this. Makes me think these guys hold stock In Tesla that rush to defend Tesla in comment section.
@MrRaitzi Tesla fanboys defending the cult, and that's what it is for a lot, a religion.
@@Noah_E Did you even watch the video? He explains clearly the difference between the two EPA test cycles and how they give different ranges.
Assuming anyone discussing objectively as a "fanboy" - i.e., being anti-Tesla - is as much of a cult or religion as being idiotically pro-Tesla.
@@Narcissist86 Tesla has consistently put out numbers they knew weren't realistic to a higher degree than any other EVs on the market. Defending them isn't beneficial to the EV cause just as much as people defending VW after dieselgate because the vehicles got better MPG and required less maintenance by cheating instead of actually spending the time and money to honestly pass emission standards. It shows a lack of objectivity.
@@Noah_E If that's a test cycle allowed by the EPA and one uses it - like Audi did as well - it's not the manufacturer's fault.
Educating consumers is the most beneficial thing to the EV cause, not blaming an automaker for a flawed test cycle.
It's not directly comparable to dieselgate because that was nefarious programming to specifically defeat regulations - THAT is cheating the rules. Tesla is following the rules and you're hating on the player rather than the game. THAT is lack of objectivity.
Even when Alex is "fired up" and "spicy" he's still more logical and thoughtful than most.
The EPA numbers are best used as a reference point nothing more or nothing less. The lawsuit is not winnable. Making the EPA range numbers more accurate is an entirely different question and issue to solve.
It means the state of California will foot the legal bill for lost suit? I would blame not only EPA but also legal system and those high paid lawyers each corporation hires for not forcing the companies to disclose on the stickers with much higher print: your mileage will vary, do not start a law suit since you are going to lose it.
Exactly the point. That’s why the lawsuit. Tesla’s reference point is leading consumers to expect a level performance that not realistic. Tesla negatively stands out here compared to other manufactures.
My only quibble is that nobody steals a Geo Metro. 😊
Tesla was fined in SKorea for their false advertisment on range
Thanks Alex. You are the best auto reviewer on YT. Thanks for your accuracy and bluntness. Need more people like you…not worrying about offending anyone!!!
Alex, We haven't recovered from the Panel Gap Scandal® yet. 🤣
The only problem I have with Tesla, and I admit that I don't know if that has changed, but they used to show the EPA number when charged at 100% in the instrument cluster. Then I prefer the guessed range as that will be more accurate.
And at the end of the day, it is your right foot that controls how much your car consume. And yes, people can beat the test numbers, I do it all the time, even on roadtrips.
They almost have to do that. If somebody buys a 300-mile EPA rated car, and take it home and charge it to 100%, then they expect to see 300 miles on the dash display. If they don't see that, they could immediately decide something is wrong with their car, or that they've been ripped off. "I was told 300 miles, I paid for 300 miles. Where's my 300 miles?"
The MPG rate on my Audi Q5 is 23-28. I have done 34mpg with full load and AC on, I have also done 18mpg in cold weather city driving. So the best number is actually achievable and can even be beaten to a great extent. Now the question is whether Model Y long range can ever do 330 miles on full charge (in ideal conditions)?
Sure. But not freeway miles. The EPA doesn't assume all freeway miles. Or really, hardly any.
I've watched a video of the mercedes EQS suv that got way over the EPA rating.This was at 70 miles an hour.
Awesome video Alex! Totally agree, many people need to be educated about this topic. We need mandatory wording such as; Range up to x Your results will vary...
This along with your reliability video should be required viewing in schools. I get that might seem like a bit over the top, but it's real-world skills that everyone would do well to understand. It's applicable to a wide variety of life situations and educates people to look further than surface level thinking. I know this sort of statement is said on RUclips a lot, but these two videos really are the best of RUclips and as widely viewed as they are or will be, deserve to be seen even more widely. This is from someone that doesn't agree with your well positioned arguments a lot of the time. Good job and much respect.
I don’t love the powder blue band on the Apple Watch.
Don’t forget that if you change the wheels with no aero hubcaps, take another 10% off.
Excellent in-depth dissection of this storm in a teacup. Thanks, Alex!
Also, none of this factors in winter temperatures. Winter temps cut off like 33% of the range right off the bat.
It's more like 20%, but yeah, it's a problem. Especially when some models don't have heat pumps as standard equipment, which is crazy in NA. A heat pump and heated steering wheel and seats should be standard on all EVs, like AC has been with ICE for decades.
@@Noah_EHalf the US population lives in areas with relatively mild winters. I do wish they all had heat pumps, but in San Francisco it isn't essential.
Alex, please explain to me why my fat Audi e-Tron is able to meet or beat its EPA rating.
Because Audi lowered the number after testing, which Alex explained is allowed. If you test the car and the tests show that your car can go 300, you're not allowed to advertise to the world that it can go 330, but you can say that it'll only go 270. And that's what many manufacturers have been doing, specifically because of how many people react to the range of EVs.
Why is this issue just coming up now? Tesla hasnt hit their range in over 10 years.
No car has ever hit it’s EPA range in normal driving!!!
Well because more sold in other countries. Tesla issues are silenced in US but no that kind of protective system outside US.
We have Tesla doing this, then we have the EQS SUV going 375 at 70 MPH when it’s rated for 301 highway , and the lyriq going 330 while I think it’s rated at 301 highway I believe
Car companies can select a voluntary reduction which is what Mercedes seems to have chosen to do, however that said, when we tested the EQS SUV, we got slightly below the EPA highway rating, but it was very close. Kyle Conner is the only one I know that has somehow been able to get more, although Edmunds did get an impressive result with the EQS sedan. The key point is however that Tesla is simply following the rules as allowed by the EPA.
Great video Alex Thanks for informing folks
Thank you for being logical and laying this out there. A 1-2 mpg difference on an ICE car is a difference of 30-40 miles on a 15-20 gallon tank, the difference is no one is measuring the range of ice cars based on a full tank in the same way they do with BEVs.
Great job Alex. The EPA range should be renamed to Grandma range.
Now imagine how worse WLTP must be and NEDC must have been 😅
Yep, don't get me started on WLTP...
The WLTP consumption on my Ioniq 6 is rated at 13.9kWh/100km. Over the past 3 months, on a total distance of 9400km I have averaged 10.5kWh/100km. On a recent roadtrip where I did 1400km in 2 days, I averaged 11.8kWh/100km.
You were saying?
That was some damn fine commentary. Informative, explanatory, insightful, and useful. Well done.
There are a few distinctions here though. Tesla's seem to lose more range vs their epa claims, but again, as you have explained, is because they do the longer 5 step epa test.
But that article said that it was the model s that did the poor calculation, not the 3 or y.
The lawsuit filed covers all models, one plaintiff specified a Model Y but the attorneys didn't say anything about the other models. However the lawsuit is for 3, Y, S and X.
Excellent!! Very well said!! Thank you!!
Thank you for so eloquently reiterating what everyone should already know!
It's called "gaming a broken system"
Thank you Alex, great video.
It was such an informative video! Thank you for taking the time to deep dive in the EPA calculations instead of simply sticking to the headlines, this is why I like your channel so much!
Excellent break down, Alex.
Great video Alex. You just nailed it with this one. I agree with everything you said in this video.
Perhaps the class action lawsuit is for the numbers to reflect real world driving. I recall Honda getting hit by this, and they adjusted their numbers.
Except the cars CAN hit the range when driven “appropriately”. I have been able to get a little over 300 miles of range on my Model Y. However that was a 64 mph cruise with a/c set to a modest 74°. It’s achievable, but with EV’s when you increase the speed, you drastically decrease range.
Outstanding explanation 👏 😊.
My PHEV comes close but doesn't achieve the predicted 'Full battery + Full gas tank' range.
I don't think any of my previous gasoline only cars ever did the advertised full gas tank range.
So I am not bothered by this so called "range issue" and Tesla is still the top contender as I look at switching over from my PHEV to an EV.
Thanks Alex for making this video. Hopefully it will help educate people to either not worry about it or to understand that the testing method needs to be updated to realistic conditions.
I often hear people complaining that their EV is not getting the "promised" or "advertised" range as if it was a constant number. As with EVs your mpg constantly varies in fossil vehicles as conditions change. The main difference with EVs is that EV chargers are currently much less common compared to gas stations so EV owners pay more attention. The new EV owner education problem also applies to charging speeds.
We actually get significantly better efficiency and range driving our Ioniq 5 than the EPA estimate. We mostly drive in the mountains of Colorado, so rarely above 65 mph. Speed is the number one user controlled variable impacting range.
BTW - I have seen range estimates as high as 442 miles at 100% SOC in our Ioniq 5. I knew that wasn't realistic of course and the estimate quickly decreased in the first 30 miles of driving.
Thanks for a very informative video giving all the proper FACTS.
p.s. where do I get that plug sweat top in the UK?
By the way UK (Europe) does not have 3 phase as standard home charging - re other video😀
I think it's really simple, and RUclipsrs just don't say it. It's about capacity. They lie about the size of the batteries. Their sizes does not measure up to the range as promised.
A gas car manufacturer will not sell you a 20 gallon gas tank while you really have 15.
You are sold a 75 kWh tesla while you have closer to 65.
This isn’t factual and a flawed argument. The advertised battery size is accurate but it doesn’t mean you have access to all of it. The best comparison is smartphones. Your phone may be a 128gb model but you’d probably only have access to anywhere between 110gb-115gb of usable space.
@RiceBROS90 you are making the case, though. Why advertise the range of something that is not available? The GBs on your phone do not hold matters of life or death on a highway.
@@ojobee life or death is a stretch when it comes to MPG. As Alex explained the range estimate is an estimate, nothing more and nothing less. This is a pointless lawsuit as Tesla, same as any other manufacturer, paid the EPA to test their vehicles and the EPA, not Tesla, determined the range.
@RiceBROS90 not a stretch if some is left stranded and loses their life. You might not know this, but ICE manufacturers get sued for this. I got a $800 refund from Ford for missstating the mpg of Ford fusion hybrid. So this is not unique to tesla. Read up on it.
@@ojobee that’s because Ford was deliberately playing with the numbers that the EPA gave them. This is completely different as Tesla is reporting the official EPA numbers that they received. Also you keep throwing in someone losing a life which is a stretch.
The reason why so many reviews don't understand this, is because they have almost no real world experience. It shows in more ways than EV range complaints.
I understand that the EPA won't be an exact number that you can count on for every case but Teslas sure seem to fall much shorter then other brands. Ford, GM, and Porsche seem to come close or even exceed their EPA range
You know what would be nice? If every review of a vehicle that has been out in the public for a few years, would include a short segment on 'known issues' that are costly to the consumer or might affect a potential buyers decision to purchase.
Excellent explainer thank you very much. I’ve been trying to explain this kind of stuff to people for a long time, but it’s really hard to articulate in a way that people understand. Hopefully we can make it even more concise and find a way to explain this to people and just 30 seconds or so. I think I’ll simply tell them, the EPA range ratings are good for comparing. However, the methodology is quite antiquated and should be adjusted and should not be used to expect real world results.
I didn't know EPA testing costs that high. Thanks for sharing this.
Do you think we have seen different numbers if the test were like $10k/cycle?
I would be willing to bet that if the test was less expensive, everyone would do it
@@EVBuyersGuideany proof that another $30k is the reason? Developing a new vehicle can cost $billions, so $30k is chump change to get a better range.
Charging speed should be advertised more than the range. That is more important that range IMO. I have a Bolt and ID4. Both have a range of 250-270. I won't take the Bolt on a trip longer than 300 miles because of its charging speed.
I’m sorry but there are plenty of vehicles that meet or exceed the EPA range, both gas and electric. Many German EV’s surpass the EPA. Tesla has exaggerated their numbers and never mention that range may be lower. They have been doing this the longest and know better.
I actually do usually get better than EPA ratings on every car on my daily commute. But that's because my commute is similar to the EPA tests, with long stretches going 50 mph without stops. I travel 23 miles and it usually takes about 46 minutes, so I average 30 mph for the one way trip.
So am I correct in understanding that one legitimate use of the EPA numbers -- more specifically, MPGe -- is to compare vehicles? And that's true even though different manufacturers can use different methods? Still unclear on this. Thanks for making the video -- a good step in the right direction toward clarifying this mess.
That's the theory, but also why it's insanity that the EPA has essentially two different tests. This means you cannot actually compare a Tesla (or Audi since they do the same thing) to a some other EV.
Alex are hybrids more likely to get closer to their EPA numbers in general? Have you seen any trends for hybrids? We have a 2022 Limited Santa Fe hybrid and our recent road trip across Eastern Washington with limited city driving returned 35 mpg which was one of our best performances to date. No mountain passes to go over, two lane rural highways 65 mph out through the desert, temps in the 100s. I was surprised it was that good.
We've driven Priuses on many long trips over the years and consistently gotten close to their EPA ratings. That was without any special hypermiling techniques, but much of the driving was on two-lane roads at 55-60 mph. Still, even on an Interstate at 70 with AC on we've seen 50 mpg. The Toyota hybrids of that sort really are exceptionally efficient.
How in hell does doing an EPA test cost the automaker $10-$20 million??
I never believed the range of my Tesla M3P. I drive it for only 150 mi. Coz, I fill up to 80% only and start charging when 20% or above.
Agreed. The range number is worthless unless it plays inside the manufacture recommended ranges ( i.e. 20% to 80% )
It is scandal.
Many EVs had over EPA range.
Fine Print for the win. Great video!
I've consistently seen the GOM in my 2019 Niro EV show a higher than advertised range. I've never achieved it, but I've been close to the advertised range of ~390km. My 2023 Model Y seems thirstier than the Niro EV - but it is also heavier and bigger. It also charges at 3 times the speed of the Niro - so what does it really matter if I have to stop to charge in the same place along a 450km trip? Maybe EVs should have a combined range and charge rating. That might serve to educate people with unrealistic expectations.
No one drives like an EPA cycle!
From my Oldsmobile Omega, Cutlass 442, Buick Grams National, Nissan Maxima, Jetta GT, WRX, STI, BMW 335i, E46 M3, Mercedes E63,Audi Q5, SQ5, Mazda CX5,
Every single one went 20% less than stated, at least. That’s in a urban neighborhood with everyday congestion. EPA rating is FOOLS Gold!
I have tested my 2022 M3 RWD in rural NM and I am able to get the EPA range (272 miles) when cruising at a steady 60-65 mph on reasonably level NM state hwys. Cruising at 82mph, the range falls to about 190 miles, if I was prepared to drive it completely empty, or about 160 miles with about 10% battery capacity left. Basically, if your average speed is under 65mph, you'll get the EPA range or close to it, but as speed rises above 65mph range will fall, and it will fall rapidly above 75mph.
BTW, I had a 1997 Geo Metro 5spd 1litre 3cylinder engine, and consistently got 55mpg on long drives in Oregon and Washington state.
Excellent explanation, YMMV! ;)
By the way, I had a Kia Niro all electric that was rated at 240 mi and that's with air conditioning on. Without air conditioning, because it's pretty cool in California most of the year, it was closer to 270 miles
I drive a 2018 Ram 1500 Hemi. 321 rear end. I get 21-24 mpg on trips over 30 miles round trip. Tires (17”). Proof is in the pudding. Driving habits definitely matter..
Have you had repairs associated with the infamous ‘hemi tick?'. If so, at what mileage? How about repairs associated with the manifold bolts shearing off due to expansion / contraction of dissimilar metals? I am exploring moving from an F150 and trying a Ram.....but these years long unresolved issues I read about, make me hesitate making that move.
love this episode
Seems like what happens when you have more people interested in a market that others already there are used to. Even if folks were used to reading those estimates wrong, it's expected that advertised doesn't match real world... Agree on the EPA, but also on automakers themselves since they lobbied for the system as well.
I do agree people should know better based on all their previous experience with gas vehicles. The dumb part is this lawsuit will probably go much farther than it really should. My only hope is these people get permanently ban from owning an EV ever again.
Educating on numbers can be tough.
Gas vehicles have had estimated range remaining for at least a decade now. All I've used seem quite like the rolling estimate described.
At least on my toyotas the estimated range is not based on the MPG it reports as instantaneous nor on what it reports as average. I suspect it is based on some average of readings for the past few minutes or 10s of minutes (which is considerably shorter than the time used for the "average" MPG reported). This can be seen as a relatively fast reduction in estimated range followed by a slow or non-existent increase in estimated range when climbing a long grade for 10-15 minutes when it is not followed by a descent. I.e. when that grade is not a pass where you go up and then down the other side (so Donner doesn't show it).
I set my Toyota RAV4 hybrid to give me tank average normally the MPG on instrument is off by 1 maybe 2. but still get 42-43 in mixed driving.
"No S@1t Sherlock." feeds my soul. That's what I say to all of this. Using a ICE car paradigm to measure EV range is nonsense.
So, I completely agree that the EPA is not realistic. However I will say I’ve owned A LOT of different vehicles from different brands and it has always seemed that German brands, in my experience, meet or exceed the window sticker estimations.
The Germans also pollute more than they should. The EPA ratings have been fairly accurate since the 2017 testing revision. Most people should be able to beat them if they try. Most people don't try, so they won't.
Spot on Alex. I have not always agreed with your EV takes but this is 100% facts EPA is the problem.
Even on my last ICE (Mk7 GTI) i was always 2 miles less than the combined EPA mpg.
So no surprised when my Tesla gets 75% off the advertised mileage just because talk would driving style EPA.
I appreciate the unbiased accurate information. This is really hard to come by nowadays sadly.
I know this is not an EV, but my 2022 Honda Insight hybrid does get the EPA range. In fact, in city driving I consistently get better than the EPA rating. One caveat: I haven't driven the car much in cold weather, so I expect the winter mileage is a bit less.
Thanks for your realistic look at this issue. At 26k miles on my Model 3 LR RWD my Lifetime Wh/Mi is 251. That's 3.98 miles per kWh. My car was EPA rated for 234 Wh/Mi, which is 4.23 miles per kWh. That's pretty amazing in my book. But I generally drive pretty conservatively, the speed limit or 5 over. Through experience I know what charge levels I'll need.
Thank you so much for some common sense, the explanation of the EPA test cycles that are used, and the non-applicability of EPA test cycles to real world driving.
My kia niro isnt getting 74 mpg alex, but its still a unicorn in my heart.
My take on the typical Tesla driver is similar to my view of most typical BMW drivers... they've got a heavy foot. (aka aggressive arseholes on the road). lol
I would research diversion team because that's what I read about which was a team to intentionally distract consumers from the fact that they're range was nowhere close to what was promised. Many of the Hyundai and Kia products, and even other brands like Mercedes have come closer to meeting their range. Tesla is way off and I do think it's a diversion.
to be fair, as an owner of a model 3 2023 RWD model says 272 here are my findings vs my ice vehicle
based on what the average whpm for this car is (255) to get the max range is achievable.
i often drive 280-300whpm.
if i were to convert that to EPA mpg on a gas car, its prob on par.
my 2022 tuscon hybrid got 38/38 per epa. after 54k miles in 18 months and driving in highway to extreme heavy urban condtitions here are my findings.
heavy city i got 33
normal city i got 36-40 (lots of hills in vegas, so where i went would vary)
highway. 37-38 under 65, 34 up to 70mph, 29 up to 80mph. highway at 80 when its 16F outside in high elevation, i got 19-21mpg.
When i would fill up, range would say 475-485 miles....i really got about 350-400 in city use.
in vegas summer, which is part of this scandal as you mentioned vegas dealers were giving people the middle finger so to say, is whenever its over 100-104F ill see nothing less than 400-435whpm with moderate to heavy city use. keep in mind, people are whining when its over 110F and their batteries are tanking hard. the dealer isnt going to spend a bunch of money inspecting cars that are operating normally because people dont understand energy usage in extreme heat vs their previous ice car.
i usually tell people this. automatically take off 15% for real world use. 25% for hot climate and cold climate. ICE gets worse mpg in winter too.
so is the EPA testing accurate? yes and no...its giving the car makers the ability to claim its best average range, which for my car in vegas, i can often get 255whpm which is the official "sweet spot" for my vehicle when its 40F-95F outside. I usually have AC on at 68F on constantly, and my car is heavily tinted and shaded on all windows including the front...however i often use under 300whpm or about a 10% miles driven vs range loss per battery meter.
when i go to work, its all slightly uphill 7 miles each way, slightly downhill on the way home.
tesla, 350whpm or so to work, 100-115whpm on the way home. (10-12 miles of range/3 miles of range)
tuscon hybrid.....25-26mpg to work, 40-50mpg on the way home.
I had a model S loaner for a day, and beat the snot out of it and there was still only about a 10-15% real world loss (starting mile estimate vs actual miles driven)
these tesla cars are rated just fine....but yes they can be done better. but they technically are accurate.
failing to mention that a few tubers have run the battery past the 0 mark and got about 15-20 extra miles before the car totally passed out. which tesla does claim exists, and has been proven that it does exist as a safety. to be fair, the RWD model 3 for 2023 should state EPA as 255 miles, and there is still that buffer of about 20....which, if you factored that in is around that 272 range they claim.
while im may sound like im defending tesla here, the experiments that have been documented, and my experiences, i dont have a gripe about the range from the EPA...to me it falls in line with an ICE EPA rating.
to be fair, the EPA rating for a 2015 bmw 328i is 23/34. and I always got 22.5-23 city and 32-35 highway with the car LOVING 82mph and getting its claimed highway ratings.
but some cars do far better...i had a rental 22 camry gas only 4cyl. says 38mpg highway. at 75mph i was getting 45-47 and AC on high.
EPA ratings are crap, and also not bad either....at least in my experiences.
As always, your mileage will vary. My Model Y was rated for 330 miles when new. Now it’s rated for 302 miles. I have actually been able to get 300 miles on a charge, however my actual range is about 280 miles. My Mazda3 AWD Premium also is 15% off it’s estimate mileage. It how these things are unless you drive the absolute speed limit, which one one does.
At some point, the EPA needs to switch EVs over to showing city and highway efficiency (not range).
The best response commentary on this subject! Well done Alex, as always!
God I love sassy Alex.
Looking at my 2023 Model 3 RWD window sticker, it says in big print: 132MPGe (pretty useless to me except for comparison purposes), then beside that is Hwy/City MPGe numbers of 138/126 (once again useless). Next to that, it says "25kW-hr per 100 miles." This tells me that with the 60kW-hr battery, I can expect about 240 miles of range if I drove until the battery was totally depleted. Now that's useful info... and guess what, it's fairly accurate. Below that it states the driving range: "When fully charged, the vehicle can travel about 272 miles" which doesn't really match the above computation. But I guess "about" is the key word. I have actually exceeded the 272mi EPA range in certain scenarios (coastal highway driving at 55-60mph with 45/35mph zones interspersed (hot day with A/C blasting). Thus, I imagine that the 5-cycle EPA tests emulate a similar driving scenario. Yeah, blowing down the interstate at 75-80+mph really sucks the battery down in comparison. YMMV.
My previous ICE would show 360 miles of range of full. I was lucky to get 275.
I am active on two PHEV forums (Kia Niro & Ford Escape) where the majority of owners exceed the EPA estimates; mostly 10-15% above EPA. I wonder if PHEVs have something "extra" going for them or if their buyers are just more conscious of their driving styles?
I think people who invest time in monitoring their consumption are also adjusting their driving style to lower that consumption and you'll get a more biased view on such topics on online forums
I can't speak for EV's, as I've never owned one, but every vehicle I've owned has met or exceeded the EPA ratings for fuel economy (8 vehicles, various brands, 2013+ model years). I'd find it reasonable to expect to get the EPA figures with vaguely gingerly driving. My only "X" factor is I've only owned 1 automatic transmission vehicle, so maybe it's the programming. I recently took my 2023 Jeep Wrangler (6-speed manual) rated for 19 MPG combined on a 2,000+ mile road trip and averaged 23.5 MPG. That includes flat highway cruising, climbing from nearly sea level to almost 10,000 feet, some offroad driving, battling oppressive headwinds in Kansas, and tootling around in the cities in the meantime.
So I dunno. Maybe EV EPA range calculations are totally busted, but I trust EPA figures as a baseline minimum for gasoline engines.
Agree EPA rating cycles need to be improved. How about we find the EPA better?
Does the manufacture's testing show real time miles per? I'm sure they test under ALL conditions?
We just bought the 2023 Kia Sportage Plug In Hybrid and the "fuel" economy is hilarious. My wife filled up the gas tank and fuel economy was like 23 mpg, I charged the battery overnight and voila! when getting to work 27 miles away, the average mpg was now over 100mpg! LOL!
So here's how I am going to judge the new vehicle. My last car was the 2013 Ford CMAX Hybrid, I achieved an average of 34mpg with it and it had a 13 gallon tank so my range was around 442 miles - about 10 days or so between fill ups depending on all the trips with it. With charging the Kia every night, I am hoping to go 14-16 days or more between fill ups. We'll see, then I'll have to see how much the electricity costs us.
Pure Oil co, years ago would buy autos to test their actual road milage! there was always about a 20% difference in stated performance and actual! Pure oil was bought out by Union 76. then the regulators shut down the program, because of the differences! (My late father worked for those companies at the time!) and the beat goes on!
2017 Chevy Bolt. I can get the exact range quoted, or more or less, depending on all the variables. I think the range quoted by Chevy is very accurate as a result, and I would expect the other car companies to do the same.
WLTP numbers are pure fantasy. EPA ratings have been fairly accurate since the 2017 testing revision. I am by no means a hyper-miler, but meet or beat EPA ratings with my ICEs. My Crosstrek was rated for 33 Hwy, but would consistently get over 39 on long trips. My Forester is rated for 28 hwy, but gets into the mid-30s. The same is true for my F350, Grand Cherokee, etc. I pay attention to what is going on ahead/around me, like slowing down when approaching a light well in advance so it turns green and traffic is moving before I get there without aggressive braking and acceleration. I have adaptive cruise on the vehicles I use most often and use it as much as possible.
My 2023 Bolt easily makes its 258 mile range in the city. I have easily made 300 miles in the city by some hyper mile driving. Highway speeds range is at least 20% lower.
Generally, Alex is right on. However, I will say, Hey wait a second!
I rented a Tesla while my A3 eTron Audi was in the shop on a warranty issue.
The Tesla provided 4.05 miles per kWh. (City driving, up to 50 mph on Folsom Blvd, Madison Ave, Howe, and Hazel) This is similar to what you did in your Tesla.
My Ford Fusion PHEV Energi returned 6.27 miles per kWh in city only, with speeds up to 50 mph on the expressways in Sacramento. Same test, run at 0200 hours with no AC. The point is that SOME PEOPLE don’t drive their cars like bats 🦇 out of Hell, and some of us can and regularly beat the EPA miles.
I am on Fuelly, and make economy my biggest goal.
I'm sorry but I'm sure the car manufacturers probably know all this. its on them then to come up with tests that are more "real world". why blame the consumer? would this be tolerated for other products? imagine you were advertised a 3000sqft house and you paid per sqft and then find out it was actually half of that.
To the point of why buyers might care more about EPA estimates for EV's vs ICE cars ... I think it mostly comes down to range anxiety when paired with a less-than-great charging infrastructure. Getting below the rated MPG in your Forester is less impactful day-to-day because it's so easy to fill it up and get over that frustration in the moment. Falling short in your Model 3 (or any EV) will lead to this kind of upset a bit quicker because those estimates on paper translate more directly into the decision behind which car you buy based on your driving needs. When buying an ICE vehicle, your MPG rating is measured on scales like "environmental impact" and "economy", but when buying an EV, that range estimate is measured on a scale of "where you can drive this car". I don't disagree with anything in this video, just sharing my thoughts as to why this is getting so loud.
Man. I love spicy Alex. 😅
💯 agree with everything but you didn’t mention the rest of the things talked about in the article that mentions Tesla employees lying to customers telling them they ran a battery diagnostic and everything was fine when in reality they did nothing and were completely blowing smoke. Granted 99% of the time the batteries probably were fine and customers were probably ignorant for all the reasons that you mentioned but thats not the point.
Just put the battery display on percentage. The rated mi is useless (I admit, when I first got my Tesla I preferred miles cause of irrational range anxiety).
Umm, my Golf TDI consistently exceeds EPA estimates 😅
We call it a "Guess-o-meter". Anyone buying an EV should expect weather and all the things you mention to affect your range. I can drive 70+ and get LESS range than miles traveled. Driving less than 70 MPH I get MORE miles traveled than range used. When the temps are in the single digits F, then I can only get about 222 miles on a complete charge. When the temps are above 90 F, then I get 290+ miles on a complete charge. This is on a Chevy Bolt, and the Tesla is probably similar. Good grief - these people just sit around and complain about everything. Some things are justified, but this is just stupidity on their part. For me, I love my Bolt and often smile as I maneuver thru traffic so easily. If you are often late for work, I suggest you buy an EV and possibly eliminate one problem in your life.
Every Prius I’ve driven has beat the EPA highway fuel economy. What is Toyota doing that is better than everyone else? (Note: I use full throttle quite often, and usually (allegedly) cruise 10mph over the limit on the freeway)
even their ice cars often do better on highway. i had a rental camry 2022 non hybrid and it got 47mpg on the highway at 75mph. literally drive from kingman AZ to vegas airport and the needle didnt even budge off of full when i returned it. EPA rated is 38 highway for this model car.
Same with watches. 50m water resistance doesnt mean you can dive 50 meters. You need a 200m dive watch (rating) to be able to do that. 100 m for general swimming. I guess the EPA's doing the same. My camry hybrid rated for 52mpg is more like in the mid to high 40s and very occasionally north of 50s (slow speeds for longer times).
Sure, and why they're called 'water resistant and not 'waterproof'. Good enough for getting wet occasionally, which is still appreciated. It is a good analogy for cars.