LR AWD now with 322 miles of range

LR AWD now with 322 miles of range

Thanks Elon,

Now let's see how many threads of, but when I charge my LR AWD to 100% I am not getting 322 this spawns.


For the record, mine has been back calculating to 298 miles lately.

jebinc | November 1, 2019

Great! Look forward to my LR AWD getting the firmware flash!

bfenster | November 1, 2019

Today I'm reading 296 @ 100% (~15k mi 19"). Assuming this is a s/w flash that also applies to existing owners and this gets me back to around 310, I'll be giddy

Joseb | November 1, 2019

Is that update already out?

bfenster | November 1, 2019

No. But I image it's within the wait time for a new car. So hopefully w/in a month or so

stingray.don | November 1, 2019

I just checked, and I only have 310 miles of range. Should I be concerned?

Just kidding! :)

WW_spb | November 1, 2019

I wonder if mine will have new range or not when it arrives on November 11th

wayne | November 1, 2019

I just charged mine to 100% and got 300 miles even. Stats extrapolates to 297. We shall see if this goes up.

FISHEV | November 1, 2019

They also upped price by $500 so doesn't look like Tesla is giving away the extra 12 miles. I'd pay $500 to get t miles. Will that be an option?

gballant4570 | November 1, 2019

I'm looking forward to this update. Should be interesting.

kevin_rf | November 1, 2019

Fishy, you claim to own a performance, not a LR AWD, so no miles for you!

lbowroom | November 1, 2019

Retroactive with software update

lbowroom | November 1, 2019

Why did I think the fish had an SR +? Are you thinking of Howard?

TAC | November 1, 2019

Ha!, so does this mean that RWD will be like 335 now?

rsingh05 | November 1, 2019

The 3P has been rated at 310, same as the non-P used to be. We know the 3 P with stickier tires will always be less than the LR AWD so if the 3P rating stays at 310 and actually delivers 310, that would be an improvement from the ~280 everyone has been getting real life.

vmulla | November 2, 2019

TAC | November 1, 2019
Ha!, so does this mean that RWD will be like 335 now?
Let's see 325 consistently across all RWD owners first.

s.spolen | November 2, 2019

It would be great to see it actually happen in my LR AWD
Have not 1x @ 300mi in first 5mo

FISHEV | November 2, 2019

"Let's see 325 consistently across all RWD owners first."@vmulla

Wonder if 2019.36 will fix that or if that is just how it works. Some cars are affected by updates others are not.

Hopefully the 322 range update for LR AWD will be an option available to current car owners. That Musk never mentioned the 322 range update, arguably more significant than power or regen he did announce, in his 2019 Q3 phone interview doesn't increase trust that Tesla is going to make things right for LR RWD folks who should have ALL seen a promised upgrade.

gballant4570 | November 2, 2019

LR AWD, since Oct 2018:

New 100% charge estimate - 306
Last May 100% charge estimate - 310
Today 100% estimate - 296

Best I can determine, real world 100% SOC mileage has not changed.

slingshot18 | November 2, 2019

Fish, did you even read the article?

-TheJohn- | November 2, 2019

No point in replying to them. They didn't and also won't usefully respond to you. Click that Flad as Inappropriate button next to their posts.

-ABC...XYZ+ | November 2, 2019

has anybody here with an already owned 3 actually received the additional mileage update?

steveishere | November 2, 2019

Looking forward to the update; could really use those few miles now that vacation season is approaching!

Iwantmy3 | November 3, 2019

If the upgrade applies to current owners, then it is no more than a re-evaluation of the rated consumption and does not impact actual car range. Don't get to excited.

The only way it is meaningful is if they have physically increased the battery capacity. This would only be applicable to newly manufactured cars going forward

gballant4570 | November 3, 2019

Iwantmy3, I don't think that your first statement has to be true. A software update that moves the access line into the reserve could accomplish a range increase without changing battery size.

It follows that your second statement is not true. Increasing the amount of battery available for routine driving would increase range without any physical battery capacity increase. We have seen this done temporarily from time to time, via software, kin areas where there is some sort of natural disaster occurring.

gballant4570 | November 3, 2019

The other possibility is an increase in efficiency of power use. If the motor's efficiency can be increased via a software update, effective range increases in proportion to the m ore efficient motor performance without any physical battery change.
Elon Musk's recent communication on the subject indicate this might be the case.

MAB1980 | November 3, 2019

^ Iwant’s statement also assumes that it is impossible to improve system efficiency, which is inaccurate.

billtphotoman | November 4, 2019

It seems like in the dual motor model 3s Tesla has some room to tweak the use of the two motors to improve efficiency. If that is the case the RWD LR may not benefit from a range boost.
Now that the performance model comes standard with 20 inch wheels it makes sense for it to have a lower rated range since that reflects reality.

entelahmet | November 4, 2019

I just got the latest update for my LR AWD. It is still calculating 310 as max range. 90% estimate is 279 miles,

Iwantmy3 | November 4, 2019

My statement is based on my experience with the range "upgrade" on the LR RWD. The range went up, the rated consumption went down, and my typical consumption for the same conditions did not change.

Releasing access to additional battery reserves is possible, but it could result in battery degradation issues down the line. If fact, based on the numerous threads following V10 introduction, the trend seems to be to increase the amount of unusable reserve in the battery.

One possibility could be that the new software may limit the amount of time that the front motor is actually in use. My understanding is that the front motor is less efficient than the rear motor. This is why AWD has a lower rated range than RWD. However, if the software is changed so that the car operates primarily in RWD unless AWD is needed, then the effective range may be moved closer to the RWD range (thus 322 vs 325). This would be backwards compatible.

95dawg | November 4, 2019

Any news on P3D- and P3D?

Syed.Hosain | November 4, 2019

@vmulla "Let's see 325 consistently across all RWD owners first."

With 28k miles (about 17 months now), I got 304 miles on a full charge last week. Not particularly surprising. I *never* saw 325 in the past with the previous upgrade... highest it ever showed was 317 as I recall.

So, if the range is increased by the new firmware, it will be nominal at best for me, I suspect.

Manjushr | November 5, 2019

@gballant4570 my numbers match yours precisely. However, weekends, I have 3 bike racks on the roof... So I am assuming it is just learning, and thusly predicting based on actual mi/kWh performance...

Manjushr | November 5, 2019

@gballant4570 my numbers match yours precisely. However, weekends, I have 3 bike racks on the roof... So I am assuming it is just learning, and thusly predicting based on actual mi/kWh performance...

Iwantmy3 | November 5, 2019

The rated range shown does not have anything to do with your driving habits. It is based on a constant rated consumption value which is built into the car's logic system. On the LR AWD the rated consumption should line up with the rated consumption line shown on the energy screen.

FISHEV | November 5, 2019

"The rated range shown does not have anything to do with your driving habits."@Iwantmy3

It didn't used to be but after 2010.32.x.x the "Rated Range" began to fluctuate prompting a lot of questions. It lead to Bjorn's testing that showed Tesla had reduced range on the Model 3's.