What watt hours per mile are you getting on your Model 3?

What watt hours per mile are you getting on your Model 3?

The model 3 is rated at 241 watt hours per mile, if I am doing my calculation right (75,000 watt hours divided by 310 miles).

In my driving so far, which has not been aggressive, I've been averaging more like 300 watt hours per mile. This means that my range is only 250 miles. Admittedly, in LA there's always lots of stop and go traffic, so I was not expecting to hit any sort of ideal. Regenerative breaking is on though.

Is this an an unusual spread relative to the EPA estimate? Are others getting better mileage and if so, what might the reason be?

This is my first Tesla and my first electric car,

stevea137 | 6 janvier 2018

What regen setting are you using?

What is your drive mixture (i.e. what % high speed highway vs % stop-n-go or low speed city driving)?

To compare your number with anyone else's, you will also have to compare those factors too at a minimum (should also include ambient temperature, environment control usage, etc).

The EPA and Tesla's rating assumes a certain % city and highway driving, at a given temperature, yada yada yada.. in the end they are both pretty optimistic. Sorry I can't add any useful data though, still waiting for mine :(

Haggy | 6 janvier 2018

274 average so far but the car has been used for only 624 miles. On today's trips I did better and beat rated range by a bit. With the Model S I average 319.

When the Model S was as new I probably got closer to 360. I would imagine that I'm being more aggressive than I might end up being in the long run.

You can have economy or you can have performance, but not both. If you push things, the Wh/Mile will go up, but with the Model 3 it will still cost less per mile driving aggressively than in a Model S driving conservatively.

Robocheme | 6 janvier 2018

I put this information in another thread, but I think that it's pertinent here. I was driving home from Portland and I did a speed vs. efficiency test on a straight section of freeway.

I did a quick test at three different speeds, 65, 70, and 75 mph.

Test basis

Flat, straight section of I5 between Woodburn and Eugune, OR
44F, 82% humidity, 430' elevation, cloudy (I'm not sure why this would make a difference, but I wanted to sound like I'm thorough)
Wind ? (from the trees and the clouds it wasn't much, and at least it was probably consistent during test)
LR with 18" wheels and aero covers
No drafting
Test procedure - I put it cruise control and then reset the odometer B. After a few minutes, the efficiency would stop changing and I would note the value.

65 mph - 239 wh/mile
70 mph - 266 wh/mile
75 mph - 303 wh/mile

Obviously, YMMV, but this does give you some indication of the penalty for going fast.

CraigW | 6 janvier 2018

robocheme: Thanks!

I too, notice quite a difference between my Model 3 and my Model S70D. However, it is hard to beat the free ions in the Model S.

tesla | 6 janvier 2018

@robocheme surprising efficiency loss from 65 to 75mph! i would have expected some but the magnitude is greater than i would have guessed

jefjes | 6 janvier 2018

Hills can make a difference in a big way and if you're not really paying attention you can actually be going up a gradual incline for several miles, especially on a freeway that appears flat to the eye. With hypermiling experience you can learn to pay real close attention to the energy bar just under the speed display. You will notice that with the cruise set to a fixed speed with no traffic on what may appear to be a flat road that the bar will be moving up and down ever so slightly. More when elevation increases as it maintains speed at the cost of using energy and drops down when it levels off and may even slightly regen as elevation decreases. For new EV owners that want to learn to get the most range, it will take some practice.

SCCRENDO | 7 janvier 2018

A couple of points here. We do not have total access to the Model S battery. I am sure it is the same with the Model X and 3. The 85S only has about 74 kWh usable battery. About 6 kWh was preserved for anti-bricking and 5kWH was said to be used for a sub-zero reserve. Some managed to drive up to 17 miles after the battery showed zero whereas others have run out of juice at 0. A simple way to measures this is to fully charge your battery and then try run the battery as low as you dare. You then look at how many rated miles you use (not actual miles) and the energy used. You can do this for shorter distances as it is linear but you would get a more accurate reading running it over a longer distance. Each rated mile in the 85S costs 278 wH or 3.6 miles per kWH. A new 85S with a 266 rated mile battery calculates out to 74 kWh. Most of us lost some battery very early which then maintained and most had a 250 mile battery which calculated out to 69-71 kWh. My battery blew out a bank of cells at 107000 miles and was sent to Fremont for remanufacture. I have driven on a loaner battery for close to a year and the technology has obviously improved as after a year and a further 28000 miles on the loaner battery it still charges to 266 miles. I get my original battery back next week.
Now to obtain these ranges in the real world LOL. I bought my car to drive not to set records. In the real world I do about 335 wH/m. Thus I could only realistically expect 220 real world miles. On my original 250 rated mile battery the longest distance I ever did was 214 miles and arrived at the supercharger with 9 miles left. But I had to watch my speed. In those days it was critical because there were very few superchargers. So we either had to drive slowly at times to preserve battery or visit campsites or other slow chargers. Also you need to be aware that the Tesla trip planner may overestimate your ability to reach your destination because it assumes you will drive at a certain speed which is generally at least 10-15 mph my real world speed. By the amount I drive I need the biggest battery available and thus ordered the so-called 310 mile Model 3 battery. But I am not kidding myself that I will be able to drive 310 miles. I plan my road trips so that I do shorter charges far more frequently try give myself a 50 mile buffer and for hilly, windy terrains and indeed colder temps consider a 70 mile buffer.

daverileyak | 7 janvier 2018

74 kWh useable is accurate for my late 2013 S 85. There are much easier ways to measure that, however. My overall wh/mile since buying the car is 290. It runs 310 to 320 on trips, and 260 to 270 around town.

Reading about Teslas in the years I was driving my 2 Volts, I had never seen any info on reserve or buffer kWh for Tesla battery packs and wondered for years how much, or how little, Tesla engineers had designed into the system. That info on the Volt is widely disseminated. I was hoping when I got the 85 that it actually would have 85kWh useable in a larger, undisclosed actual battery pack capacity. 'Twas not to be. I figured out just by watching the gauges on day 2 of ownership that I had between 72.5 and 74 kWh in the pack that I could access.

rxlawdude | 7 janvier 2018

My calculation of using % SOC and kWH used post-charge came up with 75kWh of useable capacity for the LR M3.

SCCRENDO | 7 janvier 2018

That would suggest an 80 kWH plus total battery capacity. To achieve 310 miles you would have to drive at 242 wH per mile or 4:2 miles per kWh.

rxlawdude | 7 janvier 2018

@SCC, sounds about right. | 7 janvier 2018

The math based on .23 coefficient of drag vs. .24 for MS, including the ratio of frontal cross sections and basing the numbers on Model S85 (RWD) published by Musk and Straubel, I get about 270 WH/mile for the Model 3 at 65 mph vs. the published 320 for the S85. This omits any difference in drive unit efficiencies. The M3 uses a different AC motor design employing a permanent magnet in the rotor. I haven't found any published data about that. Neither did I try to factor in possible differences due to wheel covers or dimensions.

Most of the reduction in energy demand is due to the fact that the M3 is about 20% lighter than the S85, reducing demand by about 36 WH/mile. The slightly improved aerodynamics contributes about 14 WH/mile savings at 65.

tesla | 7 janvier 2018

A little more data. I went on my first freeway oriented trip today, a total of about 130 miles, 85% freeway driving, with maybe 20% of the freeway driving stop and go. Average cruising speeds 65-75 mph. I was pleased to see that I got 230 watt hours per mile for the whole journey!

Here's something that occurred to me: given that with EV's the range concern is greater than the cost per mile concern, ultimately what matters for most road trips is the efficiency of the vehicle for freeway driving. It seems like on a freeway one will get the full 310 miles of range or maybe even a little better. Stop and go traffic in LA will be a lot worse, but ultimately that doesn't matter.

daverileyak | 7 janvier 2018

tesla, don't be surprised if the LA stop and go observed efficiency is better than the days you cruise 100%, especially if there are significant distances of "go" at 10 -25 mph in the stop and go traffic.

tesla | 7 janvier 2018

@daverileyak Definitely hasn’t been the case so far! But it’s a fun puzzle to track. | 7 janvier 2018

The capacity long range battery pack in the Model 3 is a mystery at the moment.

It contains 4416 2170 cells for which the specs do not seem to have been published yet.
Here is a guess. The 2170 cells have an estimated capacity of about 5.7 amp-hours at a nominal discharge voltage of about 3.6 volts. Multiplying these two numbers yields 20.5 WH/cell. Multiplying 4416 X 20.5 results in an estimated capacity of 90.5 kWh. This seems high.

The volume of the 2170 is 1.46 times that of the 18650. The 18650 has a capacity of 12.24 watt-hours.
Using relative volume as a baseline, 1.46 X 12.24 = 17.9 watt-hours per cell but JB gave a talk where he indicated that because of chemistry improvements the 2170 was 10-15% more energy efficient than the 18650, Using the lower of these two figures (10%) 17.9 X 1.1 = 19.7 WH/cell. 4416 X .0197 = 86.9 kWh.

The S85 battery pack has an estimated capacity of 86.9 kWh (12.24 X 7104 cells).
The usable capacity is about .279 kWh/mile X 265 miles = 73.9 kWh suggesting a buffer of about 13 kWh.

If they used the same sized buffer in the M3, this would suggest an available capacity of around 74 kWh for the M3.
Using the weight ratio of .8 and the aerodynamic ratio of .9 for rhe M3 to the S85 suggests a rated WH/mile figure of about 217 WH/mile for the M3 compared to 279 for the S85. This converts to a rated range of 341 miles for the M3 , not far from the EPA number.

Wish we had real numbers.

dbligon | 11 avril 2018

With 457 miles on the car, a trip over the mountains from Encinitas to Borrego Springs, a trip from Encinitas to Coronado, and running errands, we've averaged 236 Wh/mi. My foot appears to be slightly heavier than my wife's (who is the actual lucky owner). At .26 per kWh (in our case) this is about 33% less "fuel" cost than the VW Golf TDI we returned on the recall, and about 3x more fun to drive.

Alex_SD | 11 avril 2018

In heavy traffic I’m getting 210-220 wh/m. Normal traffic highway at 80 mph with a/c on, I’m getting 260 wh/m.
« Police chase » mode, 90-100 mph and pedal to the metal at red lights, I’m getting under 300 wh/m.

Tesla-David | 12 avril 2018

We have been averaging ~215 wh/mi in our M3 in Edmonds, WA.

SamO | 12 avril 2018

Low 230's for the first 4000 miles.

nvjx | 12 avril 2018

With about 1800 miles I am averaging 215 Wh/mile in the Bay area mixed local and freeway driving with occasional HVAC use. My 2012 P85 averaged 314 Wh/mile for about 60K miles. I am finding the 3 to be incredibly frugal on electricity. I charge to 90% when the range drops to around 150-170 miles which gives me 278-281 miles.

Wimpy ti | 12 avril 2018

I average 255 on my 100 mile commute, which is dreadfully inefficient in any car. Either going 75mph on a 2 lane, or stop and go between many many lights. Fully loaded car and Lots of AC usage as well. Fortunately electricity is $0.08/kWh in my neck of the woods.

CWFLY | 7 mai 2018

95 miles each way to airport.

Started trip with battery indicating 229 miles remaining. 95 actual miles later the battery indicated 101 miles remaining. Almost all freeway, mostly at 75 +/- 5 mph.
--> so driving 95 miles freeway took 128 miles from battery driving 75mph. Ouch!

Car was parked 4 days/3nights at airport.
Day1: 101 remaining range.
Day4: 89 remaining range.
Daytime high was about 68-70 degrees (if that makes a difference).
--> Lost 12 miles while parked 3.5 days.

Driving home, the Navigator wanted me to go to the first SuperCharger on my 95 mile journey. It made more sense to me to recharge closer to home so that I'd have more charge remaining the next day.

Summary: I'm not surprised that 75mph is worse mileage than advertised. I'm curious though, what conditions the 310 mile range marketing claim is based upon.

Kathy Applebaum | 7 mai 2018

2200 mostly freeway miles, averaging about 235.

Note to CWFLY: this would give 319 miles for a 75kWh battery. Most of my freeway driving is 60-70 mph, depending on traffic.

lilbean | 7 mai 2018

233 with 1000 miles

lilbean | 7 mai 2018

Correction 223 Wh/mile

H271 | 7 mai 2018

How lilbean? Is this all slow driving? Hanging out behind a truck hypermiling?

Has anyone tested using "Chill" to save any battery?

sabentz | 7 mai 2018

225 wh/mile with 1700 miles

SamO | 7 mai 2018

224Wh/m over 5,000 miles . . . beat me by a single watt @lil

lilbean | 7 mai 2018

@H271 I only drive downhill. :)
Actually, I've been driving slowly, going no faster than the speed limit on city streets. I don't accelerate quickly and I make good use of my regenerative braking. My AC is set to 72-74 with a fan speed of 1. Thanks to the Crystalline tint, I frequently have my AC off. When it was 45 degrees out, I used the seat heaters instead of the heater. I live in SoCal. I aim to lower my Wh/mile. My brother says I drive like an old lady.
The car is very relaxing for me and I never feel the need to speed. I do drive faster in the S and the X. In the 3, I just like to enjoy the nice, calm drive.

MarylandS85 | 7 mai 2018

After 1625 miles in a month and a half, mostly around town but some highway (“freeway,” as you Californians call it), with Aero wheels, we are averaging what I consider a stellar 215 Wh/mile. I expect the efficiency to be less favorable after a full 12 month cycle, as colder weather (and even 90°+ summer weather) will likely be less efficient than spring time here in temperate Maryland.

For comparison, my classic 2014 Model S 85 (RWD), which is about 700 lbs. heavier, has averaged 286 Wh/mi after over 53,000 miles, with more highway usage.

Tesla-David | 7 mai 2018

It should be noted that there is a direct correlation between temperature and efficiency. Here are the temperature dependent efficiency data for our M3 since delivery from our TeslaFi app. We are now averaging close to 200 wh/mi with the higher temperatures. At the lower temparatures and higher temperatures, the heater, and air conditioner were on which reduced energy efficiencies. The M3 is an incredibly efficient car, but it all depends on how you drive it. If you drive it like you stole it don't expect much, but we still have fun driving our M3 getting the noted efficiencies, were are incredibly impressive IMHO.

Temperature Efficiency - Drives Over 1 Mile

Temperature Wh/Mile Efficiency % Miles Recorded
30 to 40 F 234.87 93.7 57.35
40 to 50 F 225.35 97.7 407.02
50 to 60 F 217.13 101.4 325.47
60 to 70 F 196.12 112.2 86.63
70 to 80 F 177.4 124 42.39
80 to 90 F 213.04 103.4 33.14

Iwantmy3 | 7 mai 2018

For all of these values, I think it would help if people also included whether they are running with Aero wheels (caps on) or other. I think this is a substantial part of the 310 mile claim.

sabentz | 7 mai 2018

18" wheels removed aero covers

Goodman.Larry | 7 mai 2018

After 2200 miles in a month of 45 miles per day commutes and a couple of moderate length trips I'm averaging 220 wh/mi. That's with Aero wheels. Not bad at all.

H271 | 7 mai 2018

What speeds, Goodman?

mattjpeterson | 7 mai 2018

265 over 1500 miles, most of that being spirited local driving as well as several hundred miles of 80mph+ freeway driving. 245 seems very doable with more conservative driving. I've got a long trip planned for next week that will depend on it. I'll have to stop for inconvenient L2 charging if I can't keep it around 250 kwh.

ravisundaramam | 7 mai 2018

Do the head lamps take any measure amount of energy? Typical halogen bulbs are 35 to 42 watts each. Tesla uses what? LED or Halogen?

seattlemag | 7 mai 2018

@lilbean is my hypermiling hero :)

lilbean | 7 mai 2018

@seattlemag :)
Aero caps off and chill mode off.

Tesla-David | 7 mai 2018

The efficiency numbers I provided are from our M3 with 19" sport wheels. We are getting better than 100 percent efficiency with the wheels that are supposed to be less efficient than the Aero wheels, so I would expect even better numbers with the 18" wheels. We are getting better than 310 mile range with our M3, which astounds me, as a five+ year MS owner.

Tesla-David | 7 mai 2018

WE drive with the chill mode off, as I prefer tighter acceleration.

Mrashidi.chem | 7 mai 2018

First 600 miles Average 214 Wh/Mile.
18" Aero
Los Angeles in the SF Valley with lots of hills
AC 25% of time. The rest with fan only... No open windows driving

Since 2004 all my cars have been Hybrid/electric. I know how to drive them efficiently.

hannes | 7 mai 2018

First 640 miles average 263 Wh/Mile
18" - aero covers off
Spirited driving
Central Valley

slasher0016 | 7 mai 2018

@lilbean Do you have crystalline all the way around or just on the side windows? I had the crystalline on my Audi and now that I don't have it, I realize how hot it gets in my car.

MarylandS85 | 7 mai 2018

The Model 3 has very bright LED headlights. I don’t know how much power they consume, but I am sure it’s miniscule compared to the drive unit needs (100,000 W or more; does anyone know the peak power for the drive unit?) or even the climate control/battery cooling needs (up to 6,000 W)

lilbean | 7 mai 2018

@slasher0016 I have it on all the glass except the windshield and the glass above the front seats. You should get it in your Model 3 too.

ravisundaramam | 8 mai 2018

MarylandS85 | May 7, 2018: You are correct, even halogen draws very small power compared to the traction motors. With LEDs it would not matter.

The traction motors are rated for 100 kW for temporary transient loads, steady state power consumption seems to be of the order of 12 to 16 kW.( 250 wh/mile @ 60 mph means 15 kW steady state power draw)[*]. The HVAC system is rated for steady state usage. So it probably draws a steady 6 kW in winter and probably 1 kW in summer.

I would guess cabin heating, at max setting, could cost you 30% of the range in winter. A/C should cost 5% of the range. Just guess, based on back of the envelop calculations. Confirmation from actual users would be very satisfying to know.

[*] 12 to 18 kW to cruise at 60 mph seems to agree with ICE numbers. This is 16 to 25 BHP, ICE rated for a max power of 150 HP to 220 HP would tick at around 2000 RPM to make 20 BHP. That is what we usually see in ICE cars.

dd.micsol | 8 mai 2018

In my model S p100D I went from a friends house in Randolph VT to Neshobe Golf course. Map length was 32 miles.
I started with 273m in charge and when I got there it was 233 miles-40m of range used. Now there are 2 major mountain ranges to get there. Temp was about 65. Wind near nothing. Given 2 very large mountain ranges this is excellent. 760 elevation start to over 5k in climbing over the 2 ranges. I couldn't ask for anything more from an electric car. Average speed was probably about 45, but that's a lot of climbing and breaking-very curvy road.