Tesla Winter Range - NY Times article

[davewill]

So, the charges fly! It sounds like Musk may have stepped in it...

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/the-charges-are-flying-over-a-test-of-teslas-charging-network/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From that article:

One final note. Mr. Musk called me on Friday, before the article went up on the Web, to offer sympathy and regrets about the outcome of my test drive. He said that the East Coast charging stations should be 140 miles apart, not 200 miles, to take into account the traffic and temperature extremes in this part of the country.

That was my initial reaction to the whole thing. Tesla put the damned things too far apart, and is taking a hit for it.

 

[scottf200]

Tesla vs. The New York Times: How Range Anxiety Leads to Road (Trip) Rage
BY CHELSEA SEXTON02.12.139:00 PM
http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/02/tesla-vs-new-york-times-when-range-anxiety-leads-to-road-trip-rage/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It’s more useful to compare EVs to iPhones: a product that is firmly in the realm of early adopters today but could be ubiquitous tomorrow.

Mobile phones were never premised on delivering the exact same experience as the land-line phones (“gas cars”) they replace. They don’t have the talk time (“driving range”) of hard-wired phones, and aren’t expected to. They must be “re-fueled” much more often than home phones — much like an EV, actually.

 

[SanDust]

So, the charges fly! It sounds like Musk may have stepped in it...

Yeah, he's turning this into quite the PR disaster.

The good news is that I thought the Leaf had the worst possible range estimation technology but it seems Tesla has the Leaf beat by quite a bit. Nice to know our cars aren't the worst! Having 90 miles of range when you park the car and having 25 miles of range the next morning makes the GOM look like a precise instrument. The Leaf will certainly lose a bit of range if you park it, but it loses one bar, not six or seven. Seems like Tesla has a lot more problems than "some range-related software problems still needed to be sorted out".

 

[RegGuheert]

Also

"Virtually everyone says that I should have plugged in the car overnight in Connecticut, particularly given the cold temperature. But the test that Tesla offered was of the Supercharger, not of the Model S, which we already know is a much-praised car. This evaluation was intended to demonstrate its practicality as a “normal use,” no-compromise car, as Tesla markets it. Now that Tesla is striving to be a mass-market automaker, it cannot realistically expect all 20,000 buyers a year (the Model S sales goal) to be electric-car acolytes who will plug in at every Walmart stop."

As stated previously, I agree with this sentiment. Having to drag out the portsble cord in 10F weather will not endear people to EVs, IMO.

The good news is that I thought the Leaf had the worst possible range estimation technology but it seems Tesla has the Leaf beat by quite a bit. Nice to know our cars aren't the worst! Having 90 miles of range when you park the car and having 25 miles of range the next morning makes the GOM look like a precise instrument. The Leaf will certainly lose a bit of range if you park it, but it loses one bar, not six or seven. Seems like Tesla has a lot more problems than "some range-related software problems still needed to be sorted out".

It does seem like the electrical resistance of the battery in the Model S increases faster with cold temperatures than that in the LEAF. But it also seems that just getting in and driving resolves that issue quickly due to TMS. The question is how was the author supposed to know this if Tesla wouldn't tell him when he called them for support?

 

[RegGuheert]

Tesla vs. The New York Times: How Range Anxiety Leads to Road (Trip) Rage
BY CHELSEA SEXTON02.12.139:00 PM
http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/02/tesla-vs-new-york-times-when-range-anxiety-leads-to-road-trip-rage/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for the link, Scott!

And nice article, Chelsea!

But I will admit I find the analogy given (that Scott quoted) somewhat lacking:

It’s more useful to compare EVs to iPhones: a product that is firmly in the realm of early adopters today but could be ubiquitous tomorrow.

Mobile phones were never premised on delivering the exact same experience as the land-line phones (“gas cars”) they replace. They don’t have the talk time (“driving range”) of hard-wired phones, and aren’t expected to. They must be “re-fueled” much more often than home phones — much like an EV, actually.

Why say "iPhone" when the analogy really is with all mobile phones? But beyond that, I will point out that people flocked to mobile phones because they filled a need that landline telephones never could. You correctly pointed out the EVs also have benefits that gasoline cars do not, but for most automobile customers that EV benefit is simply a "nice-to-have", rather than the "got-to-have" value proposition that mobile phones offer. Simply put, the value of the benefit provided determines how much inconvenience consumers are willing to put up with to get that benefit. For mobile phones it was clear: having to recharge (or even having to carry a bag phone that could plug into a car) was clearly worth the effort. For many, EVs simply have not yet crossed over the benefit/inconvenience threshold.

Sure, the Model S has reduced the compromise involved, but it has not eliminated it. And Chelsea covers that point very well. Consumers who are not willing to accept EV's inconveniences will be better served with the Chevy Volt or other hybrid until EVs mature further.

 

[surfingslovak]

As stated previously, I agree with this sentiment. Having to drag out the portsble cord in 10F weather will not endear people to EVs, IMO.

This should not be a requirement, merely a recommendation. It's not an everyday scenario that someone is attempting a long-distance trip in bitterly cold weather. Extreme situations and weather could require additional considerations. Much like putting on snow chains when needed. That said, I think most of us are in agreement that today's generation of lithium-ion batteries is quite temperature sensitive, there is just no way around it. Perhaps a sufficient number of early adopters will be willing to put up with such an idiosyncrasy, until something better is available.

It does seem like the electrical resistance of the battery in the Model S increases faster with cold temperatures than that in the LEAF. But it also seems that just getting in and driving resolves that issue quickly due to TMS. The question is how was the author supposed to know this if Tesla wouldn't tell him when he called them for support?

I was told that there was a problem with sleep mode, and some of the electronics stayed on. This is likely similar to the already familiar scenario of leaving a LEAF plugged in when going out of town. The results can be both unpleasant and unexpected.

While Tesla has not said much about this publicly, I found the recommendation to condition the battery surprising. I'm not sure if anyone in their right mind would expect to double or triple the available range by warming the battery by 40 degrees or so. From its own power, I might add. To me, this is was the wrong piece of advice given the situation.

I've monitored some of the related threads on TMC since before Christmas, and don't believe that this particular question has been conclusively answered. We still don't know why the Model S is losing significant amount of range when parked unplugged in wintry conditions overnight. AFAIK this is not the case with the Roadster.

I believe that the LEAF has the potential to use up between 1 and 2 kWh in a similar scenario, but only when it's below -4F. This means that the average US driver will be rarely, if ever, confronted with this situation. They will, however, need to deal with the consequences of diminished battery capacity due to cold weather.

If memory serves, Tony's range chart pegs capacity reduction at 1% for each 4F below room temperature. Although each cell is a bit different, if you assumed that the Model S behaved he same way for the moment, we could expect approximately 15% less range from a battery, which has cooled to about 10F. Not 72%, which is what John Broder reportedly observed.

 

[mirko]

As stated previously, I agree with this sentiment. Having to drag out the portsble cord in 10F weather will not endear people to EVs, IMO.

Yeah, but it's not a problem standing at a gas pump for 5 minutes in 10F in the wind. NOT! I would rather quickly plugin and run inside where it is nice and warm. IMO

 

[scottf200]

The good news is that I thought the Leaf had the worst possible range estimation technology but it seems Tesla has the Leaf beat by quite a bit. Nice to know our cars aren't the worst! Having 90 miles of range when you park the car and having 25 miles of range the next morning makes the GOM look like a precise instrument. The Leaf will certainly lose a bit of range if you park it, but it loses one bar, not six or seven. Seems like Tesla has a lot more problems than "some range-related software problems still needed to be sorted out".

http://www.plugincars.com/response-new-york-times-stalled-ev-highway-126416.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I think their algorithm takes in a cold battery pretty aggressively. See the underscored text in this response (which I think is about his daily driving and not long trips). None-the-less the overnight cold algorithm lowered the estimate but may not mean it drained that much.

My name is Peter, and I recently very successfully completed a very long, cross country trip from Portland, Or., to New Orleans, La., Atlanta, Ga., and finally New York City in my Model S. I am only a Tesla customer, and have no other affiliation with the company.
<snip>
Conditioning
The answer you got about “conditioning” the battery when cold is completely incorrect, and used up more of your mileage—in my estimate, about 20 miles of range. Simply driving it would have warmed the battery and raised the “available” mileage as you drove. There have been a number of times, when very cold in the mornings, that I arrived at my destination with more range than I started with.

 

[RegGuheert]

http://www.plugincars.com/response-new-york-times-stalled-ev-highway-126416.html
I think their algorithm takes in a cold battery pretty aggressively. See the underscored text in this response (which I think is about his daily driving and not long trips). None-the-less the overnight cold algorithm lowered the estimate but may not mean it drained that much.

My name is Peter, and I recently very successfully completed a very long, cross country trip from Portland, Or., to New Orleans, La., Atlanta, Ga., and finally New York City in my Model S. I am only a Tesla customer, and have no other affiliation with the company.
<snip>
Conditioning
The answer you got about “conditioning” the battery when cold is completely incorrect, and used up more of your mileage—in my estimate, about 20 miles of range. Simply driving it would have warmed the battery and raised the “available” mileage as you drove. There have been a number of times, when very cold in the mornings, that I arrived at my destination with more range than I started with.

I read that the other day and thought it sounded reasonable, but thinking about it more, I doubt it could have helped here:

Did this person go out on very cold mornings with 100 miles showing and drive five miles and end up with 110 miles showing? That is a total increase of ~15% over where he started. In the case of the columnist, he went out and saw 25 miles showing but needed to drive 40 miles. Conditioning (warming?) the battery cost him six miles of range. In other words, it seems unreasonable to expect the range to double just because the battery got warmed up. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it seems Tesla should have known the answer instead of wasting an hour of his time.

 

[thankyouOB]

some great points by chelsea.

there are two things the EV naysayers ignore:
1--the LEAF and Tesla work for the vast vast majority of daily driving that Americans do--under 50 miles a day.
and it does it as efficiently, more conveniently and at a lower daily cost.
2--hanging grimly to your ICE as your daily vehicle does nothing to reduce carbon emissions or pollution.

so building a critique on the failure of an EV to be the go-to car for vacations or trips to your sister's on TNG and other holidays is simply illogical. though it does appeal to the Americans because freedom.

 

[Zythryn]

...
While Tesla has not said much about this publicly, I found the recommendation to condition the battery surprising. I'm not sure if anyone in their right mind would expect to double or triple the available range by warming the battery by 40 degrees or so. From its own power, I might add. To me, this is was the wrong piece of advice given the situation.
...

I agree. I strongly suspect that the advice was given assuming the car was plugged in. If that were the case, the battery and cabin would have warmed some off of the grid as opposed to he battery pack.
This would have increased the range as regenerative braking returned or came closer to full strength, and increased range as the batteries are more efficient at warmer temps.
It also would have preserved range by warming the cabin off grid power rather than battery.

I don't know whose fault the misunderstanding was, but it is one of the many errors that probably would have prevented the whole thing if it alone had been done correctly.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

As stated previously, I agree with this sentiment. Having to drag out the portsble cord in 10F weather will not endear people to EVs, IMO.

This should not be a requirement, merely a recommendation. It's not an everyday scenario that someone is attempting a long-distance trip in bitterly cold weather. Extreme situations and weather could require additional considerations. Much like putting on snow chains when needed. That said, I think most of us are in agreement that today's generation of lithium-ion batteries is quite temperature sensitive, there is just no way around it. Perhaps a sufficient number of early adopters will be willing to put up with such an idiosyncrasy, until something better is available.

It does seem like the electrical resistance of the battery in the Model S increases faster with cold temperatures than that in the LEAF. But it also seems that just getting in and driving resolves that issue quickly due to TMS. The question is how was the author supposed to know this if Tesla wouldn't tell him when he called them for support?

I was told that there was a problem with sleep mode, and some of the electronics stayed on. This is likely similar to the already familiar scenario of leaving a LEAF plugged in when going out of town. The results can be both unpleasant and unexpected.

While Tesla has not said much about this publicly, I found the recommendation to condition the battery surprising. I'm not sure if anyone in their right mind would expect to double or triple the available range by warming the battery by 40 degrees or so. From its own power, I might add. To me, this is was the wrong piece of advice given the situation.

I've monitored some of the related threads on TMC since before Christmas, and don't believe that this particular question has been conclusively answered. We still don't know why the Model S is losing significant amount of range when parked unplugged in wintry conditions overnight. AFAIK this is not the case with the Roadster.

I believe that the LEAF has the potential to use up between 1 and 2 kWh in a similar scenario, but only when it's below -4F. This means that the average US driver will be rarely, if ever, confronted with this situation. They will, however, need to deal with the consequences of diminished battery capacity due to cold weather.

If memory serves, Tony's range chart pegs capacity reduction at 1% for each 4F below room temperature. Although each cell is a bit different, if you assumed that the Model S behaved he same way for the moment, we could expect approximately 15% less range from a battery, which has cooled to about 10F. Not 72%, which is what John Broder reportedly observed.

well doesnt take a degree to realize not all is as it appears here. simply too many things gone wrong to make it realistic.

ya, its strange that on the one hand the trip was to test the network and he was 40 something miles from his goal but chose to spend the night somewhere knowing it was cold and ( i strongly suspect) knowing what it would do to his range overnight.

in any "real" scenario, anyone else would have asked the hotel for a plug and probably would have gotten it. we are perfect examples of that. sure there are a few that were told "no" (i think, i actually dont remember any but must be a few out there...)

and now we hear about a detour? small one or big one? who knows? either way. it got a lot of attention and guessing that will end up to be a good thing

 

[SanDust]

ya, its strange that on the one hand the trip was to test the network and he was 40 something miles from his goal but chose to spend the night somewhere knowing it was cold and ( i strongly suspect) knowing what it would do to his range overnight.

You didn't read the article very carefully. Groton was his turn around point. The fueling station at Milford is a rest stop. He wasn't going to spend the night there, just use the supercharger on the return trip to Manhattan. He could have stopped in New Haven but maybe a (girl)friend lives in Groton.

You're not being reasonable. I certainly wouldn't want to sit in the cold at a rest stop at night for an hour while my car charged. Stopping in Groton seems reasonable. The only thing that doesn't seem reasonable is losing 75% of your range overnight.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

ya, its strange that on the one hand the trip was to test the network and he was 40 something miles from his goal but chose to spend the night somewhere knowing it was cold and ( i strongly suspect) knowing what it would do to his range overnight.

You didn't read the article very carefully. Groton was his turn around point. The fueling station at Milford is a rest stop. He wasn't going to spend the night there, just use the supercharger on the return trip to Manhattan. He could have stopped in New Haven but maybe a (girl)friend lives in Groton.

You're not being reasonable. I certainly wouldn't want to sit in the cold at a rest stop at night for an hour while my car charged. Stopping in Groton seems reasonable. The only thing that doesn't seem reasonable is losing 75% of your range overnight.

i am sure that loss is where the unmentioned side trip came in or did it? i think neither side is being fully truthful. guess we have to wait for Musk's "proof"

either way, you say I am not being reasonable when referring to story? I can see why you would say that since there is very little reasoning in this story.

 

[GaslessInSeattle]

From the looks of the below article, IMHO, this guys was out to grind the same old ax as he did in a previous article last year and essentially staged a failure, not all that unlike the folks at Top Gear did with the Leaf.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/sunday-review/the-electric-car-unplugged.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&

"Yet the state of the electric car is dismal, the victim of hyped expectations, technological flops, high costs and a hostile political climate. General Motors has temporarily suspended production of the plug-in electric Chevy Volt because of low sales. Nissan’s all-electric Leaf is struggling in the market. A number of start-up electric vehicle and battery companies have folded. And the federal government has slowed its multibillion-dollar program of support for advanced technology vehicles in the face of market setbacks and heavy political criticism."

By JOHN BRODER
Published: March 24, 2012

 

[TomT]

If Tesla's logging is as worthless as Carwing's, forget about it!

i am sure that loss is where the unmentioned side trip came in or did it? i think neither side is being fully truthful. guess we have to wait for Musk's "proof"

 

[Nubo]

The real story is that real EV drivers do not behave this way.

Someone who purchases an EV understands that it is new technology and that there's going to be some learning and familiarization. They don't sign the papers and then blithely traipse across multiple states, making blunder upon blunder.

Most will have done considerable research before even buying the car, and they pretty much know the basics. And if not, they certainly understand the need to gain some familiarity before pushing the envelope in freezing conditions. Not because they are "EV Acolytes", or have drunk the "Obama Koolaid", but because they are reasonable, intelligent adults.

What real EV driver would have departed a supercharger after 58 minutes with essentially no margin for error, when they could have waited another 15 minutes in comfort and eliminated all range anxiety? They would not have. It is only under the guise of "an experiment" for publication that the arbitrary departure was made. Likely driven by personal indignation. I.e., "I'll be damned if I'm going to spend more than an hour". A real EV driver doesn't approach the situation that way. Someone with an axe to grind, does.

 

[mitch672]

I say hang him, hang him high!

He obviously had his agenda, no doubt some anti-EV interest(s) approached or even I will be so bold as to say paid him to make the car look bad. The entire ICE automotive industry is threatened by long range EVs, they will go to extremes to try make them look bad/fail. John Broder is nothing more than a paid shill for the oil and gas industry.

I own a Model S, there is some range reduction overnight, but I deal with it by simply plugging it in.
EVs are not for everyone, and I think the buyers need to still be qualified, you have to do a certain amount of planning that is foreign to ICE drivers, it's more than made up for by never having to pay for gasoline ever again.

 

[thankyouOB]

What real EV driver would have departed a supercharger after 58 minutes with essentially no margin for error, when they could have waited another 15 minutes in comfort and eliminated all range anxiety? They would not have. It is only under the guise of "an experiment" for publication that the arbitrary departure was made. Likely driven by personal indignation. I.e., "I'll be damned if I'm going to spend more than an hour". A real EV driver doesn't approach the situation that way. Someone with an axe to grind, does.

Yes, he wanted to say: I drove it just like an ICE in the most extreme conditions and in the performance category where the car is most challenged -- and it failed.
Yet, thousands of us can testify to how the EV works, is efficient, fun to drive, saves money on gas and maintenance, and DOES something about global warming and greenhouse gas emissions.
The ICE does nothing but add to the problem.

 

[TomT]

I am sorry but unfounded and unsubstantiated crap such as this is what makes US look truly bad!

He obviously had his agenda, no doubt some anti-EV interest(s) approached or even I will be so bold as to say paid him to make the car look bad.