This is really the EPAs fault for real world numbers.
Real world driving conditions especially on highways where people want to get the stated range have higher speeds than what the test tests.
If you want the EPA number to match real world speeds make the test run at real world speeds.
If you want the population to know EVs run worse in the cold, have a cold weather test be part of the test and require reporting the number. It’d showcase how good the cars heating system is and help people make a decision.
The EPA probably wanted auto manufacturers to be able to report higher numbers and incorrectly chose a lower speed. WLPT numbers are even worse for being wrong (but if I recall, the wrong is more consistent)
“Tesla years ago began exaggerating its vehicles’ potential driving distance—by rigging their range-estimating software,” The company decided about a decade ago, for marketing purposes, to write algorithms for its range meter that would show drivers ‘rosy’ projections for the distance it could travel on a full battery, according to a person familiar with an early design of the software for its in-dash readouts."
Once the battery fell below 50 percent, “the algorithm would show drivers more realistic projections for their remaining driving range.”
This has nothing to do with the EPA, and everything to do with the car’s battery management software.
Indeed. Good cars use a heuristics-based range estimation, using some form of the previous energy mileage with the vehicle to estimate the range on the remainder of the battery (or for hybrids and combination vehicles the tank).
Despite the fact the EPA is mentioned in the article; stating their actions into testing EVs and enforcing mileage estimates, the article is about Tesla inflating their battery estimates in the car’s battery management software and providing misleading numbers to their customers in real time.
Just because it provides some insight into the inner workings of EPA testing of EV’s, the EPA didn’t decide to SETUP an algorithm and give false information to Tesla drivers. Tesla did, and it looks like it’s possible by direct involvement of Elon Musk.
That’s seriously sucky. Also I swear I’ve had two or three cars whose gas gauges behaved similarly–Slow decrease until half then rocketing down to E from there.
There is a reason for that I’ve heard before. The fuel tank isn’t uniformly built, the top half of it is physically wider (therefore bigger) than the bottom half. Not sure why manufacturers couldn’t build this into the gauge though.
From my experience, my car doesn’t do that, but what it does do is the needle stays at full for 20-30 miles and only then starts moving.
This is really the EPAs fault for real world numbers.
Real world driving conditions especially on highways where people want to get the stated range have higher speeds than what the test tests.
If you want the EPA number to match real world speeds make the test run at real world speeds.
If you want the population to know EVs run worse in the cold, have a cold weather test be part of the test and require reporting the number. It’d showcase how good the cars heating system is and help people make a decision.
The EPA probably wanted auto manufacturers to be able to report higher numbers and incorrectly chose a lower speed. WLPT numbers are even worse for being wrong (but if I recall, the wrong is more consistent)
This has nothing to do with the EPA, and everything to do with the car’s battery management software.
Indeed. Good cars use a heuristics-based range estimation, using some form of the previous energy mileage with the vehicle to estimate the range on the remainder of the battery (or for hybrids and combination vehicles the tank).
That’s only what part of the article is about.
My comment was very specific
Despite the fact the EPA is mentioned in the article; stating their actions into testing EVs and enforcing mileage estimates, the article is about Tesla inflating their battery estimates in the car’s battery management software and providing misleading numbers to their customers in real time.
Just because it provides some insight into the inner workings of EPA testing of EV’s, the EPA didn’t decide to SETUP an algorithm and give false information to Tesla drivers. Tesla did, and it looks like it’s possible by direct involvement of Elon Musk.
Okay so my comment was about the EPA stuff and SK stuff NOT tesla fudging the numbers.
Is that hard to understand?
The article also talks about that.
That’s seriously sucky. Also I swear I’ve had two or three cars whose gas gauges behaved similarly–Slow decrease until half then rocketing down to E from there.
There is a reason for that I’ve heard before. The fuel tank isn’t uniformly built, the top half of it is physically wider (therefore bigger) than the bottom half. Not sure why manufacturers couldn’t build this into the gauge though.
From my experience, my car doesn’t do that, but what it does do is the needle stays at full for 20-30 miles and only then starts moving.