Its not just Edmunds who are reporting lower range than expected. Also autocar (of UK) reports lower Tesla range.
> In our tests, the Model 3 Performance achieved 239 miles of real-world driving.
> Tesla Model 3 Standard Range Plus, 181 miles
> (The Model S) is now available in a choice of different battery capacities, with the current entry-level 75kWh model managing 204 miles of real-world range
--------
All tests have their flaws. But real-world testing by 3rd parties is far more reliable than the government-mandated tests.
Its like they say: any official benchmark will be cheated, gamed, etc. etc. You really only figure out who can beat the test, as opposed to figuring out reality. A series of trusted 3rd party tests (by magazines and smaller communities) is small and unique enough that no major automaker can really "gamify" the tests, leading to more realistic results in the aggregate.
Your Autocar link did not even give any data on their testing methodology. It's even more vague than Edmunds. What were the conditions? These things matter to an informed consumer who value objectivity. I hope you're not implying that one should just blindly trust that article.
Speaking of 3rd party tests. A realtime one conducted on the same day, like this one has more merit.
> Car and Driver only got 200 highway miles on their Model 3
That's only highway miles... EPA, WLTP and NEDC efficiency tests are highway and city driving. They are standardized to control as much variables as possible. Which is fundamentally essential to anyone who understands the scientific method.
> Percentage of claimed range achieved: 78% for the Tesla Model 3
Same with the other cars on the lineup. The only one that was a clear winner was the Hyundai Kona, at the expense of lackluster performance and driving dynamics.
Actually 76%~ and below. So mid, not low-end. The Volkswagen e-Up and Renault Zoe were not tested on the same day. So temps will vary. Standardized testing is very important. Which is why it's the methodology used by government agencies. It's not perfect, but it's the most scientific.
It's interesting how some are lambasting the EPA but would cite 3rd party tests that don't even try to minimize the effects of variables. Therefore completely skewing the reliability of the results.
They are completely non-controlled with non-standardized conditions. With Edmunds being the biggest offender. Even at one point charged the Taycan to 100%, but the Model Y to only 90% on a "range" test. How can someone defend that?
Its not just Edmunds who are reporting lower range than expected. Also autocar (of UK) reports lower Tesla range.
> In our tests, the Model 3 Performance achieved 239 miles of real-world driving.
> Tesla Model 3 Standard Range Plus, 181 miles
> (The Model S) is now available in a choice of different battery capacities, with the current entry-level 75kWh model managing 204 miles of real-world range
--------
All tests have their flaws. But real-world testing by 3rd parties is far more reliable than the government-mandated tests.
Its like they say: any official benchmark will be cheated, gamed, etc. etc. You really only figure out who can beat the test, as opposed to figuring out reality. A series of trusted 3rd party tests (by magazines and smaller communities) is small and unique enough that no major automaker can really "gamify" the tests, leading to more realistic results in the aggregate.