18" vs 20" OEM Wheels for Battery Range

[simbaesq]

@AI_Speed & @simbaesq
I didn't mean to give the impression I did this without charging.
I charged at my destination which was the 200 mile point.
[can these tall ads pop up in the center of the screen at a worse time??]
The point of my post was that I'm not doing anything special, just driving 80 with the AC on.
Everything is stock.

Yeah I understood from the 2.0 and 1.8 m/kwh math that you charged, likely somewhere in the middle.

Those numbers are so much better than mine, though. If I was getting that efficiency, I would be content.

As it is on my ~160 mile trip (so 320 round trip) I'm barely making it with a charge in the middle, and so come winter I don't think I can make it without TWO charges (which the route does not support).

I've made the trip a few times now. I'm getting between 1.5-1.7 m/kwh each time (and, unlike you, not even hauling anything).

Sponsored

 

[Roy2001]

I just did a 400 mile round trip.
One direction I had the back filled with heavy stuff and the gate down: 1.8.
On the way back empty gate up 2.0
Cruise was set at 80...there was stop & go in the ATL.

edit: clarifying I charged at my half way point.

1.8-2.0 miles per kWh @80mph? I simply cannot believe it.

 

[Roy2001]

Heat also reduces range quite dramatically.

Of course. I assume he would only rely on heated seat.

 

[Roy2001]

Yeah I understood from the 2.0 and 1.8 m/kwh math that you charged, likely somewhere in the middle.

Those numbers are so much better than mine, though. If I was getting that efficiency, I would be content.

As it is on my ~160 mile trip (so 320 round trip) I'm barely making it with a charge in the middle, and so come winter I don't think I can make it without TWO charges (which the route does not support).

I've made the trip a few times now. I'm getting between 1.5-1.7 m/kwh each time (and, unlike you, not even hauling anything).

All online review mentions about 2 miles per kWh at 70mph. We all know it would get much worse after 70mph. So I cannot trust his data.

70mph is the sweet spot for EV in general.

 

[brewski]

Yeah I understood from the 2.0 and 1.8 m/kwh math that you charged, likely somewhere in the middle.

Those numbers are so much better than mine, though. If I was getting that efficiency, I would be content.

As it is on my ~160 mile trip (so 320 round trip) I'm barely making it with a charge in the middle, and so come winter I don't think I can make it without TWO charges (which the route does not support).

I've made the trip a few times now. I'm getting between 1.5-1.7 m/kwh each time (and, unlike you, not even hauling anything).

My ave over 6600+ miles shows 1.8.
I am curious how this winter goes.
While I am in the south, we had a few weeks of actual cold wx last year.
A buddy with an S couldn't even go to the airport and back (~220 mile round trip) in that cold spell.

 

[brewski]

All online review mentions about 2 miles per kWh at 70mph. We all know it would get much worse after 70mph. So I cannot trust his data.

70mph is the sweet spot for EV in general.

You don't have to trust it.
It isn't scientific, just the reality of my trip.
My normal use is around town and the airport.
Airport trips have never been an issue even when I started with 90% that one time.

 

[simbaesq]

All online review mentions about 2 miles per kWh at 70mph. We all know it would get much worse after 70mph. So I cannot trust his data.

70mph is the sweet spot for EV in general.

I definitely don't get 2m/kwh at 70mph. More like 1.8.

At 75 I get 1.5 or 1.6.

I don't go 80 (in ICE vehicles I always go 80 on the highway, so I'm already making a speed concession.)

I'm not doing anything crazy. I minimize cabin heating, rely mostly on seat climate controls (and even don't do that much, because I am very temperature-flexible.) I have no idea why my range is this bad. It's frustrating as hell.

 

[Roy2001]

I definitely don't get 2m/kwh at 70mph. More like 1.8.

At 75 I get 1.5 or 1.6.

I don't go 80 (in ICE vehicles I always go 80 on the highway, so I'm already making a speed concession.)

I'm not doing anything crazy. I minimize cabin heating, rely mostly on seat climate controls (and even don't do that much, because I am very temperature-flexible.) I have no idea why my range is this bad. It's frustrating as hell.

2m/kWh is under ideal condition, no climbing, no headwind, 70-80F. So 1.8 is not surprising.

With EV, you have to stick to 65-70mph when you need the range. Hopefully most of the time you don't need to worry about that. With Lightning, the only thing missing is the reliable charging network. May Tesla open all the chargers to Lightnings next year.

 

[AI_Speed]

@AI_Speed & @simbaesq
I didn't mean to give the impression I did this without charging.
I charged at my destination which was the 200 mile point.
[can these tall ads pop up in the center of the screen at a worse time??]
The point of my post was that I'm not doing anything special, just driving 80 with the AC on.
Everything is stock.

1.9 average seems to be about a 240-260 total range? At 200 were you down to 15% left?

 

[brewski]

1.9 average seems to be about a 240-260 total range? At 200 were you down to 15% left?

Somewhere around that

 

[simbaesq]

2m/kWh is under ideal condition, no climbing, no headwind, 70-80F. So 1.8 is not surprising.

With EV, you have to stick to 65-70mph when you need the range. Hopefully most of the time you don't need to worry about that. With Lightning, the only thing missing is the reliable charging network. May Tesla open all the chargers to Lightnings next year.

If you can't even go 200 miles without going 15mph slower than the flow of traffic, then you are not "only" missing a reliable charging network. You are a fundamentally inferior technology for a very basic and (at least where I live) common use-case for vehicles.

EV proponents make fun of "range anxiety" and insist EVs will get you where you need to go and are superior, and anything to the contrary is luddites ludditing.

Then you buy an EV, try to use it like a vehicle, and when it doesn't work the response is "well duh, you can't drive it at actual highway speeds! What are you, crazy?!"

I'm incredibly disappointed. I will make clear to absolutely anyone I can going forward that if you need to drive a vehicle more than 200 miles regularly (incredibly common in the Midwest), EVs are an inferior technology and you should not get one.

 

[Solar_EE]

If you can't even go 200 miles without going 15mph slower than the flow of traffic, then you are not "only" missing a reliable charging network. You are a fundamentally inferior technology for a very basic and (at least where I live) common use-case for vehicles.

EV proponents make fun of "range anxiety" and insist EVs will get you where you need to go and are superior, and anything to the contrary is luddites ludditing.

Then you buy an EV, try to use it like a vehicle, and when it doesn't work the response is "well duh, you can't drive it at actual highway speeds! What are you, crazy?!"

I'm incredibly disappointed. I will make clear to absolutely anyone I can going forward that if you need to drive a vehicle more than 200 miles regularly (incredibly common in the Midwest), EVs are an inferior technology and you should not get one.

Plenty of CARS could go that far or more. I see so many people on this forum that drive their very boxy F150 at 70 or 80 and are then surprised at the range reduction.
Standard Range XLT for me and I easily go 230 miles on a charge- just not super fast- speed limits in my area are mostly 55 or 65. Lifetime average for me is 2.5 miles per kWh.
Lifetime average in my Ioniq 5 is 4.0 miles per kWh.

 

[Solar_EE]

I did some research on tires/wheels. Mostly surrounding weight. I have not read any detailed information about weight; however, I read, during my 18 months wait for the my ER Lariat, that rotational mass and tire selection were a critical engineering efforts at Ford during development. Apparently, there is a delicate balance regarding rotational mass and regeneration while descending and braking. I think that the Hankooks weigh in a pound less than the Generals. My stock wheel and tire (General Grabber HTS on 20" stock wheels) weigh 79 lbs. In other words, regeneration is optimized at 78-79 lbs. This is a weird parameter to use to search for wheel/tires. Lots of clicks and page refreshes on Tirerack, I also wanted to go to 18" for some additional float offroad. I found a set, but have not purchased yet.

Further, efficiency of tread pattern, IMHO, has a fraction of the effect on mileage as tire inflation does. If you are having issues with efficiency, I would check tire inflation first. Further, you can experiment with additional 5-10 lbs if you want, at the expense of ride quality. Check the capacity of the tires you are running before over inflating.

All of the Tesla vehicles get much better range with 18" wheels. Same for the MachE and Hyundai Ioniq 5. The bigger wheels are really a waste- just because they are "fashionable" or for racing type drivers. 18" tires air down much better- my XLT is my sixth Ford truck and the best one for sand driving.

 

[sotek2345]

If you can't even go 200 miles without going 15mph slower than the flow of traffic, then you are not "only" missing a reliable charging network. You are a fundamentally inferior technology for a very basic and (at least where I live) common use-case for vehicles.

EV proponents make fun of "range anxiety" and insist EVs will get you where you need to go and are superior, and anything to the contrary is luddites ludditing.

Then you buy an EV, try to use it like a vehicle, and when it doesn't work the response is "well duh, you can't drive it at actual highway speeds! What are you, crazy?!"

I'm incredibly disappointed. I will make clear to absolutely anyone I can going forward that if you need to drive a vehicle more than 200 miles regularly (incredibly common in the Midwest), EVs are an inferior technology and you should not get one.

All depends on the point of comparison. My ICE vehicle (pre Lightning) couldn't do a 200 mile trip without refueling either.

 

[Roy2001]

I'm incredibly disappointed. I will make clear to absolutely anyone I can going forward that if you need to drive a vehicle more than 200 miles regularly (incredibly common in the Midwest), EVs are an inferior technology and you should not get one.

I am sorry to hear that. You should have looked around here and ask questions about range and usage model.

Anyway, during very cold days be careful when you have to drive 150 miles and cannot charge it during the day, use heated seat instead of HAVC which is resistance heating and very power hungry.

As always, I would say prepare 50% of the EPA USABLE range during 0F days on freeway. Usable means you need to reserve at least 5% when you arrive home, you don't want to drive too slow (close to 70mph), and you have to turn on heating.

Sponsored