Austin to McAllen, Real World Results

[CypherBlue]

Hey all,

I drove down for Mother's Day weekend to visit my family in the Rio Grande Valley. I received the A2Z typhoon adaptor on Friday the 10th, and that made me feel more confident in making the journey down south. EV charging south of San Antonio is limited to Tesla-only chargers or CCS chargers locked behind dealership gates, which only allow you to use them during regular business hours. I left on Friday the 10th, planning stops in San Antonio and Corpus and finally arriving at my destination. I kept my highway speeds at 70-75 the entire trip and used Blue Cruise as much as I could, which was about 70% of the trip. Below, you will find a spreadsheet of my charging locations and costs. Then I used ChatGPT to estimate my usage using my old 2019 Ford Ranger 2wd Lariat's average MPG, which I put 54k miles in the past four years to compare against, following my old fueling preferences.

Let me know your thoughts, I thought this would be helpful for prospective Lightning Buyers and newbies like me just starting to get used to the EV life.

Summary of the fuel cost estimation for a trip of 894.50 miles with specific refilling conditions:

1. Vehicle Details:
   • Average fuel efficiency: 22 miles per gallon (mpg).
   • Tank capacity: 19 gallons.
2. Refilling Strategy:
   • Start the journey with the tank 3/4 full.
   • Refill the tank each time the fuel level drops to 1/4 remaining.
   • Refill the tank to total capacity at the trip's beginning and end.
3. Cost Calculation:
   • Total distance to cover: 894.50 miles.
   • Average gas price: $3.30 per gallon.
   • Total fuel purchased during the trip: 61.75 gallons.
   • Total cost for gas: approximately $203.77.

This calculation assumes consistent driving conditions that allow the vehicle to maintain its average fuel efficiency and that gas prices remain steady throughout the trip. The refilling strategy ensures that the tank never falls below 1/4 full, except at the end of the journey before the final fill-up.

Using the updated fuel cost estimations, the electric vehicle (EV) charging cost for the trip is significantly lower than gasoline. Here's the comparison:

• Gasoline Cost: $203.77
• EV Charging Cost: $149.43

The savings when using an EV amount to approximately $54.34. This represents a cost reduction of about 26.67% compared to using gasoline under the specified refilling strategy.


Tesla Downtown SA:

Tesla Corpus Christi:

South Texas Buick GMC in McAllen, Texas:

Tesla Harlingen Texas:

Electrify America, La Quinta Seguin Texas:

 

[RickLightning]

Then I used ChatGPT to estimate my usage using my old 2019 Ford Ranger 2wd Lariat's average MPG, which I put 54k miles in the past four years to compare against, following my old fueling preferences.

Scratching my head here. The COST to take a trip in a gas vehicle is the total number of miles, divided by the mpg you achieve, times the cost of the gasoline. What does your fueling preferences have to do with it? ChatGPT has to be involved?

I took a 5,300 mile trip. 5,300 / 17mpg = 312 gallons, x $3.25 a gallon = $1,013.

The use of AI doesn't change the cost to drive.

 

[CypherBlue]

Scratching my head here. The COST to take a trip in a gas vehicle is the total number of miles, divided by the mpg you achieve, times the cost of the gasoline. What does your fueling preferences have to do with it? ChatGPT has to be involved?

I took a 5,300 mile trip. 5,300 / 17mpg = 312 gallons, x $3.25 a gallon = $1,013.

The use of AI doesn't change the cost to drive.

I used ChatGPT as a "fancy calculator." I added the requirement that when the tank reaches 1/4 full, I fill it up in the calculation because that is how I used to treat my Ranger. I would always fill it up with 1/4 left in the tank. This gives me a more realistic calculation based on my fill up preferences.

 

[RickLightning]

I used ChatGPT as a "fancy calculator." I added the requirement that when the tank reaches 1/4 full, I fill it up in the calculation because that is how I used to treat my Ranger. I would always fill it up with 1/4 left in the tank. This gives me a more realistic calculation based on my fill up preferences.

But total fuel purchased during the trip is irrelevant. The cost to drive your Ranger would have been $155.36, not $203.77. You're high by 31%+.

 

[CypherBlue]

But total fuel purchased during the trip is irrelevant. The cost to drive your Ranger would have been $155.36, not $203.77. You're high by 31%+.

Hey @RickLightning ,

Thanks for your feedback! I understand your point about the basic fuel cost calculation over a given distance, but let me clarify why I included my refueling preferences.

In the real world, drivers often don't run their tanks to empty before refueling. Many, like myself, refill when the tank hits a quarter full to avoid running out of gas or finding themselves without a nearby station. This habit impacts the total amount of fuel purchased for a trip, including topping off the tank at the beginning and end of the journey.

Here's a breakdown of my approach:

1. Initial Fill-Up: Starting the trip with a full tank, assuming it was previously 3/4 full.
2. Refueling Stops: Refilling whenever the tank reaches 1/4 full during the trip.
3. Final Fill-Up: Topping off the tank upon arrival, ensuring it's full for the next trip.

While this method might seem to overestimate fuel usage, it mirrors actual refueling patterns and ensures I don't run out of gas, particularly in areas with sparse refueling options. This approach gives a more realistic picture of the total cost of a trip, factoring in real-life driving habits and the convenience of always having enough fuel.

To address your calculation, the difference comes from including these practical refueling stops and ensuring the tank is always at a comfortable level. It's not just about the fuel consumed over the miles driven but also about maintaining a certain fuel level in the tank for convenience and safety.

Regarding my EV comparison, I used a similar approach. I accounted for charging times before and after the trip, ensuring the battery was full at the start and end of the journey. This mirrors the same principle of keeping a comfortable level of charge throughout the trip.

In conclusion, the additional cost in my calculation accounts for real-world refueling behavior, which can differ from a theoretical straight-line consumption model. This is why my total fuel cost appears higher but is more representative of actual travel expenses. Similarly, the EV charging cost reflects the real-world need to maintain a sufficient charge level throughout the trip.

Hope this clears things up!

 

[RickLightning]

The problem with your calculations is that it includes fuel not used on the trip. If you leave with 100% full tank, and you then fill your tank when you return, the cost of fuel for the trip doesn't include both. You leave with 100% full and zero cost. You add fuel during the trip, and then fill up at the end. That's the cost, not what it took you to fill up to leave.

Of course you can do it anyway you want to, but you're spending a lot of time calculating things that don't make sense to me.

I'd have your cost comparison as follows:

Gas cost $155.36
EV cost $149.43 - $5.51 (cost to bring it to 100%) + (131 x .15 x .14, which is the cost to get back to 100%) = $146.67.

In other words, almost identical.

 

[CypherBlue]

The problem with your calculations is that it includes fuel not used on the trip. If you leave with 100% full tank, and you then fill your tank when you return, the cost of fuel for the trip doesn't include both. You leave with 100% full and zero cost. You add fuel during the trip, and then fill up at the end. That's the cost, not what it took you to fill up to leave.

Of course you can do it anyway you want to, but you're spending a lot of time calculating things that don't make sense to me.

I'd have your cost comparison as follows:

Gas cost $155.36
EV cost $149.43 - $5.51 (cost to bring it to 100%) + (131 x .15 x .14, which is the cost to get back to 100%) = $146.67.

In other words, almost identical.

I appreciate your perspective. My goal was to provide a more realistic view of the trip's costs, including the practical aspects of refueling and recharging that many drivers experience.

Including the fuel to fill up before the trip and the final top-off gives a complete picture of the total expenditure, reflecting the actual out-of-pocket costs for the journey. Similarly, for the EV comparison, I accounted for charging times before and after the trip to maintain consistency.

While it might seem overcomplicated, this method mirrors real-world behaviors and provides a clearer understanding for those who prefer to maintain a comfortable fuel or charge level throughout their travels.

 

[Zprime29]

Of course you can do it anyway you want to, ...

So why are you telling him he's doing it wrong?

... but you're spending a lot of time calculating things that don't make sense to me.

Nah, he used AI to do the math. Probably took you longer to complain about his calculations than it did for him to compute them

 

[JRT]

I can see this sort of, but you either count fuel up at start or at end in cost, not both as trip cost. The fact is fast charging on road trips with the Lightning is normally more expensive, this is not the right use case to sell people on EVs. The best saving is if you charge at home for 95%of your needs. If I was a traveling salesman, no way I'd buy a Lightning.

 

[CypherBlue]

I can see this sort of, but you either count fuel up at start or at end in cost, not both as trip cost. The fact is fast charging on road trips with the Lightning is normally more expensive, this is not the right use case to sell people on EVs. The best saving is if you charge at home for 95%of your needs. If I was a traveling salesman, no way I'd buy a Lightning.

I see where you're coming from, and I agree that fast charging on road trips with the Lightning can be nearly as expensive as fuel prices, especially here in Texas. You might see a larger margin in California due to higher gas prices.

Most of my charging is done at home, where the cost savings are more substantial. The convenience and lower cost of home charging make a significant difference in the overall economics of owning an EV.

The cost-benefit might not be as favorable for frequent long-distance travelers like a traveling salesman. However, for those who primarily charge at home and only take occasional long trips, the Lightning can still offer significant savings and benefits.

 

[Zprime29]

Cost per mile averaging is nice to put you in the ball park. But I like the thought process of, "what am I actually spending to do this trip vs not doing it?" If I return home near empty, I need to fill up to get myself back to where I left off at a minimum. If the ICE started with 3/4 tank I'd say compare the cost to return back to 3/4 tank. If I normally charge to 80%, then I compare the cost to return my truck back to 80%.

It's not much different than using the same location as start and finish when comparing efficiency. It reduces impact of wind and elevation changes. Cost for a trip should include what it takes to get back where you started from.

 

[RickLightning]

Cost per mile averaging is nice to put you in the ball park. But I like the thought process of, "what am I actually spending to do this trip vs not doing it?" If I return home near empty, I need to fill up to get myself back to where I left off at a minimum. If the ICE started with 3/4 tank I'd say compare the cost to return back to 3/4 tank. If I normally charge to 80%, then I compare the cost to return my truck back to 80%.

It's not much different than using the same location as start and finish when comparing efficiency. It reduces impact of wind and elevation changes. Cost for a trip should include what it takes to get back where you started from.

Right, but not the cost of the full tank before you left. Can't count the tank twice.

 

[Zprime29]

Right, but not the cost of the full tank before you left. Can't count the tank twice.

I haven't checked his numbers, I assumed he only counted the top up. So his assumption of starting with a 3/4 tank means he would count the cost to fill 1/4 of a tank. If that's the case, I don't see anything wrong with it. If he counted filling a full (not just the 1/4) then I agree. That's double dipping.

 

[CypherBlue]

Right, but not the cost of the full tank before you left. Can't count the tank twice.

I'm not sure how I'm counting the tank twice. If you look at my spreadsheet, I started at 82% SoC and charged to 100% SoC before starting the trip. Normally, I keep the truck at 85% SoC, but I did some driving before preparing to leave. Then, when I returned, I was at 20% SoC and charged back up to 85% SoC.

This is like starting with 3/4 of a tank of gas, topping off before the start, and then topping off the fuel when arriving back home after the trip to where it was before I started. I counted the 18% I added before the start and then the 65% I added when I returned to get back to the original SoC. This method reflects the actual charging costs incurred to maintain my typical state of charge, providing a realistic view of the total trip cost.

 

[RickLightning]

I'm not sure how I'm counting the tank twice. If you look at my spreadsheet, I started at 82% SoC and charged to 100% SoC before starting the trip. Normally, I keep the truck at 85% SoC, but I did some driving before preparing to leave. Then, when I returned, I was at 20% SoC and charged back up to 85% SoC.

This is like starting with 3/4 of a tank of gas, topping off before the start, and then topping off the fuel when arriving back home after the trip to where it was before I started. I counted the 18% I added before the start and then the 65% I added when I returned to get back to the original SoC. This method reflects the actual charging costs incurred to maintain my typical state of charge, providing a realistic view of the total trip cost.

On your spreadsheet, you're starting at 82% and ending at 85%. Close enough for government work. Or, you can add in the cost of what it would be to go from 85 to 100% even though you didn't do it, and drop the first number getting you to 100%, because it's irrelevant.

It's the gas truck numbers that are illogical. Simple math comes up with much lower numbers. Your step #1 should not be counted. You leave with a full tank, you return with a full tank. If you leave with 75%, then fill up, and then upon return fill up again, you're overcounting by 1/4 tank.

Sponsored