Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

They could, but they don’t.

Edit: someone else pointed out if you actually navigate then it will show remaining % more accurately. Still seems like false advertising..




Having owned a Tesla and non-Tesla EV the approach to range is entirely different.

Tesla - I literally never achieved the advertised range once. BMW - I exceed the advertised range during low-speed highway cruises in ideal summer conditions.

Tesla - the range it shows me in car (not in nav) is the never-achievable EPA range. BMW - the range it shows me in car (not in nav) adjusts ride to ride based on efficiency on most recent trips. So in the depths of winter it's showing me something 20% lower than in the peak of summer. This means it's factoring in driver behavior, drive mode used, speed, and temperature effectively.

It is reasonable to assume that your range on a trip is most similar to the range in your recent trips.

I can get in my BMW, look at the range meter, guesstimate the range on arrival and be correct to within 1% 9 times out of 10.

In my Tesla, I would constantly be doing mental math to discount the range it was showing me, to what I typically got, the weather, to see how big a delta it would be.

Sure, the nav range in Tesla got smarter over time and factored things in.. but this doesn't help on long round trips. It might tell me that I'm going to reach my destination with X% left, but I now have to do mental math to figure out if I am going to make it back or not.

With Tesla, I can't simply get in the car, see 300mi range on dash.. know I am making a trip 100mi each way so I'll be fine. Instead it's like - 300mi range, NAV says I'll have 58% remaining at destination.. OK so that means it's estimating X burn rate, which means I will make it home with... 17% instead of 33%.


Exactly. Doing all this math when the main estimator says X is exhausting. Obviously I use percentage now but there is a problem with that estimate and a lot of people just want to pretend everything is fine.


Right, make it a toggle in menu - dashboard range estimator: [spec/pessimistic/optimistic].

Include weather, recent trips, lifetime consumption rates, type of road currently driving, etc.

Do anything other than the absolute simplest, laziest, most optimistic estimation which is "hey I bet you'll get the almost impossible-to-meet spec consumption rate!".


Its not false advertising, perhaps you could make a case of inaccurate ... but that's just advertising? You are not giving the car the context to provide an accurate estimate. Also you driving style might affect the estimate?


How is it false advertising.


I don't use navigation, almost ever, after the first place I go somewhere. Therefore, the main battery estimator is just wrong. If it actually worked, as soon as you got to highway speeds you would see it half. Hiding the real estimation behind the navigation tool is cowardly


How is that any different from a ICE car?

How is the car supposed to know how much energy you might be using in the future?

Last time I checked, no ICE car has the ability to predict the future.


In my ICE car, if I drive around the town getting 28mpg, the "range" trends downwards to reflect the poor efficiency, while if I drive a certain route where I get 42mpg, the "range" meter will reflect that. It uses a quite long rolling average

Tesla COULD do that, but they don't on the main display because basing it on real data instead of garbage EPA data would produce a more conservative number and that would be harder to sell.

In my ICE car, all the places I can see range remaining have the same exact number, because doing anything else would be stupid and confusing.


The distance left in the tank is closer to the Tesla's more accurate estimate because it's constantly adjusting based on both your current gas level as well as your current energy efficiency. It may not accurately convey the distance available at the start of a trip but you're going to know well ahead of time if you're burn rate is too high. If the non-navigation distance estimate in a Tesla is always padded you could find out well after it's too late to make it to your destination or a charging station.


I wonder if anyone has actually objectively measured accuracy of various car models under various driving patterns. It seems plausible to me that everyone just thinks their ICE car is more accurate because 1) gas stations are literally everywhere so there is never “range anxiety” and 2) no one routinely lets their gas car get close to empty anyway.


> The distance left in the tank is closer to the Tesla's more accurate estimate because it's constantly adjusting based on both your current gas level

How is that different from what Tesla does.

>> as well as your current energy efficiency.

How is that different from what Tesla does.

It shows you current battery percentage, it shows you live on the default screen what its discharge rate is, it also tells you in a side screen what driving habits are consuming extra energy from baseline and percentages from doing things like driving over 70 mpg, air conditioning, altitude changes.

So what exactly is an ICE car doing better.

Last time I checked, my fuel gauge wasn't telling me about the 15% drop in engine efficiency from going to high altitude areas. Funnily enough, the Tesla showed a large increase in energy use due to going up a slop, but otherwise is not affected by the drop in air density.


It is false advertising.

FTA: Musk and two local executives did so in a June 19 statement, acknowledging “false/exaggerated advertising.”


Link


You just have to click the title of the thread and it will take you to the Reuters article and you will be able to read the entire story.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: