[Analemma_]

Tesla's display shows the EPA range. While this is probably a bad idea and that's why no other manufacturer does it, "nobody else does it" is nothing but an informal standard and it seems a bit awkward to claim the approved government standard, in use at government agencies, is so obviously wrong that it constitutes fraud.

[MBCook]

Clearly Tesla knew the EPA range isn’t what customers commonly got in the real world. They’re famous for all their telematics.

If an example car can achieve 700 miles on the EPA test, but normal usage averages 150, is it fraud to advertise 700? To show 700 on the screen at full charge?

I agree it’s an interesting question. If the difference was 5% I’m not sure people would care. But at 25% off I think it is a very a fair question.

Porsche reportedly tends to outperform its EPA number significantly. They chose to lower it (a choice automakers have) to provide a more realistic picture given their customers seem more likely to use the performance at the cost of raw range.

[jncfhnb]

I mean… no, it’s not fraud.

I feel like your example uses numbers that are so aggressive one has suspect that they are not real. I don’t have a stake in this or knowledge beyond a quick Google but the EPA test does not look obviously flawed.

The more pertinent question to me would be whether the Tesla range can genuinely achieve those EPA numbers with a typical car.

[freerobby]

I'm able to beat rated range pretty easily on my '15 Model S on local roads. It's tough once I get on highways and exceed 65MPH. EPA is 290 Wh/mi. I typically get 330-350 on highways, going about 75 MPH, without the OEM low rolling resistance tires, and with roof bars and a bike rack on top (but no bike).

[mensetmanusman]

That’s on the regulators to define a metric, lest EVs compete on made up numbers. EVs are so new of course that organizations are still figuring this out globally.

[mrguyorama]

But Tesla is using that metric in a place most normally don't, and they are doing that purposely as elsewhere they use an in house estimation like everyone else.

No gasoline car uses the EPA fuel economy to do it's range estimation, EVEN WHEN IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR THEM TO DO SO, because it's wrong enough often enough to make a range estimation using it lose significant value.

Tesla has made a choice to stray from normal industry practice. If they have done so in an attempt to sway customers with the incorrect numbers, that should be considered fraud. That's pretty damn difficult to prove as a crime, but not hard to make likely in a civil case.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

I thought it was common in all cars these days. My gas car (Prius) uses the EPA fuel economy rating to estimate range at full, and is progressively pessimistic as I use up gas in the tank. On empty I can still get another 50-100 miles. My 3 also exhibits this behavior, although it's not quite as pessimistic as the Prius.

[mrguyorama]

> My gas car (Prius) uses the EPA fuel economy rating to estimate range at full, and is progressively pessimistic as I use up gas in the tank

Do you have more convincing evidence of this because I have used many Toyota vehicles and they do not use EPA figures to do their range estimation, and can be conclusively shown to be using their internally measured "average mpg" figures to estimate range.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

That sounds right. It could just be coincidence that the range estimate for the Prius is close to the product of EPA fuel economy figure and the tank size.

I'm mostly commenting on all manufacturers being conservative with fuel/energy use/metering. Even older vehicles I've had (carbureted pickup truck) usually have a gallon to so left in the tank on empty.

[freerobby]

I think the suit is just referencing the rated range meter. The trip planner (which is what predicts how much battery you need to get to your destination) uses real world conditions, not rated range.

[kjksf]

When you look at web page of Tesla (or any other EV manufacturer), when they describe the range it's always "est. EPA range".

This is 100% truth. It is an estimated EPA range.

What's more it's often actually measured by an EPA. The Reuters article that spurred this lawsuit said that EPA, not Tesla, tested 6 Tesla cars since 2020. That's at least half of them (Tesla has only 3 + 3 + 2 + 2 = 10 different models on sale in U.S. although they have to re-certify if they change the battery).

[Etherlord87]

In my opinion if people responsible for the choice of such and not another metric realized it will mislead the clients, then it was a fraud. You can do a lot of philosophical gymnastics proving fraud or no-fraud, but in the end of the day you're communicating something to your clients, and if you deliberately confuse them to think your product is better than it really is, is a fraud.

So it probably was a fraud, by my standards.

I'm considering buying Starlink access, but now I have to rethink what it really offers - maybe they use some different than common metric, which is 'technically true' but miscommunicates the actual performance?

[7speter]

Most, if any, cars don’t get close to their epa fuel economy numbers under “normal” conditions.

[kube-system]

I usually hit the EPA numbers on any car I've owned, when I drive the way people are supposed to drive. Although as horsepower and vehicle handling has drastically improved over the past 30 years, "normal" driving seems to have changed a bit.

[Sohcahtoa82]

My Tesla Model 3 Performance is the 4th car I've owned and it's the only car that hasn't achieved EPA estimations.

Hell, my previous car was a 2016 Subaru BRZ manual, EPA estimated at 24 city/30 highway. Despite the occasional launch, I still averaged 32 mpg.

That said, I'm not upset by it, despite only getting 240-270 miles depending on the weather (Out of the 300 mile EPA range). I know the reality of the difference in how an ICE and an EV use their energy.

Tesla is doing nothing wrong. If the range estimations are inaccurate, it's the EPA that needs to change.

[jackmott42]

Tesla display that but also displays highly accurate estimates of any trip you plan. To me the real party at fault with EV range in the USA is the EPA, which combines city and highway range in a single number, which inflates the highway number. Every EV that is sold advertises this inflated EPA number. Nobody cares about city range, just publish highway range, or both, like we do with gas cars.

[sdfignaionio]

There are two important things you're missing:

1. Tesla's estimates are not "highly accurate". They are alleged to use a deliberately optimistic estimate when the battery is near full, then gradually switch to a more realistic estimate as the battery drains. In particular they are alleged to incorrectly account for the weather. This means the car will always display nearly the advertised number at full charge (and on a test drive). Supposedly Tesla used to use a more accurate estimate but then got orders from on high to fudge the numbers.

2. For other car manufacturers, the range estimates are not terribly inflated. The report from Edmunds claim that most EV models meet or exceed their range estimates, and cars that miss their estimates don't miss by anywhere near as much as Teslas.

[lsaferite]

I know we are talking about EVs here, but my ICE has an estimated range display and _it_ isn't super accurate _and_ it doesn't take potential weather (or other factors like elevation) into account either. Why would you expect it to factor in _potential_ weather when giving a range estimate?

[sdfignaionio]

Allegedly,

1. Other companies have more accurate estimates than Tesla.

2. Tesla uses a different and more accurate algorithm when charge is low.

3. Tesla's estimates used to be more accurate.

It doesn't make sense to argue the problem is intractable when it has supposedly been solved by many companies, including Tesla itself.

>Why would you expect it to factor in _potential_ weather when giving a range estimate?

I wouldn't expect that. The cars have thermometers.

[maxerickson]

It's not the potential weather, the one mode for the range estimator apparently isn't taking the current ambient conditions into account. So it's not factoring in the likely load from the heat or AC when it's cold or hot and they need to run to keep the vehicle comfortable.

[brandonagr2]

One important thing you are missing, there are two different estimates being referred to. The "miles remaining" display on the battery charge gauge (which can be toggled to show percentage instead) and the trip planner / navigation estimate. The trip planner is very accurate, you can view a burn down charge of realtime estimate as it changes while you drive and it says what component contributed what % to deviate from the initial estimate. The "miles remaining" display is an imaginary number that is only meaningful if you are driving the same highway mix as the EPA test in the same climate conditions

[twarge]

This is correct. If you tell it the destination the range estimate is astonishingly accurate. And it will list all the reasons it turned out to be wrong down to what fraction a headwind impacted range.

[MBCook]

There are two tests you can run for the EPA. What I’ve heard is one favors EVs more and only Tesla uses those numbers for their EVs.

I agree the test needs a redesign. No one drives 55, and speed has a big impact on EVs due to wind resistance.

[CameronNemo]

Pretty sad that we can't just drive 55 on highways. Not even trucks that are towing will drive 55 always.

[CamperBob2]

You can. Just do it in the right lane, please.

[gnicholas]

Seems OK at first glance, but if you're in a 65 then the trucks (in the right lane) will want to go 65+. Going 55 in the right lane means they all need to pass you, which causes a domino effect onto the other lanes of traffic. If you're on a 4-lane highway (2 in each direction), going 55 means that trucks that pass you will have to go in the fast lane.

If there aren't a lot of trucks around, then going 55 in the right lane has less of an impact on other drivers. But if there are many trucks (which there usually are, IME), then going 10 MPH under the limit will cause a lot of headaches for all the other drivers around you.

[MBCook]

And that’s 65. I’ve been in places where the speed limit is 70 but people usually go 75-80.

That’s 20-25mph faster than you. At that point you’re practically impeding traffic, and having a big truck pass you is terrifying.

Just because you can legally drive 55 or maybe even less doesn’t make it safe.

[yurishimo]

Why do people need to drive slow? Sometimes you gotta get somewhere. If they are willing to pay the premium to driver faster and follow the law while doing so, what’s the harm?

[sdfignaionio]

I think you know why: efficiency and safety. Driving fast greatly increases fuel consumption and wear on tires. It makes crashes more likely and more serious.

Why do people need to drive fast? The gains are minimal even if you stay exclusively on a lightly-trafficked freeway. In more realistic scenarios, the gains are almost nothing. You'll just be the first one to the light or traffic jam.

[patmorgan23]

Air resistant. For most vehicles the sweet spot for efficiency is around 45-50 miles an hour. If you go faster than that you start spending more energy fighting wind resistance than going faster

[CameronNemo]

They are not willing to pay the premium, though.

Tell me when highways, bridges, and streets are not paid by gas taxes -- you won't.

Tell me when I can trade money for reliably sequestered CO2 -- you can't.

edit: I didn't downvote them btw

[yurishimo]

So you downvote me because you are refusing to engage in the “we live in a society” meme?

We’ve decided collectively how to fund infrastructure and engage in climate action as a society. If you don’t like it, feel free to lobby your neighbors and representatives to change the law.

[TheRealSteel]

How can you say nobody cares about city range? That's all I care about.

[nsenifty]

Because people don't tend to drive non-stop for hundreds of miles at cities (except perhaps taxis)? You also always have a charger nearby.

[xboxnolifes]

But the range is calculated based on the energy efficiency, and all drivers (should) care about that number, since that's the cost.

[patmorgan23]

Range != Efficiency. Electric motors are all pretty efficient. It has more to do with how big a battery they were able to squeeze into the thing.

This is different from ICE vehicles where fuel efficiency is more variable and does affect range more.

[sdfignaionio]

People don't generally drive 200 miles in the city in one stretch.

[jtbayly]

My memory from the first article I saw on this is that Tesla convinced the EPA to not use the EPA's measurement, and instead to trust Tesla's "measurement."

[rubyn00bie]

This take is a bit weird to me. It’s like saying because other companies aren’t lying that Tesla should be excused from lying. It sounds like Tesla has been displaying this number in car regardless of the accuracy; and in my opinion leaned into lying. From the article:

> The complaint cited testing that found three Tesla models fell short of their advertised ranges by an average of 26 percent. In addition to alleging false advertising, the lawsuit said that range estimates provided by Tesla vehicles during car trips fail to account for temperature and other factors that reduce range.

I’ve heard people on HN talk about this saying there are two separate values the car shows you and one is wildly and consistently wrong. The one that’s wrong, by the sounds of it aligns with their marketing materials.

I won’t buy a Tesla, but to me, their advantage is range. Right now their only competitors in range are more expensive (though quite a bit nicer imho). I imagine if I had bought a Tesla and the range wasn’t as good as it should be, I would be quite pissed…

[bdamm]

Right, and the one that is accurate is what you get when you put in a destination. The car can't tell you how far you can go if it doesn't know where you are going, because of all these factors (altitude gain, direction of wind, speed limits on the various roads involved, etc) which have a very significant effect on the range.

The idea of a single value for "range" is fundamentally flawed. Is it Tesla's fault that people don't understand basic physics?

[mrguyorama]

Every single other car ever made with a range estimation functionality uses past data to estimate your range. For like a decade Toyota had this on nearly every vehicle despite none of them having GPS integration, and nearly all of them were accurate enough to rely on.

You are bending over backwards to come up with an excuse for Tesla, when they quite clearly made a choice to either be lazy or misleading.

When my gasoline car says "You have 12 miles left", I KNOW I can drive 12 miles minimum, as long as it isn't at wide open throttle. The car has mountains of data at it's disposal, but in reality this technique has been used ever since a car could figure out how much gas was flowing into the injectors. The assumption is that how you have driven for the past ten minutes is a reliable indicator for how you will drive over the next ten minutes, and for most ten minute periods that is an accurate assumption.

[brigade]

Gas cars have had destination-less range estimates for decades, and as far as I know have never based it off of EPA fuel economy. Instead, they use the car’s own recent fuel economy.

Which concept more useful for drivers, the concept of remaining range if you keep driving the way you’ve been driving, or “how many miles the car can get in the EPA test cycle”?

[jcranmer]

> The car can't tell you how far you can go if it doesn't know where you are going

But the car can use your recent driving experience to get a good estimate. After all, if you've spent the past 10 minutes driving at 70 mph into a strong headwind, there's a decent chance that your next hour will be spent doing that. (Although this does get amusing on I-68 where my range estimates are markedly different after cresting the hill versus bottoming out in the valleys).

Sure, it's not the best estimate possible. But it's trivial to implement "assume recent past", and it's a far better estimate than "synthetic estimate that relies on a weighted average of two very different driving conditions."

[bryanlarsen]

According to the article, that sounds like what they do. When the battery hits 50% they switch to estimating the range based on your driving on the top of the battery.

[Y_Y]

Does your Tesla really account for the wind along your route?

[bdamm]

Yes.

[user_named]

Wrong. There are leaks saying that the fraud-dumbass himself forced the developers to display the incorrect number because it looks better.

[brandonagr2]

You can buy a Tesla, run the EPA test cycle, and get the exact same numbers.

You will get less than "the range" if you drive 90mph on the highway until the battery is depleted. Where is Tesla lying anywhere in there? The consumer was just ignorant of what the EPA rated range means.

[arrozconcosas]

The government agency is at fault here not Tesla. They need to come up with a better test.

[maxerickson]

No, the EPA test is designed to produce a characteristic value that is useful for comparing between vehicles, it's not designed to produce an algorithm that takes the state of charge of the battery and recent energy demand and produces an estimated remaining driving range.

And it's good that it's designed to produce a characteristic value that is useful for comparison.

[DannyBee]

The lawsuit claims this is false, and that for the first 50% of the range, they use a rosy algorithm, then a more realistic one.

At least, at some point.

I'll try to get the filing and paste from it, give me a few.

It's "Porter et al v. Tesla, Inc.", in case someone beats me to it.

[sschueller]

Maybe we should also ask our selves, why is Tesla's EPA range so high in comparison to all others?

I recall reading over and over in car reviews how the other EVs had low EPA estimates and during tests got an avarage above the EPA range. Why is that?