[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.