Advertisement

2012 Tesla Model S: EPA Range Of 265 Miles, 89 MPGe Efficiency

 
13,983 views Jun 20, 2012
Follow John

2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011

HI-RES GALLERY: 2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011
  • 2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011
  • 2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011
  • 2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011
  • 2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011
  • 2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011
  • 2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011
  • 2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011
  • 2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011
  • 2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011
  • 2012 Tesla Model S beta vehicle, Fremont, CA, October 2011
  • 2012 Tesla Model S Charging Connector

Related Photo Galleries


See more photos »

Friday will be a big day for startup electric carmaker Tesla Motors.

On that day, it will deliver its first 2012 Model S luxury sport sedans to retail customers in a big webcast event at its Fremont, California, assembly plant.


But a couple of days beforehand, the EPA has issued the eagerly awaited range and efficiency numbers for the high-end Model S version with the 85-kilowatt-hour battery pack.

The car has a rated range of 265 miles, and an efficiency of 89 miles-per-gallon-equivalent, a measure based on the distance the car can travel on the amount of energy contained in one gallon of gasoline.

That gives that model of the 2012 Tesla Model S the greatest range by far of any battery electric vehicle on the market.

As for efficiency, it puts the Model S behind the tiny Mitsubishi 'i' (112 MPGe), the Ford Focus Electric (105 MPGe), and the Nissan Leaf (99 MPGe), but comfortably ahead of the Coda Sedan (73 MPGe).

With seating for five, plus two optional jump seats for kids in the back, the Model S is a somewhat larger vehicle than any of those competitors. The EPA rates its interior volume at 94 cubic feet (versus 90 cu ft for the Leaf) and cargo space at 26 cubic feet (versus 23 cu ft for the Leaf).

With a 260-kilowatt (350-horsepower) motor powering the rear wheels, It's also likely to be faster; the Leaf comes in at 80 kW (107 hp) and even the Focus Electric, the comparative hot rod of the compact electric set, has only 107 kW (143 hp).

We look forward to learning more about the Tesla Model S, which certainly has a strong fan base among both electric car advocates and fans of fast, sleek, luxury sport sedans.

Meanwhile, now you have officially certified data with which to compare the Model S to any other large all-electric luxury sedan.

Oh. Wait. There are no others. Hmmmmmmmm....

+++++++++++

Follow GreenCarReports on Facebook and Twitter.





Tags:
Posted in:
 
Contribute
Send us a tip Comment Contact the editor
Follow Us

 

Have an opinion?

  • Posting indicates you have read this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
  • Notify me when there are more comments
Comments (37)

  1. fb_569496310 avatar Anton Wahlman Posted: 6/20/2012 2:21pm PDT

    Those EPA numbers were announced on May 9.
     
    Post Reply
    -1
    Bad stuff?

     

  2. john_v avatar John Voelcker Posted: 6/20/2012 4:10pm PDT

    Source, pls?
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

     

  3. fb_500068902 avatar George Betak Posted: 6/20/2012 9:24pm PDT

    John, JB and Elon blogged about it on May 9, and they specifically mentioned 265 miles EPA range.

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/model-s-efficiency-and-range
     
    Post Reply
    -1
    Bad stuff?

     

  4. john_v avatar John Voelcker Posted: 6/21/2012 3:00am PDT

    @George: Thanks for that link, which I'm aware of. But those are claims by a company; the article is about the EPA.

    While manufacturers self-certify, the EPA still has to look over the carmaker's data and give its imprimatur--and that's what this article is about. I'm sure you're as aware as I am of the claims by makers that subsequently haven't panned out in the official EPA ratings ...
     
    Post Reply
    +4
    Bad stuff?

     

  5. fb_500068902 avatar George Betak Posted: 6/21/2012 11:08pm PDT

    John, thank you for your response. Yes, that makes sense, and I'm familiar with the process. Elon and JB did not mention that EPA approval was still pending in their blog post, which would explain why Anton Wahlman, myself, and many others assumed that they were official.
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  6. john_v avatar John Voelcker Posted: 6/22/2012 6:38am PDT

    @George: At the risk of perhaps seeming overly cynical, that's not necessarily the first time that officials at Tesla (and many, many other companies) have omitted necessary context for remarks.

    "Trust...but verify." :)
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  7. fb_528677124 avatar Thomas Fisher Posted: 6/20/2012 7:03pm PDT

    Those were based on initial test results and were realeased by Tesla. Today's results are fully certified by the EPA. Same info, but todays numbers are the only ones that count.
     
    Post Reply
    +5
    Bad stuff?

  8. CDspeed avatar CDspeed . Posted: 6/20/2012 2:46pm PDT

    This Friday will be very exciting, I've actually become a little bored with new cars. Most of them are just new versions of cars that have been in production for decades. But the Model S will truly be something new and different.
     
    Post Reply
    +5
    Bad stuff?

     

  9. fb_1079063409 avatar Jeff Riley Posted: 6/20/2012 7:21pm PDT

    I agree. When someone releases an all-new, all-ice vehicle, I always think it seems like old news, old tech, boring, and disappointing.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  10. fb_100000005296979 avatar Kent Beuchert Posted: 6/20/2012 3:17pm PDT

    This is the electric car age - how about mileage stated in terms of the fuel it uses (electricity) rather than some meaningless comparison to the amount of energy (not even the extractable energy, no less) found in a gallon of that fuel used by some other vehicles. Only our brainless DOT could come up with a mileage metric this stupid and pointless. By far the most important range figure is that for trips, which means highway
    driving, and on that score the car can clock 300 miles,
    or very close to it. We don't really care what the range is for
    around town/combined conditions. Especially for this vehicle.
     
    Post Reply
    -1
    Bad stuff?

     

  11. john_v avatar John Voelcker Posted: 6/20/2012 4:12pm PDT

    @Kent: You may not like the EPA's metrics, but they are the ones that are used at the moment. I would suggest you direct your comments toward them.

    I am also amused at your assertion that "we" are not interested in the Model S's range in "around town/combined conditions". Remind me which group of Model S owners you speak for again, please?
     
    Post Reply
    +3
    Bad stuff?

     

  12. fb_528677124 avatar Thomas Fisher Posted: 6/20/2012 7:10pm PDT

    Actually, the city and highway numbers for the Model S are virtually the same. The new 5 cycle tests by the EPA are more realistic for electric cars than the 2 cycle test that the Model S was designed to get 300 miles under.

    The main difference with the new numbers is that it includes running accessories and variations in driving intensity that made less difference with a gas powered vehicle, but cause a bigger drop in electric performance.

    Regardless, 265 miles on the 5 cycle test is outstanding performance for an electric. Few people drive that much in a day without opportunities to charge the vehicle, so its very likely that Model S owners will spend a LOT less productive time on charging than an ICE car spends getting gas.
     
    Post Reply
    +2
    Bad stuff?

  13. sustainable2020 avatar Erik Roberts Posted: 6/20/2012 7:26pm PDT

    Do a little research before going off on a rant of what u assume to be true. Or is that too much to ask for a guy that apparently says he represents all of us w/ his comments that we don't care about city range. Which is wrong again.

    Do you not check the epa's website for vehicle fuel economy? Right there in b n w:
    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32557&id=32154&id=31673&id=32278

    Note that the Telsa S beats all the other EVs listed in the article above and in these posts in combined kw-hrs/100 miles range. Telsa does EVs much better right now...there's no denying that fact. Lets hope the others catch up n pass them soon.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

     

  14. fb_100001133620618 avatar Roy Harvie Posted: 6/21/2012 7:27am PDT

    "Note that the Telsa S beats all the other EVs listed in the article above and in these posts in combined kw-hrs/100 miles range."

    "beats", you mean has the highest number (38). In terms of economy the lowest kwhrs/100mi is the best (30).

    Thanks for the link. These numbers are interesting because the Ford Focus EV is tied with the Mitsubishi i-MiEV for Highway at 34 while the Tesla Model S is tied with the LEAF at 37. The main difference between the Model S and the others is City driving.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  15. fb_1576871738 avatar Charles Ellis Posted: 6/20/2012 5:00pm PDT

    What makes the MPGe so low compared to something like the Honda Fit EV? Anybody??
     
    Post Reply
    0
    Bad stuff?

     

  16. fb_100001133620618 avatar Roy Harvie Posted: 6/20/2012 6:00pm PDT

    I expected similar rating to LEAF, Focus EV, Volt etc. Only thing I can think of is that the other cars are front wheel drive and this is rear wheel drive. Most braking, and therefore re-gen is done by the front wheels. It will be interesting to see if the Model X with optional 4WD will have better economy.
     
    Post Reply
    0
    Bad stuff?

     

  17. sustainable2020 avatar Erik Roberts Posted: 6/20/2012 7:15pm PDT

    Hello....??? Why would u think that a taller, heavier, lower coefficient of drag Telsa X(w/ the same battery pack as the S) w/ 4wd get better mpge? Are u insane? Unless there are significant improvements in the drivetrain, weight, or aerodynamics, the X will likely get at least 10% worse mpge then the S. Common sense tells us that.
     
    Post Reply
    -3
    Bad stuff?

  18. fb_528677124 avatar Thomas Fisher Posted: 6/20/2012 7:24pm PDT

    All of those cars you cited are low performing compact cars, while the Tesla is a full sized high performance luxury sedan. The real question is why its efficiency is only 10-20% less then those you cited. The reality is that it has outstanding efficiency for its size and performance.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  19. sustainable2020 avatar Erik Roberts Posted: 6/20/2012 7:11pm PDT

    Hello....??? Size, weight, and power are the answers why the 85Kw battery pack S is a little less fuel efficient then the other current "budget" smaller EVs like the Fit EV. Did you not read above that the S has a 260KW motor which is far more than twice the power of the other EV motors? This thing hits 60mph in less then half the time of the other EVs even though its bigger and heavier. 89mpge is very good for this highest powered trim S model. Expect the lower trim S models to get better mpge with the 40kw battery pack Telsa S getting probably about the same as the other budget EVs currently on the market.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  20. fb_528677124 avatar Thomas Fisher Posted: 6/20/2012 7:20pm PDT

    The Model S is a full size luxury car that is equivalent to a BMW 5 series, with high acceleration, outstanding performance and a price to match.

    The real question is why the regular Honda Fit gets nearly 50% better gas mileage than a BMW 5 series (33mpg vs 23mpg) while the electric version of the Fit only gets ~20% more MPGE than the Tesla Model S.

    The answer of course is that the Tesla Model S is a marvel of engineering designed from the ground up as an electric vehicle, while the Fit is just a gas powered car with an electric motor slapped into it.

    That also helps explain why the electric version of the Fit has a terrible range and costs twice as much as the gas version, while the Tesla is reasonably competitive with a BMW.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

     

  21. Chris O avatar Chris O Posted: 6/20/2012 10:38pm PDT

    The Fit may be an ICE conversion, but it's also the best EV in it's class with better range and efficiency than a car like the Leaf that was designed from the ground up as an electric vehicle.

    And where do you get it costs twice as much than the gas version if it's a lease only compliance car (sadly)?
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

     

  22. john_v avatar John Voelcker Posted: 6/21/2012 3:04am PDT

    @Chris: The retail price of the Honda Fit EV on which that lease price is based is $$36,625 (plus a mandatory $770 delivery fee). See here:
    http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1068770_electric-honda-fit-ev-details-live-photos-from-l-a-auto-show

    The gasoline 2012 Honda Fit starts at $15,325 (plus delivery).
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  23. sustainable2020 avatar Erik Roberts Posted: 6/21/2012 12:25am PDT

    Hi Tom,
    Obviously we are both proponents of EVs and especially this great new Telsa S on the road this weekend...finally. However, I suggest you perform a bit more research and calculations before making claims and logic leaps. Three examples below where more time was needed:

    1) Your 5 series vs Fit mpg numbers are wrong.
    Base 2012 BMW 5 series now gets 23/34 mpg while the Fit sport automatic gets 27/33. BMW's new four banger twin turbo is a marvel in high performance with damn good efficiency too considering that it outperforms their previous base motor inline 6. I think you were using the previous 5 series drivetrain specs. Fit will likely still get better overall mileage but certainly not by 50%...more like 15%.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  24. sustainable2020 avatar Erik Roberts Posted: 6/21/2012 12:37am PDT

    2) Not all Telsa S trim models out w/ mpge numbers yet.
    Telsa S in 40kw n 60kw battery pack trims are sure to be more efficient than the 85kw battery pack used for the epa's calculation released today. As I predicted in a previous reply in this post, I think the 40kw trim will likely obtain a mpge rating near the other current budget mpge ratings.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

    25. There are more comments in this thread

  25. MrEnergyCzar avatar Mr EnergyCzar Posted: 6/20/2012 5:01pm PDT

    Miles per dollar would have been a better rating system for all plug-ins or pure EV's...

    MrEnergyCzar
     
    Post Reply
    -1
    Bad stuff?

     

  26. fb_100001133620618 avatar Roy Harvie Posted: 6/20/2012 6:04pm PDT

    Yes, much more ideal. But since the price of electricity varies dramatically over different parts of the country, and also by time of day, how do you choose a rate that won't cause a lot of arguments? At least a gallon of gas is a constant.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  27. Norbert N avatar Norbert N Posted: 6/20/2012 5:41pm PDT

    It seems the EPA didn't count the front trunk ("frunk"), which provides an additional 8 cubic feet of cargo space. I think no other EV has a "frunk". ;)
    ( http://www.teslamotors.com/models/specs )
     
    Post Reply
    +2
    Bad stuff?

     

  28. sustainable2020 avatar Erik Roberts Posted: 6/20/2012 7:16pm PDT

    Really good point Norbet. I think EPA did forget the frunk.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  29. fb_528677124 avatar Thomas Fisher Posted: 6/20/2012 7:01pm PDT

    "With a 260-kilowatt (350-horsepower) motor powering the rear wheels, It's also likely to be faster"

    Yes. I suppose it is "likely" to be faster, a likelihood which depends solely on how much you depress the "gas" or brake pedals on the Model S.

    For instance a Nissan Leaf *MIGHT* be faster than a Model S if the Model S stops completely. But even that is doubtful considering how fast the Model S looks just sitting there...
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  30. Mark Stang avatar Mark Stang Posted: 6/20/2012 7:10pm PDT

    We have to remember that Tesla is not competing with the Honda Fit EV or the Nissan Leaf it is competing with gasoline powered sport sedans and has to have acceleration that is consistent with that market. Also the Tesla Model S is no lightweight either. It tips the scale over 4000lbs and has 19 inch all season high performance tires similar to what other high-end gasoline sport sedans have. I bet if you were to change the wheels alone to skinny 17 inch low rolling resistance tires on skinnier rims and select max regeneration braking to enhance its efficiency I am sure you could bump that MPGe number up quite a bit. Tesla Blue star sedan will more likely to achieve higher EPA MPGe since it will not have to compete with pricey sport sedans.
     
    Post Reply
    +3
    Bad stuff?

  31. fb_799475006 avatar Pat Bahn Posted: 6/21/2012 12:40pm PDT

    I wasn't a big fan of the Roadster, but, I think the Model S is a very strong product. Upscale luxury, it's the Mercedes of EVs. Good range, lots of performance, it will sell. The key is how much profit is in there. If the margins are big, i'd expect the other luxury makers to come in fast, if the margins are thin, then the business struggles. I hope it works out.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

     

  32. fb_100001133620618 avatar Roy Harvie Posted: 6/21/2012 5:14pm PDT

    Elon is more concerned with building the company, and selling lots of EVs than making large profits from a niche product. The profit margin will be calculated to be just enough to grow the company.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

     

  33. fb_599454693 avatar Jan Durzynski Posted: 6/22/2012 8:08am PDT

    I'd say the profit margin is non-existent at this point and it will be years (if ever) before they make any actual money from this model. Selling tech and carbon offset credits will make them some cash and somewhat cover the losses in the meantime.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

Advertisement
Get great deals on the 2012 Tesla Model S!
By clicking above, you agree that your data will be subject to our Car Quotes Privacy Policy
Advertisement

Find Green Cars

Go!

Advertisement

More from High Gear Media

 
 
Green Car Reports
  • Follow Us
  • Twiiter
  • Facebook
 
 
© 2013 Green Car Reports. All Rights Reserved. Green Car Reports is published by High Gear Media. Send us feedback. Stock photography by Homestar, LLC.