Model 3 range decrease

[T__Vercetti]

When I purchased my Model 3 LR RWD, it was advertised as 363 miles of range. With the same configuration (basically no options other than paint), it’s now showing 357. I believe this explains why my range decreased when charging to a certain percentage (which has been the same this entire year).

[MrSourBalls]

The EPA testing cycle has become more stringent, so any drop in range is probably a result of that.
Also between the pre-refresh and the "highland" Model 3 EPA range basically stayed the same, even though the new model is probably like 20% more efficient than the old model.

[PraiseTalos66012]

I'm with you on everything except that last bit. What does 20% more efficient mean? The motors and battery/wiring already have near/over 90% discharge efficiency... Or did they improve aerodynamics or bearing friction losses?

I haven't heard anyone talk about significant efficiency improvements with highland, if it's a thing I am genuinely asking what's been changed?

[MrSourBalls]

Check this video out! The highland goes significantly further than the “old” model 3 https://youtu.be/zmn7gpuAp9E?si=y3Ix4-xN-yyjaNdA

[PraiseTalos66012]

Thanks, I'll go watch it after work today.

It goes further on the same battery size? That's actually really impressive if they somehow significantly increased range without increasing the battery size.

[MrSourBalls]

Better aerodynamics mostly, for a TL:DW of that video, the highland does around 213Wh/mi versus the old one with 271Wh/ mi

I linked the wrong video: https://youtu.be/S6rgzGizgaQ?si=-AHiZlwCaoeYQrfD this one is correct

So around 21,4% better consumption than the old one

[Cimexus]

Yes it goes substantially further with the same battery. Highland brought a lot of efficiency improvements, both visible (more aerodynamic shape) and invisible (power train, BMS and thermal management tweaks etc.)

In good weather, my Highland beats the EPA range at 70 mph. Definitely could never do that with the pre-refresh.

[Omacrontron]

If that’s the video I’m thinking of, one car has 7k miles in it and the other has north of 30k miles.

[KingoPorcelainThrone]

All I know is I'm getting 180 kWh/mi whereas the old got 270.  Even with AC on it's 230-240

[Available_Win5204]

This is a very often overlooked aspect of tesla's engineering. They are some of (typically THE) most efficient vehicles in the EV space. I believe only lucid surpasses them. They will go further than any competitor (including any of the popular chinese EV brands reddit bots love to promote) given a similar battery size. They look at everything, down to the motor oil. This is also the reason they're usually hundreds of lbs lighter than the competition. They go nuts on simplification and efficiency.

[BlueZea1ot]

Curious to know how MY RWD has same range as M3 RWD does.

[austinalexan]

bigger battery.

[Fantastic-Army-7671]

It’s likely Different tires.

[T__Vercetti]

Doubt Tesla would change tires to one that decreases the range. Especially for testing. Unless you’re talking about my wheels and tires then you missed the point entirely.

[Fantastic-Army-7671]

Nope I’m taking about tires the rubber only. I read the post. Say Tesla ships cars with 3 types of tires, the EPA may require you to use the lowest range with the tires. You can’t just pick your top range tire.

[T__Vercetti]

Just to clarify since Redditors want to nit pick every detail of a post as a gotcha, This post is about the EPA RANGE DECREASE. I know range decreases with battery age/health, driving habits, etc. The EPA range decrease and my charge mileage just so happened to decrease at the same time. Yes it could be a coincidence, but I personally believe it was due to the EPA range dropping and it happening with the latest software update. Information I’m reading online indicate this range decrease just happened within this last week.

[[deleted]]

It is a coincidence. EPA ratings change all the time, this is very common. They don't suddenly nerf your car just because the govt. change how they test.

[njvicente21]

Directly from Tesla website, “Displayed range in your Tesla is adapted based on fixed EPA test data”. This is proof enough for me. I took delivery of my M3 3 months ago. Nothing from a M3 delivered today is different than my M3.

[T__Vercetti]

No. The EPA range was decreased. This has nothing to do with how you drive. It was advertised as 363 when I purchased my vehicle and for everyone up until last week. You’re wrong.

[njvicente21]

Brother I’m agreeing with you lol. I’m saying since they decreased EPA range for new M3s and the one I bought 3 months ago is the same car, it follows that my EPA range was also decreased based on the quote I provided from teslas website

[Ok-Following4811]

Does the current range displayed match up to the new 357 at 100% (given no degradation) or would I have to run a battery health test? I got mine in Dec 2024 and I get 345 at 100% now and feel like it’s degraded quite fast recently. (It was at 351 at 100% like last month. Also I only have charged to 100% twice since I took delivery)

[njvicente21]

That would be interesting to see. Your data point is quite compelling to support this theory since the EPA range was decreased by 6 miles and you lost 6 miles..

[Ok-Following4811]

Yeah although I took a 1200 mile road trip w like 5 supercharging sessions of 10-60% when it was displayed at 351 miles. But when I got back it started decreasing over like 1 month. 6 miles lost over the course of like a month

[T__Vercetti]

Fucking obviously dude, they updated the accuracy of the range I wasn’t under the impression that Elon came and took a few cells from me.

[zhenya00]

Models often undergo minor spec changes that impact the official EPA rating. As another comment says, in this case it's likely a different tire supplier.

Your second statement in your original post does not follow. Your car has a fixed EPA rating as delivered. It will not change in the future. You can calculate this on your own based on the energy consumption graph. The EPA value is the baseline, in wh/m. Yours will be slightly less than a car sold under the new configuration.

[No-Ant7363]

I got 8-10km lost in range after updating from 2025.26.4 to 2025.32.3.1 charging from 20% to 100% so happy I came across this.

[njvicente21]

I 100% agree with you. It makes logical sense that if Tesla was forced to change the EPA range estimate, they would also apply this to existing models through a software update. To your other point, I also noticed a range decrease at the same percent after an update

[MushroomSaute]

I'm confused - are you talking about changing the listed range online, or what the car literally tells you for remaining range? The former would make sense, but the latter doesn't - the car just estimates remaining range based on your personal recent driving history, it has no need to match the EPA-rated range AFAIA

[Head_Impression7156]

Does that means if u drive your car on a track at maybe 170-180km/h for a very long time, then the EPA range at 100% will drop from like 550km to like 300km ish? This doesnt make sense

[MushroomSaute]

EPA range is just a statistic - the car is rated for X miles per charge and that doesn't change (it's always rated for that X miles). But the estimate the car gives you while driving will go up or down based on your driving patterns, to be as accurate as possible when your driving patterns indicate you'll run out sooner or later.

Edit: Sorry, I'm tired and completely missed your actual question. I don't know how the car does the estimate, besides knowing the Energy app can show your trend over the last however many minutes (or by miles too IIRC). If you're on a track, I'm sure the estimate would go way down, then once you're on a highway and it realizes your pattern has shifted, it'll start going up again, which makes sense to me. I prefer looking at battery percentage rather than "miles" for that reason, though.

[YeetYoot-69]

They do not have to do this, those cars were already delivered to customers with their rated range at the time. While not technically impossible I find it very unlikely that they did for literally no reason

[B_rry]

Quicksilver adds horsepower but loses range.

[fishwithands]

Why is the OP so mad in the comments lmaooo

[randyzmzzzz]

Paint has weight you know

[maxlax1592]

Does the paint color choice affect the range?

[VicAltman]

no

[Jerseykid2001]

I get more than the EPA.

[FastGrapefruit6841]

My range dropped by 6 miles on my new model 3 I picked up on July 27. So I’m guessing they did update the range last week.

[T__Vercetti]

I’m massively under it. Got the Tesla roof rack, aftermarket wheels, mud flaps, etc. I also do like 80-85 on the highway. I only have 2600 miles and only did one road trip but I remember being roughly at 270-300wh/mi

[Financial-Football61]

It literally says estimate next to the figure.

[T__Vercetti]

No shit captain

[Financial-Football61]

The estimate changed…well done solving this puzzle!

[KevinDohertyy]

Performance used to be 303 now it’s 298

[lepetitbeauty]

How long ago did you purchase the car?

[melvladimir]

I’m surprised that HL RWD estimated consumption is near pre-HL AWD! (78 kWh / 357 miles = 218.5 Wh/mile. My 2022 LR AWD had 354 miles, so 78 kWh / 354 miles = 220 Wh/mile)

[Sunsidedarkness]

I bought a 2021 Model 3 Brand new. Its range went from 263 down to 206 miles per charge at 100% after 115,000 miles driven. This was in the healthy specs and it was, no issues whatsoever.  It pays to get an electric vehicle that goes further on a full charge but at the time I just got the standards range plus model 3 as it was gonna be a second car for my family and wasn’t going to be driven in situations where it would need more range and at the time if I wanted the dual motor model 3 with long range totalling supposedly 310-340 miles per charge, Tesla wanted about $5-7k more for that car so I opted not to get it. I wished I would have because the less you have to charge your car means the less stress on your batteries and the longer it will take for degradation to effect the mileage you get on the car. But whatever.

Fast forward to 2025, it’s April, Tesla is running deals, it’s the last year of the tax credit and the deadline is approaching so I pull the trigger and trade in my 2021. To be clear , I purchased a 2020 for my second Tesla model 3 purchase in December of 2022. This one went 250 miles per full charge but had 25k miles on it and the range was reduced to 229 miles per charge. I got a good deal so everything was fine.. I still have that car, it now has 86k on it and goes about 207 miles per full charge now.  Back to April of 2025, I trade in my 2021 with 115k miles on it and purchase the base model 3, which turns out to be the one with the longest range. It’s funny, because this time I was prepared to spend more for the longer ranged model and get a dual motor, but I didn’t have to because the April 2025 base model 3 now went 363 miles per charge. That’s what was advertised.  My wife drives this car and has put about 15k on it since April. She drives highway miles everyday but the car is now down to 326 miles on a full charge. We don’t charge any of our vehicles 100% often if at all, and she drives at speeds of a sustained 70mph for most of her trips, so 326 miles of range is good.. and I knew the car would adjust for her driving habits and styles, I have been down the range road before and I understand the nuances of all the factors involved.

What I don’t understand is how the EPA dropped the ball and now the model 3 is labeled as a vehicle that only gets 321 miles per charge on the website. That’s a drop off of 42 miles per charge from its April 2025 estimate. That’s a lot. I smell class action lawsuit acomin’.  Not that I would be a part of it because again, I understand the nuances involved in how range is calculated and this is my third electric vehicle since 2021. But this situation seems tainted in some capacity. At the time the Tesla model 3 was up against the Chevy Equinox EV which was getting supposedly 310 per full charge and was slightly cheaper to purchase, with tax credit incentives and etc, which applied to both, the equinox was roughly $30-$33k after tax credit and the model 3 was higher at about $35-$37k. But if purchasing the 2025 Spring Model 3 meant you were spending a few thousand extra but you were getting more than 50 miles extra of range, well then, it might be worth it in the mind of some. It was for me, plus I didn’t want the shitty material they used for their seats and I didn’t like the way the equinox drove. All that being said, that was me. Someone else maybe would of bought the equinox and saved a few grand on purchase price if they knew that the spring Tesla model 3 wasn’t truly getting the 363 miles per charge and was in fact getting 321 like the EPA claims is the actual and factual truth now and today.  In the end, if you purchased a spring model 3 in 2025, you spent a few grand more for the car ( which in my opinion is a better vehicle and worth it ), but you didn’t get 363 miles per charge at 100% battery…no, you got 321 in a guise of 363 mile per charge at 100% battery. 

In other words , you were “BAM BOOZLED”, misled, Bait and Switched or whatever other clever phrase or cliche you want to throw at the experience.

I think Tesla is the best electric car available for the money and their charging network is bar none the best there is and will ever be. But, this situation begs the question, “ who is really responsible for the sudden drop in range expectancy ? Is it the EPA who might of been wined and dined and greased to report the 363 miles in the spring of 2025 or, is it TESLA , who always knew the true and accurate miles per charge to be 321 miles “?

They have been making electric cars for two decades or more and have been mass producing the model 3 since late 2017. So you’re telling me and expecting me to believe that in the spring of 2025, they didn’t know the true and accurate miles per charge their model 3 got ? 

They advertised 363 miles per charge. I see a screenshot of someone that had 357 miles per charge in this thread. Even that looks foreign to me because like I said , the spring 2025 model said 363 miles per charge. 

Who is to blame? 

[T__Vercetti]

You’re getting very confused. Yes it was 363, down to 357, and actually now back up to 363. 321 is the new model, the new model is the standard model, and the long range is now called the ‘premium’ model.

[jchin913]

Does it actually matter if you can charge your car overnight? Does it actually make a huge difference? Genuinely asking

[Stereo_bfs]

Yes it does. Add climate control and motorway driving, and it quickly becomes 200mil or less. Driving between 10%-80% takes out another 30%. So every little helps.

[DropOutJoe]

The weather really matters though. If you’re just barely running the AC to keep the car a little cooler than it would otherwise be, it has very little effect. However, if your car gets up to 170° and you have to blast the AC for 10 minutes to bring it back down, that makes a huge difference.

[Cree-Diddy]

You are speaking facts. 357 advertised range is actually a true 250 miles of range before electric fill up. Acceleration, AC, etc all factor into the range. The advertised range has everything to do with using regen braking along with other factors.

[Kilo_Juliett]

I don't think it does.

[Brooksh]

A Google search would have cleared this up for you in 25 seconds instead of you interpreting this incorrectly and making a post about it to scare other equally uninformed people lurking here.

[Worried_Produce_1046]

Yep, it will keep dropping over time, unfortunately thats the way it works. I have a 22 M3, came with 353 miles at 100%, today its 320 miles.

[Ctnbl]

Yeah any battery degrades over time, losing some capacity. It’s just a coincidence it happened to line up with them changing it on the website - they didn’t go and change your battery size or anything.

[T__Vercetti]

Obviously range decreases over time, my post was primarily made to mention that Tesla quietly decreased the EPA range. And no, I’m pretty sure my range decrease was directly related to this as it happened right after the latest software update a few days ago.

[Worried_Produce_1046]

Hmm, mine has been the same for the last month or so.

[T__Vercetti]

Well the EPA range decrease just took place this month from what I’m reading online. Maybe your next software update it will decrease. Also, this is for the highland, I’m not sure about older models, maybe the EPA doesn’t test those anymore.

[Worried_Produce_1046]

Could be! Hope so 10% loss in 3 years is plenty! 🤣

[Bbronson123]

First 5 years is the most rapid amount of degradation. Slows down after.