Bjorn Drives Tesla Model 3 311 Miles On Single Charge – Video


311 Miles Drive, With Some Battery Left To Spare

Driven 311 miles, with some battery juice left to spare.

This is possibly the first real range test we’ve seen conducted with the Model 3 and in typical Bjorn fashion it’s executed exceptionally well.

Video description:

“In USA, the Model 3 Long Range is rated for 310 mi/500 km EPA. We achieved that by driving on the motorway and using HVAC. This is better than Bolt EV/Ampera-e and will match Model S 75D or classic 85/P85 range. Quite impressive!”

Officially, the EPA rates this tested, long-range version of the Model 3 at 310 miles, so Bjorn exceeded that figure by 1, with some juice left in reserve. Additionally, as Bjorn notes, the HVAC was in use and driving was conducted at speed, so this wasn’t one of those extreme hypermiling exercises.

Related: Here’s Perhaps The World’s Most Comprehensive Tesla Model 3 Review

While Bjorn suggests the battery capacity is in the low 70s, that’s a useable figure. We have info suggesting its actually quite a big bigger overall though.

We’re wondering, has any Model 3 owner driven more than 311 miles on a single charge? If so, tell us about it in Comments below.

Bonus video:

Categories: Tesla, Videos

Tags: , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

46 Comments on "Bjorn Drives Tesla Model 3 311 Miles On Single Charge – Video"

newest oldest most voted

Some more details: He drove 55mph on the interstate (speed limit was 70). He used Autopilot/Cruise control the entire trip. There was no rain. Temperature was 56 degrees.

He mentions 21 C, which is 70 F.

Warm (but not hot) Low wind, flat, 55 mph, … Basically perfect hypermiling conditions

55 mph is not hypermiling if you are doing a test to simulate mixed EPA driving but simplifying things by doing slower highway only driving. That’s what he was doing. He even states this in the comments after the youtube video.

Highway driving at 55 will give you a shorter range than normal city driving in an EV. The Model 3 LR is rated by the EPA for 295.5 miles hwy and 321.9 miles city.

If you take into account the weight penalty of having an extra person on board in this test and add the extra miles he would have gotten with those extra 2-3 kWh left in the battery then his hwy range at 55 mph would have been more than 320 miles.

It seems reasonable to me if he dropped off the extra passenger, drove it to empty and drove at 65-70 mph he would have gotten the EPA rated hwy range of 295.5 miles confirming that the EPA ratings are correct.

Maybe one day an owner will do as that suggestion covers! Ideally, over a 3 or 4 day weather mix, 3 or 4 different routes with varied terrain.

But at least – this is a first of those such reports, and maybe current owners will take up the challenge and report their experiences as well!

Maybe someone will vary the test with 1-5 people in the vehicle, and empty to full luggage, as well.

It was an experiment! Use the information they attained for any of your future trips. Juice running low…slow down. And who gives a rip if the big rigs pass you up, it’s not a competition.

Anybody else notice that the picture of the car at the end showed that the Aero wheel covers had been removed. Wonder if they drove it that way cause they didn’t show the car when they turned around and drove back. Aero’s are supposed to give another 10% range!!??

“Aero’s are supposed to give another 10% range!!??”

I don’t think the claim for 10% additional range was ever believable. A test by an actual owner showed ~4% additional range (see link below). Perhaps not a truly scientific test, but some effort was made to eliminate random variables, and very likely that is far closer to the real figure than the improbable 10% which Tesla claimed.

However, it’s bizarre that Bjørn Nyland would do a range test at highway speed with the aero wheel covers removed. That’s not a proper test, and as much as he knows about Tesla cars, he should certainly know better.

As to the 10% benefit, I understood that to be a 10% improvement in drag reduction, not simply a 10% range increase.

Since the car is generally already quite slippery, with a Coefficient of Drag (Cd) of 0.21, at best it is a 10% improvement on that, taking it to about 0.19, at least that is what I related it too.

Do you have the quote handy that states that the Aero Wheel Covers give an Actual 10% More Range? It would be good if you could reply with a quote and a source linked here, as it would help in the relevance.

Cd of 0.21 was the target, actual was something like 0.23, and that is most likely in the best config with aero covers.

See my response to PP, below. I understand it is a 10% Drag Reduction, NOT a 10% Range Extension! Bit of a difference, that detail.

He also had 2 people in the car adding extra weight and had 2-3 kWh left in the “tank” which would have given him another 7-10.5 miles on top of the 311 for say 320 miles of range.

And this was not an EPA mixed test. He drove all highway miles even though it was under the typical highway speeds.

So basically the Model 3 is rated by the EPA at 295.5 miles hwy and Bjorn got 320 miles hwy at slower speeds. If he traveled at 65-70 miles per hour he would have gotten closer to the EPA hwy range of 295.5 miles.

This test seems to more than confirm that the EPA ranges are correct.

The EPA test cycle highway speed is 60 MPH, so it’s still slower than the speed at which the vast majority of people drive on the freeway. So, the average driver should get a shorter range in freeway driving unless they’re using hypermiling techniques. And “hypermiling” doesn’t necessarily mean driving slow, either. There are many driving techniques which can be used to improve the energy efficiency of a car. For example, drafting behind a large truck when driving on the freeway will improve your range, whether you’re going 55 MPH or 70 MPH.

And the faster the Semi Trailer or Large Box Truck is moving, the easier it is to pull you along, just tuck in behind as he is picking up speed! It is easier than trying to penetrate the drag cone at 70 Mph!

Yeah; on that interstate, big rigs usually drive at 65 mph, and cars at 75 to 85 mph. I wouldn’t want to drive it for hours at 56 mph!

I certainly don’t drive either my MS or Bolt like that. It would be considered a form of hyper milling to drive that slowly. I am usually running at between 75mph and 80 mph on the freeways and even then I am frequently being passed. Drive it the way we Californians drive and see what kind of range you get. There are people that claim they get 400 miles of range from their Bolt but they limit their speed to 55mph. Good way to get rear ended by someone coming too fast and not expecting you to be going so slow.

He was attempting to simulate the mixed EPA rating by simply slowing down on the highway. The EPA rating for hwy driving in the Model 3 is 295.5 miles.

If he would have driven it to a completely empty battery (it had 2-3 kWhs left) he would have gotten an extra 10 miles. Drop off that extra passenger that weights 170 lbs. and he would have gotten even more range.

So driving at 55 mph in this scenario he would have gotten 320-330 miles of range as apposed to the EPA hwy rating of 295.5 miles.

I’m sure if he would have increased his speed from 55 mph to 70 mph then he wouldn’t have lost more than 25 or 35 miles of range from his 320-330 miles of range which puts it square with its EPA hwy rating.

By the way the EPA hwy rating test isn’t pushing it at 75-85 mph. So it would be expected to be lower than the EPA hwy rating of 295.5 miles if you drive it that fast. This is true for any car’s mpg or range ratings.

John says “Drive it the way we Californians drive”, proving that CHP is missing Billions in Speeding Ticket Revenue!

No wonder they have revenue challenges and are charging EV owners a Fee now for lost revenue! You dudes and dudettes are ALL breaking the Law, and Proud Of It! ;÷)

I make that run all the time, by car and by airplane (Harris ranch also has an airfield). That run was made for a Tesla, you go at the (real world) speed of 75-85, and charge at Harris ranch, and arrive with plenty of charge for LA.

Notably, this is the area with NO CCS chargers. Nope, none.

No CCS? I’m Shocked! Shocked, I say! Dumfounded! Amazed!

So Ford, GM, FCA, VW, MB, and all those other proponents of CCS have not ensured that their buyers would be able to drive this route, some 5+ years after Tesla Drivers could do it? Shocked, I say!


No surprise then that Even in CA, the Land of Electric cars built and sold just to get CARB Credits, so they can keep selling their ICE Pigs and Fuel Swillers, they won’t even spend ONE Super Bowl Ad worth of investment in a CCS supported Corridor for their products!

If these, suposed ‘American’ Auto makers continue to support Non American sourced Fuels, the Trump should put the Mexican Squeeze on them! Make Them pay for the wall at the Mexican Border!

Ford won’t even Build their EV’s in America, with American Labour! How’s that for a Slap in your face, courtesy of FORD?

The route driven in the video is a portion of one I’d likely drive frequently. The posted speed is 70 (~115), but traffic moves closer to 80 (~130). A real test for the vehicle would be at the posted speed limit instead of the truck speed. I had a hard time watching them on I-580 in the middle lanes going 55 (~90), that’s usually grounds for drivers to get aggressive at you.

I’m sure they charged the car to full after the drive. Would certainly be nice to see how long it took and how many Kwh went back in.

Lame test. Actually kind of disappointing on range. Given they had ideal conditions, I would have thought they would have done better.

I’d like to see the test repeated, at 70 mph with aero covers on the wheels.

It fits with the EPA ratings though so it isn’t a disappointment. The Model 3 isn’t rated at 310 miles hwy only. It’s rated at 295.5 miles hwy only. And the EPA doesn’t rate the range by using only 96% of the usable battery capacity like he did in this test.

If he would have driven it until it used that last 2-3 kWhs remaining in the battery then his result would have been 320-330 miles at that 55 mph speed. I think if he drove 65 mph and dropped off his extra passenger then he would have easily exceeded the EPA hwy rating of 295.5 mph.

So speeding up to 75 mph would probably still put him in the range of the EPA hwy rating still.

“Given they had ideal conditions, I would have thought they would have done better.”

It certainly was not ideal conditions, with one or two passengers in the car (extra weight) and the aero wheel covers removed.

I’m disappointed in Bjørn’s carelessness here; I think he usually does far better than this in his testing.

Whiners and haters aside, notice that this test run almost exactly matches up with the EPA ratings.

Would love to see the same test at 70 MPH

70 Mph! Why not 100-110 Mph? I drove about 80% of a tank of fuel at those speeds, once, in England, back in 1984, on the M74 & M6, from Glasgow to Manchester! It’s amazing how fast you can drain your tank!

So what is your EPA Range on your ICE vehicle like, compared to your 70 Mph ‘Real World’ range? Even using cruise control?

The ideal comparison would be to have the Model 3 and Bolt drive together, one following the other with the same driving pattern.
I just finished a test period on my year old Bolt over a week driving like grandma. Gentle on the streets and 60 mph on the highway, ending at 246.6 miles with 25 estimated to go. It would be interesting to see what I’d get if I could force myself to keep it at 55 mph.

And have it actually be the $35k SR Model 3 while they’re at it, since that would be the one most comparable in price. Oh wait, they can’t because the SR Model 3 doesn’t actually exist yet. But honestly, that is what I really want to know, whether the Bolt actually has more highway range driving normal speeds than the EPA comparison (238 Bolt vs 220 Model 3 SR). I just wish I could get the EPA range in the Bolt. If I keep it at 65 mph on my commute here in the Bay area in interstate 580 and 80, my true range is 200 miles.

So, with your own math of 200/238 = 84% of EPA Range, times 220 miles for the standard range Model 3 = 184.8 miles!

Considering it has better Cd (@ 0.21) than the Bolt EV (@ 0.32), the Bolt EV would face a higher drag penalty at your higher speeds, so the Model 3 may even come closer to you typical 200 miles.

I would toss out a guess at about 195+ miles on a good day, maybe 190 miles on a less than good day.

Some good news, though, your Bolt EV might actually have a better Cd, at 0.308, instead of 0.320! As this artcle states, the Bolt EV Highgway EPA # is actually 217 miles! That means, you need to adjust your math to 200/217 = 92% of EPA range is your result! It also suggests at least 202 Miles for the Model 3 might be possible (@ 92% x 220 Range)!


Anyway, the most important number, often hard to find, is the CdA, which takes the Vehicles profile and Air Displacing factor into consideration. The tall but skinny Bolt may be not far off from the lower but wider Model 3, in its Area profile aspect.

Here’s some more whining, ..

He says they are using “air conditioning” (1:06/17:22) but you can see the cabin temp is set to 22 deg while the OAT is 15 (or 16). So it’s unlikely that the A/C compressor is running.

It will still need to operate occasionally to keep cabin humidity in check but, yeah, not a large draw.

Looks like they did not have the aero wheel covers on? That could have been made it easier to reach 310 with more juice or driving a higher speed.

Basically this tells us what we already know: EVs are great urban/suburban runabouts but still marginal as highway cruisers.

Highway speed is 70-80 mph; testing at 55 (or 65 for that matter) is kind of silly.

So, if everyone is, as you suggest, simply writing the rules for themselves, and no one is obeying the speed limits, as posted, they ALL think the laws don’t apply to them, we are losing a TON of Speeding Ticket Revenue, everywhere! Maybe each vehicle on the road. In the area yoy live in should just pay a default Annual Speeding Fine, equal to not less than 2x per day, x 220 days per year x the price of a local Speeding Ticket, upon plate sticker renewal? Payment plan available (if you cant afford the lump sum payment!), of 25 x2 x X$ (with X$ = the Per Speeding Ticket Fee, where you register your vehicle!), for those short on Room on their Credit Cards! Oh, and include this fee on the list of items excluded from coverage or Bankruptcy Protection, like Child Support, and Student Loans! With So many Highway deaths attributed to excess Speed, this could cut the ‘CARnage’ by 60% to 80%! If you absolutely can’t pay, you loose your Drivers Licence Privileges for one year, and if you still drive, you loose your car, and get free accommodation, in the overcrowded Prisons! 1 year should be… Read more »
Another Euro point of view

Not bad for an EV. Just came back from skying family holiday trip last week (Luxembourg -Champéry (Switzerland) – Luxembourg). 1120 km (695 miles) in total. Used one single tank (65 l). So did not have to worry about fuel the whole holiday week. I trust EV will make it & am excited about it but have to admit that for some uses “old”/dirty technology is hard to beat.

Pretty sure Switzerland is famous for Skiing resorts! What’s a Skying Resort? Is that an Astronomical Observers Dream Resort?

Another Euro point of view

Should I have written “skiing holiday resort” ? What’s the name you give to a place like Aspen Colorado where people mainly go for skiing holidays ? English is not my first language (neither my last).

Well, I did get 700 Kms befor fuel warning, running at 5.2 L/100 Kms, in my 2004 Prius, in January, and 770 Kms to dry (engine quit), but I only had a 40 Litre Tank! So, in your case you burned about 5.8 Litres per 100 Kms! Oh, the joys of carring a full days worth of fuel! But did you not Eat, or stop anywhere to use the facilities (restroom/ washroom/ toilet, etc!)? And how long were you stopped at each place? Did they all use a Coal Oil Lantern, or did they not have Electric Power there? When you really consider, Electric Vehicles are not even 10 years since first appearing for sale, commercially, and that includes all the way back to the Tesla Roadster, with about 50-70 miles less range than this Model 3, and if you start at the next, first volume production vehicle, with decent range, the Model S 85 kWh item (265 miles range), this Model 3 Beats that also by 45-55 Miles Range, and that is only 5 years later than the Model S arrived on the scene! The Bolt EV came from GM, some 14 years after the ending of Leases only… Read more »

I have done 1500 miles at 78 mph with autopilot and recharged at night, diner at 300 mph… absolutely no problemo with long run in highway with my Tesla S.

Another Euro point of view
With all due respect, the “no problemo” situations of the current 1% EV drivers usually contain most the reasons why the other 99% of car drivers are still driven away from EVs when buying a car. This is why I see super/hyper fast charging (+/-10 minutes 80% charge) as making or braking EVs in the future for anything more than say 4% car market penetration. Here a list of the “problemos” I see. 1/ at least in Europe your Model S, because of its price VAT included, would appeal to maybe 2% of car buyers max, probably less. 2/ your car, not you, decided where you would have dinner on the road. Fine for you, not sure about the other 98-99%. 3/ in all Europe at least family holidays is still very much a car thing (transporting gear/cost effective for a family), so bit exodus of millions/hundred thousands of people on the road, notably during the skying period in some areas. Should cars like Model S cost half as much (let say EUR 35K) and people would buy them “en masse”. How many superchargers would be necessary along the way during those peak holiday time ? Currently in Europe family… Read more »
A great many people ‘Learn to Fly’, get a Private Pilots License, and yet, never buy a plane! Why? Most of all your reasons above! Planning is required! Weather must be checked! Luggage must be limited! If not rated for flying at night, daylight hours must be adhered to in flight planning! However, these same reasons that exist, people still rent planes to fly such trips, even with those other limits of buying, which adds insurance, hangaring or tie down fees, expensive maintenance and annual inspections, etc! As to cars, even with just an ICE car, I have Rented a car for a 10,000 Km trip (Toronto, ON to Oshkosh, WI, to Presideo, TX, to Toronto, ON!), and I wasn’t having a leased car at the time! I would bet, that few people who own an ICE Vehicle, that are not flying commercial, have even noticed how close to home they could rent a Minivan, Station Wagon, or SUV, for the 1-2 long trips per year they take with all their stuff! Really, we are already living in the period of the Zombie Apocalypse, the way people operate without thinking! As per your question: “Should they decide to stop, one… Read more »
Another Euro point of view

Indeed all is possible and have no doubt that in a near future (5 years-10 years from now) we will have ultra fast charger network with the needed number of stalls that will allow the Euro style mass holiday exodus. But my point here is; it will take time and likely a sharp improve of current battery technology. Current technology won’t make it past 5% except in Norway and China for reasons I exposed above.

It’s a model 3 so I expect 333 mile range. A lot of our highways are 55 mph and I go just under at 53-55 to actually be under the limit!
My 3 is due any day since I did the CONFIG on line with 15 days ago.

The folks that always drive 70-80 probably never get off Interstate Freeways much, plus they likely Speed a lot!

311 miles and change at 55 MPH and not too cold temps sounds really low to me so perhaps as others have hinted the aero wheel covers make a really big difference at highway speeds. I will be curious to see more real world tests with the aero wheel covers and at the speed limit (65 – 75 MPH on the highways I drive). 300 miles at 70MPH is the minimum range for me to replace my Volt with a BEV. I do a fair amount of 160-220 mile round trip day trips to parks with no charging infrastructure so I need enough extra range to not worry about stuff like rain or headwinds.