Official EPA Ratings For Refreshed Tesla Model S – 90D Range Is 303.2 Miles Highway


Refreshed Tesla Model S

Refreshed Tesla Model S

When Tesla unveiled the refreshed Model S, aside from the new looks, what really caught our attention was the significantly improved range figures for the freshened Model S 90D. But it wasn’t until we accessed the EPA’s secret vault of detailed ratings that we came across the real headline grabber…The refreshed Tesla Model S 90D goes 303.2 miles on the highway on a single charge, a remarkable achievement that’s largely due to its aerodynamics.

The new 90D was listed by Tesla at 294 miles of range, versus the old 270-mile EPA rating (which was actually based on the 85 kWh car – the 90 kWh version was not originally re-tested/certified for greater range via increased battery capacity) and Tesla’s previous 288-mile estimate.

Meanwhile, the P90D version of the refreshed Model S was listed at 270 miles, versus the old 253-mile EPA rating, which was consistent with Tesla’s own earlier estimate.

Below is a look at the official EPA figures (with city/highway) for the 90D and P90D versions of the refreshed Model S.

s 90d

Range Figure Listed At Far Right – City/Highway/Combined – The Column Next To Range Shows MPGe Figures – City/Highway/Combined

As you can see in the graphic above, the refreshed Model S 90D now is rated to travel more than 300 miles on the highway on a single charge,

Here’s a look at the figures for the refreshed and old versions of the 90D and P90D (note: 2016 P90D is still incorrectly rated at 253 miles of range in image below):


Comparison of new 2016 versions of 90D and P90D Model S versus “old” 2015 versions.

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

94 Comments on "Official EPA Ratings For Refreshed Tesla Model S – 90D Range Is 303.2 Miles Highway"

newest oldest most voted

Excellent news, we now have a “regular” EV with a 300+ mile range! This is an important milestone.

Boom! 300 mile barrier broken! Nice.

Now for the Model 3 to push down the price of EVs. Crank up Gigafactory 1!

I am sure Tesla will make a good Electric car, but the after sale service is more important.
Here in Israel Renault decided it no longer replaces batteries
that degrade by over 50% in just two years.
And unfortunately most of the cars here seem to be having this problem
and that’s probably why they stopped!

I think that is a big achievement! Great work.

GO TESLA GO…gas guzzlers can kiss your ARSE..LOL

I don’t know. What highway speed is used by EPA to calculated this EPA range ? Since this is the US I suspect it may be a speed you run a risk to be overtaken by a bicycle. In that case I wouldn’t bring this as enthusiastically as you do as the endemic econobox around where I live has a 600 miles + range at that speed for a 1/7 of the cost of that Tesla.
There are much better arguments to say that gaz guzzlers are finito, one of the best one is planet conservation.

well, at 45 mph it does 443 miles on a single charge so 303 miles is about 65 mph.

Good, thanks, I feared it could be 55mph.

So… you can do 56 mph on a bike?

No but I fear you could.

That depends on the bike…

“…endemic econobox around where I live has a 600 + miles range at that speed for a 1/7 of the cost of that Tesla.” That is not true at all. Most small hatchbacks have ~300 mile real world range which isn’t that far off from the Model S’s range. Taken from GCR’s test of the 2015 Honda Fit: “Its capacity is given at 10.6 gallons, but in our test, the fuel-warning light flashed on after 270 miles–one of the lowest ranges from full we’ve seen on any test. The EPA rates CVT-equipped 2015 Fit total ranges at 371 to 382 miles (the manual is a grim 339 miles), but we suspect owners will have to get used to riding around with the gas-pump icon lit to get much over 300 miles.” You seem to complain about the cost of a Tesla Model S yet ignore that fact that it is a large, beautiful premium sedan with high-performance, cool features, and advanced technology. It is totally worth the high price, and in the US, it outsells every single other vehicle in its price range and category. The $35-$85,000 est. Tesla Model III is much more affordable than the Model S which… Read more »

This is why I mentioned “around where are live” which is Luxembourg stuck in between France an Germany. In Europe the econobox averages 4.5l/100km at 90 km/h constant. As those usually have a gas tank of about 50 liters that gives 1250km range or +/- 650 miles range. Now if that econobox happens to be a diesel (50% market penetration in Europe) then is much more likely to have a +/- 800 miles of range at that speed. So 600 miles range would be for people driving with somewhat flat tires, 300 miles range would be for people enjoying old timers. Do not forget we pay a liter of gas at least $1.5 here, often more. Engineers are sweating blood here to make those cars as frugal as can be.–and-often-wrong

Are those “rated” ranges, or real life range? From talking to people who drive in Europe, their ecobox diesels rarely quite make it to 700 miles, even if they’re rated for 850. The European rating system is in terrible need of revision to be closer to real world driving conditions. So is the EPA system, but at least it isn’t as bad as NEDC.

If you drive constant 90km/h yes it will achieve those ranges, while city driving or driving 85 mph on highway then you need to divide those ranges by 1.5 I would say (for diesel, for gas even more probably).

Such a scam. I think you’re agreeing with gopher65’s point.

If you drive a 24kWh LEAF ~45 MPH constantly, you’ll go 138 miles.

Where are you going to do that? A test track?

Contrary to popular belief, it is actually quite possible to go 65mph. I will sometimes do it on long drives when I’m getting tired. I’ll pull into the right lane at a safe distance behind a semi, set the cruise control and not touch it for 100 miles. It can be done.

Well, that car looks awesome without a front plate nailed on it…

The front fascia and rear defuser redesign must be really improving the aerodynamics. Seems like what they did to the Model S, they did with their Roadster update a while ago.

Great that they broke the 300 mile range EPA figure. That has to help sales, and scare the c$$p out of other automakers with 100 mile or less BEVs.

The 100 mile BEVs are commuter cars that cost 15-20K after rebates on average…not $100,000 after rebates. I don’t think anyone is scared of this, besides luxury car makers, whom are already having their lunch stolen by Tesla.

My point was that Tesla is constantly moving the goal posts.

Who else has a 300 mile BEV?

Do we know the max battery size of the Model 3 yet? Early comparisons to the Model S, suggest the M3 battery pan is actually longer between the wheels, on their 35k car. Tesla hired one of the better known Lithium Ion researchers (Jeff Dahn), and they’ve continued to advance their battery chemistry, as well.

That should scare any ICE maker, who only sells compliance EVs.

Bad ass silent killer.

This is incredible.

All the competition that have been listing the range of their fantasy EV concepts as “300 miles” are going to have to rethink things. Back to the drawing board boys…. Tesla Motors beat you to it already! (AGAIN)

The EPA mystery meat… What exactly resulted in 303 miles? The range at 70 MPH, 55 MPH, 25 MPH, 5 MPH could be different by huge amounts, or they could be close (relatively speaking) due to it being very aerodynamic. What was the temperature and how hard was AC/heat used? Basically, we’re supposed to take their word for it like little kids.

Here’s even more weird; 2014 SparkEV has 21 kWh battery and 2015 has 19 kWh, yet the EPA rated range is the same for both cars. EPA range, truly mystery meat.

My 2015 SparkEV has a different motor than the 2014, much lower torque. Still amazingly powerful, but I suspect this is what made the difference, it’s possibly more efficient. The battery may also have more usable, less reserved to prevent degradation over time, I believe we changed battery suppliers and chemistry from 2014 to 2015 also. There’s a lot more to it than just 2kWh of potential energy.

At reasonable power levels, battery capacity is the only thing that matters. It may be that 2014 probably has more “reserve” as found by users, but not enough to account for 10% less capacity to result in same range. See my blog post on range variation “range polynomial”

Driving at 35 MPH, one could easily exceed 110 miles. Even with moderate AC, it would be over 90 miles. But if driven at 70 MPH with AC, it’d be 60 miles. So this EPA number is what? 65 MPH with no AC? 40 MPH with AC and windows open? I have no idea!

You criticize the EPA based on your ignorance. Go to the EPA website and answer your own questions.

You tell me. Go to EPA web site (see link in following post) and tell me how they arrived at that one range number. For a gas car where the efficiency sucks at low power, that might have some validity. For EV where you get almost 2X the range at lower speed, the EPA number is mystery meat.

Sort of agree. It wouldn’t hurt if we were more handy with the testing protocols, that arrive at high range EV values. That said, having had three (RWD and AWD) I’m pretty confident about getting rated range from a Tesla. Stay away from 70-80mph, if you’re inclined to try.

I’m starting to think the bigger story is supercharger saturation, and how much different a 75D MX proposition is today, versus a 60 MS just a couple years ago.

I have no doubt Tesla will reach the rated range. Question is how.

2014 SparkEV was rated 82 miles range yet 62 MPH resulted in 98 miles range. 25 MPH resulted in 140 miles. That single EPA number tells very little when the range can be vary by 50% or more.

Then 303 miles EPA number can get 450 miles at some speeds. That’s way too wide variation to peg it as just one number.

Stephen D said:

“You criticize the EPA based on your ignorance. Go to the EPA website and answer your own questions.”

Wow, what set you off? Do you work for the EPA?

It’s notable that the EPA keeps fiddling with its test cycles. I’m glad that they’ve improved their testing system to give something close to real-world ranges for EVs, and it’s too bad that their MPG ratings for gasmobiles are almost uniformly inflated.

But I wish the EPA would stop fiddling with the system. That makes it confusing when numbers change from year to year even when the cars don’t.

Exactly how the EPA arrives at its numbers is most certainly a valid subject for discussion here. Why get defensive about the methodology of EPA’s testing cycles, Stephen? Clearly they’re not satisfied with all of that, or they wouldn’t keep changing them from year to year.

Highway testing cycle:
Top Speed 60 mph
Average Speed 48.3 mph

What a joke testing. You will be run over by trucks doing 60 mph where I live. Better tell what is the range at more realistic 75-85 mph with AC on or heater on.

Too much effort to *read* the text, huh?

“Beginning with 2008 models, three additional tests are used to adjust the city and highway estimates to account for higher speeds, air conditioning use, and colder temperatures.”

The High Speed part of the test goes to 80mph.

Why are we turning into such a hostile group? There is nothing at this link providing the exact cycle that was run for 302 miles, and “goes to 80” mph says little about sustained highway driving range.

Neither EPA’s ‘Highway’, or ‘High Speed’ tests look like they come close to replicating range at 65mph.

For what it’s worth, the official Tesla graph which zzzzzzzzz linked to in his post below, shows the 2012 Model S85 getting 265 miles at 65 MPH… which exactly matches what the EPA rated it at, back when it was new.

Unfortunately, we know the EPA has changed its test cycle methods since then, so we can’t say the same for the current EPA range ratings.

Did you read the text yourself? This “high speed” sub-test has average speed of the same 48 mph, briefly going to 80 mph. And it is just subtest for “adjustment”. 48 mph is not the speed most people drive on highway outside some over-congested CA areas.

You may look at Musk/Straubel post how speed changes energy consumption to get an idea why they don’t advertise it much:
This 300 miles would get to 200-150 miles in less than ideal conditions at regular 80 mph highway speeds.

Purchasers of the vehicle who wish to barrel down the road at 85 mph with the ac or heater running, are perfectly free to do so. Those testing these vehicles as part of their jobs, are probably less inclined to ignore speed limits.

80 mph is legal speed limit on some US highways, e.g. in Texas and that is what EPA test reach for very short time. I’m not advocating exceeding speed limits and risking lives of other people, but on US highways limits are loosely enforced and most people drive at least 5-10 mph more, some more than that. Driving much slower than traffic is stupid idea either as you risk being rear ended.

130 Km/h (81 mph) and 120 Km/h (75 mph) is the standard freeway speed in most counties in Europe.
But the new Model S with improved aerodynamics will have a better autonomy versus speed curve as well, so the 307 miles will probably translate to more than 200 miles at 80 mph. Even so, 200 miles at that 80 mph will still bring you from Brussels to Paris on a single charge without stoping at any supercharger along the road. I think that is a fantastic achievement.

” Basically, we’re supposed to take their word for it like little kids.”

Right, just like with…every other vehicle the EPA tests. Which is, you know, every other vehicle.

People need to stop inventing special objections for EVs. You drive fast, you use more energy. In every car. Ever.

On a side note. I was shocked as could be when I took my 2017 Volt out for a range test a few days ago and got 69.2 miles on the highway at speeds between 60 and 70 mph. I really didn’t expect it to do that well. Granted it was 75 degrees outside, and my tires are at 40 psi. I still expected more like 50 miles, though.

69.2 miles at reasonable freeway speeds is awesome, David! Too cool.

Oh, and Go Tesla for breaking 300 EPA miles.
I can feel the air getting cleaner every day. But it’s still not fast enough.

69.2 all electric range?

69.2 miles all electric range? At what speed mph?

Was there tail wind? I got 6.4 mi/kWh over 60 mile drive in freeway a week ago. That would result in 110 miles range with SparkEV, and only explanation I have is tail wind.

I would imagine once the P100D is announced soon the official range will finally break the ‘300’ barrier and comfortably do more.

I doff my cap to Tesla !

So current Model S 90D owners get no love??

Critics: “I’m not buying an EV until they can go 400 miles on a charge.”

I can use 200 or 150 mile EPA range car just fine assuming it can be refilled in 3 minutes without dependence on some proprietary walled garden charging network. OK, I’m patient and can wait whole 15-20 minutes. No, I don’t need whole hour to make a pee.

Who cares about range if range is not the limit. Range is an issue when it is a limit when you must stop for long.

Well then, enjoy your gas car or Mirai (if you live in CA within a few miles of one of the very few hydrogen stations that can only do 1/2 fill-ups and completely paid for by the taxpayers zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Don’t let the door hit you on your way out as real progress is being made every day by Tesla.

I have nothing against battery cars. They are fine for city and around, don’t emit exhaust gas, have less noise pollution and so on. Just the idea that they are already perfect for long range highway travel is zealot lunacy so far. The same lunacy is idea that Musk is changing the world with his electron guzzler. To change the world you need much more than just quick & superficial transportation change, and transportation alone is close to 100 mln. car/truck production per year.

LOL zzzzzzzzzzz, I guess you didn’t read the headline then.

Tesla is rapidly moving the bar up and now has cracked the 300mile/483km barrier which is more then enough for long distance traveling while still excelling as a daily commuter too.

With the Model 3 pre-order count at over 400,000, EVs are about to take off into true mass-adoption with or without your prejudices.

I’m not going to prevent you worshiping your Musk or Tesla or whatever cult you want to join. I’m not against electric cars either. I’m just pointing to the fact that these 303 miles is achievable under conditions that have nothing to do with real life highway driving, and they are not guaranteed. You may make them one day and another day it may turn into 150 miles, and this is as you pointed out is “limit”, i.e. you need to stop and wait for long after reaching it. Regular folks (not fans) would be better renting a gas car for long cross state trips instead of relying on such over-enthusiastic advertising.

Spoken like a true gas worshipper, huh

C’mon zzzzzzzzzzzz, I take long distance trips all the time in my Model S, to the tune of around 32k miles worth now. It gets me a genuine 250 to 260 miles of range at 55 to 65 mph, with an 85kWH pack. I know I could get at least 295 miles out of a Model S 90D, and easily break 300 miles range if I keep it below 60 and watch the helpful range estimation calculator. I don’t need an ICE to hit the road.

zzzzzzzzzz said:

“I have nothing against battery cars.”

Funny, last time I looked, all Tesla made was “battery cars”, and you spend most of your posts at InsideEVs bashing Tesla and its cars.

“Just the idea that they are already perfect for long range highway travel is zealot lunacy so far.”

That might have more gravitas coming from someone who didn’t promote hydrogen-powered “fool cell” cars with zealot lunacy. FCEVs aren’t practical under any circumstances. Not even just driving around town. And worse, even aside from the impracticality, on a well-to-wheel basis they’re even more wasteful of energy than gasmobiles, and nearly as polluting.

BEVs are going to continue to get longer ranges and faster charging. Contrariwise, the laws of physics which make compressed hydrogen fuel wholly impractical and wildly expensive are never going to change.

Musk just iterated that the supercharger network is open to other manufacturers, IF they care to join.
I surmise that if you routinely drive 85 mph on the roads, then patience may not be your strong suit and an electric car may require too much of you.

He may iterate whatever he wants for his followers, but everybody knows that he had chosen to use proprietary plug in North America and it makes technically impossible for anybody to join. Actions speak better than words.

There is no American Standard charging head, and there is a divide between the choice of the J1772, CHAdeMO, or Mennekes connectors. None of those 3 connectors are capable of providing and DC quick charge (such as at a supercharger station) in their standard non-combo configurations. There weren’t really any good options available when the car hit the road in 2012. A J1772 adaptor is provided with the purchase of every vehicle, as it has become the most widely used charging head.

I don’t think Mennekes is an option in the US.
And this “not enough power” excuse was debunked many times before. You can have all the power you may use with existing open standard Chademo or CCS plugs in backwards compatible fashion. No need to fragment charging network by inventing proprietary plugs unless fragmentation is your goal. Example:

“For his followers”, really. Place the hyperbole back on the shelf, it’s completely pointless. NOTHING is stopping other manufacturers from using the network except themselves.
If another manufacturer is willing to support the network and their vehicles can handle the power, Musk says ‘welcome’.
As far as plugs go, how hard is it to make an adapter?

How silly, “adapter” LOL 😉 Maybe GM should just give a customer a roll of copper wire and tell to do connection yourself 😉

zzzzzzzzzz said:

“[Tesla Motors] had chosen to use proprietary plug in North America and it makes technically impossible for anybody to join.”

Really? Just how does inviting all other EV makers to join in the Supercharger network, and offering to let any of them use Tesla’s patents free of charge, amount to making it “technically impossible for anybody to join”? What a bastard that Musk is for being so open and inviting! [/sarcasm]

Just what more do you think Tesla Motors should do? If it offered to pay all the expenses for all the other auto makers to switch over to the Tesla plug, would that satisfy you?

I think not. Given your history of serial Tesla bashing, zzzzzzzzzz, you’d just move the goal posts again and find some other, even more absurd reason to pretend that Tesla is keeping other EV makers from using its charging format.

Tesla Model S owner here, not a critic.

Keep it coming Tesla, you’re getting closer.

500 miles range will completely replace an ICE vehicle driving long distance in the winter.

Meh. For the vast majority of people, going above 250 or so is just a waste of money. That covers most driving and the Superchargers can handle the rare longer trips. Adding more battery is just hitting those 1% situations with more money and more weight.

And a higher profit margin.
So if the 1% will buy, then why not sell it?Justin Bunselmeier?

Perhaps MikeG is suggesting that 500 miles of EPA rated range would give a BEV ~300 miles of real-world highway range in the winter, while running the cabin heater.

And there’s probably a good reason why gasmobile makers typically give their cars a gas tank big enough for 300 miles of real-world range. They probably wouldn’t do that if it’s not what most customers want. I think we EV enthusiasts need to recognize that, and admit that BEVs are not going to be fully competitive with gasmobiles until they have ~300 miles of real-world highway driving range.

However, even gasmobiles have a lower range in very cold conditions. So I don’t think a full 300 miles of range in frigid temperatures is mandatory to make EVs fully competitive.

To fully claim ICE parity, an EV would need to have 300 miles range for worst case scenario.
Worst case means cold temps, 40mph headwind in snow or slush.

To my knowledge, only econo-box diesels and pickup trucks with 30 gal tanks can go 500 miles between refills without hypermiling. 500 miles between charges is not reasonable, at least because most gas cars can’t go that far between refills.

Nor is it wise or safe to drive that long without a break…

Fwiw our Honda Odyssey can do 500+miles on one tank. There was actually a comparison on where they were trying to break 600 miles’s a 20 gal tank.

500 miles at 80 mph may be a notch too far but 400 miles at 80 mph will indeed put the last nail in the ice car coffin.

Wait and see the 100D.

I don’t know about any of you, but for me it’s the additional .2 miles over the 303 rated miles that sealed the deal. I wouldn’t buy it if it only had 303 miles AER!


Hey! You try pushing it up a hill 3.5 football fields long to get to a plug! 😉

I’m thinking that by the middle of next year, the 100 or 100+ packs combined with new cell size and chemistry, are going to make 300 miles old hat.

The Tesla pusher press is so desperated, that they must cherry pick a SUB-rating to make a new headline!

Wow, CSC is back to his/her whining after a long-away following the 400,000 Tesla Model 3 pre-orders!

I is not so ‘desparated’ as you be thinkded, your Counter-Strikiness!

Awesome but it’s just highway, needs 300+ combined…100D will be here soon enough…

The combined distance in a Tesla is actually much higher than the highway rated range. In fact, for city-only driving, you can go well above 350 miles of range.

Perception is reality, they need to be able to advertise that…

Not for EPA city cycles.

Maybe your stop/go city cycles are better due to regen. But EPA says otherwise.

The numbers are in the table above in the actual article.

When you go long distance it is usually on a freeway so that is at 130 Km/h (81 mph) in Europe. That is where range has the most importance. This explains why the cars must have outstanding aerodynamics because it really matters at 81 mph. In the past cars were made aerodynamic to have higher top speed, then to have lower gas consumption but today it is to have more range. This is the reason why the Model 3 will have an even better Cd than the Model S.

My guess is that this has more to do with having actual EPA tests rather than Tesla-supplied estimate based on the tested 85s. The refreshes were too slight to make that much difference in aerodynamics, as far as I can tell. Of course, there could have been a software tweak, as well, to improve energy usage.

1) I don’t care what the EPA EV test cycle specifics are as long as its applied consistently to all cars tested–I want to see differences with other EVs
2) I get closer to my Rated Range in my P85 than I have ever gotten on any of my gas cars, where EPA MPG numbers have seemed like pure fantasy

I don’t believe you one bit omar.. you do not achieve those numbers… you are getting only 80% you use the a/c and radio?,,, do you keep up with interstate traffic flow?? Do you engage insane?? You are not getting those numbers.. best Hj

Curious if the EPA range on the 70D will improve with the refresh as well.

If Steph Curry worked for Tesla, they would’ve went straight to 400.

Keep dreaming. .. it’s what reality comes from with work and multiple failures..

Will never get 303 routinely until battery size is increased to 115Kw .. these numbers are a pipe dream… have not seen higher than 285 at max charge on my 2016 MS 90D..and the car delivers only about 75% of that in real world driving from personal experience with 4000 linear miles on odo.. run the a/c.. stereo…do traffic flow speeds of 75-85 mph and that’s all you get..if that.. run the wipers.. headlights.. seat heater.. or cabin heat.. you’re lucky to get the 200 low end range.. the battery size must be 115-125Kw to actually deliver over 300 miles linear range with any comfort features enabled… click twice on my name to load my site @ Nj gas prices and check out my Tesla, home solar , etc…

I assume you just got your car? So you only experienced winter driving? Winter range suffers considerably due to three factors:
– Colder air is denser and results in higher aerodynamic drag
– Running the heater eats up energy
– At low temperatures the battery can store less energy.

This is why the Model 3 won’t get one of those purely aesthetic nose jobs that are floating around the internet as photoshops. The Shark Nose style is clearly being used for aerodynamics, and will be part of the Tesla design as long as it keeps helping their range numbers.

Bingo. It’s nice that the Shark Nose has a logical place to put the license plate with very little damage to the aerodynamics, too.