Tesla Model X not recognizing 2016 Sport 16 hookup

[AWCHIEF]

Interesting marketing concept. Seems it is being strongly fought by the other auto makers. Their high dollar lobbies are successfully getting laws passed halting their sale in some states.

[KJRitchie]

I've heard in Missouri the auto dealers are the main force fighting this. They are afraid if this becomes precedent then the other manufacturer could do the same, not so much their sales would be affected by Tesla.

Kelvin

[Unherdable]

Originally Posted by KJRitchie

That is only 140miles distance.

Yes, it is only 140 miles, but..... the "range" of a Tesla is really ideal conditions. When you load your car up with stuff, and people, and it's 105 degrees outside, with a headwind, oh and nearly 1000' of elevation change along the route, and... the speedlimit is 75mph, then suddenly your range doesn't seem so great. I had a message popup on my dash to reduce speed to 55mph if I wanted to make my destination. And this was after I had FULLY charged to 250 mile range in Wichita. 80mph in hot weather going up a hill hits the efficiency pretty badly.

[Unherdable]

Originally Posted by dasams

My Cayenne was produced in July, 2005 when Bosch had no idea that LEDs would replace incandescents so no surprise that I have this problem. But Tesla's loaded with talented software engineer so I'm really surprised that they missed this. Software update?

Actually, a lot of the systems in the Tesla are simply taken off the shelf from European manufacturers. The towing in the Model X for example, is the very same Bosch system in the Porsche/VW/Audi SUVs. Which is why, the same solution works to fix it. Unfortunately not a software fix in this case, it is a separate subsystem, unless Bosch provided a mechanism to update the firmware (if there is any update-able firmware in the subsystem).

[Unherdable]

Originally Posted by AWCHIEF

Curious, since Tesla has no dealerships where do owners take their cars for service and technical issues?

There are no "Tesla dealerships" in TX either. In TX, you buy your car online, and it gets shipped to a local "service center", with California temp registration. Then you get to sit at the local tax office to get it registered in TX, and pay the sales tax on the spot with cash or check.

The "service center" in TX is in theory not operated by Tesla Motors. They opened a new company local company that just happens to have the same name and logo. However, when you call for service, somebody in California answers the call. They then relay the information to the TX service center, and transfer the call or call you back. Other than that, it is just like going to the service department of any luxury car brand. They treat you nicely and give you a nice loaner. They also offer valet services, and can pick up or return your car to you at home/work.

[ohmman]

Just to add to this conversation, as a Tesla owner and enthusiast, I've been following the relatively few people towing trailers with Model Xs. I have posted extensively over at TMC but haven't chimed in here. I am nearing a decision on a Sport: 16' or 22FB.

I met with an owner who towed his 22FB about 6000 miles, from Northern California up through the Pac NW, across Montana, as far south and east as Oklahoma and Texas, and then back through Arizona and up. He and his wife were very comfortable with range, but also are both retired and didn't mind taking their time. Most travel days, they left camp with a full charge on the X and did just one Supercharger stop, then went to the next campsite. Some days they extended that with more than one Supercharger stop, but those appear to have been rare.

One interesting thing to note about the two Sports is that the 16' has a 96" width, but the 22' has a 87.25" width. Because the width of the Model X is about 81.5" not including mirrors, all of that extra width contributes to the frontal area. At highway speeds, aerodynamics has an outsized impact on range compared to weight, so I'm curious if the 22' will have a more reasonable towing range compared to the 16'. At least until one hits the mountains...

Personally, I prefer the layout of the 16'. I like the dinette tucked into the panoramic windows and don't really like a dinette facing the galley. But the dry bath, bigger bed, bigger galley, etc. are all very nice features as well.

Any feedback on the aero impacts between those frontal areas is welcome!

[Unherdable]

Originally Posted by ohmman

I met with an owner who towed his 22FB about 6000 miles, from Northern California up through the Pac NW, across Montana, as far south and east as Oklahoma and Texas, and then back through Arizona and up. He and his wife were very comfortable with range, but also are both retired and didn't mind taking their time.

Yes, I have also met people who tow, and the common theme appears to be the speed at which they tow.... 45 - 50mph, with around 500Wh/mi if they are lucky. Personally, I think it is far too dangerous to be plodding along an interstate at that speed. Perhaps if one avoided the interstates.... Also it appears that the 22" wheels have quite the negative impact as well.

One interesting thing to note about the two Sports is that the 16' has a 96" width, but the 22' has a 87.25" width. Because the width of the Model X is about 81.5" not including mirrors, all of that extra width contributes to the frontal area. At highway speeds, aerodynamics has an outsized impact on range compared to weight, so I'm curious if the 22' will have a more reasonable towing range compared to the 16'. At least until one hits the mountains...

I did not know that! That would explain my atrocious range! I find that on a full charge I am lucky to make 115 miles pulling my 16. On top of this, with about 10k miles on the clock, my original 250 mile range is now 235 miles........ Yes, it makes sense to me that the 22' may likely be a more efficient pull than the 16'. I was forced to go with the 16' due to the 22" wheels, which lowers the tow rating.

We actually have a Bowlus Road Chief on order too. It is a 24'er, but has a much smaller frontal surface area than the Airstream. We will be keeping and using both the bambi and the bowlus....

[ohmman]

Originally Posted by Unherdable

Yes, I have also met people who tow, and the common theme appears to be the speed at which they tow.... 45 - 50mph, with around 500Wh/mi if they are lucky. Personally, I think it is far too dangerous to be plodding along an interstate at that speed. Perhaps if one avoided the interstates.... Also it appears that the 22" wheels have quite the negative impact as well.

The 22s will kill you. Most are driving at 55mph, which is often the actual speed limit for towing anyway. The consumption is about 575Wh/mi.

Originally Posted by Unherdable

We actually have a Bowlus Road Chief on order too. It is a 24'er, but has a much smaller frontal surface area than the Airstream. We will be keeping and using both the bambi and the bowlus....

I hung out with a Model X owner pulling a Bowlus as well, and toured the trailer. He has the Lithium+. Very cool trailer. It's narrow enough to fit inside of the slipstream of the X. He is able to get as low as 475Wh/mi at 55mph, and travels as fast as 65mph but with much degraded range. At your speeds, you're probably not going to do a whole lot better than you are with the 16'. Speed kills range.

My concern on the Bowlus is that I'm new to trailer camping, and it's possible I'll bail on the idea after a short while. The depreciation on those trailers is a big unknown. Depreciation on an Airstream is pretty predictable (and very limited).

[slowmover]

FWIW, rolling resistance is the chief factor in MPG to 45-mph. And then at 60-mph, aerodynamic resistance skyrockets. IOW, why the national speed limit was 55-mph.

MPG is measured in tenths for most of us. The principle applies with electric cars. I'd be having TT axle alignment verified (I don't think being off .25/inch is acceptable); as well as bearing pre-set and brake drag. Don't assume these are correct even if new. Verify.

Same for lash up of TT to TV. Be a good idea to use the three pass scale method (I linked years ago a chart by Ron Gratz from another site), and to start that process with the instructions by Andrew Thomson on his website at CAN AM RV.

Rough it in at home with the latter, and then get loads per axle (load per wheel best) with the 3-pass.

In fact, I'd consult with him on it after the above. No one knows more.

My own testing shows REAL effects in MPG when lash up not correct. ICE TV owners ignore this.

As a native Dallasite and third generation owner, there are plenty of great places to go on weekend trips in the area. Especially once summer is over.

[ohmman]

Originally Posted by slowmover

FWIW, rolling resistance is the chief factor in MPG to 45-mph. And then at 60-mph, aerodynamic resistance skyrockets. IOW, why the national speed limit was 55-mph.

MPG is measured in tenths for most of us. The principle applies with electric cars. I'd be having TT axle alignment verified (I don't think being off .25/inch is acceptable); as well as bearing pre-set and brake drag. Don't assume these are correct even if new. Verify.

Same for lash up of TT to TV. Be a good idea to use the three pass scale method (I linked years ago a chart by Ron Gratz from another site), and to start that process with the instructions by Andrew Thomson on his website at CAN AM RV.

Rough it in at home with the latter, and then get loads per axle (load per wheel best) with the 3-pass.

In fact, I'd consult with him on it after the above. No one knows more.

My own testing shows REAL effects in MPG when lash up not correct. ICE TV owners ignore this.

As a native Dallasite and third generation owner, there are plenty of great places to go on weekend trips in the area. Especially once summer is over.

Good feedback about the lash up.

You accurately describe the vehicle mechanics with regard to friction losses. Air resistance increases at the square of speed, so it's exponentially detrimental. There are some differences between an ICE and an EV from a drivetrain mechanics standpoint, though. ICE vehicles are tuned to obtain their best MPG rating at faster speeds. They are geared, and of course the engines work best in certain power bands. The EV powertrains are generally not geared (no transmissions) and have different efficiency curve. This old post by Elon Musk and JB Straubel shows the efficiency curve (and range) of the Model S. After about 35mph, things go south quickly. I dispute some of the numbers claimed in that pre-release document, having owned an S85 for 3 years, but the theory is sound.

Highly efficient TVs also appear to be impacted more negatively by the addition of a trailer. This phenomenon is exacerbated by the fact that charging takes more time than filling up with fuel, and that charging stations are not as ubiquitous.

But then, that's all part of the challenge.

[slowmover]

Yes, the trend begins downward with aero at 35, but RR is higher until 45.

The gap between TT and TV is a problem (big), as is the trailer height (more so than frontal area as those calcs assume a squared front). Height means more than trailer length, for example.

Mr Thomson is known for getting TT and TV as close as possible. Huge handling benefit (safety). This would be my focus. Kenworth and Cummins both cite steering inputs per 100-mikes travelled as measurable effect.

After that, thinking about aero add ons may help (see Tow Tector).

But be religious about mechanical. That's where your "tenths of a mpg " are hiding.

Look forward to seeing how things work for this crowd.

[Meeks]

Originally Posted by Unherdable

Yes, I have also met people who tow, and the common theme appears to be the speed at which they tow.... 45 - 50mph, with around 500Wh/mi if they are lucky. Personally, I think it is far too dangerous to be plodding along an interstate at that speed. Perhaps if one avoided the interstates.... Also it appears that the 22" wheels have quite the negative impact as well.



I did not know that! That would explain my atrocious range! I find that on a full charge I am lucky to make 115 miles pulling my 16. On top of this, with about 10k miles on the clock, my original 250 mile range is now 235 miles........ Yes, it makes sense to me that the 22' may likely be a more efficient pull than the 16'. I was forced to go with the 16' due to the 22" wheels, which lowers the tow rating.

We actually have a Bowlus Road Chief on order too. It is a 24'er, but has a much smaller frontal surface area than the Airstream. We will be keeping and using both the bambi and the bowlus....

I think it is so cool you are trying this out with your Tesla! Thanks for sharing your experiences!

[Glenritas]

An other option for a couple no taller then 5'8" would be a 16' Casita Liberty Deluxe.

At 6'6" wide and the A/C mounted low in the front closet this would be a great combo for the Tesla. The floor plan gives you a King size bed , a wet bath and a larger kitchen.
It weighs in loaded for travel around 3000 pounds.

I have a 13' Casita Patriot Deluxe same idea just smaller but no king bed. It weighs 2500 pounds loaded for travel. It even has Airstream logos on the front and rear

[Road Ruler]

The towing power that comes out of those Tesla's is impressive.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVXa6i3iqHw

[Elvis1]

I had issues with my TV not recognizing my trailer after I upgraded to LED lights, dummy loads didn't help much, but wiring a pigtail with a 194 bulb to each light circuit fixed it. You can make a box with 4 bulbs in it and wire it up to the breakout panel in the trailer where the connector terminates to... I've considered making a dummy load box I can flip a switch on to turn on and off in the vehicle to simulate the load of incandescent bulbs when I hook up a trailer with led lights. My TV is an '08 Range Rover Supercharged...