There is nothing ‘wrong’ with your car’s energy consumption. I never said there was. I simply registered my surprise at the higher consumption than I would have expected, based on most others’ comments in regards to my own consumption. It surprised me that it didn’t have better performance in those conditions, nothing more, nothing less
It’s goes without saying that 41.4 is better than 45? Not sure what you don’t think I ‘get’. In my experience, an average speed of 45 mph over 140 miles is not normal ‘highway speeds’ over a majority of the drive. You obviously had some very slow speeds to offset the 70+mph 95% majority highway. But that is neither here nor there.
My comment was simply stating I was surprised the energy consumption was that high in mild weather and a sedate average speed. I would expect better performance in milder weather (because pretty much everyone has stated as such).
That is great that you are pleased with that performance and it is in line with your expectations. That really is a good thing for you.
By the way, if you were to achieve that 41.4 over the entire usable capacity of the battery, you should be able to cover about 205 miles. That isn’t bad, but I would hope to be able to do that at sustained highway speeds, in which the average speed for the trip would be closer to 65-70mph. Sounds like the Tesla roadster will be able to do that easily.
Um, not a real significant difference between 196 mi. and 205 mi. total range, unless you have very "fuzzy math." And the new upcoming 2020 Tesla Roadster will be priced at $250k in very limited production, so it's like comparing apples to oranges. I'll pass on that one for now...guessing you will also do the same, lol! Would you also like to compare and discuss the new Rimac C Two as well?