what tires ?

I am curious about the tires as well, the temperature in the car was set a bit higher on the highland. There is also the factor of being broken in, highland is brand new, might get better after some kilometers on it. I would also try and do it with a car scanner, you can get exact numbers, different tesla operating system versions might be reporting consumption differently. The difference is so small, it could also have been, for instance, how much time you were waiting to cross the road to do the loop, or before you actually started driving. Don't take any of this as criticism, it's almost impossible to make a totally apples to apples comparison, and this one was probably as best as it can be done, so A for effort. And who knows, Tesla could be talking out of their arse and the highland is less efficient due to more weight.

@@rundmc5554Nokian Hakka R5 EV on Highland and Nokian Hakka R3 on the 2021. Both studless Nordic winter tires.

Do both cars have LFP batteries?

None of them have that. They both use NCM batteries. @@richardbuckingham4329

I suspect so too. Thanks for the insight!

Do you think the nova wheels at 19inch will get the same efficiency as the 18inch pholon wheels

⁠ ​​⁠@arrrrr9831 physics says no, here's why; 1. Weight: Larger wheels are usually heavier. More weight means the car's engine has to work harder, using more energy. 2. Rolling Resistance: Bigger wheels can increase the contact area with the road. This leads to higher rolling resistance, again requiring more energy to move the car. 3. Aerodynamics: Larger wheels affect the car's aerodynamics, reducing efficiency. 4. Inertia: Bigger and heavier wheels have more rotational inertia. More energy is needed to start and stop their rotation, especially in city driving where there's a lot of stopping and starting.

This doesn't matter. Tesla claimed that Highland is more efficient.

There's the problem....Teslas claims.

Yes, this video ended up being a better comparison than my actual sound test video due to the camera and mic placement.

Sentry mode was not on, it does not matter for driving though.

Interesting, was wondering if the battery etc might be different.

@@hakis86 same battery they use in highland they should use new one better

No, I did not find them distracting in my test drive.

Tried to drive in a similar matter. Of course it could have been a difference here, that’s why we need longer tests(more km), but I didn’t have time. My conclusion is that there are no major efficiency improvements, but that my test is a bit inaccurate.

The Highland uses Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 EV tyres, the legacy uses Nokian Hakkapeliitta R3 tyres. Both are studless.

You're wrong. All the reviews have shown an upgrade in materials throughout the entire interior. There's also many minor improvements that add up to a lot.

So just to be clear, you are suggesting that the following are not an upgrade and are cost cutting only: Rear screen Perforated and more comfortable seats Bigger rear armrest Ventilated front seats Better mics More speakers Better WiFi connectivity Better quality interior materials Smaller screen bezels Dual powered trunk struts for smoother action/better panel gaps Ambient lighting Double pane glass in the rear Noise reduction Better suspension All I will say is that you don't seem to have thought this through lol

The 2024 LR model does not use LFP battery. You are wrong.

Nope. Very happy with my Model 3 LR 2021. If I were to upgrade, I’d hope for a performance version, maybe built in Berlin? Not considering it at the moment though!

The Highland has 18 inch wheels like you can see in my driving review.

Might make a difference, but this test is only to show if there is a major improvement, which there are not.

@@RoamingNorwayyou’re probably right. Be that as it may, you make some GREAT videos.

Each car had 2.9 bars of tire pressure.

I meant to say Norways longest but I think it’s one of the world longest as well…

Yes, the difference might be close to none, but that is exactly what is dissapointing.

@@RoamingNorwayWelcome to Tesla marketing BS. LOL

It's a very good number to make conclusions.

@@tdome3000 You do not have idea what you are talking about. Consumption in the test is measured as average per 100km on 50km distance. This is 2% measurement error by definition. Well you have 2% difference with 2% error. Basically you know nothing about the real difference. I.e. there is no difference. In that sense the number is good.

@@xdenser You should have paid more attention in elementary school, because you don't even understand what you youself are writing. One conclusion of the 2% difference is that the Highland was not more efficient in this test. Your mommy must tell you every day what a smart kid she has.

@@tdome3000 Oh i.c. we have very fat troll here.

Both have 18 inch tires. Highland has Aero covers, while the Legacy does not.

@@fmm1000The Highland is the one with aero covers, and it performed worse. I agree with everything else you said.

Fan boys clutching at straws...

Wh/km is calculated per kilometer, it doesn’t really matter how far you drive as long as the route is the same. Second point, it’s not 1 km difference, it’s just that the testing route is on the edge of 53km.

@@RoamingNorway Yes, it does matter. Tesla are known to show more distance travelled than the reality. This is why all tests where EV efficiency is involved are all using a set distance (usually the Google Maps one) then the efficiency is corrected as necessary. You decided the benchmark is the Highland : 53 Km. The method presented by me is the right one to do in the given situation. And Tesla computes the Wh/km from the kWh used over the km registered as travelled. In your case once it registered 53 km, in the other case it registered 54 km, using the same kWh quantity.

@@voldar70It’s the exact same route in all the tests, but it’s on the edge of 53 km. The efficiency was no different at 53 km, the entire route is filmed.

@@RoamingNorway Yes, but you don't understand my point. Tesla presents the Wh/km using a simple math : kWh used / km driven registered by the car. The Tesla 2021 is known to overreport the distance travelled by 2%. Check Bjorn Nylan videos. It looks like the new 2024 Tesla solved this problem. 2021 reported 54 km travelled, 2024 reported 53 km travelled. 53/54 = 0.98 --> exact the 2% difference I was referencing. So, to compare apples to apples, not to oranges, you have to adjust the efficiency of the Tesla 2021. 158 Wh/km + 2% = 161 Wh/km which is the same efficiency as the Tesla 2024. This seems totally reasonable, given the fact that you drove 50 km only and the 2024 has the same powertrain as the 2021, only the drag coefficient is better. At 110 km/h and this short distance, the drag coefficient has no real impact.

@@voldar70 Ok now I get what you are saying. I know about that issue. This is a test with flaws because of multiple factors. It was what I could do with the limited time I had, and it still shows that there are no magical improvements.

I drove the same average speed in both tests. You can check the clock in the video.

Your “current drive” numbers on the screen have nothing to do with the video. First drive took 53 km 34 minutes the second drive took 86 km 1.12 hours :)

Both 18 inch

The difference maybe comes from the tires