Without the ability that Tesla has to send these kinds of amendments OTA, I doubt it'll happen - if indeed it is a miscalculation. I'm still holding out for the computer needing more data. How much, I don't know, but my sense is that after a few fill-ups, some of these wacky numbers will begin to normalize themselves - or at least tend toward some center or mean.
Unfortunately I don’t think it’s likely these numbers will refine over time. I think the underlying programming of the system is just wrong. If it was something the computer ‘learned’ over time, I think even at this point some of us would have seen some improvement. That doesn’t seem to be the case. Now with that said, I see no reason why a dealer-installed firmware update couldn’t be applied. I’ve updated several of our cars Navs with map and firmware updates via USB. I recall the dealer applying a firmware update to our Acura TLX to mitigate a rough shifting transmission. So it can be done, but I doubt Honda will think it’s important enough to bother. I have little doubt that if the Clarity were OTA-update capable, like our Teslas, we probably would have seen the update already.
I've got over 2100 miles on mine, including two HV trips of 190 miles and 700 miles, and it is settling down a bit - 52 EV and 295 HV at moment with full charge and tank, a big improvement over my 700 mile total range early on. I just haven't been paying close attention because I "just drive it" and recharge every day or 2. LOVIN' IT but for radio issues (tune into the Issues thread for details).
That’s encouraging, dstrauss. It’s the first report of an improvement over time. We’re in need of a fill up today, only our second in about 2200 miles. I’ll report back on how the range looks after the fill up.
I would call that a bit better than just "settling down". Those are the numbers you should have. Was this right after filling up after one of those longer hv trips? I have a feeling it gives better results after emptying the tank in one go in hv rather than using the gas in small increments over time in between ev drives.
Yikes, mine is getting worse! Honda really needs to do something about this loony algorithm. It's just whacked. I took a shot of my new range after I just filled up today. I mean, good grief, base the HV range on the EPA estimate of 42mpg or something close to that. That's just a no-brainer.
I have had my Clarity for a month (about 800 miles) now and it usually says 47 miles electric; 380 gas for a total of 427. In an effort to understand how the 5 modes and the Econ, Sport, HV buttons really work (I originally thought they were like old radio physical detent push buttons!) I went into the thick online manual. There are good clues starting on page 11. The interesting thing, however, is the description starts with the name: "Honda Sport Hybrid." Doing some research on the web I discovered that this is a somewhat different car sold in other countries such as Malaysia. There are good descriptions of its drive-train on the web. My operative theory is that Honda developed and tested the drive-train technology on that car and then moved it over to the Clarity. In the process, they may not have changed some of the computer parameters which predict range for the evolved US model. This should be a simple software change (due to interactions, testing needs and deployment strategies, no software change is ever simple.) So, if Honda is listening, we may eventually see this mileage over-forecasting fixed in a future software update. Cheers,
I would love to have a stated gas range of 380. How would you like an absurd predicted range of 1,000 miles as my picture depicts? Our typical usage is electric only, recharge and use electric again. It’s only the occasional longer trips, where the ICE kicks in after the depletion of the charge. I don’t think there’s anything unusual about that driving behavior and certainly nothing to give a 1,000 mile ICE range. Honda really needs to fix this. A very simple change in the algorithm that uses something close to the 42mpg EPA estimate, would render a far far more accurate predictor.
I wish I could be as impressed. I've never had a car where I needed a dartboard to 'predict' my range. I called Honda and they have no idea.
Interestingly, my range has never seemed unreasonable. On a full charge, it usually shows 29 mi of electric range and about 290-315 gas for a total of about 320-350. Never seen any outlandish numbers. But then, maybe even those "reasonable" numbers are inflated in my subzero climate.
After reading this thread and experiencing similar symptoms myself, I'm starting to wonder if we might be reading the gauge wrong. Is it possible that it takes average EV usage into account when calculating the HV range? I.e. could drivers who do a significantly higher percentage of their driving in EV mode get a higher range for a tank of gas? That would be consistent with my experience. My first couple tanks gave me ~340 miles of range. But after 2500 miles of mostly EV use, my last tank jumped up to 650 miles. Not especially intuitive, but maybe it's deliberate. Could that be what's going on here? Seems especially feasible when you see that it does support ranges in the 4-digit range.
That's a very interesting theory, and much in line with an engineer's view instead of a layman's. However, if that is the case, that needs to be remedied quickly, as some poor soul is going to get stuck in the middle of the desert, having run out his 7 gallons of gas but showing he has 500 miles to go (range-wise).
It's quite possible and it's not the first time that theory has been suggested. However, if that's the underlying concept behind these numbers, then they are totally mythical and Honda should have known that. There's zero relationship between electric & gas range. Zero. Why the electric usage should be factored into the gas range is something that's beyond me. It's wrong and our numbers clearly reflect how wrong it is. Gas range is gas range and electric range is electric range. It's just frustrating that Honda failed in something that we've taken for granted as long as we've been driving cars, a semi-accurate estimate of your remaining range.
We need a different data set folks - how accurate is the actual fuel gauge? At the mid-point of the tick marks do you have 3.5 gal left, or 2.5, or 4.5? Seriously, we know it averages "around" 40 mpg HV mode, so shouldn't we rely on the gauge for fuel mileage and the EV range for battery life? I always assume I can go 250 miles on a tank, worst case, without running completely out. If the linear gauge supports that, then I'm just going to ignore HV range estimate until they get a software fix.
That may be a big factor. The ICE in or car comes on so seldom there is little data for an algorithm to work with. The engine may have come on three or four times, for just a couple of minutes each time, since December.
Again, mine is just a theory, but if it's correct, the HV range should constantly adjust in real-time. I.e. once that guy drives into the desert and runs out of EV range, his HV range should continually adjust as he uses gas. Still a problem, considering the range would plummet as he's driving. But then, theoretically at least, it should never show 500 miles of range when he's actually out of gas.
But there's no need for personalized data for this purpose. A 'couldn't be simpler' algorithm, that uses nothing more than the EPA estimate, is all that's required. What could be easier? It sure as heck is easier than this convoluted, hideously inaccurate, 'formula' that Honda is currently using.
But if that was true, it would go back to it's absurdly inaccurate ways once you began a greater electric use. This is simply a poor underlying formula and all the excuses we can come up with, don't adequately excuse its usage. I had a friend in the car yesterday and he was very 'impressed' with the 1,000 mile range the car was reporting. I was somewhat embarrassed to say the car's reporting was totally wrong and not even close.
