Spherical cows in a vacuum and all of that.
Telsa puts a bunch of work into estimating energy use for a given route using elevation data etc, it's why they have their own route planner (that you can also tweak the behavior of).
From memory the only thing that goes into the "range" calc is current temperature, it otherwise just has to assume averages for everything else without knowing the route a priori.
Using surface street numbers for that is....unhelpful, at best. It certainly doesn't help the Windows computer hoi polloi feel as if they have gotten what they paid for.
“Charge” = total energy which is useful for charging but not specific route planning.
“Range” = charge * temperature which is a useful benchmark for known trips and drivers. The specific number isn’t as important vs knowing you can do regular trips between known locations in X units. ie you can commute 4 more days without charging.
“Remaining charge at destination” = most accurate route planning but requires a specific route and external temperature.
Strong disagree here. When doing a trip we always use the nav computer so we always have the real number. (If only so the kids can look at the computer to see the number rather than asking "how much longer" continuously).
OTOH, in town we generally don't, so the top number being accurate for in town driving is very helpful.
This was a quote from an unnamed employee in the article “...when the battery fell below 50% of its maximum charge, the algorithm would show drivers more realistic projections for their remaining driving range...”
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-ba...
If it bothers you so much, go into your app and change the settings to show percentage on the top rather than range. Myself I find it much easier to mentally convert theoretical range than battery percentage (heuristics like subtract 20% for cold, etc).