Introduction
Celebrating a milestone birthday often comes with treating yourself, and for me, turning fifty meant finally getting a Tesla. After years of driving older cars, I decided to embrace the Silicon Valley stereotype and purchased a long-range Model Y. With an advertised range of around 320 miles per charge, it seemed perfect for trips to Lake Tahoe, offering ample space for luggage and, importantly, my bike gear.
Wanting to keep the interior of my new car pristine and free from mountain biking dirt, I opted for the tow hitch installation from Tesla and invested in a Kuat Sherpa 2.0 bike rack. This setup seemed ideal for combining my love for cycling with my new EV.
Choosing the Kuat Sherpa 2.0 for My Tesla Model Y
The Kuat Sherpa 2.0 immediately stood out due to its lightweight design, weighing in at just 35 pounds. Compared to many other bike racks on the market, its sleek aesthetics were also a major draw.
Operationally, the rack is user-friendly and securely holds two bikes. However, it’s worth noting that the Sherpa 2.0 isn’t expandable for carrying more than two bikes, and it has a weight limit of 40 pounds per bike.
Currently, my primary bike, a 27 lbs Santa Cruz Chameleon C 29er, and my secondary bike, a 34 lbs Santa Cruz Blur LT, both fit well within this limit. However, the rise in popularity of electric bikes, which are often heavier, means I might need to consider a different rack in the future if I decide to upgrade to an e-bike.
Initially, I had slight concerns about my Chameleon’s longer wheelbase fitting on the rack. While the rear wheel extends slightly beyond the rack’s length, the robust tie-down strap ensures everything remains secure and stable during transport.
Investigating the Energy Consumption of Tesla Bike Racks
My primary curiosity centered around understanding how much a bike rack, especially when carrying bikes, impacts the energy consumption of my Tesla. Since I tend to leave the bike rack mounted on my car for convenience, even when not carrying bikes, I decided to establish a baseline energy usage with just the rack installed.
To accurately assess the impact, I planned two identical driving loops: one with bikes mounted on the rack and one without. This controlled experiment aimed to isolate the effect of the bike rack and bikes on energy consumption.
The test parameters were carefully set to ensure consistency:
- Total Distance: 21.8 miles
- Route Breakdown: 2.5 miles of suburban driving and 19.3 miles on the highway.
- Speed Limits: Adherence to legal speed limits, which meant approximately 65mph for 88% of the route and a mix of 25mph and 40mph for the remainder.
- Cruise Control: Engaged to maintain a constant speed and minimize variations in acceleration.
- Auto-Pilot: Disabled to remove any automated driving influences.
- Climate Control: AC and heating were turned off to eliminate their impact on energy usage.
- Driving Mode: Set to ‘Standard’ to ensure consistent power delivery, avoiding ‘Chill’ mode.
- Weather Conditions: 57F (14C) with light wind, with both drives conducted back-to-back to maintain similar environmental conditions.
To further minimize external factors, I maintained the legal speed limit, anticipating that other traffic would naturally move faster, reducing the chances of getting stuck behind slower vehicles and affecting wind resistance readings. This strategy proved effective in keeping the conditions consistent across both tests.
Quantifying the Impact: Tesla Bike Rack Energy Consumption Results
The Tesla dashboard conveniently displays instantaneous energy consumption over the last 30 miles. Lacking a direct data export feature, I photographed the dashboard displays after each drive and used image editing software to overlay and align the graphs for a visual comparison.
The resulting graphs clearly illustrate the difference in energy consumption:
Despite careful efforts to maintain identical test conditions, a minor traffic slowdown occurred during the second drive (with bikes). Additionally, some traffic congestion at the turnaround point caused a small spike in consumption. Aside from these minor anomalies, the shapes of the energy consumption curves are remarkably similar, with a consistent upward shift (offset) in the graph representing the additional energy demand caused by wind resistance from the bike rack and bikes.
Analyzing the trip statistics recorded by the Tesla further quantified the energy impact:
Without bikes: Average consumption was 267 Wh/mi
With bikes: Average consumption increased to 311 Wh/mi
The data reveals an average increase of 18% in energy consumption when driving with bikes on the rack.
For a Tesla Model Y Long Range equipped with a 75kWh battery, this 18% increase translates to a significant reduction in range, dropping from a potential 280 miles to approximately 241 miles under these specific test conditions.
In real-world scenarios, the range could be even more affected. Weekend trips to destinations like Lake Tahoe often involve stop-and-go traffic, particularly on Friday evenings, and higher speeds on open stretches. Moreover, mountainous routes introduce elevation changes that further impact energy consumption.
While the combined weight of the bikes is around 60 pounds, which is a small fraction (approximately 1.5%) of the car’s 4416 lbs empty weight, the primary factor influencing energy consumption is aerodynamic drag. A comparative test with bikes loaded inside the trunk could isolate the impact of the rack itself, but this experiment focused on the practical, real-world scenario of traveling with bikes mounted externally. The results clearly demonstrate that while convenient, using a bike rack does noticeably affect a Tesla’s energy efficiency, primarily due to increased wind resistance.
