As best as I can tell (unless Tesla releases data showing otherwise), the reporter probably did not intentionally sabotage the results, but made a number of errors possibly because he was trying to simulate a "mass consumer" driver. On the one hand, he should have known better. On the other hand, I can imagine similar things happening to some subset of new Tesla owners who fail to read up on what to do with the new technology, and it is fair to point those faults out.
I imagine the reporter's article would have rubbed Musk the wrong way a lot less if the reporter had made it more clear what was going on and that some of the things that happened were the results of mistakes made (whether or not you might expect consumers to make the same mistakes).
For example: if the reporter had explained that he was intentionally trying to simulate "normal use" by not plugging in the car at night. If the article had said, "The owner's manual said to plug in overnight, repeatedly, but I chose not to in order to see what might happen if a less educated consumer were driving the car," I imagine the article would have gotten more sympathy. The article, as I read it, didn't really get into that, and seemed to simply imply a failure on Tesla's part.
"If the reporter had explained that he was intentionally trying to simulate "normal use" by not plugging in the car at night."
That runs at odds with a claim made on Tesla's site: "The Model S battery will not lose a significant amount of charge when parked for long periods of time. For example, Model S owners can park at the airport without plugging in."
(http://www.teslamotors.com/models/facts)
Either Tesla is lying when it claims that it won't lose a significant amount of charge, or Tesla is not lying (which would imply that not charging overnight doesn't really matter)
Interesting, the manual says: "Tesla strongly recommends leaving Model S plugged in when not in use" and "The most important way to preserve the Battery is to LEAVE YOUR MODEL S PLUGGED IN when you’re not using it" and "Tesla recommends charging Model S each night or when convenient to maintain optimum driving range and battery health. If you go on vacation, plug in your Model S before you leave."*
But this also doesn't say that you can expect to lose 65 mile range in the cold if it's not plugged in. This is very good information to know and not at all what's implied by the link you provide, but it would have been good if the article had discussed all this in full context.
To be fair immediately above the point you mention it says
"... The Tesla battery is optimized for nightly charging: topping off frequently enhances the longevity of your battery."
So though I agree that the author has a good argument he should have mentioned that Tesla does advise nightly charging albeit for battery maintenance rather than to guard against charge loss.
When explaining why he didn't plug in the car overnight, he says the evaluation was "intended to demonstrate its practicality as a 'normal use,' no-compromise car" and that Tesla can't realistically expect all of its buyers to be "acolytes" who plug in all the time. I took that for him saying he didn't plug in on purpose, but I could be wrong.
I live in ND and have stayed in several hotels here (lived out of one for 6 months). I can truthfully say ND gets a lot colder than where the reporter was driving. I am wondering which hotels have overnight plug-ins because I sure don't see it here?
Honestly, I wouldn't be the person to ask: I don't own any cars anymore. But, a quick google search suggests that a number of the La Quinta Inns, Days Inns, and Super 8s in North Dakota have winter plugins in the parking lot. Maybe you've just never noticed?
Well, if its the Super 8 around here, they are not quite telling the truth. Not sure what a La Quinta Inns is, and the couple Days Inns don't have outdoor outlets either. Must be selected locations only.
It sure would have been nice when it got -20°F so I could have plugged in the head-bolt heater, but my Kia Rio started fine.
[edit 2] Handy tip, turn on the lights for about 15 seconds, turn off lights, then start the car. Warms the battery a bit.
"Elon told him the supercharging stations should actually be closer to 140 miles apart in that area rather than 200 miles."
I'm very surprised that no tesla employee tried the test first. The difficulty of the 200 mile spacing would have been apparent (and niggling about 2 miles seems petty).
I didn't downvote you, but the author says he received advice from tesla when he called them when he was getting angst about the battery range. He says they told him to take it off cruise control to let the regenerative braking help charge.
Clearly that is absurd advice, but that is what he says he is told. Given that advice, and not knowing any better himself, he thought start-stop driving would be more efficient.
It's worth pointing out that compared to ICE, electric engines are much more efficient with city-style start-stop driving.
When you're stopped with an ICE, it's still using fuel to keep the engine idling. When you're stopped with an electric car on a flat surface, the motor isn't using any energy at all. The only energy you're using in the electric car is the power for the radio and any climate control.
Regenerative breaking also helps the electric car, because it recaptures some of the energy lost in accelerating the car.
I couldn't downvote this, but here's why a downvote is merited:
In a Porsche Panamera S, start-stop driving and idling for an hour in traffic going from Secaucus NJ to Manhattan through the lincoln tunnel a month ago (had to install a new server in NY4), I used approximately 2 gallons of gas (less than 10% of capacity). It's certainly not trivial, but it's nowhere near the drain that Musk is effectively claiming.
That, combined with the fact that engaging in stop and start driving was a natural conclusion of the advice that Tesla gave him while he was driving (regenerative braking), really seems to suggest that Tesla gave poor advice (and you can't blame the author for following poor advice).
I imagine the reporter's article would have rubbed Musk the wrong way a lot less if the reporter had made it more clear what was going on and that some of the things that happened were the results of mistakes made (whether or not you might expect consumers to make the same mistakes).
For example: if the reporter had explained that he was intentionally trying to simulate "normal use" by not plugging in the car at night. If the article had said, "The owner's manual said to plug in overnight, repeatedly, but I chose not to in order to see what might happen if a less educated consumer were driving the car," I imagine the article would have gotten more sympathy. The article, as I read it, didn't really get into that, and seemed to simply imply a failure on Tesla's part.