2020, 2019, 2018 Model 3 Battery Capacities & Charging Constants

[AlanSubie4Life]

We have a Canadian? SR+ with about 135Wh/km.

What was the SR+ before, haven't followed it? It seems the battery is slightly bigger, previously 52.5 now 53.5 when new, 1kWh or thereabouts.

As outlined just above, we all know the formula for this Energy Page (everyone can verify if you don't believe me!!!):

Use the energy consumption screen, and you'll be able to calculate from the Projected Range, Rated Miles Remaining, %, and Recent efficiency, your full battery capacity:

Projected Range*Recent Efficiency / Rated Miles Remaining * (Rated Miles Remaining/%) = Full capacity

Or more simply Projected Range * Recent Efficiency / % = Full capacity (obviously some rounding error, two significant digits only in the result, so only accurate to the nearest kWh unless you work to determine the rounding error).

So, his full capacity is: 135Wh/km*289km/0.73 = 53kWh. (In the range of 53kWh - 53.8kWh)

We also know that the line on the screen is about 3Wh/km, 5Wh/mi above the actual vehicle constant.

So, this means the constant is about 132Wh/rkm. So ~212Wh/rmi.

If he had switched to distance display when the lines aligned here, he would have seen his battery range would have showed not 289rkm, but about 295rkm! (Again, anyone can verify this, so please check on your own car before clicking disagree if you are so inclined. .)

Anyway, previously it was 210Wh/rmi or so. Could have been as high as 212Wh/rmi - I never got definitive information from SR+ owners in prior years that would really allow any more precision on whether the degradation threshold was 52.5kWh or 53kWh. (So I think basically these values are the same, no change.)

I expect about 200Wh/rmi for 2021. (2021 SR+ Range/Efficiency/Battery Capacity Measurements Released by Tesla, via EPA). We'll see. It's fairly low confidence projection for me, because it depends on how they set the degradation threshold.

So I suspect his software on his new vehicle still shows ~400 rkm (250rmi) at 100%, not the new 423rkm (263rmi) value.

It's probably just not updated yet! He either doesn't have a 2021, or he doesn't have the software showing the increased range (this has happened before, it's not unusual).

It would have been much easier to figure this out if he had just switched between % and rated km (distance and energy display) just once in his video! Use rated kilometers/miles (and quickly switch to % if you're trying to figure things out and you are not at 100%), folks!

Looks to me like the battery capacity is basically the same as the 2020 version, at least for now. He has the old software, so even if there were more capacity they probably would not have unlocked it yet. But the tests Tesla did for the SR+ 2021 don't really indicate more capacity relative to prior years (see above post). Yet.

Once all the information on the 2021 models comes in and is more clear (vehicles delivered and analyzed, and EPA documents finalized, and "final" software updated), I plan to include that information in this thread. Right now just linking to it.

 

[TimothyHW3]

They'll show about 353 rated miles. No question about that.

Oh yeah? I highly doubt it. Don't we already have delivered LRs?

 

[TimothyHW3]

If he had switched to distance display when the lines aligned here, he would have seen his battery range would have showed not 289rkm, but about 295rkm! (Again, anyone can verify this, so please check on your own car before clicking disagree if you are so inclined. .)

I have, I have sent you screenshots multiple times, at 153wh/km the rated range and the remaining range in energy converge.
The values in rated range and remaining range change at different intervals though so that is what is confusing you.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I have, I have sent you screenshots multiple times, at 153wh/km the rated range and the remaining range in energy converge.
The values in rated range and remaining range change at different intervals though so that is what is confusing you.

I can’t believe we are still disagreeing on this (I actually think we agree, but you just think we disagree). Just drive around and PLEASE stop when the line is directly on top. In the US, the line is at 156Wh/km (but the constant used for the calculations is 153Wh/km). See these two pictures showing the line bracketing 156Wh/km. Note the projected range is lower than the rated range in both cases (since recent efficiency is greater than 153Wh/km, which is what is used for the calculation).

Can we close this now? If you really don’t believe me, again, check your car!!! Take a picture. Your picture above clearly shows 153Wh/km is the constant. And it CLEARLY shows that is NOT where the line is.

My original point is the guy in the video was lining up to the LINE. And we know that the rated and projected range do not match in that case because the line is 3Wh/km higher. Hence discussion above. You can’t tell in his video because he used %. End of story.

We know you do not use the line position to calculate battery capacity to match SMT. You use 153Wh/km for your car. He used the line position for his number, so his battery capacity calculations were high.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Oh yeah? I highly doubt it. Don't we already have delivered LRs?

Not AFAIK. Just wait for it in the US. And please, before crowing about it, if the initial value does happen to be 330+ miles, please wait for a software update in the next month or so. Eventually new cars will start being delivered with 353 miles. That is the EPA rated range. We will see about battery capacity; I expect about 77-78kWh from SMT for non-Performance. At least initially.

 

[TimothyHW3]

Can we close this now? If you really don’t believe me, again, check your car!!! Take a picture. Your picture above clearly shows 153Wh/km is the constant. And it CLEARLY shows that is NOT where the line is

Like I said numerous times this is a video and in the video the I can see how the line crosses. Yeah, the line is somewhere at 152.5. You are right, this is nowhere near 153... Oh wait... Also at 153 both the rated km and the estimated km merge, exactly what you said that will NOT be the case...
Anyways, I think I will close this as it is useless...

 

[TimothyHW3]

Not AFAIK. Just wait for it in the US. And please, before crowing about it, if the initial value does happen to be 330+ miles, please wait for a software update in the next month or so

Ahhhh, so I have to wait now, oo oo kkkk....

Currently at 257mi/74% = 347mi extrapolated. Gotta get my wall connector installed so the car doesn’t charge so slowly

Easier to hit funny though...

And for this software update, are we talking old panasonic batteries, new panasonic batteris or the LG 74kWh ones, just so I am not "crowing"...

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Like I said numerous times this is a video and in the video the I can see how the line crosses

Yes, at ~156Wh/km.

. Also at 153 both the rated km and the estimated km merge, exactly what you said that will NOT be the case...
...

No, that is not what I said. Sigh.

We also know that the line on the screen is about 3Wh/km, 5Wh/mi above the actual vehicle constant.

If he had switched to distance display when the lines aligned here, he would have seen his battery range would have showed not 289rkm, but about 295rkm!

Ahhhh, so I have to wait now, oo oo kkkk....

Why don’t we wait until some vehicles are delivered in the United States? I would bet you eternal glory, or $1k, that they will display 353 rated miles for a battery with capacity that exceeds the degradation threshold. No, I will not actually bet, because it is too much of a pain. But there is every reason to believe I will be correct since this is the way it has always worked.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

To the point for this discussion, from a new US 2021 vehicle, I want to see those two pictures of the energy screen, one in distance mode, one in energy mode. At the same time, separated in time by seconds. All with three sig figs on all numbers except SoC. SoC over 80% (the higher the better). The lines do not need to be aligned. Will tell us all we need to know. Works this way on any Tesla vehicle.

This is what the guy in the video above should have done!

They are being delivered now. We just need someone, anyone, to take those two simple pictures and post them.

 

[TimothyHW3]

Why don’t we wait until some vehicles are delivered in the United States I would bet you eternal glory, or $1k, that they will display 353 rated miles for a battery with capacity that exceeds the degradation threshold.

This is a US car at below 353...In Portland. You sure you have 1$k?

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

This is a US car at below 353...You sure you have 1$k?

What is? Which car?

I’ve asked this guy:

West Coast Deliveries

It’s a performance but still interesting. I expect that to have less range of course.

I have $1k. I’ll bet if you want. But I’ve already mentioned the software update - remember this is what happened in 2020 (in 2019 for 2020 vehicles) - the vehicles did not show the EPA range at first and then were updated a couple weeks after delivery (the constant was changed). If the software change goes to 353 rated miles (within 2 rated miles of that value, say) I would win the bet.

Bets online are dumb though. I will just bet on eternal glory. It is more valuable.

I’ll be right and I don’t want to take your money, which is why I am not really serious about it. I would feel bad!

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

This is a US car at below 353...In Portland.

Would be nice if you would link to what you are talking about. I would not be surprised, as I said, with a lower value initially. Just wait. Happened last year too.

EDIT: Finally found what your were referring to. It looks like I'm right - that projects to 347 rated miles, which is basically 353, which is what I would expect. Not sure why you disagree with that. I've been clear that it requires a battery above the degradation threshold to see 353 rated miles. We'll see it shortly.

The new AWD 18” (not Performance) vehicles will eventually be assigned a constant that results in 353 rated miles, in the US. For an undegraded battery (above about 77.6kWh - not sure exactly where that degradation threshold will end up in 2021 though - there is no reason it has to be exactly the same as prior years but the EPA result on the AWD (not the P) implies it will be within 1-2kWh of that value).

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Man, love the disagrees. They make no sense. But I love them. It feels good to be right, lol. Not that there was any doubt.

It's funny because you've been so adamant here and elsewhere that we wouldn't see 353 rated miles in the United States (at least, not without a significant battery capacity increase). And now that it's clear that we will see that (possibly not for the particular post you linked to - all batteries have variation and it's not uncommon for batteries to start below the degradation threshold these days because Tesla has raised it higher and closer to max possible pack capacity, vs. 2018/2019, where nearly every vehicle started above ~76kWh), you're being disagreeable.

In that thread, if we get the pictures we want, we'll soon know exactly (within 1Wh/rmi) what the constant is for the AWD 2021. And that should settle it. I expect it will be about 220Wh/rmi, or 137Wh/rkm. Within 3Wh/rmi (217-223Wh/rmi, 134-140Wh/km). We'll see. It does depend on what Tesla chose to set the degradation threshold to, which I do not know yet. So these numbers are guesses; not high certainty.

 

[JCtx]

Hey guys, any idea if the 2021 LR model 3 with the new heat pump is more efficient in winter? And if yes, by how much? Wondering what's the range in a winter day (40F low/55F high), compared to summer. Somebody already told me at 85 mph (TX), range would be 70% of EPA. How much less due to cold temperatures? And how much difference does the new heat pump would make? And also need to take into account the heating of the cabin. Thx.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Hey guys, any idea if the 2021 LR model 3 with the new heat pump is more efficient in winter? And if yes, by how much? Wondering what's the range in a winter day (40F low/55F high), compared to summer. Somebody already told me at 85 mph (TX), range would be 70% of EPA. How much less due to cold temperatures? And how much difference does the new heat pump would make? And also need to take into account the heating of the cabin. Thx.

Answered some of this in a different thread. This is a battery capacity thread so not the perfect venue for this discussion though it is related. Specific to this thread, as explained in some linked threads above, yes, the 2021 LR Model 3 will be more efficient in winter. Quantifying the amount is very difficult, as it depends on so many factors. At 40 degrees Fahrenheit, I'd estimate that rather than heat using steady state 1-1.5kW, it would use 500W. At 80mph, that would save 1000W/80mph = 12.5Wh/mi. So that's about 4% savings on 290Wh/mi. At 40mph it's 25Wh/mi, which is more like 11% savings on 220Wh/mi. Just rough ballpark numbers.

The 70% of EPA number is a reasonable estimate if you're not using heat or cooling, at those speeds. Assuming it's flat.

 

[tivoboy]

Hey guys, any idea if the 2021 LR model 3 with the new heat pump is more efficient in winter? And if yes, by how much? Wondering what's the range in a winter day (40F low/55F high), compared to summer. Somebody already told me at 85 mph (TX), range would be 70% of EPA. How much less due to cold temperatures? And how much difference does the new heat pump would make? And also need to take into account the heating of the cabin. Thx.

There have been some videos on youtube that indicate that yes, maintaining heat with the heat pump is much more efficient than the prior generation without the heat pump.

 

[Zoomit]

There have been some videos on youtube that indicate that yes, maintaining heat with the heat pump is much more efficient than the prior generation without the heat pump.

I haven’t seen any videos that have done good testing, so the results to date are questionable.

Alan is on track here. ~5% savings at highway speed is about right.

Quantifying the amount is very difficult, as it depends on so many factors. At 40 degrees Fahrenheit, I'd estimate that rather than heat using steady state 1-1.5kW, it would use 500W. At 80mph, that would save 1000W/80mph = 12.5Wh/mi. So that's about 4% savings on 290Wh/mi.

 

[JCtx]

Thank you very much for your great help. Tried to use a recommended site to see how much a LR M3 would affect our travel from El Paso to Austin, but couldn't use it. Somebody offered a 1.25 hr charge time guess, but it'd be nice to see for myself. Ha ha. Will keep looking at the other detractions, like lack of a dealer (5 hrs away), etc. At least the only supercharger in town is about 2.5 miles from my house.

 

[WillyThePooh]

Hey everyone. I recently got my 2021 Model 3 SR+ delivered from Fremont. Went on a few day trips, so I'm already at 1,032 km, but I finally got around to taking these pictures. Also, forgive my smudgy screen... I'll clean it next time. lol

Based on the numbers from the images, I calculated a charging constant of about 130.9 Wh/km and a battery pack capacity of 53.5 kWh. Note that I charged to 90% until it said complete, and both images were taken within a few seconds of each other. This would give me a full range of about 409 km, which isn't far off what I was expecting. Any insight anyone can provide based on these numbers is much appreciated!

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Hey everyone. I recently got my 2021 Model 3 SR+ delivered from Fremont. Went on a few day trips, so I'm already at 1,032 km, but I finally got around to taking these pictures. Also, forgive my smudgy screen... I'll clean it next time. lol

Based on the numbers from the images, I calculated a charging constant of about 130.9 Wh/km and a battery pack capacity of 53.5 kWh. Note that I charged to 90% until it said complete, and both images were taken within a few seconds of each other. This would give me a full range of about 409 km, which isn't far off what I was expecting. Any insight anyone can provide based on these numbers is much appreciated!

Great! Your calculations are correct. Thanks for posting here (eventually, after these numbers settle out, we will change the thread title to include 2021).

Degradation Threshold/Max Capacity: 53.5kWh. (I believe this is higher than 2020 by about 1kWh. There are pictures around here of the 2020 showing it was about 52.5kWh)

Other insights:

Charging constant is currently about the same as the 2020 SR+ (210-211Wh/rmi).

Remember that currently your max rated miles right now is only ~254 rated miles (2020 maxed out at 250 rated miles of the same energy). So I generally expect a constant change in the future to about 203-204Wh/rmi.

That would give: 53.5kWh/203Wh/rmi = 263 rated miles. (Current displayed mileage on Tesla website.)

Note it isn't actually going to give any more range. It's just a constant change. Anyway, if you do ever see a boost to about 381km at 90% charge, take another look at this Energy screen (and post here if you are so inclined!). I suspect you'll see the line position and the constant used for the calculations change, if that happens.