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

[WillyThePooh]

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.

Thanks for the response! That was fast

That sounds about right in terms of the constant. I usually charge up to 90-95% SOC, so I'll keep an eye on how much this varies and I'll post the updated pics if I see a significant change.

One other thing I was wondering is, how does ambient temperature affect these data and calculations? From what I could find, it looks like most of the EPA's testing is done at 75 F (~23.9 C). Since my data were taken in 3 to 4 C (37 to 39 F) ambient temperature, would this affect any of our derived values?

I'm assuming Tesla's algorithms take temperature into account when calculating projected range (at least indirectly through the higher average energy consumption).

If the ~20 km rated range increase is mainly due to the addition of the heat pump system, I really want to grasp how temperature is accounted for.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Tesla's algorithms take temperature into account when calculating projected range (at least indirectly through the higher average energy consumption).

Indirectly through higher consumption. The constant does not change (except possibly one single time in an upcoming software update to get you to your apparently promised 263 rated miles).


Note that for trips you should just use the trip planner on the other tab of the Energy screen (Trip). It is much better as it takes into account elevation, recent consumption, etc. The Energy Consumption page is useless, except for figuring out your battery capacity, TBH. I never look at it as it is basically irrelevant.

If the ~20 km rated range increase is mainly due to the addition of the heat pump system, I really want to grasp how temperature is accounted for.

I’ve explained elsewhere, you can look. There are five test cycles. Two of these use climate control - one hot, one cold. The heat pump does substantially better in these. This allows Tesla to claim a higher multiplier than 0.7 on their weighted two-cycle test results (which are done at room temperature). They claim (it is a defined formula) about 0.746 or so. This therefore results in higher EPA range. That is how the EPA range becomes a function of the heat pump; it’s folded into the scalar.

EPA range = (0.55*UDDS+0.45*HWY)*scalar

That results in more rated range than prior years. Basically they can specify a lower constant (even if you don’t realize it for a particular drive), so for a given energy, you can display more rated miles.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Even the heat pump in ideal conditions and poorly setup 2019 car wouldn't bring that much difference. Interesting to see what the US cars will show @100% and wether it will be above 332 miles

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

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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!

The new AWD 18” (not Performance) vehicles will eventually be assigned a constant that results in 353 rated miles, in the US

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

Alan wins the bet (of course)! (We did not actually finalize the bet though.)

US 2021 Model 3 that will show ~353 rated miles at 100%

The constant is now 137Wh/rkm, as I predicted. With the software update, within a month, as predicted.

The unlocked battery capacity (on the AWD non-P) is unchanged from 2020, in SMT, as I predicted. (Covered elsewhere with SMT captures in that thread.)

But, to be clear, I didn't "predict" anything. I just read the EPA documents, and took Tesla's number from their website, which says the EPA estimated range of 2021 Model 3 AWD is... 353 rated miles.

For some reason @TimothyHW3 doesn't want to believe the EPA documents, which have always been quite reliable.

Now...there is still the unresolved question of whether it's possible there are some AWD non-P vehicles out there with the larger (but locked) battery capacities, which the Performance all have (the Performance may have the same battery as AWD, unlocked, or a denser battery mostly unlocked (I suspect the latter) ). But that's a separate question.

 

[Phlier]

Note that for trips you should just use the trip planner on the other tab of the Energy screen (Trip). It is much better as it takes into account elevation, recent consumption, etc. The Energy Consumption page is useless, except for figuring out your battery capacity, TBH. I never look at it as it is basically irrelevant.

The important parts are in bold.

Do yourself a favor on your next road trip, and take Mr. Subie's advice.

 

[Masa]

2020 M3 LR AWD. Took Delivery in September 2020. I am getting far less range than I expected. I charged to 95% (300 miles) and drove around the city and freeway. Drove it down to under 18% in 2 days. Only drove about 120 miles. Do I have a Bad battery. Can anyone tell me if this is normal?

 

[LargeHamCollider]

View attachment 624018 2020 M3 LR AWD. Took Delivery in September 2020. I am getting far less range than I expected. I charged to 95% (300 miles) and drove around the city and freeway. Drove it down to under 18% in 2 days. Only drove about 120 miles. Do I have
a Bad battery. Can anyone tell me if this is normal?

Did you leave it in the cold overnight not plugged in? Cause that will drain it quick even though it's not being driven.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

View attachment 624018 2020 M3 LR AWD. Took Delivery in September 2020. I am getting far less range than I expected. I charged to 95% (300 miles) and drove around the city and freeway. Drove it down to under 18% in 2 days. Only drove about 120 miles. Do I have a Bad battery. Can anyone tell me if this is normal?

Seems fine. With your vehicle constant of around 242Wh/rmi (discharge/displayed about 231Wh/rmi) that driving would have used ~187-189 rated miles. (120.1mi*358Wh/mi/(0.955*0.99*242Wh/rmi) = 188 rmi.) You have 61rmi left and that leaves only 300rmi -61rmi - 187rmi = 52 rated miles unaccounted for, max. (52 rated miles is 242Wh/rmi*(0.955rmi/1rmi(displayed)) * 52rmi(displayed) ~ 12kWh)

If you use Sentry Mode or whatever other features (your screen suggests you are trying!), that could easily account for a lot of the remaining energy (Sentry uses about 1 rated mile per hour, very roughly). Some of course can also be used to heat the car remotely or when sitting in the car in Park (all such use when in Park is not counted on the meter).

Cold isn’t an issue for your car since you are in LA.

Anyway, seems fine. If you want to know your battery capacity just take this picture and do the calculation.

I expect you’ll have 76kWh as a result from that calculation, which is fine (you started around 77.8kWh).

No problems! Perfectly normal. If you don’t want it to use any significant energy on this timescale, make sure it is sleeping and you are not using any third-party apps or features like Sentry Mode.

 

[Masa]

Seems fine. With your vehicle constant of around 242Wh/rmi (discharge/displayed about 231Wh/rmi) that driving would have used ~187-189 rated miles. (120.1mi*358Wh/mi/(0.955*0.99*242Wh/rmi) = 188 rmi.) You have 61rmi left and that leaves only 300rmi -61rmi - 187rmi = 52 rated miles unaccounted for, max. (52 rated miles is 242Wh/rmi*(0.955rmi/1rmi(displayed)) * 52rmi(displayed) ~ 12kWh)

If you use Sentry Mode or whatever other features (your screen suggests you are trying!), that could easily account for a lot of the remaining energy (Sentry uses about 1 rated mile per hour, very roughly). Some of course can also be used to heat the car remotely or when sitting in the car in Park (all such use when in Park is not counted on the meter).

Cold isn’t an issue for your car since you are in LA.

Anyway, seems fine. If you want to know your battery capacity just take this picture and do the calculation.

I expect you’ll have 76kWh as a result from that calculation, which is fine (you started around 77.8kWh).

No problems! Perfectly normal. If you don’t want it to use any significant energy on this timescale, make sure it is sleeping and you are not using any third-party apps or features like Sentry Mode.

Thank you for the info! I will try disabling sentry mode if not necessary.