2020 Model 3 performance range?

[Kadenmurds]

Okay, i picked my P3D December 19th 2019. It’s a 2020 model (it has the “20 rims). It’s great and i LOVE it. I read a lot of the forums online so i knew to expect 300-400 wh/mi during the cold winter days. So I’m not frustrated at all by that.
My concern is I’m wondering what other P3D range is at 100% SOC. because they advertise it at 310 (which again i know it depends on driving habits weather etc,) but my batter says at 100% SOC i only have 289 miles.(battery gauge doesn’t change based off driving habits or weather that’s confirmed by Tesla) then to make things even more interesting, when you go to energy consumption in my car, my “rated” solid bar is at 270 wh/mi ... which if you divide that by the supposed 78kwh battery you end up with 288.888889 (or 289) miles... so in the software it’s literally rated for 289 miles come to find out. But they advertise it at 310?? And i get the bigger wheels takes some range too, but they only include the 20” rims?!? So how can they say it gets 310 miles when they even rated the car lower than that?!? Is any P3D’s getting more range at 100% SOC than i am? It can’t just be me considering it’s programed in the energy consumption to be rated at 289 miles? I’m new so i could be totally wrong, any thoughts or comments from P3D owners?

 

[M3BlueGeorgia]

Tesla use the EPA test suite to determine the theoretical range. Legally, they have to use it.

Your range WILL be different. The choice of tires also affect range, even ignoring the usual culprits of frigid temps and high speed.

Recommendation is that you change the battery display from the misleading EPA miles, to percentage.

 

[jmaddr]

Definitely agree with the above, change to percent to save you sanity!

But if you want a technically reason, look no further her than fuel economy.gov. It rates the TM3 Performance at 121 eMPG with the 18s and 113 with the 20s. That’s a 6.6 percent drop. Drop 310 by 6.6 percent and you get 289.

So technically they are advertising the “max” range a performance can get so they aren’t doing anything wrong.

Now, when you configure it with the 20s, it should drop to 289....but marketing and whatever....

Oh, and the fact the default performance configuration comes with the 20s means they should advertise it at 289, but marketing and whatever....

 

[Fresnel]

Okay, i picked my P3D December 19th 2019. It’s a 2020 model (it has the “20 rims). It’s great and i LOVE it. I read a lot of the forums online so i knew to expect 300-400 wh/mi during the cold winter days. So I’m not frustrated at all by that.
My concern is I’m wondering what other P3D range is at 100% SOC. because they advertise it at 310 (which again i know it depends on driving habits weather etc,) but my batter says at 100% SOC i only have 289 miles.(battery gauge doesn’t change based off driving habits or weather that’s confirmed by Tesla) then to make things even more interesting, when you go to energy consumption in my car, my “rated” solid bar is at 270 wh/mi ... which if you divide that by the supposed 78kwh battery you end up with 288.888889 (or 289) miles... so in the software it’s literally rated for 289 miles come to find out. But they advertise it at 310?? And i get the bigger wheels takes some range too, but they only include the 20” rims?!? So how can they say it gets 310 miles when they even rated the car lower than that?!? Is any P3D’s getting more range at 100% SOC than i am? It can’t just be me considering it’s programed in the energy consumption to be rated at 289 miles? I’m new so i could be totally wrong, any thoughts or comments from P3D owners?

I think you'll get about 200 real world miles from it.

I watch a lot of "Out of Spec Motoring" youtube roadtrip vids and I think the guy said he gets 200 real world miles on his performance 3

The first guy that replied answered your question though. EPA tests are also done in doors with no weather or added wind resistance.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

but my batter says at 100% SOC i only have 289 miles.(battery gauge doesn’t change based off driving habits or weather that’s confirmed by Tesla) then to make things even more interesting, when you go to energy consumption in my car, my “rated” solid bar is at 270 wh/m

The maximum reported 2020 Performance with 20" rims has been 294 rated miles at 100%.

This 294 rated miles is equivalent to ~314 rated miles with 18" wheels (if you want to see this, switch your wheel configuration to 18" wheels in the Service menu, but I don't recommend leaving it that way - it doesn't change your available energy at all, it just screws up the estimator on trips).

Your vehicle is EPA rated for 299 miles (I don't know the reason for the discrepancy, but it does not matter as long as you have the energy available and the correct efficiency), not 310, not 304, not 322 miles.

You can follow this post: Only 294 miles displayed range from very first full charge

and this post: Model 3 Performance - charged to 100% shows 293 miles range. Why?

to get an idea of how it all works.

Your 289 miles is a little low, but I would recommend that you only look at that number (or the extrapolated version from an SoC above 80%) when the weather is very warm, or you have thoroughly warmed up the battery (requires air temperatures above freezing and a long freeway drive at high speed, followed by battery preconditioning, followed by a Supercharger session to over 80%).

It's possible your battery is just cold (Utah is not a warm place this time of year) and that's why your number is a little low. Or you could have some small loss of capacity already.

Regarding battery capacities and charging constants (at some point I'll get around to posting more info to this thread once I figure out a few things that still don't make sense):

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

Your math is wrong for that...the rated bar doesn't matter, it's the constant which is 5Wh/mi lower (265Wh/mi) which matters. I have no idea why that line is at 270Wh/mi.

In addition, between 0 and 100%, you have only 95.5% of your battery capacity (of 78-79kWh - yours could be lower if your number is not due to temperature) available.

So 0.955*78kWh = 74.5kWh

So at 265Wh/mi consumption, you'll get ~281 miles to 0%. If you divide by the capacity all the way to a dead battery (78kWh), you get 294 miles (if you end up being able to use up all the 4.5% buffer).

The projections on that screen are also a bit pessimistic/weird...it is projecting to 0% charge (so you'd still have the buffer when you get to 0 miles projected), but on the other hand, it's using a constant (265Wh/mi) which doesn't correspond to the actual discharge constant of ~265Wh/rmi*0.955 = 253Wh/rmi, so it inflates the estimated range (to 0%). These factors offset so that initially at 100% SoC it is accurate (to a dead battery), but the numbers become increasingly pessimistic (in regards to range to a dead battery, not to 0% SoC).

 

[adrianp89]

Did a road trip in our stealth with aftermarket 19s (about same weight as 20s) and we would have only gotten about 200 miles on a full charge. We stopped in the dead middle of the trip and supercharged up into the 90s and went on our way.

 

[Fresnel]

Did a road trip in our stealth with aftermarket 19s (about same weight as 20s) and we would have only gotten about 200 miles on a full charge. We stopped in the dead middle of the trip and supercharged up into the 90s and went on our way.

Bingo. See I told ya it would be about 200 miles!

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Did a road trip in our stealth with aftermarket 19s (about same weight as 20s) and we would have only gotten about 200 miles on a full charge. We stopped in the dead middle of the trip and supercharged up into the 90s and went on our way.

If those numbers are exactly correct (and you're talking about range to 0%, not 0 battery) and you have a 2018/2019 with 310 miles at 100%, that means your consumption was about 355Wh/mi.

 

[Fresnel]

Did a road trip in our stealth with aftermarket 19s (about same weight as 20s) and we would have only gotten about 200 miles on a full charge. We stopped in the dead middle of the trip and supercharged up into the 90s and went on our way.

If you ever do a road trip and want to make it a little faster and you don't mind making more supercharger stops its better to charge btw 10% - 50ish % and go to the next super charger then to fully charge to 100% the battery charging takes longer after 50ish%. I'm sure you know but in case you don't.

 

[mswlogo]

Okay, i picked my P3D December 19th 2019. It’s a 2020 model (it has the “20 rims). It’s great and i LOVE it. I read a lot of the forums online so i knew to expect 300-400 wh/mi during the cold winter days. So I’m not frustrated at all by that.
My concern is I’m wondering what other P3D range is at 100% SOC. because they advertise it at 310 (which again i know it depends on driving habits weather etc,) but my batter says at 100% SOC i only have 289 miles.(battery gauge doesn’t change based off driving habits or weather that’s confirmed by Tesla) then to make things even more interesting, when you go to energy consumption in my car, my “rated” solid bar is at 270 wh/mi ... which if you divide that by the supposed 78kwh battery you end up with 288.888889 (or 289) miles... so in the software it’s literally rated for 289 miles come to find out. But they advertise it at 310?? And i get the bigger wheels takes some range too, but they only include the 20” rims?!? So how can they say it gets 310 miles when they even rated the car lower than that?!? Is any P3D’s getting more range at 100% SOC than i am? It can’t just be me considering it’s programed in the energy consumption to be rated at 289 miles? I’m new so i could be totally wrong, any thoughts or comments from P3D owners?

Good observation for a newbie

Tesla still lists it as 310 and on my "Stealth" Performance (shipped with 18" Aero's) it would charge to 309-ish (basically 310).
But the Rated line at that time was at ~250 wh/mi.

So take 250 wh/mi * 310 range and we get 77.5 kWh (let's call that what Tesla uses in software for the capacity, roughly).

Now let's take your rated 270 wh/mi on the P+ (namely 20" tires) and divide that into 77.5 kWh you get 287 miles. Damn close to your number.

I wonder if the numbers change if you change tire size

Regardless, your battery is probably perfectly fine and really all that matters is what you get in practice and your range doesn't consistently go down.

Good luck with your new Model 3 and watch out for pot holes with those 20" wheels.

 

[Fresnel]

watch out for pot holes with those 20" wheels.

Haha, I had a car once with thin tires and I used to get bubbles in the tires soooo much. Literally had to swap out random tires at least once a year.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Now let's take your rated 270 wh/mi on the P+ (namely 20" tires) and divide that into 77.5 kWh you get 287 miles. Damn close to your number.

Maximum reported value has been 294 rated miles for this vehicle, with 20" wheels selected.

I wonder if the numbers change if you change tire size

Yes, it is certain that they will (not physically change tire size, just change it in the Service menu). For 2020 Performance vehicles only, so far, this is a certainty assuming you are running the Christmas update (2019.40.50.x).

For the OP, assuming he is at 289 miles still with his 20" selected, he will see about 309 rated miles when he selects 18" wheels in the Service menu.

 

[Kadenmurds]

The maximum reported 2020 Performance with 20" rims has been 294 rated miles at 100%.

This 294 rated miles is equivalent to ~314 rated miles with 18" wheels (if you want to see this, switch your wheel configuration to 18" wheels in the Service menu, but I don't recommend leaving it that way - it doesn't change your available energy at all, it just screws up the estimator on trips).

Your vehicle is EPA rated for 299 miles (I don't know the reason for the discrepancy, but it does not matter as long as you have the energy available and the correct efficiency), not 310, not 304, not 322 miles.

You can follow this post: Only 294 miles displayed range from very first full charge

and this post: Model 3 Performance - charged to 100% shows 293 miles range. Why?

to get an idea of how it all works.

Your 289 miles is a little low, but I would recommend that you only look at that number (or the extrapolated version from an SoC above 80%) when the weather is very warm, or you have thoroughly warmed up the battery (requires air temperatures above freezing and a long freeway drive at high speed followed by a Supercharger session).

It's possible your battery is just cold (Utah is not a warm place this time of year) and that's why your number is a little low. Or you could have some small loss of capacity already.

Regarding battery capacities and charging constants:

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

Your math is wrong for that...the rated bar doesn't matter, it's the constant which is 5Wh/mi lower (265Wh/mi) which matters. I have no idea why that line is at 270Wh/mi.

In addition, between 0 and 100%, you have only 95.5% of your battery capacity (of 78-79kWh - yours could be lower if your number is not due to temperature) available.

So 0.955*78kWh = 74.5kWh

So at 265Wh/mi consumption, you'll get ~281 miles to 0%. If you divide by the capacity all the way to a dead battery (78kWh), you get 294 miles (if you end up being able to use up all the 4.5% buffer).

The projections on that screen are also a bit pessimistic/weird...it is projecting to 0% charge (so you'd still have the buffer when you get to 0 miles projected), but on the other hand, it's using a constant (265Wh/mi) which doesn't correspond to the actual discharge constant of ~265Wh/rmi*0.955 = 253Wh/rmi, so it inflates the estimated range (to 0%). These factors offset so that initially at 100% SoC it is accurate (to a dead battery), but the numbers become increasingly pessimistic (in regards to range to a dead battery, not to 0% SoC).

SUPER informative thank you! That makes a lot of sense, i did change the configuration just to see and you were right( i changed it back right after) well, I’m not that upset because i love the car and i knew kinda what i was getting into. Just seems a little sketchy to me on the website i think they should show for the 20” rims the loss in range when you configure it, but that’s just me I’m blown away by the support and activity of this forum. Super cool great place for info thanks everyone

 

[dsgerbc]

Did a road trip in our stealth with aftermarket 19s (about same weight as 20s) and we would have only gotten about 200 miles on a full charge. We stopped in the dead middle of the trip and supercharged up into the 90s and went on our way.

Must be getting really cold in Florida this winter...

 

[adrianp89]

If those numbers are exactly correct (and you're talking about range to 0%, not 0 battery) and you have a 2018/2019 with 310 miles at 100%, that means your consumption was about 355Wh/mi.

I didn't check it, but that is probably accurate. We were doing about 80mph most of the time, and several zones where we had to drop to 45 then back to 80.

 

[jfinephilly]

Tesla use the EPA test suite to determine the theoretical range. Legally, they have to use it.

Your range WILL be different. The choice of tires also affect range, even ignoring the usual culprits of frigid temps and high speed.

Recommendation is that you change the battery display from the misleading EPA miles, to percentage.

Is the % not just the EPA miles over the max EPA miles (310/322/etc)

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Is the % not just the EPA miles over the max EPA miles (310/322/etc)

No. The SoC the car displays is the ratio of your energy remaining available above the buffer to the maximum possible available above the buffer.

SoC % = 100* (RemainkWh - BufferkWh) / (FullkWh - BufferkWh)

So as your FullkWh goes down over time, the SoC % will be unaffected (you won't notice the reduction in FullkWh readily when using SoC %).

BTW, BufferkWh seems to always be 0.045*FullkWh, so this can be "simplified" as:

= 100 * (RemainkWh - 0.045*FullkWh)/ (0.955 * FullkWh)

= 100 * 1.047* (RemainkWh/FullkWh - 0.045)

This is not a formula that really provides much insight, but it's worth noting the buffer 4.5% value in any case.

 

[arghx7]

The first guy that replied answered your question though. EPA tests are also done in doors with no weather or added wind resistance.

There isn't any weather or "wind" in the dyno cell, but the road load resistance force on the dyno is calculated based on wind resistance, weight, rolling resistance, etc. It's a quadratic equation like in highschool algebra. They do a test with a real vehicle on a real track to calculate that force, called a coastdown test. That result is then used to program the dyno with road load coefficients. It's not perfect but it does in fact attempt to compensate for factors such as air resistance and aerodynamic drag.

Some OEM's have been caught over the years fudging the road load numbers to help bump up rated fuel economy, so the EPA does audits.

 

[Fresnel]

There isn't any weather or "wind" in the dyno cell, but the road load resistance force on the dyno is calculated based on wind resistance, weight, rolling resistance, etc. It's a quadratic equation like in highschool algebra. They do a test with a real vehicle on a real track to calculate that force, called a coastdown test. That result is then used to program the dyno with road load coefficients. It's not perfect but it does in fact attempt to compensate for factors such as air resistance and aerodynamic drag.

Some OEM's have been caught over the years fudging the road load numbers to help bump up rated fuel economy, so the EPA does audits.

I was talking about weather wind resistance like 50mph winds not default wind resistance.

 

[dsgerbc]

so the EPA does audits.

10% of manufacturer-supplied results tops tho.