Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

2021 model Y scan my Tesla battery size

mbdionio

Member
May 20, 2019
313
250
Austin, TX
so from 100%SOC, the MY AWD consumed 77.7kWh + unseen battery buffer = ~80ish kWh battery

upload_2020-12-13_17-27-59.png
 

alexcue

Member
Aug 5, 2020
348
225
Los Angeles
As a quick aside, did anyone notice the difference in motor rated power between the front and rear motors in the LR AWD and the P? Funny seems like the rear AWD has more power. But front is lower, by a bit.
 

LionelHutz

Member
Jan 12, 2019
212
206
CA

LionelHutz

Member
Jan 12, 2019
212
206
CA
so from 100%SOC, the MY AWD consumed 77.7kWh + unseen battery buffer = ~80ish kWh battery

View attachment 617441

You’re drawing the wrong conclusion. The full recharge from empty was ~77.7 kWh on the LR but ~81.0 kWh on the P. That data doesn’t allow you to round up for a battery buffer estimate, all it shows is that the MYP tested could take a bigger charge than the LR.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life

akballow

Member
Nov 14, 2020
302
161
San Jose, CA
As a quick aside, did anyone notice the difference in motor rated power between the front and rear motors in the LR AWD and the P? Funny seems like the rear AWD has more power. But front is lower, by a bit.
Yeah makes no sense that LR has more rear power when the P had the larger rear tires... all they did was shift the rear power to the front wheels which gives a closer to equal power delivery.
 

DriverOne

Supporting Member
Aug 20, 2012
866
518
Austin, TX
That 78kWh -> 81kWh (ish) battery bump on the P explains its recent range increase from 295 -> 303 miles. They did something else on the LR to attain its range increase?
 

MY-Y

Member
Mar 4, 2020
970
1,061
MD
It also shows Tesla sandbagging the actual motor power numbers, which most of us already know, especially on the MYP.
I measured 162 kW from the front motor, 218 kW from the rear motor after the acceleration boost (LR AWD Y). 509 hp (and 401 lb-ft torque) if you do the conversion. Sorry no numbers stock.


How did you measure the power output?
 

pt19713

Member
Feb 5, 2020
969
1,213
Delaware
I need to figure out a better way to upload these graphs. Imgur seems a bit pixelated.
https://i.imgur.com/rTfkrDk.jpg
upload_2020-12-14_11-25-36.png


This is an 18 minute drive, testing battery pack temp. The black line is the energy generated by the motors. The pink line is the Front Stator Motor Temp, the green line is the Rear Stator Motor temp, the blue line is the battery pack temp, and the red line is the ambient temp. I need to add Speed to my SMT app tab so that I can report that out.

I'll probably add some comments and things in a different thread since I don't want to derail this topic. Just wanted to show a screen shot (previous post) of the max motor energy generation, and this graph showing the fluctuation of the battery energy consumption and the impact it has on the Stator Motors and battery pack temps (start 61F, finish 69F).
 
Last edited:

imola.zhp

Member
Jul 13, 2020
461
280
Memphis
It also shows Tesla sandbagging the actual motor power numbers, which most of us already know, especially on the MYP.
I measured 162 kW from the front motor, 218 kW from the rear motor after the acceleration boost (LR AWD Y). 509 hp (and 401 lb-ft torque) if you do the conversion. Sorry no numbers stock.

The amazing document that was shared shows on page 29 that the front motor for the LR-AWD is 69kW and rear motor 201kW. So AB really awakens/unlocks the front motor?

Also, agree with others, why is the LR-AWD rear motor more powerful than Performance? How bizarre, or as mentioned above sandbagging which isn't unique to Tesla, other MFG's sandbag performance output. I can't think of any EV MFG's but BMW does this frequently with their ICE vehicles.
 

pt19713

Member
Feb 5, 2020
969
1,213
Delaware
The amazing document that was shared shows on page 29 that the front motor for the LR-AWD is 69kW and rear motor 201kW. So AB really awakens/unlocks the front motor?

Also, agree with others, why is the LR-AWD rear motor more powerful than Performance? How bizarre, or as mentioned above sandbagging which isn't unique to Tesla, other MFG's sandbag performance output. I can't think of any EV MFG's but BMW does this frequently with their ICE vehicles.
Yes, on the LR AWD Y, the AB wakes up the front motor. It's similar to how the AB on the LR AWD 3 works.

Per the document, the Performance rear motor is understated. I haven't seen any MYP owners post much SMT info so we'll have to wait and see exactly how much the value is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: imola.zhp

GeorgeC1

Member
Jun 2, 2020
158
92
NC
If that pdf is correct then the long range still has more range than the P, with less battery
That does appear true however in the highway portion of the test the performance is more efficient. This is backed up by some driving tests. Around town I am not that concerned about range. When I am on the highway taking trips it becomes critical.
 

ecobon

Member
Dec 13, 2016
82
46
Denver, CO
I did a DCFC via CHAdeMO this morning, and watched closely on the ChargePoint app at the battery SOC percentage and amount of total energy transferred.

From 20% to 90% it was 7.99 kWh for each 10% increment. The BMS thinks 10% of the battery capacity is equal to about 8.0 kWh on my MYP.
 

AlanSubie4Life

Efficiency Obsessed Member
Oct 22, 2018
10,059
12,113
San Diego
Seems to be a lot of non-definitive evidence supporting the 82kwh battery in the new MY

The Performance Model Y documents posted here are definitive, when taken in context with prior years and comparing vs. this year's AWD.

This is really interesting and I’m surprised it hasn’t received more attention.

It has received a lot of attention in numerous threads, here and on the Model 3 forum.

What we can't know (without paying close attention to voltage numbers out of SMT at 100% charge on an AWD vs. a Performance) is whether the AWD is actually an ~82kWh pack with a lockout. I doubt it, but the only way to tell would be a difference in the fully charged voltage, or a difference in the regen available at 100% vs. the prior model year. (This is assuming a top lock, not a bottom lock.)

If there is a way to check the battery capacity at the time of inspection,

There is. Assuming the car is delivered at a decent SoC (above 80%):

Switch to Car -> Display -> Energy Display Mode => Energy

Then go to ^ -> Energy->Consumption screen, select "5 mile, average" and calculate:

Battery Capacity @ 100% (in Wh) = Avg Wh/mi * Projected Range / SoC%

If the data is not complete due to not enough miles, not sure what will happen, so car has to have 5 miles, maybe.

That will always give you your true battery capacity at 100%, within about 1kWh. You should get a result of about 77-78kWh for an AWD, and about 80-81kWh for a 2021 Performance, AFAIK. (Others who actually own one of these models can comment).

If you see lower than that (like 75-76kWh for an AWD, and 78-79kWh or lower for a 2021 Performance), personally, I would consider refusing delivery. The reason being is that means you're on the low end of initial capacity (which is something that happens; there is natural variation), so why not just wait for one that starts with ~2% more energy? There's nothing that guarantees the alternative vehicle with higher initial capacity will not decay faster, but it still improves your chances.

Caveat 1: Can't emphasize enough that you have to do this assessment at a decent charge level (otherwise massive rounding error will cause errors in the estimate), so emphasize you want your car charged above 70% (preferably 80-90%) at delivery.

Caveat 2: Relevant to current time of year: it probably won't work well when the car battery is very cold (not sure how this will work). If you've got blue snowflake or cold battery indications, don't bother calculating. If the vehicle was kept inside the delivery center you'll probably be fine. You might be able to warm the car battery from the app (if the car is plugged in - unlikely) before signing papers if they let you, but it'll be a while. The point is that this calculation can be thrown off by cold conditions.

This method, at the current time, should work on any Model 3 or Model Y vehicle. Probably any Tesla vehicle, but no idea.

As an example, on my 2018 Model 3, my capacity is 71kWh (down from initial value of ~77kWh). This is perfectly normal and expected.


118mi*477Wh/mi / 0.79 = 71250Wh = 71kWh (only 2 significant digits, so saying 71.3kWh is meaningless)

IMG_8546.JPG
 
Last edited:

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top