Since the unveil I've heard so many people disappointed with; Slow supercharging of the 3 Lower than expected performance values for the 3 Expensive options for the 3 etc. etc. So trying to understand what they made with the 3 I plotted a spreadsheet explaining cells, pack architecture they used and supercharging speeds. We already know about the old S and X packs and their supercharging speeds. And last week we found out there were 4416 cells with the range version of the 3. Rest is all speculation but I think it makes sense. Correct me if I'm wrong or you have anything to add. I just love geeking out on technicalities like this. Here's the spreadsheet for your liking; Notes; As you can see standard Model 3 will have a very low voltage pack. Whereas most packs have 400V and 75 pack has 350V right now. Standard Model 3 pack will have a 300V pack. Meaning the same amperage when charging and driving will yield less kW i.e. power. That is why I think the spreadsheet shows the standard 3 to be slightly less efficient than the range one. I believe under acceleration packs will feed around 750-800Amps to the inverter. However because Tesla didn't want a slower than 6 sec. 0-60 car on the standard one they need more amps with standard due to less voltage. This might make it less efficient. This also explains why they're coming out with the 400V pack first. More time to test the 300V system as it is the first time they're building something with this low voltage. As for supercharging. You can see this past 4 years Tesla (up to 50%) had 1.05-1.1C supercharging with their chemistry. Figuring out the numbers from what we are given shows the same C rates for the 3. I would expect less since 2170, due to geometry, suffers from a less efficient heat dissepation. Yet apparently Tesla has made the pack cooling better with their new architecture, sustaining the same C rates. If anything they're pushing the standard pack to its limits. (I got the supercharging average power from various supercharging graph and videos I found online. They seem to check out.) I'm so glad Tesla gave up on faux battery labeling. This has been discussed thoroughly but it is very clear old 85 and 90 packs are not 85 and 90. New 75, 100 packs give what they promised. Hell a 3 year old 85 can have the same capacity as a brand new 75 now even. It astonishes me how much easier and cheaper pack building must have become with new cell geometry. ~2600 less needed for same capacity. For both terminals this means 5200 less holding or PCBs or whatever they're doing. Must have decreased the dead weight in pack as well. So to sum it all up I don't think Tesla is purposefully throttling Supercharging speed with the 3 to make S better value. If anything they're giving it their most. Also it will be very interesting if 75 indeed turns out to be more efficient than 55. OR 75 won't have 316 EPA but ~300 EPA. (Since they advertise standard to be 220mi EPA yet 310 mi non EPA for range pack) Thoughts?