Bump to 325 mi range and 5% power

[ggnykk]

Wasn't the range already 325, they just had the EPA cap it to 310 to be the same as the AWD?

this is correct.

 

[GregRF]

Wasn't the range already 325, they just had the EPA cap it to 310 to be the same as the AWD?

The EPA test doc actually showed 334.

But that was also back in '17 when they rated it at 126mpge, at some point they boosted that to 130mpge.

 

[pandam3]

I’d be curious if it’s a 5% bump all across the power band or 5% at the top end. Or even an average of 5% increase across the power band meaning same top end but much more low or midrange power.

If it’s all across the power band then it’s gonna feel significant.

 

[COrocket]

Wasn't the range already 325, they just had the EPA cap it to 310 to be the same as the AWD?

Yeah - people’s cars won’t actually go any farther. They just adjust the rated Wh/mile from 241 to 229 in the LR RWD models to account for the higher efficiency and 325 will show up when you charge to 100%, It would be cool if there was spare battery capacity to be unlocked but since they didn’t do it for the AWD, the efficiency tweak is my best guess.

 

[McFlurri]

I agree with everyone here. Doubtful that Tesla will unlock some of the spare Kwh used for anti bricking, to actually give us more range. I predict this is just a change to the little number on our screens.

Question though....
Why did he say firmware updated vs software update? I don't really know the difference. (My experience with a firmware update is the last time Tesla mentioned that.. it was for the BMS and I had to take my car to a service center)

 

[stonelance]

Yeah, i also doubt it is an actual efficiency improvement as I would expect that to also apply at least partially to AWD since it shares a motor.

 

[rajivpsf]

Is it 5% increase in power for LR AWD?

 

[Matt L]

Is it 5% increase in power for LR AWD?

For all

 

[Zoomit]

For all

on average. some more, some less.

 

[zhu-]

For all

It's 5% average though, so some models might be more.

and add an average of approximately 5% peak power to all Model 3 vehicles.

$35,000 Tesla Model 3 Available Now

 

[SlicedBr3ad]

Is it 5% increase in power for LR AWD?

I'm hoping they have some goodies coming to awd owners at some point. Like even better range than rwd lr due to optimized motor operation.

 

[PoitNarf]

Average 5% peak power increase eh? It was hard enough for me to keep my efficiency somewhat normal. Giving me a little more power? Now I’m never going to hit the old 310 max range let alone this supposed new 325 mile range

 

[Knightshade]

I'm hoping they have some goodies coming to awd owners at some point. Like even better range than rwd lr due to optimized motor operation.

..what?

The rear motor is the more efficient one. Every time you're using the front motor you're less efficient. So the "most efficient" AWD mode would be front motor off. In which case you've got a RWD with extra dead weight on the front axle.

RWD>AWD for efficiency because physics.


The S doesn't work this way because it doesn't have a higher efficiency PM rear motor like the 3 does.

 

[ebmcs03]

..what?

The rear motor is the more efficient one. Every time you're using the front motor you're less efficient. So the "most efficient" AWD mode would be front motor off. In which case you've got a RWD with extra dead weight on the front axle.

RWD>AWD for efficiency because physics.


The S doesn't work this way because it doesn't have a higher efficiency PM rear motor like the 3 does.

How come the website says RWD and AWD is the same weight?

 

[Knightshade]

How come the website says RWD and AWD is the same weight?

Eh?

• Standard RWD: 3,552 lb (1,611 kg)[5]
• Standard dual-motor AWD: 3,757 lb (1,704 kg)[5]
• Mid-range RWD: 3,686 lb (1,672 kg)[5]
• Long-range RWD: 3,814 lb (1,730 kg)[5][6]
• Long-range dual-motor AWD (including Performance): 4,072 lb (1,847 kg)

Dual motor is over 250 lbs heavier.

 

[ebmcs03]

Eh?

• Standard RWD: 3,552 lb (1,611 kg)[5]
• Standard dual-motor AWD: 3,757 lb (1,704 kg)[5]
• Mid-range RWD: 3,686 lb (1,672 kg)[5]
• Long-range RWD: 3,814 lb (1,730 kg)[5][6]
• Long-range dual-motor AWD (including Performance): 4,072 lb (1,847 kg)

Dual motor is over 250 lbs heavier.

Go here. At the very bottom compare the models. Switch between the models.
Model 3 | Tesla

 

[ebmcs03]

Eh?

• Standard RWD: 3,552 lb (1,611 kg)[5]
• Standard dual-motor AWD: 3,757 lb (1,704 kg)[5]
• Mid-range RWD: 3,686 lb (1,672 kg)[5]
• Long-range RWD: 3,814 lb (1,730 kg)[5][6]
• Long-range dual-motor AWD (including Performance): 4,072 lb (1,847 kg)

Dual motor is over 250 lbs heavier.

 

[Benjamin Brooks]

View attachment 381758 View attachment 381759

Good ol’ Tesla website errors. Dime a dozen...

 

[timk225]

To go from 310 miles to 325, Tesla is unlocking some battery capacity aside from the anti-bricking buffers. Remember, they were putting the new 2170 cells and new motor design out on the street at the time these cars began production. So they were understandably held back a bit.

I'll be taking my 3 back to the 1/4 mile dragstrip in the spring and will compare time sheets. Should go from 104 in the 1/4 to 105 or 106.

90% charge on 310 miles got me 278-279, 90% on 325 would be 292-293 miles.

Never use 1/8 mile dragstrips, they are a joke and a waste of time. 1/4 mile only!

 

[TEG]

RWD with Dual Motors !... Nice... Should I stop by the service center to have them install my 2nd motor?
It must be one motor for each rear wheel...