-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Catch me up on M3 LR from 2018 vs current
- Thread starter bottomsup
- Start date
Better software
Better motors
Better battery chemistry
Better cooling and heating - heat pump for efficiency
Add them all up, and the range goes up by a whole lot!
Tesla continues to evolve and innovate... it’s fantastic.
Some of the upgrades are certainly having some early life growing pains, ie the heat pump, changes to the interior that some like and some don't (removal of the dead pedal). I'm perfectly happy with my 2018 LR AWD and personally am glad I'm not dealing with any of the new issues. I'm sure they will all eventually get ironed out though.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
You are older.
Joking aside, your car (and my car) were rated 324 miles by the EPA but Tesla chose to list them as 310 miles. The ~ 10% increase in range is mostly heat pump/Octovalve, and I think the battery is a little better.
The improvement in range is a YMMV: not much difference outside of the summer, a definite improvement in cold winter climates. The numbers are a bit of an apples to oranges comparo because Tesla used a full 5 cycle EPA for the 2021 Model 3 instead of the 2 cycle EPA test used in the 2018 model.
Bottom LIne: Not much different for moderate climate owners; a definite improvement for cold winter folk.
Last edited:
puckpurnell
Member
Ditto. Love my late 2018 build M3 LR AWD. I'm always interested in seeing what Tesla does to innovate and improve. As I told my wife (justification here we are), buying the 2018 M3 in December of that year was like buying a 1964 or 1965 Mustang in 1964/65. This is my last car because I'm 74 and only drive about 8K a year. When Lady Sprite Blue gets handed down, she'll be almost a classic. My trust is that Elon will keep these early adopter cars viable forever as a matter of
principle.
They already had computer upgrades for people who bought model 3s in 2018. Since that is possible, it will likely continue to be possible in the future. It depends on what you define as "viable". it will probably drive, and behave similar to what it does NOW, for the forseeable future. Its certainly possible that new teslas at some point have different sensor suites etc, and do better with FSD, but that would not make this vehicle "not viable".
I dont agree that this will be a "classic", but I do think that, barring physical failure of a major component, that these cars will be "viable" for quite some time. Even if the battery gets down to 50% capacity at some point in the future, for most people that would make a "viable" around town vehicle.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
I also own a '24 kWh' Model LEAF that is good for ~ 16 kWh usable. It makes for a pretty good 'around town' vehicle. My model 3 can lose 80% of its capacity
Since when? Because as far as I know, only the Performance got the 82.1 kWh battery.
Only the M3P got the bigger battery, the M3 LR still seems to be getting the 75kwh battery which is why the 2021 M3P had a big increase in range but the LR only got a small one. 1 foot driving appeared in 2019 as did tow hook and sound generator, spec wise coat hooks went going into 2020, wheel design changed then too, changed again into 2021 which was the bigger update with the heat pump, double pain front glass and dechrome as some of the changes, interior had a few changes too and China built cars get new door cards, otherwise they're just tweaks.
You can see model changes over time here (there's a lot of MS to scroll past before you get to the model 3 but the big stuff is listed by year)
Tesla model history and changes by year
You can see model changes over time here (there's a lot of MS to scroll past before you get to the model 3 but the big stuff is listed by year)
Tesla model history and changes by year
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Well, same software if you kept the 2018 updated.
Worse, actually.
The rear anyway. Front is the same.
The LR non-P got the same rear motor as the P back in 2018.
Now it gets the less capable (but cheaper to make) 990 rear motor.
This one is certainly true.
some folks haven't had the best results with heat pump cars, but overall yeah should be helpful for efficiency
Various other non-range changes (2018 came with about $500 in hardware the newer cars don't like homelink, 14-50 adapter, dead pedal, some of the mats... for a while they had removed the auto-dim mirrors too but IIRC those are back now- the USB ports have changed, the console changed, double pane glass now, etc....
Is it really that painful ?
Oh wait, maybe you meant double-pane...
...or better yet, "laminated"...
Last edited:
Well, relative to the state of affairs in 2018, the software is certainly more efficient now than it was then. We all got a few bumps in acceleration and efficiency.
Less acceleration but more efficient. Slightly lighter, less MOSFETs... just a little more efficient.
I was (and am) one of the skeptics in extreme conditions. Anything moderate to mild, I expect great things from the heat pump. But the lowest end — could be an issue.
most of the heat pump challenges appear to be defective sensors.
So many to list ... even one-pedal driving wasn’t a thing in 2018. Remember when they added full-stop? One of my favorite updates ever!
I was thinking purely from an efficiency/range perspective but you’re 100% right. So much continues to evolve!
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
There's not really any significant evidence that this is true. In fact the 2020 Performance 18" (980) was notably more efficient than the 2020 AWD 18" (990) in EPA testing. My theory is that it was tested with the fully updated full set of efficiency optimizations, while the 2020 AWD was tested with just the intermediate improvement (there were at least two separate efficiency improvements, one around the time of this testing). If they had had the same software I would have expected them to get roughly equivalent results.
You might even expect 33% more MOSFETS (24 vs. 18) to reduce losses in the FETs in the Performance (or older AWD through sometime in 2019) motor, though any such effect doesn't appear to be substantial and it's never really showed in any efficiency testing.
In terms of raw, best achievable efficiency, on a 2018, vs. a 2021, with heat pump off, there appears to be no significant difference between these vehicles, assuming they are both on the latest software build. And the batteries appear to be the same nominal size. (Unless you're opting for a Performance of course.) So no substantial range change.
So it's not great to give people the impression that there is going to be a significant difference in range between these two vehicles. However, some reasons I can think of that a buyer might want to upgrade if range is a concern:
1) If your 2018 battery is degraded by 5-10%, you'll get that back.
2) You are in a climate where the heat pump would be helpful (rainy Pacific Northwest, for example) and save you money & efficiency. (This is the main reason for the increase from ~332 EPA miles (not 322) on the Performance 2020 18" to 353 miles on the 2021 AWD.)
I'm sure there are tiny optimizations and hardware changes that actually DO improve efficiency aside from the heat pump, but based on EPA test results they do not appear to be large. (2020 Performance 18" (980) is only about 2.5% less efficient on the raw UDDS test in the city and identical efficiency (within 0.5%) to the 2021 AWD (990) on the HWFET test.)
So my opinion is that anyone buying a 2021 Model 3 AWD solely for the 14% range increase from 2018 is likely to be sorely disappointed (caveats noted above) - but of course there are many other reasons to just buy a new car if you have the money for it.
I'm don't doubt you, but was curious about what specifically you're referring to when comparing the 2021 77.8kWh battery to the older 2018 77.8kWh battery in terms of better battery chemistry. The denser Performance batteries in 2021 are superior, for density, at least.
Last edited:
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Was basing off this thread where Gigagrunt mentions the new chemistry for 2021, and at least one participant cites their EU docs saying their LR AWD got the denser/newer pack.
https://twitter.com/BillWri90307793/status/1326456385345712128
If the new chemistry cells continue to otherwise been exclusive to the P (and apparently SR per GG) it's possible that guy got a one-off or something I guess, hadn't been following it too closely so you'd probably know better than I.
Are you trying to say that the 310-mile and 353-mile rated Model 3’s don’t offer any real difference in actual range?
We’ll have to agree to disagree.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Thanks, hadn't seen this thread before.
Not sure if this is the guy you were referring to there with the EU docs (https://twitter.com/Geniusam1/status/1328615217325084672?s=20), but we now know E3D references the “normal” Panasonic pack (all covered in that other thread). I think it's an E3LD or something for the 2170L pack in the COC docs (lol, I'm a child) now.
Last edited:
