Does the model 3 need to be fettled to be a daily driver?

[DigbyChicken]

Is this outside? (looks like it is)



Doesn't the 3pin plug simply pull out of the charger control box? (or am I missing something)

Finally, if you don't mind me asking, what's your milleage to charging routine been, how long, how often and so on?

Yes, it is outside - the setup is relatively well protected from the rain (a gutter runs above it) and certainly the main UMC unit isn't in any danger of standing in water. (And the RCD at the other end of the Toughleads socket has never tripped.)

And, yes, the 3-pin lead does connect to the main box, but I'm kind of banking on a potential tea-leaf not knowing that. ;-) The padlock is more for show I suppose. If someone wanted to walk off with my Tesla mobile connector when the car's away, I guess they could, but the cable fits very tightly, plus because of the bracket, it would take some work to free the main unit...

We've supercharged a few times but most of those 5.5k miles have come through the 3-pin! At the moment, I have two longish commutes (75 miles each way) each week. I charge it to 90% the night before (just in case...), and on my return, I plug it in and reduce the charge limit back down to its usual 80%. It depends on when I get back of course, but it's usually finished charging by early the next morning (it adds a little under 10 miles of range an hour). My wife drives the M3 to work (in town) and to see patients a few days a week, and the rest of the time it's just plugged in and trickle-charging. Plus we've had a few social weekends on top. If I had my two commuting days back-to-back it might get a little frustrating, but at the moment this seems to work for us.

 

[Jason71]

(it adds a little under 10 miles of range an hour).

I usually quote 6-7miles per hour. a little under 10 is a bit optimistic for an LR I think even in the summer.

 

[DigbyChicken]

I usually quote 6-7miles per hour. a little under 10 is a bit optimistic for an LR I think even in the summer.

I'm sure you're right - I've never really done the maths and am thinking of the 10amp/10 or 9 miles-per-hour summary I see on the Tessie app when I check to see how the charging is going...

 

[AndrewGR]

10 amps at 240V is 2.4 kW. During the summer 240 Wh/ mile is not unreasonable so would equate to 10 miles charge per hour if charging was 100% efficient. It isn’t. But 90% efficiency is realistic which would be 9 miles an hour. In winter typically I achieve closer to 300 Wh/mile so would only see more like 7 miles per hour from 10A charging.

 

[Jason71]

10 amps at 240V is 2.4 kW. During the summer 240 Wh/ mile is not unreasonable so would equate to 10 miles charge per hour if charging was 100% efficient. It isn’t. But 90% efficiency is realistic which would be 9 miles an hour. In winter typically I achieve closer to 300 Wh/mile so would only see more like 7 miles per hour from 10A charging.

The official nominal voltage in the UK is 230V and has been since 2003. I know in reality it fluctuates but I think that should be the average figure used in this sort of calculation. And I know it depends on how you drive but my summer average is more like 260wh/m.
You are right about the efficiency 90% may be generous more like 85% for a UMC I have heard.

On a side note:
I did a calculation on my car after 6 months. kwh consumed according to my charger vs kwh consumed according to the car. Actual was 30% higher than the car reported. the kwh/m figure is the car is good only for calculating range and does not account for charging loss/ sentry/preheat/vampire drain or any other use while standing still. I am not sure most people appreciate when working out the cost of running an EV that whatever efficiency they think they will average you need to add on 30% when calculating the cost of electricity.

 

[DigbyChicken]

I have no idea if this is of any interest or use, and I'm just reporting figures from my most recent lengthy-ish charge according to the Tessie app:

Time taken: 16 hours 38 minutes (from 14:45 yesterday to 07:23 this morning)
Average outside temperature: 12 degrees C (so very much not in the depths of winter...)
Average/peak power: 2 kW
Average/peak current: 10 A
Average voltage: 234 V
Peak voltage: 239 V
Energy added: 35.91 kWh ('Used': 38.92 kWh; efficiency 92%)
Range added: 163 miles

I think that makes 9.79 miles per hour, at least as far as the Tesla's own estimation of its potential range - and I'm sure there are a gazillion caveats you all wish to add now, and rightly so.

The other reason for mentioning a (doubtless optimistic) 10 miles added per hour is that it makes it easier for me to do the maths in my head.

Anyway, all I'm really saying is that 3-pin works well enough if your life allows it...!

 

[Jason71]

I have no idea if this is of any interest or use, and I'm just reporting figures from my most recent lengthy-ish charge according to the Tessie app:

Time taken: 16 hours 38 minutes (from 14:45 yesterday to 07:23 this morning)
Average outside temperature: 12 degrees C (so very much not in the depths of winter...)
Average/peak power: 2 kW
Average/peak current: 10 A
Average voltage: 234 V
Peak voltage: 239 V
Energy added: 35.91 kWh ('Used': 38.92 kWh; efficiency 92%)
Range added: 163 miles

I think that makes 9.79 miles per hour, at least as far as the Tesla's own estimation of its potential range - and I'm sure there are a gazillion caveats you all wish to add now, and rightly so.

The other reason for mentioning a (doubtless optimistic) 10 miles added per hour is that it makes it easier for me to do the maths in my head.

Anyway, all I'm really saying is that 3-pin works well enough if your life allows it...!

I think the key part there is "Tesla's own Estimation" That range is based on a wh/m of 220. But I don't think many LR drivers are getting that even in the middle of summer and definitely not on a series of short 2 way commutes starting from cold at this type of year.
Efficiency of 92% is interesting though. not sure where that comes from. Does the UMC records and report to the car the kwh it consumes? or is that the difference between what arrived at the car and what ended up in the battery? in which case there is more to take off that is not shown?

 

[AndrewGR]

I am not sure most people appreciate when working out the cost of running an EV that whatever efficiency they think they will average you need to add on 30% when calculating the cost of electricity.

I’d agree that power used is much higher than the car records for a number of reasons. I have a meter on the supply to my chargepoint. I reckon the actual power supplied is about 25% more over 15000 miles than has been recorded by the car’s trip counter.
I don’t know if this is common to all EVs but it contrasts with ICEs where, in my experience the reported mpg and hence gallons (litres) consumed very closely matches what has been dispensed by the fuel station pumps.

 

[Neilman]

I’d agree that power used is much higher than the car records for a number of reasons. I have a meter on the supply to my chargepoint. I reckon the actual power supplied is about 25% more over 15000 miles than has been recorded by the car’s trip counter.
I don’t know if this is common to all EVs but it contrasts with ICEs where, in my experience the reported mpg and hence gallons (litres) consumed very closely matches what has been dispensed by the fuel station pumps.

You're not quite equating EV's with ICE on the same level...

The fuel at the pump for an ICE car has already been refined and is "finished" and ready to use.
An EV doesn't use AC and in addition, the "engine" is partially running while refueling so the AC consumed is used to power and control battery thermals in addition to being "refined" into DC for the battery.
There is a similar loss when using 3rd party DC chargers as they bill you for the AC they used before conversion to DC (plus EV thermal losses and powering the car).

By all accounts we think the power billed at a Tesla Supercharger is for the DC that makes it into the battery.

The losses look worse when using a granny charger because there's less AC power to start with compared to 3-phase AC or higher power DC chargers.

 

[pilki42]

Charger at home is a bit of a problem unfortunately, due to length of my back garden, where my drive is located relative to the house and how I am forced to position the car when parked. Not to mention my electricity box is also at the front of the house with no reasonable route through to the back without some serious upheaval. I had thought about trying to fit a 13A extension down my back garden to my shed but as I say, there are other difficulties, as in the way I need to face the car, charge port position and so on, so even this would be far from ideal.

It might be worth speaking to a local installer about what they could do. Chances are they could be crafty with cable routing so it's nearly invisible and a home charger can be fitted to your driveway. Or failing that, perhaps an outdoor Commando socket and then using the charging cable you get with the Tesla + an adaptor.

In the long run, this will play out better, you're always going to get a far cheaper rate on your electricity if you're charging at home.

 

[DigbyChicken]

I think the key part there is "Tesla's own Estimation" That range is based on a wh/m of 220. But I don't think many LR drivers are getting that even in the middle of summer and definitely not on a series of short 2 way commutes starting from cold at this type of year.
Efficiency of 92% is interesting though. not sure where that comes from. Does the UMC records and report to the car the kwh it consumes? or is that the difference between what arrived at the car and what ended up in the battery? in which case there is more to take off that is not shown?

Absolutely agree re Tesla's range estimate (though our other car is a Leaf, complete with laughable Guessometer, so I know from personal experience, it could be a lot worse...). Would a more accurate way of approaching this be to say that I used 56% of the battery yesterday to drive 146.2 miles (lots of. shall we say, dual carriageway driving!)...? And therefore 1% of the battery = 2.61 miles of driving at that speed, etc. (A 260-mile real-world range fits well with the car/Tessie's two figures of 266 miles/270 miles 'in the real world'.) And, as per the earlier figures, it took 16 hours 38 minutes to charge the battery from 31% to 80%. That's - all of this is a bit rough, I know, given that I'm using round-number percentages - 127.89 miles in 998 minutes, or 7.688 miles added every hour charging on a 3-pin. Which is pretty much what AndrewGR said a few posts back...!

No idea where Tessie gets the efficiency score from; it simply says "The energy added versus the energy used", which isn't terribly helpful...

 

[Alistairuk]

Absolutely agree re Tesla's range estimate (though our other car is a Leaf, complete with laughable Guessometer, so I know from personal experience, it could be a lot worse...). Would a more accurate way of approaching this be to say that I used 56% of the battery yesterday to drive 146.2 miles (lots of. shall we say, dual carriageway driving!)...? And therefore 1% of the battery = 2.61 miles of driving at that speed, etc. (A 260-mile real-world range fits well with the car/Tessie's two figures of 266 miles/270 miles 'in the real world'.) And, as per the earlier figures, it took 16 hours 38 minutes to charge the battery from 31% to 80%. That's - all of this is a bit rough, I know, given that I'm using round-number percentages - 127.89 miles in 998 minutes, or 7.688 miles added every hour charging on a 3-pin. Which is pretty much what AndrewGR said a few posts back...!

No idea where Tessie gets the efficiency score from; it simply says "The energy added versus the energy used", which isn't terribly helpful...

I’ve been using a “worse case” approach of: summer - 1% = 2 miles range, winter - 1% = 1.5 miles if I’m doing a long journey otherwise 1% = 1 mile if I’m doing lots of short start / stop journeys…

Never seen it get to the stage where my actual range has been as bad as the estimate with this method but does help with any range anxiety you may have!