You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hardware. They do not have any software limited onboard chargers any more. There was only a very tiny group of Model X vehicles when that was first introduced that had software locked chargers. The Model 3 does not have that at all.Main question I have is if anyone knows if the 11kW model3 AC charging limitation in the car is HW or SW based?
Just wondering if future SW update is possible to raise the ceiling and increase AC charging speeds.
That seems to be the trend that Tesla is going toward: medium speed capability in the cars for AC charging, but relying on more locations of fast DC charging. This makes decent sense so they don't need to keep including such expensive high power chargers in every single car.
If you consider that in Europe the vast majority of Type 2 charging points delivers 22 kW, and if you take the position of someone who cannot charge at home and has to use every opportunity he can get to top up I would not say 11 kW makes perfect sense. It is much more a missed opportunity to cover the needs of these people. Supercharging is not acceptable for this use case because it does not scale; if you have 500 Model 3's in a city you cant supercharge all of them. If home charging is not an option you charge at the supermarket, you charge at the train station, you charge near someones house you visit. Each time you don't have 7 hours, but only one, or possibly three. This is sufficient with 22 kW. It is not worth connecting the cable with 11 kW for an hour. 16.5 would still have been a nice compromise.
But we will see. The problem might disappear once cities learn that widespread charging infrastructure in the streets is important, so you can "home charge" near to your house. There 3 kW is enough.
I don't think I actually agree with it, though. I do wish higher powered chargers were still an option.Agree, why pay for the charger if you don't need it. Tesla has been keeping things simple and removing what they determine to be unnecessary.
...except where there isn't. This is the part that is still bugging me. Installation costs are inversely related to available quantity. It is not all that big of an expense or trouble for a place to put an AC wall connector of some kind on an 80 or 100A circuit. You get a few of those around because it's not a lot of work or expense to get them added. But what business is going to pay tens of thousands of dollars for a DC fast charging station? Basically none, so that is left up to the charging network companies, who have the double edged sword. It's really expensive to put them in, so they have to charge horrible amounts for the electricity in order to basically not lose quite as much money.I don't really see this location -> location charging being a thing, especially with Teslas. For people who don't have home or work charging, there is supercharging.
I don't think I actually agree with it, though. I do wish higher powered chargers were still an option.
...except where there isn't. This is the part that is still bugging me. Installation costs are inversely related to available quantity. It is not all that big of an expense or trouble for a place to put an AC wall connector of some kind on an 80 or 100A circuit. You get a few of those around because it's not a lot of work or expense to get them added. But what business is going to pay tens of thousands of dollars for a DC fast charging station? Basically none, so that is left up to the charging network companies, who have the double edged sword. It's really expensive to put them in, so they have to charge horrible amounts for the electricity in order to basically not lose quite as much money.
...except where there isn't.
Perhaps my message wasn't clear. You are still thinking locally, talking about "running errands", and I'm talking about travel routes. There are still several routes near me that are the only direct reasonable path to somewhere, but it happens to be a U.S. federal highway or a state highway, but is not an interstate, and Tesla seems very tunnel-vision about only putting Superchargers on the interstates for the most part.With the range of cars having reached 200+, you don't need to charge up to do your errands. In the off-chance that you do, there will be a supercharger somewhere. The SC capacity will also be there for others who are taking trips, so there is no wasted charger being built for the needs for 0-1 people.
Perhaps my message wasn't clear. You are still thinking locally, talking about "running errands", and I'm talking about travel routes. There are still several routes near me that are the only direct reasonable path to somewhere, but it happens to be a U.S. federal highway or a state highway, but is not an interstate, and Tesla seems very tunnel-vision about only putting Superchargers on the interstates for the most part.
So for these travel routes, the cost is very reasonable for businesses to put in a 70-80 amp AC wall connector to meet that need where there is not a Supercharger to use to travel there. And it is unfortunate that Tesla is removing the capability from the cars to make use of that extra available charging power.
Do you really not see that you are arguing against yourself with this very example? They could save even more money by only making the short range version of the car and not offering any extra-cost bigger battery version. That would save them so much more money by not offering anything better as an option!!!It is easy to disagree with all the places where Tesla chose to save $100 on the car and say "its only $20 or $100 on a 40k purchase".
For example, Tesla Model 3 did not come with a key, and someone could have said "I wanted one".
For example, they only have 3 variants (SR+, AWD, P) when they could have offered more skews.
Do you really not see that you are arguing against yourself with this very example? They could save even more money by only making the short range version of the car and not offering any extra-cost bigger battery version. That would save them so much more money by not offering anything better as an option!!!
That's why your protests don't really make much sense. As an extra cost option, they could leave it out of most of the cars and have that savings, but still make extra money by selling it as an add-on to people who want it.
How is that any different in any way whatsoever?! You are suggesting making the less capable car as the only one available and not offering the more capable version as an option to anyone. It's exactly the same thing.This is sarcasm. Not offering the larger battery version and making only 1 version would mean that all customers pay the same amount no matter how much they are willing to pay. That is different than making a custom car for a few people.