Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

MASTER THREAD: 2021 Model 3 - Charge data, battery discussion etc

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
View attachment 620509 View attachment 620510 this is after the update to 2020.48.12.1 (the car wanted to download the software again, but it disapeared again)

Thanks.

We can't easily compare the SMT output to the car, since they were taken 18 minutes apart. (SMT later). If they were taken at exactly the same time, we could use the SMT value to figure out the value of the constant with perhaps more precision. It looks like you lost about 0.6kWh of charge between the pictures (seems conceivable with climate on and outside temp 12C with interior temp set to 19.5C, it's about 2kW average draw).

Looks like the constant did not change significantly (probably not at all) with this update (perhaps it went down to 161Wh/rkm, but it's easily within the rounding error). 394km*162Wh/km /396rkm = 161Wh/rkm

If you ever do get a chance to get the SMT screen capture at an actual 100% charge (or even a 95% charge, could compare to others at that level, but 100% is better), try to capture the voltage if you can. Since your car is new, it might be reasonable to do it soon, just to see if you achieve a full capacity higher than the BMS currently projects. Remember you can use the cabin heat to bring it down to 90-95% without driving, subsequently. (Just remember to set a timer for two hours or so, otherwise you'll waste lots of energy, lol.)
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the figures, here is an update of my Performance table. Only 2020 and 2021 to keep it simple.

Capture d’écran 2020-12-23 à 22.04.37.png
 
Yes it's confusing. Nobody with a 2021 Perf have more than 499km at 100% ?

No idea. This report shows a 499/500km result with a pack with (clearly) over 80kWh of capacity.

Remember that Tesla typically establishes a hard limit on the maximum that CAN be displayed for a given vehicle, no matter how energetic the battery. To me it looks like that is currently at ~499/500km for the 2021 Performance (I am using absence of evidence to the contrary to draw that conclusion). And will change in a future update.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TomaGo
21 P3D 90% is 276 miles. Can’t recall if it was different prior to update. Only 121 miles on the car.

850xxx Vin

48.12.1 with “updated range display.”

Thanks for the data!

Sounds like it hasn’t changed. This roughly matches prior reports, though not exactly (range seems perhaps slightly lower than that reported in Europe on Performance...).

If you take this picture and do the calculation my guess is you’ll end up with ~80kWh.

Eventually you should see about 283 rated miles at 90% assuming it happens soon before your battery loses some capacity.

CE041494-55B8-47E2-B5F1-D309F1C4BD1A.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlantaMCR
I charged my 2021 LR up to 100% again yesterday for a road trip. Displayed range was 352 miles / 566 km at 54F in my garage.

The charge constant from the 100% values is 136.8 Wh/km / 220.2 Wh/mi.

Does temperature-related range loss set in at that temp to account for the 1 mile loss, or is this degradation starting? I’m over 1000 miles now so I’d expect to see a little bit starting to show, so 352 makes sense. Maybe this also implies I have a 79kWh and not 82kWh battery, since degradation might take longer to show up in the latter case? But we don’t actually know what math and limiting Tesla is doing with those differing pack sizes...maybe going from 82 to 81.9 currently makes the car think it went from 79 to 78.9.

I drove the same route from Portland to Sisters and back as a couple weeks ago, but charged on the way back in Detroit this time. Could’ve made it back to Salem again with around 9% left. Average temp was colder than last trip at about 39F (Teslamate data has gaps where cell coverage drops out), and I had the cabin temp set to 65F and seat heater turned up to max. (Last trip I made it to Salem at 12%, with outside temps averaging 45F but the cabin at 68F and seat heat lower. My speeds were lower on the mountain roads this time, but I was driving ~5mph faster elsewhere so it was probably a wash.)

There was a little snow and a ton of sand on route 22 going over the mountain this trip...does driving over sanded roads affect range like wet roads do?

I drove 225.4 miles and went from 100% to 22%, so that’s 289 miles of range down to 0%, or 303 miles including the ~4.5% under zero. If I include the distance to Salem those numbers go to 303 miles to 0% and 318 miles to -4.5%.

86 - 90% of rated range with those weather conditions seems pretty reasonable! (Please correct me if I didn’t do this math quite right with the under zero buffer.) I’m extremely happy with the heat pump, since from what I know a pre-2021 car would’ve suffered much more in the cold.

Here’s a photo of my regen dots before starting out. Went down to 99% before I could check due to unplugging and the cabin heating, but I didn’t actually move before taking the photo. I heated the car for 30 - 45 mins beforehand so the battery was a little warmed.
E2199E1F-295B-4A64-8AB0-B23F5651B3EF.jpeg
 
It’s an energy estimate. But does not depend on how you drive and is intended to be as accurate a measure of energy as possible.

The 276 above was at 90%. The 550, who knows. But seems about right for an LG.

Merry Christmas.

Ok, so I have a model 3 LR AWD with "E3D" in the declaration. When I drag the slider it says right now (cold weather, but charging on schuko) 534 km. Earlier it has said both 545 and 520. So I don't understand this. When I bought it I was promised 580 km in estimated range?

Merry christmas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Npap
Awesome! Thanks for the data. You didn't happen to get detailed trip meter data to compare to rated mile use for any of the segments, did you? Since you're using % it would be of limited utility anyway (less resolution), but was just curious to see whether the alignment was still as expected (I'd expect to see about 0.99*0.955*220.2Wh/rmi = 208Wh/rmi(displayed) when doing the calculation from the trip meter and comparing to rated miles used).

Does temperature-related range loss set in at that temp to account for the 1 mile loss, or is this degradation starting?

Could be either. Wouldn't be surprised if it is just capacity loss. But cold temps also do slightly reduce capacity.

. Maybe this also implies I have a 79kWh and not 82kWh battery, since degradation might take longer to show up in the latter case?

I don't think you have a larger battery (apparently we're never going to know, because no one will get those pictures of the battery labels (fairly easy!) on the Performance and AWD in the US so we can compare them, lol). However, we can't tell from your information, anyway.

We know from other vehicles how Tesla treats software limits and capacity loss. For the SR, they limited the capacity to be about 92% of the SR+. But as the battery degrades, they simply get that same % of the maximum capacity. So say max capacity on SR+ was 52.5kWh (just arbitrarily picked). SR would have 48.1kWh to start. When the battery degrades to 51kWh max, the SR would have 46.8kWh available.

So it's actually the second thing you said - any degradation of a locked pack would basically entirely show up for you even if you COULD maintain your range if Tesla decided to treat it that way - but they don't.

does driving over sanded roads affect range like wet roads do?

Probably not as much. Comes down to how well you roll on the surface.

I drove 225.4 miles and went from 100% to 22%, so that’s 289 miles of range down to 0%, or 303 miles including the ~4.5% under zero. If I include the distance to Salem those numbers go to 303 miles to 0% and 318 miles to -4.5%.

I didn't quite understand the second sentence here. Calculations:

Energy Used: 0.78*352rmi*220.2Wh/rmi * 0.955rmi(displayed)/rmi = 57.7kWh
Miles: 225.4
Wh/mi = 256Wh/mi
Displayed on trip meter: ~0.99*256Wh/mi = 253Wh/mi

For your full 77.8kWh, at that efficiency, you had range of 77.8/57.7*225.4 = 304 miles

(Please correct me if I didn’t do this math quite right with the under zero buffer.)

It basically seemed fine, though you may have inverted it but fortunately 1/(1-x) = (1-x)^-1 ~ = 1+x when x is small. The calculation would be 289 miles/0.955 = 304 miles
 
  • Informative
Reactions: kxts
Fair enough, but what should the rated km be then?

For the LG's it is a bit unclear, but there are a couple reports of 550km @ 100%. So that appears to be the max, probably. So that would be about 75.2kWh. But haven't seen an SMT report with quite that high yet, can't remember the max, we've seen at least 74.6kWh and possibly higher. Have to search the thread; I can't keep track. All these numbers are "for now." There may be changes.

For the Panasonic the max is 568km (353 miles). At least one clearly documented report of that in the US.

When I drag the slider it says right now (cold weather, but charging on schuko) 534 km. Earlier it has said both 545 and 520. So I don't understand this.

Ignore those numbers in the app, unless your battery is charged up to 80-90%. I imagine those projections you mentioned were done from a pretty low state of charge. There is huge error on the extrapolation at lower SoCs. It's just the way the math works (you can do a sensitivity analysis yourself). Cold may also play a part (I don't live in a cold environment so I don't know exactly how it decides to declare its estimates when the snowflake is there). Best to just charge up the battery with a decently high current, maybe pre-warm the battery, and then check right after.

Anyway: Just use the miles when you're charged to 90%, and then extrapolate to 100%, that's easiest. Or charge to 100% if you're going on a trip somewhere.

Which software version are you on? To me it looks most likely that you have an LG battery on the prior software version, but it could be the numbers are generally low because of temperature (or due to two extrapolation errors which happened to break to the low side). Or your battery capacity may currently be artificially capped if you actually have a Panasonic.

Merry Christmas.

BTW, I'm not sure which EPA efficiency number is analogous to the 580km WLTP efficiency number (I don't keep track of WLTP), but you'll never see the WLTP number displayed in the car from what I understand. And that's ok. Convert the EPA number of 353 rated miles to km, and that is what the "best" AWD non-P vehicles for 2021 are displaying (568km). That rating is equivalent to or better than a WLTP number of 580km.

And no, we don't understand why E3Ds (supposed to be Panasonic) are sometimes limited to the same lower capacity (~75kWh) as the E5Ds (supposed to be LG) - there have been many reports of this.

But some E3Ds are not limited (they have 77-78kWh), from what I understand. There have been a couple reports of that, I believe. Have to peruse through 15 pages of this thread. Somebody probably keeps track of this. At this point it's so in flux, most likely, that it isn't really worth keeping track of.
 
Last edited:
Thank you all very much for the questions from me - a complete Tesla noob. Have a merry christmas and I hope I will be able to help others with things I've learned here. You are right that these estimates from the app were from a low state of charge. I will do some more testing later and also try to have a picture of the label. I have no idea whether I have panasonic, but it should be as it is E3D. Anyways, I am really happy with the car and if it charges fairly quick on supercharger on long trips I will have what I need.

I have software version 2020.48.12.1 3095698c8a55
 
over støtdemper.jpg

I honestly can't figure out how to take the picture of the battery pack. See attached image from right front wheel. The only hole i find is the one in the top of the attached image (from my video), but my phone can't fit in there... (quite small hole)
 
View attachment 620897

I honestly can't figure out how to take the picture of the battery pack. See attached image from right front wheel. The only hole i find is the one in the top of the attached image (from my video), but my phone can't fit in there... (quite small hole)
I think they changed in 21 model. I can't seem to see the motor number either. It is much better covered now.