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

[TimothyHW3]

numbers will rise in the spring.

Doubt it, it seems that these batteries don't go much higher than the 80.1kWh you got. Maybe 80.5 or something. The most maybe 81kWh, but by the time summer comes the degradation will kick in.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

This one, at over 30 pages, discusses a ton of data about 2021 model 3s, possible new batteries, etc and there are people from europe posting in it:

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

Thats likely the discussion you want.

same path as me.
2019 LR AWD where always 498-499 at 100% now 478 (475-482) after 20 months and 32k kilometers
Now I'm waiting a Performance Pearl White

..I mean, which is the displayed range on a new 2021 P3D with Perf Package?
I'm not asking how many miles it can does, I'm asking the displayed renge when the setting is in Miles and not on Percentage.

@conv90, replying in this thread to your other inquiry; not sure whether you got the summary answer for yourself here, but currently, the battery with ~80.7kWh (say range of 80.6-80.8kWh roughly) shows 499-500km for 2021 Model 3 Performance, as several have commented above. If you look carefully through the many pages of this thread, you'll see some exact calculations but this is close enough. I'd focus on the kWh capacity, not the rated km number, as described in this thread.

In the US, eventually this will show 315 miles (507km), this would not be an increase in range though (500km and 507km would be anticipated to be equal energies). My suspicion is they haven't updated the software to reflect the EPA rating of 315 miles (with associated constant change) because they're anticipating redoing the test (since the AC charging data and thus the MPGe for the 2021 Model 3 Performance appear to have had a major problem in the first EPA test - though the range I expect to be correct; the test issue only affects the AC number, MPGe - that being said, when they rerun the test they may get a better range if there have been any further software optimizations since the first test in latter half of 2020). It's also possible they'll unlock some additional Performance battery capacity too, though that's a lot less clear to me (getting cell voltage data from Performance owners at 100% and 0% via SMT can be difficult, though it may have been posted here - any ~1kWh capacity lock, if it is possible, could come from the top or the bottom of the pack). I only speculate this may be the case since no one seems to have hit the 82.1kWh "Full Pack When New" value for the Nominal Full Pack value.

To be clear, this is a lot of speculation. What we do know for sure is that the EPA MPGe numbers are wrong for the 2021 Performance Model 3, and that Nominal Full Pack does not match Full Pack When New (which is somewhat atypical for new cars). I'm not aware of reports that latest software updates have resulted in 2021 Performance in the US showing 315 rated miles (if anyone can report that of course chime in). But I think we're still waiting.

 

[AAKEE]

@alansubie4life:

2021 Performance EPA-test, yes we also saw that the WLTP test increased the range on refresh was 7% (530 to 567km).

I saw only 4.18-19v /cell when charging full and the nominal full waz still 81.1kwh.
They might be a bit on the safe side as the battery cells is a new type. Maybe we get 4.20v and a bit more capacity when the experience increases within Tesla avout the new cell.

 

[Devils son]

Doubt it, it seems that these batteries don't go much higher than the 80.1kWh you got. Maybe 80.5 or something. The most maybe 81kWh, but by the time summer comes the degradation will kick in.

I always thought going from 80.1 to 80.5 would be considered a rise.

 

[conv90]

@conv90, replying in this thread to your other inquiry; not sure whether you got the summary answer for yourself here, but currently, the battery with ~80.7kWh (say range of 80.6-80.8kWh roughly) shows 499-500km for 2021 Model 3 Performance, as several have commented above. If you look carefully through the many pages of this thread, you'll see some exact calculations but this is close enough. I'd focus on the kWh capacity, not the rated km number, as described in this thread.

In the US, eventually this will show 315 miles (507km), this would not be an increase in range though (500km and 507km would be anticipated to be equal energies). My suspicion is they haven't updated the software to reflect the EPA rating of 315 miles (with associated constant change) because they're anticipating redoing the test (since the AC charging data and thus the MPGe for the 2021 Model 3 Performance appear to have had a major problem in the first EPA test - though the range I expect to be correct; the test issue only affects the AC number, MPGe - that being said, when they rerun the test they may get a better range if there have been any further software optimizations since the first test in latter half of 2020). It's also possible they'll unlock some additional Performance battery capacity too, though that's a lot less clear to me (getting cell voltage data from Performance owners at 100% and 0% via SMT can be difficult, though it may have been posted here - any ~1kWh capacity lock, if it is possible, could come from the top or the bottom of the pack). I only speculate this may be the case since no one seems to have hit the 82.1kWh "Full Pack When New" value for the Nominal Full Pack value.

To be clear, this is a lot of speculation. What we do know for sure is that the EPA MPGe numbers are wrong for the 2021 Performance Model 3, and that Nominal Full Pack does not match Full Pack When New (which is somewhat atypical for new cars). I'm not aware of reports that latest software updates have resulted in 2021 Performance in the US showing 315 rated miles (if anyone can report that of course chime in). But I think we're still waiting.

Fantastic explanation. I really thank you.
I can say that when I'll receive the 2021 P3D i'll connect SMT immediately just to see the values of Full Pack when New" and "Nominal Full pack" to see discrepancies . I'm expecting to have my new Performance at the end of February/beginning of March here in Italy.
But it's a shame how in Europe the WLTP are advertised for Performance models.
OK, LR Dual motor are rated WLTP580 km (2019 and 2020 were 560km) and I have evidence that after the latest upgrade 2020.48.35 the rated is 545/550 so basically "close" to 580.
Performance models went from 530 to 567 and 499 or even the possible 507(=315 miles EPA) is so far distant than 567 , much more than the 545/550 to 580.

 

[conv90]

Then I am 100% certain, that this car has the 82.1 KWH battery with Nominal Full Pack of 78.5 KWH exactly.

We have seen '21 P models go as low as 479km / 77.5 KWH, but that isn't to say that some "tactical charging" didn't cure these low numbers after a while. I wouldn't worry.

"tactical charging"... Could you explain? Are you referring on what said in: "How I got my range back" Thread in this forum?
OR could you link a thread that explaines "tactical charging"?
What I noticed on my LR2019 is that I had always a raise in Nominal full Pack when I perform 3 or 4 charges in DC current in the range of 35-40 kW, suspending the regular normal AC charging that's the regular routine for my LR2019 (old but stil mine until I'll receive the Performance model).

 

[kadettilac]

First post here, new owner of a 2021 LR AWD in the Netherlands, delivered 29 Dec 2020. Learned a lot about which battery my car might have reading this very interesting thread (for hours) last night, but can use your help figuring out for sure.

On paper, I have the E5D as shown on the site of the official Dutch transport agency:


I've had the car for just over a month and been reading the car with SMT since 5 Jan plus I'm logging with Teslafi. SMT has shown nominal full pack at 77.3kWh in week 1. On 1 Feb I went on a trip starting with 100% (first time charging to 100%) from the 3 phase AC plug at home. This is where things got interesting: UI in car and on Watch for Tesla showed 100% and preconditioned, but SMT showed 96.73% before I started driving. Cell voltage maxed out at 4.15v and usable showed 71kWh (see SMT screenshots).




This seems to point in the direction of a Panasonic pack that is softlocked as there are several more usable kWh's there beside the buffer, if I understand correctly. But the E5D spec doesn't apply to Panasonic packs, right?

On to charging speed to determine further:

On day 1 after a 1 hour drive I charged at a V3 SuC and maxed out at 179kW. Didn't have Teslafi logging on yet, so let's see the charge on SuC v2 on 1 Feb from 1% with a warm pack (30C after 1hr drive with trailer navigating to SuC in 2C winter weather):

SuC speed:
Full speed 140-137kW until throttling started at 39%
102kW at 55%
66kW at 76% right before I stopped charging.

This seems higher than the LG E5D's can achieve but lower than the old Pana packs.

What do you guys think about which battery I have? I lean towards a soft locked Panasonic with E5D on the official docs being wrong.

PS A few SMT/Teslafi images didn't want to upload correctly, so I'll try again. I have additional screenshots of SMT at various states of charge throughout Jan if that helps.

PPS I haven't been able to take a pic of the pack yet and I haven't done the take-4-pics-of-energy-usage-screen yet hoping SMT would provide enough info, let me know if you need me to.

 

[AAKEE]

"tactical charging"... Could you explain? Are you referring on what said in: "How I got my range back" Thread in this forum?
OR could you link a thread that explaines "tactical charging"?
What I noticed on my LR2019 is that I had always a raise in Nominal full Pack when I perform 3 or 4 charges in DC current in the range of 35-40 kW, suspending the regular normal AC charging that's the regular routine for my LR2019 (old but stil mine until I'll receive the Performance model).

Mine sat at nominaf full 80.6 kwh or something like that, I connected the SMT OBD just after arriving home from delivery( almost 1000 km drive).

The nominal full was quite steady and I always kept the car connected to the charger asap when arriving.
Then I followed part of the advice and let it sit for about 3hrs without connecting the charger at a bit lower SOC for a couple of times( 30 and about 40) before charging.

Also, I charged once to 90%( regular home level is 70%) and I charged to full before a trip I would do. After these actions I had nominaf full = 81.2kwh

After this, about one month with quite regular charging cycles 70 to 40 % and now I have about 3500km on the odo and I think nominal full is down to 80.1 kwh

 

[AAKEE]

This seems to point in the direction of a Panasonic pack that is softlocked as there are several more usable kWh's there beside the buffer, if I understand correctly.

77.8kWh as Full pack when new definitely looks like a Panasonic 2170C.

71/(77.8-3.5)= About 95.6% SOC so it makes sense with a soft capped panna battery.

 

[eivissa]

"tactical charging"... Could you explain? Are you referring on what said in: "How I got my range back" Thread in this forum?
OR could you link a thread that explaines "tactical charging"?
What I noticed on my LR2019 is that I had always a raise in Nominal full Pack when I perform 3 or 4 charges in DC current in the range of 35-40 kW, suspending the regular normal AC charging that's the regular routine for my LR2019 (old but stil mine until I'll receive the Performance model).

Yes, basically the two theories to calibrate your BMS.
-A longer period of charging to 60% daily.
-Leaving your car parked and able to sleep at different SoC between 20% and 90% over weeks.

 

[NiTi]

Hi and thank you for an interesting read. Only read the last 10 or so pages though

To the point then. I have "unmatched" my M3LR delivery three times since December due to the car having the LG E5D specs.
Thinking I will only get matched a maximum of one or two times before the Q1 is over, is it even worth waiting and hoping for the Panasonic E3CD spec. Seems like the E3LD battery will not arrive anytime soon for the LR.

Does anyone have any kind of "statistics" on the odds of getting the E3CD over the E5D with LR deliveries in March to Europe/Belgium/Sweden?

Apologies if I hijack the thread in any way, but interested in all of you professionals opinion on this battery madness

 

[Devils son]

Doubt it, it seems that these batteries don't go much higher than the 80.1kWh you got. Maybe 80.5 or something. The most maybe 81kWh, but by the time summer comes the degradation will kick in.

Well, actually, today it read 80.4. And most surprisingly, without gaining rated range.

 

[eivissa]

My Nominal Full Pack and Rated Range jump around in sync so far. This is just a look at my last 30 days. I haven't seen the rated range hit 500km yet with the nominal full pack continuing the climb.

 

[kadettilac]

77.8kWh as Full pack when new definitely looks like a Panasonic 2170C.

71/(77.8-3.5)= About 95.6% SOC so it makes sense with a soft capped panna battery.

Thanks, that’s what I thought too. Any other views for the experts here? Since it’s labeled E5D while it looks to have a E3D battery, do you or others know if this has happened before?

If it’s indeed an pana battery, I take it as a positive over the LG battery as I’ll have less degradation to worry about (since tesla hid the extra capacity from me anyway). Plus a decent charging speed

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Since it’s labeled E5D while it looks to have a E3D battery, do you or others know if this has happened before?

Yes, I think that has been reported in this thread before. Paperwork seems subject to error. If you really want to know you can take a picture of your battery label, described elsewhere in this thread about 40 pages back. Search isn't working right now otherwise I'd link it, but it's a post with pictures from @FredMt .

 

[AAKEE]

TSince it’s labeled E5D while it looks to have a E3D battery, do you or others know if this has happened before?

Well, one thing: I would think its that probable that Tesla put the wrong label on the battery or the car, lower probability.

But wrong in the registration is quite probable. The German forum showed that the german M3 was mpore or less randomly assigned with battery size numbers.

So. I guess....there isnt a E5D label on the car or the battery? ...and its only a registration "issue"?

 

[kadettilac]

Clear @AlanSubie4Life and @AAKEE, thanks for your input. I’ll go label hunting to find out for sure and report back when I’ve been able to take a decent pic of the battery label. I’ve seen the post on how to do it.

If the E5D or E3D code should be on a label elsewhere on the car too, please let me know where to look.

 

[elptxjc]

If it’s indeed an pana battery, I take it as a positive over the LG battery as I’ll have less degradation to worry about (since tesla hid the extra capacity from me anyway).

Did Tesla also hide extra capacity on US M3LRs? I understand 100% charge is never 100%, to protect the battery. But in this case, you're saying Tesla hid even more than whatever they normally do, right? So instead of getting a 'fake' 100%, like maybe our cars, yours is charging only to about 97 'fake' %, right? So that extra buffer should extend the life of your battery compared to somebody who charges it to 100%? It's crazy how Tesla can mess with our cars with every update without even knowing what the heck they did. If they put a battery capable of delivering 100% 'fake', or safe charge level, why not leaving it to that level, even if they don't advertise it? Pretty crappy policy IMO.

 

[AAKEE]

If the E5D or E3D code should be on a label elsewhere on the car too, please let me know where to look.

I think E3D and E5D is EU registration/certification code. Not sure it is used in us.

Just get the battery part no and I guess we can establish it as a Panna battery.
I guess we know about all the possible battery types used so far. If I remember it correctly there is also a voltage and Ah marking on the battery.

Panasonic has two cells, 2170 ( = 2170C) and the new 2170L. LG has one type.

The size (capacity) of the cells set the maximum capacity. At 4.20v per cell, this max capacity is reached. So there is only these three, and their sized 82.1, 77.8 and 74.5 kwh marked size. The Panna 77.8 is soft locked to about 75 kwh, via about 96%.
There are no other known batts for the ’21 LR and 21 Performance.

 

[TomaGo]

Still a few issues with the table. The max range is around 550km. 5.50*13.7.
Mine was about 549km. Both LG and Panasonics as Panasonic is capped at same max LG capacity.
And 26 mins 10-80% no, I think it is about 30mins on the Panasonics 75

Hello TimothyHW3,
Thanks for your message. I have 2 questions :

5,50 * 13,7 = 75,35kWh = More than the battery capacity, how is it possible ?

For the charging time with the panasonic here is my source :