TimothyHW3
Active Member
He said that there was another error in his account for this car anyways. Pretty sure this is just an error for that specific VIN, not a general E3D E5D mixup.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
MASTER THREAD: 2021 Model 3 - Charge data, battery discussion etc
- Thread starter EV Promoter
- Start date
Hello @TimothyHW3 ,thanks for your help about this table.
Range at 100% : Here is an update with 550km for both LG and Panasonic LR 2021. Is it ok now ?
Time for 10 => 80% : Yes you are right, with a panasonic in 2019 it was 24 minutes but with a Panasonic in 2021 it is 35 minutes ! Table updated.
Here is another video about 82kWh pack v3 charging :
Do you agree with this new table ?
kadettilac
Member
I hope so, but I’m not too sure. At the same insurance company on the same day I signed up with them there was another m3 driver with an error of the value of his car stated by RDW (official agency), just like mine. Can’t say anything about his battery obviously, but still I doubt my car is a unicorn
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
No one has answered that question yet. They used to for 2020, but I doubt it for 2021 because only one EPA test (20”) to support it this year. So far. In 2020 they tested and had an EPA entry for all three Performance trims.
It is kind of arbitrary though, so they could make it work that way. The EPA test backing it up is not at all required, as this number changing changes nothing, of course.
Just providing the historical pattern.
TimothyHW3
Active Member
Still not ok
The LR Panasonic is 30 Minutes, The Performance is 35. Check how long it takes on the video from 9% to 74-75%%, because the Performance has 5-6% bigger capacity.(80.4kWh vs around 75.4kWh)
Thank, so i think we are good now :
I speak about your help to build this table on my Blog ;-)
Batteries 2021 :74, 77, 82kWh ? - LG, Panasonics ou CATL ? - Page 4 - Forum et Blog Tesla
Have a good day
I speak about your help to build this table on my Blog ;-)
Batteries 2021 :74, 77, 82kWh ? - LG, Panasonics ou CATL ? - Page 4 - Forum et Blog Tesla
Have a good day
TimothyHW3
Active Member
Just to add to this. If you want to hop through chargers with 70% on the LR Panasonic, 0% to 70% is the better deal than 10% to 80%. I did one such test in a fairly cold climate (+2C, battery temp was at about 25 degrees) and went from about 2% to about 69% in 25 minutes.
Bjorn Nyland did about 10% (equivalent) to about 70% (equivalent) in 22 minutes. So I think here is just more important to go low and don't go above 70%.
My LR Panasonic also wasn't that affected by the cold at low SOC% and could maintain highway speed so that shouldn't be a problem. In the summer also not an issue.
Bjorn Nyland did about 10% (equivalent) to about 70% (equivalent) in 22 minutes. So I think here is just more important to go low and don't go above 70%.
My LR Panasonic also wasn't that affected by the cold at low SOC% and could maintain highway speed so that shouldn't be a problem. In the summer also not an issue.
I have a '21 Performance with the 20" Ûberturbine.
I use 19" wintertyres and tested to change the wheels in the setup. The system rebooted, but ranged seemed to be the same.
I reset it to 20" ûberturbine as I gues the least engergy effective wheels in the setup comes closest to my spiked 235/25 -19" (I really didnt se any changes except the other choises made the car less cool on the screen).
TimothyHW3
Active Member
The range under battery symbol will not change, this is not affected by the wheel choice.
I believe the calculation of expected range and the predictions at arrival under the energy graph will change, but not sure as I never tested this as I don't care about these predictions much.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
@conv90
Worth noting that for road trips etc, it is still a good idea to select appropriate wheels to make the Trip estimator the most accurate. 18” are assumed most efficient, followed by 19” and followed by 20”. There are of course several other options now (with and without aero covers, new wheel design, etc.) and each of these is assigned a baseline efficiency assumption by the Energy -> Trip estimator.
But sounds like on 2021 no change in the constant (a completely separate consideration). Again, selecting appropriate wheels just limits unpleasant surprises or annoyance on road trips when determining how much to supercharge. The estimates still might not be accurate if you drive too fast, but they’ll be closer.
Yes, that was the reson for my change. I anticipated a change in calculated range( I dont use range displayed, I use %) so I changed to range and saw something like 450km( about 90%SOC) before ”changing wheels” in the menu. The car makes a restart ( maybe only the screen?) and after this I did still se the same range.
Up here at the polar circle we regulary have -20 to -30 C this time of the year and 3 to 4 feet of snow, so consumtion is high.
My winter tyres ( Michelin X-ICE North 4) probably rolls more sluggish than any in that list so the 20” is a good choise even though it didnt affect range.
Damn I had a long trip with the M3P 2021. And the charging was terrible. I managed to get the battery heated up to 30 C by setting destination supercharger after driving to hours. Then I reached 190 kW for a brief moment but quickly moved down to 17x kW for a very short time, before it settling on 84 kW through the majority of time. The starting SoC was like 23%
I have SMT, but how do I log to "disk" on the phone, so I could show the curves? I guess this info is worthless with just me reciting from memory.
It seems that there is a serious problem with the heat distribution and the stators providing the heat. At one time the front stator was 107C during charging.
I have SMT, but how do I log to "disk" on the phone, so I could show the curves? I guess this info is worthless with just me reciting from memory.
It seems that there is a serious problem with the heat distribution and the stators providing the heat. At one time the front stator was 107C during charging.
kadettilac
Member
Quick update; Tesla supplied me with the Certificate of Conformity and it states the car is an E5D. The VIN is correct in the app, will need to check in the car itself later. So it’s not the government agency website that has it wrong, it’s Tesla. They state the CoC is correct and it’s an E5D car no matter how high I jump, so I doubt I’ll get it changed to E3CD officially. Although I would like it to, as it’s not an E5D
@kadettilac: Strange! (Very strange actually).
I did get the 2021.4.3 update today.
Max range changed to 508km, from 499km.
(Battery still at nominal full 80.6kwh).
I did get the 2021.4.3 update today.
Max range changed to 508km, from 499km.
(Battery still at nominal full 80.6kwh).
Well that car is a v13 so they could have made a mistake and acknowledge that the car is an E3D, but no way E3CD. The latter only came with v14!
Well, we now have 003 DU Cat. II and it is a new generation rear motor of the SR+ (CATL) made in China. They are now using "hairpin winding" technology in those motors.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Cool. So that takes us (finally) to the ~256Wh/mi, 159Wh/km value that we have expected (though it wasn't 100% clear whether they were going to reduce the constant or increase the energy to make it match EPA - based on the EPA energy available, we expected a reduction in the constant, though), down from the previously calculated 260Wh/mi (I think exact). Presumably this is happening in the US as well.
Maybe it's actually 255Wh/mi; I don't really know - you're sure your exact nominal full is still 80.6kWh exactly (would suggest closer to 255Wh/mi)?
Anyway, we finally have a match to EPA, it appears, after 3 months - from here, they will likely only increase EPA range, if they ever "max out" this pack to the 82.1kWh FPWN value. Would need new EPA runs for that, though.
Similar threads
- Article
