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

[conv90]

8mV isnt that much and it wouldnt be the reason to low nominal full pack.
If we play with the math, and one lone cell is 8mV higher in SOC than all other, the pack would loose the storage for 8mV on all other cells, thats about 0.8%, or about 0.65kwh....if all other cells was 8mV lower than the highest. Irl the average probably is in the middle and thus some 0.3kWh.
Also, as we are carefull not to live the battery for long at 100% SOC, we anyhow will have some imbalance, and accounting for this, we probably dont have more loss than 0.3kwh I guess.

They say balancing only happens if SOC is 90% or more. I dont know the setup of the balancing resistors, if the the battery connector open these circuits. I know I did read that Model S and X had balaning resistors with much lower resistanse, causing higher balancing current and shorter balancing time( but more drain).

I guess you only need to ”wake the battery ” and learn the BMS as we said, some cycles, not too shallow, and at least one charge to 90% with time for balaning afterwards and if you dare, one completely full charge.
Otherwise, just use it as you will and it most probable will be good anyway. (Remember, whats good for the BMS and the readings isnt necessarily best for the battery).


I see mostly 4mV at 70-80% but If I charge to 90 it probably is more in the beginning and after some hours rest I have seen 4mV at 90 also. My full charge did say 10mV imbalance, but I drove away asap after reaching 100%.

I'm not worried about the 79.6 Nominal Full pack, I have only 230 km so I have to use it a bit to wake it up with some charge cycles, I'm only a bit concerned about the reading on SMT regarding the Hystory charging.
It seems they charged in Freemont or in USA in DC about 53 kWh (I can estimate to 100%) and then the car lost in stationary way the charge to about 40% during the two month of trip to Europe .The car was at about 40% when I had the delivery.

 

[AAKEE]

I'm not worried about the 79.6 Nominal Full pack, I have only 230 km so I have to use it a bit to wake it up with some charge cycles, I'm only a bit concerned about the reading on SMT regarding the Hystory charging.
It seems they charged in Freemont or in USA in DC about 53 kWh (I can estimate to 100%) and then the car lost in stationary way the charge to about 40% during the two month of trip to Europe .The car was at about 40% when I had the delivery.

I would’nt guess that Tesla charge it to full and leave the car sitting with 100% SOC during long time of transportation?
A logic value would be about 70-80% to have sufficient charge level for the transportation and ”storage” at a good level of SOC for the battery.

I also wouldnt worry too much about what happend with the battery during transport. They should have learned by now how to take care of this...

There should be a trip A or B on the screen that shows about total mileage and total charge( charge ”since car is built”), if no one have reset those ?

 

[Devils son]

20% difference in efficiency for an alignement? do you mean toe-in toe-out ? or even camber?
My car seems good it goes straight really straight.
I was ready to an "harsh" ride with 20" and /35 tires, and lowered suspensions. I was ready for a more "difficult to ride" car a car where you need more skill , not less skill ... but Im surprised that i feel it more "soft" and more simple to drive than my old 18" with /45 tires.
I was avoiding all little potholes on road with LR with 18". Now with the P sincerely I feel less stiff suspensions.
Many peoples complains that the P is harsh ...too rigid too stiff and that you feel all the grain of sand on the road.
...this is absolutely NOT true (on my car) and in a way I feel a bit disappointed because I was ready for a more sporty ride, giving back some comfort.
Not always I "feel" the steering in a good sincere way like the LR with 18" and this is strange.
I have to say that It has no body roll, but I was expecting more stiffer suspensions, and the fact that I feel "softer" than the LR with 18 make me feel strange.
Yes , I can do a same turn in a faster way than before , but I can'T feel the limit, I can't feel that the limit is near or just some km/h over.
When you usually are approaching to the limit of grip, you "feel" the nature (sporty or just touring) of the car. And I feel the P less sporty of the LR and that "feeling" (approaching to the grip limit) is felt usually at stering wheel .
This car make the turns at 80 km/h like you usually do normal turns at 40. It's too sipmple... too much simple , and this remove fun.
I hope You get the picture/idea.

It was after mounting H&R springs, so both toe and camber needed to be adjusted.

Because of this, I cannot directly compare the LR to the P in handling. But for a road car it handles very well. It is not a sports car and I don't expect it to behave like one.

 

[AAKEE]

It was after mounting H&R springs, so both toe and camber needed to be adjusted.

Because of this, I cannot directly compare the LR to the P in handling. But for a road car it handles very well. It is not a sports car and I don't expect it to behave like one.

Just got a message from the carrier, I have H&R 30 mm lowering springs to go and get. Start mounting today Yes, wheel alignment Planned

 

[conv90]

There should be a trip A or B on the screen that shows about total mileage and total charge( charge ”since car is built”), if no one have reset those ?

Yes there is the total trip but NOT a charge ”since car is built".
There is the total kWh used ..but we know that this data is referred to the consumption of the car in motion. (I have about 37 kWh used)
I have in SMT 113 kWh charged i TOTAL but I charged only 56 kWh.

 

[conv90]

It was after mounting H&R springs, so both toe and camber needed to be adjusted.

Because of this, I cannot directly compare the LR to the P in handling. But for a road car it handles very well. It is not a sports car and I don't expect it to behave like one.

Is possible to change the camber with stock camber rods?

 

[Devils son]

Is possible to change the camber with stock camber rods?

Shure, but more limited.

 

[Candleflame]

8mV isnt that much and it wouldnt be the reason to low nominal full pack.
If we play with the math, and one lone cell is 8mV higher in SOC than all other, the pack would loose the storage for 8mV on all other cells, thats about 0.8%, or about 0.65kwh....if all other cells was 8mV lower than the highest. Irl the average probably is in the middle and thus some 0.3kWh.
Also, as we are carefull not to live the battery for long at 100% SOC, we anyhow will have some imbalance, and accounting for this, we probably dont have more loss than 0.3kwh I guess.

They say balancing only happens if SOC is 90% or more. I dont know the setup of the balancing resistors, if the the battery connector open these circuits. I know I did read that Model S and X had balaning resistors with much lower resistanse, causing higher balancing current and shorter balancing time( but more drain).

I guess you only need to ”wake the battery ” and learn the BMS as we said, some cycles, not too shallow, and at least one charge to 90% with time for balaning afterwards and if you dare, one completely full charge.
Otherwise, just use it as you will and it most probable will be good anyway. (Remember, whats good for the BMS and the readings isnt necessarily best for the battery).


I see mostly 4mV at 70-80% but If I charge to 90 it probably is more in the beginning and after some hours rest I have seen 4mV at 90 also. My full charge did say 10mV imbalance, but I drove away asap after reaching 100%.

i dont think we have much evidence that the car balances only above 90% apart from some posts here where people say the resistors only work above a certainl voltage (was it 4?) which gets reached usually around 75-80%.
Tesla officially states that the car balances cells at any % if I remember correctly.

 

[conv90]

I think is normal. 3.882 is MIN and 3.890 is MAX ,and the lower values are at the beginning and at the end of the Pack. Higer values are in the middle.
I add that the "step" is at the first 23 cells and at the last 23 cells. I don't know if it's some sorta of geometry of the pack.

 

[Candleflame]

I lost another 4km... So thats like 12km in less than few weeks. So 10% now after 35k km.

 

[SRaf]

Today after charging at Supercharger I noticed that my Tesla Model 3 SR+ Dec 2020 LFP (2021.4.12 1400km) had sudden total range drop to 325 km.
I could not charge before up to 100% but it always indicated that it is ~ 415-425km.
Chargers always stopped at ~80% but still charged till up to 360-370km.
I requested the service but I wonder what happened, how can I fix it. Anyone had similar issues? How to fix it?

 

[Devils son]

I lost another 4km... So thats like 12km in less than few weeks. So 10% now after 35k km.

SR / LR / P?

 

[Candleflame]

SR / LR / P?

P minus 2019. 35k km, down to 452km now. Id love to say that my range estimate fluctuates a bit but unfortunately thats not the case (i presume this is caused by winter temps which we dont get here).

 

[FredMt]

Here after, evaluation of the capacity of the pack of my new Model3 Performance 2021 E3LD, received 3 days ago, VIN serie 911, pack "82kWh" 2170L, reference : 1104423-00-T ( @AlanSubie4Life, same than Arnaud at the end of december 2020).


So, somewhere on the road to Supercharger (at the north of Toulouse France):
277 × 195 / 0.67 = 80.619kWh.

Supercharge launched at the end of the morning... ../.. and ... 100% display at 504km then going on to charge at 10kW decreasing by step of 1kWh and reach 507km then it going on for at least another thirty minutes to display the charge completed with 506 km ( still 100%).

I start and ride immediately with these 100% (506km) and display stay at this value for about 3.3km; it s "new" top buffer effect.

396 x 204 /1 = 80,784 kWh
387 × 208/1 = 80.496 kWh
383 × 210/1 = 80,430 kWh

And then it finally goes to 505km and 99%
363 × 220 / 0.99 = 80.666 kWh etc.
others values are consistent with that.

So with the energy screen I got 80.78kWh max at 100%.

By the displayed value of the EPA range:
507km max but it was still charging during more than 30 minutes, and I drove 3.3km without change of range value displayed somewhere between 506 and 507km. If i add 3 km due to top buffer, i have 510km at least.
510 km with a typical consumption of 159 Wh / km gives 81,070 kWh.

So for a first evaluation, i would like to say that capacity of my "82kWh" panasonic 2170L 1104423-00-T pack is around 81kWh.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Here after, evaluation of the capacity of the pack of my new Model3 Performance 2021 E3LD, received 3 days ago, VIN serie 911, pack "82kWh" 2170L, reference : 1104423-00-T ( @AlanSubie4Life, same than Arnaud at the end of december 2020).


So, somewhere on the road to Supercharger (at the north of Toulouse France):
277 × 195 / 0.67 = 80.619kWh.

Supercharge launched at the end of the morning... ../.. and ... 100% display at 504km then going on to charge at 10kW decreasing by step of 1kWh and reach 507km then it going on for at least another thirty minutes to display the charge completed with 506 km ( still 100%).

I start and ride immediately with these 100% (506km) and display stay at this value for about 3.3km; it s "new" top buffer effect.

396 x 204 /1 = 80,784 kWh
387 × 208/1 = 80.496 kWh
383 × 210/1 = 80,430 kWh

And then it finally goes to 505km and 99%
363 × 220 / 0.99 = 80.666 kWh etc.
others values are consistent with that.

So with the energy screen I got 80.78kWh max at 100%.

By the displayed value of the EPA range:
507km max but it was still charging during more than 30 minutes, and I drove 3.3km without change of range value displayed somewhere between 506 and 507km. If i add 3 km due to top buffer, i have 510km at least.
510 km with a typical consumption of 159 Wh / km gives 81,070 kWh.

So for a first evaluation, i would like to say that capacity of my "82kWh" panasonic 2170L 1104423-00-T pack is around 81kWh.

Interesting to see that top buffer, hadn’t seen that reported for a while. I agree with your approximate calcs and think SMT would have shown something similar.

Seems like you have a nice healthy battery to start out. Also pretty warm with that time at the supercharger, but you’d prefer to see 81kWh over 80kWh in that situation! So that’s good.

 

[FredMt]

Interesting to see that top buffer, hadn’t seen that reported for a while.

Here you can find a link to a dedicated thread/ post (many thanks to @ STSUKX) following the implementation of top buffer on the Model3 by 2020.48.35.5 update (end January 2021)
This is a thread in French, which I think easy to translate via google, you will also find SMT screens which highlight this recent top buffer.

You can begin directly by the 2 paragraphs just above first picture, but history of top buffer at the begining of the post is also interesting.

Top buffer de 0,9 kWh et Maj 2020.48.35.5

Je me décide à ouvrir un fil dédié car ce sujet revêt une importance particulière concernant le fonctionnement de nos model 3. En préalable, s’agissant de considérations techniques, j’encourage vivement tous ceux qui ne sentent pas à l’aise avec ces éléments et ceux dont l’éventuelle dégradation ...

forums.automobile-propre.com

 

[kadettilac]

Looking for the Reman part number for Model 3 2021 HV pana 77,8 LR battery.

My M3 2021 LR is getting a new (not new, but remanufactured 'reman') HV battery this Friday because of a faulty temp sensor in the pack (background: there are 4 sensors in the pack, 1 of them started reporting temps of -31c when temp outside was 5c causing 0 regen, severe power limit and 7kW battery usage to warm up the battery when it wasn't necessary. Hurray for SMT for showing this fault so I could report it to Tesla).

Established earlier in the thread is that my car has the US made Pana 77,8 kWh battery, not the Chinese LG 74kWh, which I'm happy with. Built Nov '20 with 4.7k km on the odometer.

I know this isn't the thread about warranty, so my question is about ensuring I get the same type battery back in the car from Tesla. They have confirmed it wil be 'the same type of battery now installed in your car', which is too vague for me (I want to stick with Panasonic) so I'd like to be able to double check the part number and send to Tesla in advance to ensure this. Any help greatly appreciated.

Off topic: I'm not happy about receiving the Reman battery instead of a new battery on such a new car, but apparently according to Tesla they don't need to put in a new battery as long as the replacement pack is 'similar or better' in Tesla's words. Conversation about this still ongoing with Tesla.

 

[conv90]

Here after, evaluation of the capacity of the pack of my new Model3 Performance 2021 E3LD, received 3 days ago, VIN serie 911, pack "82kWh" 2170L, reference : 1104423-00-T ( @AlanSubie4Life, same than Arnaud at the end of december 2020).


So, somewhere on the road to Supercharger (at the north of Toulouse France):
277 × 195 / 0.67 = 80.619kWh.

Supercharge launched at the end of the morning... ../.. and ... 100% display at 504km then going on to charge at 10kW decreasing by step of 1kWh and reach 507km then it going on for at least another thirty minutes to display the charge completed with 506 km ( still 100%).

I start and ride immediately with these 100% (506km) and display stay at this value for about 3.3km; it s "new" top buffer effect.

396 x 204 /1 = 80,784 kWh
387 × 208/1 = 80.496 kWh
383 × 210/1 = 80,430 kWh

And then it finally goes to 505km and 99%
363 × 220 / 0.99 = 80.666 kWh etc.
others values are consistent with that.

So with the energy screen I got 80.78kWh max at 100%.

By the displayed value of the EPA range:
507km max but it was still charging during more than 30 minutes, and I drove 3.3km without change of range value displayed somewhere between 506 and 507km. If i add 3 km due to top buffer, i have 510km at least.
510 km with a typical consumption of 159 Wh / km gives 81,070 kWh.

So for a first evaluation, i would like to say that capacity of my "82kWh" panasonic 2170L 1104423-00-T pack is around 81kWh.

Good! Instead... my 2021 Model 3 Perf VIN 898 is 79,6 kWh since day one (only 8 days since delivery) , both SMT and the calculations says 79,6 .
I made only 450 total , I hope it will be better after some charge.
Today I had to remove SMT because of a visit at the Service Tesla for some alignement on doors.
They charged tha car and retutning home I saw for the first time a 70% battery and more than 350 range leading to suppose that something is better.

 

[FredMt]

so I'd like to be able to double check the part number and send to Tesla in advance to ensure this. Any help greatly appreciated.

Off topic: I'm not happy about receiving the Reman battery instead of a new battery on such a new car, but apparently according to Tesla they don't need to put in a new battery as long as the replacement pack is 'similar or better' in Tesla's words. Conversation about this still ongoing with Tesla

Here after some references of battery pack found in LR.

LR E3D end 2019, Panasonic, 77.8kWh,
Ref : Style AB (P) 1104423-00-M

LR E3D end 2020, (E3CD ?), Panasonic 77.8kWh but softlock in Europe and so ~75kWh :
Ref: Style BB (P) 1104423-00-P


LR E5D end 2020, LG ~75kWh,
Ref : Style. SH (P) 1522312-00-C

LR, E5D, fev 2021 LG ~75kWh,
Ref: Style SH (P) 1522312-17-C
Ref: Style 8B (P) 1522312-UF-D

It seems that :
- (P) 1104423 is a Panasonic pack signature (2170 or 2170L)
- (P) 1522312 means LG pack.

 

[Candleflame]

I wonder are the softlocked 75kwh cars just more efficient? Because you sort of are looking at like.... 72kwh with the buffer so only really a rated range of maybe 470km?