Feels a bit too cramped with the phone to get anything, couldn't really see evidence of a sticker, unless I did something wrong that is. Tried following the description but only ended up with wires, steel and the occasional orange plastic part.
-
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
Feels a bit too cramped with the phone to get anything, couldn't really see evidence of a sticker, unless I did something wrong that is. Tried following the description but only ended up with wires, steel and the occasional orange plastic part.
TimothyHW3
Active Member
Not sure what we are looking at here, but the only place they have a sticker, at least since 2019-20 is under the front cover around the middle. 2:50 and 3:35 you can see the location. This for example is an old M pack, and we def have N and P now(P being the latest 79 or 82, not confirmed yet)
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Yeah, that's it.
Try this thread - this gives the right strategy for the angle. You need to come in behind the right front wheel with the wheels turned to the left, and then you need to go high above the suspension piece, and angle downwards. You will be able to see it. You can see that this is at a much different angle than your picture. It's really pretty easy.
MASTER THREAD: 2021 Model 3 and differences from 2020
This thread has the right angle picture. You will be able to see the part number most likely from this angle. Assuming debris is not in the way (should not be a problem).
Attachments
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Nice observation. Care to post a picture of the screen? This is not entirely surprising for a battery that has some capacity up top locked out, I suppose. I guess we need people to post SMT data at 100% and compare an LG battery to a Panasonic (or to known data). I don't know exactly what the voltages to expect are so I'm not much help here. Pretty sure there are some SMT pictures showing what a 100% charge gives in pack voltage for the older batteries. Or better yet compare regen dots at 100% to a brand new EU AWD with the Panasonic battery (the one with more capacity). Tough this time of year at different temperatures of course.
74.5kWh, 139.4Wh/rkm. This is basically the same as everyone else for the constant of course.
Anyway, seems normal; presumably you have an LG battery. Sounds like the possibility that this is an artificial (short-term?) cap for safety still exists.
Interesting that yours maxed out at 534rkm rather than the 532 (?) from the first two posts in this thread. You may have a very slightly higher capacity battery. Or it's just random rounding error. Would have to have more data.
Interesting because it implies they may not have a hard cap at 532/534rkm. This cap is normally what they do once they have settled on a final displayed range. So the apparent lack of a cap implies that maybe they plan to expand you later. Guess we should start looking for the highest reported LG battery range? Would indicate the "best" LG battery (which will be proportionately better if they do eventually unlock it).
EDIT: Looks like the first post maxed out at 534rkm, after reading the details.
Anyway these last couple paragraphs are random speculation. Really need more robust data to make anything of it.
Last edited:
I can't really say what the battery manufacturer is, but the registration papers name the battery as E3D, which is according to the old specs ie non-LG who should be E5D unless mis-labelled in the permit
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
I meant pictures of the regen dots at 100%. Sorry. The other numbers were all solid, I took them as good data, no need for pictures, but good to have them.
Ah. They were going about 75-85% to the centre, not all the way in. And the green regen bar was about 10%
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Definitely interesting to see, especially at that this time of year, for a "100%" charged battery. Was the car stored somewhere warm to charge? What approximate temperature was the battery? You are sure this was right as you started to drive, you were still very close to 100%?
I think that's a significant amount of regen to still have at 100%, but honestly I don't have much data to go on there since it's so rare to charge to 100%. I thought it basically went to zero regen at true 100%.
Unfortunately (but not surprisingly) the first couple posts here, and the one of the US ~77.4kWh vehicle, were taken in Park, so we can't tell whether they saw the same thing, and can't compare to the US vehicle with the "higher capacity" battery at 100%.
Last edited:
Yep, the battery was not 10 minutes off charge finished, stored in a garage that held 4 degrees C, which is quite cold.
There are oddities with the % display in the apps 60-70-80 grid that is off by 1-3% regarding whether you set it in the app or the car, but the car stated 100%
Some Norwegian drivers have reported only able to charge to 99% no matter what they try, so I suspect some changes are coming in a future sw version.
I do confirm the same 534 @ 100% and the same presence of regen, i went driving just after the car charged completely.
Unfortunately from my pics i can't count the dots and i didn't checked if there were also dots at the end. But i do remember clearly that i was expecting no regen and it was there, able to stop the car at a roundbout (where i realized the regen was still there). Of course the approach at the roundabout was not very fast. Charging in garage at 13°.
Next time i'll recharge i'll count the dots (Tesla is designed by young crowd, i would need glasses to read it) and see the green bar as far it goes.
The poster with the E3D (Panasonic, we can be sure by now) is showing my identical range of 534 km at 100% and i have an E5D that is for sure LG Chem. But a friend of mine with an E3D shows 542 km @99%.
A question: i see Bjorn (testing an EU E5D LG Chem) to calculate consumption dividing the kWh used from SMT (see bottom 65.8 kWh for the test) with the km from the trip computer, taking in account 2,6% of excess for the distance.
Is it a correct procedure? Is it reliable the reading of 65.8 kWh from the picture?
@AlanSubie4Life Pic of the label on a German LR "82 kWh":
Übersicht 2021 LR / P Batteriekapazität Fahrzeugschein
If i go in Tesla OPC right now with my EU credentials, the bty part number is one number ahead:
ASY,HVBAT,E3,RWD,1PH,M3Y
1104424-00-P
Übersicht 2021 LR / P Batteriekapazität Fahrzeugschein
If i go in Tesla OPC right now with my EU credentials, the bty part number is one number ahead:
ASY,HVBAT,E3,RWD,1PH,M3Y
1104424-00-P
Last edited:
That's curious, in the Model Y part numbers there's a Model 3 bty code :
ASY,HVBAT,E3,AWD,1PH,M3Y 1104422-00-T
ASY,HVBAT,75kWh,AWD-RWD,1PH,M3,RMN 1137375-01-P
ASY,HVBAT,E3,AWD,1PH,MY,RMN 1137378-01-D
ASY,HVBAT,E3,AWD,1PH,M3Y 1104422-00-T
ASY,HVBAT,75kWh,AWD-RWD,1PH,M3,RMN 1137375-01-P
ASY,HVBAT,E3,AWD,1PH,MY,RMN 1137378-01-D
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Yeah I've seen this but I'd much prefer to get a battery label picture from someone here where we knew exactly which vehicle it was from (would also be good to see pictures from AWD both battery types, etc.)
Note that Remanufactured parts (RMN) seem to be assigned different part numbers.
I have no idea. I want to see pictures from all (3?) different types of new AWD/P 2021 vehicles! We have the power & ability to get these pictures...it's not that difficult (takes a couple minutes as long as you have a nice bright flashlight)! Pretty easy to get battery part numbers from older vehicles, on eBay. EPC is always confusing so would be good to get direct evidence.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Can you link the video?
I'm not sure what you're asking here (and as a rule I do not watch Bjorn's videos these days because it is too painful), but the 65.8kWh from SMT is an accurate assessment of the remaining battery capacity, including the buffer, from what I understand.
I'm not sure what is the extra 2.6% you refer to in your above calculation. In general I'd expect (on a new 2021 LR AWD non-P) to see about 133Wh (not 139Wh) used on the SMT meter per rated km used on the battery gauge in the video. The reasons for the 133Wh vs. the 139Wh difference (of 4.5%) are outlined above. Perhaps someone could summarize the numbers from the videos and then we can confirm this?
Car is an E5D - LG chem 77
Trip computer
449.7 km
66 kwh
146 wh/km
SMT
4,55% soc remaining
65,8 kWh used
Real distance 2% less
(odo tolerance)
440.9 km
So, real consumption should be 65,8/440,9 = 149,2 Wh/km @ real 90 km/h (93 km/h tachi)
(Btw, 20° climate, wet road, 2° C, excellent)
Do you agree with that way of calculating FE?
Then, he also speculate, from smt reading, that the available net charge was 69.9 kWh, but that's a different story.
I' m trying to understand if i can rely on smt reading for calculating real FE.
I checked personally with google the odometer and i find it's optimistic by 2,5% , more or less Bjorn's value.
Trip computer
449.7 km
66 kwh
146 wh/km
SMT
4,55% soc remaining
65,8 kWh used
Real distance 2% less
(odo tolerance)
440.9 km
So, real consumption should be 65,8/440,9 = 149,2 Wh/km @ real 90 km/h (93 km/h tachi)
(Btw, 20° climate, wet road, 2° C, excellent)
Do you agree with that way of calculating FE?
Then, he also speculate, from smt reading, that the available net charge was 69.9 kWh, but that's a different story.
I' m trying to understand if i can rely on smt reading for calculating real FE.
I checked personally with google the odometer and i find it's optimistic by 2,5% , more or less Bjorn's value.
Last edited:
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Sure, seems fine. Car may not give you the right efficiency, but it's probably counting the energy use ok. (Sometimes it seems to be off by 1% or so as mentioned previously.)
Correcting the trip meter, as he says, it should have read: (449.7km*146Wh/km = 65.65kWh, 65.65kWh/(0.98*449.7km) = 149Wh/km, 440.7km, 65.65kWh).
SMT: 65.8kWh
The ~69.7kWh usable between 100% and 0% seems about right (99% to 4.55% - but the 4.55%), 69.7kWh/0.955 = 73kWh, which is pretty close to what SMT showed (73.8kWh). Enough uncertainty from the video it seems close.
In any case the energy lines up pretty well. His trip meter (which oddly looks like it didn't reset at 8:09 but I guess it did based on later points in the video) in SMT makes sense too. He says it means he has just a 70kWh battery, but if you go from 99% to 49.1% and use 34.9kWh (11:25) then that means you have 69.8kWh usable, for a total of 73kWh. So I have no idea what he means with that statement.
It says right on the screen he has 3.3kWh of buffer!
Anyway, all seems to make sense. Why don't you think you can trust SMT?
It's unfortunate that he uses % on his display and not rated km. Would have been nice. Oh well. Presumably he used ~510 rated kilometers (530rkm to 20rkm). So that would be 130Wh/rkm (a bit lower than my expected 133Wh/rkm).... But we don't know what his 100% charge in rkm is.
It's hard to say exactly what the discharge "constant" is, because I don't see the data for this drive.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Article
