-
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
The era Q4/2020 and Q1/2021 must be perceived very differently by Model 3 Long Range customers in the states vs. the European Union.
In the states we saw how Tesla intended this transition and who their "prime customer base" is, if things dont go according to plan!
The EU ended up picking the short straw, which is not great, but the alternative would have been to get way less cars (Long Range) delivered overall.
The idea must have been what we saw in the US, a gradual transition from 2170C cells to 2170L cell technology:
In the EU it went differently:
- Model 3 SR+ / LR / P is first released to the market with Panasonic 2170C cells in two sizes (50kWh / 78kWh)
- 2021 P with 2170L (82kWh) is released to the market in Q4/2020.
- 2021 LR with 2170C (78kWh/unrestricted) is released to the market in Q4/2020.
- 2021 SR+ with 2170C (50kWh) is released to the market in Q4/2020.
- 2021 SR+ with 2170L (55kWH) is released to the market in Q1/2021.
- 2021 LR with 2170L (82kWh) is released to the market in Q2/2021.
- From Q2/2021 the transition from 2170C to 2170L is complete acrosst the fleet.
Once the Performance Refresh was out and proven to have a real 82kWH battery pack, this should have sounded the alarm, that the Long Range in the EU wasnt getting the attention (love?) it should have gotten by Tesla. The Long Range Q4/2020 and Q1/2021 wasnt the car it could have been.
- Model 3 SR+ / LR / P is first released to the market with Panasonic 2170C cells in two sizes (50kWh / 78kWh)
- 2021 P with 2170L (82kWh) is released to the market in Q4/2020.
- 2021 LR with 2170 LG (75kWh) is released to the market in Q4/2020. Not enough capacity for more 2170C packs -> LG Chem steps in.
- 2021 LR with 2170C (75kWh/restricted) is released to the market in Q4/2020. Restriction to balance the capacity with the LG Battery.
- 2021 SR+ Made in China with CATL LFP Pack is released to the market in Q4/2020. Not enough capacity? -> GF Shanghai steps in.
- 2021 SR+ with 2170L (55kWH) is released to the market in Q1/2021.
- 2021 SR+ Made in China with CATL LFP Pack is back on the market in Q2/2021. New focus on LFP in the SR+ from now on.
- 2021 LR with 2170L (82kWh) is released to the market in Q2/2021.
- From Q2/2021 the transition from 2170C to 2170L is complete. SR+ stays on LFP and made in China.
The COC's sent by Tesla painted quite a clear picture about the expected capacity in the Long Range actually:
2020 LR -> 160Wh/100km -> 560km WLTP
2021 LR -> 148Wh/100km -> 580km WLTP
An increased efficiency of 8%, but only a range increase of 3,6%? -> Smaller usable capacity / smaller battery!
Knowing that a 82kWh battery pack existed in the Performance should have been a red flag for someone waiting for the new and improved Model 3 Long Range. There was no doubt, that eventually the 82kWh battery pack would be released to the Long Range as well. Now we know the date: 01.April.2021.
Regarding the Q4/2020 and Q1/2021 Long Range battery in the EU and its advantages, disadvantages, choices...
In the end I dont see a point in complaining about the European Long Range from Q4/2020 and Q1/2021. It was obvious that this wasnt the car at its full potential and also that the "full blown" / 82kWh Long Range / Maximum Range / Long Range Plus was just around the corner. On the other hand...people who bought early, got to enjoy more time with the car.
- An unsatisfied customer could have returned the car or not accepted the papers. We just saw this again, when people in Germany refused the last built Q1/2021 LG cars out for delivery in Q2, knowing that cars produced just one day later all got the larger 82 Panasonic battery.
- Tesla could have played it smarter and openly communicated that there are two different cars coming to the market. That they both have their advantages and giving the customer a choice.
- You could look at it like chosing between a petrol and a diesel car.
- The LG (NMC) has expectional performance with a cold battery pack and at low SoC.
- The Panasonic (NCA) is faster at DC fastcharging.
- None of the two showed unusual degradation so far and we all know how much attention is paid by the Tesla community on this topic!
There is never the perfect moment to buy, but right now is a very good one
Thank you for checking, and posting the link!! Super interesting. That would be a great increase especially considering the long range was only 310 a couple years ago.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Read elsewhere here for details on that, but practically speaking, for actual realizable range under best-case conditions, think of this as an increase from 310 miles in 2018, to 332 miles (not 322) in 2020 & 2021 for the smaller (older) 77.8kWh battery, to ~350 miles in 2021 (sometime - not yet) for the new larger battery (if they make the energy available at some point). The 22-mile jump to 332 miles has probably been realized in most Model 3s though, since that was due to motor drive control efficiency improvements (so you're likely getting that 332-mile range with a 2018 model, though it would be hard to verify with capacity loss, etc.).
Completely ignoring the effect of the heat pump here - because that's not relevant for realizable range in best-case conditions (but it's the reason the range might be rated at ~370 miles with the new pack rather than the ~350 I quote above).
So, what you're missing with a 2018 vehicle is the extra capacity of the new pack (including any capacity loss you may have), and not much else (unless you can make use of the heat pump efficiency improvements for your particular situation - you're in Chicago so this might well matter to you). To my knowledge, and according to Tesla's public statements and notifications associated with software updates, the old vehicles have nearly the same efficiency as the new ones, as long as the heat pump is not a factor. Again, no real way to verify this, but there isn't any evidence I am aware of that suggests otherwise, and there is a lot that suggests they have similar efficiency.
Last edited:
ElectricChapel
Member
I just got the Certificate of Conformity for my Long Range UK/RHD Model 3 VIN 218xxx. The Variant is E5D with an Electric Range of 580 km, meaning it's the LG 75kWh battery pack. The manufacturing date is March 31st. Delivery date scheduled for May 20th.
Has anyone else in the UK got a delivery date this month, and requested their CoC?
Has anyone else in the UK got a delivery date this month, and requested their CoC?
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
For the SR+, if the objective is to state the FPWN value, I think it should be 52.5 and 53.5 instead of 50 and 55. Or 53 and 54 if you want to use round numbers though 52.5 and 53.5 would probably be less confusing.
ElectricChapel
Member
I’ve asked in the online chat and got it by email within half an hour. If you have a VIN assigned (should be in the invoice) then you can request it.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Ah, ok. Thanks for the correction (I can't keep track! I guess I was thinking of the nominal full pack values people were seeing, or perhaps the EPA values? I'm not sure I'd ever seen the FPWN of the 2021 I guess - I don't watch these videos...). I think it was 52.5 for the older pack though, right?
That's the question. I have not paid much attention to the SR+ and a quick phone search didn't come up with an FPWN values for the old 2170C SR+. Just the maths would be 53...
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Did a brief search with various keywords and got lucky. Looks like it was 52.4kWh FPWN. Makes sense (I guess...) - 5.7% higher in 2021. I think people were seeing pretty close to that value when new since 219Wh/rmi*240rmi (for pre-2020 240-mile range vehicle) is 52.6kWh.
2021 Tesla Model 3 SR+ Cold Weather Range and Capacity Test
Following this thread. Seems better the 2019 sr+ Because ours has only 45kWh useable at best. (Excluding the buffer) I also have ScanMyTesla. (338km of the 386 left, Tesla will speak to my lawyer. Never had the full pack to begin with)
teslamotorsclub.com
Can you comment on whether the SR+ 2021 has any sort of evidence of a voltage cap in these videos, or did we already discuss this (lol - I really can't keep track anymore)? It's just a bit weird to see such a high FPWN and never see nominal full pack get to it - it's similar to the 2021 Performance in that respect.
The 2021 is just inconsistent vs. the prior pattern of EPA results (I would expect 56kWh+ in EPA with FPWN at 55.4kWh - but that's not what we see - it is actually 54.7kWh vs. the 2019 at 54.5kWh).
Maybe Tesla is aligning the EPA kWh with the BMS kWh now, though. That's another possibility I suppose. They've never matched before and maybe they're trying to make them closer. Doesn't explain the 2019 and the 2021 having the same energy in the EPA test, though - those numbers should be calibrated and golden. Too many moving pieces to be able to make any sense of it.
Last edited:
It will be interesting to see what your rated range displays once you collect the car. I received mine (UK) on the 11th December and it has never displayed the rated range. I think the most it ever did was 340 miles.
Did a brief search with various keywords and got lucky. Looks like it was 52.4kWh FPWN. Makes sense (I guess...) - 5.7% higher in 2021. I think people were seeing pretty close to that value when new since 219Wh/rmi*240rmi (for pre-2020 240-mile range vehicle) is 52.6kWh.
2021 Tesla Model 3 SR+ Cold Weather Range and Capacity Test
Following this thread. Seems better the 2019 sr+ Because ours has only 45kWh useable at best. (Excluding the buffer) I also have ScanMyTesla. (338km of the 386 left, Tesla will speak to my lawyer. Never had the full pack to begin with)
Can you comment on whether the SR+ 2021 has any sort of evidence of a voltage cap in these videos, or did we already discuss this (lol - I really can't keep track anymore)? It's just a bit weird to see such a high FPWN and never see nominal full pack get to it - it's similar to the 2021 Performance in that respect.
The 2021 is just inconsistent vs. the prior pattern of EPA results (I would expect 56kWh+ in EPA with FPWN at 55.4kWh - but that's not what we see - it is actually 54.7kWh vs. the 2019 at 54.5kWh).
Maybe Tesla is aligning the EPA kWh with the BMS kWh now, though. That's another possibility I suppose. They've never matched before and maybe they're trying to make them closer. Doesn't explain the 2019 and the 2021 having the same energy in the EPA test, though - those numbers should be calibrated and golden. Too many moving pieces to be able to make any sense of it.
In my 19 SR+ in the coldest days of winter I was easily running 400+ wh/mi in normal driving. I lost like 40% of range... so very much looking forward to the heat pump (and larger battery) helping that issue. Pretty cool that the efficiency improvements can be delivered via software update. I remember hearing that the LR got a new motor design in 2019 or 2020. So that might be the only other thing that could affect it.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
There's the 990 (AWD) vs. 980 (Perf) motor issue but that's not resulting in any apparent efficiency differences. The 990 motors get just as good efficiency in the UDDS & highway tests in 2021 as the 980 motor in 2020. In 2020 the 980 got better efficiency than the 990 (but that was likely due to software differences since the tests were done on different vehicles possibly running different firmware/software).
Irish owner here so assume on the same supply chain as UK. Received my E5D Model 3 two weeks ago and the max displayed range is 530km(~330 miles). It's driving me slightly crazy at the moment. Would hope to be closer to EPA ratings. I'm just going to change to % Display and stop talking about it before my wife kills me.
Similar threads
- Article
