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

[TimothyHW3]

the new UI on my 21 LR E3D.

Do you have a picture with the old UI at 100%?

Because my regen was not that good at 100% at E3D, it was way past the old safety belt icon and way past the gear letters. And the cell temp was 20° so I should've gotten more(even though you said supercharging so maybe yours was at 40+°)

I guess there are different variants of these batteries. Do you have SMT to read yours at 100%?

Also, I can't confirm throttle of power at 20%. I was below 20% twice and on my recent run with 10° cell temp and snowflake at 23% I had 130kW power limit. I really doubt your Leaf had 200PS... Might be different batteries.

 

[FredMt]

This is a performance car, not interesting, didn't he say he has a LR?!

Yes absolutely performance with T and without OL.
No, he don t have SMT yet. But i understand he ordered cable for. I asked him to keep me informed.

Very important to read SMT data - cell voltage when full, nominal full and nominal full remaining and als he should try and do the test Nyland did with the power limit below 15°C and see how much discharge power they have. Maybe Nyland lucked out on the Performance battery too.
Please also ask him to take a screenshot when he reaches 4.15V to see how much kWh nominal remaining that is.

On the contrary, the reference of the pack is
unprecedented for a 2021 Perf:

CB 1104423 - 00 - T
Style CB -> like Perf
Ref: 1104423 - 00 - T -> like LR but T instead of P.

(You know the expected reference for a
Perf is: CB 1104423-0L-P and for
LR E3D is: BB 1104423-00-P)

It looks like a LR pack of ~ 78kWh in a Performance Model...

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

This is a performance car, not interesting, didn't he say he has a LR?!

Why is it not interesting? This Performance has a different part number (no -0L-), and lower capacity than most...

It looks like a LR pack of ~ 78kWh in

Well...to me it looks like one of the healthiest LR packs I have ever seen. So it is a strange chimera. Not sure if they are just really pushing the old cells, or what. Since the base part number is the same as the old packs, I would expect that it should have the old cells, but I guess we will see.

 

[FredMt]

Well...to me it looks like one of the healthiest LR packs I have ever seen. So it is a strange chimera. Not sure if they are just really pushing the old cells, or what. Since the base part number is the same as the old packs, I would expect that it should have the old cells, but I guess we will see.

Yes, and do you think in this variant of Performance Model 78kWh perhaps a little more, Tesla respect homologation 567km WLTP range?

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Yes, and do you think in this variant of Performance Model 78kWh perhaps a little more, Tesla respect homologation 567km WLTP range?

I've looked at your quoted WLTP numbers (530km and 567km), and it's really tough to say what energy was assumed for the 2021 567km number.

- Gain between M3P 2020 EU and M3P 2021 EU is +37km WLTP (530vs 567)

It would be great to see the actual WLTP results documents. I've Google searched but can't find anything. It's not like the US where everything has to be openly provided, I guess.

I don't know when the 530-mile number for the Performance was arrived at, and whether it pre-dated 2020. And it's not as easy to use the EPA ratings to determine how much more efficient the Performance was than it was in 2018/2019 (when it was first tested, but with 18" wheels - that's the part that makes it hard). My guess is about 6% more efficient now (and it was also more efficient in 2020 (same efficiency probably for this test)!) than it was originally.

One possibility is that the 530-mile number was arrived at with the 77.8kWh, with the old efficiency, 20" wheels, and now it's ~6% more efficient, with a ~1% larger pack size used for the test (so ~79kWh per SMT). That would take the range to 568km, 7% higher.

But it's basically impossible for me to say. And of course most Performance owners have much more energy than that to start with. Maybe they are doing even better than the WLTP test result? 6% more efficient with 3.7% more energy? That would give 585km. No wonder they don't want to advertise that (that would be better than the LR...people would get very suspicious...but it wouldn't be a surprise with 7% more energy...even if it is perhaps 6% less efficient (due to tires) than the LR)! (The downside, as Arnaud seems to have found, is it also means that Tesla can randomly put small batteries in the Performance vehicles, that meet the minimum 567km WLTP number. Maybe. This -T battery is a real mystery.)

Things are so much easier to figure out in the US, where we have regulations and stuff and the data have to be published. In the US, it is extremely clear that the 2021 Model 3 Performance is the range king when properly equipped (would be over 366 EPA miles!).

 

[FredMt]

Why is it not interesting? This Performance has a different part number (no -0L-), and lower capacity than most...

Well...to me it looks like one of the healthiest LR packs I have ever seen. So it is a strange chimera. Not sure if they are just really pushing the old cells, or what. Since the base part number is the same as the old packs, I would expect that it should have the old cells, but I guess we will see.

So after a charge at a supercharger this afternoon, 491 km of range is reached, 1kw charge just before arrived 100%, and charge stopped.
With energy screen, calculation of pack size is about 79,3 kWh.
So it s little better than before charge to 100% without hight temperature charge at supercharger.
Capacity of pack is so in "knowned value", near lowest (?) we have to wait SMT data.
Reference CB 1104423-00-T for TM3P is to be archieve and remains to be clarified.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

So after a charge at a supercharger this afternoon, 491 km of range is reached, 1kw charge just before arrived 100%, and charge stopped.
With energy screen, calculation of pack size is about 79,3 kWh.
So it s little better than before charge to 100% without hight temperature charge at supercharger.
Capacity of pack is so in "knowned value", near lowest (?) we have to wait SMT data.
Reference CB 1104423-00-T for TM3P is to be archieve and remains to be clarified.

Very interesting, thanks. Mystery persists. Maybe they just put a few 2170L cells into each brick, lol. That seems like it would be painful to manage. The famous 23p23p96s pack.

I don't see how they could achieve 79.3kWh with the old type of cells, but maybe they can if they prescreen/bin them? It would be a departure to place the same old part number (including the -00- , not -0L- which is part of the part number) on a pack with the new cells. So it is interesting!

Sadly, it doesn't look like he posted his regen at 100% after a Supercharge (warm battery) to the French forum. I would assume it is non-existent.

Those SMT readbacks - particularly the "Full Pack When New" value - are going to be interesting.

 

[khelge]

Do you have a picture with the old UI at 100%?
Do you have SMT to read yours at 100%?

Don't have SMT and don't want to invest in it. But trying to find someone in Norway that can scan my car. (Marius hit me up?)

LR 2021 E3D, picked up 15.dec, 834XX, BB 1104423-00-P. This pic was 548km range in my other screenshot showing range.
Pic is when I put car in drive and maybe drove 10meters, not more, after a 50-100% supercharge with 40min preheated battery 2 weeks ago. Took another pic when I had driven about 200 meters, then the regen is at N instead of D like in this pic. The car charged until it said charge complete both in this pic and the one you just saw of the new UI.

 

[Marius A]

Don't have SMT and don't want to invest in it. But trying to find someone in Norway that can scan my car. (Marius hit me up?)

LR 2021 E3D, picked up 15.dec, 834XX, BB 1104423-00-P. This pic was 548km range in my other screenshot showing range.
Pic is when I put car in drive and maybe drove 10meters, not more, after a 50-100% supercharge with 40min preheated battery 2 weeks ago. Took another pic when I had driven about 200 meters, then the regen is at N instead of D like in this pic. The car charged until it said charge complete both in this pic and the one you just saw of the new UI.

Getting my OBDLink on Tuesday, just ping me if interested to try it out

 

[Korgmatose]

Getting my OBDLink on Tuesday, just ping me if interested to try it out

Mark me down as interested, unless I live too far out into the wilderness that is

 

[TimothyHW3]

Mark me down as interested, unless I live too far out into the wilderness that is

He only has the OBD Plug, not the adapter cable as far as I understand. We don't know yet wether the new OBD near the pedals sends the same signals. And not all cars have OBD, I don't have it.

Why don't you guys get yourself the whole adapter package it is not that much money...It is about 100$ on a 50,000$ car...

 

[Marius A]

He only has the OBD Plug, not the adapter cable as far as I understand. We don't know yet wether the new OBD near the pedals sends the same signals. And not all cars have OBD, I don't have it.

Why don't you guys get yourself the whole adapter package it is not that much money...It is about 100$ on a 50,000$ car...

I got the OHP ODB2 adapter as well, I just thought that was implied

 

[TimothyHW3]

I just thought that was implied

You said you wanted to test the new OBD port so I assumed you had the adapter only. Which adapter cable is that from Amazon? You also need the App now

 

[jjrandorin]

(moderator note: I am not following this specific thread closely, but at 28 pages on a topic that obviously is generating interest and passion for many, I decided to convert it to a sticky thread. I realize we have a lot of sticky threads in this section, but this topic (batteries in the 2021 Model 3) will likely continue to generate interest and discussion for quite some time.)

 

[TomaGo]

Good idea for a good visibility of this important topic

 

[Marius A]

You said you wanted to test the new OBD port so I assumed you had the adapter only. Which adapter cable is that from Amazon? You also need the App now

This one: https://www.amazon.com/OHP-Adapter-Tesla-Model-2019-2020/dp/B08DXY5KVX/ref=mp_s_a_1_1_sspa
I think it's the one SMT recommends
App? But my Nokia 3210 doesn't have apps!

 

[DrL90]

2021 M3P
Vin 856XXX
2020.48.30

 

[Filip K]

Maybe can be interesting for somebody here - my LG pack charging curve (6 % SoC to 90 % SoC) on 150 kW UFC with the latest firmware 2020.48.30.

E5D charging on 150 kW CCS

20%-40%: 8:21
20%-50%: 13:22
20%-60%: 19:23
20%-70%: 27:00
20%-80%: 36:06
20%-90%: 48:09

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

View attachment 625089 View attachment 625090 View attachment 625091 View attachment 625092

2021 M3P
Vin 856XXX
2020.48.30

Thanks! Looks like 80.5-80.6kWh. Interestingly, your constant in the US Performance appears to be closer to 161.2Wh/km (259.4Wh/mi), which is notably lower than we have calculated in the videos of Performance (using SMT, so not the same method) from Bjorn (got closer to 161.6Wh/km there, with high accuracy due to interpolation). The difference is likely too large to be rounding error.

It's actually closer to what I would ultimately expect. Not clear whether they're going to lower it further to get you to the promised 315 rated miles, or whether at some point they'll unlock a little more capacity (but literally no one has gathered the SMT information on open-circuit cell voltage on a Performance at 100%, so we have no idea whether additional capacity is even available - if it is 4.2V at 100% there's probably nothing more to unlock - unless it's a bottom lock of course - which is possible too).

(To be clear, option 1 would result in no change in capacity, while option 2 would give you 81.7kWh at a full charge, which might be on the table, since this battery has nameplate capacity of 82.1kWh, but no one has seen that.)

 

[TimothyHW3]

Maybe can be interesting for somebody here - my LG pack charging curve (6 % SoC to 90 % SoC) on 150 kW UFC with the latest firmware 2020.48.3

Its about 8-10 minutes slower to 70%.