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

[Marius A]

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.)

On 100% charge or 100% and new? I assume it's the first, I'll see if I get the chance to charge to completely full next week after I get my logger.

 

[ran349]

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.)

I think the constant is probably exactly 260 Wh/mi., which converts to 161.556 Wh/km. That is consistent with your Bjorn number, which, as you say, was more accurately calculated. The car readout is in miles, according to the SMT developer. It works that way with the API app as well. If I change my car display to km, I still read miles in the raw data readout.

I agree, it will be interesting to see if they do anything to get to the 315 mile range, either with a constant change or unlocking more capacity.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I think the constant is probably exactly 260 Wh/mi., which converts to 161.556 Wh/km. That is consistent with your Bjorn number, which, as you say, was more accurately calculated. The car readout is in miles, according to the SMT developer. It works that way with the API app as well. If I change my car display to km, I still read miles in the raw data readout.

I agree, it will be interesting to see if they do anything to get to the 315 mile range, either with a constant change or unlocking more capacity.

Yeah, I agree. It's just a rounding. It seemed a little large, but looking at it more closely, it seems more plausible:

And about ~498.6rkm at ~80.56kWh.

Looking at the last two pictures in the recent report, you see oscillation between 362 and 363 miles projected range. So seemed to me like 362.5 might be closest...which would calculate out to 80.48kWh (rather than 80.59kWh)

So comparing to the Bjorn value, it seems slightly far out but I guess if you think about all the possible ways in which it could go a different way I guess they must be the same - 260Wh/mi as you say.

That calculates out to 80.6kWh which of course is an exact match to one of these pictures.

Thanks for pointing that out.

-----

It was kind of silly of me to say they seemed different. But anyway, this makes me feel better, since of course they should be the same.

We'll see how they get to 315 rated miles. I guess based on the EPA test, I'd expect them to leave the energy where it is, and just reduce the constant to 256Wh/mi at some point.

But that would be a weird situation to end at, because then there is a large discrepancy in SMT between the Full Pack When New value and actual full pack when new, which I'm not sure we've seen before, consistently. (On old 77.8kWh pack it was usually pretty close.)

Of course, they could always undo a little bottom lock later in time (and increase EPA range too). They're currently underperforming the 5% claimed capacity improvement, so adding more capacity later would make sense.

 

[Marius A]

We'll see how they get to 315 rated miles. I guess based on the EPA test, I'd expect them to leave the energy where it is, and just reduce the constant to 256Wh/mi at some point.

So around 159Wh/km. Is that a particularly low number for the Performance?

 

[TomaGo]

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

Hello,
Thank you for the charging curve of your LR E5D with LG battery. This is not a good resultat. On my previous Model 3 2019 Panasonic at 60% SoC i was above 100kW. With the LG you are 68kW.

Hope that will be improved in the future as i'm waiting for a new Model 3

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

So around 159Wh/km. Is that a particularly low number for the Performance?

The previous Performance was ~161.6Wh/km (basically exactly the same as the 2021 Performance is - at the current time).

Very small changes. Which may seem a little surprising - but remember they were already using a slightly higher scalar factor somehow (how the calculations worked out I guess; really no idea) (0.725!) for the 2020 Performance, so there was simply less to gain (in EPA rating and constant) on this vehicle when switching to heat pump scalar of 0.747.

IOW - previously the 2020 Performance was one of the most optimistically rated vehicles in the line. In 2021, it is now less optimistically rated than the 2021 LR.

 

[Marius A]

The previous Performance was ~161.6Wh/km (basically exactly the same as the 2021 Performance is - at the current time).

Very small changes. Which may seem a little surprising - but remember they were already using a slightly higher scalar factor somehow (how the calculations worked out I guess; really no idea) (0.725!) for the 2020 Performance, so there was simply less to gain (in EPA rating and constant) on this vehicle when switching to heat pump scalar of 0.747.

IOW - previously the 2020 Performance was one of the most optimistically rated vehicles in the line. In 2021, it is now less optimistically rated than the 2021 LR.

Sure, I meant or real life driving,not from an EPA rating

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Sure, I meant or real life driving,not from an EPA rating

Yes, hence the comments about relative optimism of the ratings.

 

[jjlatval]

Hello

I have a Model 3 LR 2021 refresh. I picked it up on 4th of December, so I was one of the first ones to pick the new refresh up in my country. I tried to find more info on the battery pack based on my VIN:

5YJ3E7EB7MF8xxxxx

Now it's -3C outside and the car is cooled down to +2C. It displays a max range of 540km if charged to 100%. When I picked it up it displayed 554km but it was a bit warmer, maybe +4C outside.

I wonder what battery pack my car has? I have seen discussions about E3D and E5D but I have nothing like that in my VIN. Oh, my M3LR unfortunately has old headlights .

 

[Marius A]

Hello

I have a Model 3 LR 2021 refresh. I picked it up on 4th of December, so I was one of the first ones to pick the new refresh up in my country. I tried to find more info on the battery pack based on my VIN:

5YJ3E7EB7MF8xxxxx

Now it's -3C outside and the car is cooled down to +2C. It displays a max range of 540km if charged to 100%. When I picked it up it displayed 554km but it was a bit warmer, maybe +4C outside.

I wonder what battery pack my car has? I have seen discussions about E3D and E5D but I have nothing like that in my VIN. Oh, my M3LR unfortunately has old headlights .

The displayed range is based on EPA, not WLTP, so you won't get the advertised range displayed.
Warmer matters, so that easily affects range. Also, not sure how much you've driven it yet, but the first few thousand km has the most battery degradation, so you'll see a bigger range loss the first year than the following ones. But again, that depends largely on how much you've driven the car, 14km range loss in 1 month is unlikely unless you're charging 100% every time and have driven it a few thousand km.

 

[Korgmatose]

I wonder what battery pack my car has? I have seen discussions about E3D and E5D but I have nothing like that in my VIN.

You will find that info in your registration documents from the road authorities, being in an EU country.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

It displays a max range of 540km if charged to 100%

This sounds like a projection, not an actual 100% value. Be very careful about such estimates. They are generally ok if they are derived when you are at 90%, and the battery isn’t too cold.

 

[AAKEE]

which would calculate out to 80.48kWh (rather than 80.59kWh)

That calculates out to 80.6kWh which of course is an exact match to one of these pictures.

Thanks for pointing that out.

To me it just looks like a 77.8kWh pack, pushed to the limit. Which is not surprising given the old part code (it's the same part number as the other 77.8kWh packs, just with a different revision number...so we wouldn't expect it to have the new 2170L cells).

Pretty sure we will never see such a pack in a 2021 Performance in the US. (Unless they do a new Performance- EPA test.)

If I do these same kind of calculations I also get about 80.6kwh. I havbe SMT and my EU ’21 M3P has the 82.1kwh battery. I have 1.83% battery degradation according to SMT, which also counts as 80.6 as full nominal(82.1 -1.83%= 80.6).

I do not think there really are any ’21 M3P with the old battery, Im not sure but there have been quite some threads about this and people more or less cancelled their orders. So far, I havent seen any reliable data that the old batt should exist in ’21 M3P.
I wouldnt think it is possible to get the 567Km WLTP with the old battery. I think all ’21 M3P have the 2170L.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I have 1.83% battery degradation according to SMT, which also counts as 80.6 as full nominal(82.1 -1.83%= 80.6).

Max we have seen has been about 81.4kWh, though it was not at 100% charge. And this was a pretty big outlier.

I do not think there really are any ’21 M3P with the old battery,

Other than that weird French one (which has a different part number "version" than an LR so is somehow different), I agree. Certainly in the US there's no evidence of that and in Europe there is very limited evidence of many options other than the big pack.

 

[AAKEE]

Max we have seen has been about 81.4kWh, though it was not at 100% charge. And this was a pretty big outlier.

Other than that weird French one (which has a different part number "version" than an LR so is somehow different), I agree. Certainly in the US there's no evidence of that and in Europe there is very limited evidence of many options other than the big pack.

Theres a german EV-forum ( Übersicht 2021 LR / P Batteriekapazität Fahrzeugschein ) you might have seen with a excel dokument of different batteries. There was a lot of confusion because the German ministery of department( or whoever issues the paperwork for the cars) seem to randomly have used 77kwh and 82kwh and also 79 kwh numbers in the paperwork.
I was partly worried because I had a ’21 M3P on order as a direct result of the new version with heatpump and the longer range coupled to the 2170L cell. I did get SMT and found I had the bigger battery( 82.1kwh, most likely the 2170L battery).
In this forum some still use the battery label from the paperwork that is clearly wrong which I think ad up to the confusion.
Also, some seem to mix the reported values and refer the battery size as other values than ”Full pack when new” which should be used as the value for defining battery size by specification.

I think all M3 in the German forum that actually got scanned with SMT follow a very simple pattern:

LR has:
E3D = 77.8kwh ( = old Panasonic)
E5D = 74.5kwh ( = ”new” LG )

P has:
E3D = 82.1kwh (2170L)

I still have not seen a single case not following the above, when actually scanned by SMT.

The German paperwork mix/combine 77, 79 and 82 kwh with all above, but should be completely disregarded.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Theres a german EV-forum ( Übersicht 2021 LR / P Batteriekapazität Fahrzeugschein ) you might have seen with a excel dokument of different batteries. There was a lot of confusion because the German ministery of department( or whoever issues the paperwork for the cars) seem to randomly have used 77kwh and 82kwh and also 79 kwh numbers in the paperwork.
I was partly worried because I had a ’21 M3P on order as a direct result of the new version with heatpump and the longer range coupled to the 2170L cell. I did get SMT and found I had the bigger battery( 82.1kwh, most likely the 2170L battery).
In this forum some still use the battery label from the paperwork that is clearly wrong which I think ad up to the confusion.
Also, some seem to mix the reported values and refer the battery size as other values than ”Full pack when new” which should be used as the value for defining battery size by specification.

I think all M3 in the German forum that actually got scanned with SMT follow a very simple pattern:

LR has:
E3D = 77.8kwh ( = old Panasonic)
E5D = 74.5kwh ( = ”new” LG )

P has:
E3D = 82.1kwh (2170L)

I still have not seen a single case not following the above, when actually scanned by SMT.

The German paperwork mix/combine 77, 79 and 82 kwh with all above, but should be completely disregarded.

The full pack when new value from SMT can be ignored. It usually does represent what the pack is capable of, but it does not represent what the pack had available when new, for the Performance pack. It is just a hard-coded value.

The value I was referring to was the Nominal Full Pack which is what matters.

The rest of this thread covers everything else you mentioned.

 

[AAKEE]

The value I was referring to was the Nominal Full Pack which is what matters.

The rest of this thread covers everything else you mentioned.

No, I mean that full pack when new is the specification of the pack, the marked size.
Its another thing that it might not reach the spec even as new.

For discussing which battery pack the marked label should be used for otherwise there will be a lot of mixup I think.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

No, I mean that full pack when new is the specification of the pack, the marked size.
Its another thing that it might not reach the spec even as new.

For discussing which battery pack the marked label should be used for otherwise there will be a lot of mixup I think.

Sure. That is all covered here, in any case. I recommend that you review every post in this thread, as this difference has already been covered in great detail.

 

[JCtx]

LR has: E3D = 77.8kwh ( = old Panasonic)
E5D = 74.5kwh ( = ”new” LG )

If that's the case, how can Tesla claim the same 353-mile range on both batteries? The larger one clearly should have more. Or the other less. Wish my car has the Panasonic, but no idea how to tell.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

If that's the case, how can Tesla claim the same 353-mile range on both batteries? The larger one clearly should have more. Or the other less. Wish my car has the Panasonic, but no idea how to tell.

Because that is just Europe, as far as we know. Covered in this thread. Only bigger one in the US. Everything is bigger in Texas. You can also take a picture of the battery label as detailed here. Or use the energy screen method as detailed here.