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

[FredMt]

I wonder are the softlocked 75kwh cars just more efficient?

In fact, it is just to fit to the capacity of the LG pack (74.5 kWh) installed in LRs in Europe, in parallel of the Panasonic pack. As the Panasonic has a bit too much (77.8 kWh), it s artificially adjusted to the size of the LG. This is a parculiarity of the European market. In Europe we use WLTP standard and not EPA, so you can not really see range difference if you compare European LR and US LR (without soft lock).

 

[kadettilac]

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.

Thanks @FredMt!

I've since received the part no./Ref. Style of the replacement HV battery from Tesla: 1137377-01-M

Based on your info, since it starts with 11 this could/should mean a Pana battery. I can only find out for sure once it's installed... Tesla is refusing to upgrade it to a new battery instead of reman, so there's still a risk of getting less than 77,8 kWh in the reman pack. We'll cross that bridge when we get there. I'll report back once I get the car back next week.

 

[Candleflame]

In fact, it is just to fit to the capacity of the LG pack (74.5 kWh) installed in LRs in Europe, in parallel of the Panasonic pack. As the Panasonic has a bit too much (77.8 kWh), it s artificially adjusted to the size of the LG. This is a parculiarity of the European market. In Europe we use WLTP standard and not EPA, so you can not really see range difference if you compare European LR and US LR (without soft lock).

The question is more how tesla achieves rated range with a 74.5kwh pack. 74.5kwh is much smaller than the original 78kwh pack. So theres no way you hit wltp range.or epa whatever. Unless the new cars have a lower wltp range than the 2018/2019 ones.

 

[FredMt]

battery from Tesla: 1137377-01-M

I'll report back once I get the car back next week

Never seen this reference before. If it's a Pana like it could be, i thought to E3CD 77.8kWh (without softlock).

 

[FredMt]

For LR

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?

Model3 2021 is more efficient, i hope now typical consumption for LR 2021 is 137Wh/km so with 74,5kWh you have about 543km. In Europe homologation is 580km WLTP.

 

[Devils son]

For LR

Model3 2021 is more efficient, i hope now typical consumption for LR 2021 is 137Wh/km so with 74,5kWh you have about 543km. In Europe homologation is 580km WLTP.

MY2021 is definitely more efficient. Even the Performance 2021 is more efficient then the LR 2019. And has the bigger battery.

 

[TimothyHW3]

Good post eivissa, and a good sum up !

iI think it was TimothyHW3 that had a LR and did read only 4.15v/cell att full charge. 4.15V is supposed to be close to 95% of the capacity of a li-ions normally full 4.20v. Its possible that this means it would store "marked size" 82kwh if charged to 4.20v.
What in that case doesnt ad up is that the 2170L cell is added to the LR as late as v14 of the document.

It even seems that the capacity on the Panasonics is being lowered with real degradation. Meaning that if your nominal full pack remaining is getting smaller, ie 76.5kWh for example, they lower the cap respectively to about 74.5kWh and so on. Like the buffer.

I guess anyone with Panasonic 2021 can test it by pulling the lever to 100% inside the car and checking with scan my tesla what the "to charge complete" + "expected remaining" (nominal remaining) value is and report here. If the sum is lower than 75kWh then it will be confirmed.

 

[TimothyHW3]

MY2021 is definitely more efficient. Even the Performance 2021 is more efficient then the LR 2019. And has the bigger battery

And this is tested how? Or just a gut feeling?

I tested 2019 vs 2021 LR with the same exact configuration and found no efficiency gain on the motors.

The only gain comes from the heat pump at optimum conditions (preconditioned and warm battery and temperatures above -10C)

But if the battery is cold, the weather is not optimal, you drive short city distances, then there is also absolutely no efficiency gain.

 

[Devils son]

And this is tested how? Or just a gut feeling?

I tested 2019 vs 2021 LR with the same exact configuration and found no efficiency gain on the motors.

The only gain comes from the heat pump at optimum conditions (preconditioned and warm battery and temperatures above -10C)

But if the battery is cold, the weather is not optimal, you drive short city distances, then there is also absolutely no efficiency gain.

I have both and found that the MY2021 is much more efficient driving them on the same roads, same conditions. The difference is even bigger without pre heating and on short trips, which is only logical, because then the heat pump shines. Can be up to 30% difference!

 

[AAKEE]

I only have one, ’21 P but compared to my collegues ’19 LR mine use less energy For the same drive. I have 19” aftermarket winter wheels and he has 18” with the caps. The difference can be quite big during winter times. I expect the difference to get progressively smaller as the summer comes.
At cold wheater when my heatpump went into that emergency mode, my car used about 235wh/km and the days when it worked as it should, it used some 170wh/km. This was on the same road, same speed and same ambient temp. I have seen it repetedly so it wanst a one time thing.

 

[TimothyHW3]

I have both and found that the MY2021 is much more efficient driving them on the same roads, same conditions. The difference is even bigger without pre heating and on short trips, which is only logical, because then the heat pump shines. Can be up to 30% difference!

You have both what MY or M3? You are not making any sense here, this is M3 thread.

And unless you can do a test riding side by side as I did, any test is invalid.

Plus 30% increase is just ridiculous. By the way, on short trips, especially on short trips, when the battery is cold and the heat pump can't suck up heat from it, there is zero efficiency gain. Check the second video I linked.

 

[TimothyHW3]

only have one, ’21 P but compared to my collegues ’19 LR mine use less energy For the same drive. I have 19” aftermarket winter wheels and he has 18” wit

Then why don't you just do a proper test?! Get both cars, charge them to 100%(or anything relatable, 75% on the P, 80% on the 3), unplug and
turn off the heater and drive both for about 50km and see what comes out. I guarantee you that the P will use way more energy, at least 10% to maybe 15%. I can even bet you if you are willing to.

 

[Devils son]

You have both what MY or M3? You are not making any sense here, this is M3 thread.

And unless you can do a test riding side by side as I did, any test is invalid.

Plus 30% increase is just ridiculous. By the way, on short trips, especially on short trips, when the battery is cold and the heat pump can't suck up heat from it, there is zero efficiency gain. Check the second video I linked.

MY2021 is model year 2021.

I know how to test. Great that you had other findings. Even though the heat pump is there for increased efficiency, it has made other bev’s more efficient, epa rating is up (even though Tesla started to use a different method that would lead to a lower epa), wltp rating is up (even with a smaller battery in the EU!) and other test come to the same finding as I have.

But your test should be valid, right?

Regarding the 30%: it is not that hard to imagine. The heat pump does not require a fully heated battery to work. On the contrary. In a short drive (16 km / 10 miles) the heat pump can truly shine. To maintain temperature, Teslabjorn found that you need 2.170 watt with the heater in the old model and only 735 watt with the heat pump. So that is a Cop of 2,95 at 3 degrees Celsius.

When heating up (what you do in the beginning), you will you a lot more. For this 10 miles let's say you will use an average of 4.5 kW with the 2019 and 1.5 with the 2021. So that is 3 kW difference. Now, in traffic you will drive an average of 32 km/h / 20 mph, so 30 minutes, so 1.5 kW more usage. I will calculate with kilometers, because that's what we do here in Eindhoven.

1 ,500 watt/32 km = 47 wh/km difference. If this equals to 30% than the difference would be: 157 vs 204 wh/km. And these numbers can definitely be attained whilst driving in around in freezing temperatures. My MY2019 would definitely be around 200 wh/km on such a short drive, whilst the 2021 P would be around 150 wh/km (my commute to the nearest office is 15 km, so I have seen this in practice), which blew my mind, because that was what the MY2019 would use when it was around 15 degrees outside.

 

[TimothyHW3]

But your test should be valid, right?

Yeah, it is pretty valid - same exact cars, same exact tires, same tire pressure and charge % and driving on the same road and captured on video.

I would say, pretty valid.

As for the EPA, the EPA does a calculation based on winter range and a special formula, hence why the WLTP didn't increase by that much. No heating.

As for the WLTP, this has been chewed a lot, I don't really think the WLTP numbers are correct, because the car has less capacity, but another topic altogether.

and other test come to the same finding as I have.

Oh yeah, a link to that test where they used the same exact cars with heater off and they achieved more range on the 2021?

Because I have another video, that confirms my findings too.

Check out this video where they had the setup wrong in the initial run. it is not as perfect as my test, because the heater was not completely off, but due to the wrong settings both heaters were probably pulling the same, hence the exact same consumption.

7:35 minute mark, 208 vs 204. After the cars warmed up and they changed the heat settings, then he tested around 10% advantage on 130km/h, much like in my tests.

Regarding the 30%: it is not that hard to imagine. The heat pump does not require a fully heated battery to work. On the contrary. In a short drive (16 km / 10 miles) the heat pump can truly shine. To maintain temperature, Teslabjorn found that you need 2.170 watt with the heater in the old model and only 735 watt with the heat pump. So that is a Cop of 2,95 at 3 degrees Celsius.

Are you sure you own the car? Because if you were, you wouldn't be referring to other people's tests, but your own. So why don't you do the tests?!

You need 735Watt when the battery is warm, maybe in the best of best, absolut best of scenarios. This is also what I found out - warm battery, warm car - 700-900Watt. That is true.

But most certainly not when there is no heating, the cabin is cold, outside temperature is cold and the battery is cold. If I remember my numbers correctly, it was pulling about 2kW, same or similiar as the old one.

I can definetely confirm, after a whole winter season, very cold, that the heat pump in cold battery doesn't have any effect. ZERO! Especially in short commutes of around 15/20km. I was averaging my usual 230+Wh/km in stop and go as with my old car.

I can't find a time to cut the tests I have, but I have a few where I tested this against the 2019LR. I both tested the heat pump in camp mode and while driving.

Only and Only if! the cabin is warm, the battery has enough heat and the weather is not very cold - then you have an advantage of about 10% to 15% (15% in absolute perfect conditions)

But there is no efficiency gain in the motors whatsoever.

The second video above confirms my tests to the T.

So unless you can present your own findings and don't quote random videos you don't understand, then I suggest you let it be.

 

[Devils son]

Yeah, it is pretty valid - same exact cars, same exact tires, same tire pressure and charge % and driving on the same road and captured on video.

I would say, pretty valid.

As for the EPA, the EPA does a calculation based on winter range and a special formula, hence why the WLTP didn't increase by that much. No heating.

As for the WLTP, this has been chewed a lot, I don't really think the WLTP numbers are correct, because the car has less capacity, but another topic altogether.


Oh yeah, a link to that test where they used the same exact cars with heater off and they achieved more range on the 2021?

Because I have another video, that confirms my findings too.

Check out this video where they had the setup wrong in the initial run. it is not as perfect as my test, because the heater was not completely off, but due to the wrong settings both heaters were probably pulling the same, hence the exact same consumption.

7:35 minute mark, 208 vs 204. After the cars warmed up and they changed the heat settings, then he tested around 10% advantage on 130km/h, much like in my tests.

Are you sure you own the car? Because if you were, you wouldn't be referring to other people's tests, but your own. So why don't you do the tests?!

You need 735Watt when the battery is warm, maybe in the best of best, absolut best of scenarios. This is also what I found out - warm battery, warm car - 700-900Watt. That is true.

But most certainly not when there is no heating, the cabin is cold, outside temperature is cold and the battery is cold. If I remember my numbers correctly, it was pulling about 2kW, same or similiar as the old one.

I can definetely confirm, after a whole winter season, very cold, that the heat pump in cold battery doesn't have any effect. ZERO! Especially in short commutes of around 15/20km. I was averaging my usual 230+Wh/km in stop and go as with my old car.

I can't find a time to cut the tests I have, but I have a few where I tested this against the 2019LR. I both tested the heat pump in camp mode and while driving.

Only and Only if! the cabin is warm, the battery has enough heat and the weather is not very cold - then you have an advantage of about 10% to 15% (15% in absolute perfect conditions)

But there is no efficiency gain in the motors whatsoever.

The second video above confirms my tests to the T.

So unless you can present your own findings and don't quote random videos you don't understand, then I suggest you let it be.

I don't care about driving with the heating off, because that is not real world driving.

The reason for the WLTP not gaining much is that the battery got smaller. If you account for that, the MY2021 is actually 8.2% more efficient.

And what kind of idiotic question is it if I am sure that I own the cars? Is that something that happens to you, not knowing which cars you own?

Great that you have your findings, I have mine. I can check them all using TeslaFi and I have done many rides to the office that is 15 km away from me. Even though they were on different days, there is a very clear pattern that does not allow for coincidence.

And it would be very strange if this heat pump behaves significantly different than other heat pumps. If they have less heat to work with, the COP will be lower, but not 1,00. At -7 C, a modern heat pump will still have a COP above 2. So why the hell would Tesla use one that does not manage this from a battery that is -7? And why would it not make any difference that the MY2019 will maintain a much higher battery temperature then that MY2021?

Makes no sense at all.

 

[TimothyHW3]

still have a COP above 2. So why the hell would Tesla use one that does not manage

An air to air heat pump has a maximum 2.5 at optimum levels of above 5°. I know because I own one. At -7 it is close to 1, yes. And this for big ass household heat pumps.

Whatever Tesla uses - the facts are clear and reproducible. You can easily get scan my tesla and do your own readings from the BMS. TeslaFi does not read the BMS and does its own, somewhat faulty, calculation, because of how Tesla uses the buffer.

As for driving without heat on, tgis is the only valid test to check the drive train efficiency, but I guess you must be living on the north pole, because anywhere else the heater is not on for at least 5-6-8 months...

 

[Devils son]

An air to air heat pump has a maximum 2.5 at optimum levels of above 5°. I know because I own one. At -7 it is close to 1, yes. And this for big ass household heat pumps.

Whatever Tesla uses - the facts are clear and reproducible. You can easily get scan my tesla and do your own readings from the BMS. TeslaFi does not read the BMS and does its own, somewhat faulty, calculation, because of how Tesla uses the buffer.

As for driving without heat on, tgis is the only valid test to check the drive train efficiency, but I guess you must be living on the north pole, because anywhere else the heater is not on for at least 5-6-8 months...

O my god! You are really just blurting out data in order 'te be right', aren't you? Even if your seasonal COP (average over the season) is just 2.5, the heat pump will get a E label in the EU (2 levels from least efficient, 6 levels below most efficient and so inefficient that labels E, F and G are no longer in use from September 2019). And you really think that 2.5 is maximum at optimum level. A+++ is above 5.1 SCOP. Simple facts, anyone can research.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

- then you have an advantage of about 10% to 15% (15% in absolute perfect conditions)

At what speed is this advantage you quote achieved? You cannot properly specify the heat pump relative advantage without providing the average speed as well. The advantage will be larger at low speeds, and smaller at high speeds. Both because Wh/mi usage for a fixed heating load is higher per mile at low speeds, and because aero losses are a greater proportion of overall losses at high speeds.

 

[AAKEE]

i dont think we have much evidence that the car balances only above 90% apart from some posts here.
Tesla officially states that the car balances cells at any % if I remember correctly.

I think there was some tesla information about the model S/X only balanced above 90%. A search here and on the net gives links to some tesla information, but the link doesnt work.

From my experience with lithium batterys in other applications the balancing always is done on top of the SOC, thats also the aim of the balancing, to have similar SOC and voltage( = performance) from all cells.
If you dont go to the absolute zero SOC, of close to it, the only real gain is to balamce it on the top of the range, to reach as close as 100% on all cells. Charging must be stopped when the highest cell reach 4.20V. If The imbalance causes the average Voltage to be 0.1V below the sibgle highest cell at 4.20V, we loose more than 10% capacity.
For cycles between below some 90% and below there might be less advantage of balancing the cells, a balancing session at low SOC might even cause more imbalance at higher SOC’s, because of different cell characteristics.

Well, knowing this, I arrived from a two day trip, about 600km.
My battery has shown 4.00mv imbalance for more than two months with quite shallow charged. I never have seen less than 4mv, so I leaning to the guess that 4 mv is the target when the BMS stop balancing.
When I arrived at home yesterday, I had 20% SOC, 3.47v / cell 6mV imbalance and 16.75C batt temp. I put the car in the garage and waited 5hours.
Still 20% SOC, 3.48v/cell and still 6mV. Cell temp 15.75C.

No balancing seem to have taken place during these 5 hours.

I put the car on charge to 62% with the WC at 5.5kW and by calculation from both charge time remaining and also the Kwh needed/ charging power I did get a time early this morning, I added 5hrs and that time just passed so I checked the imbalance. Still 6mV.

As it looks, no cell balancing seem to have been occuring during the charging session or after during these 5 hours.

So, the car is now on charge for a 90% SOC, I will check the imbalance when the charge is complete and also leave it for 5 hours and check.

Cell imbalance should not be a BMS estimate but actual values, so I think we can rely on these voltages as ’true’.

 

[TimothyHW3]

Simple facts, anyone can research

Anyone, but you, obviously. I just did a test run on my way today, will present the results shortly.