I hope this isn't the case, or if it is, that the range I'm getting in the car (550tkm@100%) is EPA estimate. If so, then I'm looking more at 610 WLTP if the 1,12x multiplier is correct for tesla M3 as well (EPA->WLTP)
-
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
TimothyHW3
Active Member
It took Musk 3 days to address the autopilot crash, on a reply, on Twitter...Which was a huge news and took the stock 8% down... And besides that, the 82kWh was in the P, so technically that article was half right.
Why in AC? is not the same if done in DC or at a supercharger? any particular reason to perfom all the 5% to 100% in LOW current?
BTW when at 100% (and it continue to charge until if finishes) it charges at a very LOW rate (2 or 3 kW).
Turntable666
Member
Thank you for the info, Where did this report come from, what does the VIN column correspond to, how does this number correspond to a VIN ?
- Tesla is now advertising 614km of WLTP Range for the Long Range on their website.
- Q2 Long Range customers received COC's with 580km (LG) and 640km (Panasonic).
- Maybe Tesla learned a lesson and is now advertising their cars without the extra range from the Energy Buffer!?
- The data is from a German Tesla Forum, where users are trying to make sense of the current long range situation.
- First row is production date, second row are the first three digits of the VIN range, third row is the 82kWh Panasonic (E3LD), fourth row is the 75kWh LG (E5D)
Why would you be annoyed if they not overdeliver? You got the 580 WLTP.
Now it is 614 WLTP. If you order now and you will get a capped one, then you are right to complain.
simeriaionut
Member
Hi all,
I was just browsing the Tesla website and to my surprise I see that now the Model 3 LR AWD shows a 614 km estimated WLTP range. This was previously 580 km.
Has anything been announced regarding this? Is it a bigger battery or a software optimization?
And can we expect that if we ordered 2 weeks ago, we will get this range?
I was just browsing the Tesla website and to my surprise I see that now the Model 3 LR AWD shows a 614 km estimated WLTP range. This was previously 580 km.
Has anything been announced regarding this? Is it a bigger battery or a software optimization?
And can we expect that if we ordered 2 weeks ago, we will get this range?
Hello, personally I ordered mine 3 weeks ago and my TA said to me this morning that I will receive the last one (614 kms).
but there is something strange : on certificate of conformity given to Germain customers for TM3LR delivered on 20th of May like mine, it is written : range 640 kms (with the E3LC model). I suppose that some new LRs will have the Panasonic battery extended to 640 kms and for the others, LG battery will be extended to 614 kms
but there is something strange : on certificate of conformity given to Germain customers for TM3LR delivered on 20th of May like mine, it is written : range 640 kms (with the E3LC model). I suppose that some new LRs will have the Panasonic battery extended to 640 kms and for the others, LG battery will be extended to 614 kms
What if I charge up to 80 or 90 in DC (supercharger) and I finish the process in AC?
The fact is that I have no way (no time & no plug available for 7 /8 hours) to do a complete charge in AC.
Last edited:
Another small update:
Tesla started to advertise the readily available Model 3 long range cars that are currently in transit to Europe with two different names.
- Model 3 Long Range with 580km (LG)
- Model 3 Maximum Range with 614km (Panasonic)
Tesla started to advertise the readily available Model 3 long range cars that are currently in transit to Europe with two different names.
- Model 3 Long Range with 580km (LG)
- Model 3 Maximum Range with 614km (Panasonic)
Extra range plus heated steering and new door trim. All from April/Q2 Produktion onwards.Me too hungrxyz!
Extra range is always welcome!
It is probably both. The change from roughly 75kWh (old Panasonic and LG) to the new Panasonic with 81kWh is verified. The change in consumption from 148 to 147kWh/100km is either test variation or improved efficiency from an update as the motors are the same in both old and new one.
If you VIN is from 943 onwards you should be golden.
You probably mean E3LD. Q2/2021 produced long range have the official extension 614kw WLTP via the larger battery pack. In the COC it states 640km electric range, but Tesla probably started advertising without using the Buffer/reserve below 0%.
The LG battery wont be extended to anything above the advertised 580km for two reasons. The cells are already at their maximum capacity with 4,2V and the LG seems to have reached its end of life for the European market (for now). There are no Q2/2021 LG models coming to European mainland. Only a couple of "leftovers" from Q1/2021.
Dont beleive a word of what he told you there. The SA's simply dont know better.
Certainly yes!
I was looking after another thing when I found this table.
The cell capacity is not correctly calculated. The voltage will not hold 4.2V during a complete discharge but will drop during the discharge.
The average voltage should be the ”nominal cell voltage”, which shoudl be 3.7V on these cells. If doing a calculation about the energy content in Wh you should use the nominal voltage times the Ah-rating or tested A—value. I think there is some tests on the net showing the old 2170 model 3 cell, marked Wh is 18,5 and marked marked size is 5000mah, but the tests shows real content to be 4800mah or slightly above Which seems to be consistent witht the official Tesla dokuments about the cells.
Marked capacity 18.5Wh for the old 2170 should be a little optimistic. If we use the factor 4.8/5 times 18.5Wh we get 17.76Wh.
4416 x 17.76 = 78.4kWh.
For the new 2170L-cell, if we use 5000mah as the actual capacity we get 3.7x5x4416 = 81,7kWh. To reach the 82.1-mark we need the capacity to be 0,5% larger, 5025mah.
The M3 battery capacity is not as large as it seems by your table. We can see the voltage with low SOCs with SMT and compare it with a discharge curve that the state of charge really is low.
1.6% displayed SOC should be about 6% ”real SOC” according to the common knowledge of 4.5% buffer below 0% dispalyed SOC.
15kW battery power should be quite close to 0.2-0.25C and also close to 1A current. 278V equals 2.9V/cell.
Down is a discharge curve of a tesla 2170 cell. The current draw is 1A, so the Voltage droop should be similar.
If we look at the 2.9V position we see that it is about the knee where the voltage starts to droop quite fast and there is not much energy left.
We can calculate the approximate resting capacity below 2.9V by multiplying the average voltage times the Amp hours. The average voltage could be somewhere in the ball park of 2,85V, and the Amps is 1A, time about 15minutes(= 0.25 hrs). The resting Wh is about 0.71 Ah, or 0.71/17.75 % of the Watt hours, 4%.
As this calculatiuon is not done by exact numbers. The SOC vs voltage is grabbed from a youtube video and might change slightly if another fram was chosen. Its not ”perfect” but I think we clearly can see the similarity between my 4% calculation and the 6% ”real SOC” on the picture above. When the car has shown 0% and is driven until it stops there is virtually no energy left In the cells.
The(my) conclusion is that the marked capacity by Tesla, Full size when new, is the whole capacity without any hidden capacity.
The SMT picture is grabbed from this video by Teslabjörn:
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Article
