Model 3 Battery size

[Krohleder]

I am just speculating about the battery size of the Model 3. I would appreciate any input.
So I have a few assumptions and then some math.

Tesla Model S seems to average about 3.6 mi/kwh

So if the Model 3 increased that by 10% (due to smaller size and weight - assumption) that would be about 3.96 mi/kwh.

Since they indicated during the unveiling that the model 3 would be around a 215 mile range that would mean a 50 to 60 kwh battery.

Any thoughts?

 

[Krohleder]

So upgrade will maybe be to 70 kwh battery?

 

[vortexz]

I have high reasons to belive the M3 will be more efficient than just 10%
It has a better CD, will have a new tehnology battery which will make it less heavy, will have more efficient drive units etc.
I would say it would be at least 15 % more efficient

 

[NC-3]

Agree on a minimum of 15% Hoping for 20% given the improvement in battery technology (as in GigaFactory) between Model S and M3.

So hoping base will be <50 kwh, with a 60-70 kwh option offering a huge increase in range and performance.(and assumed shorter charging time) This is the one option I want!! Willing to pass on the cow-bells.

 

[Darryl]

I had read the base battery would be 50 kWh which should give it an approximate range of 215 with a single RWD. There is suppose to be a upgrade to a 60-65 kWh and also an option for a 60-65 kWh AWD.

 

[vortexz]

where did you read that ?

 

[Model 3]

Since they indicated during the unveiling that the model 3 would be around a 215 mile range that would mean a 50 to 60 kwh battery.

My guess has for a long time been that it will get a 55kWh pack. And after the event, with the 215 miles EPA range, I do still guess on that being the base battery.

 

[Krohleder]

I have high reasons to belive the M3 will be more efficient than just 10%
It has a better CD, will have a new tehnology battery which will make it less heavy, will have more efficient drive units etc.
I would say it would be at least 15 % more efficient

I hope you are right. I was just being conservative in my calculations but I think it will most likely be 15 to 20 % more efficient. Also upgrading to dual motors increases range a bit.

 

[jjkroll]

I am sure I have seen this elsewhere, but simple logic can be applied. Just looking at geometry, you could assume the loss of 4 out of the 16 battery modules. That is if nothing else about cell/module size or density changed. That would give you 12/16 the space for model 3 batteries. Scaling from the 70kWh and 90kWh you get 52.5kWh and 67.5kWh. So my vote, with no energy density improvement, is 50kWh and 70kWh for the two Model 3 battery variants.

 

[Snowdog]

Already a long thread on exactly this here:
Extrapolation of Range and Battery Size(s)

 

[Tesloid]

Did this math 2 months ago, on another thread. I guessed the 220 mile range right, and my math for that involved a 55KWh battery pack. The upgrade option will be a 70KWh pack.

Now, depending on the economics of the cells produced at the new Gigafactory, Tesla might decide to slap bigger batteries on the 3, to make it competitive against the upcoming 200-mile EVs from other automakers. Elon did mention during the reveal that 215 miles is just the bare minimum figure and they will look to exceed it by production time. In that case, we might see 60KWh and 75KWh options for the 3 and Y, while getting 85KWh and 100KWh options for the S and X.

 

[Krohleder]

I am sure I have seen this elsewhere, but simple logic can be applied. Just looking at geometry, you could assume the loss of 4 out of the 16 battery modules. That is if nothing else about cell/module size or density changed. That would give you 12/16 the space for model 3 batteries. Scaling from the 70kWh and 90kWh you get 52.5kWh and 67.5kWh. So my vote, with no energy density improvement, is 50kWh and 70kWh for the two Model 3 battery variants.

Thanks! That's a great point and adds to the analysis.

 

[Donar]

I am just speculating about the battery size of the Model 3. I would appreciate any input.
So I have a few assumptions and then some math.

Tesla Model S seems to average about 3.6 mi/kwh

So if the Model 3 increased that by 10% (due to smaller size and weight - assumption) that would be about 3.96 mi/kwh.

Since they indicated during the unveiling that the model 3 would be around a 215 mile range that would mean a 50 to 60 kwh battery.

Any thoughts?

Where did you get the 3,6 miles per kWh figure for the Model S? That does not seem realistic to me.
Assuming the Model S 90D with 270 miles EPA range has about 81 kWh usable battery capacity, the EPA rated energy consumption would be around 3.3 miles per kWh.

Of course the Model 3 is going to be more efficient, but there is no way the Model 3 is much more than 20% more efficient than the Model S. The EPA rated energy consumption should thus be 3.8 to 4 miles per kWh.

So the usable battery capacity of the Model 3 would have to be about 54 to 57 kWh to reach 215 miles.
Thus, I think we will likely see a 60 kWh (54 kWh usable) or 65 kWh (58.5 kWh usable) battery pack.

Additionally, I estimate there will be a Model 3 with a 80-85 kWh battery pack with 72 - 76.5 kWh available, resulting in 270 to 290 miles of EPA rated range.

I think a 50 kWh pack is impossible and a 55 kWh pack very unlikely.

I am sure I have seen this elsewhere, but simple logic can be applied. Just looking at geometry, you could assume the loss of 4 out of the 16 battery modules. That is if nothing else about cell/module size or density changed. That would give you 12/16 the space for model 3 batteries. Scaling from the 70kWh and 90kWh you get 52.5kWh and 67.5kWh. So my vote, with no energy density improvement, is 50kWh and 70kWh for the two Model 3 battery variants.

Why should there be no energy density improvement?
I don't think it is unrealistic to expect a Model S with 80 and 100 kWh batteries by 2017.
There was already a leak about the P100D.
And by the way, the cell/module size changed too, at least according to the video Elon showed at the presentation of the Model 3.
Furthermore, the Model 3 seems to have a very long wheel base for its size – potentially making a pretty large battery possible.

 

[Krohleder]

3.6 was averaged between all the model S's. The sizes and dual versus single motor create variations that were kind of large. So that is why I gave it a 50 to 60 kwh guesstimate. I am thinking 50 may be more likely. The Chevy bolt has a 60 but will not be as efficient. (Just for comparison). I doubt an 80 would fit. But I could be wrong.

 

[Snowdog]

The Chevy bolt has a 60 but will not be as efficient. (Just for comparison). I doubt an 80 would fit. But I could be wrong.

The Chevy is also targeting 200 miles not 215.

Since this is just a rehash of the previous thread on the same topic, I point out the same things I said in the previous topic:

To get down to a 55 KWh pack size at 215 mile EPA range, the Model 3 would need to be significantly more efficient than the BMW i3.

The BMW i3 is carbon fiber with a tiny battery, it weighs ~2600lbs, M3 will almost certainly weigh about 1000 lbs more.
EPA test is heavily influenced by weight. See line above.
Also remember that there is a lot diminishing returns going on, there isn't that much low hanging fruit to pluck.

I think Tesla will go with a 60KWh pack and will get more range out of than anyone else (Nissan is rumored to be going 60KWh).

 

[pmich80]

The Chevy is also targeting 200 miles not 215.

Since this is just a rehash of the previous thread on the same topic, I point out the same things I said in the previous topic:

To get down to a 55 KWh pack size at 215 mile EPA range, the Model 3 would need to be significantly more efficient than the BMW i3.

The BMW i3 is carbon fiber with a tiny battery, it weighs ~2600lbs, M3 will almost certainly weigh about 1000 lbs more.
EPA test is heavily influenced by weight. See line above.
Also remember that there is a lot diminishing returns going on, there isn't that much low hanging fruit to pluck.

I think Tesla will go with a 60KWh pack and will get more range out of than anyone else (Nissan is rumored to be going 60KWh).

i agree I really think they'll start with a 60KWH batter for the lower end model. Considering in 2 years the base model for the Model S and X will most probably be 80kWh and 100kwh by then.

 

[CarlitoDoc]

With this level of anticipation and Hype, there is absolutely no way that they would let the competition have a higher range. Therefore "base" battery pack will likely be in the 60 KWH range.

 

[Zoomit]

To get down to a 55 KWh pack size at 215 mile EPA range, the Model 3 would need to be significantly more efficient than the BMW i3.

The BMW i3 is carbon fiber with a tiny battery, it weighs ~2600lbs, M3 will almost certainly weigh about 1000 lbs more.
EPA test is heavily influenced by weight. See line above.
Also remember that there is a lot diminishing returns going on, there isn't that much low hanging fruit to pluck.

I think Tesla will go with a 60KWh pack and will get more range out of than anyone else (Nissan is rumored to be going 60KWh).

Just to set the record straight, the i3 BEV is 2853 lbs per the data in this thread: BEV Spec Comparison with Model 3

I can't think of any reason the Model 3 could be significantly less than the Bolt EV (3650 lbs) which I predict will get 215-220 mi EPA.

I agree that the base battery is likely to be 60 kWh. The big unknown is what size will the larger battery be?

 

[WarpedOne]

Less than 80.
Because space.

 

[AlexT]

Less than 80.
Because space.

I'm hoping those 8 "packs" in the reveal are 10 kWh each.