Nosken
Active Member
If a Model 3 consumes less energy per mile than a Model S, wouldn’t it need to charge less?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
If a Model 3 consumes less energy per mile than a Model S, wouldn’t it need to charge less?
No. Most speculation is that a long range Model 3 will have more driving range than a S 100D.
According to the EPA documents, the TMLR might in fact have 334 miles of range. Whether of not Tesla makes this available to owners/employees is another matter.
So let's say they go as far, just TM3LR does it on 80+kWh in stead of 102.4kWh total capacity.
The real question then is, which one charges faster in mph/kph over an ideal Supercharger leap, let's say 150 miles taking 20% to 90% at barely legal driving speeds (I'm making numbers up). If they TM3LR just takes one minute less to get from 20% to 90% as needed to make it to the average next supercharger at the highest speed possible within limitation, it will beat the S100D to the finish line.
As we've seen a picture of TM3LR charging at 102kW, reportedly peaking at 108kW, it will add miles a goo bit quicker than S100D which doesn't charge being 115-120kW from what I've heard. Remember, S100D might need 25% more juice to get just as far.
Of course, the average charging speed across the typical charging state of charge gain is what really counts. Peak rates are cool for pictures.
So let's say they go as far, just TM3LR does it on 80+kWh in stead of 102.4kWh total capacity.
The real question then is, which one charges faster in mph/kph over an ideal Supercharger leap, let's say 150 miles taking 20% to 90% at barely legal driving speeds (I'm making numbers up). If they TM3LR just takes one minute less to get from 20% to 90% as needed to make it to the average next supercharger at the highest speed possible within limitation, it will beat the S100D to the finish line.
As we've seen a picture of TM3LR charging at 102kW, reportedly peaking at 108kW, it will add miles a goo bit quicker than S100D which doesn't charge being 115-120kW from what I've heard. Remember, S100D might need 25% more juice to get just as far.
Of course, the average charging speed across the typical charging state of charge gain is what really counts. Peak rates are cool for pictures.
Last edited:
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
ModelNforNerd
Active Member
I think as long as the story is clear that it's an Unverified Claim, but there is at least some compelling evidence, it should stay up.
ModelNforNerd
Active Member
The weight difference and different battery chemistry/motor technology has the most to do with it.
Sounds like we can't just go by the kWh number anymore........maybe that's why Tesla is retiring the number system for battery sizes.....
Seems like Tesla is running scared between all of the negative press recently about M3 production problems and their subsequent desire to squelch videos and photos.
Perhaps Tesla never should have launched a vehicle before it was ready for sale? Perhaps Musk should not have irresponsibly set up his company for such a potential? Maybe Tesla should have done proper development and testing, like any other normal vehicle manufacturer, and only announced the car when it was ready? I don't know, I mean it's not like Tesla is helpless here. They created their own mess.
Perhaps Tesla never should have launched a vehicle before it was ready for sale? Perhaps Musk should not have irresponsibly set up his company for such a potential? Maybe Tesla should have done proper development and testing, like any other normal vehicle manufacturer, and only announced the car when it was ready? I don't know, I mean it's not like Tesla is helpless here. They created their own mess.
Going west to east gains a "tail wind" advantage. The same reason west to east coast flights are shorter. Anyone that has attempted an EV record from East to West has failed miserably ( I will spare this teams the embarrassment of their poor planning by not providing links). The current EV Cannonball record of low 50 hours requires every advantage possible at having a chance at cracking it; including accounting for tail winds.
When Deena and I invited a journalist to join our team in 2016 we shared this same information, along with data we learned from our Guinness Book EV shortest charging time and Fastest EV Cannonball time in 2015. Video here
Of course anyone one trying to break the (dreaded) Double Transcontinental record will have to deal with the headwind heading west. For those interest the current double transcontinental EV record stands at 6 Days 6 hours and 22 minutes.
Currently we are preparing a car with Carbon Revolution wheels to set a few more records. Anyone interested in following our #Next100Records with EV or Motorcycles are welcome to follow us at www.Twitter.com/EnduranceDriver www.Facebook.com/EnduranceDriver or www.Instagram.com/EnduranceDriver
Carl Reese
Multiple Guinness Book & World Record Holder
Last edited:
Yup... pictures are posted in a few threads on the 'Pics of Production Model 3s' thread.
This shows pics of the car in LA and driving:
Pictures of production Model 3s
This one caught the car supercharging in IL:
Pictures of production Model 3s
And this post has pics of the car in NYC:
Pictures of production Model 3s
Tam
Well-Known Member
I don't think anyone has tried with Model S 100D with EPA range of 335 miles just yet!
I don't know why but it's possible that qualified drivers don't have access to it for a "cannonball run".
e-FTW
New electron smell
Exactly why one should not concern themselves solely with kW when comparing S and 3. 3 is more efficient, so adds miles much faster at same charge rate (kW).
DrivingTheFuture
Member
We did it in an 85D so definitely beatable by a Model 3, however the head of Security for Amazon who owns several Tesla's seemed to think that the charger on the 85D would not slow down charging speeds as much as the newer models so he thinks that helped us as well.
How do you propose one chemistry might differ from the other? Normally 1 kWh is just that, right? Sure, one chemistry may be less susceptible to heat losses, but within one car brand...would that matter much for range? Am I missing something?The weight difference and different battery chemistry/motor technology has the most to do with it.
Sounds like we can't just go by the kWh number anymore........maybe that's why Tesla is retiring the number system for battery sizes.....
ModelNforNerd
Active Member
just from the anecdotal stuff we're seeing, I think the chemistry advantage so far is coming from Supercharging time.
If you go to the charging info page:
Home charging installation
You'll see that the Model 3 even gets more range added per hour on a 14-50 than a Model S or X. We don't know as much about the Model 3 yet, but I find that to be odd.....the major difference between those 3 vehicles is the battery chemistry.
As far as driving range, tough to say. Maybe it's the motor type. Maybe it's the Cd, maybe it's the battery. The Model 3 is a more efficient vehicle than the S or X.
As far as "within one car brand", that seems like a throwaway comparison. Ford makes the Focus and the Mustang. Chevy makes the Cobalt and Corvette. A car "brand" can have wildly differing levels of performance under one umbrella.
gjunky
Trifecta: Solar and both cars are EVs
ModelNforNerd
Active Member
Your comment gave me an idea:
Since Model 3 supercharging isn't free, wouldn't there be an "electronic trail" of Supercharging stops, to include kWh received, timestamps, and locations from this trip...?
Shouldn't be much harder than going into the MyTesla account linked to the car.
Miles per hour charging depends on charging and vehicle efficiencies. Note that the Model 3 is based on the long-range version. I don't know which Model S and X they use. Model 3:
- is lighter (3814lb v 4850lb (100D))
- uses a permanent magnet motor v an induction motor
- has smaller wheels (18" v 19")
PS Chevy makes the Cruze and Corvette.
dhrivnak
Active Member
I think you are missing a major point that the Model 3 is smaller and weighs less which translates into greater efficiency. The Model S gets about 3 miles/KW and I would bet the model 3 is closer to 4/KW. So with 220V and 40 amps you are getting 10KW. So an hour of charging a Model S yields 30 miles and a Model 3 40 miles. A Roadster is even more efficient due to its small size as it gains 44 miles/hour on 40 amps.
HankLloydRight
No Roads
Do you mean the onboard AC->DC chargers? Because they aren't used for Supercharging, which is DC current direct to the batteries, bypassing the chargers, so they should be of no consequence if doing a cross-country supercharger trip.
Similar threads
