Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Model 3 Energy Consumption Rate, Battery Size, and SC Charge Rates

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
#22
MP3Mike said:
No, the asterisk means it is an estimate, because they haven't actually built the car to have it tested and approved by the EPA. The 310 isn't an estimate, it is the actual number that has been approved. (At least that is what I think.)
Click to expand...

That would be preferable for sure. My only pause is that when you go to configure the S or X, there is an EPA mention on all the range options. No EPA mention for the 310 M3.
 
#23
It's been speculated elsewhere that the ratio of big battery capacity to small battery capacity is 3/2, I'm quite sure this is correct given that this represents a 4.3% efficiency advantage for the $35k car which is 7.5% lighter (4.3% does seem a bit high).

Elon stated that M3 wouldn't fit more than 75kWh, this should mean the large battery is ~75kWh.

Effectively this means the M3 models are ~75kWh and ~50kWh, rather than the 75kWh/55kWh in a 4/3 ratio I'd expected.

We can also look at this from the leaked .237kWh/mile angle. The problem is we don't know if this figure is for the long range M3 or the short range M3.
Given that the focus is on the long range model it's a good bet that this is for the long range model; running the numbers:

310 * .237 = 73.5kWh usable and ~76.5kWh total. If we assume it's for the short range model and the 4.3% efficiency delta holds then we'd get:

310 * (.237 + .043 * .237) or 76.6kWh usable and ~79.6kWh usable, which seems pretty far from the 75kWh figure Elon tweeted.

So based on this we're at ~76.5kWh and ~51kWh total and 73.5kWh and 49kWh usable. Efficiencies are .237kWh/mile for the long range model and .227kWh/mile for the short range model not including charging losses.

Given that Tesla has rounded down EPA range numbers in the past I wouldn't be surprised if 310 is a rounded-down figure and the 220 figure is more or less right on.

If the above is correct the short range model should be the most efficient car in the world, beating the Ioniq which is 400lb lighter and has a PMAC motor.

This leaves the question of module size and layout unanswered, might have to wait for wk057 to tear one down.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: TEG, KarenRei and FlatSix911
#26
Zoomit said:
Not sure you can say that. If the Ioniq Electric has a 28 kWh battery and goes 124 miles EPA, then it's 226 Wh/mi, effectively the same as your estimate of the Model 3 at 227 Wh/mi.
Click to expand...
Ha, I initially assumed a constant reserve of 3kWh which put usable at 48 kWh, then changed the assumption to constant percentage in order to take the conservative approach wrt efficiency. This tipped it over the edge.
 
#27
Playing around with the stated Supercharging info...

Base pack: 130 miles in 30 minutes
LR: 170 miles in 30 minutes

130 miles is 59% of 220 mile EPA range. Assuming 52 kWh of useable capacity, that's 30.7 kWh from the battery (after charging losses). Assuming 10% charging losses, that's then 68 kW average over the course of the first 30 minutes.

In comparison, the original Model S 60 kWh charged 37 kWh in 30 minutes or at 74 kW average and 125 miles of range. So basically, the base Model 3 charges slightly slower (4% slower) in terms of rated range than the original Model S 60 kWh. Charging c-rate across that time is ~1.4C, but we don't know the peak. Tesla did change the charge taper to have a much flatter curve which means better overall charge performance but less peak rate.

The LR version obviously is much faster... assuming 74 kWh usable, 55% of EPA range in 30 minutes means 40.7 kWh after charging losses. That's then 91 kW average for the first 30 minutes. That's awesome. The 100 kWh packs get 49 kWh during the same time, average 98 kW. So with a much smaller pack, the LR Model 3 charges at a rate within about 8% of the top of the line S/X pack for the first 30 minutes.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: 1.21 Jiggawatts and Falkirk
#28
Jeff N said:
I believe it is here under the "Download the Vehicle Data" heading although I do this infrequently enough that I have trouble remembering the right page to look online.
I can't download the zip file right now but the page claims the data was updated last Thursday so maybe there is slight chance the Model 3 will be in there.
Fuel Economy Web Services
Click to expand...

Some interesting data in that database...
tesdata1.png
 
  • Informative
Reactions: FlatSix911
#29
techmaven said:
Playing around with the stated Supercharging info...

Base pack: 130 miles in 30 minutes
LR: 170 miles in 30 minutes

130 miles is 59% of 220 mile EPA range. Assuming 52 kWh of useable capacity, that's 30.7 kWh from the battery (after charging losses). Assuming 10% charging losses, that's then 68 kW average over the course of the first 30 minutes.
Click to expand...

The 10% post-rectification charging loss assumption is probably on the high side so I'd guess lower than 68 kW.

If you apply the same formula to the Bolt EV it's 90 miles would be 37.8% of 238 miles of range and assuming 58 kWh of usable capacity it would be 21.93 kWh from the battery. Assuming 10% charging losses would get 48.7 kW average DC power and we know it's actually closer to the 43.9 kW if not accounting for further charging losses.

Of course, these "xxx miles in 30 minutes" claims are resting upon various other assumings and value roundings so it's all a very rough approximation.
 
#33
@SageBrush. In message #3 I suggested to try to calculate the battery size from the two weight numbers Tesla released here:
  • 3549 lbs. (Model 3) Curb weight
  • 3814 lbs. (Model 3 Long Range) Curb weight
I have now completed my calculations. Here are the results:
  • If the base version is 55 kWh, the long range version should be 80 kWh
  • If the base version is 60 kWh, the long range version should be 85 kWh
My range calculations show that 55/80 kWh is more likely. However, Motor Trend estimates 60/85 kWh on this page. Therefore I'm not sure which one is more likely. Interestingly, the range numbers 220 and 310 miles, don't add up in either scenario:
  • If the base version is 55 kWh with 220 mi EPA, the large battery version should be 80 kWh with 300 miles EPA.
  • If the base version is 60 kWh with 220 mi EPA, the large battery version should be 85 kWh with 293 miles EPA.
That could mean 310 mi is not the EPA rated range of the RWD version. Maybe it's the range of the AWD version. Tesla advertises 310 mi range for the AWD version as well. Another possibility is that the base version has more range than 220 mi EPA but Tesla is intentionally under reporting it. This is allowed under EPA rules because Tesla has done this in the past. When they released the Model S 90D, for a while they used the Model S 85D's 270 mi EPA number. Here is a news article about it. In that case, I can say the following:
  • If the battery sizes are 55-80 kWh and the 80 has 310 mi EPA, then the 55 should have 227 mi EPA, not 220.
  • If the battery sizes are 60-85 kWh and the 85 has 310 mi EPA, then the 60 should have 233 mi EPA, not 220.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1.21 Jiggawatts
#35
Jeff N said:
The 10% post-rectification charging loss assumption is probably on the high side so I'd guess lower than 68 kW.

If you apply the same formula to the Bolt EV it's 90 miles would be 37.8% of 238 miles of range and assuming 58 kWh of usable capacity it would be 21.93 kWh from the battery. Assuming 10% charging losses would get 48.7 kW average DC power and we know it's actually closer to the 43.9 kW if not accounting for further charging losses.

Of course, these "xxx miles in 30 minutes" claims are resting upon various other assumings and value roundings so it's all a very rough approximation.
Click to expand...

I paired it with the 30 miles per hour for 240V x 32A charging.
That'd give (53.25kW,45kWh*) at 80% efficiency to (59.9kW, 53.3kWh*) at 90% efficient.

* Usable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Model 3
#37
Troy said:
This page on Tesla website has all the specs on one page. What I find unusual is that it says "estimated EPA rated range" for 220 miles but not for 310 miles. At least not for now. Below is a screenshot. Notice how 220 has an asterisk that says "EPA estimated range" but 310 does not. In addition, the bullet points on that page are as follows:
  • Range: 220 miles (EPA estimated)
  • Range: 310 miles
Tesla shouldn't be able to sell the car without a window sticker and the window sticker would definitely show the EPA rated range. Therefore it is puzzling why Tesla's website doesn't show this number. Anyway, that's just a side detail that I find unusual.

@SageBrush, we could try to calculate the battery sizes from these two numbers on that page:
  • 3549 lbs. (Model 3) Curb weight
  • 3814 lbs. (Model 3 Long Range) Curb weight
For example, what would be the larger battery if we assume 55 kWh for the smaller battery? What if the smaller battery is 60 kWh?

ghIh8q2.png
Click to expand...
Tesla already has a test group number for their ARB EO (HTSLVOO.OL13), which I believe implies that the same car has also had the fuel economy date submitted/approved by the EPA because all the ARB test group numbers for the Model S/X match up to the same EPA test group number.

https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onroad/cert/pcldtmdv/2017/tesla_pc_a3740018_0_z_e.pdf

Since there isn't an ARB EO for the 3 with the smaller pack, my guess is that it's fuel economy data hasn't been submitted to the EPA/ARB, which is why Tesla added "(EPA Estimated)" next to the range.
 
  • Helpful
  • Like
Reactions: GSP and tracksyde
#39
The leaked data from the website stated 237Wh/mi... which would seem entirely too high to also include charging losses. Although that page also uses a number that seems way too high for Model S usage numbers... so I'm not sure what to make of that.

We also know that the larger 85/90/100 packs use a pack buffer of ~4kWh, which is in the 4-5% range. the 60-75KWh cars use a 2.4KWh buffer which is in the 3-4% range. So it's conceivable that a pack in the 50-55KWh range could have a buffer as low as 1.5-20KWh or so.

So, if we calculate using 237Wh/mi for driving energy usage that's a used capacity of:

73.5KWh
for 310 miles​
53.1KWh for 220 miles

If we use the same buffer the other 75KWh packs use, that's a total pack size of ~76KWh for the long range model

If we use a similar relative percentage (4%) for a buffer for the smaller pack, we end up with a total capacity of ~55KWh.

Given that Elon has stated that the largest pack you could stuff in a Model 3 would be 75KWh, that seems not too far off.


 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: GSP and JeffK
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Strange (maybe normal) battery experience
Replies
12
Views
1K
Model X: Battery & Charging
Kibana Dai
K
Doc_Hudson
New [used] Car!! - 2022 Model 3 Long Range + Questions and info
Replies
13
Views
523
Model 3
Doc_Hudson
Doc_Hudson
J
How to get my car's rated Wh/mile via API or otherwise?
Replies
10
Views
1K
Software: Firmware Updates, Features, Tesla App
PCMc
P
X
New here. Driving Efficiency Question
Replies
18
Views
2K
Model 3
afadeev
afadeev
Alpaca
Tire Porn - Goodyear Assurance CD 19"
Replies
6
Views
1K
Model 3
Alpaca
Alpaca
Top
Back
Blog
New
Forum list
Marketplace
Menu