Model 3 Motors on the Tesla Parts Catalog

[Knightshade]

My guess is this is a new AWD inverter (but not PAWD) for a reduced cost for rear drive in AWD.

I'd guess it's mapped like this:
MOSFET -> RWD, all PAWD, and older AWD
IGBT -> SR/MR only
AWD,MOSFET-LC -> newer AWD

Assuming I'm correct... that means older (original production) AWD models are purely software mods to get to the PAWD performance. Which makes sense given the reports that some people didn't get their PAWD performance until they asked nicely, and it just took a short time in the service center (i.e. not nearly enough time to swap drivetrains).

Man I go on vacation for 2 weeks and new PNs show up!

Anyway the above was my guess too- basically everything made up till maybe the last month or two in LR (RWD, AWD, and P) all used the exact same DUs- the MR/SR used the IGBT, and now this new PN was a cheaper unit for non-P AWDs...

But the fact MR cars seem to have the same DU as the others kills that thought.

Extra weird since the IGBT listing originally explicitly SAID it was for the SR/MR cars but seems not... maybe just for SR now?

No clue what the LC would be in this case... unless it's something for overseas cars that for some reason required a change, can't imagine what though.

Still, thanks to the folks getting under their cars and posting PNs, at least reconfirms the P and AWD are hardware identical DU-wise (at least up through recent production)

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Anyway the above was my guess too- basically everything made up till maybe the last month or two in LR (RWD, AWD, and P) all used the exact same DUs- the MR/SR used the IGBT, and now this new PN was a cheaper unit for non-P AWDs...

Yeah, not too surprising. I never thought the actual motor was going to be different (drive electronics more likely to differ - but mostly does not seem to be the case yet), but now I just have more questions:

1) Why are some plates blank?
2) What do the -C and -D mean?
3) is the inverter plate (I am reasonably certain that IS the backing plate for the inverter/converter) number significant? Could it mean different components? ( I think they would all be MOSFETs though until maybe the SR, as you say.). Probably insignificant?


Maybe the true MR (rather than the LEMR) will get the 970? That is what the catalog said at one point! I have no idea whether LE means limited edition but to some extent that would explain it...

 

[mongo]

1) Why are some plates blank?

Likely from before there were multiple part numbers (or before the engraving cell(s) was on line)

2) What do the -C and -D mean?

Part revision. Goes up one letter on each release. Many, many revs existed for the S drive unit.

3) is the inverter plate (I am reasonably certain that IS the backing plate for the inverter/converter) number significant? Could it mean different components? ( I think they would all be MOSFETs though until maybe the SR, as you say.). Probably insignificant?

Inverter is the component with the switching semiconductors (IGBT or MOSFET). If the motor stator and rotor are the same, it would be the differentiator of the complete drive unit type.
The plate likely starts blank and is not engraved until after mating with a motor and testing (could also be engraved at different stages: inverter assembly, motor test). This would allow for different combinations of motor cores as well as inverters so that the motor power rating tracks the inverter for potential cost savings.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Likely from before there were multiple part numbers (or before the engraving cell(s) was on line)

Except there is engraving from before my motor (May) and one from after (a LEMR). I will give you that the font changed though!

For the record, no real surprises here, front motor is 960. Inverter plate is the same as the rear motor. For what that is worth. For all we know it could be just a piece of metal (though it does cover the inverter, not clear if it is attached to it, as I haven’t taken it apart!)

This is from a P3D+, Oct 2018 build.

 

[mongo]

Except there is engraving from before my motor (May) and one from after (a LEMR). I will give you that the font changed though!

For the record, no real surprises here, front motor is 960. Inverter plate is the same as the rear motor. For what that is worth. For all we know it could be just a piece of metal (though it does cover the inverter, not clear if it is attached to it, as I haven’t taken it apart!)

This is from a P3D+, Oct 2018 build.
View attachment 366661

Interesting.
Depending on how parts inventory went, the car build order may not match the motor build order.

 

[kbecks13]

1) Why are some plates blank?
2) What do the -C and -D mean?
3) is the inverter plate (I am reasonably certain that IS the backing plate for the inverter/converter) number significant? Could it mean different components? ( I think they would all be MOSFETs though until maybe the SR, as you say.). Probably insignificant?

1) Motors are all the same right now, so plates aren't really needed (i'm guessing)
2) Revisions of the assembly
3) Probably slight changes to backing plate geometry, maybe for cooling - this is the housing and not the drive unit itself, though.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Any potential longevity issues with the IGBT version in the MR car? I am getting the MR version.

Putting this question together with your picture...
Definitely seems like you have nothing to worry about since it appears your motor is exactly the same as the one in at least some of the P3Ds and AWD (or at least you won’t have different problems than those owners have... ). You must have been happy to see it!

I guess if the part catalog is anything to go by (which seems questionable!) if you had waited you might have got something cheaper...the 970 drive unit...

 

[SD_MDL3]

Putting this question together with your picture...
Definitely seems like you have nothing to worry about since it appears your motor is exactly the same as the one in at least some of the P3Ds and AWD (or at least you won’t have different problems than those owners have... ). You must have been happy to see it!

I guess if the part catalog is anything to go by (which seems questionable!) if you had waited you might have got something cheaper...the 970 drive unit...

Haha I have been happy to see the same part No. on my LEMR and performance edition cars. My LEMR feels quick and faster than the published 0-60.

I was thinking, I hope Tesla doesn’t dumb down my LEMR if they do end up giving MR cars different parts in the future..... who knows?!

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Haha I have been happy to see the same part No. on my LEMR and performance edition cars. My LEMR feels quick and faster than the published 0-60.

I was thinking, I hope Tesla doesn’t dumb down my LEMR if they do end up giving MR cars different parts in the future..... who knows?!

It is “limited edition,” so it deserves to be fast! (Maybe? Is there an actual Tesla source explaining the LEMR acronym?). I am sure they won’t slow you down. I haven’t been paying attention, so I don’t know what LEMRs have done on 0-60 with the VBOX.

All Teslas are plenty fast.

 

[Kirby64]

Haha I have been happy to see the same part No. on my LEMR and performance edition cars. My LEMR feels quick and faster than the published 0-60.

I was thinking, I hope Tesla doesn’t dumb down my LEMR if they do end up giving MR cars different parts in the future..... who knows?!

My guess: 0-60 numbers are probably accurate. They did just update them to lower the 0-60 slightly for the MR FYI. I'm betting they used the MOSFET driver on older models, and the new IGBTs on newer models, but the newer models also have other weight savings so it averages out to the same difference. The battery is the limiting power factor anyways I assume. You just get slightly worse efficiency with IGBTs.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

My guess: 0-60 numbers are probably accurate. They did just update them to lower the 0-60 slightly for the MR FYI. I'm betting they used the MOSFET driver on older models, and the new IGBTs on newer models, but the newer models also have other weight savings so it averages out to the same difference. The battery is the limiting power factor anyways I assume. You just get slightly worse efficiency with IGBTs.

Unfortunately we have no pictures of a “recent” LEMR - actually I would argue they are all recent (the one we have is from December of course!) and the one picture we have looks like it has an identical motor to a P3D+ and various other vehicles. It even has the latest version of the inverter plate (FWIW).

So MOSFETs for everyone so far, based on available pictures. We need more images to fill out the overall picture. Just to be sure we are not drawing the wrong conclusions.

 

[mongo]

Another caveat is that they can always put a higher performance inverter (or motor) in place of the lower performance/ cost one...
The software will keep the external performance the same.

 

[Knightshade]

My guess: 0-60 numbers are probably accurate. They did just update them to lower the 0-60 slightly for the MR FYI.

Eh? I just looked at the builder and it was listing the same 5.6 0-60 for MR it always has.

 

[Kirby64]

Eh? I just looked at the builder and it was listing the same 5.6 0-60 for MR it always has.

Oh, sorry, I'm getting the euro numbers mixed up. They quote 5.9s for the 0-100kph. I guess they also bumped the P3D down to 3.3s... maybe I'm getting one of those mixed up.

 

[Knightshade]

Oh, sorry, I'm getting the euro numbers mixed up. They quote 5.9s for the 0-100kph. I guess they also bumped the P3D down to 3.3s... maybe I'm getting one of those mixed up.

Ah, yeah... 100kph is 62 mph (though a little surprised it jumps to 5.9 from 5.6 for that).

The P3D bump was just them deciding to use rollout for the P (but not other models)- which is deceptive as hell, but it's the same crap they pull with the S/X.... I was excited initially when they did NOT pull that for the 3, then disappointed when they backtracked.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Kudos to everyone bumping this thread, which is stuck in the uncategorized area. Maybe there should be a dedicated section for drivetrain/propulsion for when the motors start to fail.

Now we just need some more rear motor pictures from people, see above for instructions! Rear motor is all that is needed. Left hand side camera, inserted to behind rear tire, starting from the front of the tire. I suspect we will discover nothing more of interest.

At this point brand new vehicles are of more interest.

 

[EricUSC]

So from what I gather here, the rear motors and inverter plates are identical for all versions of the Model 3 as of now. The differences are by production date as follows.

Rear Motor
Build Date 5/18: 1120980-00-C
***Changed from C to D sometime between 5/18-8/18***
Build Date 8/18-12/18: 1120980-00-D (blank label 9/18-10/18 followed by font change)

Rear Inverter Plate
Build Date 5/18: P1085693-00-E
Build Date 5/18-9/18: P1085693-20-E
***Changed from 20-E to 30-E between 9/18-10/18***
Build Date 10/18-12/18: P1085693-30-E

Would be interesting to continue tracking new builds to see which versions switch over to 1120960 and 1120990 motors.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

That seems to be a correct summary, thanks for going through and doing that. If we get more pictures we can refine the switchover time frames and also understand the most recent builds.

switch over to 1120960 and 1120990 motors.

You meant 1120970

1120960 is the front motor.

 

[EricUSC]

That seems to be a correct summary, thanks for going through and doing that. If we get more pictures we can refine the switchover time frames and also understand the most recent builds.



You meant 1120970

1120960 is the front motor.

You're right. Made a typo there.

 

[Marianz77]

My LR Model 3 has part no 1120980-00-D on the rear motor. The car was built in June 2018 according to door sticker.