-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Model 3 Motors on the Tesla Parts Catalog
- Thread starter EVMike3
- Start date
Got a report from a Swedish owner of a P3D from 02/19. It was a 980-00-E which makes me sad 
Swedish thread here:
TeslaClubSweden.se • Visa tråd - Vilken motor har du?
Swedish thread here:
TeslaClubSweden.se • Visa tråd - Vilken motor har du?
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Got a report from a Swedish owner of a P3D from 02/19. It was a 980-00-E which makes me sad
Swedish thread here:
TeslaClubSweden.se • Visa tråd - Vilken motor har du?
It is interesting. Not sure what to make of your 990 motor. I don’t know whether it should make you sad. Maybe it is just Tesla experimenting.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Bumping this again as it has been three weeks...any SR+/SR owners (or other owners) that have seen either the 970 motor, or the 990 motor? It's a long weekend, I'm sure people have nothing else to do.
Method:
Method:
I have an SR/SR+ and I can't for the life of me find the plate. Left rear tire as in the driver side rear tire right? What's the aeroshield? All I see are the shocks behind the wheel.Bumping this again as it has been three weeks...any SR+/SR owners (or other owners) that have seen either the 970 motor, or the 990 motor? It's a long weekend, I'm sure people have nothing else to do.
Method:
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Here is a picture:
Model 3 Motors on the Tesla Parts Catalog
On the same page of responses there are a bunch of pictures of motors too...
You can see the square silver plate stuck on the side of the drive unit.
Note this picture has the wheel removed, but you can see that if you can sneak your camera behind the wheel and above the composite shield (aero performance cover) then you can snap a picture without removing the wheel. I find having a bright flashlight to provide light is helpful for getting focus.
Note that sometimes the silver plate is completely blank! But so far it was only for a very narrow window of manufacturing dates in September/October 2018 as I recall (detailed earlier in this thread). So that can be confusing.
Hmm alright I'll give it a go before I head to work tomorrow. My SR was built April 2019 so a pretty recent build. I thought the IGBTs were only swapped in when they had trouble securing enough SiC MOSFETs. I've heard that the super early VINs also came with IGBTs but can't find where I read that. It's also odd they put IGBT/MOSFET on the drive unit casing. You'd think they'd only put it on the inverter board instead although I can see the scenario where the motors themselves are tweaked to work with IGBT/MOSFETs specifically.
1120980-00-F on April 2019 SR+ (soon to be nerfed into SR)
Ending with 00F for the inverter plate.
Ending with 00F for the inverter plate.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Thanks! Do you have a picture?
So they have revved it to a -F on the motor...
I filled in some of the pattern below, it might need to be corrected.
At the moment the 990 motor sighting reported earlier is unverified as there was no picture.
Updating build dates provided by @EricUSC earlier in this thread:
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)
Build Date As early as 2/19- As late as 4/19 : 1120980-00-E ( To Sweden - I saw one example, we may have other pictures...)
Build Date As early as 4/19-?: 1120980-00-F (need a picture)
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 10/18-2/19: P1085693-30-E (end point indeterminate, Sweden delivery build date 2/19)
Build Date 4/19: P1085693-00-F (tentative pending a picture)
At the moment I'm content with binned motors being reality, as that requires zero new assumptions.
Is this binned motor theory, still valid, now that all Right Hand Drive AWD (UK) cars are having 0-60 in 3.2. Do they have this many binned performance motors to put in?
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
I don’t think all UK AWD vehicles have 0-60 in 3.2s. Do they? It should still be around 4s for the AWD and 3.2 for the P3D (both subtracting rollout).
This is a very old quote from me...
Anyway, I think there are plenty of binned performance motors.
This was already hashed out above here. I’m not really of the opinion that there is anything other than a software difference these days. It may be that there are a few motors that don’t meet the P3D requirement and have to go in AWD, but there’s not really evidence of that, given all the part numbers are the same. It would have to be serial number based. The general argument is that this would be pretty complicated. Maybe at first there was a lack of motors that met spec...but now?
Anyway I don’t have any idea what they are actually doing, but all we can do is just gather the motor plate info...
Since Teslas just have one gear the top speed of the car is determined by the max RPM of the motor itself. I don't see the motor controller being the limiting factor for these motors so by "binning" it's probably based on the bearings and amount of heat the motor produces at full load. Originally I subscribed to the idea that the -LC label on the 990 motors meant low capacitance because it would make sense for the performance model to need the lower capacitance MOSFETs since these cars have higher top speeds and therefore the MOSFETs of these cars will see higher switching frequencies, having lower (parasitic) capacitance would go a long way in not just efficiency but in reducing heat from the inverter.
I think the most likely thing is that all these motors are the same and Tesla's just "binning" these like a CPU manufacturer where you might be selling chips that could reach higher frequencies but since you need to segment the market, you artificially lock the clock speed or laser off some features for lower spec CPUs.
Last edited:
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Yeah if they did bin it presumably would come down to the minimum loss units, which would presumably have the maximum output. I think probably the biggest sources of loss are in the inverter and maybe the windings. Obviously there are some drivetrain losses too, but those are less susceptible to thermal runaway and increasing loss and reducing efficiency at higher temps (unlike semiconductors).
The motor on my P3D after the 5% power boost would still power limit at 92% SoC - I had to engage track mode to get about 0.04 second 0-60 improvement. This is not the case for everyone. What feedback mechanism Tesla uses to determine this and adjust for motor variation (it might be peak battery pack current for me, too - or it may be that the efficiency of my motor is a little less than some) , I do not know. But to me this says there is some small variation as not everyone reported this. For example, @SleeperService saw increased power to very high speeds with the new software, while I started seeing power lining up again with the prior software even at speeds of 50-60mph.
Yeah...but no evidence of these motors or any differences yet (the 990 above we never saw a picture of...). The lower capacitance would theoretically reduce loss everywhere by allowing faster transitions. And maybe allow higher maximum RPM (17k something), but that may be limited by other factors like back EMF, other losses, mechanical limits...I have no idea.
For sure AWDs are software locked to limit the maximum current to the rear motor. But there is really no direct evidence that they have motors that are not as capable as the P3D motors. They might, but no one actually knows and we have no hard evidence of what is happening NOW. As per Elon’s tweet, they may have been doing some special selection early on just to make sure everything was going to be ok as far as motor output. Whether they are still doing that, or whether they ever did, I have no idea.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Different models of cars have different max torque and max power limits. The former is most noticable as it limits the rate of acceleration for the first few seconds.
So it isn't like different units perform differently. Binned units could be more effecient and have longer longevity but the cars' 0-30 time is only really determined by torque setting and vehicle weight. For quarter mile the max power matters some.
Last edited:
Similar threads
