I already have a 40A JuiceBox Pro, and Destination charging around here is higher powered. That's why I want the bigger one, at least.
-
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 MR charges at 32 amp vs LR at 48 amp
- Thread starter notAnExpert
- Start date
I already have a 40A JuiceBox Pro, and Destination charging around here is higher powered. That's why I want the bigger one, at least.
No, because on a road trip you would likely be using destination charging and that is often HPWC hooked to 100A breakers. (Or J1772 chargers that are greater than 32A.)
eprosenx
Active Member
Several comments:
Even the smaller battery should have no issues absorbing 48 amps at 240v. Think about the current the batteries absorb from supercharging. So I doubt that is the issue.
Honestly, I suspect it is a product stratification play more than anything. Lower cost, lower features. Gives you a reason to buy the more expensive one.
From an implementation standpoint, I see two possibilities: They may just be software limiting it. This gives a fast time to market and no different part SKU’s to stock and spare. But still allows the stratification.
The other possibility on this time frame is that I think I read that the Model S has three 16a chargers in it. One reason for this is to support three phase charging in Europe. In the US all three just use the same two hot conductors. In Europe they would each get a different phase leg assigned to them.
So in the MR they could have simply omitted one of three chargers.
Even the smaller battery should have no issues absorbing 48 amps at 240v. Think about the current the batteries absorb from supercharging. So I doubt that is the issue.
Honestly, I suspect it is a product stratification play more than anything. Lower cost, lower features. Gives you a reason to buy the more expensive one.
From an implementation standpoint, I see two possibilities: They may just be software limiting it. This gives a fast time to market and no different part SKU’s to stock and spare. But still allows the stratification.
The other possibility on this time frame is that I think I read that the Model S has three 16a chargers in it. One reason for this is to support three phase charging in Europe. In the US all three just use the same two hot conductors. In Europe they would each get a different phase leg assigned to them.
So in the MR they could have simply omitted one of three chargers.
Yeah, it wasn't in the MR specs the day it was announced. And, the page the OP pointed to was not updated w/that info on that day either. I know because I looked back then.
Until you have proof that the on-board charger hardware is identical between the 3 LR and MR, your assertion is speculation, at best.
The onboard charger is not used at a supercharger. But it will likely charge a bit slower. Less cells to share the charge. Interesting to know once the data is available.
I think you didn't read (or at least fully digest) what you were replying to.
I don't see that at all. @MP3Mike had a very insightful response to you. You were saying that since the mobile charge cable is limited to 32A, a higher onboard charger rating wouldn't be helpful, but @MP3Mike was pointing out how wall connectors and J1772 connections used when traveling through gaps in the Supercharger network are very frequently higher than 32A, so the onboard charger does make a big difference. I noticed @MP3Mike is in Oregon, and I am pretty familiar with two very common routes in Oregon which are missing Supercharger coverage that have very useful high amp wall connections to cover that. U.S. highway 95 from Boise to Winnemucca and U.S. highway 20 from Boise to Bend can both have significant benefit if you have a higher amp charger onboard the car.
Yeah, that's how I see it. Mine will be one of the last ones built, for now at least.
Yes. And the SR will charge even slower in terms of MPH, if the same pattern holds true as with the model S/X. Larger batteries allow for the electricity to be spread over a larger amount of cells and increase the amount of energy the entire battery can absorb.
Depends on what “decent” range is. Since the charge rate tapers off as the battery gets full, it is fastest to only take enough juice to get to your next stop. If you wanted to charge 250 miles, it is much faster to charge a LR car to 80% vs charging a MR car to 100%.
Thanks. We like to stop every 3-4 hours so that's probably ~200-240 miles. Looks like with the MR, a charge to 200 miles would be my "decent" charge vs time rate.
JBare
Member
I just got scared that I lied to my wife when selling the features on why we "need" this car and the abilities to charge on trips. 30 miles / hour would not be doable.
JBare
Member
I ordered a MR so other than getting a longer cable there isn't a point in me setting up a wall charger right?
eprosenx
Active Member
There are other benefits to the wall connector (tamper resistance, waterproofing, etc...), but yes, the largest key benefit would normally be the increased charging speed but hat won’t make a difference on the MR.
I want to keep my UMC in the car always, so a wall connector was not much more $$$ than a second UMC.
JBare
Member
I think I read that somewhere in the past months (years) since placing my reservation, thank you for confirming. I like the idea of having an adapter on me at all times too so I'm not sure how I'm going to proceed. I have a few weeks to figure it out, in the meantime I'm going to run a 100 amp subpanel to the garage to be ready to add the wall charger or nema plug
