Model 3 Software Update 2019.5.x

[PoitNarf]

This is a mess.

So now it depends on which model version and which software update?

Which update increases the range on Performance AWD Model 3's?

Performance AWD Model 3's will get a top speed increase to 162mph and a slight peak power increase. I only saw mention of the slight range increase for the LR RWD Model 3. Source: $35,000 Tesla Model 3 Available Now

We’re also excited to announce that we’re implementing a number of firmware upgrades for both new and existing customers. These upgrades will increase the range of the Long Range Rear-Wheel Drive Model 3 to 325 miles, increase the top speed of Model 3 Performance to 162 mph, and add an average of approximately 5% peak power to all Model 3 vehicles.
​

Also it has yet to be determined if this is actually additional spare battery capacity that has been unlocked, some sort of firmware improvement that leads to slightly better efficiency or if Tesla simply updated the numbers to report max range of 325 without changing anything regarding efficiency or available battery capacity,

 

[ModelNforNerd]

This is a mess.

So now it depends on which model version and which software update?

Which update increases the range on Performance AWD Model 3's?

Considering Elon mentioned that update would come around March 15th, I'm guessing it's not a version number we've seen yet.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Performance AWD Model 3's will get a top speed increase to 162mph and a slight peak power increase. I only saw mention of the slight range increase for the LR RWD Model 3. Source: $35,000 Tesla Model 3 Available Now

We’re also excited to announce that we’re implementing a number of firmware upgrades for both new and existing customers. These upgrades will increase the range of the Long Range Rear-Wheel Drive Model 3 to 325 miles, increase the top speed of Model 3 Performance to 162 mph, and add an average of approximately 5% peak power to all Model 3 vehicles.​

So no range increase for Model 3 Performance?

 

[Garlan Garner]

Considering Elon mentioned that update would come around March 15th, I'm guessing it's not a version number we've seen yet.

I'll get the update around June....if all remains the same.

 

[diamond.g]

So no range increase for Model 3 Performance?

Correct, the website reflects the "new" range of the LR, and (separately) the new tops speed of the Performance model.

 

[notAnExpert]

What is everyone getting for their new range calculation? I'm only getting 318 miles on a 100% charge.

The 2-3 times I checked with a third party app (StatsApp) after getting the 2019.5.15 update on Friday evening, I see anywhere from 322 to 326 miles. I don't know what you used to see 318. But I don't think we should take these numbers quite literally. When I checked just now, mine flip flopped between 322 and 324 as I was staring at the screen. Last night, it showed 326. I maybe wrong, but I also feel the rated range is always on the higher side when the car is plugged in or charged within the past few hours. It might be wise for me to ignore the range number unless it is off by 5% or more.

 

[gaM3changer]

I got the update last night, so I decided to charge to 100%. I'm getting the mileage range directly from the Tesla API.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

I got the update last night, so I decided to charge to 100%. I'm getting the mileage range directly from the Tesla API.

Your pack may be out of balance. If you let your SoC get below 10% and then charge to 100, the BMS will rebalance the pack.

 

[FlyinDelorean]

So no range increase for Model 3 Performance?

Presumably they have increased torque/HP by increasing the permanent magnet rotational capacity in the rear motor. I don't think that makes a range or power efficiency increase impossible for the performance model. This is primarily because... who drives their car, regularly, near or over 155MPH... So maybe the torque level was changed but that doesn't mean its "always" that way. Maybe you will get better range if you drive like a normal human. 5% power efficiency for every model would seem to be the key indicator for me, but I could be wrong.

 

[Stellavator]

Adding 'reading comprehension' to the list of Garlan's weaknesses.

Can we all just agree to ghost @Garlan Garner ? Dude has some chronic anger management issues.

 

[MP3Mike]

What is everyone getting for their new range calculation? I'm only getting 318 miles on a 100% charge.

What were you getting for a 100% charge before the update? (Was it ~304?)

 

[TT97]

Also it has yet to be determined if this is actually additional spare battery capacity that has been unlocked, some sort of firmware improvement that leads to slightly better efficiency or if Tesla simply updated the numbers to report max range of 325 without changing anything regarding efficiency or available battery capacity,

It is almost certain that the increase is pure calculation change and no actual improvements. If it was an improvement, the D models would also get a range boost.

Tesla has always downplayed the range of the rear drive cars. I don't think they wanted to show that the D is less efficient yet it was always widely accepted that was the case. Even the EPA has a 130 "MPGe" for the RWD vs 116 "MPGe" for the D models. It was also reported the RWD originally achieved an EPA-cycle range of 334 miles.

While on the subject, I think the Performance model still has the Performance Upgrade as an "option" (even though you can't uncheck it) as the testing was done with 18" wheels. If the Performance Upgrade was standard, they would need to retest with the 20" wheels and I doubt they would be able to achieve the 310 range for the Performance model.

 

[FlyinDelorean]

It is almost certain that the increase is pure calculation change and no actual improvements. If it was an improvement, the D models would also get a range boost.

Tesla has always downplayed the range of the rear drive cars. I don't think they wanted to show that the D is less efficient yet it was always widely accepted that was the case. Even the EPA has a 130 "MPGe" for the RWD vs 116 "MPGe" for the D models. It was also reported the RWD originally achieved an EPA-cycle range of 334 miles.

While on the subject, I think the Performance model still has the Performance Upgrade as an "option" (even though you can't uncheck it) as the testing was done with 18" wheels. If the Performance Upgrade was standard, they would need to retest with the 20" wheels and I doubt they would be able to achieve the 310 range for the Performance model.

I am a performance owner and I agree with that. Primarily because real range vs. rated range is just not as good as what others are seeing because of the wheel size and extra motor. Even in chill mode. The only physical difference are the caliper/breaks and the lowering of the suspension. And possibly some significant balancing changes in the software. I've thought about buying and throwing aero wheels on but why... I like my rims. Not only that, but I'm starting to run out of storage space! And I'm not driving 300 miles a day. I believe what you are saying is mostly factual, however. From my experience, its not significantly worse than standard LR AWD but RWD LR is probably very noticeable. However its been stated on multiple occasions that if one motor fails the car can still drive on a single motor. So it would actually be quite interesting to me to see what can be done about increasing dual motor efficiency OR having a RWD option available on the AWD variants. They have, in the past, increased efficiency over the air between both motors, so it might actually be possible.

 

[Garlan Garner]

I am a performance owner and I agree with that. Primarily because real range vs. rated range is just not as good as what others are seeing because of the wheel size and extra motor. Even in chill mode. The only physical difference are the caliper/breaks and the lowering of the suspension. And possibly some significant balancing changes in the software. I've thought about buying and throwing aero wheels on but why... I like my rims. Not only that, but I'm starting to run out of storage space! And I'm not driving 300 miles a day. I believe what you are saying is mostly factual, however. From my experience, its not significantly worse than standard LR AWD but RWD LR is probably very noticeable. However its been stated on multiple occasions that if one motor fails the car can still drive on a single motor. So it would actually be quite interesting to me to see what can be done about increasing dual motor efficiency OR having a RWD option available on the AWD variants. They have, in the past, increased efficiency over the air between both motors, so it might actually be possible.

There is also that non provable "burned in motor" mystery that separates the Performance from the rest.

 

[chronopc]

This isn't true, at least not with the version on my 3, 2019.5.4. When I have Sentry Mode turned on if I approach my car with my phone and stand alongside it the Sentry Mode screen will display.

Maybe I just needed to lock the car, which my car doesn't do until I walk away.

 

[FlyinDelorean]

There is also that non provable "burned in motor" mystery that separates the Performance from the rest.

I'm not sure I follow what you are alluding to here.

 

[Garlan Garner]

I'm not sure I follow what you are alluding to here.

I was just adding to your list of differences between the Performance Model 3 and the rest.

 

[SR22pilot]

It is almost certain that the increase is pure calculation change and no actual improvements. If it was an improvement, the D models would also get a range boost.

Tesla has always downplayed the range of the rear drive cars. I don't think they wanted to show that the D is less efficient yet it was always widely accepted that was the case. Even the EPA has a 130 "MPGe" for the RWD vs 116 "MPGe" for the D models. It was also reported the RWD originally achieved an EPA-cycle range of 334 miles.

While on the subject, I think the Performance model still has the Performance Upgrade as an "option" (even though you can't uncheck it) as the testing was done with 18" wheels. If the Performance Upgrade was standard, they would need to retest with the 20" wheels and I doubt they would be able to achieve the 310 range for the Performance model.

Agreed. The tires on the 19" and 20" rims have a lot more rolling resistance tahn the ones that come on the 18" rims. The AWD would probably be about 279 if tested on 19" rims. The Performance on 20" rims would be a little lower still but not much. As more competitive cars have been announced I think Tesla wants to highlight the range advantage it has on the LR RWD models. I have both an AWD and a RWD car. The RWD is the trip car due to meaningful range differences.

 

[PoitNarf]

Maybe I just needed to lock the car, which my car doesn't do until I walk away.

Probably, yes.

 

[FlyinDelorean]

I was just adding to your list of differences between the Performance Model 3 and the rest.

Yes so you were being sarcastic... no the only real difference is torque, lowered suspension, and calipers. But there are range differences with the AWD variants and it likely has to do with the wheel size. When I say this I mean that I concur with the previous poster that the EPA test ratings were probably all done on 18" aero wheels. People are consistantly stating that LR RWD gets better than rated range but us AWD owners, whether performance or not over here, are saying, thats almost never the case. I believe the primary cause for this is actually the wheel size. But to me the range efficiency difference is not normally discernible unless you are going on a major road trip or use your car as a cab or are a real estate agent or something. But also, even on a long range trip.. lets say... 800 miles. Is the extra 5 minutes at the supercharger going to kill you? I'd prefer having all wheel drive and better torque if needed. Thats all.