35% of the range for only $6,601 less ... no thanks! Nice of them to offer it, though.
-
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 Standard Range (Canada) Range: 150km
- Thread starter Rrdom
- Start date
-
- Tags
- incentives standard
35% of the range for only $6,601 less ... no thanks! Nice of them to offer it, though.
It was only ever a caveat for the government rate. Unless the bureaucrats stipulated this model has to be visible, I don’t understand why Tesla would put it on the page TBH.35% of the range for only $6,601 less ... no thanks! Nice of them to offer it, though.
Yep - I'm aware of the SR's history with the Canadian government, which is why I say it's nice of Tesla to offer it even though it's a terrible deal, since it opens up incentives on more desirable models.
Lets hope they put a minimum range on EV's to qualify for the incentive with the new federal budget in the 19th. I would like to see a minimum range of 300KM and an increase to 10K for the incentive.
The SR+ especially now that is has a heat pump is really the minimum that should be sold in Canada and the EV rebate should reflect that (offering it on a car with 151km of range is arguably worse). I would have much preferred to get the LR, but the additional cost and losing the rebate pushed me into a vehicle that has an uncomfortably low range (I have the 384km battery) when it drops into the negative double digits.
After some thought, making it a checkbox is a great idea. Much like initialing the box on a car rental form acknowledging that one is declining insurance on the rental. There's no question after the fact that you knew what you were purchasing. You are actively choosing to have the car gimped at 151 km range. The decision and responsibility for that choice are yours to own.
Incentives being capped by purchase price is so dumb. It's clear they're catering to the myopic crowd that doesn't want to see the rich get breaks from the government. Replacing one gas guzzling Maserati with a Model S Plaid does more environmental good than replacing one fuel sipping Civic with a M3 SR+. Especially annoying as one of the greater reasons for the increase in price of EVs is larger battery capacity which equals a more useful and versatile vehicle in our northern climate and the great distances some of us need to cover (i.e. those not in the lower mainland of BC or the GTA).
As a compromise I feel an incentive should reward long range and penalize high cost. This gives manufacturers both an incentive to increase range as well as to reduce the retail price. For example, make the rebate $15/km range. Then reduce the rebate by 1% for every $1k over $50k. This would mean full rebate of $15 x range for vehicles $50K and less and $0 rebates for any vehicle over $150k.
Some examples (my pricing is a few months old, forgive any recent price changes) rounded down to the nearest $100:
Model | EV Range | Starting Retail | Proposed Rebate
Pacifica Touring-L Plus | 51 km | $55,234 | $700
Prius Prime | 62 km | $33,500 | $900
Bolt LT | 417 km | $44,998 | $6,200
I-Pace S | 377 km | $91,000 | $3,300
Model 3 SR+ | 423 km | $52,990 | $6,100
Model 3 LR | 568 km | $64,990 | $7,200
Model 3 P | 507 km | $74,990 | $5,700
Model S LR | 663 km | $114,990 | $3,400
Model S Plaid | 628 km | $159,990 | $0
To me, this looks far more functional at getting ICE vehicles off the road than the current iZEV program. The sweet spot is maximum range at around $50k. Also gives some reward to PHEVs but far greater rewards to BEVs, which is as it should be. One could adjust the variables to fit whatever you desire, the point is reward range and penalize high price.
Too complicated. Giving rebates on EV's is not liked by many tax payers. Give rebates to expensive EV's is hated by most tax payers. The current system is good but a few tweaks such as putting a minimum range is good to stop companies from gamming the system. PHEV's need to capped at 50% of the rebate. No reason a RAV4 PHEV should get the full rebate.
Hence my system of more range = greater rebate; higher sticker price = lower rebate. Everybody wins. If that’s too complicated then that’s a pretty sad commentary on our educational system.
An arbitrary cap (ha ha, right! I’ll never be convinced it wasn’t purely a political move) that excludes better vehicles with more range while worse vehicles with less range are included in the rebate program fails to accomplish what is needed. That is to promote EVs for the masses with longer, more useful range (considering our cold climate coupled with the vast size and low population density of much of the country) while encouraging cost reductions.
Has anyone ever really figured out the algorithm?
The comments bounce back and forth between it being fairly fixed at around 145km of real driving range, regardless the conditions, those saying it can do better, or worse, than 150km!
Seeing how long these have been around, I find it amazing the there's so little understanding of how the battery is actually used and the range "locking" actually works!
If anyone has any more real data, might as well use this new thread as a place to summarize real-world findings:
- Canadian Model 3 151km "Standard Range" variant: looking for actual real-world feedback (repost here)
- Canadian Model 3 151km "Standard Range" variant: looking for actual real-world feedback (repost here)
Google wasn't helpful it trying to figure out what to do with those names! Is that a seperate website, or a user here?
Thanks!
This is pretty straight forward. The car is limited to 40% of its maximum capacity - a number that comes out to 22.35 kWh when new.
As your maximum capacity degrades over time, you are left with 40% of the current actual capacity - a number that comes out to less than 22.35 kWh.
The current state of charge is displayed in EPA rated miles, which is a fixed constant based on EPA test results - as mentioned above, that number is 148 Wh/km.
If you're driving in the winter, expect a 30 - 40% reduction in range due to decreased driving efficiency. That gives your 151 km EPA rated range car an actual range of between 90.6 km and 105.7 km. If you drive more efficiently than the EPA test, like very slowly in moderate weather, when drafting another vehicle or when being pushed by a tail wind, you could get more than 151 km of range out of your 22.35 kWh worth of charge (when new).
If your car experiences 10% degradation over five years, you'll be left with 20.115 kWh of usable capacity, which would display as 136 km of range.
Hopefully this helps clear up some of the confusion on the Canadian SR-.
As your maximum capacity degrades over time, you are left with 40% of the current actual capacity - a number that comes out to less than 22.35 kWh.
The current state of charge is displayed in EPA rated miles, which is a fixed constant based on EPA test results - as mentioned above, that number is 148 Wh/km.
If you're driving in the winter, expect a 30 - 40% reduction in range due to decreased driving efficiency. That gives your 151 km EPA rated range car an actual range of between 90.6 km and 105.7 km. If you drive more efficiently than the EPA test, like very slowly in moderate weather, when drafting another vehicle or when being pushed by a tail wind, you could get more than 151 km of range out of your 22.35 kWh worth of charge (when new).
If your car experiences 10% degradation over five years, you'll be left with 20.115 kWh of usable capacity, which would display as 136 km of range.
Hopefully this helps clear up some of the confusion on the Canadian SR-.
How would they measure degradation if the battery is never fully charged/cycled? Logically, the battery would never degrade to anywhere near the nominal use-case, so "degradation" would be completely and utterly artificial.
There is SO much more to this than simple suppositions, hard data is needed, anything else is simply guesswork.
Degradation is more of a function of time than use. The BMS can get pretty accurate measurements even without charging to full. How Tesla's battery management systems work is fairly well-known and has been discussed at length over the years. Artificially limited batteries are nothing new, either ... see the 40/60 and 60/75 pack discussions for more on that. While the SR- is relatively new and pretty rare, the functionality behind it is not new.
I guess the big difference is that the various Model S "software limited" versions were marketed on a "power" rating, not a specific range. It's essentially the same thing in the end, but different from an experience perspective since buyers will have a range notion in their head and that's a big shift in messaging that could cause complaints, bad press, etc. If you have a "power" rating, that's pretty nebulous.
But all Model 3s and Model Ys were sold on a "specific range" basis. But on none of them do they guarantee that you can achieve it under any given circumstances.
Why would you expect the Model 3 SR- to always be able to achieve 151km of range in all conditions, but not expect the Model 3 SR+ to achieve 423km in all conditions as well?
Trevor is the person, he has a YouTube channel & a forum he maintains for Model 3 owners, hence the username. I don’t think he’s on here, but YouTube and Twitter either with that username, or something close to it.
Here’s a link to his YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/c/Model3OwnersClubDotCom
Similar threads
