Model 3 to have <60kW Supercharging?

[Yggdrasill]

I think you may be missing the point that larger battery cars consume energy faster than small battery cars when supercharging such that they will get cheaper charges in "per minute" states -- and there are lots of per minute states.

A Model 3 will probably spend more time in the <60 kW tier, thus you will pay less. Not a whole lot less, but a little.

By the time the Model 3 is out, though, the payment scheme may have changed. Pricing may have been adjusted, and there are indications the superchargers will get an upgrade, so you might see one or more additional tiers. You may for instance see a new tier, >150 kW, and it's not necessarily the case that a (base) Model 3 will be able to utilize that amount of power.

Current tech allows a Tesla to charge at around 1.7C maximum, so assuming the Model 3 has three battery options, 50 kWh, 65 kWh and 80 kWh, that would allow these power levels:

50 kWh Model 3: 85 kW
65 kWh Model 3: 110.5 kW
80 kWh Model 3: 136 kW

If Tesla has managed to improve charging to 2C with the new battery tech that will soon be produced at the Gigafactory, the Model 3 could support this charging:

50 kWh Model 3: 100 kW
65 kWh Model 3: 130 kW
80 kWh Model 3: 160 kW

 

[ModelNforNerd]

At 60KWh supercharging, the 55KW battery of the Model 3 can charge about as fast as the premium models that enjoy charging at twice that rate right now. Tesla needs to distinguish the premium from the low end Model 3.

If there are going to be more Model 3's on the road than S or X, why would you make your high volume vehicle charge slower? That would do absolutely nothing to alleviate potential supercharger overcrowding concerns.

 

[EinSV]

The title of the thread is a question, not a statement.

If you ignore the question and disagree with statement fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

The problem is that the title of the thread is a fake question, not a real one.

It is completely contrary to Tesla's entire concept of Supercharging to suggest that Model 3 might be limited to 60 kW Supercharging.

This thread is FUD. Plain and simple.

 

[dsvick]

Tesla needs to distinguish the premium from the low end Model 3.

There is plenty to distinguish them already, they are not going to deliberately cripple the charging on the Model 3 just so they can say the Model S is better. All that would do is piss off all of the owners of all of the models that have to wait in line behind the Model 3 at the SC.

 

[TexasEV]

A 100kW battery at a 90kWh supercharger will have a slower charge than a 55kW battery at a 60kWh tier 1 limited supercharger.

There is no such thing as a "60 kWh tier 1 limited supercharger". Tier 1 is the price when the supercharging rate drops below 60kW in the taper.

 

[alseTrick]

At 60KWh supercharging, the 55KW battery of the Model 3 can charge about as fast as the premium models that enjoy charging at twice that rate right now. Tesla needs to distinguish the premium from the low end Model 3.

Do other car manufacturers delineate models by how fast they can refill their gas tank? Or is it based on performance specs and interior comforts and gadgets?

 

[McRat]

The peak kW number for charging is sort of pointless.

When you need to charge up while on the road, do you need kW? No you need miles. It is possible for a car with a lower peak kW charge rating to charge faster than car with a higher peak kW rating when it comes to range.

Miles per hour is the only charging spec that is useful for driving. Today, we are looking for 20-40 minute charge times for extending our range while waiting to charge.

If somebody is expecting a 120kW rate sustained into a 50kWh battery, good luck with that.

I expect 100 miles in 30 minutes or better. I don't care if that 1 kWh or 100 kWh.

 

[Skotty]

I kind of feel like everyone on this thread thinks they are in a conversation about 1 thing but are actually talking about 10 different things.

Based on what I could gleam from all of this, it sounds like Tesla is considering using tiered pricing for supercharging, where time spent over some limit (60kW) is priced higher than time spent under that limit. Pricing by time instead of by energy is of course a result of unfortunate laws in many states that don't allow pricing by energy consumed. To reduce the impact of different charging rates costing different amounts for the same energy, Tesla is considering using the tiers, but for now, they are only thinking of using 2 tiers. I would guess it is only 2 tiers to keep it simple and/or not push this scheme too far to where it would blur the line between charging by time and charging by energy and become legally questionable (imagine the extreme of pushing it to infinite tiers, at which point it becomes indistinguisable from charging by energy).

All of this would presumably be completely independent of what model and/or battery you have. A smaller battery will frequently charge at lower charge rates than a larger battery, thus falling into a lower tier more often, but batteries of all sizes could fall into each of the tiers at least some of the time dependent on multiple factors including battery size, battery temperature, state of charge, whether or not the supercharger pair is being shared, etc.

 

[Sonny Daze]

Why not have 5 tiers then?

Tesla doesn't want ANY tiers.

In most regions, Tesla owners will pay per kWh as it’s the fairest way to pay for the exact energy used. However, due to local regulations, in several regions we will charge per minute of usage instead, though we are actively working with regulators to update the rules.

• Where possible, owners are billed per kWh (kilowatt-hour), which is the most fair and simple method. In other areas, we bill for the service per minute.
• When billing per minute, there are two tiers to account for changes in charging speeds, called “tier 1” and “tier 2”.
  • Tier 1 applies while cars are charging at or below 60 kW and tier 2 applies while cars are charging above 60 kW. Tier 1 is half the cost of tier 2.
  • Tier 1 also applies anytime your vehicle is sharing Supercharger power with another car.

 

[eisbock]

Isn't it true that larger batteries charge faster? If so, in those states like Arizona with per minute fees (tiers 1 and 2), the more expensive cars will get significantly cheaper "fills" per amount of electricity consumed than the less expensive cars, right? If so, that may be something Tesla will want to look at. That observation wouldn't apply in a state like CA where fee is based on consumption, not time.

How about a Tier 1&2 price based on battery size? Shouldn't be too confusing and the end result would be everyone pays roughly the same price per kWh even though it's time-based.

So if it takes 20 minutes to charge a 50kWh battery to 25kWh (50%) and also 20 minutes to charge a dead 100kWh battery to 50kWh (50%), you would charge the 100kWh car double the price per minute for that tier since they are consuming twice the electricity. If he decided to only charge to 25kWh (25%), he would charge for 10 minutes and pay the same price out the door as the 50kWh customer, even though that guy took twice as long to complete the charge.

 

[SW2Fiddler]

A 100kW battery at a 90kWh supercharger will have a slower charge than a 55kW battery at a 60kWh tier 1 limited supercharger.

Making my head hurt. Please STOP.
Batteries are in kWh, charging rates are in kW.

And a headline in the form of a question can always be properly answered "No."

 

[Reeler]

Making my head hurt. Please STOP.
Batteries are in kWh, charging rates are in kW.

And a headline in the form of a question can always be properly answered "No."

I didn't think one had to solve for time with these givens, but the statement is true if you presume a battery can accept the full charge rate for the full time. I know that is not true and don't want to calculate the area under the curve.

But, I pose the rhetorical question again, Why would Tesla have it's low end model have faster charging times than their high end model. I posit, that they will stratify their product offering by only designing the Model 3 to accept Tier 1 charging rates.

 

[Yggdrasill]

But, I pose the rhetorical question again, Why would Tesla have it's low end model have faster charging times than their high end model. I posit, that they will stratify their product offering by only designing the Model 3 to accept Tier 1 charging rates.

First, the Model S/X will likely still charge faster. There's an upcoming update to the superchargers that's expected to be announced in the coming months. This update will likely up the charge rate so that the Model S/X aren't limited by the supercharger to the same extent as currently. And their larger battery packs should allow for faster charging.

But looking aside from that, how about these four reasons?

1. Because Tesla wants to sell 400k+ Model 3 per year.
2. Because it's very unlike Tesla to intentionally make a worse product than what is possible with current tech.
3. Because Tesla has competitors. If Tesla doesn't want to offer fast charging, someone else will.
4. Because Tesla has said the Model 3 will have supercharging. 60 kW isn't supercharging, it's just charging.

 

[Reeler]

1. Don't see your point on that one
2. Most car companies cripple all the time. So do tech companies. Standard practice.
3. Tesla Model 3 competitors are only doing 50kWh Level 3 charging
4. That level will charge just as fast as the $100K Tesla models sold today, which is called super charging.

 

[Yggdrasill]

1. Don't see your point on that one

Tesla needs all the demand they can muster. How many of the 400k reservations will be cancelled if Tesla doesn't offer fast charging for the Model 3?

2. Most car companies cripple all the time. So do tech companies. Standard practice.

Tesla isn't most companies.

3. Tesla Model 3 competitors are only doing 50kWh Level 3 charging

There aren't any BEV competitors for the Model 3 yet. But of the current low-range BEVs on the market, several can charge at more than 50 kW, including the Kia Soul (70 kW) and Hyundai Ioniq (70 kW). We're probably not looking at many years before a competitor with more than 60 kW charging is on the market.

4. That level will charge just as fast as the $100K Tesla models sold today, which is called super charging.

No, it won't charge as fast.

The Model 3 will use in the area of 228 Wh/mile, while the Model S can use around 285 Wh/mile. 60 kW charging for the Model 3 is 263 miles per hour, while 120 kW charging on the Model S is 421 miles per hour. That's a substantial difference.

 

[timk225]

Below 60 kW rate is twice as less expensive as above 60 kW rate.

You mean HALF the price?

 

[Red Sage]

Tesla is structuring the supercharging into two tiers. The below 60kW tier must be reserved for the Model 3?

Similar L3 charging rate to the Bolt and LEAF.

Goodbye, Reeler.

 

[TexasEV]

We've tried to explain it to him but either he's being deliberately obtuse or he just doesn't get it. Either way, no point for any of us to continue engaging in this thread.

 

[Twiglett]

Goodbye, Reeler.

indeed
<unwatch thread>

 

[Chris TX]

Why on EARTH would Tesla or anyone else think it's a good idea to slow down a vehicle's rate of charge? The goal is to get the cars charged as quickly as possible, and safe. Are you saying it's unfair that it takes less time to charge a 60kWh battery than a 100kWh battery? Are you saying that because the Model S 60 is cheaper than the P100D, they should be slowed down to the same charge time as a P100D, or slower? You'd have even more Supercharger crowding, if that's the case.