Preliminary EPA Data for Model 3 AWD & Model 3 P 2021 Released

[EV Promoter]

There is no efficiency gain in the motors or elsewhere. Not between 2019 not 2020 and 2021.

Who says that? You? Against the efficiency measurements of EPA & WLTP?
And there's no test you can do to contradict them, you're an anonymus private against certified test. And yours will not.
I don't know why you're struggling that much with that thing.

 

[TimothyHW3]

20C will not be 20 degrees, it will be less.

Probably it will be, but that is besides the point. Plus the 20°C you are referring to in the video is for camp mode. I sleep at 18-19° C in my house and trust me - in a small car it is warmer. But all of this is besides the point, wether it is 20-22-24 is a personal preference, what I was trying to show is that if you set it to manual or manually control it, you can achieve more range and this has been confirmed multiple times. Wether that will be comfortable to you or in your situation is a whole other ball park, I was just testing the base consumption of the heater without AC.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Probably it will be, but that is besides the point. Plus the 20°C you are referring to in the video is for camp mode. I sleep at 18-19° C in my house and trust me - in a small car it is warmer. But all of this is besides the point, wether it is 20-22-24 is a personal preference, what I was trying to show is that if you set it to manual or manually control it, you can achieve more range and this has been confirmed multiple times. Wether that will be comfortable to you or in your situation is a whole other ball park, I was just testing the base consumption of the heater without AC.

I’m going to guess that with heat pump, exact same circumstances, you’ll see 800W average rather than the 1.3kW you measured (heat pump about 500W rather than 1kW). I guess you will let us know. Have to do side l-by-side test of course. At least that IS doable, easily!

 

[AdamMacDon]

Probably it will be, but that is besides the point. Plus the 20°C you are referring to in the video is for camp mode. I sleep at 18-19° C in my house and trust me - in a small car it is warmer. But all of this is besides the point, wether it is 20-22-24 is a personal preference, what I was trying to show is that if you set it to manual or manually control it, you can achieve more range and this has been confirmed multiple times. Wether that will be comfortable to you or in your situation is a whole other ball park, I was just testing the base consumption of the heater without AC.

It cannot be 20 degrees exactly. The laws of physics prevent this. You cannot create energy, so where is this extra energy coming from to offset the thermal loss to the environment?

Whether 18C is a comfortable sleeping temperature or not is irrelevant. If you want to save energy, you could still use the auto mode and just set it for 18. That too will reduce battery usage significantly.

 

[TimothyHW3]

If you want to save energy, you could still use the auto mode and just set it for 18. That too will reduce battery usage significantly.

That will reduce energy compared to 20C on manual, probably, but it will not reduce the usage when you set it to 18C and put it on manual and turn off AC. And that is what the video is about - auto mode turning the AC ALWAYS on and using a lot of energy for that (not doing that by the way on the 2021, or at least not always, it is smarter now). We are turning around in circles...

 

[AdamMacDon]

That will reduce energy compared to 20C on manual, probably, but it will not reduce the usage when you set it to 18C and put it on manual and turn off AC. And that is what the video is about - auto mode turning the AC ALWAYS on and using a lot of energy for that (not doing that by the way on the 2021, or at least not always, it is smarter now). We are turning around in circles...

Yes, but if you put it to 18 on manual, the interior of the car will not be 18 degrees, it will be less. This is simple physics, I'm not sure how this is confusing, but I agree that we are going in circles. It is comparing apples to oranges, and that is the last I will say on it. Have a merry christmas!

 

[TimothyHW3]

...!

Basically what you failed to understand from the video or in the context of winter consumption is that:
A) in the old car Auto turns on the AC on and keeps it on
B) AC is what is causing the biggest drawback of power(about 1+ kW additional)
C) turning off the AC reduces power consumption, which is also evident in the 21 model.

Yet you somehow turned this into nit-picking wether 18C means actual 18C in the cabin...

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Basically what you failed to understand from the video or in the context of winter consumption is that:
A) in the old car Auto turns on the AC on and keeps it on
B) AC is what is causing the biggest drawback of power(about 1+ kW additional)
C) turning off the AC reduces power consumption, which is also evident in the 21 model.

Yet you somehow turned this into nit-picking wether 18C means actual 18C in the cabin...

I'd just like you do to a side-by-side test where you monitor energy needed to maintain a particular cabin temp, for the 2019 and the 2021. That would be interesting. Depends on the temp, but probably a factor of 2-3 improvement is expected. You can add in the AC impact as well. And then just tell us all the answers. You can also compare manual mode to auto mode. Would make for such riveting videos.

 

[TimothyHW3]

4) LESS energy extracted from battery during test than normal (78.6kWh vs. 79.5kWh prior years). .

You claim that on a few occasioans, but looking at the 2020 and 2019 EPA papers they always extracted about 78.5-78.6 from the AWD models and even less from the P. Where do you see 79.5kWh for an AWD, which paper?

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

You claim that on a few occasioans, but looking at the 2020 and 2019 EPA papers they always extracted about 78.5-78.6 from the AWD models and even less from the P. Where do you see 79.5kWh for an AWD, which paper?

It’s right there in my table (“EPA Test DC Pack Energy”). I don’t know what you are looking at for the 2019/2020 EPA papers - clearly not what I am looking at - can you point me to it? These values are taken directly from those EPA test documents at the link in the post you linked (the generic link:Basic Search | Document Index System | US EPA ).

Now, in cold temp testing (also in the documents), they DO extract less energy, but in the “official” test used to establish the range, the values I give are correct.

Merry Christmas!

 

[TimothyHW3]

clearly not what I am looking at - can you point me to it?

I need the PDF to look for myself. The only ones I found were for 78.5kWh.

Do you have the exact link to the PDF?

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I need the PDF to look for myself. The only ones I found were for 78.5kWh.

Do you have the exact link to the PDF?

I gave you the link to the search! This is not hard!

2020, matches all the numbers in my table. Not surprising, since this is what I generated my table from....
https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=48712&flag=1

You are right that the 2020 Performance models, 19” and 20”, they extracted a bit less energy - just as is indicated in the table with all of my “claims.”

But in 2019 it was above 79kWh.

 

[TimothyHW3]

Who says that? You?
you're an anonymus private against certified test. And yours will not.

Me and a bunch of other people testing it independently around the world

But you are of course free as an "anonymus" private to test both cars yourself and come to another conclusion. The evidence is pretty clear, no efficiency gained against 2019 motors.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Me and a bunch of other people testing it independently around the world

But you are of course free as an "anonymus" private to test both cars yourself and come to another conclusion. The evidence is pretty clear, no efficiency gained against 2019 motors.

Two comments:

1) You say 200 meters following distance. (From your video, it looked like about 2.5s following distance (it was about 75 frames at 30frames/s - images attached). 200m/2.5s is 290km/h which is 180mph - were you going 180mph??? ). Anyway, a 100m (more likely still a high estimate of the correct value) following distance is not sufficient to avoid slipstream/drafting effects. It is not a large effect, but it will be there. Redo the video and swap car positions, in two consecutive tests on the same stretch of road, to control for this small effect, if you cannot drive side by side. Obviously if it is negligible, the results will be identical. Of course, lead vehicle cannot follow any other traffic either - so must be done at a very quiet time.

2) You seem convinced that the base efficiency has not changed. You can see from the numbers that the efficiency vs. prior EPA tests is close, but you are also ignoring a critical factor: software updates on 2019 subsequent to the EPA testing done in late 2018, which improved the efficiency. This would improve WLTP results as well. And they would mean that the two cars would behave identically in an efficiency test.

I am just saying it is perfectly conceivable to have cars with two different WLTP ratings separated by a couple years, which now have the same efficiency - because they are now running similar motor control software, which is better than two years ago.

I look forward to your stationary heat pump to heater comparison results. The heat pump is going to help (of course!).