[Speculation] Model 3 0.237 kwh/mile!

[vgrinshpun]

Akilae at M3OC said 0.344 for Model S and 0.369 for X

Well, .344kWh for Model S does not square either. Something is wrong.

 

[Yggdrasill]

The official consumption figure is 330 Wh/mile for the S75D. That's including charging losses. 2017 Tesla Model S AWD - 75D

 

[KarenRei]

It's possible that those are just his numbers for S and X, and he's mistaken about them. He's not quoting them from code in the post.

If we go with 300Wh/mi for S, then 237 would be 79% that of a Model S. With Cd==0,21 and all losses proportional, cross section would be 0,90 and each axis would be 95% of the S.

If we go with 330Wh/mi for S, then cross section is 82% of S and each axis is 91% of S.

 

[vgrinshpun]

The official consumption figure is 330 Wh/mile for the S75D. That's including charging losses. 2017 Tesla Model S AWD - 75D

But that would mean that .237kWh/mile includes charging losses as well - and that is too good to be true... Something does not add up here

 

[Yggdrasill]

But that would mean that .237kWh/mile includes charging losses as well - and that is too good to be true... Something does not add up here

I agree. I think the Model 3 figure is without charging losses and the Model S figure is with charging losses. That's the only way I can make the figures make sense.

(If we remove the charging losses from the Model S, an S75D has a consumption of ~281 Wh/mile. That means that with 237 Wh/mile, the consumption for the Model 3 is ~16% lower than the S. That's completely plausible.)

 

[SageBrush]

I think that number pulled from the Tesla site is battery consumption for a combined cycle -- meaning without charging losses.
If charging losses are 15% then the wall consumption rate is ~ 280 Wh a mile

and combined MPGe = 119

Fantastic, since I think highway will be similar.

 

[scaesare]

The rated energy consumption of my RWD Model S is 0.300kWh/mile. Are you sure this 0.369kWh/mile is for Model S, not Model X?

I agree that would make more sense... I get rated range at about 275Wh/mi, although I dunno what Tesla uses for their calcs

 

[KarenRei]

Okay, so the code is in this URL:

Order your Tesla | Tesla

The 0.344 and 0.369 numbers are actually in the code. Doing more digging....

ED: I have trouble interpreting this other than "from the wall" fuel consumption figures, rather than "from the battery". It's under the categories of "Incentives.US", which appears to be about calculating what you spend, and the other fields seem related to that. And the from-the-wall figures for Model S and Model X make good sense.

..... but Model 3 can't be that low, can it? 0,237 from the wall? So maybe 0,210 from the battery? I mean, amazing if true, but...

It would have to imply a rather small cross section compared to the S. No other way around it. Like, 86% of the height and 86% of the width, for example. Or a bit larger than that at the widest points, but rounder than the S in cross section. Either that or they got the Cd lower than 0,21, but even getting to 0,21 would be amazing for a rather conventional-looking sedan. Maybe if they were ducting air to the back to fill in the wake, but for a sedan you'd need a pretty significant amount of air...

 

[powertoold]

I'm betting on the base Model 3 being 60kWh, with range of 250 miles. No doubt about it in my mind.

 

[dhanson865]

Akilae over at Model 3 owners club found this code snipet on the Tesla site:

{"months":60,"toll_savings":null,"distance_per_month":833.33,"distance":49999.8,"fuel_efficiency_imperial":28,"fuel_efficiency_metric":null,"kwh_consumption":0.237,"supercharger_kwh_price":0.2,"fuel_price":2.85,"kwh_price":0.127},"variant":["m3"],"market":"US"

If this is correct then the Model 3 will be one of the most efficient EVs on the market.

It's a good number but it's not earth shattering. The rated mile for a first gen Nissan leaf (2011 - 2017) is 0.250 wh/m aka 4 miles per kWh

Considering Tesla's rated mile is usually at a higher speed than Nissan's widens the gap a little more if you did apples to apples with the same MPH testing.

Add a better everything else and the Tesla stomps it silly in the value per anything calculations.

I'm just not going gaga over the 0.237 number. That's not an aggressive number vs lesser EVs, just just better.

 

[Swampgator]

Okay, so the code is in this URL:

Order your Tesla | Tesla

The 0.344 and 0.369 numbers are actually in the code. Doing more digging....

ED: I have trouble interpreting this other than "from the wall" fuel consumption figures, rather than "from the battery". It's under the categories of "Incentives.US", which appears to be about calculating what you spend, and the other fields seem related to that. And the from-the-wall figures for Model S and Model X make good sense.

..... but Model 3 can't be that low, can it? 0,237 from the wall? So maybe 0,210 from the battery? I mean, amazing if true, but...

It would have to imply a rather small cross section compared to the S. No other way around it. Like, 86% of the height and 86% of the width, for example. Or a bit larger than that at the widest points, but rounder than the S in cross section. Either that or they got the Cd lower than 0,21, but even getting to 0,21 would be amazing for a rather conventional-looking sedan. Maybe if they were ducting air to the back to fill in the wake, but for a sedan you'd need a pretty significant amount of air...

Or a major advance in motor/inverter technology

 

[KarenRei]

It's a good number but it's not earth shattering. The rated mile for a first gen Nissan leaf (2011 - 2017) is 0.250 wh/m aka 4 miles per kWh

https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/01/f19/fact2013nissanleaf.pdf

EPA Fuel Economy: 270 Wh/mi, 129 MPGe/340 Wh/mi, 102 MPGe /300 Wh/mi, 115 MPGe (City/Highway/Combined)

 

[Swampgator]

It's a good number but it's not earth shattering. The rated mile for a first gen Nissan leaf (2011 - 2017) is 0.250 wh/m aka 4 miles per kWh

Considering Tesla's rated mile is usually at a higher speed than Nissan's widens the gap a little more if you did apples to apples with the same MPH testing.

Add a better everything else and the Tesla stomps it silly in the value per anything calculations.

I'm just not going gaga over the 0.237 number. That's not an aggressive number vs lesser EVs, just just better.

Smaller kwh packs always mean better efficiency. The original leaf could only go like 60 miles right? Was it a 30kwh pack? Slap a 60 pack in that car and watch the efficiency plummet!

 

[KarenRei]

Or a major advance in motor/inverter technology

Motors and inverters are already very efficient. Not a lot of improvement to be made. And most of your easy gains are fatter conductors / lower resistance materials, which means more cost, not less.

 

[dhanson865]

I'm betting on the base Model 3 being 60kWh, with range of 250 miles. No doubt about it in my mind.

at 55 kWh usable it's 232 miles range.
at 59 kWh usable it's 248 miles range
at 60 kWh usable it's 253 miles range

I'd have no problem with the low pack being in the 230-250 mile range.

 

[Jleafs]

If this is correct then the Model 3 will be one of the most efficient EVs on the market. This also works out to a 316 mile range for the 75kwh pack. And over 250 miles for a 60 kwh pack. I still think they may use a 55 kwh for the base, which still works out to 232 miles.

Given that the actual usable battery capacity is less than the stated pack size, you should probably scale that down by 2-5%. The S75 usable capacity is 72.6 kWh per Jason Hughes, which would mean about 306 mile range on the Model 3 at 0.237 kWh/mile.

 

[KarenRei]

If they're even close to this level of energy consumption (particularly if it's wall-to-wheels, as it appears to be), a 50kWh pack in the base model is a real possibility.

 

[dhanson865]

Smaller kwh packs always mean better efficiency. The original leaf could only go like 60 miles right? Was it a 30kwh pack? Slap a 60 pack in that car and watch the efficiency plummet!

Pack size has nothing to do with efficiency. The rated mile is the same on Leafs with a 24 kWh pack or 30 kWh pack.

24 kWh is 21.3 kWh usable times 4.0 miles per kWh for 85.2 and they advertised 84
30 kWh is 26.8 kWh usable times 4.0 miles per kWh for 107.2 and they advertised 105

You could double the weight of the 24 kWh pack to a 48 kWh pack and with the crappy aero and other inefficient parts it comes down to a rounding error that is unnoticeable, it's still going to be rated at 0.250 wh per mile for a Leaf.

 

[Swampgator]

Pack size has nothing to do with efficiency. The rated mile is the same on Leafs with a 24 kWh pack or 30 kWh pack.

24 kWh is 21.3 kWh usable times 4.0 miles per kWh for 85.2 and they advertised 84
30 kWh is 26.8 kWh usable times 4.0 miles per kWh for 107.2 and they advertised 105

You could double the weight of the 24 kWh pack to a 48 kWh pack and with the crappy aero and other inefficient parts it comes down to a rounding error that is unnoticeable, it's still going to be rated at 0.250 wh per mile for a Leaf.

That is not true:
Take a look at Model S 60 vs 85 for proof.

Weight matters a lot a low speeds, less so at highway speeds, but it still matters. That's why Model S is not very efficient. It's super heavy

 

[dhanson865]

That is not true:
Take a look at Model S 60 vs 85 for proof.
View attachment 238068
Weight matters a lot a low speeds, less so at highway speeds, but it still matters. That's why Model S is not very efficient. It's super heavy

Tesla is not just using two battery packs, they also have multiple motors in play. Nissan just uses the same motor with a different pack. No performance change, the efficiency doesn't change enough to make them change the rated mile calculation.

Weight matters but there are other factors other than weight. Not every EV is a Tesla.

You opened it up to non Tesla math when you said "If this is correct then the Model 3 will be one of the most efficient EVs on the market." If you just wanted to say it's the most efficient Tesla ever there would be nothing to discuss.