[Spoiler Alert + Mild Speculation] Tesla has created a monster!

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Good question. It might be a typo, I don't know why Tesla would carry around the weight of a generator that was only used for braking.

It could be why reviewers are gushing about the 3's handling/zero body roll. Being able to adjust regen at both ends of the car (all four corners?) could go a long way for driving dynamics. Maybe it helps regen efficiency as well. If all of the cars have the same hardware up front, with the only difference a generator or motor (if that even makes sense, I'm not sure it does), that should make manufacturing AWD/RWD cars easier.

 

[CoastalCruiser]

Could also be some new hybrid type motor. Most PM motors are DC (Bolt).
This clearly says 3 phase PM which implies A/C

Are you sure about that? Pretty sure the Bolt is 3 phase AC. You can see the 3 fat cables running between the inverter and motor.

 

[kingjamez]

Elon said in the earnings call that if they wanted to they could dramatically increase demand for Model 3. He was right. They have really made something special and as soon as the actually "want" to sell the car, they will... to everyone....

These specs are incredible. Who in their right mind would buy a Bolt?

-Jim

 

[3Victoria]

350V is average, suggestion is 400V full and 300V empty ... this messes up the simple multiplication of AxV, as we would need the time course.

Exciting thread.

 

[R.S]

So.....Tesla just put a new rear motor in some of theS's. Could it be rare earth also, if this turns out to be true for the 3?

Since the new ones are PM motors, definitely no. Efficiency would be too different to really hide it. Induction motors are less efficient at lower speeds, but more efficient at higher speeds, so at least highway and city driving range would have changed, even if total driving range/MPGe would have stayed the same.

EPA would have needed to know about that, just like with a petrol car with a new engine.

 

[electracity]

It could be why reviewers are gushing about the 3's handling/zero body roll. Being able to adjust regen at both ends of the car (all four corners?) could go a long way for driving dynamics. Maybe it helps regen efficiency as well. If all of the cars have the same hardware up front, with the only difference a generator or motor (if that even makes sense, I'm not sure it does), that should make manufacturing AWD/RWD cars easier.

If it had a second motor or generator it would probably be listed as a line item on the form.

As much as I would like software upgradable AWD, I don't think they could carry a non-operating motor along for the ride in a RWD car.

Although considering Tesla upgradeable battery experiment a second motor/generator is not impossible. It would not need to be particularly large to be useful. Poor traction events can't use much torque.

 

[internalaudit]

So the driving ranges for both models were extremely understated and the 0-60 as well?

I went through the entire thread but admit I didn't understand 10-15% of the technology discussion but the rest seem to have laid out things nicely in plain language.

 

[AlanSqB]

As much as I love this thread, I kinda wish it wasn't so positive. I really want more people in front of me to cancel/defer. The negative threads were getting my hopes up for a 2017 delivery!

 

[CoastalCruiser]

That earlier link to the Wally Ripple article reinforces that no one design is better than an another under all conditions.

As I understand it a PM motor runs cooler than an induction motor. With an induction motor, the spinning rotor is effectively a short-circuit device (pulsed rapidly), that creates the oscillating opposing magnetic fields. The heat created by the shorted circuit tends to heat the rotor itself. Recall the at the track the Model S motor is known to overheat after repeated laps.

A cooler running PM rotor may either negate that phenomenon and/or require less cooling infrastructure (cheaper / smaller).

There's always trade offs. Tesla maybe trading away it's namesake in exchange for the hassle and expense of rare earths that come with a more efficient motor design.

I for one am not happy to own a Tesla that is not a "Tesla". But you get used to anything I guess.

Here is a primer on the Tesla 3-phase AC induction motor: Tesla’s 3-Phase 4-Pole AC Induction Motor — Why Nikola Tesla’s 19th Century Induction Motor Is The Ideal Choice For The 21st Century Electric Car

 

[electracity]

As much as I love this thread, I kinda wish it wasn't so positive. I really want more people in front of me to cancel/defer. The negative threads were getting my hopes up for a 2017 delivery!

I assume miles driven are on a dynamometer.

 

[AlanSqB]

Oh yes. No air resistance really helps the range. Mars will be great for EVs.

A good tailwind in a LEAF can make your day.

 

[internalaudit]

Surprise C&D said it was AC induction but maybe it was an assumption:
2018 Tesla Model 3: Everything We Know | Feature | Car and Driver

Powertrain
The Model 3, like the Model S, is a rear-wheel-drive car in its base form, with a rear-mounted AC induction motor.

 

[CoastalCruiser]

I think the Bolt is DC (thought I read that somewhere)
I know almost all hybrid cars use DC, not AC. They also use inverters.

Bolt is PM 3-phase AC. The EV-1 was induction 3-phase AC

Also guys, Tesla going for PM motors is old news to anyone reading Metal Event Limited:

Oh Hell! All my back issues of Metal Event Limited are piled up in customs.

thanx. ;>

 

[electracity]

Oh Hell! All my back issues of Metal Event Limited are piled up in customs.

I wonder what else he is keeping from us.
"Elon is trans? That's old new. It was in the October edition of Frock magazine".

 

[insaneoctane]

@omgwtfbyobbq fantastic thread!

 

[John Beans]

More motor porn:
Charged EVs | Tesla’s chief motor engineer discusses the potential of next-generation motor technologies

 

[SteveG3]

Using the Dyno Coefficients, we get the efficiency data:

View attachment 240071

Keep in mind that this does not include accessory use like A/C; it includes car on, inverter, road, motor, transmission and air frictions.

really appreciate the thread. honestly, a bit over my head, but, for those of you who understand all this, I'm wondering if you can share here a total miles of highway range calculation for various constant speeds (i.e. 65, 70, 75, 80 mph), of course, leaving temperature, wind resistance, elevation changes, etc., out of the calculation.

 

[JeffK]

Agreed ... one has to wonder when they will do away with current Model S/X battery nomenclature

I thought that was the plan.

 

[Stolz25]

So the driving ranges for both models were extremely understated and the 0-60 as well?

I went through the entire thread but admit I didn't understand 10-15% of the technology discussion but the rest seem to have laid out things nicely in plain language.

Glad I'm not the only one. I keep telling myself I'm an aerospace engineer and I should understand this, but nope.

 

[SageBrush]

really appreciate the thread. honestly, a bit over my head, but, for those of you who understand all this, I'm wondering if you can share here a total miles of highway range calculation for various constant speeds (i.e. 65, 70, 75, 80 mph), of course, leaving temperature, wind resistance, elevation changes, etc., out of the calculation.

Presuming the usable pack of the LR Model 3 is 78 kWh,

at speed S
Consumption C
Range = 78*1000/C

So e.g., at 70 mph C = 220
Range = 78000/220 = 354 miles

---------
Or you may prefer thinking about it this way:
Given the Wh/mile at a certain speed, convert to miles per kWh by dividing into 1000
Multiply the result by the usable battery capacity