Tesla Model Y Dimensions, Weight and Performance Off-Road

[GenSao]

Tesmanian has "exclusive" details on the new Model Y.

Exclusive Tesla Model Y Dimensions, Weight and Performance Off-Road

The Off-Road Assist is interesting. A screen capture also shows the Model Y capable of towing "if equipped".

 

[MY-Y]

I'm looking forward to the model Y being my first Tesla and it's great to finally see some specs.

I'm quite curious how they make the model Y 6" taller than a model 3 while keeping 98% of the range. My understanding is that the model 3 loses more than 2% of its range when simply moving to larger wheels. How can the model Y lose merely 2% of the model 3's range being 6" taller? Maybe the battery is bigger or some additional optimizations perhaps?

 

[iustin]

Interesting. Off road assist? I thought the Y is a pure on-road thing, especially with the tyres/wheels that is has. Well, a good sign, at least for very mild fire road or simply non paved places.

 

[cusetownusa]

I'm looking forward to the model Y being my first Tesla and it's great to finally see some specs.

I'm quite curious how they make the model Y 6" taller than a model 3 while keeping 98% of the range. My understanding is that the model 3 loses more than 2% of its range when simply moving to larger wheels. How can the model Y lose merely 2% of the model 3's range being 6" taller? Maybe the battery is bigger or some additional optimizations perhaps?

i thought the range difference was more like 10%?

 

[MY-Y]

i thought the range difference was more like 10%?

That would make sense to me, but the Model 3 AWD range on the Tesla site is 322 miles and the Model Y is 315.

 

[Thunder7ga]

The pic that has "cargo volume" at the top I wish we saw more of...it says 68 cu ft. The website says 66.

 

[cusetownusa]

That would make sense to me, but the Model 3 AWD range on the Tesla site is 322 miles and the Model Y is 315.

Hmmm. Not sure. Could be that the 3 range will be updated soon to a longer range?

 

[cusetownusa]

The pic that has "cargo volume" at the top I wish we saw more of...it says 68 cu ft. The website says 66.

I noticed that too. My Jeep Grand Cherokee has about 68 cu ft. Hope these numbers are correct. Could be a perfect replacement for me when the time comes.

 

[Zoomit]

Hmmm. Not sure. Could be that the 3 range will be updated soon to a longer range?

Most likely. To address the earlier question, both 3 and Y have the same battery.

 

[yossi]

I noticed that too. My Jeep Grand Cherokee has about 68 cu ft. Hope these numbers are correct. Could be a perfect replacement for me when the time comes.

the exterior specs are identical to BMW X4

 

[Matsayz]

****ing finally we find a number for the length!

 

[Lobstahz]

****ing finally we find a number for the length!

Agreed! Took forever to get this info. A scant 2.6" longer than the Model 3. Not unexpected, but I was personally hoping the rumors of it being 6" longer were true.

Model 3: 184.8″ L x 72.8″ W x 56.8″ H
Model Y: 187" L x 75.6" W x 64" H
Model X: 198″ L x 79″ W x 66″ H

 

[Thunder7ga]

A collection of comparisons:

Tesla Model Y: 187"L x 76"W x 64"H
Tesla Model 3: 185"L x 73"W x 56-57"H
Tesla Model X: 198″ L x 79″ W x 66″ H
Tesla Model S: 196″ L x 77″ W x 57″ H
BMW X5: 194″ L x 79″ W x 69″ H
BMW X4: 187-188″ L x 76″ W x 64″ H
BMW X3: 186″ L x 74-75″ W x 66″ H
Audi Q3: 177″ L x 73″ W x 64″ H
Audi Q5: 184″ L x 75″ W x 65″ H

Best Selling SUVs in USA 2019:
1. Toyota RAV4: 181″ L x 73″ W x 67-69″ H
2. Nissan Rogue: 185″ L x 72″ W x 68-69″ H
3. Honda CR-V: 182″ L x 73″ W x 66-67″ H
4. Ford Escape: 181″ L x 74″ W x 66″ H
5. Chevy Equinox: 183″ L x 73″ W x 65″ H

 

[Watts_Up]

Agreed! Took forever to get this info. A scant 2.6" longer than the Model 3. Not unexpected, but I was personally hoping the rumors of it being 6" longer we're true.

Model 3: 184.8″ L x 72.8″ W x 56.8″ H
Model Y: 187" L x 75.6" W x 64" H
Model X: 198″ L x 79″ W x 66″ H

I would like to know if the wheelbase increases by 2.6*?

And if there is any battery size change to explain the similar range compare to the Model 3,
despite front size, weight, and wires width increase?

 

[Zoomit]

I would like to know if the wheelbase increases by 2.6*?

And if there is any battery size change to explain the similar range compare to the Model 3,
despite front size, weight, and wires width increase?

Wheelbase is very, very likely same as 3.

Battery is definitely same as 3.
Ref: Model y battery upgrade?

 

[MY-Y]

Wheelbase is very, very likely same as 3.

Battery is definitely same as 3.
Ref: Model y battery upgrade?

Any idea how the range is about the same? There must be something I'm missing. Losing more range in the Model 3 by selecting the larger wheels than moving to a Model Y that's 13% taller, 4% wider, and 8% heavier doesn't add up to me. If the battery is exactly the same and the range estimates are accurate, two possibilities come to mind. 1) There is an efficiency innovation we don't know about yet, or 2) the Model 3 is leaving range on the table to be unlocked later. Other thoughts?

 

[johnmodely]

I’m excited this is much larger than it looks. It’s slightly larger than the Mercedes GLC coupe which was a car I was considering before I ordered the Y.

That car was perfect size for me when I test drive it so it’s awesome that the Y is the same size.

I think Tesla under promised and is over delivering like crazy on this car, which is why they have been so quiet about it’s specs.

 

[Socratez]

I still haven’t completed my availability email from 2/26 because of Tesla not sharing all of these these details for no real reason. I’m glad it’s wider than the 3 and I hope it carries through on the inside as well. My wife and I really disliked how narrow the 3 felt inside which has kept me from moving forward.

 

[Zoomit]

Any idea how the range is about the same? There must be something I'm missing. Losing more range in the Model 3 by selecting the larger wheels than moving to a Model Y that's 13% taller, 4% wider, and 8% heavier doesn't add up to me. If the battery is exactly the same and the range estimates are accurate, two possibilities come to mind. 1) There is an efficiency innovation we don't know about yet, or 2) the Model 3 is leaving range on the table to be unlocked later. Other thoughts?

It is peculiar, but no magic physics is involved. Clearly the Y is less efficient. The 3 is apparently leaving range on the table. Any gain in efficiency derived from designing the Y will be applied to the 3.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I'm looking forward to the model Y being my first Tesla and it's great to finally see some specs.

I'm quite curious how they make the model Y 6" taller than a model 3 while keeping 98% of the range. My understanding is that the model 3 loses more than 2% of its range when simply moving to larger wheels. How can the model Y lose merely 2% of the model 3's range being 6" taller? Maybe the battery is bigger or some additional optimizations perhaps?

The Model Y gets about 15% less range (raw) on the highway fuel efficiency test.

2020, 2019, 2018 Model 3 Battery Capacities & Charging Constants
And that is not even that fast a test (average speed something like 48mph).

They use a larger scalar for the Model Y when calculating the EPA results because the 5-cycle results apparently allow it to do better in that calculation (there is a formula that is used to calculate a scaling to apply to 2-cycle results; that formula is based on the results of 5-cycle testing; the larger the scalar, the better the EPA number looks). The other factor of course is that aero dramatically affects only about 45% of the EPA number.

This improved scaling may well mean better results in adverse conditions (for whatever reason).

But best case scenario (ideal conditions for range) it will likely be substantially worse on the highway than Model 3 (I would guess more than 15% worse - so in ideal conditions, maybe an easy 210 miles rather than an easy 250 miles on the freeway with aeros on).

We’ll know more when the full test results documents are published on the EPA iaspub database. Right now the data above is highly likely to be correct, but is based on the EPA datafile results, so is a back-calculated estimate by me, and there may be an error (I noticed some small discrepancies I could not explain). And we don’t have the 5-cycle results to allow us to see how they calculate the ~7.5% higher scalar. (~0.76 rather than ~0.7)

So no miracles here; at least it does not appear so with what we know so far.