TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

Tesla's 85 kWh rating needs an asterisk (up to 81 kWh, with up to ~77 kWh usable)

Discussion in 'Model S: Battery & Charging' started by wk057, Feb 2, 2016.

  1. DavidB

    DavidB 2010 Roadster Sport || 2013 S85 || 2017 X100D

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    515
    Location:
    Silver Spring, MD
    Documents filed by Tesla containing "official data sheets" are, in my humble opinion, worthless. I want real data collected by (disinterested) 3rd parties. I'm not interested in reading mumbo jumbo that has no actual data that backs it up.

    wk057 has, multiple times, called you out, saying, "put up or shut up", and you still post the same false data.
     
    • Like x 4
    • Disagree x 3
  2. vgrinshpun

    vgrinshpun Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    5,904
    Location:
    PA
    This IS actual testing data. Duplicated/approved by TWO third parties: CARB and EPA.

    What is your basis for calling it false data? It is most certainly not.

    EDIT: I did not post this particular data before.
     
    • Like x 2
  3. DavidB

    DavidB 2010 Roadster Sport || 2013 S85 || 2017 X100D

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    515
    Location:
    Silver Spring, MD
    You think Tesla always posts actual testing data? That's so cute. Naive, but cute. You think CARB or EPA actually duplicates the testing? Again, how cute.
     
    • Disagree x 4
    • Like x 2
  4. vgrinshpun

    vgrinshpun Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    5,904
    Location:
    PA
    As I've shown the data submitted by Tesla was duplicated by EPA in the Volkswagen test lab. What is cute is to refuse to acknowledge reality. But I forget, you actually do not read any REAL data.

    And by the way, if you are so averse to anything coming from Tesla, did you mark "disagree" on @wk057 post attaching outdated Tesla descriptive materials, in the post I was replying to?
     
    • Like x 1
  5. shred86

    shred86 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2018
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    USA
    #1165 shred86, Apr 22, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2019
    To be fair, vgrinshpun asked why test results suggest a higher usable battery capacity than what wk057 shared. The reasoning was that "EPA numbers are BS" and the follow up post suggested it's because the data vgrinshpun was derived from power going into the charger, to which he showed it includes both (into the charger and actually depleted). Then it was suggested all of the values are calculated, not measured, which is where there seems to be the biggest disagreement and no one actually has factual data that shows if those test numbers are in fact calculated or measured*. When asked to show a Model 3 that has gotten anywhere close to 78 kWh, there is a video of one going to 75 kWh but that test was apparently flawed, which sadly I can't figure out why, lol. I've always thought the trip meter showed total energy used while in motion, so if anything it would always show less than actual kWh usage. Anyways, just trying my best to follow along but can some with a brain please explain to me how Ben Sullin's test was flawed.

    * Edit: See post #1167. Seems to be pretty good evidence to suggest the tests were run on a four wheel dyno and not calculated.
     
    • Like x 2
    • Informative x 1
  6. vgrinshpun

    vgrinshpun Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    5,904
    Location:
    PA
    That is very objective description of the discussion we had.

    Please note that in the previous posting i did not include pages that explicitly state what is actual test data. Take a look at my latest post, it includes data sheets which specifically label test results as such: "Range Test Results". These absolutely ARE the test results. Here is the M3 SR+ re-posted for convenience (link for the whole document is in my post above):

    upload_2019-4-23_0-12-32.png
     
  7. shred86

    shred86 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2018
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    USA
    I saw those but initially I thought the argument was regardless of the title, "Range Test Results", they're still calculated values (so misleading label?). But then I saw the link to the full document which clearly states on page 4:

    ...which also has pictures of the Model 3 on a four wheel dyno with the Hioki connections to the appropriate places, so I'm inclined to believe they actually tested this on a four wheel dyno and didn't calculate the values.
     

    Attached Files:

    • Informative x 1
    • Like x 1
  8. David99

    David99 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2014
    Messages:
    4,270
    Location:
    Brea, Orange County
    The EPA does only 15% of the tests themselves. 85% is submitted by the car manufacturer. Most likely a simulation.
     
    • Like x 2
    • Informative x 1
  9. DavidB

    DavidB 2010 Roadster Sport || 2013 S85 || 2017 X100D

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    515
    Location:
    Silver Spring, MD
    Here's a clue: If you see the exact same numbers, EPA did not do anything other than parrot what was given to them by the manufacturer.
     
    • Disagree x 2
  10. vgrinshpun

    vgrinshpun Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    5,904
    Location:
    PA

    They absolutely did and do. I maintain a library of many of these applications from Tesla, which typically followed by confirmatory testing done by EPA - as I shown earlier in the case of Model S P85D, at the VW lab.

    The reason I always post links to all documents I snap shot is because the original filing contains detailed description of data and how they were obtained. In a nut shell EPA testing includes running car on a dyno according to various EPA protocols (city, highway, etc.) while measuring energy out of the battery, (vehicle DC Wh/mile), depleting range (miles) and "event recharge energy" - energy required to recharge the battery.
     
  11. shred86

    shred86 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2018
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    USA
    I'm probably just missing something here but the first 19 pages of this document, which is the "Request for issuance of a new certificate of Conformity to include a running change - Addition of a new variant to the RWD Model 3 Platform", is something submitted by Tesla to the EPA. This document specifies the conditions that were used to test the Model 3 under "Special Test Instructions" that says "This vehicle shall only be tested on a 4 wheel dyno." which includes the rest of the conditions, to include photos of a Model 3 on a four wheel dyno. The results of this test states the Tesla Model 3 LR battery capacity is ~78 kWh. On the attached pages, it shows the EPA results which I would agree, appear to just be calculated or simulated numbers. There's even a note that says "Fill in yellow shaded areas to compute range and AC wh/mi results". But that's besides the point... because it clearly appears Tesla actually tested their Model 3 on a dyno, unless they're flat out lying about the test instructions and the pictures are just fake, which I highly doubt.
     
  12. vgrinshpun

    vgrinshpun Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    5,904
    Location:
    PA
    #1172 vgrinshpun, Apr 22, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2019
    The data that I linked show that testing for Model S P85D was duplicated by EPA in the Volkswagen lab independently at the date other than the original testing by Tesla. The key is that coefficients that are entered into the dyno and its calibration need to representative of the actual load, and should be consistent between the tests, so variability is only due to the behaviour of the battery and drive unit of the car, not the dyno set.

    I can always search EPA data base for the confirmatory independent testing data by EPA. The overall key is that manufacturer does not know in advance whether their data will be approved, or randomly verified through an independent test.

    The largest difference between the manufacturer test and confirmation test by EPA I've seen so far was for Jaguar i-pace. EPA testing had much less charitable results. So they really enforce the verification of data by the manufacturers.
     
    • Informative x 1
  13. vgrinshpun

    vgrinshpun Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    5,904
    Location:
    PA
    I've addressed this before: the yellow shadowed area - Energy (Wh) and Distance (mi) as well as Recharge AC Watts are actual measured test data from the dynoed car. Other parameters on that sheet are calculated based on this test data.
     
  14. ucmndd

    ucmndd Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2016
    Messages:
    2,993
    Location:
    California
    If I’m correctly understanding your interpretation of the numbers listed on these sheets as being actual physical measured capacity, you seem to be implying that the LR RWD and LR AWD actually have different sized batteries.

    Do you actually believe that?
     
    • Like x 1
  15. vgrinshpun

    vgrinshpun Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    5,904
    Location:
    PA
    From what I see, including with my car, the battery capacity is not a rigidly fixed number, there is a variation due to the fact that testing involved two different cars with two different packs. I believe that nominally the battery capacity is approximately the same, but these two cars manufactured at different point in time, likely running different versions of BMS (note dates in the header row of the table) had actual measured battery capacity differ by roughly 1.28%.
     
    • Like x 5
  16. MarcG

    MarcG Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2014
    Messages:
    2,236
    Location:
    San Francisco
    From today’s investor presentation on autonomy, Elon himself said “Model 3 long range has a pack of about 75kwh and short range about 50kWh” :D
     
    • Like x 3
  17. FlatSix911

    FlatSix911 Porsche 918 Hybrid

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2015
    Messages:
    5,950
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    The truth will set us free... :cool:
     
  18. Newscutter

    Newscutter Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2013
    Messages:
    806
    Location:
    Wexford, Pennsylvania, United States
    Ah... I see... we're arguing about minor variations in data and nothing actually useful to the average owner.
    Ah... I see... we're still just arguing about minor variations in data and nothing actually useful to the average owner, like the questions I asked above. So... Imma gonna go out here and measure my panel gaps to the micron and then see if that can be argued against the published specs from the manufacturer. Perhaps something of relevance will appear in the meantime.

    I'd also like to state for the record that not ALL residents of PA are so stridently disagreeable as my colleague with the walls of text.
     
  19. vgrinshpun

    vgrinshpun Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2013
    Messages:
    5,904
    Location:
    PA
    I see, the “about” part, in your opinion, is useful in evaluating accuracy of actual test data..
     
  20. MikeBur

    MikeBur ManualPilot

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2014
    Messages:
    1,201
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    I had to show ignored posts to understand the context of this resurrected thread, though I guess I have to say thank you to @vgrinshpun at this moment for their lack of ability to receive other data as they caused you to post this additional info in response. Wish people would read more carefully, eg bit on 3 data on CAN bus now padding real telemetry, plugged in power for testing, etc.
    Not sure whether to repeat guidance on how to ignore noisy few now: makes for calmer reading, though we wouldn’t have gotten this gem if so.

    Thanks for posting again Jason.

     
    • Like x 2

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.
  • Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


    SUPPORT TMC