What battery cells are in the 2023 M3 LR?

[bckelowna]

If it’s any consolation to new 2023 owners, my Jan 22’ M3LR never actually received the ‘claimed’ 573km (358mi) on EPA. In fact, the first time I charged to 100% for a trip within a few weeks of ownership, the charge maxed out at 548km….25km less.
Since then, I’ve charged to 100% approx 5-6 more times for subsequent trips and same result…547-549km (342 mile) max range.

After 20 months and a super fun 55,000km driven, max is now at 540km which ain’t too shabby if I look at from a real world brand new range 548/548 when new. Reduction of 8km off. Either Tesla fibbed about max range or my vehicle was a one off.

I wonder if Tesla simply revised their range claim to be closer to actual real world?
Another possible reason Usually the simplest explanation stands lol. Could very well be battery chemistry but seems far reaching to me unless otherwise data proven. I know my example is anecdotal but thought i would share.

Does anyone with a previous 358 mile spec battery/range have similar max range data?

Conversely, are new 2023 owners actually seeing a max range of 333 miles at full charge or less?

Mine brand new 2023 long range, Canada- China is 536k range at 100%, tesla advertise 534km. My car only have 1200km now, I've only charged once to 100%

 

[Destiny1701]

Mine brand new 2023 long range, Canada- China is 536km, tesla advertise 534km. My car only have 1200km now, I've only charged once to 100%

And you are showing 534 at 100%?

 

[bckelowna]

And you are showing 534 at 100%?

536km range

 

[gsmith123]

In the data world what you're doing is called assumptive reasoning. You've got some facts and you're elected to reach a conclusion to the absence of other possibilities. Or apparently don't believe there are other possibilities

Still confused what alternate theory you're proposing. UCs explanations seem to fit what we can see pretty well.

 

[ucmndd]

Still confused what alternate theory you're proposing. UCs explanations seem to fit what we can see pretty well.

Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.

Never underestimate the capacity of humans to ignore evidence in the pursuit of maintaining a deeply held belief.

 

[AAKEE]

536km range

Would you be interrested in doing a good thing for the community and calculating the battery capacity?

Whats needed is per this picture:

Down to the right select ”Normal Range”

”Average” x ”calculated range” x 100 / SOC in percent = battery capacity in Watt hours.
Its preferable to have high SOC for a exact result but in this case there is not sny need to get it very exact.

The result will tell us quite much about what possible battery the car has.

 

[voldar]

Conversely, are new 2023 owners actually seeing a max range of 333 miles at full charge or less?

The short answer is YES.
I only once charged to 100% and the number was 535 km if I remember correctly. This is my Tessie info as of right now. It is true though, with my Tesla sleeping. I modified the app so that it doesn't awakes my car when I use it.

 

[AAKEE]

The short answer is YES.
I only once charged to 100% and the number was 535 km if I remember correctly. This is my Tessie info as of right now. It is true though, with my Tesla sleeping. I modified the app so that it doesn't awakes my car when I use it.

View attachment 964887

It would be good with the energys graph calculation as a complement to the Tessie app. Its better to have two independent sources before drawing any comclusions.

Tessie, for the initial value in the meter is a guess-o-meter. It tries to find the batteery Tessie thinks it is.
It is very common in EU that that value is completely wrong. Tessie try to find a battery that matches and use that initial value.
In this case, it could be the LG M50 battery but then the capacity and specially the range should be better.

The range 535km with the same constant as before (earlier 2023 and 2022) should mean about 73.4kWh.
Somehow someting is not right or the effeciency of the new cars is 5% less than before.

A energy screen calc would show us if 77.6kWh is correct.

 

[voldar]

Somehow someting is not right or the efficiency of the new cars is 5% less than before.

Not sure if the constant is the same… but when I did a range test with my Tesla I obtained a potential 74.4 kWh battery.

First test M3LR 2023

Today I finally had the opportunity to test the capabilities of my new Tesla M3LR 2023. I drove Montreal - Ottawa - Montreal, starting with 90% SOC and arrived back home with 4%. Made a stop of about 1H in Ottawa. > 419 km / 64 kWh / 152 Wh/km in US metrics : > 260 miles / 64 kWh / 4.1 mi/kWh >...

teslamotorsclub.com

79% SOC and 424.5 km rated > 100% SOC = 537 km

 

[AAKEE]

@voldar You edited a picture away of the energy screen?

Anyway, yor drive in the other post was 152x419 km at 86% use. Thats 74.055 kWh. On top of that you have the buffer of 4.5% so 74.055/0.955 = 77.55kWh.
Tessies number seems spot on.

For the energy graph picture it was slightly more, like 78 kWh or so.

535 km or so range is a higher constant than before with this energy level. Lower efficiency.

 

[Bouba]

In my 2021 MiC M3LR with the LG75 pack...according to my calculations an EPA kilometer takes 140 Wh...has that changed ?...I understood that the Rizen chip increased power consumption...perhaps HW4 also takes more power ?

 

[AAKEE]

In my 2021 MiC M3LR with the LG75 pack...according to my calculations an EPA kilometer takes 140 Wh...has that changed ?...I understood that the Rizen chip increased power consumption...perhaps HW4 also takes more power ?

All 2021 LR had the same constant as far as I am concerned.

79000/576 = 137Wh/km for the total capacity I think.
This means each displayed km is 0.955x 137 = 131 Wh/km.

There was a rumor that the ryzen processor was respinsible for the 20km loss off range on the M3P. But the real reason was that the LG 78.8kWh battery actually contained less energy than the 82.1 kWh panasonic

My M3P with old HW3 not ryzen but intel atom (?), did draw 220W if the car was awake (sentry for example)
Tested, measured, logged and made safe that that is correct values.

My MSP with Ryzen and HW4 draws 290W awake, sentry for example.
Tested, measured, logged and made safe that that is correct values.

The difference is 70W. During a slow EPA or WLTP test drive, we still only would get 700Wh even if the test took 10 hours.

700Wh is about 5km or less. If the test is shorter, the lost range from the increased power demand is less.

 

[voldar]

@voldar You edited a picture away of the energy screen?

Anyway, yor drive in the other post was 152x419 km at 86% use. Thats 74.055 kWh. On top of that you have the buffer of 4.5% so 74.055/0.955 = 77.55kWh.
Tessies number seems spot on.

For the energy graph picture it was slightly more, like 78 kWh or so.

535 km or so range is a higher constant than before with this energy level. Lower efficiency.

Definitely not. Why would I do it ?
I deleted these pictures because I realized it’s not what you were looking for. I took them at the same time as the energy picture posted above.

 

[voldar]

This means each displayed km is 0.955x 137 = 131 Wh/km.

Interesting. From what I get based on Teslafi.com info, after I tweaked the numbers to match what my Tesla shows as efficiency, I see that the EPA is met @ 140 Wh/km.

These are my numbers in the last 1.5 months since I have the car. I didn’t use Teslafi from the start.

And this is my setup config on Teslafi :

Teslafi reads spot on the estimated range that the energy screen shows above, at 50 km mark = 511 km

 

[bckelowna]

77.492682926829

188x169x100/41

Mine is a 2023 long range AWD , Canada

@

AAKEE​

my car only have 1200km, chinese like all canadians ,

 

[ZenRockGarden]

In my 2021 MiC M3LR with the LG75 pack...according to my calculations an EPA kilometer takes 140 Wh...has that changed ?...I understood that the Rizen chip increased power consumption...perhaps HW4 also takes more power ?

We've done generous estimates of what a few more watts to a Ryzen processor would accumulate to and it's.... nothing.

Variance among efficiency involves wheel/tire setups, changes to the battery pack, and a few tweaks to the motors over time.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

There was a rumor that the ryzen processor was respinsible for the 20km loss off range on the M3P. But the real reason was that the LG 78.8kWh battery actually contained less energy than the 82.1 kWh panasonic

this

 

[AAKEE]

Definitely not. Why would I do it ?
I deleted these pictures because I realized it’s not what you were looking for. I took them at the same time as the energy picture posted above.

View attachment 964981
View attachment 964982

These pictures give us the possibility to calculate the battery capacity.

It is about 78.2 kWh, so very probable that it is the LG M50 cells, that pack is marked 78.8kWh but often tops out slightly above 79 kWh.
(Calculation performed as per the earlier post from me).

So the charging constant is 147 Wh/km (to be able to calculate the capacity from the displayed range).

The Energy content in each km is 95.5% of this so about 141 Wh/km.

 

[AAKEE]

77.492682926829

188x169x100/41

Mine is a 2023 long range AWD , Canada

@

AAKEE​

my car only have 1200km, chinese like all canadians ,

Thats for sure the LG M50, 78.8kWh pack.
They usually starts at a lower capacity and climbs so after a few months or so you’ll see about 78.8-79.2kWh on that calculation.
These are really good battery packs!

 

[AAKEE]

View attachment 964887

The initial capacity number inside the meter should say 78.8kWh.
(Tessie is very often wrong about that number).
You should change it to 78.8 kWh by pressing the number and altering it.
Tessie try to match a known battery size, and they probably do not know that Canada get the 78.8kWh battery.

If the Tessie screen shot was taken at the same time (or a out the same time) as the other pictures, there is a clear evidence that Tessies capacity calculation is wrong on this car (these vehicles?)
The battery capacity of this car is ~78-78.2 kWh, not 76.x kWh.