Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

What battery cells are in the 2023 M3 LR?

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
#41
AAKEE said:
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.
Click to expand...
The screen shot was taken at about the same time, yesterday. Mine is also a MIC Tesla, and yes, I read about the fact that the battery pack is LG MU50, 79 kWh. Thank you for all your input and your knowledge you share with us.
So, in a word, Tessie isn't reliable as a battery capacity calculator for the Canadian (MIC) 2023 Tesla, right ?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GSP and bckelowna
#42
AAKEE said:
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!
Click to expand...
A couple of silly questions:
Does it interfere with the performance on cold weather? The LG? (This car comes the cold weather pack) maybe they choose this one for this motive?
Also, software recommend charge up to 90% for daily drive

Thanks a lot for all the info you shared here
 
#43
bckelowna said:
Does it interfere with the performance on cold weather? The LG? (This car comes the cold weather pack) maybe they choose this one for this motive?
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't and it shouldn't.
bckelowna said:
Also, software recommend charge up to 90% for daily drive
Click to expand...
Yes, Tesla doesn't like to be charged to 100%. I charge mine to 75% every night and using Stats I charge it 5% more in the morning, to ensure that the battery is conditioned too. That's why you will see in my case :

1692105609610.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: GSP and bckelowna
#44
voldar said:
The screen shot was taken at about the same time, yesterday. Mine is also a MIC Tesla, and yes, I read about the fact that the battery pack is LG MU50, 79 kWh. Thank you for all your input and your knowledge you share with us.
So, in a word, Tessie isn't reliable as a battery capacity calculator for the Canadian (MIC) 2023 Tesla, right ?
Click to expand...
It does look like it do not calculate the capacity correct.

Tessie usually calculates the actual capacity fine. Before that had a term mixing up the understanding at the isers about ehat capacity it is. That is fixed which is very good.

I guess Tessie had it easier in US with panasonicconly batteries, but in EU with two types of panasonic and two types of LG it was more often wrong than right.

Probably they fix it soon, msybe sone ibterrested could make a post in the vendors thread.
 
#45
bckelowna said:
A couple of silly questions:
Does it interfere with the performance on cold weather? The LG? (This car comes the cold weather pack) maybe they choose this one for this motive?
Also, software recommend charge up to 90% for daily drive

Thanks a lot for all the info you shared here
Click to expand...
I think they (LG M50 78.8kWh) perform better than the Panasonic at cold battery and low SOC. (It is not a problem at all so mainly a experience of loosing much power at very low SOC on a Pergormance vehicle.

I live at the artic circle in a very cold climate and I have not had any issues at all with the Panasonic 82 kWh during the 2 1/2 years I had the car.

My guess is that there are two reasone to see LG comming:
The first is the supply of batteries. The nber built in US by Panasonic/Tesla might not be enough.
The second: Before there was such big difference in capacity that a NMC was not an option. Also model S snd X with high power would need a battery that can stabd up to the power demand.
The model 3/Y Performance that got the LG just barely can get the requested power from that pack.
In the long run, with the new NMC/NCMA-packs the initial capacity is a few percent lower on the LG packs but they hold up well and after a few years the difference probably has vanished. As long as the car do not need more power than the pack can deliver, its a really good option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GhostSkater, GSP, voldar and 1 other person
#49
Tessie owner answered and told me that the 2023 he's having in the database, all show 77.8 kWh battery (BMS reading).
Still, I checked a trip I did about 2 weeks ago and something doesn't add up : it should be 78.8 kWh as @AAKEE said.

Here are the pictures :

IMG_2149.jpeg

IMG_2151.jpeg


These are the pictures I took before and after a long run (in one charge). If I do the math, in both cases I get about 78.7 kWh battery capacity.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: GSP, bckelowna and AAKEE
#50
voldar said:
Tessie owner answered and told me that the 2023 he's having in the database, all show 77.8 kWh battery (BMS reading).
Still, I checked a trip I did about 2 weeks ago and something doesn't add up : it should be 78.8 kWh as @AAKEE said.

Here are the pictures :

View attachment 965793
View attachment 965794

These are the pictures I took before and after a long run (in one charge). If I do the math, in both cases I get about 78.7 kWh battery capacity.
Click to expand...
If it is a MIC (Shanghai build), it is 99.99% safe to say you have the 78.8 kWh LG.

As a BMS can be off and batteries degrade, in many cases it is not safe to only use the energy graph calculation (or guestimate as Tessie does).

I have a memory seeing somebody wrote that they used the same ”variant coding” in Canada as in the EU.
Can you find the code Y5LD somewhere like in the CoC or registration papers?
 
#51
AAKEE said:
If it is a MIC (Shanghai build), it is 99.99% safe to say you have the 78.8 kWh LG.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is a MIC (Shanghai build) Tesla Model 3.
AAKEE said:
I have a memory seeing somebody wrote that they used the same ”variant coding” in Canada as in the EU.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately there is nothing in the documents I have that present the "variant coding". Checked everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GSP and AAKEE
#55
RSpanner said:
Is that the range showing in Energy, or have you actually done a range test...like the few video's I have seen...100% charge, then continuous freeway drive at 65 or 70? Looking for real world tests...
Click to expand...
Real world test is not 65-70 mph nonstop in a loop route. Here is a real world test :

IMG_2151.jpeg


Translated in US miles and mph :
IMG_9413.jpeg


Two persons in the car with luggage. AC 21C Auto
If the last 20 miles we weren’t caught in a mess, the average speed could have been higher.

IMG_9414.jpeg


So, we drove 245.38 miles, we had left 66 km = 41 miles, starting from 99% to 13% SOC. 2/3 of the trip @ constant speed of 75 mph.

That's 286.38 miles @ 64 mph on 99% SOC. Two persons, luggage, head wind. Let me tell you, after 4 hours of driving I was happy to stop… heck, I wish I could stop 1 hour sooner.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bckelowna and RSpanner
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jeremy3292
Is it just me or does no one seem to have the Highland battery specs?
Replies
14
Views
1K
Model 3
MP3Mike
M
Y
Is Mobile Connector Energy Star certified?
Replies
2
Views
215
Model 3: Battery & Charging
RayK
RayK
K
Battery preconditioning ?
Replies
4
Views
365
Model 3: Battery & Charging
kimwin
K
T
Anyone: comparison of 2023 high-visibility glass roof?
Replies
0
Views
97
Model S: Interior & Exterior
T fanatic
T
J
Rubber floor mats M3LR 2021 vs M3LR 2024
Replies
1
Views
131
The UK and Ireland
Steve-R
S
Top
Back
Blog
New
Forum list
Marketplace
Menu