FredMt
TM3 LR Q4 2021 (after LR Q4 2019 and M3P Q2 2021)
I agree.
Just to understand. is it tesla that performs the EPA tests or an independent group?
How can it be possible that EPA test for Performance were all messed up though ?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
MASTER THREAD: 2021 Model 3 - Charge data, battery discussion etc
- Thread starter EV Promoter
- Start date
Just to understand. is it tesla that performs the EPA tests or an independent group?
How can it be possible that EPA test for Performance were all messed up though ?
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Usually Tesla does the testing in Fremont. Occasionally the EPA audits.
Don’t know. This appears to be just an issue with energy being wasted on the recharge event (some extra energy used somehow).
All manufacturers do the testing themselves which the epa then approves. Sometimes they audit, but with the amount of defunding they’ve had over the last 4 years I imagine they’re forced to become much cozier with manufacturers.
TimothyHW3
Active Member
That is interesting, the one they added into the AWDs in Europe is same number but BB instead of CB and 00 vs 0L
Everything else the same.
The one in Europe is supposedly 77.8kWh and this one 82kWh. But there are indications that the 77.8 is not the same as the old one. We now need the sticker from a US one with LR AWD.
So much for Tesla adding completely new part numbers for new batteries...
FredMt
TM3 LR Q4 2021 (after LR Q4 2019 and M3P Q2 2021)
You confirm that BB and 00 one come from LR and not M3P ?
TimothyHW3
Active Member
I don't have the starting capacity, my car charges so slow that didn't bother. 18 minutes to get from 206km to 332km, 25 min preconditioning while driving 100-110km/h. On a 150kW SC
TimothyHW3
Active Member
25 min precondition on a cold battery at 110 will not cut it. It really depends on the starting temperature, but driving at 110 on a cold weather will cool off the battery. Even preconditioning will not help much.
Charged my performance to 100% this morning, showed 482 km and nominal full pack is down to 78,3kWh. Voltage was 400v
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
I think revving the part number extension and not the revision number does not qualify as “not changing” the part number, as you were claiming. But we can cover that in that thread, not here. It’s a middle ground; maybe we can claim everyone was right or something weak like that!
Seems like this is a part that is compatible by part number but is not intended to be the same, and it is thus not an incremental change (letter change). Hence the unusual change in part number suffix.
So, there are two different parts. With a distinct coding to indicate the difference. And the old part number, with unchanged suffix, but new letter, representing the equivalent of the old part, still seems to exist. (Though I don’t have all the pictures of recent part numbers - mine is a very different part number, but it is really old and was probably one of the ones before they split from the RWD pack.). Let’s follow up on this in the other thread if you wish (I don’t care for the discussion, just want to know about what cars have what part numbers and how those numbers are unique).
Yeah, will be tough to get a good read at this time of year, where you are at. If you want to know the approximate “answer” to where you started without SMT, I would make a concerted effort to do a spirited drive, down to a decently low SoC, pre-condition for Supercharging while driving, supercharge to 90%, and extrapolate.
Or find a warm garage, charge to 90% on a decent rate connector, and use pre-conditioning in the app.
You can’t wait until things warm up since you will lose some capacity by then.
As long as you make a decent effort to get temperature out of the picture, and make an effort to get some heat in the battery, your answer will probably be within 1kWh of the actual value.
Last edited:
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
As I recall you were on the lower side to start with, but if your battery is cold it will be difficult to get a good “accurate” read on this, probably. They attempt to control for temp changes, but temperature does change pack capacity, and there is probably small error.
TimothyHW3
Active Member
Do you have a screenshot of cell voltage at 100% not battery voltage? That is more interesting.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
What is the largest discrepancy you have seen between Vmid*96 and a total? Seems like it would be just 1V, at most, typically?
What voltage do you expect for cell voltage at 100%? 4.2V? 4.19V?
It wasn't that cold, had been driving for 30 minutes already, outside temp was 5C
2021 Model 3 - Charge data
Did you dismantle the frunk or something? Or did you find a way to take the pic from behind the right wheel?
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Looks like he just took the picture as recommended from behind the right wheel. Dismantling the frunk is not helpful. The only way for it to be easier is to unbolt the front lower aero shield (which is pretty easy, but something like ramps are needed).
It’s hard to debug any particular Supercharger problem. I would take this specific part of the discussion to the appropriate thread for it. I would just say that it is not uncommon at all for a particular Supercharger to be really slow, If I suspect I am not getting the rate I expect, and there is space, I just move to a different Supercharger as quickly as I can.
That being said, there is every reason to believe they could be hobbling the charge rate on the new packs for now. I have no idea what has been demonstrated as the max yet, for this pack.
Similar threads
- Article
