MASTER THREAD: 2021 Model 3 - Charge data, battery discussion etc

[AAKEE]

Yes, I know that., thank you. Still I was concerned about premature degradation while using normally the car .. now I'm no longer concerned, that's all.

You dont need to worry. You’ll be fine.

You dont have the possibility for daily charging? Charge more often with smaller discharged each time is better.
Also, having the car stand at lower average SOC during ”time” is also better.

I have the 82kWh battery( E3LD) 22000km, nine months and the range still shows the 507km( EPA-range) as day one and the NFP is the same( 80.7kWh) as the same day I connected SMT two days after delivery.

I charge daily, in the last part of the night.
I use a lower charging scedule then most other( 55-57% daily).

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Yes, I know that., thank you. Still I was concerned about premature degradation while using normally the car .. now I'm no longer concerned, that's all.

As I said below to your original report, it did seem a bit unusual. That sort of loss over a longer period was to be expected. But not instantly like that. It’s interesting that this is the second vehicle reported with a glitchy CAC. There was the other one recently that lost 16kWh from the pack capacity due to CAC estimate error instantaneously (?) - which then recovered. I guess in prior model years there have been steps in the estimates too, that recover, but I don’t recall them being quite this large. I wonder if there was some sort of software/firmware weirdness for a bit that led CAC estimation to lose its way on some packs.

Which is certainly not ideal in the timeframe you have experience it, and well outside the norm in that timeframe. They are estimates though, and there is in a SHORT timeframe a chance that the estimate will bounce back (though of course the overall trend will definitely be down). It can take some time to adjust back from a low CAC estimate.

 

[conv90]

You dont need to worry. You’ll be fine.

You dont have the possibility for daily charging? Charge more often with smaller discharged each time is better.
Also, having the car stand at lower average SOC during ”time” is also better.

I have the 82kWh battery( E3LD) 22000km, nine months and the range still shows the 507km( EPA-range) as day one and the NFP is the same( 80.7kWh) as the same day I connected SMT two days after delivery.

I charge daily, in the last part of the night.
I use a lower charging scedule then most other( 55-57% daily).

Hi AAKEE, let me understand if I correct uderstand:
Are you saying you charge daily indipendently of the charge reached the day before?
Fixing the target max at<60% (example57%):
Example you are at 50% and you charge up to to 57% or maybe you used more the car that day and you charge from 30% to 57% or you (not used the car during that day) and you charge from 56.5% to 57%??
If 220 V, how many Apère? 5? 8? 10? 13?
Thanks

 

[ro_explorer]

You dont have the possibility for daily charging?

I can charge daily but on a public charger. I live in an apartment building with an underground garage and I'm fighting the bureaucracy for the past 6 months straight to get a wall charger there, on my spot. Apparently I'll have my wish granted sometime in the near future but the procedures are insanely slow ... what can I say? this is Sweden
Until that day will come, I'm charging at the 11KW public station in front of my flat every other day or so, between 50-55% and 80%.
Also, every now and then I use the 50KW DC charger at the grocery store ... also till 80%.

 

[AAKEE]

Hi AAKEE, let me understand if I correct uderstand:
Are you saying you charge daily indipendently of the charge reached the day before?
Fixing the target max at<60% (example57%):
Example you are at 50% and you charge up to to 57% or maybe you used more the car that day and you charge from 30% to 57% or you (not used the car during that day) and you charge from 56.5% to 57%??
If 220 V, how many Apère? 5? 8? 10? 13?
Thanks

I have a Wallconnector connected to 3phase/400V.
-Yes, I have the charge set up to commence at 0330 during the night. If I have been at a normal working day my SOC is about 30-35%. With the charger set at 11kW it takes about 2hrs to charge to about 56%.
I always connect the WC when I park it in my garage. Charging will take place every night.
The choise of 1,3 or 11kW charging power is mostly a question of the supply to the charger. There is a slight difference in charging efficiency but these charging rates is considered slow charging( less than 0.25C) anyhow and you would probably not be able to see any difference in degradation due to this.

I got my M3P at the last new year. In hour very cold climate i started with 80% SOC during the coldest (-30C) days. When it got less cold I lowered the SOC successively and ended up at about 55-57%. As I’m a less newbee on my Tesla for the upcoming winter I might use a lower SOC during the cold days.
The li ion battery degrade less from time at lower SOC and also less when using smaller discharges(charge often is better).

I think my teslafi range chart speak for itself about low degradation. The average fleet line is usually one to three other MP3’21, depending on these cars odo readings.
Started with a NFP of 80.7kWh the day after delivery and it still is at 80.7. The NFP is affected by the charging habits and higher SOC seems to push the NFP down.

Disclaimer:
I do not think anyone need to work hard to keep degradation low. You’ll be fine anyway.
I’m interrested, partly because of a hobby where I use different lithium batterys and started reading, when I ordered the M3 I started reading research reports again about li ion in general and NCA in particular.
I decided to use my knowledge to keep the degradation down, mostly for fun and not to the extent that It impact the fun part of having a Tesla.

@ Ro_explorer: you might be able to get less degradation and a clearly higher NFP when you get your wall connector.

 

[Jejunjm]

You dont need to worry. You’ll be fine.

You dont have the possibility for daily charging? Charge more often with smaller discharged each time is better.
Also, having the car stand at lower average SOC during ”time” is also better.

I have the 82kWh battery( E3LD) 22000km, nine months and the range still shows the 507km( EPA-range) as day one and the NFP is the same( 80.7kWh) as the same day I connected SMT two days after delivery.

I charge daily, in the last part of the night.
I use a lower charging scedule then most other( 55-57% daily).

That's great. I charge generally to 60% or 70 daily (240v 27 amp) with a few charges to 90 and one to 99 (immediately drove away) maybe 3 DC charges. My NFP at 5k miles is down to 78.2 (was 80.1 in July). Any thoughts?

Edit: I live in Arizona. It routinely gets to 115F... In retrospect an lfp battery would have been fine

 

[AAKEE]

That's great. I charge generally to 60% or 70 daily (240v 27 amp) with a few charges to 90 and one to 99 (immediately drove away) maybe 3 DC charges. My NFP at 5k miles is down to 78.2 (was 80.1 in July). Any thoughts?

Edit: I live in Arizona. It routinely gets to 115F... In retrospect an lfp battery would have been fine

That charging scedule seem ok. No problems in the long run.

The part beneath is on the nerd level:
If you like to lessen the degradation from time and if you do not need more than 60% daily or maybe 55% thats better for the battery.
The combination of high ambient temps and high SOC wear more on the battery.
115F is high enough to cause more wear than 60 or 70F. It maybe is possible to use a lower SOC during the hit season?
Also set the charging schedule so the charging is done just in time before going to work etc, or at least let it charge on the morning side of the night as there probably is no need for a completed charge during the night?

This is a chart over degradation from time on a Panasonic NCA cell. The difference from ambient can be seen. 50C is 122F.
The bend at about 57% SOC is present in a lot of research reports. Staying below that for times when the car isnt used minimize the battery degradstion.

 

[conv90]

That's great. I charge generally to 60% or 70 daily (240v 27 amp) with a few charges to 90 and one to 99 (immediately drove away) maybe 3 DC charges. My NFP at 5k miles is down to 78.2 (was 80.1 in July). Any thoughts?

Edit: I live in Arizona. It routinely gets to 115F... In retrospect an lfp battery would have been fine

It's a 2021 Performance model?

 

[Jejunjm]

It's a 2021 Performance model?

Nope, 2021 LR.

115F is high enough to cause more wear than 60 or 70F. It maybe is possible to use a lower SOC during the hit season?
Also set the charging schedule so the charging is done just in time before going to work etc, or at least let it charge on the morning side of the night as there probably is no need for a completed charge during the night?

I use a scheduled departure so generally it doesn't sit at 60 or 70 long. I felt nervous about 55 since occasionally I'll use 25% in a day

 

[AAKEE]

Nope, 2021 LR.


I use a scheduled departure so generally it doesn't sit at 60 or 70 long. I felt nervous about 55 since occasionally I'll use 25% in a day

Sound good.

The li ion bsttery is not sensitive to low SOC. Tesla says charge duecto low SOC if youre under 20 or 10%, but their consern is the 12V lead batteri, which is sensitive to low SOC. As long as you dont run out of juice in the big battery, it isnt a problem.
But of course, do not draw the nerd line so you cannot use the car because of to low SOC when coming home from work etc.

 

[philly4]

I've read through a LOT of battery threads and learned a ton here. Thanks to everyone here. I'm sure I missed it, but after a bunch of searching I can't distill down the answer to a few battery questions for the Model 3 LR I'm picking up in a few days...although Ive read a lot about it.

These are all about the USA Model 3 LR (Panasonic...I think?):

1. The EPA estimates for the 2021 Model 3 LR is 353. Is that number based on the 78 kwh battery or the 82 kwh battery. From what I've read it seems like it's the 78 kwh battery. Why hasn't the EPA estimate been updated with the larger battery? Seems like Tesla would want that?

2. Is the 78 kwh battery and the 82 kwh battery synonymous with 2170C and 2170L respectively? From the context of what I've read it sometimes feels they are and sometimes it reads like they are not. Was there a 82 kwh 2170C?

3. I've read quite a bit about the 82 kwh battery potentially being (expected or estimated) rated to 370 EPA miles...is the best info we have that Tesla has (so far) software locked the cars coming off the production line now to a lower capacity? Or do they have an increase in their capacity now?

4. Am I making this more confusing than it should be?

Thanks for the knowledge!

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

The EPA estimates for the 2021 Model 3 LR is 353. Is that number based on the 78 kwh battery or the 82 kwh battery. From what I've read it seems like it's the 78 kwh battery.

It’s based off the 78kWh battery.

Why hasn't the EPA estimate been updated with the larger battery? Seems like Tesla would want that?

If they cannot build enough cars to meet demand there’s no reason to throw away that demand lever. I think we’ll see a change for 2022 model year. Maybe.

Was there a 82 kwh 2170C?

Not AFAIK.

is the best info we have that Tesla has (so far) software locked the cars coming off the production line now to a lower capacity? Or do they have an increase in their capacity now?

They definitely have more capacity now, but the details are subject to some (very minor) debate.
1) The 2170L (“82.1kWh”) cars certainly have more capacity than the older 2170C (77.8kWh) vehicles. They routinely have 79-80kWh when new, which is higher than the earlier vehicles. The Performance have shown capacities approaching 82kWh.
2) What’s less clear is whether there is any more capacity available to be “unlocked” - would it be possible to pull more than 81kWh from these packs? It has been on Performance (on occasion). But is there some sort of small limitation on LR? Less clear.

But anyway the easiest way to think about it is you have more energy for a 2170L pack (at least 79-80kWh, maybe as high as 81kWh) than was drawn from the test vehicle during the EPA test of the 2021 LR (78.6kWh). The 2021 Performance drew nearly 81kWh in its test (because it had 2170L from the beginning).

I expect at some point the 2022 LR will be tested (possibly already done), and it will show about 80-81kWh of capacity, and that will be reflected in increased range, even if there is no efficiency improvement. But this should be the same/similar energy already available on recently built 2021 vehicles. So it won’t actually change the real range unless there are other efficiency changes in the vehicle (which there might be).

 

[panpan1]

So is it confirmed that all newly built U.S. LR Model 3s have the additional capacity? There was some debate on this.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

So is it confirmed that all newly built U.S. LR Model 3s have the additional capacity? There was some debate on this.

Confirmed is a strong term. But you can check this thread about this (labels, etc.). And I believe all recent SMT read backs on US LR vehicles have shown 82.1kWh "FPWN" values. And: I haven't seen an example showing otherwise. So that's my conclusion - 82.1kWh for everyone.

Is it guaranteed? Not sure. Any new owner can & should (relatively) easily check the label as detailed earlier in this thread and determine which pack they have prior to taking delivery - do your own due diligence if this is very important to your purchase decision. @eivissa may have comments on other methods US owners could use (I don't keep track of all the VIN coding, etc.).

If I were buying an LR (in the US) I'd be confident I was getting the 82.1kWh battery but I'd confirm it before taking delivery.

 

[gord99999]

Hi all, some great info on here. I’m a relative newbie to M3 ownership, I have 2021 Long Range in white. Had it 3 1/2 weeks and done 1067 miles at an average 211Wh/mi.
I have been charging to 80 to 85% of 360 but should I calculate the SoC on my actual max. range, I’ve never seen it above 342? I bought the car 4 months ol.
I have used a combination of granny charger, home 7.5kW unit and ‘fast’ 50kW at local Asda. Is it best to mix the rate of charging up?
Thanks

 

[RVAC]

What’s less clear is whether there is any more capacity available to be “unlocked” - would it be possible to pull more than 81kWh from these packs? It has been on Performance (on occasion). But is there some sort of small limitation on LR? Less clear.

My guess is they sort the packs depending on capacity, those that come out higher go into Performance models the rest go into LR's.

 

[philly4]

It’s based off the 78kWh battery.

If they cannot build enough cars to meet demand there’s no reason to throw away that demand lever. I think we’ll see a change for 2022 model year. Maybe.

Not AFAIK.

They definitely have more capacity now, but the details are subject to some (very minor) debate.
1) The 2170L (“82.1kWh”) cars certainly have more capacity than the older 2170C (77.8kWh) vehicles. They routinely have 79-80kWh when new, which is higher than the earlier vehicles. The Performance have shown capacities approaching 82kWh.
2) What’s less clear is whether there is any more capacity available to be “unlocked” - would it be possible to pull more than 81kWh from these packs? It has been on Performance (on occasion). But is there some sort of small limitation on LR? Less clear.

But anyway the easiest way to think about it is you have more energy for a 2170L pack (at least 79-80kWh, maybe as high as 81kWh) than was drawn from the test vehicle during the EPA test of the 2021 LR (78.6kWh). The 2021 Performance drew nearly 81kWh in its test (because it had 2170L from the beginning).

I expect at some point the 2022 LR will be tested (possibly already done), and it will show about 80-81kWh of capacity, and that will be reflected in increased range, even if there is no efficiency improvement. But this should be the same/similar energy already available on recently built 2021 vehicles. So it won’t actually change the real range unless there are other efficiency changes in the vehicle (which there might be).

Good info! Thanks.

 

[miss demeanor]

Is this bad efficiency to be at 80%? I gunned it a few times to merge into traffic:

Is it normal for my High Range mileage to be 280 after 3 years and 24k miles on my M3 LR AWD? That seems really low.

 

[Soul Surfer]

Heyo Teslati,

I have a 21 M3LRAWD on order. I believe it has a 75 KWa/h battery. I read about an 82 Kwa.h battery. Is the 83 on the Performance model and the SR= has 60? Thank you all.

 

[AAKEE]

Is this bad efficiency to be at 80%? I gunned it a few times to merge into traffic:

Low efficiency = you did have fun -> Not bad.
High efficiencyyou did’nt have that fun -> Not that good