-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
garsh
Re Member
The Leaf can do it, and the Model 3 is roughly Leaf-sized with much better aerodynamics. It shouldn't be a problem with the base 2wd sedan with LRR tires.
voip-ninja
Give me some sugar baby
You have to remember that Tesla quotes range under the most favorable conditions. Such as 55mph on the highway. Basically you should take Tesla's quoted range and multiply by .85 since for battery longevity you won't want to top the battery off normally. Then take that remaining number and multiply by .8 if you cruise the highway at 70-80 mph.
So on a battery longevity charge, driving on a fast highway the 215 mile range of the base Model 3 becomes about 150 miles and that's when the battery is new. As the battery ages that range will degrade.
For urban commuters and errand runners the base model battery pack is probably adequate, I do expect though that the majority of these cars will spring for the battery pack upgrade if Tesla prices it reasonably.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
I think that was true in the Roadster days but now the EPA is used. I have wondered though if Tesla is only quoting the anticipated highway component. It would make sense to me since that is where range is important.
As for battery longevity: the suggestion to not charge to 100% to extend life has merit on a daily basis but should not be a problem for occasional use.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
voip-ninja
Give me some sugar baby
It has been a while since I used the configurator at the nearby Tesla retail location but when I last did they had a range slider where you could simulate highway speed vs anticipated range. Increasing the speed past 60mph or so had a pretty noticeable affect on the range.
Supercharging and charging the battery to 100% are both hard on the battery and should be done sparingly if possible.
Those who are biting their nails about 215 miles being "enough" for their uses should just plan on spending the money for the bigger battery pack, because in real world usage it is highly unlikely you will get the full range.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Oh, for sure, although if the Model3 manages a Cd of 0.21 we should get a nice speed bump compared to the Model S for the same aero friction, somewhere in the range of 7%. A smaller frontal area will improve things even more. If say, 10% less frontal area then combined there will be an 11% speed difference. 60 mph in a Model 'S' vs 66ish mph in a Model 3 for equivalent aero forces.
Last edited:
Base: 353
Upgrade: 383
'cause they sound the coolest. I'm also hoping the front and rear motors are rated at 204.5 HP. That way my car will be a 383 with 409 (it may be possible my muscle car roots are showing).
Upgrade: 383
'cause they sound the coolest. I'm also hoping the front and rear motors are rated at 204.5 HP. That way my car will be a 383 with 409 (it may be possible my muscle car roots are showing).
glhs272
Unnamed plug faced villian
I am a bit concerned with a <60kwh pack. In winter, heating loads really do eat up a lot of energy. Reducing the drag coefficient does nothing to help this. This will not be a practical winter car, unless Tesla has come up with some kind of magic heating system that doesn't use much energy. Perhaps they will finally go with a heat pump for heating.
Still this news is bad to my ears. A lot of people will be buying or counting on buying the base model battery. If that doesn't work in the northern half of the country then we are going to see poor resale values of the 3 as people realize this car won't work for them. And perhaps a lot of angry owners who didn't realize what they were getting into. As a Model S 60 owner, it's a battery size that's just too small and I recommend it to no one unless they really know what they are getting into. In the summer it's "OK". But with the current supercharger spacing strategy, a 60 is a really poor performer in the winter. Most of the time I need to do a nearly full charge to get to the next charger. That's an hour or longer process. That will really kill a lot of electric car enthusiasm. The great thing about the 70D is that it gets much closer to the original 85 with just a bit more battery and improved efficiency over the 60. I understand that the Model 3 will be better efficiency than the S, which is why I was really hoping for a 60kwh battery. Then it would behave much like a Model S 70.
Still this news is bad to my ears. A lot of people will be buying or counting on buying the base model battery. If that doesn't work in the northern half of the country then we are going to see poor resale values of the 3 as people realize this car won't work for them. And perhaps a lot of angry owners who didn't realize what they were getting into. As a Model S 60 owner, it's a battery size that's just too small and I recommend it to no one unless they really know what they are getting into. In the summer it's "OK". But with the current supercharger spacing strategy, a 60 is a really poor performer in the winter. Most of the time I need to do a nearly full charge to get to the next charger. That's an hour or longer process. That will really kill a lot of electric car enthusiasm. The great thing about the 70D is that it gets much closer to the original 85 with just a bit more battery and improved efficiency over the 60. I understand that the Model 3 will be better efficiency than the S, which is why I was really hoping for a 60kwh battery. Then it would behave much like a Model S 70.
I'm pretty sure that Elon said that the range would be at least 215 EPA rated miles. Which is not under the most favorable conditions.
voip-ninja
Give me some sugar baby
This is still a very practical car for the majority of those commuting in the winter. The average commute is about 40 miles round trip and this car will have range to spare even if driven in a sub-zero temperature blizzard.
Will this be a great car for frozen winter road trips? Probably not, but most of us have alternate transportation burning evil fossils for those kinds of situations.
One thing that will slightly assist with winter range is programming the car to heat up the cabin and warm up the seats before you ever disconnect from your home charger. Once you are on the road you can back off on the climate control substantially and basically "coast" on built up cabin heat for at least 20 minutes before the car really starts to feel chilly.
Don not worry, it is still hidden, nobody found out
Please just forget the kWh rating of the battery, and look just at the range figure. Model 3 55 with "at least 215 EPA miles" will give you more range then a Model S 60 with "208 EPA miles".
And, just as with Model S, Model 3 buyers will have to check out the range of the car to see if it fits the job it is intended to do. But you have a good point that the buyers have to be educated about that winter-range < summer-/EPA-range. I do not need 200+ EPA miles range, but I need to do about 120 miles - even at wintertime, and with some buffer, so I think 215 EPA miles wold be perfect. But more is even better
glhs272
Unnamed plug faced villian
No disagreement on coping strategies. However, most folks I talk to that have a Model 3 on order have no idea what they are in for should they have to go through these great lengths to get somewhere far in the winter. A lot of them are coming from a Prius. None of them are expecting to have to keep a spare ICE car for when they want to travel afar. Hour long waits at the supercharger, planning preheats, driving with a cold cabin, driving slow. All of these things are going to come up as a nasty surprise. Most of them will not heed my warning to disregard the base model battery pack and go straight to the full sized pack.
As far as I am concerned, this is all by choice for Tesla. Assuming they are building the battery system much they way the Model S is, where the larger pack is determined by the limits of footprint size and cell technology. The lower base model pack size will be entirely by Tesla's choosing. It will simply be a derivative of the larger pack where Tesla chooses how many cells or modules to remove. I am suggesting Tesla is making a mistake by making a Model 3 base pack too skimpy on capacity.
As long as the base model 3 can perform with the relative capability of a Model S 70 or Model X 75D, I think it will be OK. But I don't think a <60kwh pack will do that.
glhs272
Unnamed plug faced villian
This is my concern, that people will look at it this way. I think that is exactly the opposite of how we should be viewing this. The EPA range is almost irrelevant in that it doesn't take into account winter heating.
Perhaps I am not explaining my concern very well. So let me give this exaggerated example:
So car brand X can go 200miles. Car brand Y can also go 200 miles. Car brand X has super good drag coefficient. So it can get 200 miles of range with a tiny 10kwh battery (this is an exaggeration just to illustrate my point). Car brand Y has not such a good drag coefficent. To cope with that, they threw in a 100kwh battery to make it go 200 miles. This works great for both car brands in the summer, when the EPA gives them their ratings. Now comes winter. Both cars have the same size cabins to heat. Both cars are sitting in the same cold temperatures. The laws of thermodynamics are such that it will take X amount of energy to heat the air up (ΔT). So, it will take 5kwh of energy to heat up 10° air to 70° for 1 hour (not actual energies, just to illustrate a point). Both cars will have to put in the same amount of energy to heat that air. So if it takes 5kwh of energy for either car, brand X car will have 10kwh-5kwh=5kwh of energy to actually go somewhere. That would be a 50% range hit. For car brand Y, they have 100kwh-5kwh=95kwh of energy to actually go somewhere. That would only be 5% hit in range.
So a Bolt with a 60kwh battery is going to perform much better in the winter than a Model 3 with only a 50kwh battery.
Yes, you have some good points here. But remember to factor in that the Model 3 with better aerodynamic will be less affected with the heavier air-resistance in the cold, witch is one of the reasons that you use more energy in the winter then in the summer. (Snow/ice and/or water (summer and winter) on the road is an another, and then is an headwind...) And the cure for this is just the same as it is with Model S (and probably with the Bolt): Preheat the car while plugged in before you leave - and if possible charge the battery to heat that too... It uses less energy to keep the temperature steady then to heat the car - if Tesla will just fix the problem they created with the v7.0...
But yes, Tesla need to ensure that the customers will be educated about this before they order the car. So they know what the limitations is and can make a better decision about what battery size they need. (But most will probably think Tesla is trying to make them order the more costly option anyway
)
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Very good point, and it will be true for any bump in the 'fixed' costs of summer driving. More road resistance from water and snow, for example.
This is why, by the way, that the only 'gotta have' option for me is the winter package.
Two thoughts:
- The times you're using the full battery capacity, using 150+ mi range, is during longer trips, when you're traveling faster on the highway and the Cd means a lot for range. Here the Model 3 has a real advantage, as was mentioned above.
- The difference in heating efficiency needs to be considered. The Bolt EV will likely only have a resistive heater, while the Model 3 may have a more efficient system similar to the S.
What more efficient heating system does the Model S have? I thought it had two resistive heaters, one for the cabin and another for the battery. (Excess battery/drive train heat is not piped in to the cabin.)
I was under the impression that the Model S had both a resistive heater and a heat transfer loop that harvests heat from the motor and electronics. If it just has a resistive heater, then my second point is invalid.
Edit: ...and a quick search confirms my error. Model S cabin heat is resistive only. Model 3 and Bolt EV will likely have similar heating efficiency.
Last edited:
..assuming the Model 3 uses the same heating system as the S and X, of course. But if they go to a heat pump with resistive backup, there could be a much more efficient heating system at the cost of more parts and weight. How about this for speculation - subzero package for Model 3 will include a heat pump, for colder climes. For warmer areas, it'll remain resistance heat only.
Last edited:
Similar threads
