Watt hours per mile to attain projected range

[dweeks]

I'm getting a 2023 Model 3 LR to replace my 2017 Model S.

In the S, the magic watt hours/mile number to get the projected range was 306. If you drove to get 306 watt hours per mile, you'd make the range projection.

What's the equivalent number for the 2023 Model 3 Long Range?

 

[Sophias_dad]

If we assume the given 333 mile range and an 82.1kwh battery, that's 246wh/mile.

 

[jjrandorin]

I'm getting a 2023 Model 3 LR to replace my 2017 Model S.

In the S, the magic watt hours/mile number to get the projected range was 306. If you drove to get 306 watt hours per mile, you'd make the range projection.

What's the equivalent number for the 2023 Model 3 Long Range?

@AlanSubie4Life has the range constants (the number are looking for to hit rated range). I think its what @Sophias_dad posted, or very close to that, but tagging him to see.

 

[KenBlub]

I bought my LR in August. It has the LG 78.8 battery. Does that change the calculation?

 

[E90alex]

If we assume the given 333 mile range and an 82.1kwh battery, that's 246wh/mile.

333 mile range version does not have 82.1 kWh battery. It has a ~78 kWh LG battery.

 

[Sophias_dad]

I bought my LR in August. It has the LG 78.8 battery. Does that change the calculation?

Sure, a little. 78800/333 is 238 wh/mile.

 

[dweeks]

If we assume the given 333 mile range and an 82.1kwh battery, that's 246wh/mile.

Thanks!!

 

[E90alex]

Sure, a little. 78800/333 is 238 wh/mile.

Usable capacity is less so probably about 75.5 kWh. Giving approx 225 Wh/mi.

That will be very difficult to achieve unless you never use HVAC and don’t drive faster than like 45mph.

 

[dweeks]

Usable capacity is less so probably about 75.5 kWh. Giving approx 225 Wh/mi.

That will be very difficult to achieve unless you never use HVAC and don’t drive faster than like 45mph.

I was able to do the magic 306 wh/mi number on my 2017 Model S without too much trouble.

 

[jjrandorin]

I was able to do the magic 306 wh/mi number on my 2017 Model S without too much trouble.

If you are able to regularly drive in the way required to hit EPA range in a model 3, you will be one of the very (very very very) few I have seen post they can do that, compared with the at least 2 posts every day since I have been here (late nov 2018) with some variation of "not getting range!"

 

[Max Spaghetti]

If I may ask a question: it is my understanding that the trip meter Wh/mi (or Wh/km in my case) is only driving consumption, and excludes other parasitic consumption such as HVAC, correct? So even achieving the magic consumption still won't achieve the rated range?

 

[KenBlub]

If you are able to regularly drive in the way required to hit EPA range in a model 3, you will be one of the very (very very very) few I have seen post they can do that, compared with the at least 2 posts every day since I have been here (late nov 2018) with some variation of "not getting range!"

I am a grandpa and drive like one going the speed limit +4. My 60 mile drive is basically 30m highway and 30m country roads. My lifetime Wh/mi is 229 in my LR. Maybe I’ll get put on Tesla’s witness list . TBH I went on a road trip with my son and he wanted to drive. His efficiency was certainly worse than mine.

 

[gtg465x]

If I may ask a question: it is my understanding that the trip meter Wh/mi (or Wh/km in my case) is only driving consumption, and excludes other parasitic consumption such as HVAC, correct? So even achieving the magic consumption still won't achieve the rated range?

No, it includes all consumption while driving, including HVAC, but it doesn’t include drain while you’re in park. So if you do it all in one drive, or at least within a day or two and don’t have Sentry or cabin overheat protection on, you’ll make the range if you hit the magic number.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

What's the equivalent number for the 2023 Model 3 Long Range?

@AlanSubie4Life has the range constants (the number are looking for to hit rated range).

I don’t remember a posting of the energy screen for this vehicle version yet, so it is a little hard to say.

And I have not seen EPA numbers yet either for this vehicle (have not looked recently).

There is some ongoing confusion about why the range is so low relative to the one with Panasonic pack - the energy reduction alone from 82kWh to 78.8kWh does not explain it. It probably also did worse on five-cycle testing and got a reduced scalar.

Based on the numbers above, as various people said, using roughly 78kWh (this may be high; the pack is 78.8kWh but degradation threshold is the determinant here!):
78kWh/333mi = 234Wh/mi
(Energy screen line would be at 239Wh/mi)
But that will not do it, for displayed miles. Have to reduce that number by 4.5%:
224Wh/mi

For mile for mile rolloff. These are likely NOT exactly correct numbers, pretty close though. We need data from a real car, preferably brand new, and then can determine actual numbers.

 

[KenBlub]

I have a LR 78.8 pack in mine BOT in September. If you tell me what you need I’ll post it. My lifetime Wh/mi is 230 after 4700 miles or so. I do have a picture of my Wh/mi x range / SOC screen.

 

[KenBlub]

Here is a copy of my EPA sticker from my car if this helps

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I have a LR 78.8 pack in mine BOT in September. If you tell me what you need I’ll post it. My lifetime Wh/mi is 230 after 4700 miles or so. I do have a picture of my Wh/mi x range / SOC screen.

Two pics.

Energy screen with two numbers (proj range, recent efficiency) in average mode, also capturing rated range display ( upper left mid screen). Three numbers total.

Same in percentage mode.

Do at above 70-80%.

See sticky for example.

Might be too late if you no longer show max, but we’ll see.

Can still answer orig question.

I feel like may have already got this at some point…

We got some info…

So 223.5Wh/mi will give mile-for-mile rolloff. 234Wh/mi constant.

Battery Degradation question

 

[KenBlub]

Here are 2 photos. Sorry not to 70%. Hope these help. I have followed the low SOC advice and the car has only been charged over 50% twice. Right now my daily drive is under 15 miles. Temperature is 35F

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Here are 2 photos. Sorry not to 70%. Hope these help. I have followed the low SOC advice and the car has only been charged over 50% twice. Right now my daily drive is under 15 miles. Temperature is 35F

Extrapolates slightly higher to 78.9kWh than the above link.

But could be extrapolation error.

Basically 224Wh/mi (234/235Wh/mi constant) for mile-for-mile rolloff).

 

[Kimmi]

Can someone with more knowledge than me tell what size battery my 2021 Model 3 has from these two photos and amount of degradation it has suffered? Three years old with 29,500 miles. The Monroney sticker showed 353 range, 134 MPGe and 25kW-hr per