Model 3 LR RWD bumped to 325mi

  • Greetings! Model 3 Owners Club is expanding! Our new name is Tesla Global Owners Club. Content remains unaffected, just a new logo, name and new domain. You'll just have to login to your existing account and carry on as before. Thank-you for your continued support! Read more here

fsKotte

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
241
Location
Walnut Creek, CA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
If your range really increases(which I doubt), from 310 to 325 using the same amount of electricity, I figure you're saving about 40c. Is that really worth all this angst? If you can make your round trip back to home, or make it to the next SC, why does it matter? This dead horse has been mangled. Let's move on.
Not sure what you’re talking about. Most threads on most forums (esp around these parts) feature dead, mangled horses, being repeatedly beaten. I see no reason to stop ruminating over this dead horse, versus all the others.
 

fsKotte

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
241
Location
Walnut Creek, CA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
According to the recent electrek article, there are efficiency improvements: https://electrek.co/2019/03/13/tesla-model-3-range-increase-software-update/
Welll . . . . . Maybe. Even the Electrek.co author of this article is skeptical, and he essentially has the same suspicion many of us have - that the range was always there, since the EPA rated it at 335, so they're just now expanding the range as-is, to 325. Big Quote from the article:

"I am skeptical of this being about Tesla finding more efficiencies or simply deciding to advertise the higher range on the Long Range RWD Model 3 now that they are selling even less expensive versions."
 

slasher016

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Messages
279
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
Welll . . . . . Maybe. Even the Electrek.co author of this article is skeptical, and he essentially has the same suspicion many of us have - that the range was always there, since the EPA rated it at 335, so they're just now expanding the range as-is, to 325. Big Quote from the article:

"I am skeptical of this being about Tesla finding more efficiencies or simply deciding to advertise the higher range on the Long Range RWD Model 3 now that they are selling even less expensive versions."
Agreed, but why make the comment that you found efficiencies if you didn't? Musk makes bad choices as time but I'm not sure we've ever seen him intentionally mislead.
 

fsKotte

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
241
Location
Walnut Creek, CA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
Agreed, but why make the comment that you found efficiencies if you didn't? Musk makes bad choices as time but I'm not sure we've ever seen him intentionally mislead.
I get it that Elon's intentions are good, but he has exhibited reckless disregard for truth in the past. Just ask the SEC, esp. regarding the whole "going private" fiasco . . . . . "funding secured" Elon said . . . . . but nope, not actually the case. If anybody should have known if "funding" was truly "secured," it would have been Elon. So, there is at least an Exhibit A to support the contention that Elon is at the very least capable of negligently misrepresenting stuff, even with the best of intentions.

Look, I love my car, and I have immense respect for what Elon/Tesla has done and is doing. So I hope you're right, that it's a true range gain. I have a LR RWD, my rated range at 100% went up by just around 10 miles (to 320, not an inch more for some reason - maybe I lost the other 5 miles to battery degradation after 11,500 miles), and I'd love to think it's a real range gain.

But in the end, without more detail, I don't think we'll really know for sure.

All things being equal, I think it's fair to think about and view this claim critically. Can't hurt to want real proof of a real range gain.

In the meantime, I sprung for the $2k AP deal and I'm continuing to love driving/riding in this car, every second I'm in it. . . . .
 
Last edited:

Bokonon

Self-identified Teslaholic
Moderator
M3OC Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
2,631
Location
Boston
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
Technically-minded readers may find this post in the CAN bus thread interesting and relevant to this discussion.

TL;DR/English translation -- @fast_like_electric examined his car's internal drivetrain/battery data before and after updating to 2019.5.15, and found no change in usable battery capacity or power output. The app and screen did change, however, and displayed an additional 11 miles available at 81%. Conclusion:

So it is pretty clear that 5.15 does not dip into the battery more to get more range. Still unknown if some unnecessary load is being turned off for better efficiency, or if this is just a rescale of the displayed mileage estimate vs. % charge.
 

Nautilus

Well-Known Member
M3OC Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2018
Messages
233
Location
Indiana
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
Aero or Sport wheels?
@ummgood, I'm the one who agreed with FF35, I can't speak for him, but I have June-2018 build LR RWD with 18" wheels. I only have the Aero covers on for long road trips (2 so far), not for daily use. Here is my Battery "degradation" (gradation? undegradation?) chart from TeslaFi. You can see the jump in reported range after I received 2019.5.15 around 4300 miles last week:
1552576100620.png 1552576100620.png
 

ummgood

Top-Contributor
Joined
Feb 13, 2017
Messages
931
Location
Austin
Country
Country
@ummgood, I'm the one who agreed with FF35, I can't speak for him, but I have June-2018 build LR RWD with 18" wheels. I only have the Aero covers on for long road trips (2 so far), not for daily use. Here is my Battery "degradation" (gradation? undegradation?) chart from TeslaFi. You can see the jump in reported range after I received 2019.5.15 around 4300 miles last week:
View attachment 23242 View attachment 23242
Thanks that's a cool chart. Part of me wants to sign up for TeslaFi but I just can't get myself to pay for it.
 

fsKotte

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
241
Location
Walnut Creek, CA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
@ummgood, I'm the one who agreed with FF35, I can't speak for him, but I have June-2018 build LR RWD with 18" wheels. I only have the Aero covers on for long road trips (2 so far), not for daily use. Here is my Battery "degradation" (gradation? undegradation?) chart from TeslaFi. You can see the jump in reported range after I received 2019.5.15 around 4300 miles last week:
View attachment 23242 View attachment 23242
Interesting chart. I have opted to use Stats for reporting out my Mod 3 info. At 11,500 miles, Stats shows the same type of jump at the moment I upgraded, but mine jumped only to 320, and ever since, the spot-measurements show 318-320. Never 325, or even 321. Mine is a late April 2018 build LR RWD, 18" wheels, mostly with aeros off (though as we've determined, the car doesn't know if the aeros are on or off, so caps on/off can't affect the car's calculation of rated range).

My guess is that I may be looking at some slight battery degradation - around 5 miles of range. 5/325 = 1.54% degradation after almost 12,000 miles. I find that acceptable and quite good, actually.

As I think Teslafi does, the Stats app extrapolates your total range, without one having to actually charge to 100%. Since it does this at least once a day, you end up with quite a few data points after awhile. That said, since I'm going on a long-ish trip tomorrow, I'm planning on charging to actual 100% at some point tomorrow. Will post what I get . . . .
 

ummgood

Top-Contributor
Joined
Feb 13, 2017
Messages
931
Location
Austin
Country
Country
My guess is that I may be looking at some slight battery degradation - around 5 miles of range. 5/325 = 1.54% degradation after almost 12,000 miles. I find that acceptable and quite good, actually.
What's weird for me is my car is 316-317 when charged full. My car is 1 year old (Mar 2018) and has 12k miles. Another person I know with a very early car (Aug 2017) also has 316 but has 31k miles. So if it is battery degradation why would mine have the same as someone with 30k miles? It's strange. I haven't been abusing my battery pack. I used to only charge it to 80% every day until this year because I saw where Elon recommended 90% all the time and that is when I changed my behavior.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2019
Messages
5
Location
Santa Ana, CA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
When the LR RWD car was first tested by the EPA in the U.S. it was given a range rating higher than 310 miles. Tesla lowered it to keep the AWD cars attractive (that’s my speculation on motive, but Tesla did lower the range) and are now being more open about it’s true range.
That is a plausible explanation. So if we continue along these lines of thought, it might also have something to do with new competition coming out who are claiming 300 plus range. Just a thought.
 

fsKotte

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
241
Location
Walnut Creek, CA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
What's weird for me is my car is 316-317 when charged full. My car is 1 year old (Mar 2018) and has 12k miles. Another person I know with a very early car (Aug 2017) also has 316 but has 31k miles. So if it is battery degradation why would mine have the same as someone with 30k miles? It's strange. I haven't been abusing my battery pack. I used to only charge it to 80% every day until this year because I saw where Elon recommended 90% all the time and that is when I changed my behavior.
I was sort of the same - actually for the first 6k miles I charged just to 70%, which actually skewed my Rated Range estimate way down (to about 287 at its lowest, at extrapolated 100% SOC). When I too saw Elon's 90% recommendation, within a week of doing so my 100% SOC extrapolate went right back up to 310.

I can't explain why yours at 12k miles is 316, and someone else at 31k miles also has 316 (or why mine at 11.5k is at 318-320). That is odd. I wonder how much of it might just be "natural" variation between mass-produced batteries? That's just a thought, speculation really. It's all I can think of.
 

fsKotte

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
241
Location
Walnut Creek, CA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
That is a plausible explanation. So if we continue along these lines of thought, it might also have something to do with new competition coming out who are claiming 300 plus range. Just a thought.
Yes, I agree - plausible explanation. It may also explain why so many, under the 310-mile range regime, were reporting "no degradation" after even 20,000 miles and touting that they still showed 310 miles at 100% SOC. Basically, since the real range was 325, then the car/battery has 15 miles of degradation to give, before starting to go under 310.

But now, since they re-jiggered the range to 325, much closer to the EPA estimate and no doubt closer to the real maximum, folks such as myself, who used to always top out at 310, are getting 318-320; five to seven miles less than the 325 range touted with the update.

My theory is that, because they're now giving a range that's a bit closer to the bone, there's no miles/range to give, so that any battery degradation is going to now show up, as something less than the 325.
 

fsKotte

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
241
Location
Walnut Creek, CA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
What's weird for me is my car is 316-317 when charged full. My car is 1 year old (Mar 2018) and has 12k miles. Another person I know with a very early car (Aug 2017) also has 316 but has 31k miles. So if it is battery degradation why would mine have the same as someone with 30k miles? It's strange. I haven't been abusing my battery pack. I used to only charge it to 80% every day until this year because I saw where Elon recommended 90% all the time and that is when I changed my behavior.
I just thought of another explanation as to why your car at 12k miles has similar 100% SOC range (316) as someone with 31k (and also why both are below the newly stated max range of 325).

Basically, it's this: Conventional wisdom on the Model S/X forums is that there is a steeper degradation over the first "year" of the car, and then it flattens out. I think there's some articles about this as well, no time to find them right now but if pressed I could probably dig something up off the internets. I think that Ben Sullins guy did something on battery degradation that showed an initial steep drop-off of about 5%, followed by then a much flatter/slower degradation after that.

So . . . . Perhaps your drop to 316-ish at 12k miles is what the other guy who's at 31k miles experienced also at 12k miles, but didn't know it, since back then the stated range was 310. In other words, you (and me) at around 12k miles are at some point (hopefully near the end) of the initial steeper drop-off in degradation, such that for the next 15-20k miles we might see little additional degradation and/or change to our rated range at 100% SOC.

Just a theory, but I do know there is some amount of info/data out there that shows that, at least for S/X models, the degradation drops off more steeply for the first "year", and then significantly slows after that.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2019
Messages
5
Location
Santa Ana, CA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
Yes, I agree - plausible explanation. It may also explain why so many, under the 310-mile range regime, were reporting "no degradation" after even 20,000 miles and touting that they still showed 310 miles at 100% SOC. Basically, since the real range was 325, then the car/battery has 15 miles of degradation to give, before starting to go under 310.

But now, since they re-jiggered the range to 325, much closer to the EPA estimate and no doubt closer to the real maximum, folks such as myself, who used to always top out at 310, are getting 318-320; five to seven miles less than the 325 range touted with the update.

My theory is that, because they're now giving a range that's a bit closer to the bone, there's no miles/range to give, so that any battery degradation is going to now show up, as something less than the 325.
Walking a tightrope; show better mileage but reveal degradation vs. just better mileage. I'd probably vote for the latter if i was Tesla - Not that any of this means much to me with an AWD anyway.
 

fsKotte

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
241
Location
Walnut Creek, CA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
Walking a tightrope; show better mileage but reveal degradation vs. just better mileage. I'd probably vote for the latter if i was Tesla - Not that any of this means much to me with an AWD anyway.
I'm ok with the unlocking/revealing the true range, even if it means I can start to see a touch of degradation. It's batteries; they're gonna degrade. It's what they do, over time and with use/cycles. I'd rather have the more accurate range indication than an artificially low one anyway.
 

fsKotte

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
241
Location
Walnut Creek, CA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
I just thought of another explanation as to why your car at 12k miles has similar 100% SOC range (316) as someone with 31k (and also why both are below the newly stated max range of 325).

Basically, it's this: Conventional wisdom on the Model S/X forums is that there is a steeper degradation over the first "year" of the car, and then it flattens out. I think there's some articles about this as well, no time to find them right now but if pressed I could probably dig something up off the internets. I think that Ben Sullins guy did something on battery degradation that showed an initial steep drop-off of about 5%, followed by then a much flatter/slower degradation after that.

So . . . . Perhaps your drop to 316-ish at 12k miles is what the other guy who's at 31k miles experienced also at 12k miles, but didn't know it, since back then the stated range was 310. In other words, you (and me) at around 12k miles are at some point (hopefully near the end) of the initial steeper drop-off in degradation, such that for the next 15-20k miles we might see little additional degradation and/or change to our rated range at 100% SOC.

Just a theory, but I do know there is some amount of info/data out there that shows that, at least for S/X models, the degradation drops off more steeply for the first "year", and then significantly slows after that.
@ummgood, Here's one of the articles I was thinking about:

https://electrek.co/2018/04/14/tesla-battery-degradation-data/

The two graphs, especially the one scaled to accentuate the initial degradation, offers an explanation as to why you/me at 12k-ish might have the same degradation/range as that other guy at 31k miles, for two reasons:

1. Indeed the rate of degradation slows significantly after around 30,000 Km (18,600 miles approx).

2. The data points are in a cloud and vary significantly. There are plenty of comparisons to be found where someone with 100,000 Km on their car reports the same 100% SOC range as someone with just 50,000 Km. So maybe that other guy with 31,000 miles who is getting 316, versus you/me at around 12,000 miles is just an example of a few data points per the above.
 

ummgood

Top-Contributor
Joined
Feb 13, 2017
Messages
931
Location
Austin
Country
Country
I just thought of another explanation as to why your car at 12k miles has similar 100% SOC range (316) as someone with 31k (and also why both are below the newly stated max range of 325).

Basically, it's this: Conventional wisdom on the Model S/X forums is that there is a steeper degradation over the first "year" of the car, and then it flattens out. I think there's some articles about this as well, no time to find them right now but if pressed I could probably dig something up off the internets. I think that Ben Sullins guy did something on battery degradation that showed an initial steep drop-off of about 5%, followed by then a much flatter/slower degradation after that.

So . . . . Perhaps your drop to 316-ish at 12k miles is what the other guy who's at 31k miles experienced also at 12k miles, but didn't know it, since back then the stated range was 310. In other words, you (and me) at around 12k miles are at some point (hopefully near the end) of the initial steeper drop-off in degradation, such that for the next 15-20k miles we might see little additional degradation and/or change to our rated range at 100% SOC.

Just a theory, but I do know there is some amount of info/data out there that shows that, at least for S/X models, the degradation drops off more steeply for the first "year", and then significantly slows after that.
Thanks this is the best theory I have seen yet. The only potential weird thing is there are cars getting 325 and are made in June/July and have the same mileage as mine. Hmmm.
 

tencate

Top-Contributor
M3OC Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2018
Messages
406
Location
Los Alamos, NM
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
I can't explain why yours at 12k miles is 316, and someone else at 31k miles also has 316 (or why mine at 11.5k is at 318-320). That is odd. I wonder how much of it might just be "natural" variation between mass-produced batteries? That's just a thought, speculation really. It's all I can think of.
I've got 31k miles on mine too and since getting the upgrade, I've been checking at various SOC and I see from around 307 before the upgrade to variously 310 to maybe 317, it's kinda random actually. Wonder what the "error bars" are on this calculation? I don't expect my battery to be like new, my car is over a year old too. YMMV. Someone said earlier that the differences we're talking about are almost in the noise and not worth discussing. I agree but it's fun to speculate anyway. :)
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2018
Messages
8
Location
CA
Country
Country
Here are the results for my 2019.5.4 vs 2019.5.15 battery capacity test I mentioned I was working on earlier in this thread.

TL/DR: No notable change in usable battery capacity with the increase in reported range.


Background: ChargePoint chargers report the energy delivered during every charge session. I recorded the starting and ending SOC along with the energy added. This provides the calculated battery capacity, assuming 100% charger efficiency. We know there are some losses so this calculation is higher than reality, but what's important here is the comparison between tests, not the actual capacity.

2019.5.4 test on 3/1/19 (baseline)
41%-90% SOC
38.49 kWh add per ChargePoint = 78.55 kWh "capacity" (not including charging losses)

2019.5.15 on 3/11/19
32%-70% SOC
29.94 kWh added = 78.79 kWh "capacity"

2019.5.15 on 3/14/19
~24.5%-90% SOC
51.89 kWh added = 79.2 kWh "capacity"

So we're looking at just ~0.5kWh (0.6%) capacity change if there was no error in my measurements. For a 13 mile range increase (309 to 322 for my car), we'd expect 3.1 kWh increase, assuming no change in Wh/mi accounting or system efficiency improvements.

There are a number of sources of error and variability in the measurements, such as battery temperature, accuracy in SOC estimate, and SOC readout precision (for example, 0.5% SOC error equates to ~0.4kWh). I tried to take out what variability I could by doing these charges after at least 30 minutes of driving after a starting battery temp that was likely within 10 degrees for all 3 tests (overnight cold-soak in Bay Area, CA), but I'm sure they weren't perfect comparisons. Based on the very small measured difference and demonstrated variability of the 3/11 and 3/14 tests themselves (0.4kWh), my conclusion is the measured difference is very likely within the error bars of the test, so no notable capacity change.

If there are future firmware updates that have indications of changes to the usable battery capacity, I'll repeat the test to see if I find any changes.