# Model 3 range increase



## Jeremy Rosser

I am reading mixed information. Has the 325 mile range increase come to the model 3 yet?


----------



## MelindaV

Jeremy Rosser said:


> I am reading mixed information. Has the 325 mile range increase come to the model 3 yet?


that came to RWD LR cars with 2019.5.15, but some cars never had the boost in range registered.


----------



## Tmo6

MelindaV said:


> that came to RWD LR cars with 2019.5.15, but some cars never had the boost in range registered.


I have VIN 38XXX LR RWD with .20 firmware and am still stuck at 310 ☹


----------



## bwilson4web

Bought March 26, running 19.16.2, we're still seeing 238-240 mi maximum charge on our SR+M3. No idea why we see a variable maximum range but since it is <1% of the rated capacity, my hair is not on fire. I suspect it is temperature dependent.

Bob Wilson


----------



## HCD3

Here’s what Teslafi reports for me.


----------



## SR22pilot

The range "increase" was only on the LR RWD. It isn't a real range increase but rather changes the full charge number from 310 to 325. The EPA test had been more like 334 all along so the change is a marketing decision by Tesla. There is no real world change in range. The LR RWD has always gotten more miles from a charge than the AWD. Also the AWD and Performance 310 numbers are with 18" Aero rim/tire combinations on them.


----------



## ateslik

I just upgraded to 2019.16.3.2 and my LR RWD ranged bumped from 287 to 290 at 90%. When I first got the car 4/2018 the 90% was 282.


----------



## George McLaird

ateslik said:


> I just upgraded to 2019.16.3.2 and my LR RWD ranged bumped from 287 to 290 at 90%. When I first got the car 4/2018 the 90% was 282.


How do I apply for this upgrade?


----------



## FF35

George McLaird said:


> How do I apply for this upgrade?


You're probably past that version. The only time you can "apply" any version is when the car or app tells you one is available.


----------



## Quickfix

Is there any upgrade path from SR+ to LR in Canada?


----------



## garsh

Quickfix said:


> Is there any upgrade path from SR+ to LR in Canada?


No, SR+ has a different battery pack.


----------



## bernie

My LR RWD has peaked at 314 and that was in warm climate on a road trip from Palm Springs to Santa Fe


----------



## SkipperOFMO

I charged my car to 100% after reading this post and it registered 325, at 90% it's 293. I'm curious to know how much further will I be able to drive (of the 325) once my car goes from HW2.5 to HW3 considering the hardware is more efficient (220w vice 300w).


----------



## FF35

SkipperOFMO said:


> I charged my car to 100% after reading this post and it registered 325, at 90% it's 293. I'm curious to know how much further will I be able to drive (of the 325) once my car goes from HW2.5 to HW3 considering the hardware is more efficient (220w vice 300w).


Depends how fast you drive, climate usage, etc. 80w isn't much compared to the big battery underneath the car.


----------



## Dr. J

SkipperOFMO said:


> I charged my car to 100% after reading this post and it registered 325, at 90% it's 293. I'm curious to know how much further will I be able to drive (of the 325) once my car goes from HW2.5 to HW3 considering the hardware is more efficient (220w vice 300w).


This sounds like a math problem (using reasonable assumptions). 1.6 miles?


----------



## sduck

My year old LR RWD car got the update back in March with firmware 2019.5.15, bumped up to 325 for a whole 3 weeks(!), then when 2019.8.5 came out it went back to 310.


----------



## ateslik

sduck said:


> My year old LR RWD car got the update back in March with firmware 2019.5.15, bumped up to 325 for a whole 3 weeks(!), then when 2019.8.5 came out it went back to 310.


interesting. Mine is back down to 283 at 90% too.


----------



## FF35

My 2018 LR RWD gets 323 on a full charge. 33,000 miles


----------



## Yanquetino

It's now been well over a year since Musk announced that early Model 3 LR RWD models would receive a range "increase" from 310 to 325 miles. It is not as if I'm bothered that I never received it, but I am curious to know _why_ some owners received it, yet others did not. The latter owners' cars have different hardware? A bug in that particular firmware upgrade that randomly skipped some cars? Have any of you heard an _official_ explanation from Tesla? Inquiring minds would like to know!


----------



## FRC

I can't say that I "know" the answer, but my opinion follows. The range display is simply an estimate that can vary significantly as a result of you driving and, more importantly, charging habits. The way I use my car may result in a much lower range estimate than the way you use yours. And it will vary up and down as your charging/driving habits change. As you said, it's a curiosity, that doesn't really matter if we can make it to our next charging solution.


----------



## Yanquetino

FRC said:


> I can't say that I "know" the answer, but my opinion follows. The range display is simply an estimate that can vary significantly as a result of you driving and, more importantly, charging habits. The way I use my car may result in a much lower range estimate than the way you use yours. And it will vary up and down as your charging/driving habits change. As you said, it's a curiosity, that doesn't really matter if we can make it to our next charging solution.


Oh, yes… achieved range definitely depend upon one's driving style and habits. But I don't think (?) that effects the guess'timate of the range _prediction_ after a charge -which depends upon the pack's capacity and how much of it is "reserved" as buffers at the top and bottom. Indeed, I might be wrong, but I think the idea behind that announced increase was that Tesla had determined they could reduce those buffers slightly -which would allow the display to predict a higher 325 mile range from a full charge.

I can tell you that, when the Model 3 was new, a full charge would predict 310, 311, once even 312 miles of range. Now, after 26 months, 35K miles, and a lifetime average of 241 Wh/mi, a full charge displays ~306 miles, i.e., my pack's capacity is at 98.7%. Not bad! If I'd received the "increase," however, that prediction should predict ~321 miles. (Here is a graph that plots the pack's capacity loss after each charge to date.)


----------



## FRC

Yanquetino said:


> Oh, yes… achieved range definitely depend upon one's driving style and habits. But I don't think (?) that effects the guess'timate of the range _prediction_ after a charge -which depends upon the pack's capacity and how much of it is "reserved" as buffers at the top and bottom. Indeed, I might be wrong, but I think the idea behind that announced increase was that Tesla had determined they could reduce those buffers slightly -which would allow the display to predict a higher 325 mile range from a full charge.
> 
> I can tell you that, when the Model 3 was new, a full charge would predict 310, 311, once even 312 miles of range. Now, after 26 months, 35K miles, and a lifetime average of 241 Wh/mi, a full charge displays ~306 miles, i.e., my pack's capacity is at 98.7%. Not bad! If I'd received the "increase," however, that prediction should predict ~321 miles. (Here is a graph that plots the pack's capacity loss after each charge to date.)
> 
> View attachment 34511


That is likely the most impressive [lack of} degradation graph I think I've ever seen. I think typical degradation for your mileage and age is probably in the 4-6% range which would put 325 at about 309. While we can't see an obvious uptick from the 325 boost, I think you got it, it's just disguised in there somewhere.


----------



## Yanquetino

FRC said:


> That is likely the most impressive [lack of} degradation graph I think I've ever seen. I think typical degradation for your mileage and age is probably in the 4-6% range which would put 325 at about 309.


Wha…? If the degradation is 4-6%, why is the graph not showing it? If I did get the 325 boost, why didn't I see my range jump from a charge one day to the next day after the upgrade overnight?

I typically charge to 80%. When new, that gave me 248 miles of range. One year ago today, that charge predicted 246 miles of range. As of yesterday, that charge gave me 245 miles. Never have I seen an 80% charge jump UP HIGHER after any upgrade. If I'd received the boost a year ago, you'd think I would have noticed an increase to ~257 miles from an 80% charge. Never have.


----------



## FRC

Yanquetino said:


> Wha…? If the degradation is 4-6%, why is the graph not showing it? If I did get the 325 boost, why didn't I see my range jump from a charge one day to the next day after the upgrade overnight?
> 
> I typically charge to 80%. When new, that gave me 248 miles of range. One year ago today, that charge predicted 246 miles of range. As of yesterday, that charge gave me 245 miles. Never have I seen an 80% charge jump UP HIGHER after any upgrade. If I'd received the boost a year ago, you'd think I would have noticed an increase to ~257 miles from an 80% charge. Never have.


The boost to 325 would be about 5%. Normal degradation is about 5%. You're where you should be but I'm not sure how you got there. As a counterpoint I drive a P3D with About 60K miles. I started at 310, no boost, normal 7% degradation puts me at 289 currently.


----------



## Yanquetino

FRC said:


> You're where you should be but I'm not sure how you got there.


I'm not sure either. Unless your assumption is off.

What you're saying is: a year ago an 80% charge predicted 246 miles of range, I then got the upgrade boosting it by 5% (257 miles), but when I charged it the next day, it had already LOST that 5% again (displaying 246 miles). In one day! Yet over all last year it has lost only 1 more mile from an 80% charge -a .3% capacity loss.

Regardless of whatever we speculate for my pack, the question I asked still remains: WHY did some owners receive the boost, and others did not? I know I am not the only one to have never seen the boost: feel free to chime in those of you for whom such is the case. As far as I know, Tesla has never explained it. I'm simply curious to know.


----------



## Dr. J

What would (maybe) help us solve this problem is understanding what the range boost actually was. Did Tesla simply change the range calculation by substituting a new constant for Wh/m? Did they free up a piece of the reserved battery capacity? Did they perform some sort of OTA magic? And why did it apply only to RWD (and AWD?) and not Performance? (I think that's true, but I could be mistaken.)

I noticed a boost when it happened, but it's gone now at 17,000 miles. My guess on the discrepancy between individual cars is: individual differences in battery capacity. But I can't formulate that into a coherent theory that explains what people are reporting.


----------



## Yanquetino

Dr. J said:


> Did they free up a piece of the reserved battery capacity?


That's what I understood, but perhaps I misinterpreted Musk's original tweet announcing the range increase. Maybe someday we'll know for sure, if and when Tesla finally _explains_ why some received it and others did not.


----------



## bwilson4web

Dr. J said:


> What would (maybe) help us solve this problem is understanding what the range boost actually was. Did Tesla simply change the range calculation by substituting a new constant for Wh/m? Did they free up a piece of the reserved battery capacity? Did they perform some sort of OTA magic? And why did it apply only to RWD (and AWD?) and not Performance? (I think that's true, but I could be mistaken.)


With 'tesLAX', I'm slowly going through the available data and you're reminded me to look for something like this.

I noticed that after 2020.24.6.4, the Guess O Meter (GOM) suggested I'd gotten more than my original 240 mile range. After a couple of days, it returned to my expected 232 miles. Just I've not stumbled across a data metric that might hold a value. Perhaps @JWardell might have come across this?

Bob Wilson


----------



## MelindaV

FRC said:


> That is likely the most impressive [lack of} degradation graph I think I've ever seen. I think typical degradation for your mileage and age is probably in the 4-6% range which would put 325 at about 309. While we can't see an obvious uptick from the 325 boost, I think you got it, it's just disguised in there somewhere.


that posted chart is not the normal "Battery Degradation Report" others typically post from Teslafi. The degradation report shows miles on the left axis, not percentages.


----------



## Yanquetino

MelindaV said:


> The degradation report shows miles on the left axis, not percentages.


Not quite. The left axis shows _extrapolated_ percentages based on the car's original 310-mile range. For example, yesterday's 80% charge displayed 246 miles of range:

246 ÷ 80% = 307.5 ÷ 310 = 99.19%


----------



## MelindaV

I would argue if you have a rwd, you should be using the 325 rated number, if you saw that bump when it came out or not. That would put you much more in line w the actual fleet degradation numbers


----------



## Yanquetino

MelindaV said:


> I would argue if you have a rwd, you should be using the 325 rated number, if you saw that bump when it came out or not.


That's my point. I never SAW a "bump" in range when it supposedly came out. Musk tweeted that it was coming in the beginning of March 2019. Here are my miles-of-range from 80% charges for the first 6 months last year, averaging 247 miles. _Never_ did I see an 80% charge predict anywhere near 260 miles-of-range during those months -and haven't seen one since.


----------

