# Is 75kWh Enough?



## Bobby Garrity (Jan 22, 2017)

I know that many of us intend to purchase the largest battery pack available on the 3, or at least the largest battery pack we could afford. However, I think nearly all of us expected that the largest battery pack offered would be greater than 75kWh, even after Elon confirmed that it would be less than 100kWh.

Now that we know 75kWh will be the largest pack offered, I would like to know if anyone here finds this too small. Is this a deal breaker for anyone? Also, it would be helpful if you include in your post what range you expect the 3 to get from 75kWh.


----------



## AEDennis (Apr 10, 2016)

Bobby Garrity said:


> I know that many of us intend to purchase the largest battery pack available on the 3, or at least the largest battery pack we could afford. However, I think nearly all of us expected that the largest battery pack offered would be greater than 75kWh, even after Elon confirmed that it would be less than 100kWh.
> 
> Now that we know 75kWh will be the largest pack offered, I would like to know if anyone here finds this too small. Is this a deal breaker for anyone? Also, it would be helpful if you include in your post what range you expect the 3 to get from 75kWh.


I have an 85 kWh S and travelled from Southern California to Maine and back... considering that the 3 is more efficient than the S, it's fine.

I would expect a 75 kWh 3 to get 250 miles


----------



## Michael Gatti (Apr 22, 2016)

I expect the base model, whatever that battery size is, to have a slightly better range than a Bolt, because that is what it is competing against price wise. If they do manage to achieve that, then we could expect a range of 300 miles from the 75kwh battery. Bear in mind that the Model 3 should be a little more efficient than the S and X due to the lighter weight, the better aerodynamics and the 2170 batteries.


----------



## Bobby Garrity (Jan 22, 2017)

Michael Gatti said:


> I expect the base model, whatever that battery size is, to have a slightly better range than a Bolt, because that is what it is competing against price wise. If they do manage to achieve that, then we could expect a range of 300 miles from the 75kwh battery. Bear in mind that the Model 3 should be a little more efficient than the S and X due to the lighter weight, the better aerodynamics and the 2170 batteries.


I wouldn't bet on the base 3 to have better range than the Bolt. Keep in mind that the Bolt has a 60kWh battery pack and the base 3 will have something less than 60kWh.


----------



## MelindaV (Apr 2, 2016)

and the Bolt has the aerodynamics of a toaster oven (.32 drag coefficient)


----------



## Bobby Garrity (Jan 22, 2017)

MelindaV said:


> and the Bolt has the aerodynamics of a toaster oven (.32 drag coefficient)


Now that I think about, there may actually be toaster ovens out there with a Cd of .32.


----------



## MelindaV (Apr 2, 2016)

for reference, a mid 1990s Ford Taurus is .32


----------



## Watts4me (Nov 25, 2016)

I bet that .32 in 1990's was cutting edge. Lol


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Bobby Garrity said:


> I wouldn't bet on the base 3 to have better range than the Bolt.


Oh, I'll take that bet.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/845331893176324096


----------



## RickDeckard (Apr 7, 2017)

For me the expected range of the base model of around 215 miles is enough since I almost never drive beyond 300 km (and in the very rare instances when i would, i would have stop to go to the bathroom, stretch a bit and eat at a restaurant anyway)


----------



## BigBri (Jul 16, 2016)

I mostly was planning on the bigger battery to future proof the car a bit and allow for degradation. 2170 being new and all we really won't know how the packs age but the S and X give us a pretty good indication they'll age very well. I didn't want to buy a battery that would get me to my destination today but 3 years down the road couldn't make it. I might be in a smaller subset but my car gets around 350 miles a tank and I maybe fillup every 3 weeks if that. It'd have almost 0 impact on my life to charge every 10 days instead of a fillup every 20.


----------



## Topher (May 11, 2016)

garsh said:


> Oh, I'll take that bet.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/845331893176324096


To be clear, he doesn't say BASE Model 3. The 75 kWh Model 3 will certainly beat the Bolt.

If Elon is intent on having the base Model 3 beat the Bolt, that shouldn't be too hard even staying within his constraints (under 60 kWh).

Thank you kindly.


----------



## Guy Weathersby (Jun 22, 2016)

Michael Gatti said:


> I expect the base model, whatever that battery size is, to have a slightly better range than a Bolt, because that is what it is competing against price wise.


Other than a few short slighted people who are obsessed with numbers, I really don't think that people would pick the Bolt over the Model 3. The Bolt is not supporting by a Supercharger network and if you by the base version, full home recharging is recharging measured in days. So the Bolt will not be as good on the road or around town, if range is your main concern. Tesla batteries have a reputation for keeping about 90% of their capacity for years, GM's are an a less known quantity.

Plus remember that when Tesla said "pencils down", last summer it is increasingly clear that they meant it. So I don't think that they made any changes when the Bolt was announced. There may other reasons to pick the Bolt , such as if you need car before the Tesla is available, or that they are reportedly available at a discount, but no reasonable person would buy one just for range.


----------



## Topher (May 11, 2016)

Guy Weathersby said:


> Plus remember that when Tesla said "pencils down", last summer it is increasingly clear that they meant it.


Not disagreeing with anything you said, but I expect adding a few cells to each module isn't a huge design exercise.

Thank you kindly.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

Topher said:


> To be clear, he doesn't say BASE Model 3. The 75 kWh Model 3 will certainly beat the Bolt.
> 
> If Elon is intent on having the base Model 3 beat the Bolt, that shouldn't be too hard even staying within his constraints (under 60 kWh).
> 
> Thank you kindly.


With all due respect, we've already exchanged some about how to interpret this specific tweet by Elon... I do _believe_ it is Elon's intent to offer more range than the Bolt with the base Model ≡, not because they _have_ to do it to be competitive to that fugly box on wheels, but because they _*can*_..!
I have faith...


----------



## Randy (Aug 1, 2016)

Topher said:


> Not disagreeing with anything you said, but I expect adding a few cells to each module isn't a huge design exercise.
> 
> Thank you kindly.


I would guess that the battery tray for any capacity would be the same regardless. I have seen somewhere on you-tube that the smaller capacity battery packs on the S have blank or fake cells to act as spacers/fillers I imagine it wouldn't take too much to replace a few of those incomplete cells with active ones. Regardless if it pencils down or not ,I do not believe Elon would let the bolt's capacity trump his newest creation. Could be the reason we have not received any exact info on the battery size, waiting for the official EPA mileage estimates I'd bet.
Randy


----------



## Martin Lacey (Apr 9, 2017)

Bobby Garrity said:


> I know that many of us intend to purchase the largest battery pack available on the 3, or at least the largest battery pack we could afford. However, I think nearly all of us expected that the largest battery pack offered would be greater than 75kWh, even after Elon confirmed that it would be less than 100kWh.
> 
> Now that we know 75kWh will be the largest pack offered, I would like to know if anyone here finds this too small. Is this a deal breaker for anyone? Also, it would be helpful if you include in your post what range you expect the 3 to get from 75kWh.


It's worth noting that 75 kWh is the max capacity and not necessarily a purchasing option. Tesla in their recent blog post said "
_*Model S will also continue to be the longest-range vehicle we offer, capable of a landmark 335 miles on a single charge,*_" Way back when, even before the reveal we were told the base model would be below 60 kWh. Since the Blot (deliberate Spelling mistake) came out EM has hinted at more than 238 mile range. Until we know the Miles/kWh figure we can only speculate. My guess is on one battery option under 60 kWh on the launch cars with increases coming once the backlog is caught up with. This will help the production ramp scale up faster, especially while GF1 is still being built and is nowhere near full capacity.

For the record I reckon 5 miles per kWh, but wouldn't know what the battery reserve would be to prevent premature degradation through depletion.


----------



## Topher (May 11, 2016)

Michael Russo said:


> we've already exchanged some about how to interpret this specific tweet by Elon...


Sorry, I didn't realize that you had closed discussion on the topic. You should probably give more indication, lock the thread or some such.

Thank you kindly.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

Topher said:


> Sorry, I didn't realize that you had closed discussion on the topic. You should probably give more indication, lock the thread or some such.
> 
> Thank you kindly.


Oh, no issues. It was most certainly in a different thread, and a few weeks ago... Don't think there was anything to close, I was just referring to it.
Time flies when we are having fun... waiting...


----------



## Topher (May 11, 2016)

Michael Russo said:


> Oh, no issues. It was most certainly in a different thread, and a few weeks ago... Don't think there was anything to close, I was just referring to it.
> Time flies when we are having fun... waiting...


Then I am lost on why you would say 'with all due respect...'. If my opinion is welcome, why give the impression that somehow, I am going over covered and closed ground? And then why cover the same ground yourself?

Thank you kindly.


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

Topher said:


> Then I am lost on why you would say 'with all due respect...'. If my opinion is welcome, why give the impression that somehow, I am going over covered and closed ground? And then why cover the same ground yourself?
> 
> Thank you kindly.


@Topher, because that is how I meant it.

I did not intended to sound critical & merely wanted to remind you (not sure you actually had seen this exchange or not) that (I believe) someone else had already alluded to the fact Elon's response did not specifically refer to the base battery range.
Your opinion is of course always welcome, whether or not all share it or not... And your posts are often very insightful!

And on this one, in the end, we are indeed saying the same thing in light of what you wrote in the second part of your post #12 above.

We're cool. Good evening.
Mike


----------



## Badback (Apr 7, 2016)

Guy Weathersby said:


> Other than a few short slighted people who are obsessed with numbers, I really don't think that people would pick the Bolt over the Model 3. The Bolt is not supporting by a Supercharger network and if you by the base version, full home recharging is recharging measured in days. So the Bolt will not be as good on the road or around town, if range is your main concern. Tesla batteries have a reputation for keeping about 90% of their capacity for years, GM's are an a less known quantity.
> 
> Plus remember that when Tesla said "pencils down", last summer it is increasingly clear that they meant it. So I don't think that they made any changes when the Bolt was announced. There may other reasons to pick the Bolt , such as if you need car before the Tesla is available, or that they are reportedly available at a discount, but no reasonable person would buy one just for range.


Or, if you were trying to get good looking women to stop pestering you.


----------



## UncleT (Apr 9, 2017)

I will most likely opt for the larger battery but don't have any expectations (the more the better, of course).


----------



## Michael Gatti (Apr 22, 2016)

Guy Weathersby said:


> Other than a few short slighted people who are obsessed with numbers, I really don't think that people would pick the Bolt over the Model 3. The Bolt is not supporting by a Supercharger network and if you by the base version, full home recharging is recharging measured in days. So the Bolt will not be as good on the road or around town, if range is your main concern. Tesla batteries have a reputation for keeping about 90% of their capacity for years, GM's are an a less known quantity.
> 
> Plus remember that when Tesla said "pencils down", last summer it is increasingly clear that they meant it. So I don't think that they made any changes when the Bolt was announced. There may other reasons to pick the Bolt , such as if you need car before the Tesla is available, or that they are reportedly available at a discount, but no reasonable person would buy one just for range.


Agreed! There are many reasons a 3 is miles ahead of a Bolt (pun intended) regardless of range, but we were specifically discussing range.

For the record, I don't care if the base Model 3 has more or less range than the Bolt, but I believe that it is important to Elon and that's why it will in fact have more range.


----------



## Bobby Garrity (Jan 22, 2017)

garsh said:


> Oh, I'll take that bet.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/845331893176324096


Like Topher and others have mentioned, he may not have been referring to the base model. But let's say he was. Let's say the base 3 with a 55kWh battery achieves 238mi (383km). 75/55 = 1.36. So then we can multiply the base range by 1.36 to gives us 324mi (521km) of range on the 75 3. Maybe I'm just pessimistic here, but that sounds too good to be true.


----------



## Bobby Garrity (Jan 22, 2017)

Martin Lacey said:


> For the record I reckon 5 miles per kWh, but wouldn't know what the battery reserve would be to prevent premature degradation through depletion.


5mi/kWh? That sounds incredibly optimistic. Would you mind sharing how you came to that figure?


----------



## AEDennis (Apr 10, 2016)

Bobby Garrity said:


> 5mi/kWh? That sounds incredibly optimistic. Would you mind sharing how you came to that figure?


That is very optimistic my lifetime average on a Model S at 72k miles is 308 wh/mile, and I'm pretty conservative.


----------



## Gabzqc (Oct 15, 2016)

Regarding battery sizes, surely it makes more sense to extreme streamline the production line and put the "cheaper, coming off the factory floor like bullets" 2170 cells into a 75KWH battery thats then in ALL THE CARS. software limit it to 55kw sure, but allow us to upgrade later... how much profit would tesla really loose doing things that way? vs the time spent "putting fake cells in the battery pack for ""packing""

Just a thought... #optimisitc


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Gabzqc said:


> Regarding battery sizes, surely it makes more sense to extreme streamline the production line and put the "cheaper, coming off the factory floor like bullets" 2170 cells into a 75KWH battery thats then in ALL THE CARS. software limit it to 55kw sure, but allow us to upgrade later.


Batteries are the most expensive part of an electric car. Tesla would not make a profit at $35,000 using the software-limited battery approach.


----------



## Martin Lacey (Apr 9, 2017)

Bobby Garrity said:


> 5mi/kWh? That sounds incredibly optimistic. Would you mind sharing how you came to that figure?


The LG Blot is capable of more than 4.7 miles per kWh in a poor 0.32cd form factor, using a first generation motor and weighs 3580 lbs. Tesla model 3 has 0.21cd a third generation motor. Weight is anyone's guess, but as the Model S 60 rwd weighed 4,323 lbs and we should be able to strip out 20% for the model 3 making it lighter than the Blot (probably more, glass roof, 50% less wiring harness etc).

I may be wrong, but driven like a daily runner and not a track car, I reckon 5 MPkWh is within reach. It also allows a sub 60 kWh pack compete with the Blot on range!


----------



## Martin Lacey (Apr 9, 2017)

Gabzqc said:


> Regarding battery sizes, surely it makes more sense to extreme streamline the production line and put the "cheaper, coming off the factory floor like bullets" 2170 cells into a 75KWH battery thats then in ALL THE CARS. software limit it to 55kw sure, but allow us to upgrade later... how much profit would tesla really loose doing things that way? vs the time spent "putting fake cells in the battery pack for ""packing""
> 
> Just a thought... #optimisitc


 I like your optimism, however those kind of touches are not affordable at Model 3 prices. I think we will be limited to one pack size, sub 60 kWh at launch as Tesla are keen to ramp up production ASAP.

But what do I know?


----------



## jman (Aug 5, 2016)

Being a smaller car than the S or X, using better batteries, having a 75kwh battery will crush the Bolt and give it around 280 miles is my prediction !!! We drive an S now and look forward to sit in a M3 although don't mind the wait in a way....people who first owned Model S had to wait years for a vehicle from a company that almost had no history, didn't know what exactly it would look like and probably didn't test drive it. So I think we are all in a great place at this point in time !


----------



## thredge (Mar 24, 2017)

Bobby Garrity said:


> Like Topher and others have mentioned, he may not have been referring to the base model. But let's say he was. Let's say the base 3 with a 55kWh battery achieves 238mi (383km). 75/55 = 1.36. So then we can multiply the base range by 1.36 to gives us 324mi (521km) of range on the 75 3. Maybe I'm just pessimistic here, but that sounds too good to be true.


I was thinking of doing this same thing, but I think your right, with Elon stating the Model S is going to stay the range king, that is a little too close on it's heals. But what if we were a little more conservative / pessimistic. I'm assuming batteries aren't quite linear, and there are all sorts of other factors dependent on the motor options, but let's see. Elon said 215 miles minimum, and we are assuming a 55kWh battery, so if we just extrapolate that with your previous ratio, we end up at 292 miles, which sounds a lot more believable and comfortable to me too. As well as worth an upgrade cost. Since it sounds like they are hoping for better, I'm still guessing within like 10 miles of 215 or 292.


----------



## WaitingForTesla (Apr 8, 2016)

MelindaV said:


> and the Bolt has the aerodynamics of a toaster oven (.32 drag coefficient)


That's offensive to toasters the world over.


----------



## Bokonon (Apr 13, 2017)

thredge said:


> Since it sounds like they are hoping for better, I'm still guessing within like 10 miles of 215 or 292.


My WAGs are in that ballpark:

*Nominal 55 kWh pack:* 56 kWh true capacity, 53.5 kWh usable, 4.15 miles/kWh = 222 miles
*Nominal 75 kWh pack: *75 kWh true capacity, 72 kWh usable, 4.10 miles/kWh = 295 miles


----------



## killr0y (Apr 11, 2016)

Topher said:


> Then I am lost on why you would say 'with all due respect...'. If my opinion is welcome, why give the impression that somehow, I am going over covered and closed ground? And then why cover the same ground yourself?
> 
> Thank you kindly.


Mr. Russo is clearly a Walloon of Italian heritage, and therefore, English is probably his 2nd or 3rd language. I'm sure he didn't mean any disrespect toward you, more likely a communications misunderstanding. Thank you, and now back to our regularly scheduled program...


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

killr0y said:


> Mr. Russo is clearly a Walloon of Italian heritage, and therefore, English is probably his 2nd or 3rd language.
> (...)


Yes, you are so right, thank you. @killr0y !
In fact, I really don't speak English at all, I am just veeeerrry proficient with Google Translate...


----------



## thredge (Mar 24, 2017)

Bokonon said:


> My WAGs are in that ballpark:
> 
> *Nominal 55 kWh pack:* 56 kWh true capacity, 53.5 kWh usable, 4.15 miles/kWh = 222 miles
> *Nominal 75 kWh pack: *75 kWh true capacity, 72 kWh usable, 4.10 miles/kWh = 295 miles


I had a teacher that used SWAG, which is a more apt description. "SCIENTIFIC Wild Ass Guess," all the difference in the world.


----------



## teslaliving (Apr 2, 2016)

I'm with @AEDennis, 75kWh should be plenty in the 3 if we get one that big. Basically, I think they have to meet or beat the Bolt at 240 so 250-275 range is what I expect. My S is rated at 265 (bit less now at 78K miles) so as long as it's close to my S then there's no changes in my Tesla lifestyle 

Of course, with free Supercharging on my S, I may still be doing that for long road trips. Will be a tough call. Autopilot in the 3 or free Supercharging in the S?


----------



## MelindaV (Apr 2, 2016)

teslaliving said:


> Of course, with free Supercharging on my S, I may still be doing that for long road trips. Will be a tough call. Autopilot in the 3 or free Supercharging in the S?


I'd take the car with EAP hands down. When you figure on a road trip you would leave home with a full charge, and possibly staying overnight at locations with destination chargers, you can go quite a distance on the included SC kWhs included - and anything beyond will be near what is paid for charging at home.


----------



## teslaliving (Apr 2, 2016)

teslaliving said:


> I'm with @AEDennis, 75kWh should be plenty in the 3 if we get one that big. Basically, I think they have to meet or beat the Bolt at 240 so 250-275 range is what I expect. My S is rated at 265 (bit less now at 78K miles) so as long as it's close to my S then there's no changes in my Tesla lifestyle





MelindaV said:


> I'd take the car with EAP hands down. When you figure on a road trip you would leave home with a full charge, and possibly staying overnight at locations with destination chargers, you can go quite a distance on the included SC kWhs included - and anything beyond will be near what is paid for charging at home.


I pretty much figured the same thing. Long drives are tiring. EAP would help a lot and the costs are not significant and still way cheaper than driving an ICE. Of course, if my bike doesn't fit thats a different problem.


----------



## AEDennis (Apr 10, 2016)

teslaliving said:


> I pretty much figured the same thing. Long drives are tiring. EAP would help a lot and the costs are not significant and still way cheaper than driving an ICE. Of course, if my bike doesn't fit thats a different problem.
> View attachment 1266


Your bike will probably fit albeit more snugly than in your S.


----------



## teslaliving (Apr 2, 2016)

AEDennis said:


> Your bike will probably fit albeit more snugly than in your S.


I hope so. That pic was of me on my way to FL to escape the MA winter and get some rides in. Would love to do the same thing in the 3 this coming winter with Autopilot. Was a long drive (for me) down to FL and a lot of chargers


----------



## JimB (May 11, 2016)

One more way of looking at the Model 3 range. I may have missed it, but I haven't seen this approach used.

The Model S 75 has an EPA range of 249 miles. If the Model 3 got 10% more range because of its smaller size, the range would be 274 miles. If 15%, it would be 286 miles. If 20%, it would be 299 miles.

I would think it would be between 10% and 20%. Take your pick.

% M3 Est
10 274
11 276
12 279
13 281
14 284
15 286
16 289
17 291
18 294
19 296
20 299

My guess is in the 280's, and hoping for the 290's.


----------



## Polly Liversalts (Jul 9, 2016)

I've got a Ms 85 and get adequate range and it can certainly get down the road faster than I need. With all that reduced weight in the M3, it's going to be a pocket rocket...


----------



## KenR (Aug 9, 2016)

Bobby Garrity said:


> I know that many of us intend to purchase the largest battery pack available on the 3, or at least the largest battery pack we could afford. However, I think nearly all of us expected that the largest battery pack offered would be greater than 75kWh, even after Elon confirmed that it would be less than 100kWh.
> 
> Now that we know 75kWh will be the largest pack offered, I would like to know if anyone here finds this too small. Is this a deal breaker for anyone? Also, it would be helpful if you include in your post what range you expect the 3 to get from 75kWh.


I'm fine with a 75 kWh battery. I'm hoping it approaches 300 miles per charge.


----------



## Jean Théoret (Apr 6, 2017)

KenR said:


> I'm fine with a 75 kWh battery. I'm hoping it approaches 300 miles per charge.


You should be able to get that 300 miles easily.


----------



## Guest (May 27, 2017)

Jean Théoret said:


> You should be able to get that 300 miles easily.


Model S (100D) will have longer range than Model 3 75kWh AWD model that will not be available this year.


----------



## Randy (Aug 1, 2016)

I think 75 kw will be more than sufficient. If the predictions are correct (4 to 5 miles per kilowatt hour) 300. miles non stop, is still further than my bladder will allow 
Randy


----------



## SoFlaModel3 (Apr 15, 2017)

My daily commute is 75 miles. 215+ miles of range is all I need along with wiggle room for my lead foot syndrome


----------



## sam s (Oct 18, 2016)

does anyone know if you will be able to do an over the air update if you purchase the smaller battery and want to at a later time upgrade to the bigger battery?


----------



## Michael Russo (Oct 15, 2016)

sam s said:


> does anyone know if you will be able to do an over the air update if you purchase the smaller battery and want to at a later time upgrade to the bigger battery?


Sam, doubt it. Our current thinking is it is _highly unlikely_ as there is probably not enough money in a $35k car to offer it as a software-limited 60 kWh as they did on the S...


----------



## sam s (Oct 18, 2016)

Michael Russo said:


> Sam, doubt it. Our current thinking is it is _highly unlikely_ as there is probably not enough money in a $35k car to offer it as a software-limited 60 kWh as they did on the S...


That makes sense. Thanks for the quick response Michael.


----------



## SoFlaModel3 (Apr 15, 2017)

Michael Russo said:


> Sam, doubt it. Our current thinking is it is _highly unlikely_ as there is probably not enough money in a $35k car to offer it as a software-limited 60 kWh as they did on the S...


I would agree with this. You have to realize at this price point it's very unlikely that a buyer comes back later with say $5,000 to get more range. Many will finance or lease and that kind of money won't be sitting around, so it would be a losing proposition. They've already stocked the car with autopilot hardware without knowing how many people will pay for the software unlock.


----------



## Guest (May 31, 2017)

The only possible way to upgrade battery would be to swap it (buy the bigger battery, possibly with big discount if you give the smaller one back).


----------



## Twiglett (Feb 8, 2017)

arnis said:


> The only possible way to upgrade battery would be to swap it (buy the bigger battery, possibly with big discount if you give the smaller one back).


while that is technically possible, the number of times they have done this is extremely low.


----------



## JBsC6 (Oct 17, 2016)

If with awd and a performance mode it can get me to sixty mph in 4 flat...I'm happy..

As long as it's not crazy expensive like ludicrious mode...

The pricing on that option on the model S is ridiculous...

Charge me for the awd...charge me for the battery and call it a day....

And I'm in


----------



## teslaliving (Apr 2, 2016)

arnis said:


> The only possible way to upgrade battery would be to swap it (buy the bigger battery, possibly with big discount if you give the smaller one back).


Generally, Tesla has NOT done these. Very rare and uncommon to get it to happen. I would not count on/expect a pack swap.


----------

