# Model 3 charge rate spreadsheet



## KarenRei

So, like a lot of people, I'd like to get some charge rate curves for the Model 3, to incorporate into trip planners and help figure out optimal charging strategies  So far, there's only a few datapoints, but that's a start! And so that those datapoints don't get misplaced, here's a spreadsheet for us to manage them:

Link

If any of you can get more datapoints, by all means go ahead. Fill in all the data you can! There are invisible (white text) formulae for calculating mph on the range estimate if you manage to get available miles, target miles, and minutes remaining. The ideal "get" would be a video, from very low SoC to very high SoC, so we can fill in a ton of datapoints.

I'll crosspost this on teslamotorsclub. 

ED: Now modified to include energy consumption when driving as well!


----------



## AEDennis

KarenRei said:


> So, like a lot of people, I'd like to get some charge rate curves for the Model 3, to incorporate into trip planners and help figure out optimal charging strategies  So far, there's only a few datapoints, but that's a start! And so that those datapoints don't get misplaced, here's a spreadsheet for us to manage them:
> 
> Link
> 
> If any of you can get more datapoints, by all means go ahead. Fill in all the data you can! There are invisible (white text) formulae for calculating mph on the range estimate if you manage to get available miles, target miles, and minutes remaining. The ideal "get" would be a video, from very low SoC to very high SoC, so we can fill in a ton of datapoints.
> 
> I'll crosspost this on teslamotorsclub.


Karen, ambient temperature would probably be a good gauge as well.


----------



## KarenRei

Done. Keeping all units in imperial for now since all of the current owners are stateside, so it should simplify things


----------



## KarenRei

Added in a tab for energy consumption when driving as well. Probably need to start hunting through old videos for some starter datapoints 

ED: just from the *very* limited data we have now, it looks to charge on SCs at fairly similar powers to an S 60 - slow (from a power perspective) compared to other S's, but not when vehicle efficiency is taken into account. It looks like CHAdeMO will start to get current limited at somewhere around 2/3rds charge, so if you need, say, 45% charge on CHAdeMO, fastest would be to time it to go from around 30% to 75%, give or take.

I think, from the EPA data and the pack layout that voltages will be similar to (maybe a touch less than) the new S/X models, not the old low-range Ss. If so it should get something like 170mph EPA range from CHAdeMO in this charge range, which would not be too shabby!

That said, I hesitate to estimate supercharger performance between different SoCs because unlike CHAdeMO, you want to arrive at a SC at a low SoC, and we have minimal data at present about that.


----------



## KarenRei

Ed: went back through some old videos to see if I could get energy-consumption-while driving data, but it appears that you don't have any sort of consumption meter when driving - at least from the vids I saw  Is that not correct? If so that's a serious deficiency that I hope they remedy in later updates.


----------



## Model34mePlease

KarenRei said:


> Ed: went back through some old videos to see if I could get energy-consumption-while driving data, but it appears that you don't have any sort of consumption meter when driving - at least from the vids I saw  Is that not correct? If so that's a serious deficiency that I hope they remedy in later updates.


I believe there is nothing with numbers yet. Just a bar graph for use in on direction and regen in the other.


----------



## Troy

Hi. I quite like what Tesla is doing on the presskit page here. They mention Supercharge rate as rated miles added in 30 minutes. Of course, this would mean starting from 0%. The page says the Model 3 LR Supercharge rate is 170 rated miles in 30 minutes. However, they don't mention a comparable number for the Model S or X. But the video here shows the charge percentages for different Tesla packs at 30 minutes. Therefore it would be an excellent idea to compare the range added in 30 minutes. It's a shame that 1 EPA rated mile in one Tesla model is not the same as 1 EPA rated mile in another Tesla model. Therefore the numbers don't quite do justice to the Model 3.

Another interesting idea would be to look at how many rated miles you can add overnight using a standard 110V home socket in the USA or 220V in Europe. The reason this is interesting is that home changing with a standard socket is normally too slow but because the Model 3 is more efficient, you will get more range per kWh. Therefore a standard socket should be sufficient for more people especially in Europe.


----------



## KarenRei

The press kit figures are incorporated into the spreadsheet. If anything, they look pessimistic so far. And yes, of course I'll be publishing comparison curves once we have enough datapoints to make them


----------



## Insaneoctane

The limited actual data points that we currently have points to the impression that Tesla's press kit data is sandbagged. Hmm, where have we seen this before?


----------



## KarenRei

It could just be nonlinearity in the charge profile; we'll know more as we get more datapoints on the low end. But at least with the limited data we have so far, it does look like they're downplaying it.

Amazing, amazing vehicle.


----------



## EValuatED

@KarenRei did you see this tweet from @TrevP this evening?


----------



## KarenRei

EValuatED said:


> @KarenRei did you see this tweet from @TrevP this evening?
> 
> View attachment 3812


Thanks for that - just assume I haven't see it if you encounter a datapoint unless you see it in the spreadsheet.

My reaction to this: já sæll!....  That's bloody amazing. 102 kW at 45% SOC on a vehicle that has such low energy consumption.... just, wow!


----------



## scaots

Another data point from PTFI


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/920097010182709248


----------



## KarenRei

There's a consistent pattern now. It's not an anomaly, we've now seen datapoints from three separate vehicles pointing to it. Model 3 LR literally can do 100kW+ up to nearly 50% SOC.

That's insane.

While any data is good data, I think the supercharging curve is now coming into shape, at least at the low end (unless there's a surprise, such as the rate going over 102kW at very low SOCs). The high end is still rather sparse, we can only guess at it based on the estimates for how long it will take to complete. We have no CHAdeMO data yet. AC data is a bit sparse, but also pretty predictable. And we have no driving data.

But, the spreadsheet is at least starting to fill out!


----------



## Michael Russo

KarenRei said:


> There's a consistent pattern now. It's not an anomaly, we've now seen datapoints from three separate vehicles pointing to it. Model 3 LR literally can do 100kW+ up to nearly 50% SOC.
> 
> That's insane.
> 
> While any data is good data, I think the supercharging curve is now coming into shape, at least at the low end (unless there's a surprise, such as the rate going over 102kW at very low SOCs). The high end is still rather sparse, we can only guess at it based on the estimates for how long it will take to complete. We have no CHAdeMO data yet. AC data is a bit sparse, but also pretty predictable. And we have no driving data.
> 
> But, the spreadsheet is at least starting to fill out!


Karen, apologies for the dumb question... in your assessment, how would all this translate to _SC charge time_; in other words, how much time would the LRB take from 20 to 90%? How much longer would it take for the SRB?
Thanks for helping this (older as of Thursday... ) man!


----------



## Troy

Hi. Comparing Supercharge times in terms of kW rate or percentage doesn't do justice to the Model 3. To see the problem better, think about the Model S 100D and Model S P100D. These two cars have the same battery. Therefore they will reach the same percentage at the same time. However, 50% of 335 miles EPA rated range is not the same as 50% of 315 miles EPA rated range.

Therefore the Model S 100D will supercharge faster than the Model S P100D. The difference is even bigger between Model S and Model 3. Therefore comparing range added over time is an excellent idea. That's why I like Tesla's "X miles in 30 minutes" format. Another excellent idea would be to compare the time it takes to supercharge from 0 to 200 rated miles.

Bjorn used to compare range added over time. Here is an excellent video by Bjorn. Unfortunately, more recently he completely ruined his comparison videos and made them useless when he started comparing kW and % instead of range. I wish all Tesla cars had the exact same battery. This would have made it clearer that comparing range added over time makes more sense than comparing kW or percentage.


----------



## JBsC6

How long it takes to recharge?


----------



## KarenRei

JBsC6 said:


> How long it takes to recharge?


I'll make some "best guess" graphs this evening based on what we know, although we still have gaps.


----------



## KarenRei

> Hi. Comparing Supercharge times in terms of kW rate or percentage doesn't do justice to the Model 3. To see the problem better...


Already well understood, commented on, and that's more to the point the reason I'm so excited about these numbers


----------



## KarenRei

So I present, with some giant caveats.... Graphs!

*ED: This graph has been superceded. Always use only the most recent graph in this thread, takk.  
*








The caveats:

* We have no data on the very bottom of the LR range, not the top
* We have few datapoints, period.
* We have no SR datapoints. I simply currrent limited LR at 46/31x sooner (the ratio of cells in the LR to the SR). This assumes that the cells themselves are the limiting factor, not cooling rates (which I presume would be the same capability on both vehicles).
* We have no CHAdeMO data. The voltage curve is a guess, although probably a reasonable one.
* I'm assuming Tesla uses a basis of 244 Wh/mi for the SR and LR (probably should have cut the SR by 2% now that I think about it) and 290 for the S 100 - the fastest charger in Tesla's current lineup. Other Teslas will be slower, some significantly.

But hey, it's something! Enjoy!


----------



## Model34mePlease

KarenRei said:


> So I present, with some giant caveats.... Graphs!
> 
> View attachment 3816
> 
> The caveats:
> 
> * We have no data on the very bottom of the LR range, not the top
> * We have few datapoints, period.
> * We have no SR datapoints. I simply currrent limited LR at 46/31x sooner (the ratio of cells in the LR to the sr)
> * We have no CHAdeMO data. The voltage curve is a guess, although probably a reasonable one.
> * I'm assuming tesla uses a basis of 244 Wh/mi for the SR and LR probably should have cut the SR by 2% now that I think about it) and 290 for the S 100 - the fastest charger in Tesla's current lineup. Other Teslas will be slower, some significantly.
> 
> But hey, it's something! Enjoy!


Those are great, thanks! It would be terrific if the graphs could plot the actual data points we have to make some of the certainties and uncertainties obvious.


----------



## danzgator

KarenRei said:


> So I present, with some giant caveats.... Graphs!
> 
> View attachment 3816
> 
> The caveats:
> 
> * We have no data on the very bottom of the LR range, not the top
> * We have few datapoints, period.
> * We have no SR datapoints. I simply currrent limited LR at 46/31x sooner (the ratio of cells in the LR to the sr)
> * We have no CHAdeMO data. The voltage curve is a guess, although probably a reasonable one.
> * I'm assuming tesla uses a basis of 244 Wh/mi for the SR and LR probably should have cut the SR by 2% now that I think about it) and 290 for the S 100 - the fastest charger in Tesla's current lineup. Other Teslas will be slower, some significantly.
> 
> But hey, it's something! Enjoy!


Thanks for the charts! Very informative. I think you explained this technically earlier, but in layman's terms, I find that I typically charge between 100 miles to 200 miles at Superchargers on road trips. It doesn't make sense to charge above 80% unless you're having lunch or something like that because it charges at a much slower rate. Additionally, typically you try never to cut it so close that you would get to a Supercharger with 0% because it is risky, time consuming, and costly, if you don't make it. In the real world you aim to get to the next charger with 10-20% charge, minimum. Therefore, you're typical charge is from 10-20% to 70-80%. On the S 100 and 3 LR, that seems like it will take 20-30 min. However, if you only charge to 80% on the SR (+/-170 mi range), you would be cutting it a little too close for comfort to make it to the next Supercharger in most situations. So, on the SR, it ends up taking 50-60 minutes to get to the 200 mile "safe range" you want to get to the next Supercharger. On long road trips, doubling your charge time like this means hours of extra time Supercharging on the SR. I was beginning to think that maybe the LR was overkill given the sandbagged range and efficiency of the 3, but these charts convince me to stick with the LR.


----------



## Rusty

Troy said:


> Hi. I quite like what Tesla is doing on the presskit page here. They mention Supercharge rate as rated miles added in 30 minutes. Of course, this would mean starting from 0%. The page says the Model 3 LR Supercharge rate is 170 rated miles in 30 minutes. However, they don't mention a comparable number for the Model S or X. But the video here shows the charge percentages for different Tesla packs at 30 minutes. Therefore it would be an excellent idea to compare the range added in 30 minutes. It's a shame that 1 EPA rated mile in one Tesla model is not the same as 1 EPA rated mile in another Tesla model. Therefore the numbers don't quite do justice to the Model 3.
> 
> Another interesting idea would be to look at how many rated miles you can add overnight using a standard 110V home socket in the USA or 220V in Europe. The reason this is interesting is that home changing with a standard socket is normally too slow but because the Model 3 is more efficient, you will get more range per kWh. Therefore a standard socket should be sufficient for more people especially in Europe.


I get 4mph from a 110V outlet in my MS. Someone on this forum posted a 5mph rate for their M3 from 110V outlet.


----------



## KarenRei

Rusty said:


> I get 4mph from a 110V outlet in my MS. Someone on this forum posted a 5mph rate for their M3 from 110V outlet.


Yes, that's in the spreadsheet.


----------



## KarenRei

danzgator said:


> I was beginning to think that maybe the LR was overkill given the sandbagged range and efficiency of the 3, but these charts convince me to stick with the LR.


Note the caveats, particularly with regard to the SR; we're going on a whole zero datapoints here  We don't know that it will be some simple linear adjustment relative to the number of cells - for example, perhaps the limitations will be thermal, wherein it would track the LR much closer. I expect we'll be finding out more very early next year


----------



## KarenRei

Hey, I just realized something that might help (a little!) to tease out cell limits from thermal limits for getting a (still very speculative) curve for the SR. We actually *do* (kind of) have a datapoint: the press kit! We don't know exactly what SOC the press kit meant the "170 miles in 30 minutes / 130 miles in 30 minutes" figures from, but that can be figured out by finding out where on the LR's curve it gets 340mph. I can then ensure than SR gets 260 mph at that point.

An observation: while I used 46/31 = 1.48x as the difference between the SR and LR's curves, 170/130 is only 1.31x. So that would suggest somewhere between the thermal-only limit case and the cell-count-only limit case.

Next time I make graphs (aka, after I get a few more datapoints from our friendly local Model 3 owners!  ), I'll update the SR curve based on this new data. It should improve somewhat.

ED: Meh, forget waiting:  Wow, this looks a lot better after incorporating the press kit datapoint! I also incorporated a 2% efficiency boost for the SR this time:










Concerning the previous comment of wanting 200 miles range for a drive after arriving at what I assume to be about 40 miles, it looks like a stop would be 54,5 minutes vs. 27,3 minutes. That's twice as long at 27,3 minutes extra.

For 150 miles of range at departure (from an arrival at 40 miles range), it's 16.5 minutes vs. 22.5 minutes, aka 36% longer, 6 minutes extra per stop.

For 100 miles of range at departure from 40 miles range at arrival, the SR is actually faster, because of its greater efficiency and because it arrives at a higher voltage (15,1 minutes for the SR, 15,9 minutes for the LR - 0,8 minutes difference, 95% as long for the SR)

Again, consult all of the *big* caveats about our *extremely* limited data at present


----------



## danzgator

KarenRei said:


> Note the caveats, particularly with regard to the SR; we're going on a whole zero datapoints here  We don't know that it will be some simple linear adjustment relative to the number of cells - for example, perhaps the limitations will be thermal, wherein it would track the LR much closer. I expect we'll be finding out more very early next year


Since Tesla posted 170 miles/30 min on the LR and 130 miles/30 min on the SR, I don't think so. You can see that there's a problem with the short range charge speed right there. It start diverging from the LR before 30 min.


----------



## danzgator

KarenRei said:


> Hey, I just realized something that might help (a little!) to tease out cell limits from thermal limits for getting a (still very speculative) curve for the SR. We actually *do* (kind of) have a datapoint: the press kit! We don't know exactly what SOC the press kit meant the "170 miles in 30 minutes / 130 miles in 30 minutes" figures from, but that can be figured out by finding out where on the LR's curve it gets 340mph. I can then ensure than SR gets 260 mph at that point.
> 
> An observation: while I used 46/31 = 1.48x as the difference between the SR and LR's curves, 170/130 is only 1.31x. So that would suggest somewhere between the thermal-only limit case and the cell-count-only limit case.
> 
> Next time I make graphs (aka, after I get a few more datapoints from our friendly local Model 3 owners!  ), I'll update the SR curve based on this new data. It should improve somewhat.
> 
> ED: Meh, forget waiting:  Wow, this looks a lot better after incorporating the press kit datapoint! I also incorporated a 2% efficiency boost for the SR this time:
> 
> View attachment 3817
> 
> 
> Concerning the previous comment of wanting 200 miles range for a drive after arriving at what I assume to be about 40 miles, it looks like a stop would be 54,5 minutes vs. 27,3 minutes. That's twice as long at 27,3 minutes extra.
> 
> For 150 miles of range at departure (from an arrival at 40 miles range), it's 16.5 minutes vs. 22.5 minutes, aka 36% longer, 6 minutes extra per stop.
> 
> For 100 miles of range at departure from 40 miles range at arrival, the SR is actually faster, because of its greater efficiency and because it arrives at a higher voltage (15,1 minutes for the SR, 15,9 minutes for the LR - 0,8 minutes difference, 95% as long for the SR)
> 
> Again, consult all of the *big* caveats about our *extremely* limited data at present


Wow, this is better, but the SR getting to 100 mi faster assumes that you start charging at 0%, which would never happen in the real world. You'd always try to get there with 10% at a minimum, 15-20% if you're conservative.


----------



## SSonnentag

Great work on the graphs! Thanks!


----------



## Michael Russo

Karen, wonderful job. A big Takk to you! 
Am a correct in reading that (as expected) 60’ charging will get you ~50 miles more in the LRB than in the SRB?


----------



## KarenRei

danzgator said:


> Wow, this is better, but the SR getting to 100 mi faster assumes that you start charging at 0%, which would never happen in the real world. You'd always try to get there with 10% at a minimum, 15-20% if you're conservative.


Please reread the post  Those numbers are assuming beginning the charge at 40 miles range remaining.

Likewise, your previous post was already long since addressed by the time you wrote it, and the post you were replying to had a big boldface notice alerting people to the fact


----------



## KarenRei

Michael Russo said:


> Karen, wonderful job. A big Takk to you!
> Am a correct in reading that (as expected) 60' charging will get you ~50 miles more in the LRB than in the SRB?


60'? 60 feet? I'm going to guess minutes. From.... 0%? Yes, a bit over 50.

The big caveats here are, beyond that we only have a semi-vague datapoint from the press kit to go on for our SR curve, that we don't know the very bottom of the LR's curve (we can speak with more precision when talking about charges starting at higher SOCs - although even there we need more datapoints!  ). All Teslas, around zero or below, start out charging very slowly because of the combination of current limits and low pack voltages. The rampup however varies greatly between models - some take a good while to hit their peak, while others are off and running at just a bit over 0%. I based the bottom here on an average of the curves between the different Tesla models that I could find data for, but we won't know what's right until we actually have some low-SOC Model 3 LR charges in our dataset! 

The thing I found surprising, but makes perfect sense, is that at low SOCs, SR charging looks like it might be _faster_ than LR, and not just because it's a touch more efficient due to its lower weight. It's because - until it starts throttling - it fills up faster, aka the SOC rises faster, aka the pack voltage rises faster. And power is current times voltage, and we're operating on what appears to be a current-limited situation. Now, once it starts to taper, the LR obviously shoots past it


----------



## Dan Detweiler

Wow, this is all fascinating stuff! I just wish I had the slightest idea what you guys are talking about! I have never felt like such a dullard in all my life. Oh well, glad this makes sense to some of you anyway. I will just be satisfied with the knowledge that those of you that DO know what all of this means seem to be pleased. LOL!

To me, supercharging just means "can I stop to charge, order my Big Mac value meal, enjoy it while checking my emails and then have enough charge to get me to my next Big Mac!" It looks like I am probably good. 

Dan


----------



## Akilae

Dan Detweiler said:


> Wow, this is all fascinating stuff! I just wish I had the slightest idea what you guys are talking about! I have never felt like such a dullard in all my life. Oh well, glad this makes sense to some of you anyway. I will just be satisfied with the knowledge that those of you that DO know what all of this means seem to be pleased. LOL!
> 
> To me, supercharging just means "can I stop to charge, order my Big Mac value meal, enjoy it while checking my emails and then have enough charge to get me to my next Big Mac!" It looks like I am probably good.
> 
> Dan


Summary:
M3 charges really fast


----------



## Dan Detweiler

Akilae said:


> Summary:
> M3 charges really fast


Thank You! I understand that!

Dan


----------



## danzgator

KarenRei said:


> Please reread the post  Those numbers are assuming beginning the charge at 40 miles range remaining.
> 
> Likewise, your previous post was already long since addressed by the time you wrote it, and the post you were replying to had a big boldface notice alerting people to the fact


Yeah, sorry I was trying to follow on my phone at the time. Thanks.


----------



## Michael Russo

KarenRei said:


> 60'? 60 feet? I'm going to guess minutes. From.... 0%? Yes, a bit over 50.
> 
> (...)


60 feet...? LOL!  Of course I meant minutes... you guessed me well, Karen! 

Thanks for your explanations and clearly I get there are still a lot of caveats. I am strongly leaning towards the LRB though I will remain a bit on the fence until I know more reliably what French prices will be in the late 2018 timeframe... Charge time if acceptable for the SR may make me keep my options open (budget wise... ) though I stupidly feel like much more than 45' to go from 20 to 80-90 % chargé still is a bit of a paradigm shift me, particularly with frequent 850-1100 kms trips with Midnight S≡R≡NITY... Your assessment & detailed data helps in shaping that choice... yet today I am still thinking that LRB will be the first box I'll tick... even way before the UWCs!! .

Gosh I can believe I just wrote this, @SoFlaModel3 !!


----------



## Insaneoctane

Troy said:


> Hi. Comparing Supercharge times in terms of kW rate or percentage doesn't do justice to the Model 3. To see the problem better, think about the Model S 100D and Model S P100D. These two cars have the same battery. Therefore they will reach the same percentage at the same time. However, 50% of 335 miles EPA rated range is not the same as 50% of 315 miles EPA rated range.
> 
> Therefore the Model S 100D will supercharge faster than the Model S P100D. The difference is even bigger between Model S and Model 3. Therefore comparing range added over time is an excellent idea. That's why I like Tesla's "X miles in 30 minutes" format. Another excellent idea would be to compare the time it takes to supercharge from 0 to 200 rated miles.
> 
> Bjorn used to compare range added over time. Here is an excellent video by Bjorn. Unfortunately, more recently he completely ruined his comparison videos and made them useless when he started comparing kW and % instead of range. I wish all Tesla cars had the exact same battery. This would have made it clearer that comparing range added over time makes more sense than comparing kW or percentage.


Interestingly, I am not sure that we agree. I think it depends on what you are trying to compare. If you want to compare raw power charging speed, you don't want the effects of the vehicle's driving efficiency in the mix. If I just wanted to know if one car can take 120kW and another can only take 90kW, that would show the vehicle that takes 120kW has more capable charging equipment. However, if I just want to know which vehicle puts range on faster, then I agree with your statements. I would also concede that this is what most people would be concerned about. Once you factor in the vehicles driving efficiency, the Model 3 looks fantastic. But, as an engineer, I want to evaluate both the raw charging efficiency AND the vehicle efficiency to see what really changed between the MS and Model 3 ....


----------



## Troy

@KarenRei, here is a new data point at 5:30:





@Insaneoctane, I guess I had too many arguments with people who didn't understand that Model S 100D Supercharges faster than a Model S P100D. They came up with arguments like, "you can slow down if you need more range".

There are too many people who are easily confusable and Tesla doesn't show the data to clear things up because their cheaper cars are better in terms of range and supercharge times and they don't want to talk about that.


----------



## SoFlaModel3

Michael Russo said:


> 60 feet...? LOL!  Of course I meant minutes... you guessed me well, Karen!
> 
> Thanks for your explanations and clearly I get there are still a lot of caveats. I am strongly leaning towards the LRB though I will remain a bit on the fence until I know more reliably what French prices will be in the late 2018 timeframe... Charge time if acceptable for the SR may make me keep my options open (budget wise... ) though I stupidly feel like much more than 45' to go from 20 to 80-90 % chargé still is a bit of a paradigm shift me, particularly with frequent 850-1100 kms trips with Midnight S≡R≡NITY... Your assessment & detailed data helps in shaping that choice... yet today I am still thinking that LRB will be the first box I'll tick... even way before the UWCs!! .
> 
> Gosh I can believe I just wrote this, @SoFlaModel3 !!


I like it -- forget that range, you want to get to 60 mph .4 seconds faster


----------



## KarenRei

I was really excited when I saw that he was going to charge, and then really frustrated by what I saw. That datapoint is worthless. There hasn't been enough time for the current to ramp up, and it looks like he may be sharing a charger :Þ

That whole video was a frustrating experience. E.g. him continually searching for EAP and complaining about EAP features being missing (like TACC) when it's obvious that the owner didn't purchase it.

As for the whole "driving styles" thing, that doesn't factor into this. These figures are for rated miles The miles that will tick up on your screen and hit their nominal maximums. Obviously any individual will deviate from this depending on their driving, but I'm not going to personalize ranges. We're sticking with what shows up on the screen


----------



## Sandy

KarenRei said:


> I was really excited when I saw that he was going to charge, and then really frustrated by what I saw. That datapoint is worthless. There hasn't been enough time for the current to ramp up, and it looks like he may be sharing a charger :Þ
> 
> That whole video was a frustrating experience. E.g. him continually searching for EAP and complaining about EAP features being missing (like TACC) when it's obvious that the owner didn't purchase it.
> 
> As for the whole "driving styles" thing, that doesn't factor into this. These figures are for rated miles The miles that will tick up on your screen and hit their nominal maximums. Obviously any individual will deviate from this depending on their driving, but I'm not going to personalize ranges. We're sticking with what shows up on the screen


Thanks for all this Karen! Great work. Looking forward to added data.


----------



## KarenRei

Sandy said:


> Thanks for all this Karen! Great work. Looking forward to added data.


So am I!


----------



## 3V Pilot

So I have a quick question for you charging experts out there..... Right now if I wanted to drive from the Tucson, AZ Supercharger (just opened) to the El Paso, TX Supercharger and I started at 100%, could a LR Model 3 make it? And if so what max speed could I do and still arrive with 5% charge or at least a little buffer? I’m asking because I want to do this and they have not opened the other planned Superchargers along this route. Of course by the time I get the car they may have more locations open. I just want to know if I could make the distance.....


----------



## Troy

Hi, @Mike Land. Of course, others might have different opinions on this but I think the Model 3 LR RWD will perform just like the Model S 100D because both have practically the same EPA highway dyno test scores. The difference is only 0.7 miles. However, the Model 3 LR AWD should have about 10 miles more range.


----------



## Michael Russo

Mike Land said:


> So I have a quick question for you charging experts out there..... Right now if I wanted to drive from the Tucson, AZ Supercharger (just opened) to the El Paso, TX Supercharger and I started at 100%, could a LR Model 3 make it? (...) I just want to know if I could make the distance.....


Quick question from all of us far away foreigners D), how many miles would that be? Just curious too...


----------



## Frank99

At 316 miles, you'd have to make some adjustments. First, you'd have to watch the weather - rain or a headwind would reduce your range enough to not make it. You'd also likely have to choose a cooler part of the year, because you won't want to run the A/C or roll down the windows. You'll have to limit your speed to the 55 mph speed that Tesla uses as a benchmark for it's range calculations - going 65 will likely guarantee that you won't make it. Given those caveats, yes you'll be able to make it.


----------



## SoFlaModel3

Mike Land said:


> So I have a quick question for you charging experts out there..... Right now if I wanted to drive from the Tucson, AZ Supercharger (just opened) to the El Paso, TX Supercharger and I started at 100%, could a LR Model 3 make it? And if so what max speed could I do and still arrive with 5% charge or at least a little buffer? I'm asking because I want to do this and they have not opened the other planned Superchargers along this route. Of course by the time I get the car they may have more locations open. I just want to know if I could make the distance.....


Is there no ability to charge along the way?

I'd be weary of arrival with ~5% left...


----------



## KarenRei

Tesla does not use 55 mph as a benchmark.

As for charging along the way, only NEMA 14-50s and some J1772s near the end. You should stop and add some range at a 14-50 en route if nothing better has been built since then.


----------



## Dan Detweiler

Mike Land said:


> So I have a quick question for you charging experts out there..... Right now if I wanted to drive from the Tucson, AZ Supercharger (just opened) to the El Paso, TX Supercharger and I started at 100%, could a LR Model 3 make it? And if so what max speed could I do and still arrive with 5% charge or at least a little buffer? I'm asking because I want to do this and they have not opened the other planned Superchargers along this route. Of course by the time I get the car they may have more locations open. I just want to know if I could make the distance.....


By the time you get your car that gap will have filled in. Look at the projected Supercharger layout on the Tesla sight. Deming, NM and Willcox, AZ both scheduled to be built by the end of this year. You won't have any problem making the trip.

Dan


----------



## garsh

Frank99 said:


> You'd also likely have to choose a cooler part of the year, because you won't want to run the A/C or roll down the windows.


I know you said "cooler", so if you're talking about temperatures around 60-70° F, then I agree.

But generally, warm weather is good for a battery's ability to deliver power. And the AC is efficient enough that it won't affect range too much. I wouldn't worry too much about distance driving in hot weather.

Cold weather, OTOH, can severely reduce range. Additionally, a cabin heater (if you feel the need to turn it on) will use more electricity than the AC. I start noticing a negative effect on my Leaf's range below 60° F. And it gets worse the colder it gets. And my car is kept inside an integral garage, so it stays relatively warm when parked in winter. Those who have to park their cars outside overnight in cold weather will feel the effects even more.


----------



## KarenRei

garsh said:


> I know you said "cooler", so if you're talking about temperatures around 60-70° F, then I agree.
> 
> But generally, warm weather is good for a battery's ability to deliver power. And the AC is efficient enough that it won't affect range too much. I wouldn't worry too much about distance driving in hot weather.
> 
> Cold weather, OTOH, can severely reduce range. Additionally, a cabin heater (if you feel the need to turn it on) will use more electricity than the AC. I start noticing a negative effect on my Leaf's range below 60° F. And it gets worse the colder it gets. And my car is kept inside an integral garage, so it stays relatively warm when parked in winter. Those who have to park their cars outside overnight in cold weather will feel the effects even more.


Meanwhile, Bjørn Nyland, who works as a courier in Norway, reports only a 10-20% reduction in range on long trips in the winter in otherwise good (dry, clear road) conditions.

Don't confuse a Leaf with a Tesla, nor initial startup heating with long-term heating to maintain the temperature. 

(Note that I'd expect more of a summer/winter difference in a 3 vs a S, because the former should have less waste heat. Then again, less surface area for heat loss, but I still expect the efficiency issue to dominate.)


----------



## danzgator

Mike Land said:


> So I have a quick question for you charging experts out there..... Right now if I wanted to drive from the Tucson, AZ Supercharger (just opened) to the El Paso, TX Supercharger and I started at 100%, could a LR Model 3 make it? And if so what max speed could I do and still arrive with 5% charge or at least a little buffer? I'm asking because I want to do this and they have not opened the other planned Superchargers along this route. Of course by the time I get the car they may have more locations open. I just want to know if I could make the distance.....


This is funny because I am keeping an eye on this route for my trip home from Fremont because it is the most direct. I keep track of the construction status on https://supercharge.info/ There are two Superchargers that were under permit and recently began construction. One for 2 days and one for 11 days. The one they just built here in Pinellas Park took less than a few weeks once they started construction. I would not risk the trip without one of those two being constructed unless you were planning to stay somewhere in between for a few hours, or overnight where you could charge. Its just not worth the risk and the stress. I've been there and done that, and believe me you do not want to run out of power. However, I assume they should be by the time we take delivery.:


----------



## 3V Pilot

Thanks for the quick replies, you guys are great. I don’t want to hijack this thread but I think charging and range go hand in hand here. I do realize that other superchargers are “scheduled” to be online before the end of the year but they have showed that same map for several years now. I’d say they are on “Elon time” and will be done by the end of the year......just maybe not this year.....LOL!

I’ll have to quote Sammy Hagar here because “I can’t drive 55” is playing in my head and I usually do 85-90 on a road trip like that. Guess I’ll have to wait for those other locations to open up before I attempt that trip. Even waiting for a 14-50 charge sounds painfully slow for the extra miles it would take to make the distance.

So, I guess that brings me to the next question, what kind of mileage can be expected doing 85mph in best case scenario, flat road, no headwind, no AC or heat running, windows up, 60-70 degree day? And yes I know that will never happen but I can’t imagine even getting close to 310 miles at that speed even with “perfect conditions”. Oh, and please don’t hate for the fact I’m going over the posted speed limit, I haven’t gotten a ticket in over 20 years!

If your are a moderator and feel this discussion would be better off in a separate thread please feel free to move it......


----------



## 3V Pilot

Okay in the time it took me to write that the post above it showed up. Guess I’ll be eating my words about “Elon Time”. I didn’t know you could see the status of the superchargers under construction. That is fantastic news! Still curious though of what kind of range the car might do at 85MPH, even in real world conditions.......


----------



## danzgator

Mike Land said:


> Thanks for the quick replies, you guys are great. I don't want to hijack this thread but I think charging and range go hand in hand here. I do realize that other superchargers are "scheduled" to be online before the end of the year but they have showed that same map for several years now. I'd say they are on "Elon time" and will be done by the end of the year......just maybe not this year.....LOL!
> 
> I'll have to quote Sammy Hagar here because "I can't drive 55" is playing in my head and I usually do 85-90 on a road trip like that. Guess I'll have to wait for those other locations to open up before I attempt that trip. Even waiting for a 14-50 charge sounds painfully slow for the extra miles it would take to make the distance.
> 
> So, I guess that brings me to the next question, what kind of mileage can be expected doing 85mph in best case scenario, flat road, no headwind, no AC or heat running, windows up, 60-70 degree day? And yes I know that will never happen but I can't imagine even getting close to 310 miles at that speed even with "perfect conditions". Oh, and please don't hate for the fact I'm going over the posted speed limit, I haven't gotten a ticket in over 20 years!
> 
> If your are a moderator and feel this discussion would be better off in a separate thread please feel free to move it......


You get less and less efficient the faster you go, so every MPH you can drop makes a significant impact. I used to do 85-90, but find myself going 74-79 nowadays on long trips because its just so wasteful to go that fast. Not from a green sense, but because you aren't getting to your destination faster. Although you are getting from Supercharger to Supercharger faster, you spend a lot more time charging and your overall trip becomes longer. It also matters how much weight you have in the car. I'm just guessing, but I'd assume it would decrease your range +/-80%. If no one has a more exact answer, I'm going on a road trip tomorrow and will see if I can roughly figure out the difference on my Model S playing around with the cruise control.


----------



## 3V Pilot

danzgator said:


> You get less and less efficient the faster you go, so every MPH you can drop makes a significant impact. I used to do 85-90, but find myself going 74-79 nowadays on long trips because its just so wasteful to go that fast. Not from a green sense, but because you aren't getting to your destination faster. Although you are getting from Supercharger to Supercharger faster, you spend a lot more time charging and your overall trip becomes longer. It also matters how much weight you have in the car. I'm just guessing, but I'd assume it would decrease your range +/-80%. If no one has a more exact answer, I'm going on a road trip tomorrow and will see if I can roughly figure out the difference on my Model S playing around with the cruise control.


Okay, that is the perfect answer and just what I was looking for from someone with experience. Thank you! I figured that going that fast would kill the range. I'm a pilot by profession and I knew aerodynamics at those speeds would not be efficient. Thanks for the info, that really helps.


----------



## Rusty

I wiuldn’t I expect an 80% drop but something like 30-40% reduced range.


----------



## danzgator

Rusty said:


> I wiuldn't I expect an 80% drop but something like 30-40% reduced range.


I meant drop to 80%. I don't think you'd drop 80% if you were going 100 mph.


----------



## KarenRei

You wouldn't need much 14-50 range. Basically the 14-50 is just your safety buffer. If you wanted to add, say, 40 miles there that would take about 1 hour.



> I do realize that other superchargers are "scheduled" to be online before the end of the year but they have showed that same map for several years now.


Except that they're both now actually under construction. As of Monday they were laying conduit at Wilcox, and they're just about to installing pedestals at Deming. Just a couple more weeks and both should be live.

They haven't showed that same map for several years. Those "construction cone" symbols on the map only popped up recently. Once construction starts, it's generally pretty quick.


----------



## Insaneoctane

Mike Land said:


> ... Still curious though of what kind of range the car might do at 85MPH, even in real world conditions.......


About 264 miles. If you look up the efficiency at 85 MPH from this posting here (disclaimer the link is another forum), you can see the EPA data prediction that the model 3 should get 295 Wh/mi at 85 MPH. This is 3.39 miles per kWh. Assuming that the LR pack is 78kW, you get 3.39 x 78 = 264 miles of range at 85 MPH. No AC or heater, no rain or wind.


----------



## roflwaffle

In case someone hasn't posted this, Tesla has charging speed versus breaker rating for the 3 up.

https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation#wall-connector

They're also assuming ~250+Wh/mile, compared to ~400Wh/mile for the S at 12A, which is really nice. I wouldn't be surprised to see less than 200Wh/mile from the plug if I drive efficiently.

Edit - It looks like the S is at ~330+Wh/mile at 90A/17.2kW, so for it efficiency depends a lot on charging power. The 3 is more or less flat across it's entire range.

Edit2 - These are 240V.


----------



## Rocco Speranza

roflwaffle said:


> In case someone hasn't posted this, Tesla has charging speed versus breaker rating for the 3 up.
> 
> https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation#wall-connector
> 
> They're also assuming ~250+Wh/mile, compared to ~400Wh/mile for the S, which is really nice. I wouldn't be surprised to see less than 200Wh/mile from the plug if I drive efficiently.
> 
> Edit - It looks like the S is at ~330+Wh/mile at 90A/17.2kW, so for it efficiency depends a lot on charging power. The 3 is more or less flat across it's entire range.


I do believe this is new, thanks!


----------



## SoFlaModel3

roflwaffle said:


> In case someone hasn't posted this, Tesla has charging speed versus breaker rating for the 3 up.
> 
> https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation#wall-connector
> 
> They're also assuming ~250+Wh/mile, compared to ~400Wh/mile for the S at 12A, which is really nice. I wouldn't be surprised to see less than 200Wh/mile from the plug if I drive efficiently.
> 
> Edit - It looks like the S is at ~330+Wh/mile at 90A/17.2kW, so for it efficiency depends a lot on charging power. The 3 is more or less flat across it's entire range.
> 
> Edit2 - These are 240V.


Thanks for pointing this out!


----------



## Insaneoctane

Why do you think Tesla is providing the Gen 2 mobile connector with the LR? They clearly show the Gen 2 is limited to 32A and the Gen 1 is still being provided to the MS/MX is limited to 40A. They also show that the LR is capable of 48A.... Seems strange to me.


----------



## Sandy

Insaneoctane said:


> Why do you think Tesla is providing the Gen 2 mobile connector with the LR? They clearly show the Gen 2 is limited to 32A and the Gen 1 is still being provided to the MS/MX is limited to 40A. They also show that the LR is capable of 48A.... Seems strange to me.


The LR is capable of 48 amp charging. The Gen 2 MC may be limited to 32 amp charging BUT with only a 40 amp breaker on a Nema 14-50 at that rate it charges M3 at 30mph (50 kph) at 7.7 kW. Impressive! At 32 amps charging the S gets 23 mph and the X 20 mph.

On a wall connector with a 60 amp breaker and 48 amps charging M3 gets 44 mph compared to the S at 34 mph and the X at 30 mph.

My guess is as the MC charging speed is sufficient at 32 amps on the LR they are only manufacturing one MC connector for the M3 for use on both LR and SR. Cost saving and M3 fleet compatibility.


----------



## Sandy

COOLEST thing about the new chart is that on a *15 amp breaker 12 amp charging you get 11 mph / 18 kph!*

Hint. For Canadians and other non US to see the new charging chart incorporating the M3 you must switch over to the US website. CDN website charging page has a different chart and no M3 data yet.


----------



## KarenRei

roflwaffle said:


> In case someone hasn't posted this, Tesla has charging speed versus breaker rating for the 3 up.
> 
> https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation#wall-connector
> 
> They're also assuming ~250+Wh/mile, compared to ~400Wh/mile for the S at 12A, which is really nice. I wouldn't be surprised to see less than 200Wh/mile from the plug if I drive efficiently.
> 
> Edit - It looks like the S is at ~330+Wh/mile at 90A/17.2kW, so for it efficiency depends a lot on charging power. The 3 is more or less flat across it's entire range.
> 
> Edit2 - These are 240V.


Awesome - I'll incorporate that into the spreadsheet this evening. Note that it's a shame that they just write "Model S" and "Model X"; there's different energy consumption levels between the different variants models (at least there's not as much variation as there used to be...). And there's nothing about the SR, although we should be able to get pretty dang close - just a minor efficiency adjustment combined with the 32A upper limit.

(The thing that's awesome about the efficiency for me, in a place where Tesla has no superchargers, is how fast I'll be able to get a CHAdeMO charge  )


----------



## Love

All of this is me getting in way over my head but it is fascinating. I saw this over on TMC and wanted to share in case it was new info and useful.

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/model-3-specs.94989/page-17#post-2368346



















EDIT: Wow, yeah, it is literally just a few posts up. Sorry all


----------



## JWardell

roflwaffle said:


> In case someone hasn't posted this, Tesla has charging speed versus breaker rating for the 3 up.
> 
> https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation#wall-connector
> 
> They're also assuming ~250+Wh/mile, compared to ~400Wh/mile for the S at 12A, which is really nice. I wouldn't be surprised to see less than 200Wh/mile from the plug if I drive efficiently.
> 
> Edit - It looks like the S is at ~330+Wh/mile at 90A/17.2kW, so for it efficiency depends a lot on charging power. The 3 is more or less flat across it's entire range.
> 
> Edit2 - These are 240V.


It's awesome to see how much more efficiently the Model 3 charges, especially at the lower current rates. This will make a big difference for most people. Suddenly plugging into a standard 120v outlet is no longer useless! No doubt this is due to Model 3's smaller size, better efficiency, and more modern electronics in the charging and drive system.


----------



## Insaneoctane

Ironically, the model 3 charge rate in kW is the same or lower than the model S/X, but due to it's higher driving efficiency, this results in faster MPH during charging (the same or less kWh = more range for 3 vs S/X}. Maybe not a significant point to most, but it's hard for me to say that the model 3 has a better charging efficiency... Eventually I will bite the bullet and move on ;}


----------



## Model34mePlease

I assume folks commenting about 15A charging realize that is at 240V, not 110V


----------



## EValuatED

Lovesword said:


> All of this is me getting in way over my head but it is fascinating. I saw this over on TMC and wanted to share in case it was new info and useful.
> 
> https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/model-3-specs.94989/page-17#post-2368346
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Wow, yeah, it is literally just a few posts up. Sorry all


No worries. It saved us from going to the other forum, where it's not as friendly.


----------



## Insaneoctane

Any ideas why the model 3 would be so much more efficient charging at low amps? It is more than twice the MPH of the X at 2.8kW!


----------



## KarenRei

Insaneoctane said:


> Any ideas why the model 3 would be so much more efficient charging at low amps? It is more than twice the MPH of the X at 2.8kW!
> 
> View attachment 3842


That's a misleading graph, since Model 3 can't charge at more than 11,5kW. Your graph makes it look like there's an elbow in Model X and S charge rates at high levels, when it's just that Model 3 stops using more power.

Anyway, at low powers it means that there's lower parasitic losses in Model 3.


----------



## Insaneoctane

KarenRei said:


> That's a misleading graph, since Model 3 can't charge at more than 11,5kW. Your graph makes it look like there's an elbow in Model X and S charge rates at high levels, when it's just that Model 3 stops using more power.
> 
> Anyway, at low powers it means that there's lower parasitic losses in Model 3.


Yes, I agree that the graph is misleading above 11.5kW (the model 3's max charge rate). I haven't been in front of a desktop for a while - all mobile.


----------



## Sandy

Sandy said:


> COOLEST thing about the new chart is that on a *15 amp breaker 12 amp charging you get 11 mph / 18 kph!*





Model34mePlease said:


> I assume folks commenting about 15A charging realize that is at 240V, not 110V


My bad, brainfart. I lost the fact that the chart is predicated at 240V. Probably 1/2 those numbers on the 15 amp breaker 12 amp charging at 120V.


----------



## Insaneoctane

@KarenRei, does this YouTube video help?


----------



## KarenRei

Insaneoctane said:


> @KarenRei, does this YouTube video help?


A little bit (already saw it). Like most people, they just posted brief "excerpts" rather than a full charging video, and cut off half the necessary information from the screen most of the time, but I still got a couple datapoints.


----------



## iwantmy3

I got an impressive charge rate yesterday. 22C ambient (72F) Belleville, Ontario. This charging station just opened in the last few days.


----------



## scaots

I had up to 493mph and added over 100 miles in 15 minutes.


----------

