Bjorn, I wonder if all the inaccuracies of the numbers and measurements combined with relatively small differences found make any assumption justified. Let's do a check: Take for example your two calculations: 526.6 * 133 / 0.94 = 74.5 526.6 * 133 / 0.95 = 73.7
First let's take the lowest possible and the highest of the last calculation: 526.550 * 132.51 / 0.9549 = 73.07 = 73,1 526.649 * 133.49 / 0.9450 = 74,39 = 74,4 Difference: 1.3 / 73.1 * 100 = +1,8% Even more if we take the highest possible of your first calculation: 526.649 * 133.49 / 0.9350 = 75.19 = 75.2 (!) Difference: 2.1 / 73.1 * 100 = +2.9% Conclusion, based on the inaccuracies of the the numbers by the car and with the inaccuracies of measurements by the car basically unknown it is in my opinion impossible to make any conclusions. Especially if the batteries need to be calibrated too. Just my 2 cents. Or 3.
thats a point of view i didnt "consider" before (simply didnt think of exploring how big the inaccuracies actually can be) and it might explain a good chunk of whats happening but one thing bothers me .. if all of that is just down to "random" inaccuracies .. why is bjorns constant for range on the display now lower than before "minimizing" a possible range reduction buy expanding the bottom buffer ... which is almost certainly the case since even his charging voltage at a given state of charge is now higher (meaning the battery is actually more full by comparison to the old charging voltages while displaying "the same" state of charge) i mean i really hope thats some weird misscalibration in the battery paired with high inaccuracies while measuring .. but it kind of feels off given Teslas history of patching something like this and simply not say a word because all the media would endlessly thrash tesla for it (even if they do it for safety reasons)
Yes, any scientific or engineering calculation should incorporate error bars or tolerances as part of the analysis: standard procedure particularly when making comparisons. It's also perfectly valid to conclude that there's no statistical difference.
If it helps, my US Model 3 SR+ recently started to show 211 miles at 90% state of charge vs the 216 miles I was getting before. It started around the time of the v10 update or the updates right before it. I assumed it was just an algorithm adjustment to the range estimate based on driving factors such as speed/acceleration/terrain/weather.
This is about the same noise level I get. I added the roof band and it did help. Road noise is the most. Weather is nicht gut for testing but just have to account for the higher consumption. Hmmm I still feel there was software changes to BMS kicked off some early degradation. 8.3 added the 5% peak power. 20.4.4 rebalanced again on mine before 24.4 which enabled chademo. Each I noticed a change in rate of degradation. Thanks for trying to confirm more.
I just think that the degradation on the Tesla Model 3 is very high since 250 kw was enabled via software update. 250kw charging speed on such a "small" 75kwh battery with only 400V architecture must put a lot of stress on the battery, so i say they added a bigger buffer per OTA update to the battery to compensate for that but the degradation must still be high.
My LR awd @ 7100 km supercharged twice (first time only 70 kW max) and a couple of DC charges @40ish kW. List 489 km equivalent... Started at 494 km. Consumption avg lifetime is 169 Wh/km 80% motorway 110-130 km/h. Charged to 80% normally every second to third day plus 4 times to 100% just before departure (distributed evenly over lifetime for BMS calibration purposes). Never left standing at sub 30% SoC.
I still think outside temperature should do a lot as well even though the battery started somewhat warm. You should get more energy out of the battery at 25 degrees compared to 5 degrees.
I noticed the bottom buffer sudden change in X100D from 4 til 5 kWh after one of V9 updates. That could be it. Again, Brørn, I cannot stop telling you this - get can bus cable and scanmytesla :)
Hi Bjørn, Greetings from Kristiansand. Since I'm considering to swap in a couple of month my now 2 years old Mazda CX-5 with other el-bil (our second car is VW e-Up 2014) I'm watching basically all of your videos. I just want to say that I'm really impressed with all efforts that you are putting into these very detailed tests and want to thank you for your hard work. I hope that in the near future you will be able to take both Polestar 2 and Volvo XC40 for the test. Tesla 3 or Y is also on my radar and not to forget crossovers from VW and Skoda. By the way, pass my regards to my country-man Paweł :)
I measured 72.6 kWh when the car was 1 month old back in October/November last year. This was on the old software obviously. I’ll do another test soon to test with new software. Not sure how you got 74.5 before must have been perfect conditions, maybe very warm.
@Bjorn Nyland My Model 3 LR RWD car is a June 2018 build. Searching my TeslaFi charging logs my noticeable range decrease started AFTER my 8/21/19 update to SW version 2019.28.3.1 - Wonder if there is a pattern here among others?
What an odd coincidence. My LR AWD is also delivered 30 March. I have driven about 32.000 km. And my range dropped to 482km @ 100% charge. And like you, I have not recalibrated my M3. Between delivery and now - average consumption is still 158 Wh/km.Looking forward to your following tests. Hopefully we get some answers where the capacity has gone to.
Good stuff. I have 25,000 miles and the battery is doing very well. Full charge is 299 down form 310. It is a year old. Not much supercharging. Maybe 5 times. Charge to 70 or 80%. Keep changing so battery does not get stuck at one level.
@@Tore_Lund somewhere i think have seen, maybe even bjorn said that, that unless hard acceleration or necessary due to traction, only one motor is running (if that is enough for road conditions/speed, etc.), it would make sense but i cannot confirm that
@@Tore_Lund The induction motor will spin freely while cruising, so only the permanent magnet one is used. There's still some drag left but that should be very minor. So technically it doesn't disengage as there's no clutch but the result is nearly the same.
LR RWD - 32,000km (19,883miles) Since range increase a 90% charge would always show me 470km. (292miles) Right after V10 a 90% charge showed 455km. (283miles) As of this morning a 90% charge is showing 429km. (267miles) I was at the service center last night* and asked "why is my rated range dropping". They told me "with the new software updates that range is now based on your driving habits as it learns the way you drive and predicts your range accordingly". Tesla recommended I change my display to battery percentage. (*Note: I was at SC for a failed upper control arm ball joint. It was squeaking, they replaced under warranty. Tesla told me the vendor did not clean out the burs in the ball joint which leads to premature failure.)
Karen Pease This is simply false. Even Bjorn recognize that if it’s the case, that’s not over 1 kWh. Mine has always 499km since february, going to make a battery capacity test to prove that there is absolutely no degration.
Bjørn Nyland I’m sorry, I corrected the mistake. I know that a lot of people encounter this behaviour. If you read my comment in your last video, I said that we are trying to collect data about this. But some people like me doesn’t have any issue, even on the latest software version, so it’s enough to prove that it is not correlated to any software update or whatever. We suppose that those who experiencing the problem are commuting below 50% (maybe oftenly to 30 or 40) and/or doesn’t plug their car on a regular basis (means daily and as soon as possible @ higher SoC probably 80 or 90% to help balancing the voltage on the cells).
@@Stlaysix_27 Just because you and others don't have an issue doesn't mean that there isn't an issue. You may want to take a look at this thread over at TMC - teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/sudden-loss-of-range-with-2019-16-x-software.154976/page-329 What had happened to the Model S is now starting to show up on the Model 3. I work in I.T. - your logic of "just because i'm running xyz version the same as everyone else = no issue as I don't have a problem" doesn't hold weight i'm afraid. I see issues day after day of people running exactly the same software and it behaving differently on exactly the same hardware. You have no idea what the software is doing or what it is looking for.
There is the possibility it could be normal degradation. You are more knowledgeable than me but if it continues at this rate then after 100,000km you will have lost about 55 kilometres approx 10%. Could that be normal
Wow I'm really surprised to hear you say that the consumption was high at 204. I'm struggling to get below 250 in my performance and that's only if I drive below 60 mile an hour.
Bjorn, give us some initial thoughts on the XC40 specs that have just been announced. Looks like they are sharing the same battery with the Polestar 2, but the range looks way worse. Is the XC40 that much of a brick?
Have you used Tesla spy to see is one of the battery banks has some low voltage cells? That would go along with the no 100 charge and the apparent loss of capacity. Just my guess.
i really would like if you got the CAN bus readout of the BMS (if you find equipment for that please share info about it since i myself am quite interested to maybe get somehting myself) ... as you saw+explained often enough the information from the BMS is just so much more sophisticated .. and with more data you and we all can draw much better conclusions from whats happnening ^^
@@dojohansen123 troll? Really? I'm in love with model 3. You must be high or drunk. Who's talking about Norway? I'm in the UK. South coast!! I do 4.3miles/kWh winter and 5.3 on summer. I do a chart every month, 180 miles a week on mixed roads. City to motorway then outskirts to company. My next car will be a model 3 in fact. I'm just totally afraid it won't be as efficient as advertised. Now who's the troll? Troll... 🤪
old Leaf has 80kW motor...acc 0-100 is 12 sec...not a good comparisation....UK South Coast hardly has temp below 10°......Apart from that Leaf has no facilities to heat and cool the battery which also cost some energy...We all know the troubles u will have with the Leafs battery due to the lack of these facilities...
@@johndrawing1176 good points, thank you, apart from last one. The UK's climate makes temperature management irrelevant if I don't quick charge the car. I only knocked 4% off in 16k miles.
@@ShabaaUkelele This is a dual motor and its a capacity test so Bjorn is not driving it like he does on the range test. If he accelerates both motors are in use, that explanes the consumption.....Check out this test with a single motor m3, you will see here consumption numbers from 114 to 122 wh/km.....ua-cam.com/video/Gpvg2f7HyQs/v-deo.html
Hi Bjorn. Beginner, and yet not Tesla owner (I only have a matchbox M3) question. Do using a Tesla you are able to check the life time consumption, like I can in my Ampera? I mean not the usual trip meter, but over all not resettable one.
My TM3P shows 480km at 99% (finished). Its 12 Weeks old and the odometer Shows 10000km I Tested today how many kWh my Tesla take up. From 0% to 50% (36,95kwh) 50% - 99% finished 36,54kwh Screenshots available
Shocking that you can only get 200 miles range in the long range model 3, which is sold as having 310+ in the USA and god knows what here in the UK. Either way you were only driving at 110km/h which is about 68 mph, yes it is rainy and cold, but that is standard weather for the UK for 5 months of the year.
Basically Wh/mi is energy required to drive 1 mile and MPGe is distance you can drive using 33.7 kWh of energy. Kilowatt-hour is kW * h - power * time = energy 1 kWh = 3 600 000 J (1 kW * 1 h = 1000 W * 3600 s) Wh/mi (or km) is consumption - energy used to drive 1 mile. MPGe is miles per gallon equivalent - a distance you can drive using equivalent of 1 gallon of gasoline - 33.7 kWh.
are we sure this is a long range model 3 he only got 203 miles (327km) using 94% of the battery this number seems closer to what a standard range+ gets on the highway
I really like you videos. I have a question: I’m considering buying a Tesla model 3 performance. But, range, for me is really important. Can you tell me, please, how many km can I make if I’m driving on the autobahn at 150 km/h, before needing to recharge?
Rogerio Gomes Osório with my model 3 awd long range I get 410-420 km at 130km/h and 370 - 380 at 140 km/h . Optimal weather conditions (no wind no rain) , ac always on. However you can find several autobahn tests on UA-cam
It would have to fail. They guarantee up to 70% of the battery so you would need 31% or more of loss in battery module. They will swap module rather than entire pack now.
Ehhh. These computer screens are no more than “estimates” and even if they are 99% correct, that’s still a margin or error of quite a bit of distance/power. Tech forum channel has a Model 3 with over 50,000 miles on it and his battery has seen less than 2% degradation. It’s known by most of the EV community that the estimates of battery range shown in the car are just estimates. When it’s showing 4%, it could be 4 to 7%, so if you recharge the car and take into account what 4% of battery capacity should be and subtract that from how much the car charges to 90% to try to get a “total battery energy” calculation, it’s going to be quite a bit off if the car was actually at 7% and showing 4%. That example could make you think that the battery is missing 3%, when in reality, it’s there but just not reflected in the estimated percentage. To test this kind of thing correctly, someone needs to write a custom firmware and hard load it into a Tesla to read the battery health from the firmware/hardware report. It would also help to drive the car until it actually stops to have some kind of a baseline between vehicles when calculating energy back into the battery. Everything I’ve seen from real world usage makes me think the Model 3 batteries will hold up very well over long periods of time. I have a new Model 3 Performance so it’s pointless for me to test, but I have several close friends with Model 3 vehicles with 30,000+ miles on them with virtually the same range as day 1. A coworker of mine has a vacation house right at 3.5 hours away- the day he bought his car a 100% charge would get him there with 6% left. The same car 32,000 miles later gets him there with 5% left. Identical driving conditions. I wouldn’t read too much into these tests- while interesting, they don’t mean much unless you can get Tesla software to read the battery firmware or you custom write firmware to get a more realistic reading. The margin of error with the computer estimates will always make people think “degradation” or “Tesla hid my power” by making charging calculations reflect missing percentages that are actually still there.
Bjorn, I wonder if all the inaccuracies of the numbers and measurements combined with relatively small differences found make any assumption justified. Let's do a check:
Take for example your two calculations:
526.6 * 133 / 0.94 = 74.5
526.6 * 133 / 0.95 = 73.7
First let's take the lowest possible and the highest of the last calculation:
526.550 * 132.51 / 0.9549 = 73.07 = 73,1
526.649 * 133.49 / 0.9450 = 74,39 = 74,4
Difference: 1.3 / 73.1 * 100 = +1,8%
Even more if we take the highest possible of your first calculation:
526.649 * 133.49 / 0.9350 = 75.19 = 75.2 (!)
Difference: 2.1 / 73.1 * 100 = +2.9%
Conclusion, based on the inaccuracies of the the numbers by the car and with the inaccuracies of measurements by the car basically unknown it is in my opinion impossible to make any conclusions. Especially if the batteries need to be calibrated too.
Just my 2 cents.
Or 3.
thats a point of view i didnt "consider" before (simply didnt think of exploring how big the inaccuracies actually can be) and it might explain a good chunk of whats happening
but one thing bothers me .. if all of that is just down to "random" inaccuracies .. why is bjorns constant for range on the display now lower than before "minimizing" a possible range reduction buy expanding the bottom buffer ... which is almost certainly the case since even his charging voltage at a given state of charge is now higher (meaning the battery is actually more full by comparison to the old charging voltages while displaying "the same" state of charge)
i mean i really hope thats some weird misscalibration in the battery paired with high inaccuracies while measuring .. but it kind of feels off given Teslas history of patching something like this and simply not say a word because all the media would endlessly thrash tesla for it (even if they do it for safety reasons)
Yes, any scientific or engineering calculation should incorporate error bars or tolerances as part of the analysis: standard procedure particularly when making comparisons. It's also perfectly valid to conclude that there's no statistical difference.
Only left to test the Tesla Model 3 SR+!!
If it helps, my US Model 3 SR+ recently started to show 211 miles at 90% state of charge vs the 216 miles I was getting before. It started around the time of the v10 update or the updates right before it. I assumed it was just an algorithm adjustment to the range estimate based on driving factors such as speed/acceleration/terrain/weather.
@@Radium3D cool, but you need to do like Bjorn, kWh not miles or kms
This is about the same noise level I get. I added the roof band and it did help. Road noise is the most. Weather is nicht gut for testing but just have to account for the higher consumption.
Hmmm I still feel there was software changes to BMS kicked off some early degradation. 8.3 added the 5% peak power. 20.4.4 rebalanced again on mine before 24.4 which enabled chademo. Each I noticed a change in rate of degradation.
Thanks for trying to confirm more.
3 views!
the last time I was this early, Hydrogen was still a thing :P
🤣
I just think that the degradation on the Tesla Model 3 is very high since 250 kw was enabled via software update. 250kw charging speed on such a "small" 75kwh battery with only 400V architecture must put a lot of stress on the battery, so i say they added a bigger buffer per OTA update to the battery to compensate for that but the degradation must still be high.
Unless you can use Ionity you won't get close to 250 kW. Most anyone can get is 150 kW on v2 superchargers
My LR awd @ 7100 km supercharged twice (first time only 70 kW max) and a couple of DC charges @40ish kW. List 489 km equivalent... Started at 494 km.
Consumption avg lifetime is 169 Wh/km 80% motorway 110-130 km/h.
Charged to 80% normally every second to third day plus 4 times to 100% just before departure (distributed evenly over lifetime for BMS calibration purposes). Never left standing at sub 30% SoC.
I still think outside temperature should do a lot as well even though the battery started somewhat warm. You should get more energy out of the battery at 25 degrees compared to 5 degrees.
I noticed the bottom buffer sudden change in X100D from 4 til 5 kWh after one of V9 updates. That could be it. Again, Brørn, I cannot stop telling you this - get can bus cable and scanmytesla :)
Hi Bjørn,
Greetings from Kristiansand. Since I'm considering to swap in a couple of month my now 2 years old Mazda CX-5 with other el-bil (our second car is VW e-Up 2014) I'm watching basically all of your videos. I just want to say that I'm really impressed with all efforts that you are putting into these very detailed tests and want to thank you for your hard work.
I hope that in the near future you will be able to take both Polestar 2 and Volvo XC40 for the test. Tesla 3 or Y is also on my radar and not to forget crossovers from VW and Skoda.
By the way, pass my regards to my country-man Paweł :)
I measured 72.6 kWh when the car was 1 month old back in October/November last year. This was on the old software obviously. I’ll do another test soon to test with new software. Not sure how you got 74.5 before must have been perfect conditions, maybe very warm.
Is it that you should count 1% tolerance, so that the actual number is +/- 0,7 kWh (70 / 100)?
@Bjorn Nyland My Model 3 LR RWD car is a June 2018 build. Searching my TeslaFi charging logs my noticeable range decrease started AFTER my 8/21/19 update to SW version 2019.28.3.1 - Wonder if there is a pattern here among others?
Mine started at the same time
same time on SR+
Great video thanks ! But I'm suprised that the windshield and widows do not seem to have any water repellent...
What an odd coincidence. My LR AWD is also delivered 30 March. I have driven about 32.000 km. And my range dropped to 482km @ 100% charge. And like you, I have not recalibrated my M3. Between delivery and now - average consumption is still 158 Wh/km.Looking forward to your following tests. Hopefully we get some answers where the capacity has gone to.
Do you think that high KW Ionity supercharging can be harming the battery in some way?
Good stuff. I have 25,000 miles and the battery is doing very well. Full charge is 299 down form 310. It is a year old. Not much supercharging. Maybe 5 times. Charge to 70 or 80%. Keep changing so battery does not get stuck at one level.
32k here. It's still a great rate at 300
If only someone could do a capacity test just before and after upgrading the software (v10?)
well this car from this video was at the filming on v9, at least i think i haven seen that on screens...
How about the software version?
Same as MC Hammer. Latest version.
So a full charge only gives you 327km when at 110km/h? What speed is WLTP tested with? Free falling?
@@Tore_Lund somewhere i think have seen, maybe even bjorn said that, that unless hard acceleration or necessary due to traction, only one motor is running (if that is enough for road conditions/speed, etc.), it would make sense but i cannot confirm that
@@Tore_Lund The induction motor will spin freely while cruising, so only the permanent magnet one is used. There's still some drag left but that should be very minor. So technically it doesn't disengage as there's no clutch but the result is nearly the same.
hi bjorn can you advise me which one is better tesla m3 LR vs kia e-niro vs hyundai kona build quality battery degradation and price wise?
LR RWD - 32,000km (19,883miles)
Since range increase a 90% charge would always show me 470km. (292miles)
Right after V10 a 90% charge showed 455km. (283miles)
As of this morning a 90% charge is showing 429km. (267miles)
I was at the service center last night* and asked "why is my rated range dropping". They told me "with the new software updates that range is now based on your driving habits as it learns the way you drive and predicts your range accordingly". Tesla recommended I change my display to battery percentage.
(*Note: I was at SC for a failed upper control arm ball joint. It was squeaking, they replaced under warranty. Tesla told me the vendor did not clean out the burs in the ball joint which leads to premature failure.)
So like I said Bjorn, glad to see that you recognize that the issue is not a software update but probably a bad BMS calibration.
Who's Byorn? And there were in fact sudden changes. Didn't you read the comments here? Lots of people are reporting it.
Karen Pease This is simply false. Even Bjorn recognize that if it’s the case, that’s not over 1 kWh.
Mine has always 499km since february, going to make a battery capacity test to prove that there is absolutely no degration.
Bjørn Nyland I’m sorry, I corrected the mistake. I know that a lot of people encounter this behaviour. If you read my comment in your last video, I said that we are trying to collect data about this. But some people like me doesn’t have any issue, even on the latest software version, so it’s enough to prove that it is not correlated to any software update or whatever.
We suppose that those who experiencing the problem are commuting below 50% (maybe oftenly to 30 or 40) and/or doesn’t plug their car on a regular basis (means daily and as soon as possible @ higher SoC probably 80 or 90% to help balancing the voltage on the cells).
@@Stlaysix_27 Just because you and others don't have an issue doesn't mean that there isn't an issue. You may want to take a look at this thread over at TMC - teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/sudden-loss-of-range-with-2019-16-x-software.154976/page-329
What had happened to the Model S is now starting to show up on the Model 3. I work in I.T. - your logic of "just because i'm running xyz version the same as everyone else = no issue as I don't have a problem" doesn't hold weight i'm afraid. I see issues day after day of people running exactly the same software and it behaving differently on exactly the same hardware. You have no idea what the software is doing or what it is looking for.
@@Stlaysix_27 Bad speculation. Car should balance every time it sleeps. Regardless of SOC. That is standard BMS thing.
Shouldn’t we also consider the unusable buffer that is built-in?
There is the possibility it could be normal degradation.
You are more knowledgeable than me but if it continues at this rate then after 100,000km you will have lost about 55 kilometres approx 10%.
Could that be normal
I’ve scheduled an appointment for my Performance because the displayed range has fallen 40km since I got it.
Wow I'm really surprised to hear you say that the consumption was high at 204. I'm struggling to get below 250 in my performance and that's only if I drive below 60 mile an hour.
204 Wh/km = 328 Wh/mile.
@@karenrobertsdottir4101 good point!
Are you running heat. I saw a temperature of 7 degrees C. How do you account for energy consumed to heat the interior of the car?
Bjorn, give us some initial thoughts on the XC40 specs that have just been announced. Looks like they are sharing the same battery with the Polestar 2, but the range looks way worse. Is the XC40 that much of a brick?
Could be.
It's a brick and pretty large and heavy compared to something like an M3.
@@TriviaChallenge iI'm specifically comparing it to the Polestar 2. which appears to have the same battery.
Have you used Tesla spy to see is one of the battery banks has some low voltage cells? That would go along with the no 100 charge and the apparent loss of capacity. Just my guess.
i really would like if you got the CAN bus readout of the BMS (if you find equipment for that please share info about it since i myself am quite interested to maybe get somehting myself) ... as you saw+explained often enough the information from the BMS is just so much more sophisticated .. and with more data you and we all can draw much better conclusions from whats happnening ^^
Did you check the tire diameter in settings?
My model3 long range also charges to 99% and stops. It has only 9000km on it and it’s not that old either. Can it be some problem with bms?
162Wh/km? And it's considered low? I so 138 with my shitty 1st gen leaf and I'm always flooring it with 18" wheels. Are Teslas really efficient?
@@dojohansen123 troll? Really? I'm in love with model 3. You must be high or drunk. Who's talking about Norway? I'm in the UK. South coast!! I do 4.3miles/kWh winter and 5.3 on summer. I do a chart every month, 180 miles a week on mixed roads. City to motorway then outskirts to company. My next car will be a model 3 in fact. I'm just totally afraid it won't be as efficient as advertised. Now who's the troll? Troll... 🤪
old Leaf has 80kW motor...acc 0-100 is 12 sec...not a good comparisation....UK South Coast hardly has temp below 10°......Apart from that Leaf has no facilities to heat and cool the battery which also cost some energy...We all know the troubles u will have with the Leafs battery due to the lack of these facilities...
@@johndrawing1176 good points, thank you, apart from last one. The UK's climate makes temperature management irrelevant if I don't quick charge the car. I only knocked 4% off in 16k miles.
@@ShabaaUkelele This is a dual motor and its a capacity test so Bjorn is not driving it like he does on the range test. If he accelerates both motors are in use, that explanes the consumption.....Check out this test with a single motor m3, you will see here consumption numbers from 114 to 122 wh/km.....ua-cam.com/video/Gpvg2f7HyQs/v-deo.html
I have a mid-range Model 3. Not many tests / reviews / videos on it. Can Bjorn do one real life capacity test on mid-range Model 3?
10:26 400 Amps not 200
Why don't you just read BMS_nominalFullPackEnergy on your car?
Hi Bjorn. Beginner, and yet not Tesla owner (I only have a matchbox M3) question. Do using a Tesla you are able to check the life time consumption, like I can in my Ampera? I mean not the usual trip meter, but over all not resettable one.
There are two trip meters, and they can be renamed. I renamed Trip 2 to Lifetime, and I've never reset it. So it gives me total kWh consumed.
@@pepstein thanks, it sounds good as long as others do the same. Cause if I buy a used car, I affraid that I receive it with resetted meters...
@@gabornagy7832 you can compare the odometer with the trip meter. If they match then you know you're getting lifetime usage data.
My TM3P shows 480km at 99% (finished). Its 12 Weeks old and the odometer Shows 10000km
I Tested today how many kWh my Tesla take up. From 0% to 50% (36,95kwh)
50% - 99% finished 36,54kwh
Screenshots available
Shocking that you can only get 200 miles range in the long range model 3, which is sold as having 310+ in the USA and god knows what here in the UK. Either way you were only driving at 110km/h which is about 68 mph, yes it is rainy and cold, but that is standard weather for the UK for 5 months of the year.
What software versjon is there on this car? The exact number please.
V10.
Will you explain Kilo/watt/hour what does it mean as related to mpgE? I don’t know what all this means. Thanks
Basically Wh/mi is energy required to drive 1 mile and MPGe is distance you can drive using 33.7 kWh of energy.
Kilowatt-hour is kW * h - power * time = energy
1 kWh = 3 600 000 J (1 kW * 1 h = 1000 W * 3600 s)
Wh/mi (or km) is consumption - energy used to drive 1 mile.
MPGe is miles per gallon equivalent - a distance you can drive using equivalent of 1 gallon of gasoline - 33.7 kWh.
My Model S clocked 52,000 miles today
Could it be that the 99% is to allow a 1% buffer for regen, so it's got somewhere to dump the energy? Just guessing here...
are we sure this is a long range model 3 he only got 203 miles (327km) using 94% of the battery this number seems closer to what a standard range+ gets on the highway
Your costs are always 0.00, how?
Referrals.
1 Million free km: watch?v=eb452B2Co9Q
Basically, the EV Ambassador will never pay for Supercharging in his life, regardless which Tesla.
@@kasmopaya2676 No, this is not my car.
I really like you videos.
I have a question: I’m considering buying a Tesla model 3 performance. But, range, for me is really important. Can you tell me, please, how many km can I make if I’m driving on the autobahn at 150 km/h, before needing to recharge?
Maybe like 400 km on a good day. But with a buffer 350 km. But it's just a guess, i'm not a Model 3 Owner because i'm broke as hell 🙁
Rogerio Gomes Osório with my model 3 awd long range I get 410-420 km at 130km/h and 370 - 380 at 140 km/h . Optimal weather conditions (no wind no rain) , ac always on. However you can find several autobahn tests on UA-cam
You can see his run here. ua-cam.com/video/L8LLb4HXd_M/v-deo.html
I would be happy if tesla reportrs bad chemistry next year, so I could get a new pack, maybe fit a 75 on a standard range
It would have to fail. They guarantee up to 70% of the battery so you would need 31% or more of loss in battery module. They will swap module rather than entire pack now.
Did the car show 495km at 99% SOC ?
Yes
Well I think it wont charge to 100% because it must have some free space for recuperation
Shiiiieeeeeeeeeeeettttttttttttt!!!!!!
Let's see if Tesla has anything to say about this.
All true but... my Tesla is a 2 year leasing with my company, so really do not care 😅
Looks bad for long term capacity of Model 3 batteries.
Ehhh. These computer screens are no more than “estimates” and even if they are 99% correct, that’s still a margin or error of quite a bit of distance/power.
Tech forum channel has a Model 3 with over 50,000 miles on it and his battery has seen less than 2% degradation. It’s known by most of the EV community that the estimates of battery range shown in the car are just estimates. When it’s showing 4%, it could be 4 to 7%, so if you recharge the car and take into account what 4% of battery capacity should be and subtract that from how much the car charges to 90% to try to get a “total battery energy” calculation, it’s going to be quite a bit off if the car was actually at 7% and showing 4%. That example could make you think that the battery is missing 3%, when in reality, it’s there but just not reflected in the estimated percentage.
To test this kind of thing correctly, someone needs to write a custom firmware and hard load it into a Tesla to read the battery health from the firmware/hardware report. It would also help to drive the car until it actually stops to have some kind of a baseline between vehicles when calculating energy back into the battery.
Everything I’ve seen from real world usage makes me think the Model 3 batteries will hold up very well over long periods of time. I have a new Model 3 Performance so it’s pointless for me to test, but I have several close friends with Model 3 vehicles with 30,000+ miles on them with virtually the same range as day 1. A coworker of mine has a vacation house right at 3.5 hours away- the day he bought his car a 100% charge would get him there with 6% left. The same car 32,000 miles later gets him there with 5% left. Identical driving conditions. I wouldn’t read too much into these tests- while interesting, they don’t mean much unless you can get Tesla software to read the battery firmware or you custom write firmware to get a more realistic reading. The margin of error with the computer estimates will always make people think “degradation” or “Tesla hid my power” by making charging calculations reflect missing percentages that are actually still there.
@@Unkn0wnC0mmand Spot on dude. Mine is doing very well. One year later and 25,000 miles.