Tesla Model 3 - V3.0

Core6

The WLTP rated range is 491Km on the Cert of Conformity.

I am regarding the Usable Remaining battery of 52.7kWh with the battery at 95% as equal to 55.5kWh when it is at 100%.

I didn't check it when the car was showing 100% battery but I will the next time I charge it.

ELM327

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119726396#Comment_119726396

55 would tie with what I had calculate manually but there have been reports of a lot of new cars having less than that available - like approx 52kWh only

mc2022B2TF

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119726396#Comment_119726396

Those figures are hard to interpret so you could be right - but yeah best to see what you have at 100% if you could.

So the below video (time stamped) is when the original 60kWh LFP came out. You can see the smaller buffer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wanYzbsi4k&t=140s

Looking at this video it looks like you have a bigger energy buffer than Bjorn above but a lot smaller than i have.

So my pack size is 60.5 and the total energy buffer of about 8kWh.

reni10

I just ran my September delivered RWD from 100% to 0% and according to the trip meter it used 52kwh.

So I charged it back up again and the Tesla app said it put 59kwh back in versus my Zappi that said 61kwh back in.

I have now used 50% of that charge and used exactly 26kwh so it would seem there is still only 52kwh available so where did that other 9% go????

I am not happy that my car seems to have that very large buffer and you cannot get 491km from it with only 52kwh useable so I think we need to try and take this a step further with Tesla if we can and get them to reduce the buffer…

Gumbo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119727980#Comment_119727980

It’s below 0%.

theres 10% of the range below 0 seemly according to Bjorns tests.

I doubt you’ll get the 491km even with the full battery available though.

reni10

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119728023#Comment_119728023

if there is 10% below 0% then what is the actual point of saying that it is 0%?

That just makes no sense….

Just leave the 10% on the bloody battery percentage and then everyone knows how much is actually left!

Gumbo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119728039#Comment_119728039

I agree. I’m just telling you where it is as that’s what you asked.

Kramer

We've a Q1 (March '22) Model 3 & a Q3 too. Both have had OBD dongles fitted from the day after collection & I regularly check (& record) the data.

The Q1 has approx. 20k kms now & showed max gross capacity initially, of 62kWh. It had/has a 2.7/2.8kWh buffer (changes occasionally or may be varying between 2.74kWh & 2.76kWh so rounding up or down). It had over 59.3kWh available but that gradually reduced & had somewhat settled now, at 57.3/57.4kWh net.

I was very happy with the 62kWh gross capacity.

The Q3 has very little mileage so far & initially indicated 61.1kWh gross with a 2.7kWh buffer & 58.4kWh net.

Both indicated 439km range on collection so that's obviously a default fixed figure & reduces based on degradation (one would hope).

Those are SMT stats & both cars have/had those available capacities, as evidenced by the trips readings too.

I'd be fairly miffed with a 52kWh car to be honest.

mc2022B2TF

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119728654#Comment_119728654

crazy how my car also shows 439 range but has about 6kWh less available that yours. This is what i have been getting at - it's total false advertising. The range in my car needs to be honestly adjusted to below 400kms.

The lad in Tesla said that the cert of conformity on mine must be different but i know that is not true.

I am wondering if there is a way we could compare our certs? I have no problem providing mine.

At least then if they are the same then i can get on to Tesla again and call them out on this BS.

Its so annoying that all the calculations my car is doing is based off about 57/58 kWh being available - it makes estimating range impossible. Not to mention the fact that i may need to stop at a charge well before i should have to etc.

ELM327

The thing is the range is there, it's just beyond 0. It's the same for petrol/diesel cars. The "range" based on the pie in the sky MPG test figures is only achieved if you drain the tank

mc2022B2TF

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119729435#Comment_119729435

Yes but the range displayed is accurate to zero in an ice car based off specified parameters for a make/model.

My car 0-100% has 52kWH yet shows a range of 439 when full which is adjusted down to zero (at an incorrect ration) as the percentage battery decreases.

Kramers car 0-100% has 58kWh yet shows a range of 439 which is adjusted downwards based on the correct WLTP/EPA range based of the correct available battery

My cars range estimates are all over the shop - they reduced the available battery but left a hardcoded range figure in there which was based off a usable battery of 57.5.

In an ice car of course there is a range past zero but the range shown before zero is based of a certain MPG and amount of litres in the tank, which will be consistent across the same car.

ELM327

I've kindof come around to agreeing to your POV, especially since seeing Bjorn's video. Those are all valid points you make - but these have been sent mostly to tesla already and the "It's below 0" is what they have said.

I sent you my Reg by PM, would be interested what (if anything) Tesla say when they see the critical mass of differing experiences. I've had to threaten them with SCC just to get back my 2k refund that they have had for a month after trade in. My average ratio is 5 emails to one response. They have a long way to go.

mc2022B2TF

Posting my cert of conformity below - be interesting to see if there are any differences especially in the build date and battery variant and versions are different between those with smaller/larger buffers.

Like are all of the larger ones a later build date?

Josieg

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119729510#Comment_119729510

Ok so I've been reading your posts with interested as I had a suspicion about my own Sept delivered M3 not quite behaving when it came to battery %. Today was the first chance I had to test this by your method. I charged overnight to 100%. I preconditioned before leaving and minimum use of heating/cooling. It was dark for the first hour of my journey so lights used. Mostly under 100km/hr as no motorway for the first 120km of a 200km trip. As I approached 50% depletion it was obvious that I was going to hit exactly 26kw used.... extrapolate to 52kw for 100%. It's definitely same as your situation. I didn't push past 0% to further test the theory. See pic below. Sorry for poor quality but take a look at since last charge and the remaining battery %.

reni10

Mine is the same so it looks like all the September deliveries have this 7kwh buffer which is ridiculous!

We all need to make a big deal of this and get this out so that Tesla actually do something about it!

Tesla seem to be in denial about this but that is not on as they advertised my car as being able to do 491km WLTP but it cannot do this with a 52kwh usable battery!

mc2022B2TF

Thanks for the above.

I think a lot of people looking on that have one that is behaving normally or an older model kind of don't understand all the fuss. But I can see more and more complaints. I have to say I'm disappointed by teslas "nothing to see here" response so far.

Fact is the displayed range in the car is working off a 57.5kWh usable battery for 100% to 0%

If the 100% to 0% usable is less than 57.5kWh then this range should be adjusted downwards but its not.

To give an extreme example what if the buffer was 30kWh do we think it would be acceptable to still be displaying the range for a 57.5kWh usable amount?

It stinks. Don't tell me it's an honest mistake either. As if tesla don't know what they are at here. It does amaze me though how so many don't even want to dig and seem to just blindly accept things.

Anyway I hope they fix it.

mc2022B2TF

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119731842#Comment_119731842

The car is rated 117 wh/km for efficency. So the max u will get is 445km from 52kWh usable.

Usable should be the range from 100% to 0%

We have been done rightly.

reni10

I opened a thread on the Tesla motors club forum so we should also start adding our findings over there too:

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/september-2022-european-model-3-rwd-delivered-cars-have-a-7-5kwh-buffer-instead-of-2-5kwh-reducing-the-100-0-range-by-10-over-previous-22-cars.282484/

mc2022B2TF

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119732079#Comment_119732079

Cheers. I was going to do that before but tried posting and didn't have sufficient privileges

I think everyone that has the issue needs to open a service request with tesla and push them. More noise the better

Zurbaran

Not that it will surprise anyone but my September car is the same 52kw as others. Is anything being made about this else where? I’d like to know the reasoning behind it since they haven’t changed LFP cars from earlier in the year to the same buffer.

Josieg

Btw my manufactured date is the 15th July. Is there any one way to inform Tesla of this "mistake"? Did you call/email someone in Dublin or was it the generic number that gets you the UK office?

JOL1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119731877#Comment_119731877

Understand your logic but the one significant factor missing is the additional range accessible/usable by continuing to drive beyond reaching the 0%... (not on fumes but on power within the battery). Some recent Youtube tests on LFP (Bjorn Nyland) has shown that if you continue as an experiment to drive beyond when the car shows 0% until it comes to a stop that it went for a further 56km, relying on battery buffer energy. The WLTP that is quoted by Tesla and most likely all other manufacturers is a universal standardised measure no doubt based on the entire battery energy.

By all means it is reasonable to debate why Tesla's BMS system allocates such a large % buffer, which appears to be overly prudent, but that is different to arguing that the WLTP is incorrect or that a driver (who takes the risk of driving beyond the 0%) cant access battery power within the buffer.

Zurbaran

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119728023#Comment_119728023

That’s still a big loss though no? If reni went down to zero and there is still 6/7 kWh left in the battery before the hard buffer but then added 59/61 kWh that is a big loss. This may be normal and I’ve just not known there are such big losses when charging.

mc2022B2TF

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119732171#Comment_119732171

Open a service request and ask within it for a callback and not a shity generic text response.

mc2022B2TF

Wltp ratings are based on usable battery percentage. Which up until know was always the nominal full pack minus a buffer.

As I said earlier let's say the buffer was 30kWh would we just accept this?

Would we be happy with the remaining range in the car showing us as 439km?

It's a joke. Any other car at 100% shows u the range that is left without the buffer. Yet this car shows u the range including the buffer but still when u get to zero percent shows zero km range.

It's like percentage is based off the usable but km range based off full pack.

It's literally nonsense.

mc2022B2TF

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119732178#Comment_119732178

The app literally works off 60kWh and if u add 100% will say u added 60kWh even though u only added 52

Not sure how the zappi gets its calcs though.

You'd be better looking at your esb meter

mc2022B2TF

Hence why "gas savings" in the app is total rubbish too. Its overestimating what u add by 10% and making the savings look bigger. That's for another day though .

mc2022B2TF

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119732175#Comment_119732175

That would all be fine it the range displayed also deducted the buffer but it doesn't. Instead of range and % remaining reducing in a linear manner the range reduces at a rate 10% more than the percentage remaining.

This is an issue. Like it or not. Its plain as day that it is not correct. Tesla either need to reduce the buffer or reduce the displayed range in the car. But they don't want to reduce the range as then that opens up a whole can of worms

Gumbo

Can you hand the car back as defective?

mc2022B2TF

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119732348#Comment_119732348

I'd rather have it sorted without having to do that. The car is a great car and extremely efficient but this defect should be addressed in an open and honest manner by Tesla

If enough people can firstly understand the issue and secondly complain then we might get there.

Understanding is key and then being able to articulate this to tesla