Tesla Model 3 - V3.0

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 %.

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.

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/

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

And of the day the usable battery is generally the full pack minus a buffer

All the wltp figures for this car assume a usable battery of 57.5kWh

Early 2022 models clearly show this.

Tesla can mess about with buffers and definitions etc. to suit their narrative. But it's disingenuous and dishonest.

Basically they are learning about the lfp and realise they should probably tweak the BMS to protect it. Fine.

But if u are going to do that then you have to reduce range displayed in the car accordingly and be honest with your customer.

But they cannot face admitting a backward step when it comes to range.

Well put

I know very well that I cannot achieve the WLTP figure but that is the only figure that Tesla publishes and stands over for their range estimates so it is all we can use to debunk the newer deliveries being able to achieve this figure with a much smaller usable battery pack.

Just remembering this did actually affect one of my journeys. Was in Donegal with around 80% the car said it would be -4% to get home. Had my car been from earlier in the year I would have been able to make the trip with out stopping, Ha.

How do you get 117 wh/km consistently? It is impossible under normal driving throughout the year. The poster above says he expects it and this is the problem with these figures.

Cant wait for the presentation. Bet it will be a cracker.

So tesla never give a usable battery size because it means they can conveniently f*** about with buffers etc. to suit whatever narrative they want to peddle at any given time. VW emissions style without the emissions

Totally unaccountable