Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

Martyn1981

@Grumpy_chap   Hi, I read this article and thought of you. I appreciate this is quite a small specific issue, but one you've mentioned a number of times regarding the TM3 as being a good choice for drivers who do longer trips and higher mileage because of the extensive supercharger network. You've also suggested the need to get the LR version due to the longer range, but of course that ups the cost by about £7k (15%).

I'm not 100% in agreement with the need for the extra range, but I do think it's a valid argument worth serious consideration.

Anyways, it appears the latest TM3 (I think the base has now dropped the SR+ designation) with the larger battery might be good enough and negate the need to go up to the larger battery LR version, especially if the AWD and the extra power aren't needed.

So Bjorn, who carries out these tests has achieved ~4m/kWh at -3C, wet conditions at 56mph, and ~3m/kWh, again in those poor conditions at 75mph. Resulting ranges are 250 miles and 180 miles respectively.

Again, I appreciate it's a very specific issue/discussion, but I've found it interesting and thought you might enjoy this 'update'. In the longer term, hopefully the UK's charging network will improve opening the door (or roads) to lots more BEV's with competive ranges/prices.

New Tesla Model 3 RWD (LFP 60 kWh) Gets Remarkable Winter Range

In winter conditions (at about -3°C) with wet roads and with 18" Sailun Ice Blazer Arctic (235/45-18) tires, the new Tesla Model 3 had a noticeably higher efficiency and range than the previous version, as well as a long list of other cars.

At 90 km/h, the car achieved a range of 404 km (251 miles) - 99% covered and 1% estimated. That's almost 17% more than the previous version in the winter test (see full report here). The difference, higher than the increase in battery capacity, is partially related to 6.6% lower energy consumption at 142 Wh/km (228 Wh/mile).

This is a remarkable achievement that an entry-level electric Tesla can achieve roughly 400 km (250 miles) on a single charge in the winter.

By the way, according to the video, the new version is only slightly heavier - 1,860 kg vs 1,840 kg previously (including driver).

At 120 km/h (75 mph), the range decreased by 28% to 289 km (180 miles) as energy consumption increased by 40% to 199 Wh/km (320 Wh/mile), however, those are outstanding results, better than in the case of many other models with 20 kWh bigger battery packs.

Grumpy_chap

Martyn1981 said:

@Grumpy_chap   Hi, I read this article and thought of you. I appreciate this is quite a small specific issue, but one you've mentioned a number of times regarding the TM3 as being a good choice for drivers who do longer trips and higher mileage because of the extensive supercharger network. You've also suggested the need to get the LR version due to the longer range, but of course that ups the cost by about £7k (15%).

I'm not 100% in agreement with the need for the extra range, but I do think it's a valid argument worth serious consideration.

Thank you @Martyn1981

I certainly do feel that the balance is shifting rapidly towards me getting an EV as my next car.  The threshold is a 100 kWh (or thereabouts) battery (as charging any more overnight on single-phase is not realistic) and 4 miles/kWh (or thereabouts).  Both of these threshold have pretty much been met (together).  There is no longer a range prohibition on making the switch.

I am, fortunately, still not back to the office and that will not be next reviewed until April, so I stay at home and stay barely using the car at all.

Once (when / if) I am back at the office full / part time will determine what car is suitable. 
Any choice has to be better than a Mondeo (which is the car I actually really like and would be my default choice) - better can be through price-point or being better quality / spec.  In high trim level, the Mondeo is an excellent car.  From ICE's the alternative that appeals would be the Lexus ES - it seems more "premium" but OTR broker prices are not much higher.

So, the next step if I go EV is the model that achieves the bench-marks above and also matching the price and quality of the Mondeo / Lexus ES models.  This still seems to be led by the MG5 (price-matched to the Mondeo but smaller and lower quality) or the TM3 (but capital outlay is a challenge).  Moving to EV certainly requires the life-cycle maths to be done.

As an aside, I've seen marketing e-mails from various manufacturers recently promoting "new" model vehicles and I was disappointed to see "new" model vehicles still being marketed that are ICE-only with now full EV option.  It is about time the motor industry built all new cars from bottom-up as EV and, if appropriate, the ICE is added as an options.

I am actually getting some electrical work done at home and will get the power cable in place from the fuse board to outside to facilitate a future EV-charge point.  This will mean that I can decorate without having to ruin that as and when I buy a new car.  Over on the Motoring forum, it was suggested to also run an ethernet cable to the charge point as well.  Is that necessary?

Martyn1981

Hiya, yeah just thought that new range, and tested range in tough conditions, sat quite nicely above the old TM3 SR+ to make the new base model a decent all round package. Quite a nice upgrade and uplift.

For the charger, yes I think you need a comms cable, as all chargers have to be 'smart', so well worth putting something in, but I'm a neanderthal when it comes to the tech/geek side (Wifey is the alpha geek in this household), so check what is best to install.

Just an aside or digression, but your future proofing plans have reminded me of the new requirement that new builds have to have a smart charger, I think it was chatted about on here last year. Something has been nagging at me ever since - why require a charger, wouldn't it be better just to require what you are doing, and having a suitable power connection put in place, so that an appropriate charger can be installed when required. Might seem petty, but what if you don't need one for years (or at all) wouldn't it age, have warranty issues etc etc.. But as I said, just a silly nagging thought, and the requirement to be PEV ready is a good idea.

JKenH

Porsche Taycan Sets New Record for Coast to Coast Crossing With Just 2.5 Hours of Charging

A Porsche Taycan completed the 2,835 miles (4,562 km) journey between Los Angeles and New York with a total charging time of less than two and a half hours. 

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/porsche-taycan-sets-new-record-for-coast-to-coast-crossing-with-just-25-hours-of-charging-180296.html

EVandPV

The Zappi charger (currently the best option for charging with surplus pv) needs to be linked to a Myenergi hub if you want to use the app to control it. The hub requires an ethernet connection to your router for net access.

 It's not strictly necessary though and you can change all the settings from the controls on the front of the Zappi. It's just nice to be able to make changes from the comfort of your living room, especially when the weather's crap.

 As Mart say, there's probably other 'smart' chargers that require a similar connection to control them remotely.

Grumpy_chap

Martyn1981 said:

Hiya, yeah just thought that new range, and tested range in tough conditions, sat quite nicely above the old TM3 SR+ to make the new base model a decent all round package. Quite a nice upgrade and uplift.

I am not actually sure how different the car actually is - some "gossip" suggests the battery is the same in all 3 versions of the TM3 and it is only software that limits the range.  

That would make sense between the LR and the Performance - same battery but tuning for economy or performance impacts range, and there is not a massive difference in quoted range.  BUT, the SR is also lower performance and would achieve the highest range.  You can see why, if that was the case, TESLA would restrict things otherwise the SR would sell and the LR sales would be decimated.  

Then again, if it was only software, would there not be a "hack"?

All a big unknown.  There are also reports that when there was an evacuation ahead of storm in the Florida Keys, the range was software increased on some cars:
https://electrek.co/2017/09/09/tesla-extends-range-vehicles-for-free-in-florida-escape-hurricane-irma/

Martyn1981

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

Hiya, yeah just thought that new range, and tested range in tough conditions, sat quite nicely above the old TM3 SR+ to make the new base model a decent all round package. Quite a nice upgrade and uplift.

I am not actually sure how different the car actually is - some "gossip" suggests the battery is the same in all 3 versions of the TM3 and it is only software that limits the range.  

That would make sense between the LR and the Performance - same battery but tuning for economy or performance impacts range, and there is not a massive difference in quoted range.  BUT, the SR is also lower performance and would achieve the highest range.  You can see why, if that was the case, TESLA would restrict things otherwise the SR would sell and the LR sales would be decimated.  

Then again, if it was only software, would there not be a "hack"?

All a big unknown.  There are also reports that when there was an evacuation ahead of storm in the Florida Keys, the range was software increased on some cars:
https://electrek.co/2017/09/09/tesla-extends-range-vehicles-for-free-in-florida-escape-hurricane-irma/

I've lost track a bit with Tesla now, especially since their expansion into LFP batts as the technology is now coming out of patent - I may be making that last bit up? Also news keeps changing, for instance the Austin TMY's are probably going to launch with the larger 4680 cells, but the Berlin TMY's will have the 2170's.

Going back Tesla absolutely used standardised battery packs in some vehicles, such as the TMS 60 and TMS 75, that way they simplified production runs, and then offered OTA updates at a price to buy the extra later on, and during emergencies would unlock the range. That's actually akin to the acceleration boost OTA update I did on my TM3 LR, since it effectively has the same motors as the P model, but power is software restricted.

Looking at the current TM3's from China, and this is off the top of my head, so apologies if it's also out of my backside, but my understanding is that the LFP's are less energy dense, so more space is needed for them. So they can replace the batts in the TM3 pack, but not in the LR pack. Also LFP's are tough steady workers, so they don't mind 100% charging, don't degrade much, don't suffer thermal runaway, but at the same time they can't deliver as much power, so they aren't used in the performance models. In fact I think the base TM3's and Y's have actually had a small reduction in their 0-60 times as a result, but that could also be a software issue to boost range.

Do you know what, there are so many issues and moving targets here, and doubts about what I'm saying, I've also come to the conclusion I may not have a clue. 

Grumpy_chap

I've tried to post twice but can't seem to.  So here's an abbreviated note.

TESLA battery capacities seem rather difficult to ascertain.  Certainly there is nothing clear on the TESLA website.  An internate search gives various outcomes, but suggest:

• SR was 50 kWh, now 64 kWh
• LR / Performance was 75 kWh, now 82 kWh

No links or details because the posts are going missing

ABrass

Grumpy_chap said:

I've tried to post twice but can't seem to.  So here's an abbreviated note.

TESLA battery capacities seem rather difficult to ascertain.  Certainly there is nothing clear on the TESLA website.  An internate search gives various outcomes, but suggest:

• SR was 50 kWh, now 64 kWh
• LR / Performance was 75 kWh, now 82 kWh

No links or details because the posts are going missing

All the SR models are supposed to be either LFP or moving to it now. LR or performance use Cobalt/Nickel chemistry.

The increased size of battery in the SR is probably the effect of taking the volume for a LR pack, then filling it with less energy dense LFP batteries. More power than the old SR, less than the old LR. Probably still significantly cheaper even though it's bigger.

Martyn1981

Grumpy_chap said:

I've tried to post twice but can't seem to.  So here's an abbreviated note.

TESLA battery capacities seem rather difficult to ascertain.  Certainly there is nothing clear on the TESLA website.  An internate search gives various outcomes, but suggest:

• SR was 50 kWh, now 64 kWh
• LR / Performance was 75 kWh, now 82 kWh

No links or details because the posts are going missing

Yep, Tesla seem to make it hard to get info on packs, so you typically have to rely on the guys who go digging into the software code, or the licensing specs when vehicles get approved for sale in a country(?).

Based on that I think your numbers for the TM3 are a bit out, or rather mostly correct, but depend on what is being described at any given point.

So the 'old' TM3 SR+ seems to have 3 numbers, a name or reference in articles and conversations of 50kWh, but a useable 52.5kWh and an actual 55.5kWh. The 'new' TM3 (though it goes back a few months) has a battery referred to as 60kWh and approx 60kWh total, but useable is around 57.5kWh.

So the 50 to 60 flatters the uplift, v's a fairer comparison of 52.5 to 57.5 ............ I think!

But now I've gone down this rabbit hole I'd be interested to see your links, as I'm too having to draw from stuff I've read and heard, and info varies.