How big is the Model Y Battery?

FredT

Well-Known Member
First Name
Fred
Joined
Feb 1, 2020
Messages
107
Reaction score
54
Location
California
First Name
Fred
Vehicles
1999 Mercedes 320E. 2003 Passat Wagon, just finished lease of 2017 Audi A3 Enron
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
Official EPA estimates have been posted, and from those It appears to have a useable capacity 88 kWh. EPA range is 315 miles and efficiency is 28 kWh/100 miles, or 3.57 m/kWh. Do the math and you get 88. So how much bigger than that do you think the battery is?
 

silverelan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2019
Messages
554
Reaction score
497
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
2015 Subaru Outback
Country flag
Official EPA estimates have been posted, and from those It appears to have a useable capacity 88 kWh. EPA range is 315 miles and efficiency is 28 kWh/100 miles, or 3.57 m/kWh. Do the math and you get 88. So how much bigger than that do you think the battery is?
I've been wondering about that. IIRC, Bjorn Nyland estimated they had a 5-6kWh holdback reserve on the Model 3 LR.
 

Nak

Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
187
Reaction score
144
Location
Camas, Washington
First Name
Mike
Vehicles
Tesla Model Y Performance, Tesla Model 3, 1992 K1500 Blazer
Country flag
Range and efficiency are for some reason calculated differently. Don't ask me why. The Y is rated at 4.1 miles/kWh. Rounding off, 4.1 x 77 = 315, which is the EPA range. Efficiency is rated at 28 kWh per 100 miles. But to get a range of 315 you're going to need to get 24.4 kWh per 100 miles. Same deal with the AWD 3. Rated at 28 kWH per hundred miles, but needs to get 24 kWh to get the rated range of 322. My AWD 3, with good tires aired up to 44 psi, in freeway driving averaging 60 - 65 mph, gets about 24 kWh per 100 miles. On a recent trip with mixed freeway driving from 60 - 75 mph, and driving over the coast range From Portland to Seaside Oregon averaging 60 mph, and adding in varying speed driving and stops along the coast, got 26.2 kWh per 100 miles.

Anyways, I hope that's clear as mud. :) Long story short: The Y has 77 kWh usable battery capacity, same as the 3.
 

Billyk24

Well-Known Member
First Name
William
Joined
Nov 29, 2019
Messages
460
Reaction score
149
Location
PA
First Name
William
Vehicles
Ford C-Max Energi, Premium Mach-E ordered
Country flag
With the Y being higher, heavier and a little less aerodynamic than the "3", look for different values between the two. Only one version of the "y" is rated at 315 miles range. Leads to the question of Tesla unlocking more of the buffer for this version than the others?
 
OP

FredT

Well-Known Member
First Name
Fred
Joined
Feb 1, 2020
Messages
107
Reaction score
54
Location
California
First Name
Fred
Vehicles
1999 Mercedes 320E. 2003 Passat Wagon, just finished lease of 2017 Audi A3 Enron
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #5
Range and efficiency are for some reason calculated differently. Don't ask me why. The Y is rated at 4.1 miles/kWh. Rounding off, 4.1 x 77 = 315, which is the EPA range. Efficiency is rated at 28 kWh per 100 miles. But to get a range of 315 you're going to need to get 24.4 kWh per 100 miles. Same deal with the AWD 3. Rated at 28 kWH per hundred miles, but needs to get 24 kWh to get the rated range of 322. My AWD 3, with good tires aired up to 44 psi, in freeway driving averaging 60 - 65 mph, gets about 24 kWh per 100 miles. On a recent trip with mixed freeway driving from 60 - 75 mph, and driving over the coast range From Portland to Seaside Oregon averaging 60 mph, and adding in varying speed driving and stops along the coast, got 26.2 kWh per 100 miles.

Anyways, I hope that's clear as mud. :) Long story short: The Y has 77 kWh usable battery capacity, same as the 3.
Thank you. Your explanation clarifies the discrepancy for me but still leaves me baffled. Was that recent trip on your new tires?
 

agoldman

Well-Known Member
First Name
Alan
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
72
Reaction score
20
Location
dc
First Name
Alan
Vehicles
2020 volvo xc60 Polestar Edition Plug-in
Country flag
Saw this today. Competitors really need to step up a little bit:

A 2020 Tesla Model Y Performance will go 315 miles on a full charge, according to final numbers posted to the EPA’s fuel economy site. Forbes spotted the posting first, and they match the numbers that were laid out in Tesla’s Q4 2019 earnings report. Tesla initially promised a range of approximately 280 miles when the Model Y was revealed, but “due to continued engineering progress of the Model Y all-wheel drive,” the number was revised to 315 miles.

The official MPGe rating was also revealed by this posting to the EPA’s site, too, showing that the Model Y received a 121 MPGe combined rating. That makes it the most efficient electric crossover or SUV out there, just beating the Hyundai Kona Electric by a sliver (rated at 120 MPGe). For some further perspective on that MPGe number, the Audi E-Tron is rated at a much lower 74 MPGe combined, and a Jaguar I-Pace at 76 MPGe. Since the Kona’s battery pack is much smaller than the Model Y’s, it can only go 258 miles on a full charge, as opposed to the Tesla’s 315-mile rating.

We’ll also note that this rating is only for the dual-motor Performance trim with all-wheel drive. Tesla estimates the Long Range version at the same 315 miles on its website, but there’s no separate rating on the EPA’s site yet. Both the Model 3 Long Range and Model 3 Performance have the same 322-mile EPA rating for range, so this isn’t an anomaly within Tesla. If you opt for the Model Y Performance with the Performance Upgrade, you get a lowered suspension, performance brakes, larger 21-inch wheels and a higher top speed (155 mph instead of 145 mph). Larger wheels tend to sway EPA range ratings by a significant amount — see the Leaf Plus — and the estimated range falls down to 280 miles on Tesla’s site with this package selected.
 
OP

FredT

Well-Known Member
First Name
Fred
Joined
Feb 1, 2020
Messages
107
Reaction score
54
Location
California
First Name
Fred
Vehicles
1999 Mercedes 320E. 2003 Passat Wagon, just finished lease of 2017 Audi A3 Enron
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #7
Saw this today. Competitors really need to step up a little bit:

A 2020 Tesla Model Y Performance will go 315 miles on a full charge, according to final numbers posted to the EPA’s fuel economy site. Forbes spotted the posting first, and they match the numbers that were laid out in Tesla’s Q4 2019 earnings report. Tesla initially promised a range of approximately 280 miles when the Model Y was revealed, but “due to continued engineering progress of the Model Y all-wheel drive,” the number was revised to 315 miles.

The official MPGe rating was also revealed by this posting to the EPA’s site, too, showing that the Model Y received a 121 MPGe combined rating. That makes it the most efficient electric crossover or SUV out there, just beating the Hyundai Kona Electric by a sliver (rated at 120 MPGe). For some further perspective on that MPGe number, the Audi E-Tron is rated at a much lower 74 MPGe combined, and a Jaguar I-Pace at 76 MPGe. Since the Kona’s battery pack is much smaller than the Model Y’s, it can only go 258 miles on a full charge, as opposed to the Tesla’s 315-mile rating.

We’ll also note that this rating is only for the dual-motor Performance trim with all-wheel drive. Tesla estimates the Long Range version at the same 315 miles on its website, but there’s no separate rating on the EPA’s site yet. Both the Model 3 Long Range and Model 3 Performance have the same 322-mile EPA rating for range, so this isn’t an anomaly within Tesla. If you opt for the Model Y Performance with the Performance Upgrade, you get a lowered suspension, performance brakes, larger 21-inch wheels and a higher top speed (155 mph instead of 145 mph). Larger wheels tend to sway EPA range ratings by a significant amount — see the Leaf Plus — and the estimated range falls down to 280 miles on Tesla’s site with this package selected.
The Europeans are struggling, the US makers have barely started, but the Koreans look like they might have a plan:

https://www.press.canoo.com/press-r...lectric-platform-for-future-electric-vehicles

$87B is a big number.
 

Nak

Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
187
Reaction score
144
Location
Camas, Washington
First Name
Mike
Vehicles
Tesla Model Y Performance, Tesla Model 3, 1992 K1500 Blazer
Country flag
Thank you. Your explanation clarifies the discrepancy for me but still leaves me baffled. Was that recent trip on your new tires?
Yep, Michelin Cross Climate+ tires. I really do love these tires. :) Great traction in all conditions, quiet, long lasting and low rolling resistance.

I did a little research and figured out the discrepancy. Range is tested by fully charging the car, letting it sit overnight, and then testing the range. kWh/100 miles is measured by measuring the power required to charge the battery. So the latter number includes charging inefficiency. Realistically, it's almost a meaningless number to most drivers. It doesn't even give you an idea of relative charge time because cars charge at different rates. It does give you a good idea about what your cost to charge is going to be.

The EPA really should publish miles/kWh on the label. (Based on range, not charging.) That's a better and more understandable metric for comparing EV efficiency. You can find the number, but you have to dig for it.
 
OP

FredT

Well-Known Member
First Name
Fred
Joined
Feb 1, 2020
Messages
107
Reaction score
54
Location
California
First Name
Fred
Vehicles
1999 Mercedes 320E. 2003 Passat Wagon, just finished lease of 2017 Audi A3 Enron
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #9
Yep, Michelin Cross Climate+ tires. I really do love these tires. :) Great traction in all conditions, quiet, long lasting and low rolling resistance.

I did a little research and figured out the discrepancy. Range is tested by fully charging the car, letting it sit overnight, and then testing the range. kWh/100 miles is measured by measuring the power required to charge the battery. So the latter number includes charging inefficiency. Realistically, it's almost a meaningless number to most drivers. It doesn't even give you an idea of relative charge time because cars charge at different rates. It does give you a good idea about what your cost to charge is going to be.
OK, thanks for that. I think I finally have a handle on this.
The EPA really should publish miles/kWh on the label. (Based on range, not charging.) That's a better and more understandable metric for comparing EV efficiency. You can find the number, but you have to dig for it.
I agree completely. And they should throw out the silly MPGe number at the same time.
 

Nak

Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
187
Reaction score
144
Location
Camas, Washington
First Name
Mike
Vehicles
Tesla Model Y Performance, Tesla Model 3, 1992 K1500 Blazer
Country flag
MPGe includes charging inefficiency, so yes your number works but it just gives you the same information as the kWh/100 mi that's on the EPA label, just in a slightly different format.
 

macchiaz-o

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2019
Messages
323
Reaction score
274
Location
Valley of the Sun
Vehicles
Fiesta
Country flag
Right -- it's efficiency calculated from the point of view of energy that I as an energy consumer must pay to a utility. SImilar to MPG efficiency where the gallon is measured from the pump at the gas station, where I paid for it.

Why do we also want to see miles per kWh of stored battery energy added to the window sticker? It seems like this is less useful and would add confusion. It doesn't take into account AC/DC conversion losses, which can vary by vehicle.
 

Nak

Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
187
Reaction score
144
Location
Camas, Washington
First Name
Mike
Vehicles
Tesla Model Y Performance, Tesla Model 3, 1992 K1500 Blazer
Country flag
Why do we also want to see miles per kWh of stored battery energy added to the window sticker? It seems like this is less useful and would add confusion. It doesn't take into account AC/DC conversion losses, which can vary by vehicle.
For me personally, it let's me know how I'm doing as far as driving efficiently. The EPA tells me my car is rated at 28 kWh per 100 miles and a range of 320. So I see 260 w per mile on the car and I think I'm doing great on range. Nope, I need to average 240w/mile to get get the rated range. The EPA doesn't tell me there's a difference so unless I study it and figure it out I'll never know. You and I and a lot of people on different forums will figure it out, but Joe public will not most of the time. There's two metrics EV drivers need: cost to charge AND driving efficiency. They are two different numbers, unlike ICE vehicles.
 

silverelan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2019
Messages
554
Reaction score
497
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
2015 Subaru Outback
Country flag
Y has the same battery pack as the Model 3. Out of Spec Motoring's range test estimates came back with 74kWh usable pack size and 270wh/mi at 70mph.

10:07 timestamp
 
Top