Forums

Musk Announced 5% Power Improvement...

Musk Announced 5% Power Improvement...

On today's earnings call Musk announced that an OTA in next few weeks would yield an additional "5% power improvement" from improving motor control software (not clear if that is range or muscle). Also will include and one pedal driving. Also faster supercharging for SR and SR+

All good stuff.

vmulla | 23 oktober 2019

One pedal driving would be awesome.
I’d prefer range over power - but OK

billlake2000 | 23 oktober 2019

vmulla, you might want to opt for the power instead of the range, as if you are going faster, you could coast farther if you ran out of electrons.

ncancilla81 | 23 oktober 2019

More power pleaseee. “3.2” feels slowww now:(

vmulla | 23 oktober 2019

@billlake2000,
I got what I paid for, so anything else is a bonus. I'm not complaining.

beaver | 23 oktober 2019

And 3% power boost for S and X

Giddy up! Take that Tincan

PteRoy | 23 oktober 2019

Disclaimer: I know jack about batteries

Question, could the 5% power increase be related to the lower range people seem to be reporting since the last update? Or completely unrelated

CST | 23 oktober 2019

Any electricians want to chime in?

calvin940 | 23 oktober 2019

Uhm don't we already have one pedal driving?

CST | 23 oktober 2019

I think it means coming to a full stop.

calvin940 | 23 oktober 2019

"I think it means coming to a full stop."
-----
So as in the application of brakes at the end as well. Hmm I guess I'll see how I like that. Although I was apprehensive about standard regen and now I can't do without it

Joseb | 23 oktober 2019

Yes, yes, give me powa, unlimited powa... dew it.

jordanrichard | 23 oktober 2019

I too heard that remarks about the 5% for the 3 and 3% for the S/X, but I believe they meant range. I could be wrong, but here is the context in which Elon said that.

Elon said that the Models S long range is at 370 but actually it can do 373, they accidentally certified it for 370. Then he offered up this increase in power via the OTA update. Then someone else piped in on how they did that and in background Elon said that the long range S would then, “.....then really have a high 370’s”.

I took that as meaning the range will go from 373 to somewhere Above 375.

Slonkis | 23 oktober 2019

I'm really looking forward to one-pedal driving. I got my first ticket in 25 years for not fully stopping at a stop sign. Now I make sure to use the brake pedal for the last 5mph, but it'll be great not to have to do that.

snathla | 23 oktober 2019

Tesla increased the range a few months back for the LR from 310 to 325 but then seems to have reduced it back to 312-315. Not sure why the back and forth

Teslanene | 23 oktober 2019

5% increase will get us back to 260 on the mid-range, just getting back the miles we lost.

Tronguy | 23 oktober 2019

@PteRoy: So, it's like this.
Say one is driving down the NJ Turnpike at a steady 65 miles/hr. Rated car energy use is 250 W-hr/mile. So, the rate of energy usage = power = 250 W-hr/mile * 65 miles/hr = 16.25 kW. That's not unexpected; there's 735.5 W/Horsepower, so that 16.25 kW/735 = 22 HP. The SR+ has a max horsepower rating of around 275 HP = 202 kW.
So: What's this mean?
Running straight down the road uses about 1/10th the power rating of the car; that's all about the efficiency of the motor, and we're presumably not straining the battery pack.
Full power is maximum current through the motors: That is likely straining the battery pack. Further, there's plenty of high-power switching transistors whose on time, off time, cycle time, duty cycle, and all that jazz is completely under the control of the software running those transistors and the car.
So: Did the Tesla engineers come up with a high-falutiing algorithm that does a better job of converting electrical power to rotational energy? If so, one would expect at first glance that both efficiency (i.e., range) and max wheel power would both get a boost.
On the other hand, maybe that motor stuff if vaguely unchanged, but they've figured that they can draw more power out of the battery plant without blowing funny molecules left and right. In which case, the efficiency (range) is unchanged, but one gets a bigger neck-snap at pedal to the metal.
Or some combination.. I'd guess that the efficiency/range won't change, or might get better.

MAB1980 | 23 oktober 2019

“ Rated car energy use is 250 W-hr/mile. So, the rate of energy usage = power = 250 W-hr/mile * 65 miles/hr = 16.25 kW”

... not how it works

Tronguy | 23 oktober 2019

@MAP1980: OK, where'd I go wrong? Initially was going to convert 250 W-hr/mile to 900kJ/mile, but realized didn't have to do that. All I was looking for was Watts.. And 21 HP steady state as a check seemed about right at 65 mph.

MAB1980 | 23 oktober 2019

^

Wh/mile is dependent upon efficiency and is nonlinear.

Doubling speed won’t double power required, it will ~ octuple it.

billlake2000 | 23 oktober 2019

My car has beat every pinto that has been foolish enough to challenge me.

RedShift | 23 oktober 2019

Oh boy oh boy oh boy!

Hal Fisher | 23 oktober 2019

id rather have 5% more range.

lbowroom | 23 oktober 2019

I’d like an Oompa Loompa

rsingh05 | 23 oktober 2019

The range improvement appears related to improved regeneration and one - pedal driving:

"Elon R. Musk -- Founder, Chief Executive Officer & Director
Yeah, and there's also the single pedal driving that will improve the range as well.
Drew Baglino -- Chief Technology Officer
Very excited about that. It's an improvement in comfort and feel.
Elon R. Musk -- Founder, Chief Executive Officer & Director
Yeah, it's easier to drive. And it improves the range."

The power improvement is unrelated. So we are getting BOTH range improvement and power increase.

lbowroom | 23 oktober 2019

Can’t make the battery or motor bigger, but you can allow more current to flow between them

gballant4570 | 23 oktober 2019

I like reading this thread.

Zakynthos | 23 oktober 2019

The power increase and range increase were two separate statements. They never even gave a precise number on how much range will increase other than citing Model S going up to high 370's, followed by statements about power, which some people assume to think they mis-spoke range to be power. I don't see how both Elon and Drew would both mistakenly say power but mean something else. The transcript below makes it perfectly clear that both power and range are increasing as byproducts of separate improvements.

1:54:15 (Elon Musk) - "Oh I forgot to mention we're also expecting there's going to be an over the air improvement..that will improve the power of S,X, and 3. That's oh by the way coming in a few weeks...um should be something on the order of 5% power improvement due to improved firmware. Drew, do you want to say anything on that?"
1:54:37 (Drew Baglino) - Uh yeah we just continue learn how to optimize motor control in our products, so yeah 5% improvement for all model 3 customers and 3% for our S and X."

vmulla | 24 oktober 2019

CST | October 23, 2019
I think it means coming to a full stop.
——
Yes, and a lot more regen braking. It’s a nice option to have.

teslamazing | 24 oktober 2019

Sucks for those people for pro- option for regen brake lighting to be off in that other thread lolol.

GrumpyinAZ | 24 oktober 2019

Elon and Drew both have said in the recent past that Tesla models will have range increases so that they're somewhere around 400 - competing DIRECTLY with ICE ranges. OK, so what's the fallout?

Right now, the Supercharger network has been built with the paradigm that the cars' top range is about 300. So, every 150 miles or so along an Interstate, they constructed a Supercharger station. The algorithm for planning takes this into account. So, with more range, theoretically, the cars could go farther - and outside the paradigm, reducing the time you need to stop for recharging, and perhaps eliminating a stop or two, depending on your charging levels on long trips. Eventually, if the fleet overall improves its range, it's possible that the Supercharging network would require reconfiguration to factor in the added range, rather than the shorter time to recharge. Obsolescence built into the system supporting the continuous updating of the car. What irony!

WEST TEX EV | 24 oktober 2019

I think easily possible to improve both range and performance, these are complex brushless motor systems. Very sensitive to ms and even MICROSECONDS of power cycling/control. Kind of like the split second timing of Fuel injection can achieve big economy numbers. (Catch 1 ms earlier in cycle etc)

Improved range when pedal at 40% (cruise on highway)
Improved performance at pedal near 100%!

andy.connor.e | 24 oktober 2019

I'd rather have free coffee at Service Center, but instead my car gets better performance that i did not pay for. This is an outrage i tell you!

gballant4570 | 24 oktober 2019

Your avg wh/m should also improve with the move to complete one pedal driving. I am looking forward to this update more than any previous update.

teslamazing | 24 oktober 2019

The car just keeps getting better and better and better and better. I love it.

gballant4570 | 24 oktober 2019

Although..... I have read that the phenomenon some are calling sudden range loss/battery degradation is due to a kwh limit Tesla placed on the battery for some safety reasons.

My last 100% charge showed an estimate of 296 miles. The optimization that resulted in this announcement may have come from a mitigation effort to try to give that 5% back - true one pedal driving may have been the easiest place to look. To make that last regen step, a higher electron flow was likely required. That higher flow going out would boost the upper power limit, and the increased regen would put the range back while preserving the reason for the kwh limit.

I wonder....?

gballant4570 | 24 oktober 2019

Not to say that if the conclusion I jumped to is true, that it would not still be all positive. You gotta love the process.

vmulla | 24 oktober 2019

@gballant4570,
One pedal driving was a popular request for a long time - many many threads asking for it. It could just be yet another feature request that's being delivered.
And, the language used does not suggest that the improvements are specific to one-pedal driving usage.

gballant4570 | 24 oktober 2019

vmulla - No, Elon's language does not. I am just thinking, something I used to be good at....but I think my logic is sound. True one pedal driving could require faster e flow, and enabling faster e flow & achieving one pedal driving could result in the stated upgrades.

pelkofer | 24 oktober 2019

I'm very excited to see the 1 pedal update. I hate having to use the brake for that last 5mph. But it's not going to make any significant difference to the range of the model 3.

If the car weighs 4000 lb (1800kg) and is going 5mph (8km/hr), then kinetic energy is 1/2 mv2 which is 57,600 joules. 57600 joules is 16 watt hours. (A joule and a watt hr are both units of energy. You divide joules by 3600 to get watt hours.) So, every time you use regen to slow the car from 5 mph to a stop you are adding a max of 16 watt hours (yes, it's less than that due to efficiency of the energy conversion, which I don't know). So, if you car uses 250 whr to go 1 mile, you will need to stop 15 times to get 1 more mile of range.

For those of us who end up sitting in stop and go traffic on autopilot for 40 minutes a day during commute, it might make a small difference. For the rest of us, we won't notice.

lbowroom | 24 oktober 2019

"Kind of like the split second timing of Fuel injection can achieve big economy numbers."

No. That can make a difference when you're working with engines that a 27% efficiency, not with electric motors

agkulcz | 24 oktober 2019

Very exciting... Meanwhile the range on my LR RWD has dropped another 4 miles after the last charge. It's now down to 306 miles from a high of 317 after the last range increase - I would still like to find out what is up with that, alas Elon has giveth, Elon has taketh away, maybe Elon will giveth again, only Elon knows....

FISHEV | 24 oktober 2019

"I have read that the phenomenon some are calling sudden range loss/battery degradation is due to a kwh limit Tesla placed on the battery for some safety reasons."@gballant4570

A 5% loss of range on one update. A 5% increase in power transmission in the next. Looks related. I'd go for the range back vs the power but the power is the more popular choice.

MAB1980 | 24 oktober 2019

Netflix added in one update. A 5% increase in power in the next. Looks related.

texxx | 24 oktober 2019

@Andy - "I'd rather have free coffee at Service Center, but instead my car gets better performance that i did not pay for."

My BMW dealer give me coffee AND donuts while I'm waiting for my $144 oil change. All I get with my M3 is a better car, month after month. So unfair.

Njbrw549 | 24 oktober 2019

We charged up to 324 miles last weekend, running v.12.258.
Updates don't seem to be affecting range on ours.
Bill

lbowroom | 24 oktober 2019

Next update adds a rear wiper

tdwin2000 | 24 oktober 2019

Like others have stated, before V10 update when charging up 90% I would get 279 consistently. Since the update, I now get about 268 at 90% charge (which is 90% of 297 and not 310). I know that when they did the update that was supposed to go to 325 for my LR RWD I never got that one. So I think when they increase the miles of a charge within the next few weeks they are basically giving us back the miles they recently took away. We might at best see the same 325 on a full charge that some people (not myself) saw back in March of this year. And, they did a power increase of 5% already this year too. Who knows, maybe that has been reduced since they upgraded that and they are giving us back the same increase as before. Remember, there is only so much they can do to increase these things. Give it, take it away, then make a statement that we are getting it (again).

lbowroom | 24 oktober 2019

I doubt that anyone has changed the amount of energy stored in your battery or that your actual range on the road has changed at all.

FISHEV | 24 oktober 2019

Its interesting that Tesla says that more aggressive regen will add range. I would think a well timed regen to stop would be able to recharge as much as a short hard regen. Engaging regen further out and easy decel vs. a hard decel closer in would be equal energy generators.

ADinM3 | 24 oktober 2019

@Fish, I think the main benefits of harder Regen is that it would allows use of Regen in more, driving situations such as people cutting in on you or braking when you are tailgating someone, not that is recovers more energy for a well planned deceleration to a stop sign.

Another better example would be exiting a highway with a short exit ramp. Today you will enter the ramp too hot and need to apply brakes as the Regen doesn't slow you quickly enough at high speed. Hard Regen would allow more of this energy to be reclaimed.

Pages