Report: Tesla Model 3 Charges As Fast As Tesla’s Flagship 100D


Tesla Model 3 and Supercharger

First some background on charging speed.

Charging speed can be stated in different ways:

First, there’s C rate which is the time to reach 100% charge. C rate of one means the battery can be charged to 100% in one hour. C rate of 2 means the battery can be charged to 100% in 1/2 of an hour. C rate of 3 means the battery charges to 100% in 1/3 if an hour. Other chemistries have higher C rates but may not have the energy density and may cost more than Tesla’s NCA chemistry. Lithium titanate (LTO) is a chemistry that can be charged at very high C rates. In general though, Tesla automotive batteries charge at a C rate of about 1.

Tesla’s 100D premium offering equal to Model 3 when it comes to charging?

A second way of stating charge speed is power (kw) that the battery can take during charging. More power means more energy (kWh) can be pushed into the battery in a given amount of time. Obviously more power means faster charging when measured in miles per unit time.

A third and most important way to state charging speed is in miles per unit time. Miles per minute of charging is really is all the consumer needs to know. If it is X miles to the next charging stop then this measure of charging speed tells the consumer how long he has to wait at the super charger before heading out to the next destination.

Miles per minute charging speed is the product of two variables: charging power times vehicle energy efficiency or miles per kWh. In other words how far will the car go on 1 kWh of energy.

If you want to maximize charging speed you can do it by increasing charging power and/or vehicle efficiency.

Here in lies the secret to why Model 3 can charge as fast as a P100D. It is very energy efficient. It goes much further on 1 kWh of energy than the Model S or X. The new Model 3 with big battery appears to return an MPGe of 126 while my 2012 Model S has an MPGe of only 89 a whopping 41% increase!

But I digress. How do we know that the model 3 charges as fast as the 100D?

First some simple math and a video by Bjorn Nyland of the P100D charging tells us.

P100D Charging (via Bjorn Nylund)

In this video we can see that the P100D charges 50% in 30 minutes. Range of the Model S 100D is 335 miles. 50% of 335 is 168 miles. Essentially the same as Tesla’s Model 3 specs on super charging speed of 170 miles in 30 minutes for model 3. Implicit in these calcs is the assumption that a Model X P100D in Bjorn’s video and a Model S 100D will charge at the same C rate.

Tesla Model 3 getting some juice!

Second we have a quote from Tesla’s Q2, 2017 earnings call courtesy Seeking Alpha.

Question from Colin Langan UBS Securities:
“And what about, just as a follow-up, the charge time? I know Porsche has said that they could charge in 15 minutes. Do you think that’s possible in the future? And is the charge time on the 3 the same as the S? I wasn’t sure in some of the release.”

Elon Reeve Musk – Tesla, Inc.
“It’s about the same. It’s comparable to the high-end S. The recharge rate of how many miles per hour you recharge is sort of a function of the battery pack size. So, like a 100 kilowatt-hour pack, because charge rate is a function of percentage of pack – think of 3 and a high end S as being similar in charge rates.”

So there you have it. The Tesla Model 3 charges as fast as the Tesla Model S 100D.

170 miles in 30 minutes

Add this to the fact that the Tesla Model 3 has nearly the range of the Model S 100D and you have quite an impressive product for less than half the price.

Transcript of Tesla earning call courtesy Seeking Alpha
Hat tip JeffK at Tesla Motors Club

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

102 Comments on "Report: Tesla Model 3 Charges As Fast As Tesla’s Flagship 100D"

newest oldest most voted

C rate is THE MOST IMPORTANT metric to gauge charging speed. Literally everyone charge to X% when charging, not to X miles or X kWh. In that regard, SparkEV still remain the quickest charging EV in the world, over twice as quick as any Tesla.

All that really matters to the user is how many miles per minute are charged. They aren’t going to care about the C rate unless it means they get more miles per minute. Larger batteries mean lower C rates fore the same miles oer minute, which means the battery will last longer.

When’s the last time you saw someone only charge to 25% and stop because they had enough miles / kWh? That never happens. Everyone only care about % and nothing else, which makes C the most important.

Viking79 is correct. It appears that you are holding on to C rate as the important metric because that is what makes the spark EV look the best.

In other words, you come across as biased not objective.

Again, how often do you you see people stopping at 20% or even 50% just because they have enough miles? Nobody cares about miles.

How many times? Every single time that somebody just needs to charge just enough to get home.

Or every time somebody needs just enough charge from a slower charger to make it to a much faster charger a little further away.

Or every time they need to pay for just enough charge to make it to a free charger.

I did it 4 times on my trip to SoCal a couple weeks ago.

Tesla drivers do it a lot because the in-car system encourages it and has already selected your next charger based upon not charging to full right as you start supercharging.

You have to understand the dynamics of longer range EV ownership some time. You could get a jump on this by having one.

Yes, of course it is far from universal. There are still a lot of issues to work out in terms of infrastructure. But as charging stations become more common, charging to less than full becomes more common.

I also DCFC only as much as I need.

I do all the time. There is no point in spending more time at a charger than what you need to get to the next location

I regularly stop at lower percentages so I don’t have to wait any longer.

I routinely stop at 25%, or maybe 50%, depending upon how much further I have to go, or if I don’t want to wait for the taper.

Nonsense! When I’m returning home and have insufficient energy, I will charge at a public charger just enough to allow me to reach home (i.e., I know my driving efficiency, mi/kWh, and how far I need to drive, miles, so I add only the kWh required). C rate and % charge aren’t important to me.

You’re weird. 🙂

I have NEVER seen anyone who charge to less than 70%. If there are people like that out there, they are of extreme minority.

Your experience must be limited to the slow CCS chargers and EVs with very limited range even when fully charged.

Not charging to 100% at public chargers is completely normal for Teslas.

Not charging to 100% is normal for every EV I encounter. But every EV I encounter including Teslas charge far above 70%. Few times I saw Tesla, they were far above 80%, 1.25 hours and still charging.

My exposure to Teslas is limited since I’m not at supercharger. But based on Bolt experience, I suspect Teslas also charge above 70% rather than X miles. I doubt Tesla people are that much different from Bolt people (or are they?)

“Bolt people” “Tesla people”

It doesn’t work that way. You’re looking at people who are leasing a car weekly from Gig/Maven and who are charging at DCFCs routinely (they have no reason to install an EVSE at home if the car will be gone next week) and assuming they are “Bolt people”.

There really isn’t “Bolt people” or “Tesla people”. Different drivers do different things. And they do different things at different times. I never even fast charge, but a couple weeks ago I did it several times in 3 days because I was on a trip away from home.

Over time there will be all kinds of people with all kinds of usage patterns.

Yep. I charge to 100% all the time. I rarely charge to anything less, unless I’m at a certain location for a limited time and I have to go somewhere else. Otherwise, it’s 100% for me.

I can’t speak for other people as I don’t care to ask others about their charging habits, but I certainly have frequently seen other vehicles on chargers in the 70% + range.

I don’t know about that. If I have a Model 3 with a 310 mile range and I’m traveling to Brunswick area of the GA coast from Atlanta traveling at highway speeds with the AC on then I will need to stop at the future Metter GA Supercharger to add only about 80 miles of charge to get me there with a comfortable margin left over. I know there is a L1 charger there I can use for free to top off while I stay there so why would I wait around for an hour to completely fill up at a Supercharger spending more money and time to do so when I know that I can do it for free while it is parked anyway at my destination? Certainly people that haven’t owned an EV would like to replicate their experience of filling up with a gas car because that is what they are used to. Fill it up and be done with it. But if they had the option to fill up their car for less money at home or for free at their resort destination then I guarantee you people would take 5 seconds to calculate the minimum… Read more »

If I’m charging to get to another charger I’ll do the minimum plus margin to get me there.

This keeps charging as fast as possible, and keeps the trip running.

The Model S makes this easy and encourages this.

Why waste time charging if you don’t need to? Also, charging at the bottom is faster.


SparkEV said:

“I have NEVER seen anyone who charge to less than 70%. If there are people like that out there, they are of extreme minority.”

No. You have apparently convinced yourself this is the case, but it’s not reality. You’ve made that pretty obvious, Sparky, from how you’re always complaining about people using free chargers and always charging to 100%. That distorted world-view seems to be just part of your very misanthropic attitude toward humanity in general.

You don’t like the fact that sometimes you have to wait on others to use one of “your” fast-chargers, and so you’ve convinced yourself they’re always hogging them unfairly.

When I am roadtripping an EV I will only stop long enough to get to my destination charger with a decent reserve.
Having a tiny pack with a high C Rate is useless for roadtripping. You need a decent sized pack with a high amount of miles of AER gained per minute of charging, preferably with a relatively low amount of charge rate tapering.
The Spark EV is a one trick pony. The Bolt is considerably better and the 3 will be the reining champ.
Spark EV, I understand you like your car, but let’s stay realistic about what most drivers will want.

You’re confusing total battery capacity with charging. Sure, it’s nice to have bigger battery, but that’s nothing to do with charging. People only care about % charged (C rate) even with big battery Teslas.

Battery pack size has a lot to do with charging. If you have a large battery pack, you have more charging options. You can choose to only charge it to have the same charge as a short range less than 100 mile range EV. Or you can choose to charge it to full range.

Folks with short range EV’s don’t have that choice, and would indeed have different charging choices.

Battery and charging are two different issues. For example, I wouldn’t take 300 miles trip on Rav4EV (without JDemo) with 130 miles range and 0.2C charging. But I’d take that trip with SparkEV with 2.6C charging despite only 80 miles range.

As for what you and many others here claim, I have yet to see any EV charging to less than 70%, and that includes Teslas and Bolts (even the rare non free charging ones). Maybe you guys are extremely rare people, but the general public certain care far more about C rate than miles.

LOL! SparkEV, I hear you but I disagree strongly. I know what I want and when I talk to other EV owners, most of them want the same thing. We want to be able to drive as far as possible without stopping to charge. But if we do have to charge, we want that stop to be as short as possible. We don’t want to stop every 80 miles and charge, even if that charge is a fast one. We want to drive for a couple hours, stop for 20 to 30 minutes and then drive for another couple hours.
C Rate is nice, but it is just a statistic. Miles per minute of charging is everything.
Not too surprisingly, most of these discussions took place as we were plugging our cars in or unplugging them…

Never happens? That is the standard operating procedure for Telsa road trippers.

SparkEV said:

“When’s the last time you saw someone only charge to 25% and stop because they had enough miles / kWh? That never happens.”

There was a post here at InsideEVs just a day or two ago from someone who said they were on their way home, and stopped at a Supercharger for a 10-minute charge, because that’s all they needed at that point.

You need to quit riding your hobby horse, Sparky. It’s distorting your view of reality. Not everyone in the world is obsessed with using free charging whenever possible, as long as possible, even when they don’t need to.

It’s just you, dude.

And Viking79 is right.

I do it everytime I charge at a DCFC.
Mainly, because my car charge at a much higher speed when the battery is low and slow too much after 50% fill up.

I drive a Leaf and you might know, since you alway point that out.

Anyone that stay longer is in desperate need of juice or simply don’t understand how an EV work.

Especially when you consider your charging costs at a random fast charger are going to be much higher than putting the car on “slow perk” once you get home. The only thing I care about is charging speed– and the term miles/ charge hour is the easiest way to express that. I *routinely* top off my charge just enough to get home, and I would assume this method of dealing with limited range is common.

“All that really matters to the user is how many miles per minute are charged. They aren’t going to care about the C rate…”

Bingo! People don’t need to become electrical engineers to drive a PEV, any more than they need to become experts on the internal combustion engine to drive gasmobiles.

Well not for supercharging. I charge to get X miles – destination + buffer. Why would I charge to a percentage – that doesn’t make much sense at all.

Even at home I charge to miles. I charge enough to get home at 50%. So I guess technically that is a mix of miles and percent.

I’m confused. Putting on miles in the same amount of time is not the same as charging the battery at the same rate as an S 100. ?

He said “as fast as” a Model S. Maybe he should have put the word “fast” in quotes.

Honestly, all I care about is miles/minute, and I know what’s going on behind the scenes. The average consumer isn’t going to care about C rate.

Well, that’s fair. I care about C rate for several reasons, but I do realize others may not.

Average consumer ONLY care about C rate and nothing else. They don’t care that the car has added 1000 miles range if they see it’s only 10% charged even if they’ve charged for an hour. They are going to sit there until they seem something substantial like 80%.

With EV’s going mainstream, future EV owners won’t even know what the C-rate is for their cars. The vast majority of car makers don’t even publish C-rate for their batteries.

People care more about % than anything else. Whether you choose to call that C or % or time doesn’t matter. Ultimately, it’s C, never the miles (other than “weirdos” who post here).

If you don’t believe me, go look at how people charge. You won’t see many (any?) who charge less than 70%, and statistically it’s not possible that everyone needs 70%+ worth of miles every single time.

I disagree, as have a long list of people on this board. You say X, everybody else says Y, and there is no hard data.

So let’s see what the advertising professionals who put their advertising talking points through study groups came up with for mass market vehicles with fast charging and 200+ miles of range:

Tesla Model 3: 170 miles in 30 minutes and 130 miles in 30 minutes. No other mention of C-rate or time to charge from 0-80% or 20-70%

GM Volt: “DC FAST CHARGING — ABOUT 90 MILES IN AROUND 30 MINUTES OF CHARGE” No mention of C-rate, no mention of charging to 0-80% or 20-70%.

I bring up battery size, because battery size does matter, and this is probably one of the ways that size matters.

So while I don’t doubt your perception of charging of short range EV’s based upon free chargers in your local area, you probably don’t personally observe people who charge differently.

You are wrong. And the nice thong to do is leave it at that.

SparkEV, as many on this forum who also own EVs have stated (me included) you are pushing a personal agenda and a way of thinking on others who do not agree with you.

Please stop, it’s getting annoying.

If talking about reality is personal agenda, sure, that’s my personal agenda. If you’d rather bury your head in the sand and think people charge based on miles, keep living that fantasy.

Now what is your personal agenda? Pushing fantasy?

Sorry but you are speaking on behalf of customers with short range cars. When you have a bigger battery, you have tons of options. Although long-range cars may be considered minority, the next year or so will change this mindset. Off-site charging is SO much more expnsive than at home charging, or even free charging at a supercharger.

Sparky, you are on the minority here…most will not give a damn about C. Try it on your friends and see for yourself.

Why don’t you go see for yourself, friends and strangers? EVERYONE charge to 70%+. If it’s strictly on miles, you should see some (or many) who charge less, but that never happens. That says people care more about C (percent) than anything else.

ClarksonCote asked: “I’m confused. Putting on miles in the same amount of time is not the same as charging the battery at the same rate as an S 100. ?” It depends on how you choose to measure it. If you measure in terms of kWh charged per minute, then of course it’s not the same. The Model 3 has a smaller battery pack, and will charge more slowly in terms of kWh per minute. But if you measure it in terms of miles added per minute of charging, which frankly is all the average driver is gonna care about — “How long will it take me to charge the car enough to get where I want to go?” — then it’s the same as charging a Model S100, at least according to this article. (I suspect it’s only close, not exactly equivalent.) I think I see where Tesla is going with this. It goes along with refusing to specify the kWh rating of the battery packs. Tesla wants to move beyond the “early adopter” stage of the EV revolution, and that means making their cars easy for Joe Average to use. Joe Average doesn’t understand kW or kWh. But… Read more »

That’s the beauty of having a very efficient EV. You get good range with a small battery and also you charge with more miles/hour using less power from the charger.

Tosho – Yes but the real elephant in the room is that Tesla most likely COULD have allowed the Model 3 to charge at 100-120kw giving it way MORE than 170 miles per 30 minutes of supercharging, but they chose to throttle its charge speed to 80kw in order to avoid immediate cannabilization of Model S sales overnight.

Nonsense. A smaller battery pack mandates a slower safe charging speed in terms of kWh/minute, all else being equal.

Larger packs have the potential of charging faster, in terms of kWh. That’s battery tech 101.

I agree that miles per hour of charging or miles.per minute of charging is of primary importance. It is easy to explain to a non-EV tech-head, and it uses familiar units. Also, intuitively, higher numbers are better.

“C” rating is a multiplication of a cell’s current rating… not a unit of time! Fast charging generally tops out at 80%… not 100%

No, “C” rate is a rate relative to the capacity of the battery, in kWh. C is for capacity.

So if you charge at a 1C rate, you’re charging at a kW rate that is numerically equal to the kWh of the battery.

More exactly, the C rate is the charge current divided by the capacity of the battery. A higher C rate denotes ONLY how fast a particular battery can be charged– a higher C on a battery denotes a battery that can be charged faster, and a higher C in discharge denotes a battery that can dump more power into the driveline.

In any case, C is usually expressed as a dimensionless value, but its actual dimension is 1/hours, not hours. At least at work, we generally use the phrase “per hour” to express this.

oBjustification: I design electric and hybrid vehicles for a living.

Agree completely.

Additional detail: I’m jealous you get to design these for a living, I’m just an electrical engineer obsessed with the technology. 🙂

How nice to see a technical explanation from someone who’s actually an expert on the subject.

Thanks for posting!


Yeah, and that is why my Hyundai IONIQ Electric is also very fast when charging with 50-70 kW CCS DC.
Since it is very efficient (10-12 kWh / 100 km) it will even beat Model 3 at a a CHAdeMO Charger 🙂

Ionic is the best EV ever made.

The Ioniq EV may be the best EV ever made but they are exporting so few to the US that it is more correct to say the Ioniq EV would be the best EV if they bothered to make more than a handful

If only you could get one with twice the battery capacity….

A 60 and/or 80 kWh Ioniq would be killing it.

Mikael – Or at 40kwh the Ioniq would be REALLY killing it in terms of price/efficiency/range mix. It would be a 170 mile EV with a 2018-Nissan-Leaf-matching MSRP. But then again they would have to plan for WAY more than 7,000 batteries per year with LG Chem, otherwise they will continue to be tragically supply-constrained.

I guess it depends on what you are looking for. If it is maximum efficiency at the expense of having below average performance and average EV range then the Ioniq is champ. It beats the Prius at that game in spades.

But if you want a longer range EV with above average performance and also almost as good efficiency then the Model 3 will have it all. Of course with that comes a price premium of around $5,000 over the Ioniq.

That is impressive efficiency coming from the Hyundai Ionic EV. Anything over 6 mi./kWh is amazing.

That efficiency comes rather anemic performance.

Exactly. There is no magic there. You could take a Model 3 and give it a smaller lighter motor geared completely for maximum efficiency at the expense of performance and then reduce the battery pack size to lose weight and you would have the Ioniq.

It doesn’t make one car better than the other it just shows that each is engineered differently and marketed to different customers.

Yeah, the miles/kWh rating for the Ioniq Electric is astonishingly high. But when we look at the weak-sister acceleration performance, it suddenly becomes clear how Hyundai managed the remarkable feat of 4.43 miles per kWh (as calculated from the EPA’s range rating). As you say, there’s no magic involved. It’s a trade-off.

Car and Driver rates the 0-60 time as 8.6 seconds; Motor Trend rates it at 8.1 seconds.

That is not a bad 0-60 at all. My eGolf is slower than that and i bet you will not find anyone owning one complain about how slow it is (mainly because 0-30 it seems very fast). Very few drivers actually drag race on public roads. I’m seriously considering leasing one in a year or 2 is it will be available as efficiency is more important to me that range (if range is over 100). This car can really save you some money as a commuter.

Stefan Ko – The unfortunate reality is that Tesla most likely COULD have allowed the Model 3 to charge at 100-120kw giving it way MORE than 170 miles per 30 minutes of supercharging (and therefore faster DC charging than the Ioniq), but they chose to throttle its charge speed in order to avoid immediate cannabilization of Model S sales.

Until high speed chargers are as ubiquitous as gas stations (can’t run to “empty”) and until we have batteries that can charge at high power to 100%, the most important metrics for long driving are:

1) how far can you go on a charge between 20% and 80% SoC
2) how long does it take to charge from 20% and 80% SoC

On the weekend I went on a fishing trip. This time it was along the largest highway in Canada (i.e. best chance to find a high rate charger). I made the trip on one tank of gas so no refueling stop but we talked about how the trip would be different if we had an BEV pickup.

If we started with 100% SoC on a 100KWh pack, we would have needed 2 charges to get there and 3 on the way back (there is no destination charging at the boat ramp).

If there were more charging locations and we could charge to 100%, we could have reduced that to 3 stops total, maybe even down to 2 stops if we could go to single digit % SoC.

That or have a 300KWh battery and no stops!

That, or put a generator in the back of the truck.. It would be cool if that said generator could be a little diesel that could provide some power directly to the drivetrain (secondary motor) so that at highway cruising speeds on level ground it did most of the work and the ev drivetrain could help out. IDK.. weird idea, but totally technically possible, and nearly as viable as a 300kwh battery in a pickup.

SparkEV takes about 15 minutes from 20% to 80%. But more important than absolute number is when the taper takes effect. SparkEV taper starts at 80%, hence charging to 80% is the quickest.

If every DCFC is right next to the road and no waiting (few seconds to access), SparkEV would be quicker than Bolt in long distance trips. That’s because Bolt peak power is less than SparkEV since Bolt’s “step down” occur around 50%.

Of course, there is always waiting at DCFC in the real world, which makes Bolt lot quicker due to fewer waiting (less stops to charge). Tony Williams wrote about the strategy to get quickest time considering taper for Bolt, but that was without regard to waiting.

Yeah, Spark, but going from 20% to 80% in a Spark EV is only gaining you 50 miles of AER since the Spark EV has less than 20 kWh of pack capacity now. 50 miles is chump change.
For a full utility BEV you need AT LEAST 50 useable kWh. 60 kWh is probably a real world entry level pack for a huge portion of the car buying public. Obviously, higher taper points and high C Rate help a lot, but pack capacity is what allows you to expand your driving radius.


My understanding is the max charge rate on a SparkEV is 44kW. A Bolt gets to 46 on a 125A charger. Presumably this is due to differences in pack voltages?

And the Bolt does 56kW on a higher current charger.

In the end it hardly matters since your peak charge rate will be narrower since your pack is such small capacity. You can’t sustain that peak for long, so unless you only came to add 10 miles range talking about the height of the peak and not the area under it doesn’t make a lot of sense.

I will say this, on my long trip I did find that charging more often for less range (90 miles at a pop) wasn’t as annoying as I thought, at least in the areas between cities where chargers are near the road. Stopping for a half hour worked quite well. Although a Spark EV wouldn’t even be able to put in 90 miles in a half hour I due to that being over 100% of capacity.

SparkEV has higher voltage at 80% than Bolt at 50%. Given the same 125A, SparkEV would charge with higher power. I typically see peak of 48 kW. Bolt would probably top out at about 45 kW if the voltages are similar to SparkEV.

Given that average power to charge SparkEV is higher, it would be quicker than Bolt even with more stops in the hypothetical where stops do not incur any penalty. But the reality isn’t the case with all the damn waiting for free chargers as well as chargers that are miles away from the highway.

I’ve seen higher than 45kW on my Bolt. And I’ve never used a charger over 125A. So that theory is out the window. Even if you think the SparkEV has a higher peak the average power isn’t higher on the SparkEV unless you manipulate the timeframe. Because your pack fills up so quickly it will drop rate long before the Bolt does. If you want to get 10 miles maybe your average power is higher. Is that really the case we want to optimize for? I do understand that your later taper means you can “grab and go” a larger fraction of your battery capacity at high charge rates. But when it comes to how much range you can actually “grab and go” the Bolt can put in more miles (or kWh, take your pick) before slowing down than you can. You’re not going to beat the Bolt in any reasonable trip considering they can just plain skip the first two charge stops you make and they charge at essentially the identical rate at all the other stops. I wish to back away from what I said about the 56kW above. That guy’s graphs are merely modeled. Maybe he’s right,… Read more »

Get a PHEV pickup or SUV. Done.

If you are unhappy that you cannot buy a PHEV SUV or pickup, go tell Ford.

Bjorn Nyland has a Model X.

…as noted in article

Your right, I see, thanks.

Is it just the 310 mile version that can add 170 miles in 30 minutes? Any thoughts on how fast the 220 mile version can charge?

Likely 120 miles.

145 in 30 min.

Tesla says 130 in 30.

And that is pretty weak.

It may not be state of the art any longer, but getting 130 in 30 isn’t that bad. It gives you almost 2 hours of additional driving in just 30 minutes. That isn’t an optimal roadtrip car, but it is not that bad of a compromise. Obviously, more range quicker is better, but it is still early days.

OK, I seem to recall that now that you posted it. Hmm, I think I could live with 130 in 30 min.

How many kms, one way, was your trip?

While 20% to 80% is preferable and desirable, on a long trip certainly it is not the smart way to travel. Just limit your charging stops and charge up to 100% when you can, especially if eliminates a stop in the long run.

I don’t think 100% is advisable considering the taper. I saw Tesla P85 using Chademo, and it tapered to 40 kW (from 43 kW) at 80%. At that rate, it could take close to another hour to reach 100%. If one’s expecting an hour wait at every DCFC, avoiding a DCFC stop by charging to 100% is worth it.

But if it won’t save a DCFC stop or if the expected wait time is less than an hour, stopping at something less is going to be quicker.

Exactly, I think for some cars, at around 90% it tapers so badly, that it is actually faster to just hook up to a level 2 charger for your last 10%, if you want to charge to 100%

“While 20% to 80% is preferable and desirable, on a long trip certainly it is not the smart way to travel. Just limit your charging stops and charge up to 100% when you can, especially if eliminates a stop in the long run.”

I can’t speak to the best strategy for non-Tesla cars, but that’s definitely not the smart way to do road trips using Superchargers.

A relevant quote from a post at the Tesla Motors Club forum:

The most important, as others have pointed out, is the state of charge when you arrive at the Supercharger. The lower the battery, the faster it will change thus shorter wait. So when doing a long trip across many Superchargers, charge only as much as you need to get to the next one arriving at low state of charge. That’s the best way to shave off time of your total travel time.

Charging that last few percent to 100% is a waste of time, because at that point the car charges quite slowly. When you need to — but only when you need to — slow down a bit to stretch out the range to your next charging stop.

How easier would it be if Tesla could publish the usual numbers that characterize their cars and batteries….. But then there would be a lot less buzz on the net… So may be they are right to do it the Apple way… Just more frustrating. As a soon owner of a new Model X 100D expected for delivery in second half of September, all charge rates with current SuperChargers v1 & v2 have already been extensively published and proof-pointed in endless YouTube videos, including the excellent ones from Norway. Only thing I’m missing is the full story on SuperCharger v3 that Elon said Porsche 350KW chargers will be for Children Toy once Tesla SC v3 will come out…. This for me is THE MYSTERY that let me delay my purchase since the end of last year, and that only a great deal could overcome leading me to order despite no answer a few weeks ago…. The hope on Model 3 was that its 2170 new battery cell could be more durable, means more cycles allowed when used at same C level as before, which could have allowed Tesla to support, for same level of life cycles a much higher C… Read more »

For people making long-trips this is the stat that matters the most and it’s great they’ve achieved this.

If you’re a person who doesn’t AC charge at home or work and are using superchargers as your charging you may be more interesting in C rates. Actually, you might be more interested in the C rate of the other cars you are waiting to clear the stall you are in. 😉

Well written article George! It is one of those that should go into the educational tab if (IEVs had one.) There are going to be a LOT of newcomers who want to get up to speed. This one articulates the information concisely.

“So there you have it. The Tesla Model 3 charges as fast as the Tesla Model S 100D.”

As much as I hate the term “In theory”, because it actually implies a hypothesis, this is indeed all about the theoretical charging rate. In the real world, only about 100 people have even had the opportunity to test this, and they’re all staying mum.

So don’t say “there you have it, that which I have set to prove has been proven” until you actually have a Model 3 in your hands, and are charging it at a rate of 170 miles in 30 minutes. And until then, I don’t believe you.

All wrong. As I said in my article here years ago, what matters for cross country trips is DUTY CYCLE. If you drive from LA to New York, what you care about is the ratio of drive time vs. the time you spend sitting at a charger.

Ps. I do plan to resubmit my spreadsheet findings for the new cars, but plan to wait until I have a Model 3 in hand. Then I can verify the actual results against both a Bolt and a M3 on real drives.

I’d never drive from LA to NY, but I could see myself needing to stop at (1) Supercharger on some trips. If I can get 170 miles in a 30min stop, that’d be great.

I have a problem with this story.

“C rate of one means the battery can be charged to 100% in one hour. C rate of 2 means the battery can be charged to 100% in 1/2 of an hour.”

That is not at all true. It means that the battery can take a charge or discharge at the stated instantaneous normalized rate. It does NOT mean that you can charge to 100% in that amount of time. Charge tapering makes full charging take a lot more time than that. The taper curve can also be very different between different battery packs. For example, the Model S/X 100kWh packs charge with less taper than the 90kWh packs.

The fundamental conclusion of the article is likely true though – when empty, a Model 3 LR can add miles as fast as a Model S 100D.

Not only that, but the article gets it backward.

C rate of 2 is the rate that (if it could be sustained) would charge the battery in two hours, not a half hour.

You sometimes see lead acids rated C20 and even C100. I guarantee they aren’t fully charging them in 36 seconds!