Tesla Model 3 Charging Charts Reveal Details On V3 Supercharger


Fairly steep taper but still a huge improvement.

We just reported on the unveiling of the first V3 supercharger. Now we have the first chart showing a Tesla Model 3 charging on the v3 Supercharger. Captured by user privater via Twitter here are the charts:

We don’t know about you, but we were a bit shocked at Tesla’s claim that the Model 3 Long Range RWD will charge at 250 kW. As such, we expected a fairly steep taper. While there is indeed a fairly steep taper, it’s still a huge improvement over the current V2 Superchargers. It looks like the average power between 0-50% SOC is still in the neighborhood of 200 kW. So, during the first half of the charge, you might be able to get an average of around 800 MPH charging rate.

We estimated around 600 MPH charging rate during the first half of the charge (ref). We based that on a maximum current capability in the charging cable that runs from the charging port to the battery. Per Ingineer, the manufacturer’s spec on that cable is 430 amps, and we are sticking by that current rating.

However, our power calculations were at a lower voltage. We incorrectly estimated more like 350 average volts during the first half of the charge. Preliminary leaked V3 supercharger specs were that V3 can charge up to 500 volts.  At 430 amps and 500 volts, the power calculates out to 215 kW, which is still a bit shy of the demonstrated 250 kW charging rate. It looks like in this one sample, the Model 3 Long Range held 250 kW between 10 and 18% charge.

Categories: Charging, Tesla

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

36 Comments on "Tesla Model 3 Charging Charts Reveal Details On V3 Supercharger"

newest oldest most voted

can somebody explain to me why the v3 charger is still charging faster at 55%+? At that point the v2 charger seems not to be the limitation anymore.

Hardware limitations with the charger itself?

V3 is at 55% after about 16 minutes while V2 is there after about 26 minutes. I would guess that a 10 minutes longer charging time, even at a lower power of 90-120 kW, does heat the batteries more than charging 10 minutes faster at higher power.
Could also be that a higher voltage is helpfull. If I remember my school days correct, there is a connection between higher voltage and less resistance = less heat. But I’m not an electician.

As heat is R*I^2 obviously higher currents mean more heat. Double the current in half the time means double the heat in the battery.

As well heat loss to the environment is reduced when charging faster.

They have increased the charging rate on the battery, while probably sacrificing some longevity. The V2-curve is before the update to the charging curve.

The higher power on 10-30% SOC isn’t helping that much in charging time by itself.

I very much doubt they are sacrificing longevity. They simply gained enough confidence now that the batteries are fine with the higher rate.

They increased the longevity of the battery cells first, which allows them to supercharge faster.

This is from two years ago:

“Tesla’s use of aluminum means that its cars and batteries could last for 20 years, a battery researcher working with the company has claimed. Jeff Dahn at Dalhousie University worked with Tesla to improve the lifespan of its batteries, and in a lecture given at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology last week, he claimed that his team doubled the cells’ overall life four years ahead of the project’s scheduled end. These cells are not currently in Tesla’s products, but that could be set to change.

It’s an incredible breakthrough and one that could have a major impact on the Model 3”

Now we’re seeing Model 3’s with 2170 cells are going to charge faster than S/X’s with the old cells. Just like predicted 2 years ago.


Model 3 cell production started in H1 2017… They might have put the improvements into production by now — but it would still leave older Model 3s with a battery that degrades faster.

Either way, just reducing degradation under normal circumstances doesn’t suddenly allow charging significantly faster without destroying the cells. Charging speed vs. degradation is not a linear trade-off — not even close.

Tesla was more conservative with the initial charging rates as they collected data. They have done this in the past. Seems they are now confident in increasing the charging rates and will do with V2 Superchargers too.

Has anyone with a Mid Range Model 3 been able to charge on the V3 yet? How are the charge times for it? Will it still do 250KW or is it reduced for the smaller battery packs? How fast will the Standard and Standard Plus batteries charge?

v3 is a demo right now, not available to the public for a couple months.

Supposedly it’s available to people in the early access program… Which might or might not include some MR owners.

What is the battery voltage at low state of charge of 10% to 18%? If about 400V, current would be 625A. Then what’s the voltage at 80%? 500V?


250kW using 75kWh battery is 3.3C charging rate, but charging from 15% to 80% in 24 minutes as shown is

(80-15)/24*60/100=1.6C average
1.6*75kWh = 122kW average charge power

While Tesla 3 is now quicker than SparkEV in peak C, SparkEV (3C peak) is still the quickest charging EV to 80% in C rate at 2.6C.

Battery is below 350V at low state of charge. I don’t know what voltage they apply during v3 charging. The article talks about 500V, which sounds high.

That’s what gets confusing. Twitter photo shows 250kW, but cable is rated 430A. That means the voltage has to be 581V. But if you assume 350V like the article states above, current has to be 714A, way over cable spec. What’s up with this???

Apparently they are driving the cable above its spec? Probably not a problem, since the time is relatively short…

Yeah, My Spark EV goes fast all the way to 100% . It’s the best at fast Charging of any Electric I have owned. Our model 3 is also fast and I can’t wait for a V3 to get to Phoenix Arizona.

Peak voltage is ~400 V. (96 cells in series, ~4.15 V each at end of charge.) Nominal voltage is ~350 V. At the low SoC where the peak power is achieved, it has to be below 350 V. (Not sure how much. Less than 330V I’d guess?…)

The fact that the charger can deliver 500 V does *not* mean that the same batteries suddenly can be charged at a higher voltage. That’s not how Li-Ion batteries work. In fact, the V2 Superchargers were also capable of delivering a higher voltage than any existing Tesla vehicle can take.

This is likely for future-proofing. What’s more, they probably need 500 V for their European chargers to comply with CCS specs?… (The I-Pace with its 400 V nominal battery for example needs ~450 V peak to charge fully.)

Maybe the Roadster mkII will have a higher nominal battery voltage?

It may be that the high voltage system in the Roadster Mk II will use substantially higher voltage, possibly running at 800v as some have speculated. But I don’t see Tesla using higher voltage cells. With 200 kWh worth of cells in the car, Tesla can use the same battery cells it’s using in either the Model 3 packs or the Model S/X packs.

Again, if you assume 350V, that means the current at 250kW has to be 714A. That’s quite a ways from 430A rating, even if it’s only for few minutes. 350*430 is only 150kW.

Where is the 430A rating from?

IngineeriX measured the diameter of the cables. 430 A is apparently what cables of this diameter are generally specified for…

Would be even more informative/revieling if the chart was to scale with time, in other words show the taper over time, that is really what everyone wants to know….starting at 10% SOC, how long does it take for V3 to get to each SOC % vs. V2

2nd graph?

The x axis of SOC graph is not even linear scale.

MPH charging, thats interesting way to put it. Never seen that. The issue though is that for many their mph charge time is 6,000, for 300 miles of gas in 5 minutes. It’s an interesting metric, mph charging, but it still is going to come down to time at charger.

“MPH charging, thats interesting way to put it. Never seen that.”

Last year when I expressed the charging rate in mph here at IEV others objected and I was chastised for it. It is interesting that now Others are using it. I understand there may be confusion at first but for Americans it is probably less confusing than say miles per deka minute.

The issue, imo, of all these charge per whatever is that the people trying to be convinced to go from gas have no connection to it. I still can’t figure out whats a good rate or not. When it comes down to it, how long does it take me to get a full charge is all that matters. If I need to stop someplace am I there 2 hours or 20 minutes?

That’s the issue with explaining “refueling” times to someone who doesn’t own an EV.
It’s really all about the time to charge from 20% to 80% (the sweet-spot). So if you plan on long distance travel, buy a car that has approximately 40% more range than the usual distance between chargers for an efficient charging schedule. (Over-simplified, but helps frame their understanding.)

You rarely charge to 100% in the middle of a trip. The MPH metric allows comparing different EVs; and also easily estimating how long you will need to spend at the charger before you are good to go on the next hop.

Those with electrical engineering degrees may object to the “miles per hour” rate for EV charging, but the rest of us are going to find it a handy yardstick. I think it’s going to catch on, if it hasn’t already.

Put it this way, with my existing LR Model 3, If I roll into a SuperCharger with the battery at 10% SOC it will get 180-200 miles in about 1/2 hr as long as I am not sharing the SuperCharger with another Tesla. This is affected by temperature of the battery so if its cold it goes slower. #1. With the existing 120KW SuperChargers, this allows me to drive about three hours on the freeway before I have to charge for 1/2 hour which is great because by that time I have to use the bathroom and want to walk and street out and maybe eat or get a drink anyways so its no waste of time in that regard. #2. With this new V3 SuperCharger that charging time will be down to 15 minutes or so for people in a hurry or people who are contemplating switching from ICE and worried about charging times. #3. With Tesla using their vastly superior software and OTA capabilities they will institute the conditioning of the battery so it is at the right temperature just selecting on the navigation the SuperCharger you are going to next so it will mitigate temperature obstacles to… Read more »

Yup, a fairly steep tapering off of the charging rate, as I expected. Odd that I got some push-back on my earlier claim that if a production Model 3 (not one specially modified for a demo) did charge at 200-250 kW, it would only be for a short period of time, and certainly wouldn’t support a sustained charge at that speed. Not that I think I’m in a position to brag about my perception; that was merely applying some pretty basic engineering principles.

But still, Kudos to Tesla for making a production car that can charge at 250 kW, even if it’s only for 3 or 4 minutes.

If Tesla can bring the 8% to 90% charge time back to 20 minutes from 40 minutes then it is all over for gas cars.
This looks more like it could be a component capacity issue at this stage rather than a battery charging issue, so the component limit issue may just be a straightforward engineering fix.

The taper (v2 and v3) shows it’s a battery limitation and nothing else.

But even so, 100 miles in 7 minutes is pretty amazing. Couple that with home charging, and it makes gas clearly less convenient, IMO.