On WLTP these two look almost identical: 716 km against 621. Observed, the gap widens to 555 km against 475 — 80 km — because the Model 3 uses 142 Wh/km against the ID.7’s 162. It is also a second and a half quicker to 100 km/h and cheaper in both markets. The ID.7’s answer is space.
What actually differs
- Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD goes 80 km further on the observed real-world figure than the Volkswagen ID.7 Pro.
- Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD is 14% more efficient than the Volkswagen ID.7 Pro, which is what the electricity bill follows.
- Volkswagen ID.7 Pro charges from 10 to 80 per cent 1 minutes faster than the Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD.
- Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD carries 2 kWh more usable battery than the Volkswagen ID.7 Pro.
- Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD is 281 kg lighter than the Volkswagen ID.7 Pro.
- Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD is 2 seconds quicker to 100 km/h than the Volkswagen ID.7 Pro.
Every line above is computed from the table below, not written: a difference is only stated where both cars carry that figure from a named source.
| Specification | Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD Tesla | Volkswagen ID.7 Pro Volkswagen |
|---|---|---|
| Market & identity | ||
| Curb weight | 1,899 kg | 2,180 kg |
| Battery | ||
| Cell chemistry LFP tolerates daily charging to 100% and is the most thermally stable; NMC and NCA pack more energy per kilogram. | NMC | NMC |
| Usable capacity The figure every range and cost calculation on this site is based on. | 79.0 kWh | 77.0 kWh |
| Thermal management Active liquid or direct-refrigerant cooling is the strongest single predictor of slow degradation and repeatable fast charging. | liquid-active | liquid-active |
| Pack voltage 800 V architectures hold high charging power for longer and waste less energy as heat. | — | 350 V |
| Capacity loss per year Rate for this vehicle class from published fleet datasets, not a measurement of this model and not a manufacturer claim. | 2.0% / year est | 2.0% / year est |
| Projected state of health at 8 years Modelled from the observed degradation rate at average annual mileage. An estimate, not a measurement. | 84% est | 84% est |
| Range & efficiency | ||
| EPA range US EPA combined cycle, the most conservative of the three official tests. | 557 km | — |
| EPA range, city The city half of the EPA combined rating. Usually the higher of the two for an electric car. | 579 km | — |
| EPA range, highway The highway half of the EPA combined rating, and the figure to plan a long drive around. | 529 km | — |
| WLTP range European combined cycle, typically 15 to 25 percent more optimistic than EPA for the same car. | 716 km | 621 km |
| Observed real-world range Mixed-conditions figure from independent testing. This is the number that matters on a road trip. | 555 km | 475 km |
| EPA consumption | 16.4 kWh/100 km | — |
| Real-world consumption | 142 Wh/km | 162 Wh/km |
| Charging | ||
| Peak DC power Held briefly, often only inside a narrow state-of-charge window. | 250 kW | 190 kW |
| 10 to 80 percent DC charge time The honest measure of fast-charging speed. | 28 min | 27 min |
| AC onboard charger Sets how fast the car fills up overnight at home. | 11 kW | 11 kW |
| DC connector (Europe) | CCS2 | CCS2 |
| DC connector (US) The plug fitted to the car as sold in the United States. Blank where we have not sourced it for that market. | NACS | — |
| Performance | ||
| Peak power | 366 kW | 210 kW |
| 0-60 mph | — | — |
| 0-100 km/h | 4.4 s | 6.5 s |
| Cost of ownership | ||
| Base MSRP (US) | — | — |
| Base price (EU) | €50,990 | €54,105 |
| Est. out-of-warranty pack replacement (US) | — | — |
| Battery warranty | 8 yr | 8 yr |
| Est. 5-year residual value | — | — |
| Safety & risk | ||
| NHTSA overall rating | 5/5 | — |
| Euro NCAP overall rating | 5/5 | — |
| Battery or high-voltage recalls | 5 | — |
| Battery safety score | ||
| Composite score Our own composite of thermal management, cell chemistry, crash rating and recall record. Formula | 6.5 / 10 | — |
highlighted marks the better figure for that row. Where a car is not sold in a market, its price and official range for that market are blank rather than converted. est marks a modelled value, explained on the methodology page.
Range and efficiency
555 km observed against 475, from 79 kWh usable against 77. Two kilowatt-hours of battery does not explain an 80 km gap; 142 Wh/km against 162 does. That is a 12 percent efficiency advantage, and it shows up in the electricity bill as well as the range.
The ID.7 is a large, roomy saloon and the Model 3 is a smaller one, so some of this is simply size. But both are aerodynamic four-doors of similar shape, and 20 Wh/km is a wide margin between two cars trying to do the same thing.
Charging: level
27 minutes for the ID.7 against 28 for the Model 3 — call it identical. The Model 3 peaks higher at 250 kW against 190 kW and gains nothing from it over the window that counts. Both are 400-volt cars and both are well behind the 800-volt Korean saloons.
Because the Model 3 goes 80 km further per charge, it needs fewer stops even at identical charging speed. Over a long journey that compounds.
Performance and price
366 kW and 493 Nm through both axles against 210 kW and 560 Nm to the rear; 4.4 seconds against 6.5. In the UK, £49,990 against £51,005; in Germany, €50,990 against €54,105. The Model 3 is cheaper and quicker in both markets.
The ID.7 is a physically larger car with a considerably more spacious rear cabin and a hatchback tailgate rather than a saloon boot. That is what the money and the 80 km buy.
One gap in our data
The ID.7 is not sold in the United States, so its EPA range, EPA consumption and NHTSA rating are blank rather than converted from the European figures. The table shows those rows empty on purpose — a WLTP number relabelled as an EPA number would be wrong, not approximate.
Which one should you buy
Buy the Model 3 on every number here: more real range, less energy per kilometre, much quicker, cheaper in both markets.
Buy the ID.7 if you need the rear-seat space and the hatchback opening. It is a bigger car, and no amount of efficiency makes a Model 3 into one.
Frequently asked questions
Why is the real-world gap bigger than the WLTP gap?
Because WLTP runs at a low average speed where aerodynamic and rolling losses matter less. In mixed real driving the Model 3’s 142 Wh/km against the ID.7’s 162 counts for more, so the 95 km WLTP gap becomes an 80 km observed gap from a much lower base.
Is the ID.7 sold in the US?
No, which is why its EPA range and NHTSA rating are blank on this site rather than estimated from the European figures.
Which charges faster?
They are level — 27 minutes against 28 from 10 to 80 percent — despite the Model 3 peaking at 250 kW against the ID.7’s 190 kW.
Where these numbers come from
Sources are credited per figure on the Model 3 and ID.7 Pro pages.