Yo, that is not normal. You need to take it up with Tesla to get your battery looked at. Either it is super abused (not my first guess), or something is wrong with it and it should be fixed under warranty.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Battery Degradation
- Thread starter padal77
- Start date
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
Based on the poster I assume he’s using some of that “new math” to arrive at his figure, not what the car is actually reporting to the owner.
ACA Man
Member
ahkahn
Active Member
So you're suggesting that if the battery degrades 50% by 50,000 miles, Tesla won't do anything about it?
Fair enough. Here is the math and I'll let you decide how you want to arrive at 14%:
Car charged to 294 brand new
Current charge to full according to the car is 272
That's 8% degradation, not great, but not horrible.
However, the car won't go 272 miles. The farthest it will go until 0% is 255 miles (this is the usable capacity of the battery where when it hits 0%, the car reports 0%)
That's 14% degradation
If you take the commonly agreed EPA full charge when new of 288 miles....
Those numbers are 6% and 12% respectively.
Which number would you like to use?
Last edited:
Without errors in the BMS, no. According to them, it's doing exactly what it's supposed to do. But what I can't get over is the fact that under no conditions, short of driving in a straight line at 45-50mph, can the car go the rated 272 it reports on a full charge. What it actually goes and what actually fits perfectly into the Usable Capacity, is 255 miles.
Tesla replaced two batteries in the same car under warranty for Tesloop (kind of a taxi service). The first time when the battery had supposedly only 6% degradation but the car would shut down before zero. The second time when the battery had 22% degradation.
When I read it, I was under the impression that the reason for replacing was not related to degradation, but because the car was behaving incorrectly maybe as a result of the degradation. The premature shutdowns or charging/balancing faults might get you a replacement. But if you have an unlucky 75kWh pack that just lost 20 miles without any other symptoms, I would expect them to tell you it’s within tolerance.
I don't know. That's what the article said. I assume they looked at rated range and how much you lose like we all do.
'Cell imbalances' is what they claimed fir the first swap. Basically it means some cells degraded faster than others and that probably caused the BMS to report an incorrect range, thus the car shut down before it showed 0 miles. But at the core it's plain and simple degradation of the battery (just not all equally).
They didn't give a reason for the second replacement other than mentioning the massive 22% degradation after just over 100k miles. I would agree that's not acceptable.
To be fair, though, Tesloop is kind of in the spotlight and if they start having issues with their cars it would become public and cast a shadow on Tesla's reputation. I believe Tesloop is getting special treatment from Tesla to make sure there is no negative press. I doubt any normal owner would have gotten those two battery replacements.
OT...what is the deal with Tesloop and the supercharger use? I thought that SC were not for fleet/business use but the Tesloop drivers said otherwise. Sucks sharing a full SC with a few Tesloop cars when you are on a roadtrip
Cars purchased before December 15, 2017 were grandfathered in since there were no restrictions before that date.
Tesla introduces new ‘Supercharger Fair Use’ policy to focus on long distance travel and deter commercial use
Tesla changed their policies on commercial use. All car sold before that date were fine to use Superchargers for commercial use, all car sold from that point on are not to use the Superchargers for commercial use. Tesloops's car were all sold before that cut off date.
ACA Man
Member
I am not suggesting anything.
My post was based on my on-going battle with Tesla concerning my own car’s degradation.
If you do your search here, it seems to be a common theme for Tesla to brush you off and said it;s normal or within tolerance, whatever that may mean.
I am currently exploring legal actions against Tesla for this particular issue.
ACA Man
Member
My car is at 160 miles at 100% charge with about 81,000 miles.
I bought it as a CPO with around 75,000 miles and it’s 166 miles since Day 1.
its hard to enforce that rule though. As long as the superchargers aren't full, i personally dont care. Are we going to exclude any business from using teslas by removing their access to the largest charging network on the planet? hardly seems fair.
I think the concern was with car that have free Supercharging. For commercial use that can add up quite a bit. 400k miles on Superchargers on a Model X is $36,000 in electricity alone. If thousands of Uber and Lyft and taxis use free supercharging, it does add up.
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
I have no dog in this fight and freely admit that I haven’t read your other thread in great detail. But when everyone is stating numbers in an implied consistent manner (current rated miles at 100% / rated miles at 100% when new), if you’re going to state things in a manner different than everyone else, you should probably lead with that to avoid confusion.
Similar threads
