Battery degradation???

[focher]

agree, except for the one time I went out to unplug the car to take a trip and it would not unplug. Had to call mobile tech and even he had to call yet another mobile tech
After that lesson, I check to make sure it will unplug LONG before I want to go anywhere. Yet to realize, that one problem was probably very unusual.

Or just reach through the trunk and pull the manual release. As documented in the owner’s manual.

 

[BlindPass]

Let's be fair, ICE fuel tanks don't noticeably decrease in capacity as part of their regular life cycle. Batteries do, and start doing so immediately.

And yeah, ICE gets worse mileage when they're old, but like really old. Not something you see just 2 years into ownership.

I'm not saying ICE is better, just that they're different and there is no precedent do this with an ICE vehicle because they behave entirely different over their lifetime (plus fueling infrastructure is very different currently).

Plus, the consequences of range degradation are less impactful in ICE. It’s not the range itself that’s valuable, it’s the avoidance of needing to replenish the range. If ICE cars took as long to refuel, there would be a lot more discussion on mpg degradation.

 

[Silicon Desert]

Or just reach through the trunk and pull the manual release. As documented in the owner’s manual.

no it was a LOT more complicated than that. It's why the first tech had to call a second tech.

 

[tomas]

Plus, the consequences of range degradation are less impactful in ICE. It’s not the range itself that’s valuable, it’s the avoidance of needing to replenish the range. If ICE cars took as long to refuel, there would be a lot more discussion on mpg degradation.

Granted. But I do not understand why there’s a new false alarm thread on this weekly when there’s ample easily found real data that would put most people’s minds at ease. Understandable that people would be vigilant. Less so that they’d skip the research step... but I guess that’s social media: you’ve got a concern, post it, and the right answer will come to you if you are wise enough to pick it out from the crap.

 

[jjrandorin]

Granted. But I do not understand why there’s a new false alarm thread on this weekly .

Way, way way (way) more than "weekly".

 

[Gasaraki]

 

[texas_star_TM3]

Absolutely not. Please don’t spread myths. The cars have a power used per mile constant. This doesn’t change. It doesn’t matter how you drive it. The only factors that play in to it are which model you have and which wheels the car is programmed as having. The cars have an estimated power available in the battery. The range shown is this constant divided by the estimated power available in the battery.

funny how on the same day that range changes then ... same temperature, same SOC (...)

 

[tomas]

What exactly does tha

t mean?

 

[jjrandorin]

What exactly does tha

t mean?

That gif, or ones like it are a gif of the emoji eating popcorn as if they were watching a movie.

it normally means "I am going to sit back and watch this unfold".

Normal usage is in a topic just like this one "Battery degradation!!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!??" in which someone is signifying "I have seen what happens in previous discussions on this topic, so am going to sit back and watch this one".

(making an assumption here that your post was a real question, so giving a real answer).

 

[dgo3]

To be fair to the OP, one of the reasons the topic keeps coming up is there's never been a definitive explanation, and there are lots of myths. My car as an example would charge to 308-310 at 100% and 278 @ 90% for the first year I had it. Then overnight it dropped to 289/260 where it remains almost a year later. This screams software change to me, but it's never been proven. I've tried changing charging from always plugging in at home to letting it drop to 10-15% charge and recharging to 90%+. Repeated cycles of that didn't affect rated mileage at all. It was certainly disconcerting max range drop from 310 to 289, but somewhat comforting that it's happened to a lot of people.

 

[jjrandorin]

To be fair to the OP, one of the reasons the topic keeps coming up is there's never been a definitive explanation, and there are lots of myths. My car as an example would charge to 308-310 at 100% and 278 @ 90% for the first year I had it. Then overnight it dropped to 289/260 where it remains almost a year later. This screams software change to me, but it's never been proven. I've tried changing charging from always plugging in at home to letting it drop to 10-15% charge and recharging to 90%+. Repeated cycles of that didn't affect rated mileage at all. It was certainly disconcerting max range drop from 310 to 289, but somewhat comforting that it's happened to a lot of people.

Ok.. but that does not explain why each person feels THEIR issue somehow needs a new thread, rather than reading / posting in (at a minimum) the stickied thread that talks specifically about range. People see that, and say "I cant be bothered reading that giant thread... MY issue MUST BE different than all of those". Or "Here is this explanation for why im posting here instead of an existing thread"... Or " I just got this car, I have degradation already?!?!?!?1. I dont have time to look at the other threads on this so I am just going to post a new one, because those cant possibly be relevant to my issue".

 

[focher]

To be fair to the OP, one of the reasons the topic keeps coming up is there's never been a definitive explanation, and there are lots of myths.

May I humbly suggest that an Internet forum is no place to look for anything resembling “definitive”, regardless of topic.

But the real issue is what difference does it make? The car is going to travel whatever distance it’s going to travel. No sane person will depend on using the range counter to zero. And no one has ever posted numbers that approach a warranty coverage situation.

 

[Firedog7881]

No sane person will depend on using the range counter to zero.

I beg to differ with this statement, see evidence

 

[tomas]

That gif, or ones like it are a gif of the emoji eating popcorn as if they were watching a movie.

it normally means "I am going to sit back and watch this unfold".

Normal usage is in a topic just like this one "Battery degradation!!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!??" in which someone is signifying "I have seen what happens in previous discussions on this topic, so am going to sit back and watch this one".

(making an assumption here that your post was a real question, so giving a real answer).

Thanks sent as rhetorical question. I HATE that whole philosophy. I’ve got nothing to say, but I’m going to go to the trouble to post anyway to let you know I’m watching in hopes it gets nasty or stupid. That’s what it means to me. The most passive aggressive emoji on the internet maybe.

 

[tomas]

May I humbly suggest that an Internet forum is no place to look for anything resembling “definitive”, regardless of topic.

But the real issue is what difference does it make? The car is going to travel whatever distance it’s going to travel. No sane person will depend on using the range counter to zero. And no one has ever posted numbers that approach a warranty coverage situation.

May I humbly suggest that an Internet forum is no place to look for anything resembling “definitive”, regardless of topic.

Darned straight on that! The right answer IS usually there, but the BS seems to magnify with each range thread. I say, look outside forums for published statistics on lithium ion battery degradation in EVs. Refuse to look at any “opinions”, only research with > 1,000 data points.

 

[focher]

I beg to differ with this statement, see evidence

I stand by my sentence! There were two conditions in it. You only passed the second one.

But bravo. That’s either desperation or big cajones.

 

[KenC]

I beg to differ with this statement, see evidence
View attachment 569619

Tesla home delivered my "3" with zero miles, so I guess they don't rely upon it either.

 

[DB-Cooper]

To be fair to the OP, one of the reasons the topic keeps coming up is there's never been a definitive explanation, and there are lots of myths. My car as an example would charge to 308-310 at 100% and 278 @ 90% for the first year I had it. Then overnight it dropped to 289/260 where it remains almost a year later. This screams software change to me, but it's never been proven. I've tried changing charging from always plugging in at home to letting it drop to 10-15% charge and recharging to 90%+. Repeated cycles of that didn't affect rated mileage at all. It was certainly disconcerting max range drop from 310 to 289, but somewhat comforting that it's happened to a lot of people.

That’s the same as my situation, almost exactly. I’ve always rationalized it this way. When I got the car in late 2018, all Model 3s had 278/310, but at some point Tesla added in wheel calibration. Since I have the 20” P wheels, mine seemingly overnight one day (SW update) went to 26X/299. Similarly, Tesla.com now changes the estimated range as you select different wheels, it didn’t do that before. I haven’t calibrated or done anything, but heat and things seem to vary it a bit right after I charge it. In at 264/294 right now. I charged last Friday.

I have 11k miles, don’t drive a lot and don’t leave it plugged in. I rarely supercharge and typically L2 once a week From 30-40% to 90%. However, with Covid-19, it’s now like once a month to get down to 30%.

 

[Austindude]

This ^^^.

You can also drain the battery down yo say 10-15% SoC, then let it L2 or supercharge back up to 90 or even 100%.

As it reaches 98, 99, 100 the BMS will re-learn your actual top/max capacity.
Drive off and again drain down to 20% or below and juice back up to 100%.

Once the car reports its done charging and fully topped off, switch the GUI from SoC to Miles and report back.

I am at >2 years with an AWD+ that is rarely ever plugged in and showing 305-310 miles at 100% SoC.

I also have an early 2018 LR RWD and I have seen improvement in predicted range by taking the battery down to 10% then charging back up to 90% (100% just before a trip) and doing this repeatedly for a couple of charging cycles. It does seem to be the BMS learning and recalibrating rather than actual range decrease with the battery pack. This also makes me believe the calibration and predicted approximate range has nothing to do with your driving style, only the repeated depth of discharge and then the top recharge of the pack.

 

[Gasaraki]

I beg to differ with this statement, see evidence
View attachment 569619

He said 'sane person'. =D