fluxemag
Member
2013 S40 with 31k miles, 130mi rated on a "full" charge. I'm not sure the rated range really means anything though.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
Wk057, I'm fascinated by your post suggesting that balancing is triggered when SOC exceeds about 93% SOC, the BMS determines the voltage difference between the modules, remembers that difference, and begins slowly bleeding the appropriate modules by an amount to bring them to a closer SOC to each other, even if the car is not sitting with a full range charge. That makes a lot of sense, and is fairly consistent with evidence we've seen. To confirm, you're fairly certain that this slow bleeding continues for awhile once triggered, even if the pack is brought to lower SOCs due to use?
I see those random jumps in 'rated range' often. Sometimes when I drive, the trip graph magically jumps up one percent, or when the car is done charging but just sitting there. Sometimes it does the opposite, it just jumps down. Happens rarely, though. One thing I also noticed when I charge to 100% 1 out of 3 times, I can drive for 5-9 miles before the rate range or percentage goes down. So there is some extra that just doesn't show up in the initial rate range estimate. Having experienced all these things I always try to remind people that looking at the rate range display is not a good way to measure battery degradation.
Here the car is done charging for an hour and then the rate range jumps up by 4 miles (while percentage is always at 100). (top line is rated range, middle line is percent)
Here an example where a smililar jump happens while I was driving
If that's due to balancing, there is proof that it happens at any given time. PS: this jump in the energy graph was not caused by regen.
Here the car is done charging for an hour and then the rate range jumps up by 4 miles (while percentage is always at 100). (top line is rated range, middle line is percent)
Here an example where a smililar jump happens while I was driving
If that's due to balancing, there is proof that it happens at any given time. PS: this jump in the energy graph was not caused by regen.
Last edited:
travwill
Active Member
These batteries and algorithms to estimate range are always surprising. I'm traveling a lot lately and don't drive much even when home so just charge to 50% always on my 70D. The range at 50% was 122 when new, then for a while now it has dropped most of the time to showing 117, maybe 118. But out of the blue it is back up to 120 now so seems like give or take 5 or so miles is normal even at 50%. Have to remember batteries are not an exact thing, they are a chemical/chemistry thus just require estimation.
jimtelsa
Member
CPO 2013 85 when using supercharging for first time, rated range was 231, just let the car set it self.
Last night did a trip charging with my 240v 13 amp Volt converted charging set up and got 258. was hoping for the 265 range
Not sure after reading many posts if thats correct or if thats on low side, I have a B battery pack.
Last night did a trip charging with my 240v 13 amp Volt converted charging set up and got 258. was hoping for the 265 range
Not sure after reading many posts if thats correct or if thats on low side, I have a B battery pack.
My HOA complained about the window AC unit I installed this summer in my garage. I was hoping it would slow the degradation. I had to take it down. I also left my car parked at the airport between 70-85% for several days per week. Always covered, but still in the 90's.
glhs272
Unnamed plug faced villian
Not unusual, right at the average actually. See Tesla Battery Survey (old name MaxRange) - Google Sheets (and add your data
)
Last edited:
Pilot_51
Member
Added my car. It's kind of looking like something may be wrong with my battery. It's too early to tell if the 100% charge followed by discharge to 11% (18 miles) helped much; still getting 156 miles at 90% (give or take 0.4 mile according to VT). I'll have service take a look if it doesn't improve satisfactorily after a month or two. I'll need the range for my Yellowstone trip next year.Not unusual, right at the average actually. See Tesla Battery Survey (old name MaxRange) - Google Sheets (and add your data
glhs272
Unnamed plug faced villian
If you haven't tried this already, you might just charge it to 100% everyday for a couple of weeks. You might be surprised at the results...
glhs272
Unnamed plug faced villian
It may be helpful to find out if the battery is just out of balance/calibration (recoverable) or if there is really a problem with the battery, such as a weak module (not recoverable). Is it worth it? Well, if the battery is getting 150 miles of range @90% where it should be 175 to 180 miles, that is effectively 12% of degradation. "Battery level degradation" if you will. But, if running the battery at 100% for a couple of weeks recovers the battery back to 180 at the expense of 0.001% cell level degradation, that would be an acceptable trade-off to me anyway. You can time the charge so it doesn't sit at 100% too long.
<soap box>
Anyway, I think people are making too big of a deal about the occasional range charge. I do it all the time. And guess what, my car has the least amount of battery level degradation on any car I have seen with it's relative amount of miles. My car lives at 90% almost all the time unless it's being driven or I am range charging it. How long would it have to be at 100% to have any measurable degradation? Weeks? Months?
In my view people are "stepping over dollars to pick up pennies" with their charging habits. Folks are charging to 60 to 70% every day allowing their batteries to go out of balance, thinking they are saving their batteries (which at the cell level they might be slightly correct) but suffer horrible range loss very quickly and then complain about it demanding Tesla replace their batteries. The difference in cell level degradation 90% versus say 60% is miniscule. Why suffer?
<steps off the soap box>
<soap box>
Anyway, I think people are making too big of a deal about the occasional range charge. I do it all the time. And guess what, my car has the least amount of battery level degradation on any car I have seen with it's relative amount of miles. My car lives at 90% almost all the time unless it's being driven or I am range charging it. How long would it have to be at 100% to have any measurable degradation? Weeks? Months?
In my view people are "stepping over dollars to pick up pennies" with their charging habits. Folks are charging to 60 to 70% every day allowing their batteries to go out of balance, thinking they are saving their batteries (which at the cell level they might be slightly correct) but suffer horrible range loss very quickly and then complain about it demanding Tesla replace their batteries. The difference in cell level degradation 90% versus say 60% is miniscule. Why suffer?
<steps off the soap box>
What you wrote will definately work, although if one complains loud enough, the SC will reset the battery info manually, and you will get the same results without the range charges.
According to new evidence only a single range charge is required to activate the balancing circuits. Multiple range charges are superfluous.
Similar threads
- Question