Early 75/75D pack degradation

[smac]

@wk057 I'm torn on this.

I'd really like to see some transparency, because like you I believe misrepresentation of products is wrong.

What scares me, and it has for a while, that if something like this comes to light it risks setting back all EV's, not just Tesla.

There is no denying Tesla have done a massively good job in raising awareness of not only EV's, but environmental issues in general. However with this meteoric rise they have become core to setting expectations for all EV's

While many think that "evil ICE" manufacturers are sat doing nothing. I take a less radical view.

I put a lot of research into replacing my Tesla, and what truly impressed me was BMW's whole i division seem to be putting significant effort into the environmental issues, above and beyond swapping out the drive trains from ICE to EV to build compliance cars.

Full cradle to grave analysis, including how serviceable their cars are out of warranty, how to reduce the material impacts, how efficient the cars are in operation (given we aren't at 100% renewable grids yet), a working second-life battery installation, on site renewable energy and a huge array of funding going into environmental startups via their i Ventures arm.

I would hate for the press to have a field day and all EVs tarred with the same brush. If even one person who would buy a BMW EV decides not buy a BMW ICE, just because Tesla chose to put a pack out into the wild that wasn't ready, it would be a crying shame.

It's a tough one that's for sure, but I respect your decision which ever way you go.

 

[Xenius]

@wk057
While many think that "evil ICE" manufacturers are sat doing nothing. I take a less radical view.

I'm pretty sure most of the big automakers didn't sit around doing nothing. They in fact worked actively against alternative fuel vehicles while helping Exxon mobile and it's ilk prevent the flow of information showing the undeniable fact that burning a massive amount of oil and releasing the byproducts into the air, is in fact, not good for the environment.

Sorry for the somewhat OT (to this particular line of discussion) post.

 

[jakamo]

I have been charging my April 2016 S70 to a 100% since i got it, get between 239 and 244, colder weather may have
an effect on lower range charge.This is my work lease car at 26000 miles.

 

[RGagne1975]

I have found that with my S 90D that the only way I can get even close to the rated range is if I drive in optimal conditions at an average of 55 mph. I personally go by the projected range instead and ignore the rated. I have 26,600 miles on my car and now it charges to 255 miles of rated range at 90% and around 285 miles at 100%.

 

[xborg]

It's really just a matter of getting the information out to the people who do care. Personally, if I were you, and my 90D which had an advertised range of ~290 miles or so already has less range than a regular RWD 85... I'd be a bit irritated and want to hold Tesla accountable. Just because you don't doesn't mean others won't.

Tesla also dances around the fact that supercharging and high-rate discharge of the 90-type packs causes accelerated degradation, but doesn't have anywhere near the same effect on the 85-type packs. I love the dodgy non-answer wording in their older FAQ on the topic that went something like, "Will supercharging frequently hurt my battery?" "Supercharging frequently does not affect the battery warranty." ...... Since the warranty explicitly disclaims degradation....... yeah, of course it wouldn't affect the warranty.

I personally have a huge problem with anyone who misrepresents a product... and Tesla is currently the king in this area. Performance specs, Autopilot capabilities (v1 and v2), actual pack capacities, time lines for literally everything, advertised features and improvements that have not nor are likely to ever come to fruition, etc etc etc... all examples. This is just another thing to add to the pile. And really, there can't be any blame placed on me for anything bad that becomes of providing data and insight. If Tesla had been honest about things from the start, there would be no problems. Unfortunately, Tesla has been so incredibly dishonest about so many things over the past few years it's amazing they're still both playing the same game and getting away with it.

The lawsuits in Norway seem to be the only things actually holding Tesla accountable for any of their false marketing. I really hope they stop with the misleading and outright false claims on things at some point... but probably won't until after they're forced to in court somewhere along the lines.

In any case, I'm giving Tesla more than enough notice and opportunity to get out in front of this and do the right thing by their customers. All I'm doing is providing data. The fact that the data shows that Tesla pretty much screwed 90/75 folks isn't my fault.

Thanks for providing us real data. I agree that Tesla's practices are being very dishonest. Apart from technical stuff, let's also add "we never discount" lie as well.

I reckon degradation problem with 90 batteries are also linked to P90D battery failures.

 

[Jaimebond]

Just read this thread. I have a 90d from oct 2016 or so. Bought as inventory in march 2017 w 500 mi and i noticed degradation in batter but tesla sc said batt was ok and that this range change is expected as the car learns and recalculates range based on real world driving. Still when i bought the car 90% charge was around 260 and now w 22000 mi i get about 252. Reality is in cyrrebt weather driving i get about 150 mi before car is completely out. Ive only supercharged three times and charge at home and at work usually. I feel frustrated as i think if there is a problem tesla should just recall and replace the batt packs. I love the car and would buy another tesla but transparency is important in an industry and is necessary for a car manufacturer to excel. @wk057 let me know how i can help and if u need data from my car at all.

 

[TessieEddie]

I have a 2016 60 that I upgraded to the 75. When I first made the conversion in Spring 2017, it would briefly charge to 240 but very quickly degraded to 238 and then 237. That was June 2017 and as of today, probably 10,000 mi later it will still charge to 237. So after an initial nearly 5% degradation, it seems to have stabilized. Current mileage is 30,000. Other things to note:

I have done a lot of long trips and used Superchargers, but almost never charging beyond 90% (it becomes too slow in any case if you do). Probably 10-12,000 mi of those 30,000 were trips using Superchargers.

When it was a 60, I charged every night to 100% under the mistaken notion that the "battery headroom" of the software limited 60 battery was on the top end. When I made the conversion it became obvious that the "headroom" was actually on the low end not the top: 20+ miles of range suddenly "appeared" during my first charge as a 75.

After around 10,000 mi of this practice I started to notice a decrease in range. 210, 208 and finally 205. At that point I started doing 90% charges daily and only range charges for actual trips which of course is exactly what Tesla recommends that you do.

So I blame a lot of the early degradation on my "abuse" of the battery, not following Tesla's recommendations.

The fact that it has stabilized now gives me a lot of comfort that it will indeed last a long time with only slight degradation over the next 30,000 mi or so.

Something that I have also noticed, using Teslalog.com, is that driving at 70 mph with the 60 battery used to use RM at about a 5% premium and 80 mph was a 25% premium. With the 75 battery I notice little or no "premium" up to 72 mph and only about a 15% premium at 80 mph. So it appears that Tesla were playing with the displayed range on the 60 to make it appear to have more range than it actually had.

 

[Mike Kiefer]

@wk057 Keep up the good work, ignore the people who cannot accept the fact Tesla has missold/lied to them.

I love our 75D X, its the best car I have ever owned. But am under no illusion about how the real world works.

Without people like your self big business will think they can get away with anything......Lets not all forget just badly wrong it can all go if no one is there to keep a check on coporate greed.

Volkswagen emissions scandal - Wikipedia

 

[Euro3d]

We have a Tesla model S 60 purchased Sept 2014 without the supercharging option, so never supercharged

100% Charge when new gave 284 km
After 40,000 km (approx 25k miles) highway miles at 100km/hr (63mph)
100% Charge gives 302km, yes it has increased with the caveat the battery pack is original as far as we know? Would Tesla change the battery pack during a service with out telling us? Doubt it, Could also be software parameters have been tweaked over the last 4 years.

Note we operate the battery between 20% DOD and 50% DOD, rarely outside this window and trickle charge overnight at 10A max.

We do think SC'ingh and operating outside the 20/50 DOD window degrades the battery if all the research is correct.

We will continue to trickle charge the battery and operate between 80% SOC and 50% SOC. Will be interesting to see the range over the next 5, 10 , 15 and 20 years. We are hunting for 10,000 battery cycles off this pack. Car is aluminium so won't rust and should be in good shape after 20 yrs.

 

[Tummy]

I don't think my usage is particularly extreme - I drive ~120 miles per day, charge to 90% and typically have ~25% remaining at the end of the day. The car has been charged to a true 100% maybe 10 times, and discharged into the low single digits maybe 15 times. I estimate I've supercharged about 35-40 times.

Driving 120 miles per day puts you in the top 1% of travelers in the US. I would consider it very extreme.
Approximately 95% of car commuters in the U.S. travel less than 40 miles to work round trip (the weighted average is 13.6 miles) based on National Household Travel Survey of 150,147 households.

 

[Mike Kiefer]

I have the Model S 75D which was upgraded from the 60D. It is a 2016 refreshed model with 40,000 miles on it already. During our harsh winters in below zero temperatures we charge between 90 to 100% for my wife's 120 mile commute to work. Also we have used superchargers for approximately 6,000 miles of the 40,000 miles driven. So we have stressed the battery pretty good. We now get about 247 miles with a full charge compared to 259 miles for a new 75D. Note that this is about a 5% loss which is right in line with what is expected. I think some people are too quick to claim Tesla has mislead them or lied to them It could be as simple as needing to have the battery recalibrated.

 

[ucmndd]

Driving 120 miles per day puts you in the top 1% of travelers in the US. I would consider it very extreme.
Approximately 95% of car commuters in the U.S. travel less than 40 miles to work round trip (the weighted average is 13.6 miles) based on National Household Travel Survey of 150,147 households.

Not pretending I don’t drive a lot, but that’s not really the point I’m trying to make. I’m saying the usage of the battery - typical charge cycle, DC charging rate, etc. is not particularly extreme or different than someone who traveled the same number of miles over twice the time.

 

[ucmndd]

When it was a 60, I charged every night to 100% under the mistaken notion that the "battery headroom" of the software limited 60 battery was on the top end. When I made the conversion it became obvious that the "headroom" was actually on the low end not the top: 20+ miles of range suddenly "appeared" during my first charge as a 75.

After around 10,000 mi of this practice I started to notice a decrease in range. 210, 208 and finally 205. At that point I started doing 90% charges daily and only range charges for actual trips which of course is exactly what Tesla recommends that you do.

So I blame a lot of the early degradation on my "abuse" of the battery, not following Tesla's recommendations.

I’m not sure what leads you to believe this, when I upgraded my “100%” charged 60 it instantly became an “86%” charged 75. This is in line with other peoples’ experience on this forum.

 

[Drone Flyer]

My S75, built July/August 2016 (VIN in signature), with 26000km (16000 miles), original 90% rated range (or typical, as it's called in EU) was 341km (212 miles), and now, 13 months later, 90% SOC shows 332km (206 miles). approx 3% loss which is in line with my expectations.

The battery has been taken good care of, never run down to single digits (lowest was once down to 13%, and charged to 100% once, normally SOC is between 40% - 90%, supercharged approx 10 times in total).

One thing I have not done, and perhaps you should consider as well, is balancing the pack. Running down the battery to low - single digit SOC, and then charging all the way to 100%. It may improve the rated range display. My lifetime consumption is 188wh/km (302wh/mi).

Have you tried your car in -30 degree weather yet? LOL!

 

[Tummy]

Not pretending I don’t drive a lot, but that’s not really the point I’m trying to make. I’m saying the usage of the battery - typical charge cycle, DC charging rate, etc. is not particularly extreme or different than someone who traveled the same number of miles over twice the time.

I was more reacting to the lack of self-awareness that what you are doing is extreme. I read during the PowerWall launch that they were engineered for daily cycles compared to Model S and X that they expected to typically average one charge cycle per week.

 

[ucmndd]

I was more reacting to the lack of self-awareness that what you are doing is extreme. I read during the PowerWall launch that they were engineered for daily cycles compared to Model S and X that they expected to typically average one charge cycle per week.

Thanks for the feedback.

Again, I’m struggling to understand the point you’re trying to make when discussing battery degradation over miles driven. At 36,000 miles, I’ve experienced 9% degradation of my battery as reported by rated range.

Assuming a similar charge cycle and driving/charging characteristics, it seems almost completely immaterial to me whether the 36,000 miles were driven over one year or five.

I started this thread to see if my experience was in line with others. While it’s definitlely on the high end of what’s been reported so far, it seems I’m not exactly alone either.

 

[RobInAZ]

Is the estimated range truly based on battery performance, or is it a mix of battery performance and driving style? I know that when I had my BMW i3 it was based on both and everyone on the BMW forums called it the 'Guess o Meter' because it was so inaccurate and fluctuated so much. BMW also had a hidden menu where you could see the actual battery stats and measure the degradation.

If it is influenced by driving style at all then I don't think it is an accurate measure. Also FWIW I've never gotten any advertised MPG on any car I've ever owned. With that being said, I haven't witnessed any noticeable change in my 75D with 25k miles.

 

[smac]

@RobInAZ It's almost impossible to know from an end user's perspective how well the packs are holding up.

Bjorn does a good job of discussing some of the issues here without going into too much technical jargon

 

[animorph]

There are plenty of cars with well known weaknesses. My last Porsche was known for weak roller bearings that could prematurely self destruct and take the whole engine with them. My earlier 944 Turbo had the common driveshaft vibration that caused the car to shudder under acceleration, similar to the Model X. Not a lot of transparency from Porsche either. Tesla sounds pretty normal to me. The cars aren't perfect, as much as we would like them to be.

 

[smac]

@animporh I'm guessing you are referring to the IMS bearing problem.

Porsche didn't exactly cover themselves in glory over that one: Porsche IMS Settlement for 996 & Boxster Reached - Ferdinand