Early 75/75D pack degradation

[JRP3]

Gave me 2 months with 2 cars to work out any quirks I distinctly recall getting either a phone call or an email along the lines "we are bringing out a new battery chemistry. It will have about 3% more range but it is still experimental so we don't know how it will do in the long term. If it works out badly, we will replace it with an old-chemistry 85 Would you like to do that?"

I'd guess Tesla did not do that with most buyers.

 

[Kargok9]

Had to chuckle at this as my dieselgate TDI was the catalyst for buying a Tesla.

Same here, VW repurchase of our TDI prompted ordering the M3 but had a Viet Nam colleague pass away shortly there after and decided not to wait for the M3. Bought an MS that is now languishing in our drive.

 

[liuping]

Even when consuming only at the rated consumption of 324 wh/mi (difficult to do), my actual range is about 220 miles.

I believe the consumption used for the rated miles on a 90D is around 295 wh/mi. EPA 324wh/mi includes charging losses (approximately 10%), and is not reflected on the dash.

 

[liuping]

What makes you think that the actual range is anywhere near the cars display of range? My cars actual range (and battery capacity) are 15% to 20% less than the displayed range. 2016 90D.

Is that 15-20% less than Rated Miles based on driving a constant 65MPH, with little to no elevation changes, at 72 degrees F, with no head winds or rain?

I find the range shown to be pretty accurate when I drive that way. I just don't usually drive like that

 

[prash]

The cars display of range may have nothing to do with the actual range and the actual battery capacity. That is, your battery could be seriously degraded and still display a "normal" range. My 90D when fully charged (done only a few times) shows a "rated" range of 275 miles or so. No way. Even when consuming only at the rated consumption of 324 wh/mi (difficult to do), my actual range is about 220 miles.

Isn't the rated wh/mi for 90D 295wh/mi?

 

[AZ Desert Driver]

If Tesla had been making batteries/cars for decades, then they would have a data base from which to project range from a pack. The oldest pack is barely 10 years old. They made a best guess, ran algorithms, but did they REALLY make promises ? Did thy say the degradation would withstand any and all abuses?
I hope my pack lasts a long time. Will it last as long as others? Will it affect my future trade in value? How much heartache is this worth?

 

[BobinBoulder]

There has been a lot of discussion on this board about the higher than expected degradation of the 90kwh packs. I'm curious what other owners are experiencing with the 75kwh packs that were produced during the same time period. It appears they used the same cells, so it likely makes sense that these packs are going to degrade at the same high rate.


My December 2016 75, with 37,000 miles, has lost 8% of its original capacity in a year, with a 100% charge now yielding 229 rated miles. For the first 8 months of its life this car was a software locked 60, so it never charged to a true 100%.

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.

Any other owners of early 75kwh packs (pre 100kwh pack announcement, because it appears around that time new cells were introduced in both the 100 and 75 packs that seem to exhibit degradation rates more in line with historical expectations) experiencing this level of decline? I know my miles are high but the reduction in range has far exceeded what I was conditioned to expect based on the behavior of other packs.

Would love to assemble some data on other peoples' experiences.

Thanks
Nick

I bought the 70D in June of '16 and up until last November it was software locked at 70KwHr. I have since unlocked the remaining 5KwHr capacity on the battery.

Curiously, I was just remarking the other day to someone that I hadn't noticed any appreciable degradation in battery performance in the year and a half I've owned the car. At worst I can say it looks like I may have lost 2 miles of range in that time, but even that is hard to say, since temperature fluctuations in Colorado make a "full charge" fluctuate well within that margin of error.

All in all, I can say I personally have not noticed and appreciable difference in the max charge before, or after the addition of the extra battery capacity. Maybe I'm just one of the lucky few?

 

[JonG]

If Tesla had been making batteries/cars for decades, then they would have a data base from which to project range from a pack. The oldest pack is barely 10 years old. They made a best guess, ran algorithms, but did they REALLY make promises ? Did thy say the degradation would withstand any and all abuses?
I hope my pack lasts a long time. Will it last as long as others? Will it affect my future trade in value? How much heartache is this worth?

That’s not our problem. Tesla need to satisfy themselves things will be fit for purpose and will meet their claims, it’s not for us to buy experimental stuff that might not work out. Tesla push something into the market too early to be first there, they carry the risk when they do that, our risk is we may need to sue them to maintain our rights. A normal car manufacturer does extensive testing before launch, cold weather, hot weather, abuse, thousands and thousands of miles, tuned to safe operating levels (it’s why many cars can be remapped to higher performance due to the safety margins on the cars). What do Tesla do? Limited testing, and trial it on owners. When the 90 came out they expected it would give 6% more range over the 85, it actually only gave 3%. What place is there when buying $100k cars for vagueness and error on these things? Why did they not know? Had they actually tried the damn thing when they started taking orders? They couldn’t even get what it can do right before any predictions on how well it maintained that performance,

 

[apacheguy]

Tesla doesn’t need an entire decade old fleet to tell them the story on degradation. Accelerated aging tests on the bench can get the answer a lot faster.

 

[JRP3]

Sometimes accelerated testing can actually hide potential issues, such as bad side reactions during longer charging periods.

 

[MIT_S60]

That’s not our problem. Tesla need to satisfy themselves things will be fit for purpose and will meet their claims, it’s not for us to buy experimental stuff that might not work out. Tesla push something into the market too early to be first there, they carry the risk when they do that, our risk is we may need to sue them to maintain our rights. A normal car manufacturer does extensive testing before launch, cold weather, hot weather, abuse, thousands and thousands of miles, tuned to safe operating levels (it’s why many cars can be remapped to higher performance due to the safety margins on the cars). What do Tesla do? Limited testing, and trial it on owners. When the 90 came out they expected it would give 6% more range over the 85, it actually only gave 3%. What place is there when buying $100k cars for vagueness and error on these things? Why did they not know? Had they actually tried the damn thing when they started taking orders? They couldn’t even get what it can do right before any predictions on how well it maintained that performance,

Good thing you didn't own a Nissan Leaf...

 

[JonG]

Good thing you didn't own a Nissan Leaf...

I don’t follow but if it’s like Tesla I’d have the same issue.

I’ve also never understood 2hy somebody disagrees with a post and offers no explanation as to why.

Im not sure you can be a troll of a company you’ve bought 2 of their cars which cost close to $200k, actions speak louder than words, but that doesn’t mean I have to like everything they do, I am allowed to be incredibly frustrated at the they work.

 

[bambam4171]

I disagreed with your post because it is unrealistic. How many expensive cars have you owned? Just because you have a 100k car, that does not mean the gearbox will not fail before 80k or the motor will not need replacement shortly after 100k or electrical goes haywire and you replace one ECU after the other. And this is with ICE cars that have been manufactured for over 100 years in large quantities.
So expecting that Tesla knows more about Battery chemistry than all the Universities out there is simply unreasonable.

You do have a point with the advertised value vs the real value. That was just lying to the face of the customer.

 

[ATC@LWSK]

I also disagreed with your particular post @JonG. I find it unrealistic and "cocky" (for lack of a better word). I view your post as one with an "entitlement attitude" which doesn't resonate with me. I appreciate the fact that with your purchase, you helped Tesla - there's no denying. However, your expectations were perhaps not set properly. Everyone's experience varies, I guess, but we need to see further in the distance to appreciate. At least, that's my opinion, which may, or may not align with yours.

 

[JonG]

I've owned/own a $150k Aston Martin, and a $100k BMW, to name two in the last 4 years. Are you really suggesting a manufacturer can not test using techniques designed to prematurely age components to ensure they work reasonably well? Are you really saying it was OK to advertise the 90D battery upgrade over the 85D as having "about 6% more range" and when they delivered it they changed it to 3%? Is that really how a company should operate? Did they really take my money when they had no idea whether it was 6% or not? Was 3% upgrade worth the several grand in cost when 6% was marginal? It had a range that was on typical only 7 miles further for thousands?! And thats ok and I'm being unrealistic?

You've swallowed too much kool aid if you think it is.

To not know the range change over an 85 more than suggests they'd hardly tested it at in any meaningful sense of the word. Its funny how other posts are suggesting the 85 was/is the better battery, it had been around a couple of years with millions of miles under its belt, so they decided to try something, something that gave virtually no benefit to the owner, was unproven in almost every sense, but they could charge more for, and its worse but they've not responsible in any way because its breaking new ground. That's not really very good.

 

[Buster1]

Apple and Microsoft have been doing this for years. One lawsuit was dismissed. Not saying it’s right, but it’s not that big of a deal.

Apple sued for shrinking storage space on 16GB devices thanks to iOS 8

 

[smac]

I've owned/own a $150k Aston Martin, and a $100k BMW, to name two in the last 4 years. Are you really suggesting a manufacturer can not test using techniques designed to prematurely age components to ensure they work reasonably well?

I'm hearing rumours Jaguar have cracked 2 seconds 0-60 in testing of the Ipace.

Will they tweet this and then sell those cars to customers.

Nope they are sticking to 4s, and building themselves in safety margin to protect against warranty claims, and ensuring they avoid lawsuits if the production cars have variations that mean they fall short.

Personally I feel far more comfortable with Jaguar's approach. It removes the gamble from what is a 6 figure purchase.

 

[jeffro01]

I'm hearing rumours Jaguar have cracked 2 seconds 0-60 in testing of the Ipace.

Will they tweet this and then sell those cars to customers.

Nope they are sticking to 4s, and building themselves in safety margin to protect against warranty claims, and ensuring they avoid lawsuits if the production cars have variations that mean they fall short.

Personally I feel far more comfortable with Jaguar's approach. It removes the gamble from what is a 6 figure purchase.

Great, then go buy a Jaguar and move on from here...

I really don't get this attitude from some members... Constantly talking about how other manufactures do things and how those things are done better and blah, blah, blah, blah... If you really feel that way then why are you here? Why are you not there?

I WANT Tesla to constantly push the boundaries of what's possible even if they come up short from time to time... I never, EVER, want Tesla to start behaving like a traditional car company, that's what makes them unique and special.

Jeff

 

[JonG]

Your arrogance and ignorance is astounding. Batteries are NOT the same as physical/mechanical parts and it's already been explained to you in different ways by different people why this matters. Yet you continue to ignore what you've been told in order to push this uninformed narrative then you have the audacity to accuse people of swallowing too much kool aid? Come on...

Jeff

I'm the arrogant and misinformed one? Explain what happens when the 90 came out then as I was only buying one at the time? Am I wrong? Did they not say the battery would have 6% more range only to change it later to only 3%? Can you offer a single plausible explanation?

Explain why a 100 other Tesla promises haven't quite worked out? If you look back over this thread you'll see it was I that defended Tesla over the installed motor power fiasco providing the screen shots. I don't agree with Teslas actions but i will defend the truth, Tesla didn't say the cars had that power.

So we have myself, as evidenced, who will take a balanced fact based view, and then there are people like you who use personal insults when facts don't fit your agenda.

 

[JonG]

Great, then go buy a Jaguar and move on from here...

I really don't get this attitude from some members... Constantly talking about how other manufactures do things and how those things are done better and blah, blah, blah, blah... If you really feel that way then why are you here? Why are you not there?

I WANT Tesla to constantly push the boundaries of what's possible even if they come up short from time to time... I never, EVER, want Tesla to start behaving like a traditional car company, that's what makes them unique and special.

Jeff

Unfortunately Tesla is a car company having it comply with marketing standards, consumer protection law and the like, they are not a religion.