Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Early 75/75D pack degradation

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
@jelloslug They are examples of consumption, but even this may not be enough. You are relying on the screen to be accurate, which it might not be.

Looking at how both Bjorn and Tesloop's packs behaved, they show remaining range then suddenly die. In effect the bottom X% of miles have "gone", so the screen still says 240 miles range at full but 10 miles actually = 0.

In Bjorn's case this happened at around 100k miles, but his lifetime average is crazily high due to all the towing he does. With your really low average Wh/mi (which would be impossible to hit here in colder climates), it should mean your car's pack is in good health.

The other factor may be supercharging, with both Bjorn and Tesloop doing so much more than a typical owner.

If we look at the actions put in play by Tesla, many seem aimed at kerbing high power draw and supercharger stress, with the OTA changes looking to limit those activities (chill mode, performance counters, supercharge capping). I wonder if this means the new chemistry is more sensitive to high currents than the old pack. So it's not necessarily mileage alone, but how those miles have been driven/charged.
Look at the other stats I have posted about my particular car/pack.
 
I have a S75. First full charge was 242 miles max. Since then it varies 243 - 247 miles when full. I don’t pay much attention to this as this Is an estimation not gospel. Often the range goes up when I start driving and the pack warms. What I have noticed is when limit is set by the slider, the car reports fewer miles range than a calculation gives. When I use Remote S , it will show the slider under sets the percentage. Nominal 80 is actually 78%. When set with Remote S , 80% is 80%. And miles agree. I guess this is a long way to say there figures aren’t worth bothering about.
 
I have a S75. First full charge was 242 miles max. Since then it varies 243 - 247 miles when full. I don’t pay much attention to this as this Is an estimation not gospel. Often the range goes up when I start driving and the pack warms. What I have noticed is when limit is set by the slider, the car reports fewer miles range than a calculation gives. When I use Remote S , it will show the slider under sets the percentage. Nominal 80 is actually 78%. When set with Remote S , 80% is 80%. And miles agree. I guess this is a long way to say there figures aren’t worth bothering about.
Exactly. I pay almost no attention to the rated range, even when on road trips. What I pay attention to on trips is the consumption.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Earl
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?.
.

my 90D has 6% plus, but at least 3 different pack numbers exists for the 90D, i wish i could find the .jpg of allpack numbers that i found once here
 
I have 75D car built in the end of 2016. Pack full capacity dropped to 69.400 kWh during last 6 months (original 72.6). The car has around 20k miles on it. I'm not looking at the milage but actually pack capacity reported by BMS.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: smac
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.


Short of a time machine you can't tell with 100% certainty if a new battery chemistry will be better or worse than the old one. Nissan, Tesla, anyone that makes large packs will change battery chemistry as needed (minor changes multiple times a year is not uncommon, major changes could happen every couple of years and will be less often but any change has risk).

Your rant said that other manufactures would test the cars for years before giving them out to paying customers. The only way they can test it for 10 years and then sell it is if they sell 10 year old technology that no one wants.

Competition won't let you test packs that thoroughly now. Maybe in fifty to a hundred years battery chemistries will be stable enough to test like that and not lose your competitive edge.

You got disagrees because you didn't understand the underlying issue that forces car manufacturers to do this.

Now if you post had said a good car manufacturer will warrant/replace as needed. You would have gotten a different response. But you picked testing as the focal point.
 
I didn’t say they’d test them for years, I said they’d test them and they’d use techniques to accelerate wear..

I’m struggling to see why people don’t accept Tesla sell things way way ahead of what’s reasonable. They can still be much more agile than a traditional manufacturer but Tesla sell a lot of new features off plan and not of reality.

Batteries
Full ludicrous performance
Original AP
EAP
FSD
Model 3
Roadster 2

Even things like ventilated seats which quickly got dropped because they were fairly useless

Or the some if the safety devices in the FWD that got retired because the doors wouldn’t open on a slope.

Then even simple stuff like auto wipers

All these sold before the product appears to be in any sense ready to ship. It’s as if Tesla start selling when they have their first rough prototype whereas old school start selling after they’ve done 6 months of hard winter testing in the artic. Somewhere in the middle would be nice.

How many are still waiting for a single FSD feature let alone full blown coast to coast capability a year later?
 
Last edited:
I didn’t say they’d test them for years, I said they’d test them and they’d use techniques to accelerate wear..

Tesla does accelerated testing. Just google "coulombic efficiency" "dalhousie university Jeff Dahn" and read and watch videos. There is a large amount of data and documentation about how accelerated testing is done.

Here I'll give you some links in case you aren't good with google.

About - https://www.dal.ca/diff/dahn/about.html
Research - https://www.dal.ca/diff/dahn/research.html
News - https://www.dal.ca/diff/dahn/news.html
dalhousie university jeff dahn - YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=dalhousie+university+jeff+dahn

Still you'd need a time machine to be 100% certain and you seem to want that level of certainty. You have spent several posts talking about the difference between 3% and 6% which means 3% matters to you.

No battery manufacturer will give you 3% accuracy on any chemistry that has been around for less than 10 years.

If they make a new chemistry in 2014, test in in 2015, and use it in 2016 they still have to wait until 2024 to have 10 years data. So you either use it after accelerated testing and hope it's good or you don't use it and buy someone elses 10 year old tech. Either way accelerated testing isn't magic.
 
Last edited:
I didn’t say they’d test them for years, I said they’d test them and they’d use techniques to accelerate wear..

I’m struggling to see why people don’t accept Tesla sell things way way ahead of what’s reasonable. They can still be much more agile than a traditional manufacturer but Tesla sell a lot of new features off plan and not of reality.
...
All these sold before the product appears to be in any sense ready to ship. It’s as if Tesla start selling when they have their first rough prototype whereas old school start selling after they’ve done 6 months of hard winter testing in the artic. Somewhere in the middle would be nice.

How many are still waiting for a single FSD feature let alone full blown coast to coast capability a year later?

Because Tesla is aiming high?
Which feature upgrades did you get on your Aston Martin after you took delivery?
And after you took delivery of your BMW, did the manufacturer give you a new software that made your car faster by more than 20%?

FSD was always and still is marked as "when technology and legislation permits". If you don't understand what that means you might be well served not to pay for it upfront but wait until both conditions apply and you can buy safely. You know, this is one of the features you have in a Tesla ;)

You don't need to pay for everything you might want at some point but can enable and pay for things later. They don't make you buy a new car in many cases which no other manufacturer can claim. So how about a bit of gratitude for things like this?
 
  • Disagree
  • Like
Reactions: SMAlset and croman
Because Tesla is aiming high?
Which feature upgrades did you get on your Aston Martin after you took delivery?
And after you took delivery of your BMW, did the manufacturer give you a new software that made your car faster by more than 20%?
Both cars came with all the features I bought from the date I took delivery. Its a novel concept I know, I mean who'd actually want what they'd paid for?

It's more sensible according to people on here to buy a car on a 3 year lease and after 18 months still not have one of the features you ordered.

And the BMW was remapped which added more power - went from 313 to 380 bhp - what that.. erm, 21%.. so yes I think it did. Ok, I admit, it cost about $300 to do. You got me.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Esme Es Mejor
And the BMW was remapped which added more power - went from 313 to 380 bhp - what that.. erm, 21%.. so yes I think it did. Ok, I admit, it cost about $300 to do. You got me.

BMW did remap your Engine and gave you full warranty for it? Wow, you must be the only one that got that package.

Here in Europe your warranty would be void (and your engine usually toast after 50k km). If you can read German I recommend going through this to get some insight why remapping is almost always a bad idea.
Stalzamt: Die Wahrheit über Chiptuning – Spaßbringer oder Motorentod? - Motorblock
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SuisseDriver
I have 75D car built in the end of 2016. Pack full capacity dropped to 69.400 kWh during last 6 months (original 72.6). The car has around 20k miles on it. I'm not looking at the milage but actually pack capacity reported by BMS.
About to buy a used MS .. may I ask .. how, exactly do you get the pack capacity in kWh ?
thanks in anticipation - coming from roadster I have a lot to learn about MS :cool:
 
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.

You should try a Ferrari :) ... I think you'd 'love' their attitude .... :cool: .... they think THEY are entitled, not you :D