I also agree tesla wording is more geared towards marketing. “Keep it plugged in and charged all the time”. Tesla wants its customers to have the best experience with the car and no range anxiety. They dont want customers to keep the car long term 5+ years. They want customers to enjoy the car and hope we buy another one/ replace the car in 1-2 years. Their official wording is not about keeping your battery longevity. Is why they say keep it plugged in and charge to 90%.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Favor Low SoC or Small Cycles?
- Thread starter Drinyth
- Start date
I also agree tesla wording is more geared towards marketing. “Keep it plugged in and charged all the time”. Tesla wants its customers to have the best experience with the car and no range anxiety. They dont want customers to keep the car long term 5+ years. They want customers to enjoy the car and hope we buy another one/ replace the car in 1-2 years. Their official wording is not about keeping your battery longevity. Is why they say keep it plugged in and charge to 90%.
Well, there is at least a few tests with actual Tesla cells.
Also when you have learned how things work around lithium batteries you also have learned that the possibly small changes there is between other similar cells and actual Tesla cells do not change the behaviour noticably.
Cells taken out of a Tesla model S
Cells taken from a model 3
Cells from model 3
The results from these tests match very other tests with Panasonic NCA very close.
As usual there is small differences that probably comes from the test setup. These differences are small enough to be disregarded in general and do not change the big picture.
Basically, as the battery cells are very similar we can use the research data from other research to 100%.
Except now they do recommend 80%. Maybe not BS after all
zoomer0056
Active Member
Yup. I think Tesla is monitoring TMC and decided to change their recommended daily charge limit. I keep my limit at 55%. Also, for me it would be a huge PITA to keep my car plugged in. The chord would be in the way. I find it easier to plug in in the morning and unplug when charging done. No problem with battery temp in seaside SoCal. My car sees less than 1% phantom drain per day.
There are not temperature benefits from keeping it plugged.
When plugged, it do not draw any energy from the battery so when plugged this reduces the number of cycles long term.
When plugged it will not run out of battery.
Tesla has newer said to keep it at 90%.
Before the recent change to “80% for daily” it was “below 90%” which technically was not 90% but any charge level below, thats 50-89%.
I’m not aware of any 80% recommendations from Tesla untiö the recent change.
When they, long time ago, changed the charge setting in the model S from to fixed sertings to the slider they made this recommendation:
Below, background from the change to
Slider.
There will be no huge win by reducing the charge level to 80 from 90%.
The main reason is that calendar aging doesnt differ much between these settings, and for cycles there are only minor reduction of the cyclic aging. In total there might be a very small difference that we will not notice.
But this doesnt mean that 80% is the sweet spot and that 90% is close to this.
Both 80 and 90% will have much higher calendar aging than 55% or lower SOC.
This is tested very many times in research and we have examples with actual Tesla cells from both model 3 and S that match the research results from other similar batteries as well.
Please note that Tesla took the charging advices from the manuals and put them in the apps.
Doing this, they made the app only show the ”80% for daily” if you set the charge limit above 80%. This advice is not
shown below 80%.
Depends what you refer to as BS…
If you mean the forum rumors about that 80% is the ”sweet spot”, where you are babying the battery: that is BS.
Teslas charging advice was never about minimizing the degradation.
80% is not even close to the level causing the lowest degradation.
But the advice not to charge full if you doesnt need full is a good advice.
Agree with you 100%. I was only being snarky about the improper internet myths. I am all about keeping my NCMA SOC at 50% or below given my daily driving habits.
If you don’t mind a slight thread drift. I was on my first road trip and a situation arose where it would be much easier if I charged to 75-80% and have the car sit for 2 days. Any concerns with degradation doing that? I can foresee it’s a situation that might happen 3-5x per year. Thanks
Nope, no issues at all.
Calendar aging could be seen as ’incremental’ so the calendar aging from each day stack on top of the earlier calendar aging.
The easy way to se it is that high SOC causes double calendar aging compared to low SOC for each hour or each day.
Leaving the car at 75-80% for two days would therefore result in the same degradation as having it for four days at 60% or below (NMC has 60% as the limit for low / high calendar aging, and we can guess that NCMA is similar, its NMC 811 but with 4% Aluminium added.
I guess you know most of this already but for others that fillow the thread:
I try to add some things to the posts from time to time, but its bot possible to have it at each post:
-The battery would hold up following Teslas easy advices. It would have a little more degradation but it would not break.
- I recommend not trying to reduce the degradation in absurdum. Keep it practical and do not let it take over the ownership. It should be fun to have a Tesla.
-When needed, charge to 100% ( it is not dangerous). When needed supercharge, its not dangerous.
When needed, leave it at any SOC you need to.
-If you did choose to use low SOC in general, this will save so much degradation that you can allow anything needed when needed and still end up way below average degradation.
E90alex
Active Member
I would say don’t concern yourself with degradation while on a trip. Charge to whatever is needed or more convenient for the trip. It will only be a small fraction of the whole battery’s life cycle.
Just search for my earlier comments about batteryuniversity.
In general I think the site is a very good idea. But the information need to be correct.
It is too much for a short post.
But in short, they are wrong on multiple points, and they have been using some pictures from research withouth really understanding the background from the research behind the picture. This have resulted in wrong conclusions.
They are wrong on too many points to be recommended if you ask me.
Its more common with people making referenses from B-U that is not correct than referenses that actually are in line with the sum of the research results.
I might be able to expand the discussion later about this.
Similar threads
