Just so its clear to me...I am assuming when you say rapid degradation and gaining miles back you really just mean the computer estimate is just going down or up depending on your driving/charging habits...correct? Or do you actually mean that the battery degrades and than the degradation reverses as you imply?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Getting pissed with degredation
- Thread starter KetchupKilla
- Start date
Just so its clear to me...I am assuming when you say rapid degradation and gaining miles back you really just mean the computer estimate is just going down or up depending on your driving/charging habits...correct? Or do you actually mean that the battery degrades and than the degradation reverses as you imply?
Actual battery degradation cant be reversed, as you likely know (based on how you phrased the question), so if any of it "comes back" its not degradation.
Right...but he(she) keeps posting about battery degradation...but on further reading it seems like the issue isn't actually battery degradation. Seems like a weird thread to be obsessing how the computer calculates remaining miles available. My ICE car calculates the remaining miles to empty and it fluctuates all of the time depending on how I drive, city/highway, weather, etc, and I never once obsessed about it or barely gave it any thought at all.
I see your join date here is in January of this year. I am not saying that to pick on you, but just to say that this specific conversation (people obsessing about the range number on the screen) has been going on for much longer than I have been on this site, and I have been here since nov of 2018 or so.
The specific statement you just made has also been made probably 100 times by various people here, as well. I am not picking on you at all (I agree with what you just said 100% in fact), but, because these cars have a battery, it seems to drive many people to look at it differently.
There are all sorts of reasons why that is (that have also been stated a ton here), but if you go search this website, you will likely find a new post about "degradation" on this website at least every 24 hours, from someone, on some part of this site.
Many of those posts include either a statement to like "teslafi says" or "my stats app battery degradation report says" or "scan my tesla reports..." in them, as well. Thus, one of the earlier posts I made in this thread, where I stated:
I think I can relate to some people talking about how they might have battery degradation because of how the computer calculates range left depending on how the car is driven.
Coming from a Prius, I think it's not battery degradation, but how the EPA rating for a Tesla is kind of overpromising range to anyone who's new to driving a Tesla/EV.
I find that in my Prius, I can drive it without being energy consumption conscious and I would still hit the EPA rating for the car, but for my Model 3 LR AWD that I have for around a week now, I have to choose between driving efficiently or driving like I want to drive with all the creature comforts (using AC/heat).
Also in both instances of either a ICE or EV, it's never good to run your fuel or battery to empty, and everyone should always at a buffer of when they have to re-fuel/electrify so they don't cause damage to fuel pump or degrade the battery
Coming from a Prius, I think it's not battery degradation, but how the EPA rating for a Tesla is kind of overpromising range to anyone who's new to driving a Tesla/EV.
I find that in my Prius, I can drive it without being energy consumption conscious and I would still hit the EPA rating for the car, but for my Model 3 LR AWD that I have for around a week now, I have to choose between driving efficiently or driving like I want to drive with all the creature comforts (using AC/heat).
Also in both instances of either a ICE or EV, it's never good to run your fuel or battery to empty, and everyone should always at a buffer of when they have to re-fuel/electrify so they don't cause damage to fuel pump or degrade the battery
Last edited:
Thanks...I am thinking about buying a Tesla and have been learning as much as I can about them.
I first came to this thread thinking there must be an issue with Teslas batteries...but after reading through the thread it sounds like the OP is obsessing about nothing and just wanted to confirm that with the the OPoster to see if that was the same conclusion he/she came too.
I don't think its over promising really - just like an ICE car, its all down to how you drive it. One of the cool things I like with TeslaFi is the driving stats that tell you the drive efficiency. I can tell when I've been relaxed while driving, or been in a hurry with the Wh/mile ranging from 190 to 300 (sometimes higher).
no issue with batteries - just perception
I just checked the range on mine - currently 305 miles. Thats <2% drop after 36k miles.
I've seen it drop to 288ish and it is a real drop, but its all down to driving/charging etc etc. The problem is that most folks don't have a frame of reference when it comes to capacity/range so can tend to stat-watch and obsess about it, which then turns a fluctuating number into a serious issue (when it isn't serious or terminal)
I was initially concerned, but having seen it fluctuate wildly I've grown accustomed to it. Seeing as how the OP saw this issue after less than 2k miles I can understand why they saw it as a concern, but am equally sure that after another 30k miles they would see it change.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
It wasn't clear you were talking about Tesla here, but keep in mind that Tesla does not do this (for the battery energy display). They only do that calculation on the Energy Consumption screen.
That's a great result for a Model 3 Performance 2018 more than 2 years old with 36k miles! Envious! Just a 4% drop (most likely not 2%, keep in mind, since you likely started with closer to 78kWh, not 76kWh).
For the 288 rmi number, what were the conditions? Was that on a cold winter day in Austin? Was it a value you saw when actually charged to 100% or is it extrapolated?
don't forget, the 2018 cars had an "as new" range of 310, mine was 309.92, I can forgive the .08 of a mile
Current range is 305.67, that gets 1.39% drop. It was 307 miles yesterday and has been fluctuating between 305-307 for the past month or so.Max range I've ever seen was a short time at 311.
But you assumed correct. The lowest of the lows was the middle of winter before quarantine hit, after which the car hardly moved which kept it hovering around the 290s. Once we could get out and drive again it started creeping back up to current number.
The numbers are extrapolated. I've only charged to 100% twice, never had a reason to.
Using abetterrouteplanner really helps for planning longer journeys and gives pretty accurate charging recommendations which avoids the need to guess and use 100% charge.
I figure I've got an 8 year 100k mile battery warranty I can use if I really need to. Losing 20 miles isn't going to affect how I use the car.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
I assume this was an extrapolated number and not shown on the display (I've never seen a picture of an LR AWD 2018/2019 showing more than 310 rated miles).
Oh, I know. But remember that 310 rated miles is likely "capped" cleverly. 2018 cars started at at least 77.5-78kWh based on known SMT data. If you use the simple constant, that equates to 318 rated miles (78kWh/245Wh/rmi = 318rmi). Tesla likely "cleverly" conceals this by inflating the rated miles energy content (so it is higher than 245Wh/rmi) until you hit the degradation threshold of 76kWh (310rmi*245Wh/rmi = 76kWh) (that's why 2018/2019 cars didn't show degradation for a few months, typically). This way, you'll see rated miles immediately start to click off when the car is new, but they click off slightly more slowly when the car is new (about 2.5% more slowly). Tesla benefits from this because no one freaks out that their car shows fewer rated miles than another owner, and they can ship batteries that have a small variability (probably 2-3%) in initial capacity - and they all display as having the same initial 310 rated mile range, as long as they start over 76kWh. (For 2020 AWD, this threshold has changed to 77.6kWh, BTW, so they'll need tighter tolerance on that initial capacity to achieve the same result - closer to 1-1.5%.)
You're below the threshold, so we can definitively say you have about 306rmi*245Wh/rmi = 75kWh of energy remaining when your battery is fully charged.
It's very likely given your capacity loss performance and the age of the car that you started with over 78kWh (if you had had SMT from the beginning you would know this for sure, but you'll have to trust me). Looks like you started with a great battery, likely with 1-2kWh more capacity than some other owners.
So that would be 75kWh/78kWh = 96%, so 4% capacity loss.
There's not really any doubt here - keep in mind that Tesla published the capacity of the battery in their EPA-submitted documents to be in excess of 79kWh, for 2018, 2019 and 2020. (For whatever reason this appears to translate to closer to 78kWh in SMT, but this is kind of a side issue. The exact discrepancy is unknown since I've never seen an SMT readout on a brand new vehicle, or even one that is just a week or two old with a few thousand miles on it (more representative of the EPA test article).)
Last edited:
Yes it's down to how you drive the car, but like I'm saying they're overpromising in the sense that the EPA testing is flawed, yet they still went by it's #s. I have to actually drive my LR AWD efficiently if I want the rated mileage (which is really really really hard, seeing how much power/fun it is), while in my previous car (prius), it is much much easier to hit the EPA rated mileage without even trying to drive it efficiently at all and if I tried (hypermiling) then I can really really beat the EPA mileage rating by a long shot.
The funny thing is that I'm watching Bjorn do a range test on a model 3 in California highway traffic going 90km/h (55mph equivalent, funny how he doesn't switch it to mph even when he's in the states), and yes he blows the mileage range out of the water, but he's pretty much going way under the speed limit (and everyone around him) AND he's limiting his AC use.
So it goes back to the OP that they feel they have battery degradation because they look at the (ever changing) mileage calculation of their 3 and compare that to what the stated range should be (on paper), and it'll never be what it's stated because they don't drive their 3 like they want to save every last drop of energy.
"yet they still [did what they are required by LAW to do.]"
There. Fixed that for ya.
The point of the EPA number is to provide a like for like comparison. Most people misinterpret that to mean its the number the car is guaranteed to get in all circumstances - which is obviously implausible. So you end up with folks bleating about how they can't get 24mpg in their ICE trucks when they tow an RV up a mountain, or they drive like they're at Laguna Seca all the time and how they've have been lied to by "the man".
I'll be enjoying driving my car and not worrying about it, I can easily beat the range numbers and regularly get better than 100% efficiency, I also equally regularly get 50 to 70% efficiency - but the key is I'm taking responsibility for the difference.
Full disclosure - my first EV was a LEAF, so I learned early on about efficiency
Before that I had a truck that did 11mpg on a good day which meant wallet pain when going too fast.85 mile total range on the LEAF is a real right foot educator, its guessometer said it had a 115 mile range. But all Tesla's do have the constant nagging urge for you to plant the pedal which makes it very difficult
Even when I'm driving slowly I'm accelerating faster away from lights than most cars, which tells me I'm not doing too well.I have to wonder. Did everyone here obsess over their ICE gas mileage as much as this? I'm sure it degraded as much or more as needed maintenance was missed or the car aged yet most folks didn't give it a thought. The batteries are warranted for 8 years and so far, all evidence points to them lasting for much longer, albeit with some degradation, just like that which happens in ICE vehicles. The tech in EVs can be a bad thing when its used to constantly look at every second of use. Chill people, chill
So I just got back from my usual 220mile round trip commute that I do around once a month (weekend warrior). (I will probably get some flack from diehards for this post, but it is what it is and I bought the car knowing what I was getting into and more for the YOLO and AP, as it is godsend for the long commutes that I do sometimes)
I charged up to 100% (computer only showed 320 miles instead of advertised 322, but I guess some say there's some hidden range, but I doubt I'll ever test it for my battery's sake). Got to my destination (only doing the speed limit, most of the stretch was 65mph with some 55mph zones and a 20 miles stretch at 70mph)and range was down to 180 (around 56-57%), albeit it was a little cold (not freezing yet, but I still had to sparingly use the heat as I saw that battery was draining at a greater than 1 to 1 miles driven). I parked it and figured I would have to turn off sentry mode (or else I would be losing around 1% every hour, and the lot is gated and controlled entry too, so not much worries there), since I would be leaving it to sit for 2 and a half days. Throughout the weekend I probably woke it up a few times to check phantom drain, and when I drove back home today, SoC was at 174 (so 6 miles drained in 2.5 days w/o sentry mode). I got back home with 44 miles left. I stopped at the local SC to go to the bathroom and came back out to go home home with 110 and trickle charge at home (so the SO can have a bit more range for work Monday).
Compare that to my old car (prius c) on the same route, I would only get 40-44mpg since I usually do 10 above the speed limits (and use AC/heat to my heart's content), it's measly 9.5 galls turns into 380-418 mile range (and if I drive it efficiently at speed limits, I can easily get the 48 to 55 mpg = 456 to 522 mile range for 9.5 gallons of gas)...and gas is somewhat cheap in Wi (around $2 for 87 octane, which is all that's needed for a prius)
So I'm standing by my argument that Tesla over promised with the EPA rating, and for anyone to get what was promised, they will have to drive it slower than those who drives prius to save money and also drive with less creature comforts (ac/heat)
But as I said, I bought my LR AWD knowing full well its limitationsdo (hence buying the LR for the most range, as range is king when it comes to BEVs)
I charged up to 100% (computer only showed 320 miles instead of advertised 322, but I guess some say there's some hidden range, but I doubt I'll ever test it for my battery's sake). Got to my destination (only doing the speed limit, most of the stretch was 65mph with some 55mph zones and a 20 miles stretch at 70mph)and range was down to 180 (around 56-57%), albeit it was a little cold (not freezing yet, but I still had to sparingly use the heat as I saw that battery was draining at a greater than 1 to 1 miles driven). I parked it and figured I would have to turn off sentry mode (or else I would be losing around 1% every hour, and the lot is gated and controlled entry too, so not much worries there), since I would be leaving it to sit for 2 and a half days. Throughout the weekend I probably woke it up a few times to check phantom drain, and when I drove back home today, SoC was at 174 (so 6 miles drained in 2.5 days w/o sentry mode). I got back home with 44 miles left. I stopped at the local SC to go to the bathroom and came back out to go home home with 110 and trickle charge at home (so the SO can have a bit more range for work Monday).
Compare that to my old car (prius c) on the same route, I would only get 40-44mpg since I usually do 10 above the speed limits (and use AC/heat to my heart's content), it's measly 9.5 galls turns into 380-418 mile range (and if I drive it efficiently at speed limits, I can easily get the 48 to 55 mpg = 456 to 522 mile range for 9.5 gallons of gas)...and gas is somewhat cheap in Wi (around $2 for 87 octane, which is all that's needed for a prius)
So I'm standing by my argument that Tesla over promised with the EPA rating, and for anyone to get what was promised, they will have to drive it slower than those who drives prius to save money and also drive with less creature comforts (ac/heat)
But as I said, I bought my LR AWD knowing full well its limitationsdo (hence buying the LR for the most range, as range is king when it comes to BEVs)
Your argument that "tesla overpromised the EPA range" is inherently flawed, unless you are saying you believe they falsified the EPA tests, a-la VW. Unless you are sayiung that, your argument that "tesla overpromised EPA range" is inherently false, because the tests are the tests. Blame the EPA for the test and say "The EPA should re design the test as I dont believe they are accurate" and THAT is a statement that you can make. You simply can not make an arugment that "Tesla overpromised the EPA range" because tesla did not design the test.
As @Rocky_H said:
As @Rocky_H said:
Most mfgs getting the flawed EPA test rating for their car...
"guys we'll have to lower this # so customers can hit it without too much effort"
Tesla getting the flawed EPA test rating
"cha-ching"
Take it as whatever you want, seeing your view is unchangeable. Like I said, it's MUCH easier to hit EPA ratings for non-BEVs just driving normal, but you will have to try really hard to hit the EPA ratings for a BEV if you drive normally.
That is contributing to people who are not familiar with driving efficiently/hypermiling that think that they are getting a bad battery, especially when most marketing of EVs revolve around their efficiency.
I have NEVER heard of a car manufacturer "lowering the EPA test rating so customers can hit it without too much effort". Maybe your experience is "its much easier to hit EPA in non BEVs" but that has not been my experience in any car I have owned my entire life, and my Model 3 is my first BEV. None of them have ever gotten EPA statistics for me under any circumstances, freeway, city, etc.
EDIT: I should add that my lifetime wh/mi figure on my model 3P is 268, which will show my driving style is not the issue (that is a pretty low number for a performance model 3 on 20 inch factory rubber, and its over 23k miles)
Last edited:
I have to wonder. Did everyone here obsess over their ICE gas mileage as much as this? I'm sure it degraded as much or more as needed maintenance was missed or the car aged yet most folks didn't give it a thought. The batteries are warranted for 8 years and so far, all evidence points to them lasting for much longer, albeit with some degradation, just like that which happens in ICE vehicles. The tech in EVs can be a bad thing when its used to constantly look at every second of use. Chill people, chill
My previous car was a diesel. It got great mileage for an ICE, but I easily lost 100 miles of range in the winter
Similar threads
