M3 Range Loss Date and Mileage Trend

[notAnExpert]

LOL. The techs know about as much as we do when it comes to software. Show some proof...

If it was just the tech’s word that would be one thing but the graph from another poster supports the theory as well:

Based on my experience with 5-6 Tesla Techs, I'd tend to agree with @VT_EE that the Techs don't know any more about software updates and feature changes than we do. I wouldn't really place any trust in what they say.

Based on the posts here, there is certainly evidence that range display is showing a drop for some people. But there are also a handful of posts from some, including me, that we are still seeing the original Tesla rated range (in my case 325 miles for a 9-month old LR RWD @4,500 miles) even with the latest software updates.

If this is an intentional software change to protect the battery as the Tech claims, why would Tesla would exclude some Model 3s? For Model S and X, Tesla actually released a statement in response to a lawsuit that it made some software changes to protect some older cars. But the statement says nothing about Model 3. Going by Tesla's exclusion of Model 3 in its official statement about the cars affected by software changes, I doubt that the Model 3 perceived drop for some cars is due to an intentional software change. But then, we are dealing with Tesla here. Communication isn't its forte.

 

[SWUtah]

Knock on wood. After 11 months, my LR AWD battery is doing just fine & hope it stays that way. VIN 11xxxx. My charging to this point in time has been a mix of about 50% L1, 25% L2, and 25% Supercharging. I normally charge to 70%-80% at home on a 120V, 16/20A NEMA 5-20. It's been charged to 100% perhaps 8-10 times total in its lifetime. It has never experienced less than 10%-11% SOC, and that level only twice. Each of those times it was quickly recharged. It spends most of its life between 60% and 80% SOC. Currently at 2019.28.3.1 software.

 

[T3SLAROD]

I just confirmed with Tesla this is due to software update.

They rolled back 325 to 310 miles to protect the battery and 310 is rolled down to 300 to protect the battery too.

Some going under rated is based on their driving style. The saw many at 280-285 max range and that is normal because they have a heavy foot. Most should see 300 for AWD and 310 for RWD.

I bought used LR RWD (4.400 miles), May 2018 build. I was getting 290 miles at 90% charge 2 updates ago. Once I reached the 8,000-9,500 range I dropped to 287, then 285 and now it's at a steady 281. I did the whole deplete and supercharge. Full Charge got up to 310 and was pretty pissed that I did not get the stated 325 which is why I purchased the LR in the first place. Glad I saw your post, I was worried the batteries were already F'd up.

I will say this, on my daily drive whether I am charged to 290 or the 281 I always end up with 210 miles at my daily destination, of course this all depends on my heavy foot an AC use.

 

[sperkin]

I bought used LR RWD (4.400 miles), May 2018 build. I was getting 290 miles at 90% charge 2 updates ago. Once I reached the 8,000-9,500 range I dropped to 287, then 285 and now it's at a steady 281. I did the whole deplete and supercharge. Full Charge got up to 310 and was pretty pissed that I did not get the stated 325 which is why I purchased the LR in the first place. Glad I saw your post, I was worried the batteries were already F'd up.

I will say this, on my daily drive whether I am charged to 290 or the 281 I always end up with 210 miles at my daily destination, of course this all depends on my heavy foot an AC use.

The battery is fine. It just estimates incorrectly. I got 340 miles out of the RWD LR, but the estimate at 100% was at 310.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

The battery is fine. It just estimates incorrectly. I got 340 miles out of the RWD LR, but the estimate at 100% was at 310.

All the evidence to date suggests that the estimate is a measurement of the energy available. It is possible that this estimate is inaccurate sometimes but I doubt that is the core issue here. How far you can drive is not really the issue being discussed here - you can drive 600 miles in the LR RWD, but that is not really the point.

Has the max pack voltage at 100% changed, before and after the range loss, in TeslaFi, for the people with reduced range? Not sure how much might change for a change of 2-5kWh of stored energy (might not be detectable), but might be worth looking at.

 

[KenC]

Switch to %age instead of range, and everything will be fine. Any change less than 10% is probably not meaningful, because

View attachment 446234

Knock on wood. After 11 months, my LR AWD battery is doing just fine & hope it stays that way. VIN 11xxxx. My charging to this point in time has been a mix of about 50% L1, 25% L2, and 25% Supercharging. I normally charge to 70%-80% at home on a 120V, 16/20A NEMA 5-20. It's been charged to 100% perhaps 8-10 times total in its lifetime. It has never experienced less than 10%-11% SOC, and that level only twice. Each of those times it was quickly recharged. It spends most of its life between 60% and 80% SOC. Currently at 2019.28.3.1 software.

Interesting, my Stats battery health graph is the same. Same model, LR-AWD, and similar VIN range, 104xxx. I also charge between 75 and 80% SOC, but on 240v. I've charged to 100% once, by accident, touched the Stats app battery slider by mistake. The car came with 0% SOC, so I've definitely been under 10%.

The start of the chart, < 2000 miles, was still Winter, and the range varied more widely, as low as 290 miles. I also charged higher to 90% SOC. I switched to 80% as it warmed up. Would the BMS be less accurate at higher SOC %age?

 

[VT_EE]

The battery is fine. It just estimates incorrectly. I got 340 miles out of the RWD LR, but the estimate at 100% was at 310.

This point is spot on. Everyone needs to stop worrying about fluctuations in the estimator. Let the BMS do its job. If your mileage is drastically reduced, then have Tesla take a look.

 

[gecko10x]

The point is that Tesla should be crystal clear when they change something that we can see.
If they specifically said in the release notes of an update "you'll see a 2% range reduction, which we've done because blah blah blah", then we wouldn't have to speculate about if it's intentional, unintentional, or a battery issue.

 

[VT_EE]

The point is that Tesla should be crystal clear when they change something that we can see.
If they specifically said in the release notes of an update "you'll see a 2% range reduction, which we've done because blah blah blah", then we wouldn't have to speculate about if it's intentional, unintentional, or a battery issue.

This is a great idea. It’s the speculation that spins people up.

 

[electronblue]

I agree. The main purpose for this thread that I think most would or in my view at least should agree to is information gathering. That is mostly because Tesla is so opaque about these things and we have to find out ourselves if we are to find out.

The suggestion to ask Tesla is all well and good but we know from experience that Tesla is not exactly forthcoming and, as said, their service techs might at times be in the dark too.

An unfortunate situation. I guess only time will tell what the effect of the recent BMS changes (that have stripped Model S’s tens of miles of range) is on Model 3 if any because I doubt Tesla will.

 

[gecko10x]

Mine has dropped again since moving to 2019.28.3.1

I'm now down 4% to 253 (from 264).

FWIW, I sent an email into Tesla Support this morning. If past experience is any guide, I'll never get a response .

 

[VT_EE]

Mine has dropped again since moving to 2019.28.3.1

I'm now down 4% to 253 (from 264).

FWIW, I sent an email into Tesla Support this morning. If past experience is any guide, I'll never get a response .

4% is nothing to worry about. If they respond, Tesla will tell you the same thing.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

4% is nothing to worry about. If they respond, Tesla will tell you the same thing.

4%, gradually, over a year, is probably nothing to worry about.

4% overnight, and I'd like an explanation.

 

[VT_EE]

4%, gradually, over a year, is probably nothing to worry about.

4% overnight, and I'd like an explanation.

Keep monitoring it. If you keep losing range then it is worth your time to contact the S.C. If you don’t lose anymore, then you will get the canned Tesla response that the BMS evolves and adjusts how it calculates estimated range.

 

[Saghost]

In watching the threads on range loss, I'm recognizing a trend in the shape of several member's battery degradation curves.
It appears that many of ushave seen the same significant drop at nearly the same time.

In my case, according to Teslafi, I lost 8 miles of range between 8/1/19 and 8/3/19 with 16K miles on version 2019.24.4.
Stats confirms this report but not in the same detail.

Has anyone with this sudden range loss had this occur at similar dates or mileage?

View attachment 442015

View attachment 442024

View attachment 442025

One thing I've been learning is that the car has trouble accurately calculating the 80% point sometimes. All your charging appears to be to 80%, so the BMS might not be understanding the capacity correctly.

As you can see, I've had a few instances where the car thought the capacity dropped, but it came back up after charging to 90%. I think that's because 90% is up above the constant voltage range of the pack, so the car can clearly see where that point is.

Yesterday I was surprised and disappointed that the car thought I'd lost ~4 miles from just a couple days before.

After some thought, I switched to 90%, and suddenly those four miles came back and TeslaFI is reporting a 150% charging efficiency for the 80-90% block.

I've been of the mindset that charging to 80% is best, since I really don't need the rest on a normal day, but seeing the BMS error first hand like this is making me wonder.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

Keep monitoring it. If you keep losing range then it is worth your time to contact the S.C. If you don’t lose anymore, then you will get the canned Tesla response that the BMS evolves and adjusts how it calculates estimated range.

a 100% charge for me right now is ~286 (theoretical, I only ever top off at 90%). And I've done the whole "run it <10%, charge it back to 80% 3 times" cycle.

It plummeted after the .16 update specifically, and hasn't really recovered.

 

[VT_EE]

a 100% charge for me right now is ~286 (theoretical, I only ever top off at 90%). And I've done the whole "run it <10%, charge it back to 80% 3 times" cycle.

It plummeted after the .16 update specifically, and hasn't really recovered.

I don’t think you are going to get a good reading unless you charge to 95 to 100% from a <20% charge. From what I’ve read on this forum, charging to 80% doesn’t allow the BMS to calibrate the estimate.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

4%, gradually, over a year, is probably nothing to worry about.

4% overnight, and I'd like an explanation.

Personally I would care less about a 4% overnight drop - since I can be fairly certain that either 1) it’s not real or 2) my battery has started to rapidly fail and Tesla will be forced to replace it shortly!

The 4% over a year would be more than I’d want to see, seems somewhat atypically high, and is likely irreversible.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

So, I had already put in an email to support about this, and their ears must have been burning, because I JUST got this (expected) response:

 

[gecko10x]

After some thought, I switched to 90%, and suddenly those four miles came back and TeslaFI is reporting a 150% charging efficiency for the 80-90% block.

I've been of the mindset that charging to 80% is best, since I really don't need the rest on a normal day, but seeing the BMS error first hand like this is making me wonder.

Interesting. I had read in another thread that the BMS was vastly improved now, and state of charge should make no difference. Clearly you have a different experience, so maybe I'll give this a shot (I also always charge to 80%).