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

Model 3 SR+ LFP Battery Range, Degradation, etc Discussion

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Does the degradation numbers from driving match with the degradation that can be calculated from the infotainment range numbers.
Yes they do, unless the BMS is off on its estimate. In which case the BMS adjusts afterwards as you would expect.

@AAKEE has done a few experiments with this and you can use it to determine actual capacity if the BMS is off, based on the correction.

Apparently the meter measuring energy is pretty accurate.
 
75,000 mile (120,700 km) update for my Sep 2021 SR+ LFP. The car is now 2 years 5 months old and was originally rated at 253 miles on a full charge. The Tessie app shows a battery capacity of 51.1 kWh (down 6.4% from my original Oct 2021 post of 54.6 kWh), and a max range of 236 miles (down 6.7% from my original range of 253 miles, and down 1 mile since my 70,000 mile update). I've had Tessie since my first day or two or ownership, so this data shows the entire life of the car.

1709389173638.png


1709389267135.png


According to the car's screen, I'm averaging 211 Wh/mi over the life of the car (up from 210 at the 70,000 mile update). In cold winter weather I can expect 240+ Wh/mi when it's below 30f, and in ideal temps (75-85f) I routinely manage under 200 Wh/mi on my 100 mile round-trip commute. Assuming I could tap into the current 51.1 kWh battery at my lifetime average 211 Wh/mi efficiency, that gives me a real-world range of 242.1 miles.

1709389332417.png


My charging is mostly Level 2 from a Grizzl-E delivering 24 amps on a 40 amp circuit in my garage. I charge almost every day/night due to a long commute, typically to about 75% a few times per week and a 100% once or twice a week. I fast charge about twice per week on average, and over time I find myself fast charging more and more due to the growth of DCFC networks and the convenience of plugging in while I'm getting groceries or whatever.

Driving the same distance in my old Ford Focus would've cost $7,086 in gasoline. To a large degree, my car is sun-powered since installing solar at my home. If I'd kept my 2012 Ford Focus (37mpg), I would've used 2,029 gallons of gas to travel these 75,079 miles. At about 19 pounds of CO2 per gallon, that would've been 38,551 pounds of CO2. Prior to getting solar, my carbon emissions were about 35% of what I would've released in my efficient little Focus. But now that I have solar, that number is much lower, and it's pushing the car's lifetime average down every day.

To illustrate the power of solar, a couple days ago on 28 Feb, my panels generated 67.11 kWh of electricity. On the same day, I used 26.1 kWh to make my 100+ mile commute (it was a cold day so my drive was relatively inefficient). Just a reminder that any plug-in EV can be sun-powered.

We had a snow storm roll through the other day, and it took me four hours to get home from work. It was another reminder how good this RWD car is on icy roads, compared to gas-powered FWD and RWD cars. There were people spinning out all around me, and people who couldn't get up the slightest of inclines. It was a mess. But the weight over the Model 3 RWD has proven to be good in these conditions, and my car was planted throughout. I did stop and buy some bags of ice melt, and threw them in the trunk just to add a little more weight, but I'm not sure if that made any difference. Also, despite being stuck in traffic for hours, my battery percentage was only 2% lower when I got home than was originally predicted. So sitting in idle traffic made minimal impact on my range, even though I was using all the comfort systems.
1709390614843.png


I had a rare maintenance issue about a month ago. Tesla mobile service came to my home and rotated the tires, but the next morning two of those tires were flat. It turns out the service tech had loosened two of the valve cores, causing slow leaks. Eventually I got it figured out and it didn't cost me anything, but it was a bit frustrating in the moment and I didn't make it to work on time that day.

I'll try to post another update at 80,000 miles.
 
Last edited:
Tesla mobile service came to my home and rotated the tires, but the next morning two of those tires were flat. It turns out the service tech had loosened two of the valve cores, causing slow leaks.
How does that happen during a tire rotation? I mean, they will usually check the tire pressure, but to mess with the valve cores seems really strange to me.
 
Reporting in with 2023 LFP M3 RWD. Purchased just before Thanksgiving 2023. Now March 4, so just over 3 months old. Not sure I’ve even let the battery drop below 10% to recalibrate, but this morning is the first time I’ve seen 100% range down to 270 (from 272). Almost 1% degradation in 3 months. Not sure if letting the BMS recalibrate will show more or less degradation, or if it’s just reporting in on what it expects for this age. I will have to look at the charts.
 
2023 Model 3 RWD here. Purchased in Aug 2023, about 5000mi atm. Up until the last few weeks, it was displaying 269mi at 100%. I charged it up to 100% for the first time in a few weeks today (no home charger, I mostly supercharge and had an opportunity to take it to 100 today). It’s suddenly showing 242mi. Has anyone seen a similar drop, possibly relating to the estimate changes listed in 2024.2.x (I’m running 2024.2.7)? Or did my battery really just spontaneously degrade 11% in a month after barely degrading at all the first 6 months?
 
  • Informative
Reactions: eevee-fan
Reporting in with 2023 LFP M3 RWD. Purchased just before Thanksgiving 2023. Now March 4, so just over 3 months old. Not sure I’ve even let the battery drop below 10% to recalibrate, but this morning is the first time I’ve seen 100% range down to 270 (from 272). Almost 1% degradation in 3 months. Not sure if letting the BMS recalibrate will show more or less degradation, or if it’s just reporting in on what it expects for this age. I will have to look at the charts.
I had dropped one percent within a couple months. I think what you're seeing right now is normal.
 
2023 Model 3 RWD here. Purchased in Aug 2023, about 5000mi atm. Up until the last few weeks, it was displaying 269mi at 100%. I charged it up to 100% for the first time in a few weeks today (no home charger, I mostly supercharge and had an opportunity to take it to 100 today). It’s suddenly showing 242mi. Has anyone seen a similar drop, possibly relating to the estimate changes listed in 2024.2.x (I’m running 2024.2.7)? Or did my battery really just spontaneously degrade 11% in a month after barely degrading at all the first 6 months?
That would be very abnormal. I'd try to take it to 100 percent on a level 2 charger and let it sit for a while.
 
2023 Model 3 RWD here. Purchased in Aug 2023, about 5000mi atm. Up until the last few weeks, it was displaying 269mi at 100%. I charged it up to 100% for the first time in a few weeks today (no home charger, I mostly supercharge and had an opportunity to take it to 100 today). It’s suddenly showing 242mi. Has anyone seen a similar drop, possibly relating to the estimate changes listed in 2024.2.x (I’m running 2024.2.7)? Or did my battery really just spontaneously degrade 11% in a month after barely degrading at all the first 6 months?
Probably because you always supercharge. Run it down to <15%, let it sit for a few hours then charge it to 100% on a level 2 charger.
 
I am now at 258 miles (415km) of range (down from 272 (438km) new) at 100% SOC with ~37500 (44300km) miles on the clock. Having said that, my new Sailun Erange 18in tires have boosted my actual range and appear to have more than offset the battery degradation.

Well, LFPs are affected by calendar aging just as any battery therevis so far.

If your car is about 2 years and has been at high SOC mostly we could expect ~ 5% for the first year and square root 2 times 5 after 1.5 years, so 7 % loss.

I think the degradation threshold are somewhere around 58.5 kWh or something like that which means you should have about 420km range. I’m probably not right on the degradation threshold so take it with a grain of salt.

What I mean is that we know where to look on the range scale from calendar aging. Cyclic aging is negligible on the LFP Cars so the ODO number doenst really matter.
 
Well, LFPs are affected by calendar aging just as any battery therevis so far.

If your car is about 2 years and has been at high SOC mostly we could expect ~ 5% for the first year and square root 2 times 5 after 1.5 years, so 7 % loss.

I think the degradation threshold are somewhere around 58.5 kWh or something like that which means you should have about 420km range. I’m probably not right on the degradation threshold so take it with a grain of salt.

What I mean is that we know where to look on the range scale from calendar aging. Cyclic aging is negligible on the LFP Cars so the ODO number doenst really matter.
The car's build date was March 2022. I charge to 100% at least weekly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AAKEE
I forgot to attach a picture:
Teslalogger data on range vs ODO.
Rember that tge ODO reading should have very little to do with the degradation and displayed max range.

M3 RWD with the LFP batt.
The higher batch of ranges origin at ~ 438 km.
We can see that the loss is not too far from the other M3 batteries (LR) seen in lost percent.
Thos is calendar aging that we see.
IMG_7786.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life
If your car is about 2 years and has been at high SOC mostly we could expect ~ 5% for the first year and square root 2 times 5 after 1.5 years, so 7 % loss.
My car at 26 months old is now showing at full charge 258 (probably 257.7 based on the energy screen) rated miles versus 272 when new (5.1% lower). Scan My Tesla says 57.2 kWh nominal full pack, versus 60.5 kWh when new (5.5% lower).

Most home charging has been to 70% or a bit lower, but I charge to 100% approximately once per week. I rarely use Supercharging, except during a ~1,500 mile road trip, and I usually Supercharged from 10-15% to 50-60% for the fastest charging (ABRP strategy for fastest trip).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baluchi and DuncanM
My car at 26 months old is now showing at full charge 258 (probably 257.7 based on the energy screen) rated miles versus 272 when new (5.1% lower). Scan My Tesla says 57.2 kWh nominal full pack, versus 60.5 kWh when new (5.5% lower).

Most home charging has been to 70% or a bit lower, but I charge to 100% approximately once per week. I rarely use Supercharging, except during a ~1,500 mile road trip, and I usually Supercharged from 10-15% to 50-60% for the fastest charging (ABRP strategy for fastest trip).
I wish there were better numbers out there to use as advice. I have my charging set to 90% except 100% maybe once a week or 1.5 weeks. I was using lots of free supercharging thinking maybe I was saving a bit of money but since realized it’s less than $10/charge at home. So I stopped supercharging. We have just a little over 3 months and under 3000 miles. Lost 2 miles of range so far but have probably never let the charge drop below 10%. Typically we recharge before it gets to 20% bc my wife starts to freak out. She doesn’t like to pull the car all the way up to the garage where I charge either. So charging is only 1-2 times per week. I have no idea if any of this is good or bad. 270 range it now says. Down from 272. Less than 1%. I guess if we expect 5% in the first year, I’m doing well and might expect less than 4% at the end of the year assuming linear loss. Hopefully it will get better since I’ve stopped supercharging and it’s supposed to level off too. Right?

We’ve only taken one trip so far, but our relatives have a beach house 100 miles away where I guess I will likely be installing a 14-50 outlet or supercharging might start in the summer. Time will tell for us all. Right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baluchi
That would be very abnormal. I'd try to take it to 100 percent on a level 2 charger and let it sit for a while.
Taking it to 100% on an L2 didn’t change anything. I did, however, dig in the charge stats for the SC session to 100%. It was 24kWh, and I believe I pulled in with the battery at 59%. That would be 24/(100-59)=0.585. Or 58.5kWh at full capacity, which would be about 2.5% degradation and right in the expected ballpark. Which led me to another question: why are we trying to solve degradation from the range value anyway? Isn’t computing the SoC % to kWh value via a charge session more accurate than using the range value, since range value is filtered through an unknown scale factor? Am I missing something here? Why are we instead solving SoC * X * 2.72 and just assuming X = battery health, when we can easily divide out energy added from a charge vs nameplate capacity directly?
 
Isn’t computing the SoC % to kWh value via a charge session more accurate than using the range value, since range value is filtered through an unknown scale factor? Am I missing something here? Why are we instead solving SoC * X * 2.72 and just assuming X = battery health, when we can easily divide out energy added from a charge vs nameplate capacity directly?

Depends. What value was the 24kWh?

We have thre different values:
1 - The energy drawn from the net.
2 - The energy that the car displays was charged.
3 - The energy that was actually filled in the battery.

1 is higher than 2 because of the losses.
2 is higher than 3 because the car shows a higher energy filled due to the way Tesla displays it (exaggerated with 4.7% as the car also counts the buffer which was not charged.
3 is the real energy charged.

The BMS SOC value is probably a bit unreliable for a LFP car, as LFP batteries has a flat voltage curve.
To get reliable SOC values the car should be let sleeping for a while before reading the number. For LFP its probably still unreliable.
Anyway, as the ”filled energy” is a calculated value that was taken from the BMS estimate of the capacity. So it is not a real value. It comes from the estimated nominal full pack value. So in practical terms it origins from the same number that gives the maximum range.