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

[AlanSubie4Life]

So it is better fo rbattery not to charge to 100% too often or?

No, it’s really totally fine. Just don’t leave it there.

Nothing matters but the storage charge level, to first order.

Would I charge to 100% all the time? Yes if it were necessary. I’d just use it right away, to below 65-70% for LFP. Which should be a non issue to do since the car was charged to 100% for a reason.

 

[DuncanM]

Interesting. Having not really been following LFP batteries before I am curious. Are there any research/graphs of degradation of LFP? Is it still the conclusion they degrade less than NCA?

There's no doubt that LFP degrades less per charge cycle than NCA, and CATL LFP batteries (as in the M3 RWD) have about twice the rated cycle life of NCA. However, it maybe that LFP has a higher calender degradation than NCA.

There's some interesting data in this report:

https://storage.googleapis.com/itp-renewables-website/documents/Battlab_Report_12_Final.pdf

 

[tgrobbo]

There's no doubt that LFP degrades less per charge cycle than NCA, and CATL LFP batteries (as in the M3 RWD) have about twice the rated cycle life of NCA. However, it maybe that LFP has a higher calender degradation than NCA.

There's some interesting data in this report:

https://storage.googleapis.com/itp-renewables-website/documents/Battlab_Report_12_Final.pdf

Finally someone else is saying this lol. A 7% loss as per the earlier post is no different to what you’d expect from an NCA battery at that age and mileage - perhaps even a little worse. But if it’s not cyclic aging causing this loss, well then it must be calendar aging. Even if you just say ‘as a percentage of total capacity loss, LFP loses more to calendar aging than other Tesla chemistries’ that’s surely a hard statement to disagree with.

 

[karlos22]

Finally someone else is saying this lol. A 7% loss as per the earlier post is no different to what you’d expect from an NCA battery at that age and mileage - perhaps even a little worse. But if it’s not cyclic aging causing this loss, well then it must be calendar aging. Even if you just say ‘as a percentage of total capacity loss, LFP loses more to calendar aging than other Tesla chemistries’ that’s surely a hard statement to disagree with.

It is very clear that LFP calendar ageing is comparable to that of NCA. There has been ample evidence posted in this discussion.

 

[Baluchi]

Interesting. Having not really been following LFP batteries before I am curious. Are there any research/graphs of degradation of LFP? Is it still the conclusion they degrade less than NCA?

There are graphs posted in this thread, multiple times...somewhere.

 

[tgrobbo]

It is very clear that LFP calendar ageing is comparable to that of NCA. There has been ample evidence posted in this discussion.

I don’t think so - graphs don’t mean anything compared to real life examples - it’s only now we’re starting to see LFP cars with a little bit of age. They’re three years old and they’ve got the same or worse degradation as NCA, therefore, they are calendar aging more, (as a percentage of their total degradation) because it’s clearly not cyclic aging. Cheers

 

[karlos22]

I don’t think so - graphs don’t mean anything compared to real life examples - it’s only now we’re starting to see LFP cars with a little bit of age. They’re three years old and they’ve got the same or worse degradation as NCA, therefore, they are calendar aging more, (as a percentage of their total degradation) because it’s clearly not cyclic aging. Cheers

I haven't really seen evidence of that, however if that was the case then it could be explained by LFP owners charging to 100% frequently (higher calendar ageing above 70%).

 

[tgrobbo]

I haven't really seen evidence of that, however if that was the case then it could be explained by LFP owners charging to 100% frequently (higher calendar ageing above 70%).

I don’t follow NCA cars that closely to be honest as we mainly just have LFP and NCMA in my country, but from what I’ve seen, a three year old NCA car is doing better or the same as a 7% loss. In fact there are some at 200,000 miles with only 7% loss. All I’m saying is calendar aging makes up a bigger portion of the loss in LFP - which has to be true if it has less cyclic aging than NCA - however I am suspicious that they might actually just have more calendar aging. If they are losing similar capacity over the same time period as NCA, then they definitely do. 100% charging would be the likely culprit for sure.