Model X 90kWh battery pack degradation

[jgrgnt]

2017 X90D with 60,000 miles. 7% degradation according to the A Better Route Planner (ABRP) app.

 

[Harvey Danger]

2017 X90D with 60,000 miles. 7% degradation according to the A Better Route Planner (ABRP) app.

Wait I thought *you* tell the *app* what your degradation is, not the other way around. How is ABRP determining this?

 

[jgrgnt]

Wait I thought *you* tell the *app* what your degradation is, not the other way around. How is ABRP determining this?

The feature arrived in a recent update. You can still enter it manually, but there’s now a toggle to pull that data directly from the car.

 

[Gwgan]

Had a chance to wait on a Supercharger for a bit so charged 2016 P90D X to 100%.
Estimated 196
Rated 226
Ideal 280

 

[DarkMatter]

2017 90D, 32k miles. 227 or 228 rated miles at 90%, and it's been one of those two since 25k miles, which was the last time I saw 229 rated miles at 90%.

 

[Harvey Danger]

2017 90D, 32k miles. 227 or 228 rated miles at 90%, and it's been one of those two since 25k miles, which was the last time I saw 229 rated miles at 90%.

Wow man, your 90 is my 100. Maybe this is obvious, but are you really charging the car to 90% and the battery says 227 miles? Or are you extrapolating to what a 100% charge would be? If 90 really is 227 and 100 would be 252, then that seems like hardly any degradation at all in four years. That would be pretty sweet!

 

[bhorn]

Wow man, your 90 is my 100. Maybe this is obvious, but are you really charging the car to 90% and the battery says 227 miles? Or are you extrapolating to what a 100% charge would be? If 90 really is 227 and 100 would be 252, then that seems like hardly any degradation at all in four years. That would be pretty sweet!

Performance. That bigger motor eats watts for breakfast.

 

[israndy]

So what do people think the upshot is? In the first few years you can lose up to 10% of your range, but then it kind of stabilizes? I haven't put all this info into a spreadsheet, but I also haven't seen anyone talking about Tesla swapping the battery under a only 70% range remaining after less than 10 years issue.

 

[Harvey Danger]

Here's something fairly recent:

I got the graph from this page
(If you can scroll past the guy trying to plug his new book, there's some interesting data from as recently as 2020..) :

Tesla Model S battery degradation data

Want to read about the acceleration we are seeing in our society in the area of mobility? Read our new book ‘Forward’. Updated June 9, 2020. Today, Tesla Motors published their 2019 Imp…

maartensteinbuch.com

 

[DarkMatter]

Wow man, your 90 is my 100. Maybe this is obvious, but are you really charging the car to 90% and the battery says 227 miles? Or are you extrapolating to what a 100% charge would be? If 90 really is 227 and 100 would be 252, then that seems like hardly any degradation at all in four years. That would be pretty sweet!

Indeed if you have a Performance you can't directly compare, as the large rear motor is quite a bit less efficient than the small rear motor. It's the price you pay for that quicker 0-60.

My last 100% charge came in at 255 RM. That was at 30k miles back in August. Haven't been driving much in the last 14 months or so for obvious reasons. The curve has been pretty consistent overall. In fact it's been level for long enough that the trendline is actually turning a touch upward, which I expect to have reversed once I start putting more miles on. Probably I would have lost a couple more miles to cycling if I had been driving at the usual rate in the last year. Regardless I'm pretty happy given the original 257 mile rating. I plug in basically whenever I park at home, and charge to 90% except when a trip is planned, at which point I charge to 100%.

Here are a couple of quick ways to visualize the data. First is against time.

Second is against mileage.

Given the trends so far I expect to hit 250RM steadily around 45k miles give or take.

 

[tengtengvn]

2017 X90D 29k miles.
237 rated @100%. When I changed it to ideal, it showed somewhere around 300.
How often do you charge to 100%?

 

[DarkMatter]

I'm not clear on who you are asking. If you are talking to me, I have charged to 100% twenty two (22) times since purchase in July 2017. Below is the same graph based on only the 100% charges. The data is obviously noisier but the trendline looks similar. This leads me to trust the BMS estimate from extrapolating 90% charges reasonably well.

 

[Harvey Danger]

I'm not sure I'm agreeing with where this discussion is going.

According to the first post in this legendary TMC thread, Both the 90D and the P90D (at least prior to the mid-2019 refresh) came with identical battery packs. The nameplate capacity was “90 kWh”, and they actually only held 81.8, but hey who’s counting. Either way, they were the same pack.

Now I guess what people are claiming in the last few posts is that a) the P90D has a higher consumption rate than the 90D and b) this will result in a higher number of charge cycles all other things being equal and c) this number of charge cycles, as much or more than calendar age, is the main determinant of battery degradation.

Do I have this right? I mean, I actually agree with those things.

Because if that's all true, then it matters how many more charge cycles we are talking about. That same post cited above gives an idea of the relative difference in consumption a person might expect between these two variants: the regular non-performance 90 had a “rated” consumption of 320 Wh/mi and the Performance version used 333 Wh/mi.

Obviously everyone’s *actual* usage will be different, but this ratio should give a decent guide to how many more charge cycles one version might go through vs the other version, all other things being equal.

It’s a 4% difference, people.

Show me a chart of degradation , not versus time , but versus charge cycles. (Someone has helpfully supplied exactly such a chart just a couple posts above this one.) Pick a data point. Make a note of how far you are to the right along the X axis. Now, move your ruler FOUR PERCENT FURTHER TO THE RIGHT and tell me what point lies directly above this new location. They’re almost identical values. Maybe a fraction of a percent different.

I'm sorry but that comes nowhere near explaining how one guy has 256 and the other guy has 226, even if one is a 90D and the other is a P90D

Am I missing something?

 

[DarkMatter]

Rated miles will read differently on the P and the non-P vehicles, to the tune of around three percent. (250 vs 257 rated miles)

So yes, that will result in a few more cycles. Sentry Mode for those who have upgraded will also add some or even a lot of cycles. Not using Energy Saving will add some cycles. 22 inch wheels will add some cycles. Cabin Overheat Protection will add some cycles. Supercharging will add some wear. Leaving the pack in a low SOC will add some wear. Keeping the car awake with a monitoring app such as Fi adds battery cycles. Then on top of that all the BMS seems to get out of whack if you don't normally recharge to 90%. Some packs are better, some are worse.

All of it could certainly add up to a bigger wear difference. I would consider my situation to be nearly ideal: temperate climate, non-Performance, no use of Sentry mode, regularly charge to 90%, very little Supercharging, Energy Saving on, only a thousand miles of towing so far, don't use Fi. Maybe on top of that I got lucky with my battery. Without more data I can't say.

 

[Harvey Danger]

Ok, sure, all that sounds valid.

But I still think most of that is general consumption-related common sense that falls in the category of 'all other things being equal'.

Rated miles will read differently on the P and the non-P vehicles [snip]

Thank you for the reminder, my remarks above glossed over this somewhat.

So basically the things that would cause a P90D to read lower than an *identically-driven* 90D really boil down to a) the 4 percent difference in the energy value of a rated-mile, and b) the higher degradation due to higher amount of charging needed to go the same distance.

I feel like everything else would apply equally to 90D's and P90D's right?

My big long screed in the other post was just pointing out the contribution from b) seems pretty small, so anecdotal comparisons describing anything bigger than a 4% delta make it seem like those other things you mentioned came into play and not just because "performance motors are hogs".

 

[DarkMatter]

Performance motors being hogs mean that if you try to make a like-for-like comparison with a 90D you'll be starting 4% back. That's the big difference.

 

[Lancew]

At 115,000 miles my 90X is at 206 miles at 90%. Seems pretty steady. over last 20,000 miles. March 2016 Build.

 

[Harvey Danger]

A look at Tesla battery degradation and replacement after 400,000 miles

In this new installment of our series on the highest-mileage Tesla Model X (and one of the highest mileage EVs...

electrek.co

This came out a year ago, not sure how I missed it, but it contains data that directly pertains to this thread. (check out the blue/green scatter plot!)

Spoiler alert the *new * battery pack in the car has 10% degradation after 100,000 miles. The title of the article says 400,000 miles which is nice but the original pack on the car failed and was replaced at 300,000 : he does not supply range info for the one that failed.

 

[israndy]

Yeah, he wasn't around for that period of the car's life, he bought it after the battery had been swapped and is going off the service records and what he was told about the car when he bought it.

I would like to get 400,000 miles or more as I am already almost to 100,000 after almost 3.5 years. I think I am wearing thru the padding in the seat. Perhaps I can swap with the passenger seat. Otherwise it's been smooth sailing.

 

[overthepond]

X-post from Battery degradation after 8,700 miles...

2016 90D that I've just taken delivery of.

First registered Feb 2017. Not sure exactly what 2016 model, but I'd guess late 2016 with the 2.0 Autopilot hardware.

8,700 miles.

Full charge: 237 miles.