Model Y standard range battery LFP?

[Eto Demerzel]

Understand your point from a business standpoint. You're correct Tesla has a lot more competition in China compared to the U.S., where they can rest back on their laurels.

From a me/customer standpoint, I don't like it. I wish I could have the latest technology, and I'm holding back my purchase as a result.

I've always said Tesla has been too slow with introducing improvements and upgrades. They are all about streamlining costs, not creating value through improved build quality. But who am I to argue, they have no competition when it comes to value for $ for an ev.

On this particular topic, these are minor changes and I think it's a smart approach.

 

[tgrobbo]

I have the RWD SR Model Y with the 54kWh battery from early 2021 and I completely agree with the efficiency you stated. My vehicle is about 500 lbs lighter than an AWD LR Model Y with a 77-82kWh battery. Granted that vehicle had the NCM pack and will do 0-60 in 5.3 seconds.. it has the exact powertrain from the SR+ Model 3 that was sold in the US from 2019 to 2022. In the spring/summer/fall it's not uncommon for me to average 200-210wh/mi.. which is amazingly close to 5 miles per kWh. And of course, all Model Y's come with a heat pump.

My lifetime wh/mi is 248.. but that's only because I do a ton of highway driving at 75-80mph. Even driving at those speeds the car still gets me about 80% of the advertised range. Pretty easy to knock out about 180 miles of highway driving before I need to look for a charger. That actually works out perfectly because by that time I probably need to use the bathroom anyway lol.

Oh yep that’s about the same as we get with LFP RWD MY down here. Although you would probably have the bigger motor than our later cars and possibly a slightly lighter battery. Your car is probably faster than 6.9 0 - 60 I would say.

 

[Darmie]

The LFP allows for 100% charging increasing your effective range.

I see this often and I would agree that on the M3 SR there are no distinctions of daily or trip SOC levels. I still would be concerned of leaving the charge rate so high. After reading about the new data and seeing the graphs, calendar aging is what I would be concerned with. Each cell type is different but the LFP appears to have a bigger calendar aging hit if the SOC is kept higher than 70pct.

Some new data from research on Tesla model 3 cells

There has recently been released a series of new research reports containing tests on Tesla Model 3 Cells (Panasonic 2170 NCA). This is the calendar aging test from one of them (25C, 15, 50 and 85% SOC. Checkup once a month): Using the datapoints from these and putting them in the old charts I...

teslamotorsclub.com

 

[DanDi58]

I see this often and I would agree that on the M3 SR there are no distinctions of daily or trip SOC levels. I still would be concerned of leaving the charge rate so high. After reading about the new data and seeing the graphs, calendar aging is what I would be concerned with. Each cell type is different but the LFP appears to have a bigger calendar aging hit if the SOC is kept higher than 70pct.

Some new data from research on Tesla model 3 cells

There has recently been released a series of new research reports containing tests on Tesla Model 3 Cells (Panasonic 2170 NCA). This is the calendar aging test from one of them (25C, 15, 50 and 85% SOC. Checkup once a month): Using the datapoints from these and putting them in the old charts I...

teslamotorsclub.com

I don't know that Tesla recommends ALWAYS charging the LFP battery to 100%, just that they recommend doing it at least once a week. They don't make the same recommendation for the non-LFP batteries.

 

[Darmie]

I don't know that Tesla recommends ALWAYS charging the LFP battery to 100%, just that they recommend doing it at least once a week. They don't make the same recommendation for the non-LFP batteries.

I would agree, but I bet the damage is already done where people think it's ok to charge to 100% and just leave it there. Good friend just leased a Model 3 SR and I hear the advisors mention, just charge to 100%. Guess what he was doing? Keeping the car at 100%. Calendar aging got the best of me with our 2018 MX where it was common to charge to 90%, then it changed to 80%. Now on my Model 3, the charging tips is to only charge to 80%. I will say based on the new data graphs, I keep both of ours set to 55pct as per the chart. This is perfect for daily use. If we drive out of town, I'll bump to 70. There are so many chargers on the roads that you really never need much more.

 

[vickh]

I would agree, but I bet the damage is already done where people think it's ok to charge to 100% and just leave it there. Good friend just leased a Model 3 SR and I hear the advisors mention, just charge to 100%. Guess what he was doing? Keeping the car at 100%. Calendar aging got the best of me with our 2018 MX where it was common to charge to 90%, then it changed to 80%. Now on my Model 3, the charging tips is to only charge to 80%. I will say based on the new data graphs, I keep both of ours set to 55pct as per the chart. This is perfect for daily use. If we drive out of town, I'll bump to 70. There are so many chargers on the roads that you really never need much more.

Hmm. I keep my '19 SR 3 (non LFP) at 50 but charge to 100% occasionally. Hoping unlocking the top buffer would help with degradation some day

I too, thought that I'd KEEP the LFP SR Y at 100%

 

[pdx_m3s]

It's a misnomer that LFP can be charged to 100% without any extra degradation. LFP needs to be charged to 100% frequently for balancing and accurate SOC readings, and it does induce a bit of extra degradation vs. keeping it at 50%, albeit to a much lower extent than NMC/NCA.

 

[Daekwan]

Oh yep that’s about the same as we get with LFP RWD MY down here. Although you would probably have the bigger motor than our later cars and possibly a slightly lighter battery. Your car is probably faster than 6.9 0 - 60 I would say.

Yeah, my car actually has the 990 rear motor from the Performance Model Y. So would actually be MUCH faster if someone could figure out a way to unlock it. Unfortunately, the aftermarket software unlocks I've found so far only work on the LR AWD version. I calculated it probably faster than advertised.. simply because the MYSR and M3SR+ both quote 0-60 times of 5.3 seconds.. even though the MYSR is 300 lbs heavier.

That said Im honestly fine with the acceleration. 5.3 seconds is enough to jump in front of 95% of the cars on road.. which is the only time I really need to push the accelerator all the way to the floor. It's honestly a lot closer to the acceleration of the LR than you would think. The video linked shows exactly the acceleration difference between the 2021 MYSR and MYLR.. and helped me choose the 2021 MYSR.. which was $9,000 cheaper than the 2021 MYLR at the time. As for the range.. I practically never drive more than 300 miles in a single day.. so stopping to charge for around 20 mins after 180 miles of driving is generally enough to get me back home.

 

[vickh]

e the 2021 MYSR.. which was $9,000 cheaper than the 2021 MYLR at the time.

no brainer then, but now it's a ~$6K difference now makes the choice harder.

 

[MP3Mike]

So would actually be MUCH faster if someone could figure out a way to unlock it. Unfortunately, the aftermarket software unlocks I've found so far only work on the LR AWD version.

Sure, the motor can support it, but can the battery? As far as aftermarket unlocks, those are just changing the configuration to something that Tesla supports. Tesla doesn't make a faster SR/RWD variant so there is nothing for them to copy.

I calculated it probably faster than advertised.. simply because the MYSR and M3SR+ both quote 0-60 times of 5.3 seconds.. even though the MYSR is 300 lbs heavier.

But the MY RWD with LFP pack, that this thread is about, has a stated 0-60MPH time of 6.6 seconds. It is possible that one of the aftermarket unlocks could apply the MY SR profile to an MY RWD making it faster. (But I sort of doubt that they are still using the same motor, so it probably wouldn't work.)

 

[Daekwan]

no brainer then, but now it's a ~$6K difference now makes the choice harder.

I would agree. I said the same thing about the Austin-built AWD Y with the 4680 battery pack. Rather than save $3K.. I'd rather take the extra acceleration + 50 miles of "EPA range". I'd imagine most of us would pay an extra $3K for 50 more miles of driving. I mean how much of a difference would your monthly car payment change by spending $3K more.. when financed for 60-72 months? My guess is about $50 more.

That said after 2.5 years of ownership and 51K miles of driving the original SR Y.. what I've found is that you rarely drive more than 200 miles in a single day. This means for someone who isn't some type of highway warrior.. this newly announced MY-RWD with 260 miles of "EPA range" is probably going to handle almost all of their driving needs without needing to stop & charge often. And if they do need to stop and charge.. 20mins at a Supercharger should easily add another 125 miles of EPA range. So now you theoretically have up to 385 miles of EPA range in a single day.. if you include the 20min charging stop. That is ALOT of driving for one day. And I don't know about you guys.. but I still need to pee every 2-3 hours lol.

One of the most amazing stats I've seen if from Bjorn. He conducts a 1000km (600 miles) test on lots of vehicles. This is driving point A to B.. and only charging as much as necessary.. to make the trip as quick as possible. What he found is that even in 40-degree weather.. the M3-RWD with the 60kWh LFP battery only takes 45 minutes longer to drive 600 real world miles.. than the M3LR with the 82kWh NCM battery pack. I can't imagine driving 600 miles in one freaking day. That said if you want to do it.. apparently the M3-RWD will do it in 10 hours & 5 mins.. while the M3LR will do it in 9 hours & 20 mins.

Most impressive was this overall travel time was still near the top of the list! At the time Bjorn has completed this test on about 47different EVs. The M3-RWD was number 12 of that list of 47. It completed the 600-mile trip within 10 minutes of the KIA EV-6 with the 77kWh battery. The "real world" difference simply isn't as much as you would imagine.

Bjørn's 1,000 Km Challenge: New Model 3 RWD (LFP-60) Is A Beast

In the most recent 1,000 km challenge, Bjørn Nyland tested the latest MIC Tesla Model 3 RWD (former Standard Range Plus/SR+) with about a 60 kWh LFP battery.

insideevs.com

 

[Fairchild]

I would agree, but I bet the damage is already done where people think it's ok to charge to 100% and just leave it there. Good friend just leased a Model 3 SR and I hear the advisors mention, just charge to 100%. Guess what he was doing? Keeping the car at 100%. Calendar aging got the best of me with our 2018 MX where it was common to charge to 90%, then it changed to 80%. Now on my Model 3, the charging tips is to only charge to 80%. I will say based on the new data graphs, I keep both of ours set to 55pct as per the chart. This is perfect for daily use. If we drive out of town, I'll bump to 70. There are so many chargers on the roads that you really never need much more.

If you are doing that, you may as well own a NISSAN Leaf. My 2014 Model S is at 13% degradation with 178,234 miles and it has been charged to 80% daily and 100% on road trips.

I buy a vehicle to buy it, not play charging games with it in my garage. And selling every two years, I could really care less about the battery for the second and third owners. Based on my 2014 Model S, it's not an issue anyway. Much ado about nothing. No need to mentally masturbate over it.

 

[Da Cathode]

I dont think there is a Model Y LFP, at all (in the US). The Model Y AWD (what people call the standard range one) isnt LFP, and none of the other ones are either.

Fremont MYLR is 2170 LFP. I believe. Austin MYLR is 4680 LFP, but all current MY's are LFP chemistry.

 

[jjrandorin]

Fremont MYLR is 2170 LFP. I believe. Austin MYLR is 4680 LFP, but all current MY's are LFP chemistry.

No, they arent.

 

[Da Cathode]

No, they arent.

So none of the US-based MY's use LFP?

 

[jjrandorin]

So none of the US-based MY's use LFP?

Only one they just announced at the end of september. definitely none of the ones you stated.

 

[pdx_m3s]

So none of the US-based MY's use LFP?

All LR are 2170. SR is the same LFP pack as Model 3.

4680 doesn’t have enough performance for long range/fast charging. The 4680 pack was the worst pack Tesla has ever put in a 3/Y.

 

[Da Cathode]

Only one they just announced at the end of september. definitely none of the ones you stated.

Interesting. Have you seen this table from this website?
Tesla Batteries: What Kind of Battery Does My Tesla Have?.

 

[jjrandorin]

Interesting. Have you seen this table from this website?
Tesla Batteries: What Kind of Battery Does My Tesla Have?.

What about it? Nothing there says that all US based model Ys are LFP, as that would be patently, categorically incorrect. You said "All current US model Y are LFP" which is a completely false statement. There are currently NO Long Range, nor Performance Model Y LFP vehicles, yet those are part of "All current US model Ys" for example.

 

[E90alex]

Fremont MYLR is 2170 LFP. I believe. Austin MYLR is 4680 LFP, but all current MY's are LFP chemistry.

No, no, and no.

Fremont and Austin made MY LR and P are all Panasonic 2170 NCA cells

Austin made standard AWD (now discontinued) had Tesla 4680 NMC cells and structural battery pack.

Shanghai and Berlin made MY LR and P use LG Chem 2170 NMC cells.

Fremont and Shanghai made MY RWD use CATL prismatic LFP cells.

There are no LFP cylindrical cells (18650/2170/4680) in any Tesla.

There are no LFP Long Range or Performance models because LFP does not have enough energy density or discharge rate to support long range or high performance.