New M3 Performance 8.4% degradation?

[AlanSubie4Life]

Quick update. Charged to full (99%, wouldn’t go higher), Tesla showed 315 on the range indicator. With the additional data Tessie now shows 3.1% degradation. Tessie tells me that 77.5 kWh were added from 4-99%. I think all is well! Might have been a combination of lack of low end and high end bms data as well as lack of overall data for Tessie. Cheers!

Yes. It is fine. Not sure what Tessie was reporting, but this is layering on a bunch of confusion you don’t need.

If your car shows 315 rated miles at 99%, you’re very likely at 80.6kWh or above (you cannot tell easily if you are above 80.6kWh, though it is possible with careful metering during a drive). It really just cannot be otherwise. Just the way it works. The BMS is very strict about this display relationship.

I am not sure how the Tessie 77.5kWh number is measured, or where it came from. It seems off by 1kWh.

The constant is ~80.6kWh/315rmi.

If you charge from 4% to 99% that is 95% of 315rmi, or 299rmi (if you toggle the range display you can see the miles added (or kWh added) during the charge event on the screen in the car, as long as the car remains plugged in).

299rmi*80.6kWh/315rmi = 76.57kWh

So I think the screen would have displayed 77kWh for energy added.

Anyway, as discussed earlier, from 4% to 99% most likely the actual energy added is closer to:
0.95*0.955*80.6kWh = 73kWh

It may have been slightly more depending on exactly the capacity of your pack.

There’s a buffer of about 3.6kWh below 0%. Which you cannot safely use.

I have no idea why Tessie says you have lost capacity. You certainly have not lost anything significant yet.

I would go ahead and tap the initial value in the Tessie app and enter 80.6kWh or so as posted earlier.

 

[johnny_cakes]

Quick update. Charged to full (99%, wouldn’t go higher), Tesla showed 315 on the range indicator. With the additional data Tessie now shows 3.1% degradation. Tessie tells me that 77.5 kWh were added from 4-99%. I think all is well! Might have been a combination of lack of low end and high end bms data as well as lack of overall data for Tessie. Cheers!

Very interesting. Did you wait until your car slept at low SoC before you charged to 99%? I'm also seeing high degradation from the Tessie app and will try the low SoC to high SoC charge cycle to see if anything changes.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Very interesting. Did you wait until your car slept at low SoC before you charged to 99%? I'm also seeing high degradation from the Tessie app and will try the low SoC to high SoC charge cycle to see if anything changes.

Just extrapolate your 100% charge range from the car. When charged to greater than 80%. Compare to the EPA original range for your car.

It is all you need, and is rock solid. Gives you the % loss. BMS data is right at your fingertips.

If you want to know the actual kWh value you can use the sticky method (posted on the sticky). (It will work as long as you are below the degradation threshold, otherwise it will give you the degradation threshold.)

No need to worry about Tessie. And you can tap on the number in the Tessie app it sounds like and adjust your initial capacity to the correct value (for the OP here that would be over 80.6kWh).

Once you figure out your degradation you can correct Tessie to make it align. And then hopefully the data will continue to align subsequently.

 

[Steven Matsko]

Very interesting. Did you wait until your car slept at low SoC before you charged to 99%? I'm also seeing high degradation from the Tessie app and will try the low SoC to high SoC charge cycle to see if anything changes.

I did not, I have a road trip today so I had to get a full charge asap. From what I read though, ideally you want to let it sleep. I’ll have a lot more data and chargers from this road trip so we’ll see if Tessie’s numbers continue to climb higher.

 

[Steven Matsko]

Yes. It is fine. Not sure what Tessie was reporting, but this is layering on a bunch of confusion you don’t need.

If your car shows 315 rated miles at 99%, you’re very likely at 80.6kWh or above (you cannot tell easily if you are above 80.6kWh, though it is possible with careful metering during a drive). It really just cannot be otherwise. Just the way it works. The BMS is very strict about this display relationship.

I am not sure how the Tessie 77.5kWh number is measured, or where it came from. It seems off by 1kWh.

The constant is ~80.6kWh/315rmi.

If you charge from 4% to 99% that is 95% of 315rmi, or 299rmi (if you toggle the range display you can see the miles added (or kWh added) during the charge event on the screen in the car, as long as the car remains plugged in).

299rmi*80.6kWh/315rmi = 76.57kWh

So I think the screen would have displayed 77kWh for energy added.

Anyway, as discussed earlier, from 4% to 99% most likely the actual energy added is closer to:
0.95*0.955*80.6kWh = 73kWh

It may have been slightly more depending on exactly the capacity of your pack.

There’s a buffer of about 3.6kWh below 0%. Which you cannot safely use.

I have no idea why Tessie says you have lost capacity. You certainly have not lost anything significant yet.

I would go ahead and tap the initial value in the Tessie app and enter 80.6kWh or so as posted earlier.

Tesla app was showing a higher kw added (can’t recall exact). Tessie showed 81.1 used and 77.5 added. I know the Tesla app trended closer to the used value rather than the added

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Tesla app was showing a higher kw added (can’t recall exact). Tessie showed 81.1 used and 77.5 added. I know the Tesla app trended closer to the used value rather than the added

To be clear I am talking about the screen in the car, or the value on the splash page in the app - not the value in the charge stats page (which is different).
Next time you do this just take a picture of the car screen. Swap between miles and kWh added (tap the battery icon), take pictures of both.

Then compare to Tessie screen capture. It’s hard to determine exactly what is going on without a picture of exactly what is happening.

The energy added is very deterministic so something doesn’t add up with what you are saying.

Can you check the Tesla app charge stats for that day (assuming a single charge) to double check the results? (Press and hold the day and then Screen cap!) Do you know exactly what miles you started at and finished with (you finished with 315)? It is possible that things work differently above the degradation threshold (not sure).

Edit: (Actually this added app energy won’t work - since it attempts to measure the wall energy before losses - so this should give something like 81kWh or more. But would be curious to see what it is - what is your charging setup?)

 

[AAKEE]

I guess its impossible for Tessie to measure a capacity more than 80.6 kWh.

Maximin added on screen would be 315 rated miles, if charging 0-100%.
That would be the 80.6, or the degradation threshold.

So we cant know the exact capacity from Tessie, but we know everything is fine!

The Tessie degradation value is wrong and at 315 rmi / 80.6 kWh, the degradation per definition is 0%.

(The battery is a 82.1 kWh battery but they do not start there according to the cars BMS. They most often start at 80-81 kWh.
My battery showed 80.7 the day after delivery, but then I had driven home from the delivery 1000km and three/four supercharging sessions. I did see a nominal full pack of 81.6kWh and nominal remaining of 82.0 kWh using Scan My Tesla about four months after delivery)

 

[johnny_cakes]

Just extrapolate your 100% charge range from the car. When charged to greater than 80%. Compare to the EPA original range for your car.

It is all you need, and is rock solid. Gives you the % loss. BMS data is right at your fingertips.

If you want to know the actual kWh value you can use the sticky method (posted on the sticky). (It will work as long as you are below the degradation threshold, otherwise it will give you the degradation threshold.)

No need to worry about Tessie. And you can tap on the number in the Tessie app it sounds like and adjust your initial capacity to the correct value (for the OP here that would be over 80.6kWh).

Once you figure out your degradation you can correct Tessie to make it align. And then hopefully the data will continue to align subsequently.

Thanks, I'll do as you suggest. Can you elaborate on what the degradation threshold is?

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Thanks, I'll do as you suggest. Can you elaborate on what the degradation threshold is?

It’s my term for the battery capacity where degradation starts to show. Above that level the energy content of each rated mile is expanded from the default “constant” value to keep the same max value showing even if the capacity exceeds the threshold. This is how for slightly varying initial capacities above the design threshold, all such cars initially show the same range.

Just think of it as the initial capacity. Many cars initially slightly exceed it but fairly quickly drop below it.

 

[gtg465x]

I think some of the confusion in this thread boils down differences between batteries in different regions. In America, we get this Model 3 Performance with 82 kWh nominal capacity, but other parts of the world get this Model 3 Performance with 78.1 kWh nominal capacity.

Like @AAKEE pointed out, Tessie shows original actual capacity (based on fleet average) in blue, and confusingly labels current actual capacity (which includes the buffer) as "Usable Capacity". Based on the blue number being 78.8, OP must have the non-American Performance model (edit: or Tessie thinks he does).

Another problem that may be confusing us all is that Teslas may show different initial range in different regions. In the US, a Performance model should show 315 miles when new, because that's the EPA rating, but on the UK site, Tesla advertises the Performance as having 340 WLTP miles, so maybe the cars there actually show 340 miles when new? If that's the case... maybe that's where the 307 miles Tessie is showing comes from. If the car is actually seeing like 71.x kW at 100%, it might be showing (71.x/78.8)*340 = 306-310 miles remaining.

Edit: I just saw OP's location is Ohio. Now I'm confused. Did Tesla start importing the batteries they normally put in the Euro Model 3? Or did Tessie bug out and assume his car was a Euro variant? Still confused where the 78.8 kWh comes from if it's not a Euro Model 3. If Tessie assumed the wrong variant of the car, then you should probably do what @AlanSubie4Life suggested and tap the initial value in the Tessie app and enter 80.6kWh, although the degradation graph the app is showing you is still going to be from the Euro fleet I guess. Might need to reach out to the Tessie devs.

 

[AAKEE]

I think some of the confusion in this thread boils down differences between batteries in different regions. In America, we get this Model 3 Performance with 82 kWh nominal capacity, but other parts of the world get this Model 3 Performance with 78.1 kWh nominal capacity.

Like @AAKEE pointed out, Tessie shows original actual capacity (based on fleet average) in blue, and confusingly labels current actual capacity (which includes the buffer) as "Usable Capacity". Based on the blue number being 78.8, OP must have the non-American Performance model (edit: or Tessie thinks he does).

Another problem that may be confusing us all is that Teslas may show different initial range in different regions. In the US, a Performance model should show 315 miles when new, because that's the EPA rating, but on the UK site, Tesla advertises the Performance as having 340 WLTP miles, so maybe the cars there actually show 340 miles when new? If that's the case... maybe that's where the 307 miles Tessie is showing comes from. If the car is actually seeing like 71.x kW at 100%, it might be showing (71.x/78.8)*340 = 306-310 miles remaining. If that's the case, then there is indeed either ~9% degredation or the BMS calibration is somewhere that much off.

Edit: I just saw OP's location is Ohio. Now I'm confused. Did Tesla start importing the batteries they normally put in the Euro Model 3? Or did Tessie bug out and assume his car was a Euro variant? Still confused where the 78.8 kWh comes from if it's not a Euro Model 3. If that's the case and Tessie assumed the wrong variant of the car, then you should probably do what @AlanSubie4Life suggested and tap the initial value in the Tessie app and enter 80.6kWh, although the degradation graph the app is showing you is still going to be from the Euro fleet I guess. Might need to reach out to the Tessie devs.

All european Teslas show the EPA range, Im not aware of any other range shown.

All US M3P still use the 2170L /82.1 kWh battery.

Yes, this is a US car with the 82.1kWh batt.

The first year and a halv since the facelift the M3P’s in europe did get the 82.1kWh battery (I have that, coincidently showing 78.8kWh )
The EPA range was shortened from 567 (315 mi) to 347. The ’saying’ is that the new AMD processor use more energy but in real the drop of a few kWh must play a big part.

The 78.8 kWh, same as the LG M50 (”5L” in europe) would be the ”average initial capacity” messured by Tessie according to the developers.
I have seen just about any number in the blue text inside the metet in Tessie in different Teslas.
In most cases that number is not the total capacity (Full pack When New) and not the same between different same type of cars.

The blue text in the meter is the base for degradation calc, so if just setting it to the appropriate value, the average line should match, as long as Tessie do not have a high degree of bad origunal capacities.

One thing I do not like with Tessie is that people often see a much lower degradation, and as the text says ”usable” people think that they have very low degradation.
”I charge to 90% daily and only have 3% degradation ”.
If the values are checked up, its clear that 3% is not even near to the truth.

For the degradation value, it would be proper to use the capacity that was the base for the certified range.
It do not matter if I get a battery that was low from the factory, or if the car degraded before delivery or degradee by my use.

I bought a car with a specified range, and there is a specified amount of energy needed to cover that range so in my eyes it should be that value that is set.
Preferebly it should be automatically ”correct” set by BBC the app.

 

[gtg465x]

All european Teslas show the EPA range, Im not aware of any other range shown.

All US M3P still use the 2170L /82.1 kWh battery.

Yes, this is a US car with the 82.1kWh batt.

The first year and a halv since the facelift the M3P’s in europe did get the 82.1kWh battery (I have that, coincidently showing 78.8kWh )
The EPA range was shortened from 567 (315 mi) to 347. The ’saying’ is that the new AMD processor use more energy but in real the drop of a few kWh must play a big part.

The 78.8 kWh, same as the LG M50 (”5L” in europe) would be the ”average initial capacity” messured by Tessie according to the developers.
I have seen just about any number in the blue text inside the metet in Tessie in different Teslas.
In most cases that number is not the total capacity (Full pack When New) and not the same between different same type of cars.

The blue text in the meter is the base for degradation calc, so if just setting it to the appropriate value, the average line should match, as long as Tessie do not have a high degree of bad origunal capacities.

One thing I do not like with Tessie is that people often see a much lower degradation, and as the text says ”usable” people think that they have very low degradation.
”I charge to 90% daily and only have 3% degradation ”.
If the values are checked up, its clear that 3% is not even near to the truth.

For the degradation value, it would be proper to use the capacity that was the base for the certified range.
It do not matter if I get a battery that was low from the factory, or if the car degraded before delivery or degradee by my use.

I bought a car with a specified range, and there is a specified amount of energy needed to cover that range so in my eyes it should be that value that is set.
Preferebly it should be automatically ”correct” set by BBC the app.

What do you mean the blue text is not the "full pack when new" capacity? Seems like it is, but it might be different for different cars depending on when they first started using Tessie. I would guess if you start using it within the first 500 miles or some low threshold, they attempt to show the value they calculated for your specific car, but if you start using Tessie after you already have a lot of miles, maybe they just use an average value from the fleet of the same model. I guess you're saying it should be neither of those values, but the rated capacity of the pack?

I have a 2023 Model 3 RWD with the 60.5 kWh rated LFP pack (I guess that's what it's rated, based on a random website, but not sure where to find the official info), and Tessie shows 60.3 kWh in the blue text, and also 60.3 kWh for the "Usable Capacity" text, indicating it thinks I have 0% degradation (I've only had the car for about 4 months and have only put 1045 miles on it). Are you saying it should actually show 60.5 kWh in blue text and should show that I currently have 0.3% degradation?

 

[AAKEE]

What do you mean the blue text is not the "full pack when new" capacity? Seems like it is, but it might be different for different cars depending on when they first started using Tessie.

This is from the Tessie link, after asking:

Original capacity is the average BMS measurement taken at ~0 mile odometer of all Tesla owners with the same configuration. If Tesla changes battery manufacturing processes in the middle of the year, you replace your battery, etc. then it'll be wrong. You can fix it by tapping the capacity

Link: Tessie vendors answer

For example the LG batteries tend to start eay lower, so if the average for these cars is used, it might be 75-76 kWh but the battery ”tops” 79-79.1kWh, and the spec is 78.8.

Offset the ”degradation number” quite much for many people.

I have a 2023 Model 3 RWD with the 60.5 kWh rated LFP pack (I guess that's what it's rated, based on a random website, but not sure where to find the official info), and Tessie shows 60.3 kWh in the blue text, and also 60.3 kWh for the "Usable Capacity" text, indicating it thinks I have 0% degradation (I've only had the car for about 4 months and have only put 1045 miles on it). Are you saying it should actually show 60.5 kWh in blue text and should show that I currently have 0.3% degradation?

I guess that would be fair (not knowing the base for the stated EPA range though).

 

[gtg465x]

I guess that would be fair (not knowing the base for the stated EPA range though).

I don't think we can know the base for EPA range since they only tell us amount of power needed to charge the pack (25.4929 kWh/100mi * (272/100) = 69.34 kWh required to charge the pack, including losses during charging), and not the actual amount consumed during driving.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I don't think we can know the base for EPA range since they only tell us amount of power needed to charge the pack (25.4929 kWh/100mi * (272/100) = 69.34 kWh required to charge the pack, including losses during charging), and not the actual amount consumed during driving.

Approx methods:
1)The EPA test document gives this approx answer.

2) also can approximately get it from SMT, and those reads have showed 60.5kWh as I recall for the full pack when new value (and new vehicles typically exceed it, again, IIRC), and the degradation threshold is similar, but only in the case of this vehicle - in some vehicles the values are quite different.

Here is an example of SMT:

MASTER THREAD: 2021 Model 3 - Charge data, battery discussion etc

Yes I know. Approx 192.000 km I think and 8 years. Just wondering as I am about to buy one, if this is a worry point if I plan to keep for 3 years. ........Maybe I should just lease :) Well, the batteries degrade mostly from time. Miles also wear but in general, less. Calendar aging lessens...

teslamotorsclub.com

But the official way is to calculate your charging constant from the Energy Screen (there are a couple easy ways) and multiply that by the EPA range of 272rmi.

These various methods all give you the degradation threshold. (My made up term.)

Fortunately it looks like someone did it already, so that means the degradation threshold is 222Wh/rmi*272rmi = 60.4kWh so 60.4kWh is what you should enter. Though in reality you probably started with a bit over 60.5kWh (see SMT capture above suggesting 61.3kWh for the RWD). Excess capacity above the threshold is dealt with by expanding the energy content of the rated miles.

These are small changes so I can’t guarantee the last sig fig for the threshold. Maybe it is 60.3kWh, maybe it is 60.5kWh.

If you get below the threshold, you’ll start to show range loss. There is rounding so you can go ~0.1kWh below it before the loss shows.

I am not 100% sure but I believe the Tessie method for capacity calculation cannot detect excess capacity above the degradation threshold and will converge on the degradation threshold. But again, not 100% sure. The root of this would be detection of the expanded rated miles - it depends on how the car reports the kWh added during a charge.

 

[gtg465x]

Approx methods:
1)The EPA test document gives this approx answer.

2) also can approximately get it from SMT, and those reads have showed 60.5kWh as I recall for the full pack when new value (and new vehicles typically exceed it, again, IIRC), and the degradation threshold is similar, but only in the case of this vehicle - in some vehicles the values are quite different.

Here is an example of SMT:

MASTER THREAD: 2021 Model 3 - Charge data, battery discussion etc

Yes I know. Approx 192.000 km I think and 8 years. Just wondering as I am about to buy one, if this is a worry point if I plan to keep for 3 years. ........Maybe I should just lease :) Well, the batteries degrade mostly from time. Miles also wear but in general, less. Calendar aging lessens...

teslamotorsclub.com

But the official way is to calculate your charging constant from the Energy Screen (there are a couple easy ways) and multiply that by the EPA range of 272rmi.

These various methods all give you the degradation threshold. (My made up term.)

Fortunately it looks like someone did it already, so that means the degradation threshold is 222Wh/rmi*272rmi = 60.4kWh so 60.4kWh is what you should enter. Though in reality you probably started with a bit over 60.5kWh (see SMT capture above suggesting 61.3kWh for the RWD). Excess capacity above the threshold is dealt with by expanding the energy content of the rated miles.

These are small changes so I can’t guarantee the last sig fig for the threshold. Maybe it is 60.3kWh, maybe it is 60.5kWh.

If you get below the threshold, you’ll start to show range loss. There is rounding so you can go ~0.1kWh below it before the loss shows.

I am not 100% sure but I believe the Tessie method for capacity calculation cannot detect excess capacity above the degradation threshold and will converge on the degradation threshold. But again, not 100% sure. The root of this would be detection of the expanded rated miles - it depends on how the car reports the kWh added during a charge.

Thanks, good info! I believe Tessie can detect excess capacity above the threshold, based on this graph from my car. You can see it gets a new reading each time I charge more than 5 kW, and many are above 272 miles, with the highest being 274.6 at 99 miles on the odometer.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Thanks, good info! I believe Tessie can detect excess capacity above the threshold, based on this graph from my car. You can see it gets a new reading each time I charge more than 5 kW, and many are above 272 miles, with the highest being 274.6 at 99 miles on the odometer.
View attachment 923663

Not necessarily. This sort of variation can be due to rounding error depending on the method. Given they are clustered around 272 and not more like 275 as it would be for much higher capacity I expect it is rounding. Of course your actual capacity could be right around 60.4kWh. But for a new car it is probably higher right now.

If you want to know, without SMT, you have to meter your energy usage carefully using the trip meter for a very long drive (in excess of 200km ideally), while also precisely tracking rated mile use. And it may not be precise enough (this judgement has to be made by the person making the measurements with an understanding of precision).

(Wh/km * distance)/ rated km used / 0.955

If this is a percent or two higher than 222Wh/mi then this suggests you have extra energy above the threshold.

 

[AAKEE]

Not necessarily. This sort of variation can be due to rounding error depending on the method.

I guess tessie get about the same (API) data as teslafi.
My teslafi range jumps around about 5-7km despite that the nominal full pack does’nt change at all.
Example from yesterday to today, the NFP is steady at 78.8kWh but the teslafi reported range went from 495 to 487km.
This is not a real variation, it think it comes from that the API sending rounded SOC to the whole number.
The reported range jumps around quite much despite my NFP being quite solid.

 

[dcgrant]

I think some of the confusion in this thread boils down differences between batteries in different regions. In America, we get this Model 3 Performance with 82 kWh nominal capacity, but other parts of the world get this Model 3 Performance with 78.1 kWh nominal capacity.

Like @AAKEE pointed out, Tessie shows original actual capacity (based on fleet average) in blue, and confusingly labels current actual capacity (which includes the buffer) as "Usable Capacity". Based on the blue number being 78.8, OP must have the non-American Performance model (edit: or Tessie thinks he does).

Another problem that may be confusing us all is that Teslas may show different initial range in different regions. In the US, a Performance model should show 315 miles when new, because that's the EPA rating, but on the UK site, Tesla advertises the Performance as having 340 WLTP miles, so maybe the cars there actually show 340 miles when new? If that's the case... maybe that's where the 307 miles Tessie is showing comes from. If the car is actually seeing like 71.x kW at 100%, it might be showing (71.x/78.8)*340 = 306-310 miles remaining.

Edit: I just saw OP's location is Ohio. Now I'm confused. Did Tesla start importing the batteries they normally put in the Euro Model 3? Or did Tessie bug out and assume his car was a Euro variant? Still confused where the 78.8 kWh comes from if it's not a Euro Model 3. If Tessie assumed the wrong variant of the car, then you should probably do what @AlanSubie4Life suggested and tap the initial value in the Tessie app and enter 80.6kWh, although the degradation graph the app is showing you is still going to be from the Euro fleet I guess. Might need to reach out to the Tessie devs.

So I recently bought a 2021 M3P and Tessie shows me at 78.8 KW. I am currently at 93.6 % battery health. I bought the car used with 7k miles. I’ve put about 7k on the car since I bought it beginning of October. My max range at 100% charge says 289 miles.

So I’m confused am I suppose to have a 82KW pack or a 78.8 kw pack.

 

[AAKEE]

So I recently bought a 2021 M3P and Tessie shows me at 78.8 KW. I am currently at 93.6 % battery health. I bought the car used with 7k miles. I’ve put about 7k on the car since I bought it beginning of October. My max range at 100% charge says 289 miles.

So I’m confused am I suppose to have a 82KW pack or a 78.8 kw pack.

The classic faults of Tessie. Does not know or see the capacity.
All M3P 21 had the Panna 82.1kWh.

So youre at 73.8 kWh right now, seen from the range.