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

Range Loss Over Time, What Can Be Expected, Efficiency, How to Maintain Battery Health

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Occasionally charging to 100% will not impede or degrade the battery. There are numerous threads on this type of question. Make sure to use the search function to check those out. No one can tell you with finality what the 100% would be for your Tesla, why don't you try it now by adjusting the charge level within the app, let it charge to 100% and then see what it says.
 
1. I usually configure my car to a max charge of 90% which yields 250 miles. Is that low for a 90%?

2. If i charge to the max 100% and immediately take off what would that charge be in miles on a 2020 Model 3. Does that degrade the battery performance in the long run?

Can i make it 225 miles?
I'll assume you have a 2020 LR Model 3 (not Performance), starting with rated range of 322 miles. If it's Performance, please disregard below, though if you have a Performance showing 278 miles vs. the original 299, it's arguably a better case (though your tires would hurt you), since you have more energy with 278 miles in a Performance 20" than you do in an LR with 278 miles.

1) Yeah, 250mi@90% suggests 278 rated miles which is fairly low relative to your starting capacity of 322 miles, so you have lost about 14% capacity.

2) You'll have about 278 rated miles, which is 67.2kWh. No, charging to 100% won't matter. As you can see from your results so far, rated range loss is fairly unrelated to how high you charge your battery - it's probably a factor, but a very minor one, based on available evidence. Time is really the biggest factor as far as I can tell (and random results/birth day of the vehicle).

3) From 100%, your battery has 67.2kWh available to use, but only 95.5% of that to 0%, or 64.2kWh. So to go 225 miles you'd need to do better than about 285Wh/mi (actually better than 282Wh/mi due to uncounted losses). That would get you there with 0% indicated, with 4.5% of your energy remaining (again, 0% indicated), or 3kWh (this is the buffer, which you should never count on using).

This should be just doable in a long range starting at 100% with 278 miles. The car will likely tell you to slow down to make it to your destination at some point (it tries to get you there with 5% or more remaining). If you tuck in behind someone (max following distance) for extended periods that would help. You should definitely be able to make it at 65mph, but you'll probably be able to make it at 75mph with some traffic, as long as there's no headwind or other bad conditions - or if it's an uphill leg.

You'd have to give details on the actual leg. If you lose 2000-3000 feet on the leg 225 miles would be absolutely no problem at all, because that would give you an extra 3-4.5kWh to work with (though the reverse would be very difficult).

Anyway, I'd explore other bailout options on that leg on ABRP (A Better Route Planner) or similar. You can't guarantee the conditions you'll encounter (if it's raining and windy you'll probably never make it). So you need to have options.

This is an example of a situation where you'd really like a car with the original capacity! You could make it there at 330Wh/mi, which means it would be no problem except in awful conditions (cold, windy, rainy, etc.). Unfortunately, this is not how EVs work - they always, without exception, lose capacity.
 
Last edited:
The trend of nominal capacity continue to go the same way: down.
68.2kWh now.

I'm still doing the method of letting the car sleep at various SOC between 30 and 90%.

Doesnt affect my daily driving obviously, but annoying nevertheless
I'm right there with you. 11 months, 12k miles and the capacity keeps going down much quicker than expected.
Screenshot_20210523-164948_Chrome.jpg
 
  • Informative
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life
Your advice please.
I have driven from Columbus Ohio to both Seattle WA and another trip to Memphis. Never has any leg of the planned trip been over 160 miles. But on a new plan including a leg of the trip being 225 miles i am nervous about driving to Houston in very hot weather temperatures, possibly up to 90 degrees F.

1. I usually configure my car to a max charge of 90% which yields 250 miles. Is that low for a 90%?

2. If i charge to the max 100% and immediately take off what would that charge be in miles on a 2020 Model 3. Does that degrade the battery performance in the long run?

Can i make it 225 miles?
Have you used ABRP to test some of your assumptions? I punched it in with 90F and 115% of speed limit and 15% SOC arrival, and the only caveat is the 2nd leg from Florence KY to Bowling Green. That 202mile leg requires you stay at 70mph max. Charge up to 96% at Florence, arrive at Bowling green at 15%.

If you charge up to 98% in Florence and drop your SOC arrival to 12%, it says you can drive 75mph max, which saves about 10mins of driving time, but you probably lose those 10mins by having to charge a little more.

If you supercharge a few times to 100% and leave immediately, that probably has minimal longterm effect.
 
I'm right there with you. 11 months, 12k miles and the capacity keeps going down much quicker than expected.
View attachment 665432
It looks like you perhaps did not start at 316 rated miles? Hard to know what happened in that first 1116 miles. I don't know what happened for you, but I definitely recommend to new owners to not sign for a vehicle that is not going to reach the nominal rating when new (check the energy screen prior to signing, to see the extrapolated pack capacity, insist that the car be delivered at over 80% SoC to make this calculation more accurate, and don't take no for an answer). There's no guarantee at all that starting at or above the rated range is going to result in slower capacity loss, but my feeling is that starting 1-2% short is likely putting you 2-3% behind everyone else, out of the gate. There are obviously caveats to the calculation, described elsewhere, but fundamentally it is sound.

The rated range is an estimate, but it's an estimate which is well grounded in the reality of your pack health. It's really the only indicator of your pack health, without using third-party tools.
 
That 202mile leg requires you stay at 70mph max. Charge up to 96% at Florence, arrive at Bowling green at 15%.

If you charge up to 98% in Florence and drop your SOC arrival to 12%, it says you can drive 75mph max, which saves about 10mins of driving time, but you probably lose those 10mins by having to charge a little more.

If you plug in 14% capacity loss (back calculating from ABRP they assume a pack of about 78.5kWh for a brand new pack, and the OP's pack appears to be 14% reduced in capacity, so 14% is reasonable), you get:

98% Florence -> Bowling Green 2%

2:50 to do 202 miles (70.5mph, says max 75mph) (Works out to 306Wh/mi or so, 64.3kWh*0.96/202mi)

This is with 115% speed limit to force the limiting.

(With no capacity loss it does 91% to 3%, at an average speed of 74mph, somewhat consistent with your ABRP results. (Works out to 328Wh/mi.)


I think these numbers are a little pessimistic from ABRP for an LR with aeros, but anyway you get the idea.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KenC
For the first time I charged my car to 100% but it only registered 275 mile, some 35 miles short of the 310miles it's supposed to register give or the a mile or two. Its a 2019 M3 5000 miles only ever used a supercharger 3 times in its life and only charge to around 75% at home on a 15 amp circuit. Can anyone till me why or what is the problem or is it rectifiable or is it something Tesla can and needs to solve?
 
For the first time I charged my car to 100% but it only registered 275 mile, some 35 miles short of the 310miles it's supposed to register give or the a mile or two. Its a 2019 M3 5000 miles only ever used a supercharger 3 times in its life and only charge to around 75% at home on a 15 amp circuit. Can anyone till me why or what is the problem or is it rectifiable or is it something Tesla can and needs to solve?

If you "only charge to around 75% at home" (likely driven by something you read on the internet), your BMS is likely not aware of the cars actual capacity because you are not using it. You can try taking the actions detailed in the first post in this thread:

 
Have you used ABRP to test some of your assumptions? I punched it in with 90F and 115% of speed limit and 15% SOC arrival, and the only caveat is the 2nd leg from Florence KY to Bowling Green. That 202mile leg requires you stay at 70mph max. Charge up to 96% at Florence, arrive at Bowling green at 15%.

If you charge up to 98% in Florence and drop your SOC arrival to 12%, it says you can drive 75mph max, which saves about 10mins of driving time, but you probably lose those 10mins by having to charge a little more.

If you supercharge a few times to 100% and leave immediately, that probably has minimal longterm effect.
Many thanks.
 
Sorry for another "Is there something wrong with my battery" post, but wanted to see if I should or shouldn't be concerned.

See pic below - 2020 M3 SR Plus with $16k miles, purchased in November 2020. Charged to 90% but only when it drops to around 20% or if I need the miles for the next day, use it in Chill mode, but battery percentage seems to go much quicker than anticipated. Here are the details:

- Charged to 90%
- Drive 105.5 miles, used 22 kwh
- 207 wh/mile
- Now at 23%
- Projected range = 192 for full battery?

Should I be worried and contact TSC?
 

Attachments

  • PXL_20210525_035233854.jpg
    PXL_20210525_035233854.jpg
    557.3 KB · Views: 42
Sorry for another "Is there something wrong with my battery" post, but wanted to see if I should or shouldn't be concerned.

See pic below - 2020 M3 SR Plus with $16k miles, purchased in November 2020. Charged to 90% but only when it drops to around 20% or if I need the miles for the next day, use it in Chill mode, but battery percentage seems to go much quicker than anticipated. Here are the details:

- Charged to 90%
- Drive 105.5 miles, used 22 kwh
- 207 wh/mile
- Now at 23%
- Projected range = 192 for full battery?

Should I be worried and contact TSC?
The meter does not count use while in park. You did not provide sufficient info to evaluate your battery capacity, but assuming it is at about 50kWh (started at 52.5kWh) , 95.5% of this is available above 0%, or 48kWh.

21.8kWh is about 22kWh which is 46% of this, so for the ~67% capacity you used since the last charge, 21% (10kWh) was used in while park (Sentry mode and other features or whatever - very normal ).

So your projected range neglecting that is about 230 miles at 207Wh/mi.

But as I said you haven’t provided the info needed for your battery capacity - so this is just approximate - but that is easily determined from the sticky:
Calculating Your Battery's Estimated Capacity Using the Car's Energy Screen

Your battery is probably fine though - extremely easy to determine in any case. No guessing needed.
 
Last edited:
Hi, sorry if this has been posted before. I have a one year old M3 dual motor, haven’t driven around much (about 3000miles). Battery also well maintained per the manual and never depleted.

but now I’m charging only up to 285miles max (rated). This is over 10% degradation.

is this normal?
 
The meter does not count use while in park. You did not provide sufficient info to evaluate your battery capacity, but assuming it is at about 50kWh (started at 52.5kWh) , 95.5% of this is available above 0%, or 48kWh.

21.8kWh is about 22kWh which is 46% of this, so for the ~67% capacity you used since the last charge, 21% (10kWh) was used in while park (Sentry mode and other features or whatever - very normal ).

So your projected range neglecting that is about 230 miles at 207Wh/mi.

But as I said you haven’t provided the info needed for your battery capacity - so this is just approximate - but that is easily determined from the sticky:
Calculating Your Battery's Estimated Capacity Using the Car's Energy Screen

Your battery is probably fine though - extremely easy to determine in any case. No guessing needed.
Thanks Alan!