-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Range Loss Over Time, What Can Be Expected, Efficiency, How to Maintain Battery Health
- Thread starter KK_RedM3
- Start date
That's pretty solid evidence that 90 percent is bad for the battery. So why is Tesla recommending this? Gonna be a lot of disappointment particularly during the pandemic where cars like mine are sitting around all day.
So is 80%, or 70%. Its "best" for the battery to sit at 50%.... but of course that means you cant drive your car.
I really dont understand the juxtaposition of "90% charge brings a smile to my face" and "these missing miles do not impact my usage of the car at all... I even put parts on the car that lower actual range" with 'Im upset about 20 miles missing from the max range of my car".
Everyone is free to go down this rabbit hole (thats what this thread is about), but I certainly dont get getting all "spun up" about it. If you plan on driving this car "until the wheels fall off", even, and end up missing 20 miles range in relation to someone who "did everything right", how is that going to impact you in year 6-7?
Is it going to prevent you from being able to take a trip? (probably not). Add 2 extra supercharging stops to your trip? (probably not). Add 1 extra supercharging stop to a long trip? (maybe).
So, in effect, you are proposing not doing something for 6 years "that brings a smile to your face" in exchange for 1 additional supercharging stop on a trip (maybe), 5-6 years down the line, if you still have the car.
I get this concern if you are a traveling salesperson, or use the majority of your cars range every day. I dont get it when someone already put stuff on their car like wider tires etc that is completely known to reduce actual range, then worried about "less max range".
Last edited:
@jjrandorin of course you are right. Personally I hope to keep this car about 5 years...so it doesn't matter about battery degradation - but I would know that I didn't take care of it in an optimal fashio(and thus I would feel bad. Though I did charge to 100% yesterday for no apparent reason except to see what nfp really was)
Humans aren't good at risk determination (sharks versus heart disease etc) and subsequently make seemingly irrational decisions. I accept that.
Humans aren't good at risk determination (sharks versus heart disease etc) and subsequently make seemingly irrational decisions. I accept that.
Re reading my post, it sounds a tad more aggressive than I ment it to be. I was just trying to provide a viewpoint on what getting upset about this actually is, especially if one is a person who likes charging to a higher percentage to "use the performance of their car that they paid for", and also put things on the car that lower the actual range.
I understand this complaint more from someone who bought a SR or SR+ with the idea that "the range should be just about right" and didnt account for any of this stuff. I understand it more from someone who buys a LR version of the car, and lives somewhere with long distances between superchargers that makes them have to drive slower (someone like @Candleflame for example).
I dont understand it from someone who has a performance model 3 with 20 inch tires, either standard or put on there aftermarket. The first order of business would be to put on smaller tires, as that would increase range. If one isnt doing that, then they dont really care how far the car can actually go (and thats totally fine), but then to get upset about the number on the screen, or complain that they cant use the car how they were using it last week, when they are not driving that range out daily, doesnt make a lot of sense to me.
i was just trying to provide a viewpoint that might help someone see what they are getting upset about. If they understand all that, but still want to be upset about it, at least they have the information on how the situation is actually impacting them (it isnt).
They probably will give you a pack that will be able to be at least at 70% the day the warranty expires. Thats what warranty is about, youre warranted at least 70% at the limit.
There is battery packs that is changed every now and then. These is not trashed but the problem is fixed and then you get a battery that holds the same capacity as your did before the problem. In most cases capacity is not the problem but maybe a contactor or another compoment need to be fixed.
If you have a battery that go below 70% before the warranty expires, you get one that is on track to be good enough the day the warranty expires.
This is not strange or bad service, it is actually quite logic.
Tesla is setting the ”rules” to give a as carefree life as possible. If you not have any interrest in cars(i.e being here on TMC) you probably would not like to have 20 different rules for which SOC at which time etc.
The simple basic rules Tesla set for owners will keep the battery within the degradation threshold of 70% capacity when the warranty expires.
Tesla newer said that you will have 90% capacity after 8 years and XYZ miles.
I missed this question, but they likely wont (be giving you or anyone else a "new" pack if they hit 70%"). The warranty specifically states that tesla has the option for new or remanufactured, and based on people with model S experiences, what you should expect is a re manufactured pack that at a minimum meets the specification of "70% capacity".
Said another way, if your pack falls below 70% during the warranty period, expect to receive a re manufactured pack that has "70% or more", not a new one, as they likely would never choose to give a new one unless they had no other option.
Vehicle Warranty | Tesla Support
Find and view warranties for Tesla vehicles including New Vehicle Limited Warranty, Used Vehicle Limited Warranty and more.
(battery portion)
(relevant information from "new vehicle limited warranty" link above, stating that tesla, at its sole discretion will provide a new, reconditioned or remanufactured battery, and that the replacement may not restore the battery to "like new" condition.
No - 90% is too high to be "great" for longevity - at least for the Model 3/Y. Maybe for the 85 kWh Model S/X it was great. But not for the 90 kWh Model S/X it especially was not. The 100 kWh S/X was in between the 85/90 kWh cars. Model 3/Y seems to be similar to the 100 kWh chemistry - maybe worse.
"Great" for longevity is probably 70%. Even better is < 55%. The key to letting the BMS figure out capacity seems to be to let it get down to 25-30% before charging with occasional charges to 90%+. Very shallow cycles cause more drift.
All depends on your normal driving habits. My car charges to 55% now most of the time. Used to do 50%, but it seemed that the BMS drifted more at 50% vs 55% and according to the charts AKEEE has posted, 55% should be basically the same as 50%. Longer drive? Charge it up appropriately over night. Most of the time I charge back up when SOC is around 25-35% mark, depending on how much driving I expect to do the next day. I very rarely drive more than 30 miles a day, so ~30% leaves plenty of buffer. YMMV.
Before COVID when I drove more, I typically charged to 70%, but still recharged around 30% every 3 days or so - mainly because I'm too lazy to plug in every day, but that also lowers the average SOC. Sudden road trip? Lots of Superchargers around, so no real issue there, either. Though that's never been required. My 2018 Model 3 LR RWD currently estimates around 300 mi range, so is well within typical after this time.
To me the two having nothing to do with the other. I'm not complaining about a loss of range because I need it. I'm complaining that even though I've treated the car properly, I appear to have permanently lost part of my car forever. Sure I can always ditch the wheels and spacers, but I can never get back the 22 miles of lost range. I didn't choose to lose the 22 miles. I paid for it. I expected 4 or 5 percent in year 1. I'm at 8 percent at 10 months. It's gone forever. Big deal? Probably not unless it stays at this same rate. I still think I can be disappointed.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Do get a picture posted if you can. Great to get data on 2021 Performance. We have very little information. And to confirm, you have documented evidence that you initially saw 315 rated miles displayed? Keep in mind the method is most accurate at high SOC %.
It would be great if Tesla would provide more detailed information on capacity loss rates vs. typical SOC, of course. They know this info. But they don't want people to focus on it for obvious reasons.
That being said, I'm fairly sure there have been reports here from people who have generally kept SOC below 70% and still have substantial capacity loss. So it's not a guarantee; there's some level of randomness to it. It'll be interesting to see how @AAKEE's battery fares over time.
My recommendation would be to charge your battery in a way that works for you. As @AAKEE suggested, if you're planning to thrash your car, charge it up to 90% right before you leave. If you're just poking around town most of the time, just leave it at 60-70% if that works best. Clearly this requires a little more thinking - but you're not going to do any significant damage to the battery or affect its capacity any more than normal calendar aging and cycling would by briefly charging it up to 90% or more and then going out and driving it right away.
It's entirely possible that you could baby the battery and still see capacity loss, and that's even worse than what has happened to you.
I have 10% capacity loss on my Performance after three years and it does not affect my ownership experience at all, with multiple thousand-mile trips. I do live on the West Coast and that makes any capacity loss a non-issue since there are now Superchargers everywhere. The lack of impact on my ownership experience would not apply to everyone.
Remember also that capacity loss will likely slow down substantially. You may not see very much more (perhaps 5% more over the next 2-3 years).
Last edited:
I believe it was 310 when new but I don't remember actually confirming. I was just so excited for the car and didn't even think to check. I will get a picture posted next time i charge over 70. Really appreciate the responses.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Before the first software update it would have displayed 310 (because it sounds like you were an early buyer in late 2020). But then they adjusted the constant to match the EPA results rather than using the placeholder from prior years, and these vehicles started displaying 315 rated miles with no change to capacity if they had an NFP greater than about 80.6 or 80.7kWh.
One possibility is that your pack started slightly on the low side and never showed 315 (which requires about 80.7kWh). Not really better in the end, but it's possible you just have less capacity loss than you think. This matters because while it doesn't help your current lack of energy, prior capacity loss does likely provide some insight into future capacity loss (helps scale the curve, perhaps). If you started at 78kWh (305 miles), maybe you've only lost 4%, rather than 7%. And that could mean that maybe after 3-4 years you'll have 8% loss rather than 14% loss. (This is all very speculative of course.)
Last edited:
just adding a metric - my car is a 2018, back from the days when you could only choose paint color, wheels and EAP/FSD.
It was 309 when delivered and was 311 a month later. Never saw 315 or 325.
As a matter of interest, what was the nominal capacity for a 2018 pack?
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Yeah it probably lost capacity by the time the capacity unlock came along. So never showed 325.
315 is specific to 2021 Performance.
2018 pack was 77.8kWh or so.
I can ad that I am very sure my M3P show 507-508km( 325mi) at 80.4kWh or more and at 80.3kWh it starts reducing the range.
My M3P was hovering around that value just before the lastest firmware, which seem to have biten about half a kWh off( steady at 79.9 now.)
( I think 80.7 was true before the software that changed from 310 to 315mi, at least it did look so for me with SMT.)
I suspect this may be part of it. I took delivery in early January but the car was built in late October. Had 39 miles on it. Saved 800 whopping dollars. Perhaps it came a little short to start as it had 2 to 3 months before delivery. That would make me feel a bit better I suppose. I'm not sure I ever saw 300, 305 or 310 but I would have never charged past 90.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Yeah, that seems about right. The 80.7kWh may never have been exactly correct, it was just an estimate.
I dug up a post with 80.45kWh for a pack showing 507km. The 2021 Performance will show as high as 509km (508.5km) though.
MASTER THREAD: 2021 Model 3 - Charge data, battery discussion etc
Yes, all that is clear for me since long. The thing, that we have known but dunno why is that the actual WLTP in the papers is 640km( yes, we understand that part) but Tesla only advertises WLTP 614km on these cars on their homepage. As the buffer is about 4.5%, it quite close to the delta. If...
teslamotorsclub.com
So that suggests the degradation threshold might be something like 508.5/507.4*80.45kWh = 80.6kWh.
So definitely no higher than about 80.6kWh. But you'd see capacity loss below around 80.4kWh since each km is about 158.5Wh. So at 80.6kWh you see 508/509km, and at 80.3-80.4kWh you'd see 507km.
I guess if that's right you'd be seeing around 504km displayed right now.
But just because of how I define the degradation threshold, you actually see the capacity loss a little lower than that value. If the display showed the extra decimal place you'd see the loss right at the threshold. But no one cares about small fractions of 1kWh of course.
Candleflame
Active Member
I am one of these 60% people. I charge to 90% or 100% for roadtrips and do deep discharges but the cars sits at 50-60% most of the time at home.
I have 445km rated range so like 15% degradation.
Similar threads
