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.
I purchased SR last year and never saw the advertised 220 miles in the screen. Today, I fully charged the car to 100% and got to 202 miles.
I have talked to multiple people at Tesla since the beginning and they assured me that my battery is healthy and this degradation is expected. Is this number accurate? Or should I have a longer range by now? Currently at 20k miles.
 
All I'm saying is my car had 310 miles of estimated range at 100% SOC when new, and it now has 310 miles of range at 100% SOC after 54K miles and 2years.

I finished my research today. @ran349 you might be interested as well.

LR Battery - Usable Capacity Rating and Rated Wh/mile

The rated line did not change position (for those for whom it did, it was temporarily reduced, and resulted in a concurrent increase in miles which would have meant no actual energy increase for that brief period). But ultimately, for everyone AFAIK, because rated miles increased with no change in the constant, more available energy was unlocked.

Roughly:
When Model 3 LR RWD was first released it had 72.5kWh (310rmi*234Wh/rmi) available, though the battery itself had at least 76kWh (often as much as 78kWh) capacity when new.

In March 2019, Tesla increased the amount of energy available to match the LR AWD, which was 76kWh (310rmi*245Wh/rmi, and 325rmi*234Wh/rmi).

The constant has remained the same before and after this change. (Perhaps not during the change.)

So, it is true that you have the same amount of usable energy available now as you did when you started. And it's even possible that your efficiency is better than when you started.

But the key point, which I think is true (not 100% certain): it's worth noting that if your battery had not lost capacity, you would be able to see 325 rated miles on your vehicle (which would be at least 76kWh). As it is, you're at 311 rated miles, which is 72.7kWh, which is perhaps 200Wh more than what you bought the car with (in terms of actual energy made available by Tesla).

Summary: You have the same amount of energy available as when you bought the car, and you probably have a more efficient car as well, but your battery has lost capacity - you just have a special case where you didn't notice it because the amount of degradation has not exceeded what Tesla put aside as unavailable for use, initially. For people who have bought after March 2019, this special case does not apply. They'll see the capacity loss much sooner.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: VT_EE
I purchased SR last year and never saw the advertised 220 miles in the screen. Today, I fully charged the car to 100% and got to 202 miles.
I have talked to multiple people at Tesla since the beginning and they assured me that my battery is healthy and this degradation is expected. Is this number accurate? Or should I have a longer range by now? Currently at 20k miles.

Seems reasonable. 8% loss of capacity is pretty normal at 20k miles with that size battery I would think. Tesla's right.
 
I finished my research today. @ran349 you might be interested as well.

LR Battery - Usable Capacity Rating and Rated Wh/mile

The rated line did not change position (for those for whom it did, it was temporarily reduced, and resulted in a concurrent increase in miles which would have meant no actual energy increase for that brief period). But ultimately, for everyone AFAIK, because rated miles increased with no change in the constant, more available energy was unlocked.

Roughly:
When Model 3 LR RWD was first released it had 72.5kWh (310rmi*234Wh/rmi) available, though the battery itself had at least 76kWh (often as much as 78kWh) capacity when new.

In March 2019, Tesla increased the amount of energy available to match the LR AWD, which was 76kWh (310rmi*245Wh/rmi, and 325rmi*234Wh/rmi).

The constant has remained the same before and after this change. (Perhaps not during the change.)

So, it is true that you have the same amount of usable energy available now as you did when you started. And it's even possible that your efficiency is better than when you started.

But the key point, which I think is true (not 100% certain): it's worth noting that if your battery had not lost capacity, you would be able to see 325 rated miles on your vehicle (which would be at least 76kWh). As it is, you're at 311 rated miles, which is 72.7kWh, which is perhaps 200Wh more than what you bought the car with (in terms of actual energy made available by Tesla).

Summary: You have the same amount of energy available as when you bought the car, and you probably have a more efficient car as well, but your battery has lost capacity - you just have a special case where you didn't notice it because the amount of degradation has not exceeded what Tesla put aside as unavailable for use, initially. For people who have bought after March 2019, this special case does not apply. They'll see the capacity loss much sooner.

Very interesting, thanks for sharing the results of your research @AlanSubie4Life!

Can you clarify what you mean by "change"? Was it a software update? And did it reduce the amount of buffer?
 
Can you clarify what you mean by "change"? Was it a software update? And did it reduce the amount of buffer?

The general change I am referring to is the range increase from Tesla announced in February 2019 that the LR RWD would get better efficiency and more range.

It was a software update (referenced in the thread referenced above).

I don’t know how the buffer was treated during all of this or how Tesla limited the energy available to the LR RWD initially. Would need SMT data from before the update for that.
 
I purchased SR last year and never saw the advertised 220 miles in the screen. Today, I fully charged the car to 100% and got to 202 miles.
I have talked to multiple people at Tesla since the beginning and they assured me that my battery is healthy and this degradation is expected. Is this number accurate? Or should I have a longer range by now? Currently at 20k miles.

8% degradation... just checked today and I'm also at 8% loss (LR AWD) and I got the car less than a year ago and only has 9000 miles and have only charged 5 times on SuC.

It's a Battery lottery. There are multiple reports of people that don't take any kind of extra care to the batteries and have 1 or 2% degradation. It's probably not about how you take care of the battery but how lucky you are when you get a car.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrgoogle
8% loss at that mileage/age seems high to me, I have 15,000 miles and full range estimate is currently at 301 (3%?) (P3d-), delivery august 2019. One thing I have noticed is I think teslafi does seem to mess up the math when the battery is cold and the available charge is a percent lower on teslafi than it is on the screen/tesla app. The BMS has been wildly fluctuating for me after the latest software update..... see this picture.. it may fall again to like 5% degradation
 

Attachments

  • 2-13-20-degradation curve.jpg
    2-13-20-degradation curve.jpg
    138.5 KB · Views: 104
Last edited:
8% degradation... just checked today and I'm also at 8% loss (LR AWD) and I got the car less than a year ago and only has 9000 miles and have only charged 5 times on SuC.

It's a Battery lottery. There are multiple reports of people that don't take any kind of extra care to the batteries and have 1 or 2% degradation. It's probably not about how you take care of the battery but how lucky you are when you get a car.
It’s not necessary real degradation either. It is highly dependent on how you charge too. It’s clear that short charging sessions in the middle percentages messes with the BMS’ ability to accurately determine real capacity. There are numerous posts showing changes in charging regiments increasing “capacity”.
 
It’s not necessary real degradation either. It is highly dependent on how you charge too. It’s clear that short charging sessions in the middle percentages messes with the BMS’ ability to accurately determine real capacity. There are numerous posts showing changes in charging regiments increasing “capacity”.
Seems reasonable. 8% loss of capacity is pretty normal at 20k miles with that size battery I would think. Tesla's right.

Thanks!, if I were to upgrade to SR+, would I get the original 240 range or the updated 250? Also, would my current battery condition affect that number as well? (I.e. reflect current degradation?)
 
Thanks!, if I were to upgrade to SR+, would I get the original 240 range or the updated 250? Also, would my current battery condition affect that number as well? (I.e. reflect current degradation?)

Assuming you have a 2019, it would go to “240” nominally.

Yes, your current battery condition would affect the number. For you it will probably show around 220 rated miles but not 100% sure how the math works out as some people have reported it being a bit inconsistent with expectations.
 
My take, after being rather concerned about the apparent "loss of range" on my car, is that the advice to change the battery display to %age instead of miles is probably the best.
The range number isn't based on anything real, just a calculation that doesn't into account the many factors that will really affect the range.
Basically its just as bad as the guess-o-meter in the Leaf
Takeaway - don't bother using it and use the energy graph on long drives if you're concerned but just enjoy the car at all other times.
I really get the impression that the rated range is easy to see rather than being accurate, so isn't a valid indicator of actual available capacity.
 
I really get the impression that the rated range is easy to see rather than being accurate, so isn't a valid indicator of actual available capacity.

There is plenty of evidence in this forum that it is an extremely accurate indicator of how much energy your car thinks is available (SMT data, etc.). As far as the accuracy of that estimate made by your car's BMS - I've personally never seen a significant deviation from the discharge constant except in very cold conditions (where pack temperature changes can result in energy "reappearing"). If your battery is imbalanced, that actually IS a limitation on your available energy, until the imbalance is resolved.

just a calculation that doesn't into account the many factors that will really affect the range.

This is true. The battery display is an indicator of energy remaining, not range.
 
Last edited:
There is plenty of evidence in this forum that it is an extremely accurate indicator of how much energy your car thinks is available (SMT data, etc.). As far as the accuracy of that "thought" that your car has - I've personally never seen a significant deviation from the discharge constant except in very cold conditions (where pack temperature changes can result in energy "reappearing"). If your battery is imbalanced, that actually IS a limitation on your available energy, until the imbalance is resolved.



This is true. The battery display is an indicator of energy remaining, not range.


They really should have a third option for battery level: actual energy remaining, in kWh, with at least one, preferably two, decimal places.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life
They really should have a third option for battery level: actual energy remaining, in kWh, with at least one, preferably two, decimal places.

I think Telsa realized that people would be happier telling themselves those miles were just an estimate, and didn't really mean anything. Calling a spade a spade might be a bit too direct. I think there is also the issue of variable initial capacity which they are somehow papering over...I have my theories on that, which have been anecdotally verified recently, but no way to verify them myself.
 
I think Telsa realized that people would be happier telling themselves those miles were just an estimate, and didn't really mean anything. Calling a spade a spade might be a bit too direct. I think there is also the issue of variable initial capacity which they are somehow papering over...I have my theories on that, which have been anecdotally verified recently, but no way to verify them myself.

I'm well aware of WHY they don't do that, but as one of the more numbers obsessed members of society, I want precision and accuracy! :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life
8% degradation... just checked today and I'm also at 8% loss (LR AWD) and I got the car less than a year ago and only has 9000 miles and have only charged 5 times on SuC.

It's a Battery lottery. There are multiple reports of people that don't take any kind of extra care to the batteries and have 1 or 2% degradation. It's probably not about how you take care of the battery but how lucky you are when you get a car.
I have had my 3 23 months and nearly 40,000 miles. When new we could charge to 310 miles. After the range update 324 then after a later update 312. My last range charge was 311. So I’d that a 5% loss from the 324 or a .3% gain from the initial 310? While we have not tried to abuse the battery we have range charged 6-10 times and have SuperCharged probably 50 times.