Real World Comparison--NMC vs LFP Trip Duration

[PianoAl]

I'm planning our fourth trip from the California coast to Denver, and I compared the estimated trip duration for our two cars (see signature).

As expected, Nick will get us there about two hours faster (about 7.5% faster) due to range and charge speed differences.

We'll probably take Tessie because she's quieter, smoother, more efficient, and has no roof rack. Two extra hours of charging is significant, but we are usually eating or having a snack, and spend even more time than needed at Superchargers.

 

[E90alex]

Interesting. So about ~10 min longer charge time at each stop but still the same number of stops for both.

Also a 2020 LR would have an NCA (Panasonic) pack not NMC (LG).

 

[gtg465x]

Not sure if this is true for the Long Range, but I've found that both the app and car usually overestimate how long my LFP RWD takes to charge, sometimes by a lot.

Just yesterday I was on a road trip and stopped to eat, so I raised the charge limit to 100% because my kids are slow eaters and I figured we'd be there for a while. I was at 18% and the car said 55 minutes to charge limit, but in reality it only took 43 minutes to charge from 18-100%.

Another example that I can remember from this trip... the Tesla app said when I arrived at the Louisville (Boerste Way) Supercharger with 16%, it would take 29 minutes of charging to reach the next planned Supercharger in Indianapolis (Southport Rd) with 11%. In reality, I reached the Louisville charger with 14% and charged to 70% in 18 minutes to reach the Indianapolis charger with 12%. I mean, 29 minutes predicted vs 18 minutes actual is a massive difference.

Do the predictions just suck or are they lying about how long the LFP batteries take to charge to push people towards the Long Range?

Another anecdote... practically every single time I stop at a Supercharger while road tripping my LFP RWD, I arrive, charge, and leave before any of the Long Range 3s, Long Range Ys, Ss, and Xs that were already charging when I got there leave. Maybe the average Tesla driver is just very unoptimized and charges to 90-100% every time, but I find it odd that I leave before everyone else so often. According to my stats, my average Supercharging session is 17.5 minutes, which would be like charging from 10-65%, which is pretty typical for me, unless my family is eating a meal.

Here are the charge times I'm typically seeing on my RWD:

10-50%: ~11 minutes
10-60%: ~15 minutes
10-70%: ~20 minutes
10-80%: ~26 minutes
10-90%: ~35 minutes
10-100%: ~50 minutes

 

[DuncanM]

I'm planning our fourth trip from the California coast to Denver, and I compared the estimated trip duration for our two cars (see signature).

As expected, Nick will get us there about two hours faster (about 7.5% faster) due to range and charge speed differences.

We'll probably take Tessie because she's quieter, smoother, more efficient, and has no roof rack. Two extra hours of charging is significant, but we are usually eating or having a snack, and spend even more time than needed at Superchargers.

View attachment 1060022

Bjorn Nyland in his 1000km (620mile) challenge tests shows about a 30-35min (corrected for temps) difference between the 82kw M3 LR and M3 60kw LFP RWD. The M3 RWD has a lower peak charge rate but the charge curve is flatter and better at high SOC, so I'd expect a real world difference of about an hour over a 1400 mile trip. I've been able to replicate Nyland's times in my M3 during trips from Abbotsford BC to Toronto or to our home in SE AZ, north of Douglas. However, we almost inevitably overcharge when road tripping, when on the road, so it takes discipline. I always carry my CCS1 adapter to maximize DCFC options.

 

[DuncanM]

Here's another set of useful range, at 80mph, and 15min charging tests; note how well the M3 LFP RWD does!

10% EV Challenge

The charging and range challenge to show the true road trip range of electric vehicles

www.youtube.com

A 2024 M3 LR (19in wheels) achieved 100 miles after a 15min charge (from 10% SOC) at 80mph vs 106 miles for the M3 LFP RWD (18in aero)!

 

[PianoAl]

Do the predictions just suck or are they lying about how long the LFP batteries take to charge to push people towards the Long Range?

Perhaps they just overestimate to keep us happy. I know that in almost every case our cars are finished charging 30 to 60 minutes early (at home).

Maybe the average Tesla driver is just very unoptimized and charges to 90-100% every time,

That's probably true. I'll bet many don't know that charging is much faster at lower SOCs, and it's more efficient to make more short stops. People on this forum are different from the general population.

 

[gtg465x]

Perhaps they just overestimate to keep us happy. I know that in almost every case our cars are finished charging 30 to 60 minutes early (at home).

Yeah, perhaps. I wish they would just make it accurate. Sometimes friends who don't have an EV ask what a typical trip / route plan looks like, and if I show them a route plan in the Tesla app, I have to tell them the charge times are overestimations and it actually charges quicker than that, but I'm sure they're thinking "yeah, sure, buddy." ABRP seems to give more accurate charge times, though.

 

[gtg465x]

Just out of curiosity, I put the same stops in ABRP since it has much more accurate charge times for the RWD, and it shaved off 47 minutes total (90 minutes of actual charge time... more on 47 vs 90 later) just down to Laramie.

For ABRP config, I set starting time and SOC to match at Redding, speed to 100% of speed limit, charger arrival to 16% because it seems like the Tesla app chooses that a lot, and Wh/mi @ 65 mph to 215 (from default of 230) because that is most accurate for my RWD.

The Tesla app actually shows 90 extra minutes of charging compared to ABRP. The reason the end result is only 47 minutes difference is because ABRP adds 5 minutes per stop to account for getting parked, getting unbuckled and buckled, plugging in and unplugging, etc, and 90 min - 5 min * 10 stops = 40 min, which leaves 7 minutes unaccounted for, but it's probably just a slightly different turn or speed in a couple spots. Tesla's charge times are all 6+ minutes longer than ABRPs. It makes me think the reason the charge times are so long in Tesla's app is that they are including not just charge time, but possibly an additional 6 minute buffer, and maybe even the time it takes to get off the highway and to the actual charger, but that wouldn't make sense for the Long Range, because there's no way some of those Long Range charge times include a 5+ minute buffer. Or maybe it makes perfect sense... could Tesla be calculating differently to make the Long Range look like a bigger difference from the RWD? They have been known to measure 0-60 times differently as well to make the Performance look like a bigger difference from the Long Range than it actually is, so I wouldn't put it past them to measure charge times differently to make the RWD look worse than it is.

Or perhaps it was just laziness on the part of the Tesla app devs. Maybe the app doesn't use the actual LFP charging curve... maybe it uses the charging curve of the older non-LFP RWD, which wasn't as good.

 

[bruce4000]

Not sure if this is true for the Long Range, but I've found that both the app and car usually overestimate how long my LFP RWD takes to charge, sometimes by a lot.

Just yesterday I was on a road trip and stopped to eat, so I raised the charge limit to 100% because my kids are slow eaters and I figured we'd be there for a while. I was at 18% and the car said 55 minutes to charge limit, but in reality it only took 43 minutes to charge from 18-100%.

Another example that I can remember from this trip... the Tesla app said when I arrived at the Louisville (Boerste Way) Supercharger with 16%, it would take 29 minutes of charging to reach the next planned Supercharger in Indianapolis (Southport Rd) with 11%. In reality, I reached the Louisville charger with 14% and charged to 70% in 18 minutes to reach the Indianapolis charger with 12%. I mean, 29 minutes predicted vs 18 minutes actual is a massive difference.

Do the predictions just suck or are they lying about how long the LFP batteries take to charge to push people towards the Long Range?

Another anecdote... practically every single time I stop at a Supercharger while road tripping my LFP RWD, I arrive, charge, and leave before any of the Long Range 3s, Long Range Ys, Ss, and Xs that were already charging when I got there leave. Maybe the average Tesla driver is just very unoptimized and charges to 90-100% every time, but I find it odd that I leave before everyone else so often. According to my stats, my average Supercharging session is 17.5 minutes, which would be like charging from 10-65%, which is pretty typical for me, unless my family is eating a meal.

Here are the charge times I'm typically seeing on my RWD:

10-50%: ~11 minutes
10-60%: ~15 minutes
10-70%: ~20 minutes
10-80%: ~26 minutes
10-90%: ~35 minutes
10-100%: ~50 minutes

The less accurate charge times may be do to LFP batteries having a more non- linear voltage curve so I’d harder for the BMS to predict. This is why Tesla says to charge up to 100% once a week or so.

 

[DuncanM]

The less accurate charge times may be do to LFP batteries having a more non- linear voltage curve so I’d harder for the BMS to predict. This is why Tesla says to charge up to 100% once a week or so.

I've found that when preheated my charge curve is very predictable. I suspect that Tesla doesn't use preconditioning, when trip predicting charge times and the NCA/NMC batteries don't suffer as much as LFP when not preconditioned.

 

[MidBaz]

I'm planning our fourth trip from the California coast to Denver, and I compared the estimated trip duration for our two cars (see signature).

As expected, Nick will get us there about two hours faster (about 7.5% faster) due to range and charge speed differences.

We'll probably take Tessie because she's quieter, smoother, more efficient, and has no roof rack. Two extra hours of charging is significant, but we are usually eating or having a snack, and spend even more time than needed at Superchargers.

View attachment 1060022

If the M3LR (sorry, I can't start referring to cars by pet names ) has a roof rack. And if you plan to load up that roof rack. Then will that car still be the more 'efficient' of the two?

 

[PianoAl]

If the M3LR (sorry, I can't start referring to cars by pet names ) has a roof rack. And if you plan to load up that roof rack. Then will that car still be the more 'efficient' of the two?

Pet names? Aren't we required to give our cars pet names? What is yours called?

Nick has the roof rack and would be less efficient even without it*. Tessie will go on the trip to Denver.

*Based on articles online. I can't compare them from my driving because Nick rarely drives without the surfboard on the rack, and 95% of his driving is at 55 MPH. Tessie does in-town driving, although the nearest town is 25 miles away on a 65 MPH freeway.

Nick:

Tessie:

 

[Petermcg]

Pet names? Aren't we required to give our cars pet names? What is yours called?

No, we aren’t required to name our cars, This is what Tesla does if you leave the name blank.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Here's another set of useful range, at 80mph, and 15min charging tests; note how well the M3 LFP RWD does!

10% EV Challenge

The charging and range challenge to show the true road trip range of electric vehicles

www.youtube.com

A 2024 M3 LR (19in wheels) achieved 100 miles after a 15min charge (from 10% SOC) at 80mph vs 106 miles for the M3 LFP RWD (18in aero)!

Note this is because that 2024 M3 LR has a garbage (for charging speed specifically) LG pack. The new AWD-E with Panasonic pack will do quite a bit better if they retest it and if they didn’t bork the charging curve on the AWD-E vs. the P (P has been demonstrated to charge fast, and both use the Panasonic pack). The AWD-I remains with the crappy charging LG pack.

Basically the LG pack has no 250kW plateau at all and starts tapering somewhere around 10%, while Panasonic will taper just below 30%.

For this test especially this taper will have an enormous impact - and Kyle from Out of Spec has directly addressed this recently on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1805607008453935242

The only thing worse is the true garbage pack king - the Tesla 4680, at least with currnetly proven capabilities (there are promises to make it mediocre to below average with a software update “soon”).