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

Tesla Official Statement on Range

Status
Not open for further replies.

PhilRogers

Member
Apr 25, 2020
80
48
Chicago
Do we have a firm idea on when the battery balances? Some say 90%. Some say 85%. Fewer say 80%. Some say 4.00V/cell. But the thing is, my car (via SMT) shows 4.00V/cell far before 85%. I can't recall exactly, but I'm betting it's somewhere between 70%-80%. Which would imply we don't need to be charging as high as 90% just to balance the packs.

I recently had a sudden drop that's probably just the BMS catching up to real degradation finally. Funny thing is I saw this with the percent display instead of range - my percentage jumped up 2% overnight, and confirmed this was a change in capacity via SMT rather than some temperature variable or something. Had I been displaying range, I would know this without SMT which is... kinda nice?



Hey, I know it's been a bit since you posted this. Wanted to say sorry for all the misleading or lacking statements on range you encountered prior to getting your car. Tesla is responsible for this, and as a very hyped community we often are too optimistic.

Teslas lose range in the same conditions gas vehicles do, but you've probably never noticed it that much. Where it tends to vary a lot (e.g. highway travel), you're just stopping at gas stations as necessary in ICE because they're plentiful. With the reduced range capability of an EV, you now have to be very aware. Anyone who says otherwise likely has a good EV charging network nearby (I don't and didn't even after travelling 2500km into the US).
  • Rain hurts range a lot, but what hurts way more is being in the rain grooves. Try to rid atop the higher spots so that you're not pushing so much water out of the way.
  • Supercharging is slower than you'd expect because you're probably charging all the way. The last 30% is especially slow. Working with the lower part of the battery (0-70%) will give you faster charging, but is of course riskier in terms of being stranded. You can pick fast charging or a comfortable range buffer, not both. Using abetterrouteplanner.com will give you a more time-optimised route in the future (stops at more chargers, but uses the lower portion of the battery for faster charging).
  • Cold is super detrimental. You often can't just not heat the car in those conditions (turns out you need to be able to see the road and feel your hands to drive), but the heater takes a lot of power. Expect 30-40% reduced range normally in cold, more if it's really cold or snow/rain exists. A Model Y will do better since it uses a heat pump, not a resistive heater.
  • The range display is "rated range", so in cold you will indeed burn through rated miles faster than actual miles travelled. Rated miles are actually a sort of energy unit (because it's rated for so many Wh/mi). If you use energy faster than rated, it will show. So yes, perfectly normal.
  • Wheels do impact range, but you do you. I wanted them as well but the Aeros grew on me, plus we highway travel a lot.
  • Lights & wipers don't really consume significant amounts of energy. I know Tesla recommends turning off lights, but they're really not significant at all and you need the lights. Turning off the AP computer would technically net similar results, but they don't let us do that!

I think you're right to think about range all the time, honestly. A 56mi round trip every day in the worst conditions consumes something like 110 rated miles. You only have 250 to work with, but you're probably only using 80% of your battery on a daily basis at most (keeping between 10%-90%), which is only 200 miles of rated range to work with.

Now you know. This is the EV lifestyle. This isn't a situation unique to Tesla (though those do exist). Well... the heating being so expensive is a bit more of a Tesla problem than some other popular EVs, but it's not unique to Tesla.
Voltage sag would mean reading a lower voltage at higher SoC (remaining capacity) though - if anything, 85% @ 4.00V seems to indicate that's the reference with sag based on my car? Which is why I'm not sure these statements are really accurate?

Right now, ~45 minutes after a drive, it's showing a minimum of 4.10V at 86.6% SoC at a fairly reasonable 26C. Even if I inflate the percentage by not accounting for the bottom end buffer, that's about 87.2%. I hate to say "the service manual is wrong", especially given that I'm using third-party tools to get this information and can't hold Tesla to it at all , but it certainly seems to have contradictory numbers. Anyhow, it seems that the 4.0V is the important part since the 85% SoC is in brackets, and perhaps was just an honest mistake or rough head calculation. If so, at least based on my car, then it seems we don't need to charge beyond 85% (probably lower, will need to report back) in order for it to start balancing. I definitely saw greater imbalance numbers when I was charging to 60-70% but never when I charged to 80%, so there might be something here.

What about everyone else? If you often charge to 80% for example, what voltages are you getting at 80%?



Hey, no problemo. I sympathize a lot with the "not an electrical engineer or a fanboy" folks - if EVs are going to become common, then it's not just EE's and fanboys going to be driving them, and it's gotta work for them too!

RIGHT! Thank you so much!!!
 

Zoomit

Active Member
Sep 1, 2015
2,180
4,083
SoCal
Voltage sag would mean reading a lower voltage at higher SoC (remaining capacity) though - if anything, 85% @ 4.00V seems to indicate that's the reference with sag based on my car? Which is why I'm not sure these statements are really accurate?

Right now, ~45 minutes after a drive, it's showing a minimum of 4.10V at 86.6% SoC at a fairly reasonable 26C. Even if I inflate the percentage by not accounting for the bottom end buffer, that's about 87.2%. I hate to say "the service manual is wrong", especially given that I'm using third-party tools to get this information and can't hold Tesla to it at all , but it certainly seems to have contradictory numbers. Anyhow, it seems that the 4.0V is the important part since the 85% SoC is in brackets, and perhaps was just an honest mistake or rough head calculation. If so, at least based on my car, then it seems we don't need to charge beyond 85% (probably lower, will need to report back) in order for it to start balancing. I definitely saw greater imbalance numbers when I was charging to 60-70% but never when I charged to 80%, so there might be something here.

What about everyone else? If you often charge to 80% for example, what voltages are you getting at 80%?
85% at 4.0V would definitely be without sag or load due to it needing to be in a stand-by state. But point made, I could be mixing up which case gets the sag.

The SOC value mentioned could be a different reference than the "indicated SOC". As you say, it could be usable SOC, or even actual SOC. You should have something like 4.5% bottom end buffer, not 0.6%. I'm not a SMT user, so I don't know what SOC numbers you are referencing.

Please do report back if you see indications of balancing at 80 or 85%. The number of people monitoring their brick voltages is pretty small. I wouldn't expect many other responses.

What voltages are you seeing at 100% and near 0%? Here's a 0.25C discharge curve from Jack Rickard that may be close enough to the resting voltages to back out a SOC at 4.0V if we know the top and bottom voltages.

a8c9058f-5270-4fe9-8eca-5e452eb49227-jpeg.535502
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Arctic_White

camalaio

Active Member
May 28, 2019
1,483
2,086
Vernon, BC, Canada
85% at 4.0V would definitely be without sag or load due to it needing to be in a stand-by state. But point made, I could be mixing up which case gets the sag.

The SOC value mentioned could be a different reference than the "indicated SOC". As you say, it could be usable SOC, or even actual SOC. You should have something like 4.5% bottom end buffer, not 0.6%. I'm not a SMT user, so I don't know what SOC numbers you are referencing.

Please do report back if you see indications of balancing at 80 or 85%. The number of people monitoring their brick voltages is pretty small. I wouldn't expect many other responses.

What voltages are you seeing at 100% and near 0%? Here's a 0.25C discharge curve from Jack Rickard that may be close enough to the resting voltages to back out a SOC at 4.0V if we know the top and bottom voltages.

0.25C will be relatively far from open circuit voltage to my understanding and experience. I haven't ever recorded a 100% voltage accurately other than about 402V for the whole pack, and been too distracted otherwise anywhere near 0% :p but the consensus is that Model 3 is highly implied to charge to 4.2V @ 100%. It's pretty well known that there's 96 series cells effectively and the max voltage is just over 400V (you can see this at CHAdeMO charging stations for example). 402V/96 == 4.1875V/cell, but I'm not sure if 402 is the full pack maximum. Actually, due to imbalance, it likely is a bit higher than the 402V would imply. Less sure of what the lower bound is.

I was recently talking to a friend that built an e-bike. Loosely conveyed, he has two things that can tell him battery SoC. One is based on voltage alone and swings wildly when the bike is being used (both up and down because of regen), the other is "smarter" like the SoC display on the Tesla.

I've never monitored the voltages while driving, and I genuinely didn't expect that I'd be able to see voltage swings while driving. Turns out I can see that!

I had to be pulling probably close to 1C to get it to sag to 4.0V at 85% SoC, so 85% clearly isn't related to 4.0V as implied. Parked at 83% SoC at 25°C, it was reading 4.084V minimum and 4.086V some hours later as well. These are not open circuit voltages (I don't think I can get that since I need the car to be awake to get the numbers), so they could potentially be higher during sleep (but not by much). These are measured at less than 0.005C discharge so I expect any sag to be fairly minimal.

Not sure when I'll be driving next so it might be a bit before I find where 4.00V is on my vehicle.

Like other recommendations for charging, 90% is still a convenient recommendation if balancing occurs above 4.00V simply because it gives a lot of room for other variables (e.g. having Sentry on or something, having a lot of imbalance to cover over a rest period of multiple days, etc.). Correcting imbalance would then be the strongest argument for keeping your car plugged in IMO. However, if you keep it plugged in, you can probably use a lower SoC and still get balancing since you'll stay above 4.0V (TBD where that is, but pretty sure 80% would be fine at this point).

EDIT: Based on how balance chargers work in the hobbyist community, I wouldn't be surprised if the balancing decision was purely based on voltage rather than the SoC calculation. That's the assumption I'm going forward with, but it'll be hard to show if it's false or not.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Zoomit

aerodyne

Active Member
Nov 19, 2018
2,180
1,626
Los Angeles
Same here...although I am not a "Sparky". I know some who are.

Not sure if the last few posts were model 3 centric, but I am pretty sure, a Model S/X without batterygate will charge to about 4.2 VPC at 100% SOC.
 

camalaio

Active Member
May 28, 2019
1,483
2,086
Vernon, BC, Canada
Ok folks, it's been a while but I have some new notes.

Hopping in the car, battery was at 18.5°C, showing 4.076V/cell minimum, showing 80% on display (80.2% temperature-corrected, 80.5% temperature-independent).

After driving, even at a temp of 23.8°C (1.2°C lower than last trips), I'm still above 4.000V/cell at 76.8% SoC. A few seconds after driving, it was reporting 4.044V/cell minimum (most of the voltage sag recovers quickly, I expect it may float up to 4.046V but that's it). It takes about 12kW of draw (roughly equivalent to flat highway driving speeds) to sag the voltage to 4.000V.

So, I find no compelling reasoning that we need to charge beyond 80% if the balance threshold is 4.000V/cell minimum:
  • At 77% on the display with a mostly up-to-temp battery, it is still 44mV above the threshold.
  • Even if at 77% it was able to be at 4.000V due to 44mV of imbalance, that's a huge imbalance and it likely isn't that bad.
  • With a charge level of 80%, you could leave the car unplugged for a week and still have a high enough voltage to be above the balance threshold, giving plenty of time to balance (assuming you don't use Sentry constantly or something).
  • At just 83% with a up-to-temp battery, there's room for 84mV of imbalance. This amount of imbalance would have a huge hit to your range (so, basically, you're in talks with Tesla, not this forum), and still only requires charging to 83% to achieve balancing to my understanding, which could be entirely incorrect.
That said, I'm unsure how temperature hits the voltage. Perhaps in Winter it's important to charge higher for this purpose. Any Model 3 owners in Australia that can report on this data?

Perhaps charging above 80% could be beneficial for balancing if:
  • It has been consistently cold (<10°C), AND
  • You have only driven very short distances, AND
  • You have consistently not preconditioned the cabin in the cold, AND
  • You consistently do not use DC fast charging (Supercharger and/or CHAdeMO and/or CCS)
  • OR
    • You have conditions that induce high imbalance with little opportunity to correct them (e.g. full-time track vehicle, full-time taxi with spirited drivers that leave the cars discharged overnight, etc. in Alaska)
That's a perfect storm of "if you have a lot of imbalance, you may have had few or no opportunities for a warmer battery to balance at <=80%" (assuming temperature would sag the cell voltages but not the threshold for balancing). DC fast charging would very sufficiently warm the battery. Driving a long distance would do so as well. Preheating the cabin now preheats the battery a bit too when it's cold, so that also would work if you also drive around a bit.

In parallel discussion, I lost 2.8% usable capacity (2.0kWh) in the last 7 days while the car was unplugged. More or less exactly 7.0 days, so 0.286kWh/day implying an average consumption of 11.8W. This 11-ish watt figure is fairly constant for longer term storage of my car when left unplugged. It always consumes more when plugged in.

I will keep running down the battery to see where 4.000V is. Tomorrow or the next day I will likely cross the threshold, but it will be while driving and thus may have some additional sag attached (which only means that the true 4.0V point is at a lower SoC than I will report).

Keep in mind this is all bunk if the documents that have been referenced are incorrect or we have interpreted them wrong. I have no known signals that indicate if balancing is actively occurring, and I don't recall my cells ever being outside the 5mV threshold mentioned that's required for balancing. Could be a big ol' nothingburger. I either need more vehicles locally to sample from (too much commitment really) or I'd need to intentionally induce imbalance in mine (yeah, not happening).

EDIT: Also, you'd think that if you could never balance by charging to 80%, Elon would not have recommended it when asked about what level to charge to for best battery health. Not asking Elon to know everything, but many here like to go by what Elon says.

Same here...although I am not a "Sparky". I know some who are.

Not sure if the last few posts were model 3 centric, but I am pretty sure, a Model S/X without batterygate will charge to about 4.2 VPC at 100% SOC.

Very specific to Model 3 (but probably Model Y by extension). The batteries will be similar-ish, but the software handling it could be very different. I've heard there's a lower top level for all Model S/X but I have nothing to support that claim. Also a higher bottom level I believe, but again I have nothing to support that.
 
Last edited:

jjrandorin

Moderator, Model 3, Tesla Energy Forums
Nov 28, 2018
8,083
8,946
Riverside Co. CA
These posts likely should be in the large "effect on range" topic. (MASTER THREAD: Range Loss Over Time, What Can Be Expected, How to Maintain Battery Health) , to keep THIS thread, which started off as "tesla's official statements" from getting completely bogged down in the minutiae and pages (and pages and pages) of detail that tends to overwhelm most owners who "just want to know their car is OK".

I keep coming back to this statement... lots of tesla owners like to dig into all of these details, and thats fine, but it is NOT NECESSRY to own and drive this car. I doubt very much @PhilRogers cares much about "cell minimum voltage". He, and others like him, are just looking for someone "who knows more than they do" to tell them "your car is fine, I understand what is happening with it".
 
  • Love
Reactions: dmurphy

PhilRogers

Member
Apr 25, 2020
80
48
Chicago
Wow thank you so much! I was starting to wonder what had happened to my original question. And yes---I didn't buy this car to be a PhD thesis on quantum physics. I bought it to be a car. This is not a knock on anyone who wants to do a deep dive into what's happening beneath the floor. But there is a belief, I believe, on the part of some, that you have to really be a) insanely loyal to the cause, and b) totally into the path the electrons take.

In the world of gasoline engines, there are of course, the vast majority that just want to drive their cars, and others who want to tinker with them in the garage. And that is really really great. Nothing against those folks (although it is a little intimidating for someone like me who doesn't understand much of anything).

I do firmly believe a couple of things. EV's will not truly become mainstream until they are "just another car". In other words, when we don't have to worry about using the heater or the air conditioner, when we don't have to worry about how fast we accelerate, or whether we park in the sun or the shade. Because people in ICE cars don't have to do that.

It reminds me a bit of when I got a new iPhone some years back, one which advertised the brightest display yet. And it really was beautiful---they were right. But it had terrible battery performance. When I asked on one of the forums what I could do to improve battery life, person after person said, "Turn down the brightness of the display". My response was, "What's the point of the world's brightest display if you can't use it?

To truly be at parity with ICE owners or even superior, we need to be able to drive our car just like any other car.

When I first got my Tesla, I had to drive it from St. Louis, where I picked it up, to Chicago. It was raining and cold. Driving rain. I had to recharge twice en-route. That really shook me up. When I asked, people said, "Yes, rain affects range, and so does cold". I was telling a friend of mine about that, and she said, "Oh, you mean the kind of conditions you see very frequently, where you need to be able to DRIVE?"

I got the message. And it was not an improper one.

There was an old joke about Henry Ford and the Model A. "Any color you want---as long as it's black". The suggestion here is, "Drive any time you want, as long as it's sunny, dry, between 65 to 90 degrees, on terrain that is flat as possible----otherwise be prepared for a range hit." That isn't realistic, and to suggest otherwise is naive.

I LOVE MY CAR. I truly love that I just plug it in at night and never go to a gas station. Yes, I love no oil changes. Yes, I love that my brakes are going to outlast everyone else's because of one-pedal driving. And yes, I love that I'm not spewing junk into the atmosphere. But there are compromises with an EV. People who drive internal combustion cars just set off on a trip. If they want to drive fast they do. If they want to use the air conditioning or the heat, they do. Because they know there will be a gas station on just about every other block. And that they can pour another 450 miles of "range" into the car in about five minutes.

Ours isn't the same level of convenience as an internal combustion engine. Electrics aren't there yet. They will be. And in a few years ICE cars will be relics. And we are on the forefront. But they aren't there yet.

Don't yell at me.
 

toolman335

Member
Oct 3, 2019
842
593
Rochester
Wow thank you so much! I was starting to wonder what had happened to my original question. And yes---I didn't buy this car to be a PhD thesis on quantum physics. I bought it to be a car. This is not a knock on anyone who wants to do a deep dive into what's happening beneath the floor. But there is a belief, I believe, on the part of some, that you have to really be a) insanely loyal to the cause, and b) totally into the path the electrons take.

In the world of gasoline engines, there are of course, the vast majority that just want to drive their cars, and others who want to tinker with them in the garage. And that is really really great. Nothing against those folks (although it is a little intimidating for someone like me who doesn't understand much of anything).

I do firmly believe a couple of things. EV's will not truly become mainstream until they are "just another car". In other words, when we don't have to worry about using the heater or the air conditioner, when we don't have to worry about how fast we accelerate, or whether we park in the sun or the shade. Because people in ICE cars don't have to do that.

It reminds me a bit of when I got a new iPhone some years back, one which advertised the brightest display yet. And it really was beautiful---they were right. But it had terrible battery performance. When I asked on one of the forums what I could do to improve battery life, person after person said, "Turn down the brightness of the display". My response was, "What's the point of the world's brightest display if you can't use it?

To truly be at parity with ICE owners or even superior, we need to be able to drive our car just like any other car.

When I first got my Tesla, I had to drive it from St. Louis, where I picked it up, to Chicago. It was raining and cold. Driving rain. I had to recharge twice en-route. That really shook me up. When I asked, people said, "Yes, rain affects range, and so does cold". I was telling a friend of mine about that, and she said, "Oh, you mean the kind of conditions you see very frequently, where you need to be able to DRIVE?"

I got the message. And it was not an improper one.

There was an old joke about Henry Ford and the Model A. "Any color you want---as long as it's black". The suggestion here is, "Drive any time you want, as long as it's sunny, dry, between 65 to 90 degrees, on terrain that is flat as possible----otherwise be prepared for a range hit." That isn't realistic, and to suggest otherwise is naive.

I LOVE MY CAR. I truly love that I just plug it in at night and never go to a gas station. Yes, I love no oil changes. Yes, I love that my brakes are going to outlast everyone else's because of one-pedal driving. And yes, I love that I'm not spewing junk into the atmosphere. But there are compromises with an EV. People who drive internal combustion cars just set off on a trip. If they want to drive fast they do. If they want to use the air conditioning or the heat, they do. Because they know there will be a gas station on just about every other block. And that they can pour another 450 miles of "range" into the car in about five minutes.

Ours isn't the same level of convenience as an internal combustion engine. Electrics aren't there yet. They will be. And in a few years ICE cars will be relics. And we are on the forefront. But they aren't there yet.

Don't yell at me.

Phil I enjoy reading your posts. Very articulate.
I don't mind having to charge on a long road trip. Why travel if you're in a mad rush and need 450 miles of range in 5 minutes? That takes the fun out of it. I love where superchargers are. Chill out, grab something to eat, use the bathroom, and get yelled at by the car that idling charges are about to start is the way to travel!
The biggest factor for electric cars hitting the big-time is price. It's that simple. The only low cost EVs are severely lacking in range and/or are horrendous to look at. Legit competition from Tesla and lower battery prices will be a game changer in 5+ years.
 

PhilRogers

Member
Apr 25, 2020
80
48
Chicago
Phil I enjoy reading your posts. Very articulate.
I don't mind having to charge on a long road trip. Why travel if you're in a mad rush and need 450 miles of range in 5 minutes? That takes the fun out of it. I love where superchargers are. Chill out, grab something to eat, use the bathroom, and get yelled at by the car that idling charges are about to start is the way to travel!
The biggest factor for electric cars hitting the big-time is price. It's that simple. The only low cost EVs are severely lacking in range and/or are horrendous to look at. Legit competition from Tesla and lower battery prices will be a game changer in 5+ years.

Toolman you are too kind! Thank you for your kind words. And in Rochester you certainly know a thing or two about cold weather, right? Much of my situation doesn't involve mad rush. It just involves day to day life. Where I live, it doesn't have to be a road trip to rack up 150 miles in a day. Plus my mother in law is in poor health and lives 90 miles away. We go to see her a lot and usually drive our Honda Pilot, because we just don't want to deal with the issue of having to Supercharge with our 9 year old. Yes, there is Netflix and Hulu. But the Pilot can be in and out of a gas station in 5 minutes. It's not that we are in a dreadful hurry. We just have better things to do than sit when we don't have to.

The flip side is that I'll be driving to Indianapolis in a few weeks. I'm looking forward to driving my M3. Yes, I'll stop in West Lafayette to throw a little more juice in. But it is a long trip and I know it's manageable.

I agree with you 100%. 5 years and this whole discussion is going to look very different. (And yes, the low cost EV's are horrendous to look at). Although the Kia seems to be a pretty good car with pretty good range. But if anything, it's more expensive than my Model 3.

Many thanks!
 

camalaio

Active Member
May 28, 2019
1,483
2,086
Vernon, BC, Canada
My newest data says the 4.0V threshold is probably around 73%. If we take the 4.0V/cell as the balance threshold, there is no reason to charge beyond 80% for balance purposes.

These posts likely should be in the large "effect on range" topic. (MASTER THREAD: Range Loss Over Time, What Can Be Expected, How to Maintain Battery Health) , to keep THIS thread, which started off as "tesla's official statements" from getting completely bogged down in the minutiae and pages (and pages and pages) of detail that tends to overwhelm most owners who "just want to know their car is OK".

I keep coming back to this statement... lots of tesla owners like to dig into all of these details, and thats fine, but it is NOT NECESSRY to own and drive this car. I doubt very much @PhilRogers cares much about "cell minimum voltage". He, and others like him, are just looking for someone "who knows more than they do" to tell them "your car is fine, I understand what is happening with it".

Perhaps I went a bit too deep, but I'm just around where the relevant conversation is (whether or not it's a rabbit trail from the original topic). Especially since there's already a hot debate between 80/90%, I figured it would be beneficial to substantiate/deny the claims. My hope is that in providing the more technical findings, the more technical members can absorb that and tune their recommendations for those who don't care about the details. I saw the balancing discussion/threshold here, so this is where I contributed that info. Apologies to all if it was merely noise.

Back to topic and in contrast, sticking to Tesla's statement would have you believe that things like "signature lighting" could consume a noticeable amount of energy (mentioned alongside with climate control, which consumes way more energy), which is neither true nor productive to helping someone understand the basics of battery or range capabilities. Personally, I don't know how to have that discussion without numbers. But signature lights effectively don't matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zoomit

jjrandorin

Moderator, Model 3, Tesla Energy Forums
Nov 28, 2018
8,083
8,946
Riverside Co. CA
My newest data says the 4.0V threshold is probably around 73%. If we take the 4.0V/cell as the balance threshold, there is no reason to charge beyond 80% for balance purposes.



Perhaps I went a bit too deep, but I'm just around where the relevant conversation is (whether or not it's a rabbit trail from the original topic). Especially since there's already a hot debate between 80/90%, I figured it would be beneficial to substantiate/deny the claims. My hope is that in providing the more technical findings, the more technical members can absorb that and tune their recommendations for those who don't care about the details. I saw the balancing discussion/threshold here, so this is where I contributed that info. Apologies to all if it was merely noise.

Back to topic and in contrast, sticking to Tesla's statement would have you believe that things like "signature lighting" could consume a noticeable amount of energy (mentioned alongside with climate control, which consumes way more energy), which is neither true nor productive to helping someone understand the basics of battery or range capabilities. Personally, I don't know how to have that discussion without numbers. But signature lights effectively don't matter.

No, it was very interesting, actually... its just.. I know how this starts to go. You put a bunch of engineering types (no matter the discipline, electrical, mechanical, software, automation, chemical, etc etc) together, and because of the way engineers minds work, you can get "technical" pretty quickly, even if its very interesting or relevant.

The point I was (I guess poorly) trying to make is that, for the users who come and post "I just got my car a month ago, its supposed to be 299 range for my model 3P, it only charges to 297, should I contact tesla?!?!?!?" they likely should "start" with what tesla says, because IF they choose to go talk to tesla about "lost range" we all know they are going to go tell them to pound sand, politely or less politely, depending on how many times that Service Center has tried to explain that "no there is nothing wrong with your car because it shows 6 miles less than it used to" (or some such).

It was interesting info, for sure, to those of us who may like that stuff :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matsayz

AKinDC

Member
Apr 30, 2019
220
265
DC
The point I was (I guess poorly) trying to make is that, for the users who come and post "I just got my car a month ago, its supposed to be 299 range for my model 3P, it only charges to 297, should I contact tesla?!?!?!?" they likely should "start" with what tesla says, because IF they choose to go talk to tesla about "lost range" we all know they are going to go tell them to pound sand, politely or less politely, depending on how many times that Service Center has tried to explain that "no there is nothing wrong with your car because it shows 6 miles less than it used to" (or some such).

True, but it would help is Tesla was a bit more specific, and instead of saying, “hey don’t worry, the car will let us know if there’s a problem” have them say “if you lose X percent in that 1st year, or Y percent in 2 years” then call us.
My 3 lost almost 10% in the 1st year. Really frustrating, but I know it’s in the margin of error. Most new buyers don’t.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: mrgoogle

uujjj2

Member
Aug 11, 2020
328
1,231
San Jose, CA
Does parking in a garage versus outside affect the battery degradation? We park outside and have seen about 20 miles of indicated range loss since the car was new (Nov 2018, just under 30k miles). This is in San Jose, CA, which is very sunny but rarely gets any extreme temps. We charge to 90% (the default) once or twice a week.
 

camalaio

Active Member
May 28, 2019
1,483
2,086
Vernon, BC, Canada
Does parking in a garage versus outside affect the battery degradation? We park outside and have seen about 20 miles of indicated range loss since the car was new (Nov 2018, just under 30k miles). This is in San Jose, CA, which is very sunny but rarely gets any extreme temps. We charge to 90% (the default) once or twice a week.

Very situational. Garage would normally help, but the degree to which it helps varies considerably.

Two factors:
  1. Storage temperature (too hot is bad, too cold is bad, neither are really catastrophic or should matter much)
  2. Energy drain due to temperature maintenance
The second point uses power and thus "wears" your battery the same way miles do, but without counting miles. One of these is Cabin Overheat Protection. Another, if you live somewhere very hot, would be battery cooling (this is where a garage could actually work against you, if your garage gets superheated in summer). The most detrimental for energy use though is actually cold, and it has to be pretty dang cold outside before it heats the battery, and probably not relevant to your case.

In my case where we have pretty distinct seasons (gets decently hot and decently cold), our garage keeps it warmer in winter and cooler in summer. How much this actually helps, who knows, but this would be the ideal case for a garage helping vs. outside.
 

ElectricIAC

Devil’s Advocate
Dec 31, 2019
2,219
548
DFW
Does parking in a garage versus outside affect the battery degradation? We park outside and have seen about 20 miles of indicated range loss since the car was new (Nov 2018, just under 30k miles). This is in San Jose, CA, which is very sunny but rarely gets any extreme temps. We charge to 90% (the default) once or twice a week.
So far only 9-10mi range loss indicated on my P3D. Always garaged when not out and about however detached so not climate controlled (summer temps can and do reach 115F ambient)
 

camalaio

Active Member
May 28, 2019
1,483
2,086
Vernon, BC, Canada
So what's the easiest way to find out what your current battery capacity is?

Set car to display range, not percent. Open app. Drag slider all the way to the right and note the miles it displays. This is your reported range at 100%.

Go here, multiply your 100% range by the appropriate "Endpoint BMS Constant" for your model. This gives you "usable" Wh. Divide by 1000 for "usable" kWh. If you're interested in total capacity including the bottom buffer, then divide that by 0.955.

This aligns pretty much perfectly with what you get get from CAN bus data, just with more steps and slightly less accuracy due to calculations on rounded numbers. Of course, if you already have something like ScanMyTesla, that is technically "easiest" to use.
 

rydenfan

Member
Jun 23, 2020
26
4
Massachusetts
hopefully this is the correct place to ask this...

I just received my 3 dual, long range AWD and at a 90% charge it is showing like 260 miles...

We took it out this weekend for about 175 mile trip; when I left I was at 98% and returned at 17%. That seems like a lot of loss for that distance. But would love some help. thanks!
 

dfwatt

Active Member
Sep 24, 2018
2,997
5,027
FL
hopefully this is the correct place to ask this...

I just received my 3 dual, long range AWD and at a 90% charge it is showing like 260 miles...

We took it out this weekend for about 175 mile trip; when I left I was at 98% and returned at 17%. That seems like a lot of loss for that distance. But would love some help. thanks!

Was this new or used? If it's new you should call Tesla immediately
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top