TeslaFi Battery Report - What does your LR car charge to @ 100%?

[TT97]

Interesting, how do they handle the change in range the Model 3 when thru last year, bumping the RWD from 310 to 325? No change other than software version.

If you click on settings it shows all the vehicles used for comparison. For each time you charge, it compares to other cars that charged as well (couldn't really make out if they charged on the same day or not). [edit: On second thought, based on the sample size, I think they only look at the mileage and not the date charged as I seriously doubt there were 87 cars with 15,325-15,375 miles on the odo that charged today). It selects car with the same configuration (3LR for mine) within 25 miles plus or minus on the odometer. It does show the temperature for each car charging but would be interested in seeing software version # as well.

There doesn't seem to be any significant step for the magical "325" (which I never saw either).

The 87 vehicles referenced is just the latest charge (other charges have more or less cars).

 

[Zoomit]

I'd like to see a plot for a larger number of 2018/2019 AWD vehicles only, with data back to 0 miles.

Here’s Model 3 LR AWD from 0 to 30k miles. All temps, within 50 miles, charges above 90%.

 

[JBT66]

Mines been getting slightly better lately.
Actually very similar to @Zoomit s graph.

Mines a 2018 AWD 18” charged to 90% most of her life.
I set charging to 80% most days for about 2 months and very recently put the aero caps back on.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Here’s Model 3 LR AWD from 0 to 30k miles. All temps, within 50 miles, charges above 90%.
View attachment 514928

Not having TeslaFi, I am just confused. I guess I am just looking for the mean value of the rated range for all cars (a given variant), vs. odometer reading. I have seen elsewhere that maybe that is not what this tool is set up for.

I really only care about the first 15-20k miles. And I guess as far as data, would be good to limit it to charges to above 79%.

Anyway, it is ok. I guess I see some of the issues with this now that I think about it.

For the most part this curve looks like what I would expect though perhaps maybe expected a bit longer plateau at the beginning. Though maybe not now that I think about it.

I guess it would be interesting to split the data into the vehicles that have above 295 miles at 30k and a separate group with the ones below...just to see how the curves compare. I would guess the ones with lower range start their degradation sooner. And a plateau near 0 miles might be visible in the group above 295 miles at 30k miles.

 

[Zoomit]

I would guess the ones with lower range start their degradation sooner. And a plateau near 0 miles might be visible in the group above 295 miles at 30k miles.

My data would be a counter-example, having plateaued for 6,600 miles but now under the average at 30k mi.

Here’s the data behind the point where mine falls off the ~310 mi plateau. At 6,600 mi, 55% of the sampled cars (127 of 230) still have a rated range above 307mi and thus are still on their plateau.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

My data would be a counter-example, having plateaued for 6,600 miles but now under the average at 30k mi.

True. In addition to variable starting capacity, there is probably also random variation on the amount of degradation that occurs. So it would only be a correlation...not a guarantee that if you had a decent plateau (meaning, presumably, a higher than average starting capacity) that you would end up “above average.”

 

[McFlurri]

My LR RWD claims 484km at 40,000km for 100%

 

[MarcG]

Guys, don't forget that Telsa fudges the numbers early on in the battery cycles to always display the maximum rated range for your specific model at 100% (e.g. 310 miles if that's the official EPA rating), even if the true calculation of the nominal full pack (minus buffer) in Wh divided by the Wh/mi constant yields a higher number of rated miles.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Guys, don't forget that Telsa fudges the numbers early on in the battery cycles to always display the maximum rated range for your specific model at 100% (e.g. 310 miles if that's the official EPA rating), even if the true calculation of the nominal full pack (minus buffer) in Wh divided by the Wh/mi constant yields a higher number of rated miles.

Most likely, yes. Would be super easy to verify for someone with a brand new vehicle and SMT (or instead of SMT the patience to measure rated mile energy with the trip meter).

Presumably “initially more energetic” rated miles are the reason for the initial plateau.

Again, verification would be great - super easy.

For 2020 AWD vehicles the inflation looks to be at most 2.5%, vs up to 4.6% for 2018/2019.

 

[MarcG]

Most likely, yes. Would be super easy to verify for someone with a brand new vehicle and SMT (or instead of SMT the patience to measure rated mile energy with the trip meter).

Presumably “initially more energetic” rated miles are the reason for the initial plateau.

Again, verification would be great - super easy.

For 2020 AWD vehicles the inflation looks to be at most 2.5%, vs up to 4.6% for 2018/2019.

Yeah, I really wish I had SMT and the CAN adapters from day 1, but oh well.. better late than never.

Based on my diligently recorded data (besides TeslaFi or VisibleTesla, back in the day) of both trip data and charge data, I'm definitely seeing an usual cap in the first ~4500 miles of ownership where it appears there's zero degradation. My P85D never did that with either battery (I had a replacement 2 years in).

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

my diligently recorded data (besides TeslaFi) of both trip data and charge data,

Depending on what documentation you have early in your vehicle life, we could probably prove it. Unfortunately I had some pictures from early in my car's life, but they weren't detailed enough, and I also deleted them...

We'd really need a very controlled capture of rated miles use in conjunction with a long enough continuous trip meter capture, when the car was very new.

That being said, one of Bjørn's videos does suggest more energetic rated miles when he tests a new AWD vehicle. Looked like about 234Wh/rmi on the trip meter which means 239Wh(BMS)/rmi, which is about right for a battery with 77.6kWh, well above the 76kWh for 2018/2019 vehicles where we know capacity loss starts to show up.

Pretty much good enough for me to indicate this is what is happening qualitatively. The only thing I'm not sure of is exactly how well the BMS kWh line up with "true" kWh. Since I've never seen a report of much over 78kWh on the SMT, and it's pretty common for Tesla to measure in excess of 79kWh on their test vehicles...

 

[Zoomit]

This is probably the time to remember that Tesla doesn’t use new cars for the EPA testing. They’re all at least 4,000 miles aged, IIRC. Seeing “EPA rated miles” driving off the lot is not sufficient. The cars should be able to meet the EPA tested range after some amount (4,000 mi worth) of battery degradation.