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

What is your 100% on your 90kWh battery?

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
See, I'm not understanding your posts. Are you saying that the full charge range indicated is depleting much faster than it says? ie. 275 miles is depleting to zero in 150? That's a different issue. The max range should be reflective of battery degradation whereas the depletion of the full charge is reflective of driving habits.
Sorry this is not more clear.
My cars display of full charge range (275 miles) is only consistent with a battery which has more capacity than my battery has. For the amount of battery degradation that my battery has, the display of full charge range should be lower. If I drive at the rated wh/mile, I will not get the rated range displayed (220 instead of 275). Not even close. Bottom line: My cars display of full charge range is just plain wrong. By any measure. Since the displayed full charge range is inaccurately high, it gives the false impression of a battery with less degradation than my battery actually has.
Of course it is true that if I drove with a low enough wh/mile, I could get the rated range as displayed. But if the wh/mi necessary to achieve this (277) is both unattainably low, and lower than all published values (300-330), then it is a fictional contrivance.
For years, the vast majority of owners have assumed that full charge range displayed is an accurate reflection of battery condition. While that may be true for many cars, it is certainly not true for my car and others. Thus, the displayed full charge range is not in general a reliable indication of battery condition. Of usable capacity. Many owners are loathe to believe this. But it's true.
 
Sorry this is not more clear.
My cars display of full charge range (275 miles) is only consistent with a battery which has more capacity than my battery has. For the amount of battery degradation that my battery has, the display of full charge range should be lower. If I drive at the rated wh/mile, I will not get the rated range displayed (220 instead of 275). Not even close. Bottom line: My cars display of full charge range is just plain wrong. By any measure. Since the displayed full charge range is inaccurately high, it gives the false impression of a battery with less degradation than my battery actually has.
Of course it is true that if I drove with a low enough wh/mile, I could get the rated range as displayed. But if the wh/mi necessary to achieve this (277) is both unattainably low, and lower than all published values (300-330), then it is a fictional contrivance.
For years, the vast majority of owners have assumed that full charge range displayed is an accurate reflection of battery condition. While that may be true for many cars, it is certainly not true for my car and others. Thus, the displayed full charge range is not in general a reliable indication of battery condition. Of usable capacity. Many owners are loathe to believe this. But it's true.

Are you sure your car isn't set for "ideal range" versus "rated range"? What model do you own? It's not in your signature. If your car is supposed to be around 220, that sounds like a 75?
 
Are you sure your car isn't set for "ideal range" versus "rated range"? What model do you own? It's not in your signature. If your car is supposed to be around 220, that sounds like a 75?
My car is an early 2016 S 90D. The range setting is on "Rated".
The battery has 72-73 available kwh. The cars display of range conceals this degradation by showing a like-new range of 275 miles. This has been true since I got the car with 7,500 miles on it.
 
My car is an early 2016 S 90D. The range setting is on "Rated".
The battery has 72-73 available kwh. The cars display of range conceals this degradation by showing a like-new range of 275 miles. This has been true since I got the car with 7,500 miles on it.

The only problem is that 275 miles is not "like new", as the car is rated at 296 miles new. So you have about 20 miles of degradation.
 
Wow, I don't mean any offense to 90D owners, but I don't know how else to say that I'm glad we didn't buy a used 90D. Range of 275 miles at 100% is basically what a Standard Range Raven S gets, using the same battery as a 75D. Although I think the 90D charges faster than a 75D.
 
Wow, I don't mean any offense to 90D owners, but I don't know how else to say that I'm glad we didn't buy a used 90D. Range of 275 miles at 100% is basically what a Standard Range Raven S gets, using the same battery as a 75D. Although I think the 90D charges faster than a 75D.

It does. 275 miles on a 90D is already degraded, originally new they are 294. Mine got as high as 298 miles. My 100% now is around 265 miles.
 
The only problem is that 275 miles is not "like new", as the car is rated at 296 miles new. So you have about 20 miles of degradation.
In early 2016 the 90D cars in the showroom showed a full charge rated range of 280-285 miles. None of them showed 296 at that time.
Regardless of the displayed range, the degradation of the battery in my car was, and is, about 10 kwh. (72-73 kwh usable instead of 82-84 kwh).
 
260 miles @ 100%. 64K miles. What really is the bad part is the slow charging limits. New batteries are much better at handling many many fast charging sessions. Here to hope tesla does right for everyone by proactively replacing all 90D packs down the rode once they are profitable continuously as a company. Really the 90D guys were the Guinea pigs for their battery tech and the results of those pack has help tesla build much better pack resiliency for their future cars. The least tesla can do once they can afford to is to rewards those who risk and help the company build better cars to stay way ahead of the competition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pilotSteve
No one will get what the car says. At 100%, the car is giving you the total battery capacity, but 0 miles/0% on the dash is actually when the car reaches the bottom 4kw which you shouldn't/can't use.
That is not correct.
It is true that the usable capacity in kwh is less than the nominal battery size due to reserve at the top and bottom. But the rated range is supposed to exist in between those reserves. You know this is true because as you drive the car approaching "empty", the SOC and the remaining range approach zero together. Likewise, as you charge, the range and SOC come up to 100% and max range together.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: supratachophobia
That is not correct.
It is true that the usable capacity in kwh is less than the nominal battery size due to reserve at the top and bottom. But the rated range is supposed to exist in between those reserves. You know this is true because as you drive the car approaching "empty", the SOC and the remaining range approach zero together. Likewise, as you charge, the range and SOC come up to 100% and max range together.
Please look at the BMS, I'm not wrong on this. Using EPA wpm, the only way your could achieve the number listed at 100%, is if you add in that lower 4kw. Also, there is no "reserve" at the top. A car at 100% will show all bricks as measured at 4.2v, the full charge voltage of an 18650.