X: What's your 90%?

[scottf200]

As I just got a 'used' X 100D (replacing a deer totaled Sig P90D), I was curious how I compared.
FYI, I used the last couple of pages as an example. Here is my little table. Blue text is calculated/extrapolated. Black text is provided data. Sorted high to low on Miles 90%.

 

[kiwiguy]

X100D - Delivered Dec 2017
~1000 miles with 2x 300 mile road trips and a lot of autopilot.
90% = 270 miles
100% = 300 miles

 

[RVD98072]

X100D. Delivered 11/2017. Inventory car with 1000 miles on it. Built in 8/2017.

Currently has 4100 miles on it after 2 road trips (SF<->LA, SF->Seattle).

90% charge is 264 miles.

Never tried 100% charge yet.

 

[Maximilien]

For my 100D, 90% charge fluctuates between 264 miles and 266 miles. Mostly 266 miles tho'

 

[McManX]

90D:
90% - 235 rated
10,250 miles
328 wh/mi avg

90% - 229
90D with ~20k miles

Updating:
90% - 226
90D with ~33k miles

90D - 42k miles
90% = 224

63k miles
90% = 223-224 looks like I am past the initial degradation people talk about

 

[Ruffles]

32k miles, 2016 X 90D, vin...6551: 90% = 222 miles

 

[Tombhs]

So I thought I would post here and see what you all think. Have a model X 100D that was a July build. Picked up in Sept. Would charge to 75 to 80% at home and would get up to 280 miles at the 80%. We went on a road trip within the 1st 2 weeks and charged to 100%. Car showed 356 miles. These were the actual miles available. Over the past 3 months I have continued to charge in the same way, always getting 260 to 275 miles showing available at 75 to 80%. Last month we took another road trip and charged to 100%. Car showed 354 miles available. Yesterday we went on another trip and charged to 100%. Car showed 294. Today I charged to 80% and car shows 235.
Anybody have this happen? Thinking I was fortunate to have a great battery, or was conditioning it correctly. The only thing I can think of that is different now has been the over the air updates.

 

[scottf200]

So I thought I would post here and see what you all think. Have a model X 100D that was a July build. Picked up in Sept. Would charge to 75 to 80% at home and would get up to 280 miles at the 80%. We went on a road trip within the 1st 2 weeks and charged to 100%. Car showed 356 miles. These were the actual miles available. Over the past 3 months I have continued to charge in the same way, always getting 260 to 275 miles showing available at 75 to 80%. Last month we took another road trip and charged to 100%. Car showed 354 miles available. Yesterday we went on another trip and charged to 100%. Car showed 294. Today I charged to 80% and car shows 235.
Anybody have this happen? Thinking I was fortunate to have a great battery, or was conditioning it correctly. The only thing I can think of that is different now has been the over the air updates.

Re: 100% 354 miles --- Those numbers don't make sense to me. New it is supposed to be 295 miles at 100%. I can't explain what was wrong but it seems to be more realistic now.

For comparison I just picked up a 'used' X 100D and gathered some numbers from other threads to see how mine was. Here my my table for reference.

 

[gjunky]

32k miles, 2016 X 90D, vin...6551: 90% = 222 miles

26K Miles, X90D Vin 58xx, 90% = 222-224 (seems to vary a bit from charge to charge)

 

[wallstguy]

Just hit 25k km (15,500 mi) on my X75D received in April

90% initially was 342km (212mi), currently it is 335km (208 mi)

 

[Jays200]

Scottf200, some updated figures and info for you.

So, I hadn't 100% charged for a while and my car now has 451kms with 18440kms on the odo.

Strangest thing is my 90% new was 409kms and dropped to 403kms. On recent 90% charges it has been 404, 405 and even 406kms. I don't know how that works but I have been doing a lot of home charging from my new 6.5kW solar system at 5A, 250v, 3 phase (3750kW) via the HPWC, which I consider to be gentle charging. I had been doing quite a lot of 50kW DCFC and a few Supercharger charges up until a few months ago.

On my last visit to our only Supercharger in Western Australia, I arrived with 37kms left and charged to essentially 100% without waiting for it to stop charging. Maybe that helped recalibrate things. just guessing though.

BTW, all my figures are "typical"

 

[scottf200]

Scottf200, some updated figures and info for you.
So, I hadn't 100% charged for a while and my car now has 451kms with 18440kms on the odo.
Strangest thing is my 90% new was 409kms and dropped to 403kms. On recent 90% charges it has been 404, 405 and even 406kms. I don't know how that works but I have been doing a lot of home charging from my new 6.5kW solar system at 5A, 250v, 3 phase (3750kW) via the HPWC, which I consider to be gentle charging. I had been doing quite a lot of 50kW DCFC and a few Supercharger charges up until a few months ago.
On my last visit to our only Supercharger in Western Australia, I arrived with 37kms left and charged to essentially 100% without waiting for it to stop charging. Maybe that helped recalibrate things. just guessing though.
BTW, all my figures are "typical"

Thanks. Hard to say about your variances but those are pretty minor changes and climate changes could account for such minor changes. If you had consistent kms's quite a while after your 'lot' of DCFCs then those are good average. Your recalibration point was good too. Bjørn Nyland (<--his videos) had a great video on this as had an interview with a person whose company did battery testing/monitoring related software. I looked but couldn't find it.

Thanks for pointing out you were using 'typical' which I was first confused about but then reviewed another of Bjorn Nylands videos. I added this to my chart to help me remember and for clarity.
* More 'realistic' range == USA 'rated' == non-USA 'typical'
* 'Constant value' range == USA 'ideal' == non-USA 'rated'
* Typical, rated and ideal range explained

Refresher on the 'contant value' range from the famous wk057 post.

First, a bit of a warning to those easily offended by anything negative about Tesla: I've posted several threads about the actual capacities of Tesla battery packs. Raw data with mixed reception. Unfortunately it seems like any time anyone posts a thread that puts Tesla in a negative light most of them tend to get overrun by posts that either aren't on topic or try incessantly to defend Tesla's failing. Bluntly, this thread is not the place for defending Tesla, explaining why they chose to operate as they do, etc. This is about the raw data. Let's gather it, share it, and discuss it logically. If you don't like the data, honestly I don't care. Facts are facts. I don't care if they don't "matter" to you or if you think they don't "matter" to others, and frankly I don't think anyone else cares either. Again, this is about discussing the data and the numbers. Not about how you feel about them. Anyway, sorry about that. The above is my best effort to not have this thread overtaken by nonsense. It's certain to fail, but worth a shot I suppose.

To the facts.

In a previous thread I posted this data about actual pack capacities after gathering data from multiple cars of each variety:


As it turns out, at or near 100% displayed charge the rated miles (not ideal) * the static rated miles value for the vehicle type/config matches the BMS's reported total usable capacity to within about +/- 1 kWh in nearly all cases I've checked on real cars. The disparity is mainly due to lack of significant figures beyond rated miles, the fact that Tesla rounded the rated miles number to a nearest 5 Wh, and the fact that the car seems to round up on reported rated miles. Also, the rated miles display is not refreshed constantly when the BMS value changes, so there is some latency there. Extrapolating from SoC under 100% results in numbers that are very close, but tend to be off due to other factors.

In general, what you need to calculate capacity are the exact static rated mile values for your type of configuration. And actually, they're pretty simple. Here they are:

• All RWD Cars (non-Performance and Performance): 295 Wh/Rated Mile
• All Pre-refresh Model S Dual Motor, non-Performance: 290 Wh/Rated Mile
• Refresh Model S Dual Motor, non-Performance under 100 kWh: 285 Wh/Rated Mile
• Model X Dual Motor, non-Performance under 100 kWh: 320 Wh/Rated Mile
• Model S Dual Motor, Performance under 100 kWh: 310 Wh/Rated Mile
• Model X Dual Motor, Performance under 100 kWh: 333 Wh/Rated Mile
• Model X Dual Motor, Performance 100 kWh: 342 Wh/Rated Mile

Quick notes: Rated miles are EPA miles. I'm unsure what systems are used in other parts of the world. Internally on the cars everything in miles and uses these numbers then calculates the values for other regions using these as a base.

These are the exact numbers pulled from the Tesla firmware. Rated miles are static Wh/mi. They do not change with driving style or anything else besides the configuration of the car as noted above. The car simply takes the estimated usable energy remaining as reported by the BMS, divides by the appropriate static number above, and displays the value. There is another static value for "ideal" miles, but I haven't bothered to gather it.

For example, at my last 100% charge on my X P90D I reached 245 rated miles. To get kWh usable I look at the list above, pick 333 Wh/Rated mile because it matches my car. Then, I take 245 * 333 to get Wh usable. Then divide by 1000 to get kWh. In this example, I end up with 81.6 kWh usable capacity. The BMS on this car reports 81.7 kWh full usable capacity, so pretty darn close.

For fun, lets use the EPA range numbers from Tesla's website for some examples. All for sale now are refreshed versions, so keep that in mind.

• Model S 60 (s/w limited 75): 210 rated miles * 295 Wh/mi = ~62 kWh usable
• Model S 75: 249 rated miles * 295 Wh/mi = ~73.5 kWh usable
• Model S 60D (s/w limited 75): 218 rated miles * 285 Wh/mi = ~62.1 kWh usable
• Model S 75D: 259 rated miles * 285 Wh/mi = ~73.8 kWh usable
• Model S 90D: 294 rates miles * 285 Wh/mi = ~83.8 kWh usable
• Model S P100D: 315 rated miles * 314 Wh/mi = ~98.9 kWh usable (* Estimated Wh/mi)
• Model X 75D: 237 rated miles * 320 Wh/mi = ~75.8 kWh usable
• Model X 90D: 257 rated miles * 320 Wh/mi = ~82.2 kWh usable
• Model X P100D: 289 rated miles * 342 Wh/mi = ~98.8 kWh usable

As you can see, these numbers actually pretty closely match the capacity values I posted previously. The refresh S 90D appears to make the capacity appear to be a little overrated vs actual capacity, and the X 75D seems to really overstate usable capacity. by over 3 kWh... I'm unsure the reasoning for this. Keep in mind that the rated miles Wh numbers Tesla uses are always rounded to the nearest 5 Wh... which over ~300 miles of rated range is a potential disparity of about +/- 750 Wh before accounting for other factors.

A fun extrapolation: A Model S 100D would have a rated range of 337 miles.

It's also pretty interesting that given the internal static rated miles values the range numbers on Tesla's website pretty closely match actual usable capacity values. However, if you tried to go by the advertised capacity values (60,75,85,90,100, etc) to come up with a rated miles value you'd end up with something totally different in all cases. After taking the 4 or 2.4 kWh unusable portion into account (for the 85,90,100 or 60,70,75 packs respectively), the only cars still sold where advertised capacity doesn't match actual total capacity appears to be the 90. Previous 85 variants would also fall into this category as well. The 60, 75, and 100 actually appear to have packs of at least their advertised total capacities after taking the unusable portions into account. (Only opinion based portion of this post: On that note, perhaps Tesla is trying to actually match their name plate/advertised capacities on newer car variants. Doesn't really help people who own "85"s and "90"s that are short several kWh vs advertised, but, it's a start.)

Anyway, mainly wanted to put out the internal rated miles values so that people can calculate their actual available usable capacities. Should be interesting to see data from more than just the cars I've looked at.

-wk

Edit: Updated some data for 100 kWh variants.

 

[Sambas]

My 90% is 261 miles. MX100D. 17,000 miles.
Unchanged since my last post when I had 10,000 miles on the car.

 

[jammyeatworld]

75D
204 miles

 

[Rk3782]

75D 20’
27dec2017
3200 miles ( 2200-2300 highway miles )
90% = 214 ( went up from 212)
100%= 238 miles
Average till now: 340w/m
80% -85% charging done at SC

 

[brokercop]

MX 100D 263 @ 90%

 

[scottf200]

MX 100D 263 @ 90%

How many miles on the odometer?

 

[Helmuth]

MX 100D
6 weeks old/11,000 miles
90% 266

 

[tslalrry]

Last time, my 75D (December 2016), ~10K miles, was at 205 miles, which seemed like it had dropped a lot from 213 initially. However, the SC had let the battery sit close to zero (2 miles range on pickup after 48 hours from 50 miles). I'm wondering whether long-term sitting at <10% was a factor. It was over Christmas and they admitted to leaving the fobs in the car, but no other reason was given for such a dramatic discharge in a mild climate.

 

[WeooooooHuh]

90D - 231 is my 90% and I have 11,000 miles with a lot of supercharging.