GHammer
Dark Star
No, you're potentially inducing unnecessary anxiety in someone who is already unnecessarily concerned about losing 5 miles on the GOM and who is already using their car appropriately.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Model Y Long Range constantly showing 315-317 mile range when fully charged.
- Thread starter J-a-x
- Start date
- Status
sublimejackman
Member
The anxiety was introduced by Tesla lying about the range, then employing thousands to gaslight owners.
I’m trying to remedy that with some simple advice that works in the real world.
Advice Tesla could easily give and doesn’t require a bunch of well actuallys. (that the degradation is techically not as bad when the sun is shining on Tuesday or whatever)
Last edited:
I havent read anything in this thread that is much different than the other 100s of battery threads I have read here. if they go on at all, they always devolve into some sort of back and forth about optimum charge percentage etc.
The only thing I will say on that topic is that from the 100s of threads I have already read on this topic here, if someone wants to deep dive into this, they should search for posts from @AAKEE in some of the many various battery threads they have posted in.
In particular, this following thread might be one someone can look into, if so inclined:
Battery myths
There is a lot of myths* about lithium batteries floating around. Perhaps we can use this thread to kill or bust some of these, one by one? There also might be statements that we ca not directly sort as facts or myth’s, lets find out. For staters, which myth’s did you fall for? Try this quiz...
teslamotorsclub.com
Other than that, as far as what the OPs question was, its already been addressed by multiple others, in this thread, and others, as its probably the single most posted thing on TMC since I joined in late 2018 (some form of "My battery only charges to X is it broken? / When I drive X distance my car shows Y range off the battery, is it broken?)
sublimejackman
Member
Yeah. I think this all boils down the very very flawed methodology the EPA uses and Tesla markets with (it doesn't help that Tesla's policy is to gaslight customers when their real world range is nowhere near what they advertise). The range of your car is gonna vary drastically and is always less than what the EPA gets when they strap a brand new car on treadmill in a temperature controlled warehouse.I havent read anything in this thread that is much different than the other 100s of battery threads I have read here. if they go on at all, they always devolve into some sort of back and forth about optimum charge percentage etc.
The only thing I will say on that topic is that from the 100s of threads I have already read on this topic here, if someone wants to deep dive into this, they should search for posts from @AAKEE in some of the many various battery threads they have posted in.
In particular, this following thread might be one someone can look into, if so inclined:
Battery myths
There is a lot of myths* about lithium batteries floating around. Perhaps we can use this thread to kill or bust some of these, one by one? There also might be statements that we ca not directly sort as facts or myth’s, lets find out. For staters, which myth’s did you fall for? Try this quiz...
Other than that, as far as what the OPs question was, its already been addressed by multiple others, in this thread, and others, as its probably the single most posted thing on TMC since I joined in late 2018 (some form of "My battery only charges to X is it broken? / When I drive X distance my car shows Y range off the battery, is it broken?)
Generally speaking. You rarely charge the car above 90% and discharge it below 5%. The battery degrades ~5% in the first year. And (as reported by TezLab) Teslas usually run at ~70%-90% efficiency.
So, if the marketed/EPA range is 330mi:
Take 330 * .95 (initial degradation) * .85 (charge to 90% - discharge to 5%) * .9 (efficiency) to get the high range. Take 330 *.95 *.85 *.7 to get the low range.
After one year of ownership, you can expect your car to travel up to 190 – 250 miles between charges. This is the real world range of a Tesla marketed with a 330mi “EPA Range”.
Last edited:
Totally normal. You will lose another 20 or so miles over the next year and then it will level out. Switch to percentage and forget about it.
The display you are seeing is not affected by your driving. There is a different display for that. The one you are seeing on the front page is just an indication of battery health using a very simple formula. Your battery health is fine.
The display you are seeing is not affected by your driving. There is a different display for that. The one you are seeing on the front page is just an indication of battery health using a very simple formula. Your battery health is fine.
It’s called science. Researchers performs tests about how lithium batteries behave.
There is literally hundreds of good research reports out and most of them paint a very clear and common picture. Below, facts from the researchers:
Initially we need to begin with splitting the degradation into calendar aging abd cyclic aging.
Calendar aging happens virtuallly all the time, even if the cell is constantly used.
Most EV’s are parked /stored for ~20hrs/day.
Calendar aging is set by [Time x Temp x SOC].
(This picture could be seen as an average between quite some research reports. It is not “one of a kind but in line with the common findings.)
Calendar aging is reducing the rate with square root of time. To double the first year, it will take three more years, so four in total.
0% is not completely empty. 0% is defined by the cell manufacturers “stop discharge point”. 100% is defined by the manufacturer’s stop charge point.
(There is research on overdischarge, and even slight overdischarge is not that bad. Not “good” but not that bad).
If you buy a lithium ion cell, for example Panasonic NCR18650 these are made to be used between 100% and 0%. It is possible to charge a lithium ion cell to 130% or so, but the life will be short. The 100% level has been sat to keep a good combination of life and energy stored.
100% is set at 4.20V per cell and is not dangerous to the cell at all. Look at the calendar aging, not really worse than at 70-90%.
This is panasonic ncr18650 very closely telated to tesla model S cells cycled at 100%, 90% and 80% (left to right)
While lower SOC reduce the cyclic wear (reducing high voltage and reducing the DoD) and is one of the reasons Tesla recommends 80% or lower, wich was ”below” 90% for very long time the 100-0% continous cycles made the cell hold up to 625 complete cycles wcich would be about at least 250K km in a LR/P.
100% - 0% will not kill the battery that soon.
I have a lot of lithium cells since 2007. Also studied research since that.
These are made to be charged to 100%. In fact most chargers for anyone can only charge to 100%.
These two cells are two of 35 Panasonic 2170 (“model 3 cells”)I bought ~ 2 year back.
I stored them at different SOC for about one year and checked them at regular intervals. In short, they behaved just like in the first picture highest up. Actually 100% was slightly less bad than 80%. There is a lot of research supporting just that also.
One year ago I felt that the test was done so I used some cells for different tasks and gave away some. Some cells still are laying around with different SOC.
These two has been left at 100% for one year at about 24C all the time.
In short, they have now lost about 9% by being at 100% for two years. Its good damned right on that 25C line.
So charging above 90% or leaving the car at 100% will not kill the battery.
Its the two left that was at 100%.
sublimejackman
Member
TLDR: What you're doing is fine. Your experience is the same all of ours. The number Tesla reports in the car is made up, with no relationstip to the actual range your car can get. Tesla actively lies and then gaslights customers when they bring it up. Just part of the Tesla charm I suppose haha.
Reuters did a good breakdown: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/
sublimejackman
Member
I don't understand how any of this points to my advice being unsound?
I get that there is SIGNIFIGANT nuance with regards to battery degradation. Not arguing that, just trying to give someone some real world advice that meets their needs.
I knew that this would somehow be the outcome. Now the OP question is just being answered with white noise. Shame really, cause what the OP is doing is fine, we all pretty much all agree on that...
Like going to the engineer of your CPU to ask why Windows is running slow on your laptop... Geeezz. Well actually since your clock speed is slightly lower on core 3 and Windows only is address this much RAM...
Last edited:
sublimejackman
Member
Since you dragged me down this rabbit hole. I'm gonna repsond...Recent studies are showing this is more or less a myth too.
It’s not studIES it's just one study, which has been regurgitated by every EV news site and blog. Which is extremely flawed and uses Tesla's EPA/marketing range, that is a made-up number.
Here is the Reuters article on how Tesla gaslights owners about their range: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/
In November, Sandy Munro was interviewed by Forbes. He's an actual expert, using his experience and real studies to come to the conclusion that repeated supercharging degrades EV batteries faster.
Here is the Forbes article: Experts Address Excessive Use Of Tesla Supercharger After Model 3 Dies
Because you are passing on "forum myths" as if they are fact, like:
Which is not a thing, and
Which also has been proven to "not be a thing".
You also are talking about "Tesla makes up range numbers" when they dont, its based on EPA range. They choose which one of the EPA tests to report on, but they are not making it up. You also keep repeating "Tesla gaslights customers", when what is happening is 8 bazillion people ask questions like this OP is about range going down by a few miles and when Tesla says "its fine" people run off to message boards etc complaining about "Teslas not listening to me!" or some variation of that.
If we all stuck to "its fine, charge to whatever level you want, here are some threads to read if you have more questions" instead of either going back and forth or presenting previous forum myths as fact, we would all probably be in better shape.
sublimejackman
Member
Again, I had to pick a number. Generally, charging to higher voltages, degrades the battery faster. This is in't controversial. The OP said they charge 80%. In the real world, saying "hey, keep it under 90% and for daily use you want it below 80% and you'll be fine" isn't bad advice or misleading. It's just how humans comminicate with other humans without posting charts. Any number other than 3.7v per cell technically degrades the battery faster than that exact volage.
Keeping the car above 20% for long periods is just sound advice. It gets cold, sentry and preconditioning stops working, etc.
This is the ultimate undefendable position. Tesla not only picked whatever number best suited marketing, they misrepresent the actual range when people are using the car. That's called lying. Then when the person being lied to points it out and they say no you're wrong, that's gaslighting. Which is what Tesla does. Why even TezLab makes a joke about it in their app.
Again, I knew this was how this was going to go when I posted some general advice about owning a Tesla.
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
You continue to conflate EPA range with degradation and suggesting one can’t be used to calculate the other. This suggests to me you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how these things work. The Reuters article doesn’t say what you think it does and has nothing to do with the validity of calculating battery degradation based on observed battery capacity from the BMS.
From your own source:
1) A singular anecdotal experience of a failed battery in a Model 3 by a user who fast charged a lot. Zero evidence of causation provided. Batteries fail for a lot of reasons and most of them actually have little to nothing to do with the cells themselves.
2) Munro citing “rule of thumb” type anecdotes that don’t stand up to actual data (again, start reading AAKEE’s detailed posts if you’re interested in actually learning). Munro is not a battery chemistry expert. Not even close. He’s a manufacturing expert that has found some YouTube notoriety by being friendly to Tesla.
3) An actual battery expert saying fast charging starts to cause permanent damage “somewhere around 4C” - which by the way is approximately 330kw on a long range Model 3/Y pack - and further stating that any claim trying to pinpoint damage from fast charging is dubious because it’s entirely anecdotal without large datasets. You know, like the Recurrent one you’ve dismissed out of hand because you don’t understand the relationship between EPA testing, displayed range, and observed battery degradation in a Tesla.
Darn it sparky, I told you it’s Christmas. Gonna need some more ‘nog if you want to keep droning on about this.
"Cold, sentry, preconditioning" sure, but you put it forth as degradation advice and for that its not appropriate. As for the rest, its the same thing in every other thread that goes down this rabbit hole which is why I generally dont participate in any of these threads.
As I said, there are probably 100s of them at this point and they all end up at the same point, so there isnt anything someone is going to learn in this one that wasnt already gone over ad nauseum in multiple other threads on this topic.
Anyway, happy holidays, I will check out on this topic, hope everyone has a nice holiday season.
sublimejackman
Member
"In the charts above, the y-axis shows the percentage of original range as shown on the cars’ dashboards. Note that the dashboard range in Teslas is different from its Real Range, which is a value that factors in the range effects of temperature, drive style, and terrain"
Is there anyone here who would argue that the range reported on the dashboad isn't artifically inflated? Like we all know the dashboard range is kept artifically high. This also isn't controversial.
Not talking about damage. Never have, talking about degradation. Lithium batteries degrade faster when charged to a higher voltage or at faster rate. This too is not controversal.
I'm at the inlaws. I can do this all day
Darn it sparky, I told you it’s Christmas. Gonna need some more ‘nog if you want to keep droning on about this.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Do you have supporting data for this single point of perfection for capacity loss minimization?
Sure but you did not present it this way. I think you have an obligation in context to try to make that clear.
I think the EPA needs to have a better test which properly represents real-world highway range in good conditions . Tesla provides rated ranges which are legal per EPA rules. They’re not exaggerated from what is allowed (they use a scalar other than 0.7 but that is allowed and even if they used 0.7 the problem would still exist).
All of that discussion is separate and unrelated to capacity loss.
I agree people don’t understand how it works, this can lead to upset, and some manufacturers will have real-world ranges closer to ratings. There are a variety of reasons for this.
But not really relevant. The OP was asking about their range display, what it meant, and not about real-world range.
The number on the dashboard has nothing to do with range. It’s energy. Rated miles are units of energy. Not distance. This is not controversial. I agree that that indicator should be denominated in kWh but I understand why Tesla does not do that.
There’s no way to artificially inflate the number since it is just the car’s estimate of energy available, and it is as accurate as the BMS can be (it can make errors). You don’t even explain what you mean and to my knowledge in Model 3/Y there has been no funny business since 2018.
I think diverting into constant griping about Tesla taking advantage of EPA rules is not helpful to answering the OP’s question.
The answer is that the OP’s battery has lost capacity, which is normal, and this loss is directly shown (as an estimate) by the rated range indicator (the estimates can move up and down but generally trend downwards!). This loss of capacity will have real impact on real-world range, and in an EPA dyno test in a warehouse, this vehicle would no longer meet the original rated range specified (it would end up being close to what is displayed for rated range, plus whatever random variability is accepted for EPA testing).
There are ways to minimize this capacity loss (if desired) that have been demonstrated by data posted in this forum. Generally it cannot be “healed” after being lost - though a small amount of recovery perhaps is possible with low SOC (debatable!).
Merry Christmas all.
How many miles do you actually get? Uphill or downhill. With wind or without? Highway or city driving? Winter or summer? How is that compared to an ICE?
sublimejackman
Member
I'm sure it's not exactly 3.7v. My point was that no matter what I said, I was gonna get the "well actually". When all I wanted to do was give advice. Which is good advice.
Yeah, looking back at it, I could have made it clearer. My point was to convey just some good practices not a complete methodly for all my advice. But yeah I could've done better.
Absolutely. As I mentioned above there should be no single "range". It should be a range of ranges. And those ranges should account for normal degradation. Example "After one year of ownership you can expect a range of up to 190-250 miles between charges"
I didn't do this. I brought up the fact that the marketing/EPA/dashboard range is artificial and that there are options for finding the true range. ie. TezLab or switching to percent mode.
All stuff I addressed in my first post. That the range on the dashboard is detached from reality. That 5-10% degradation was normal in the first year. That once the lithium is "dead", it's not recoverable.
Merry Christmas!!
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
No. Some of us just understand that it isn’t related to the current discussion in any way, shape or form.
For the purposes of this discussion, damage and degradation are synonymous.
I do not think it is inflated.
I did read a lot of the EPA test’s protocols and they actually drive lomger in thr test than the advertised range. They in principle multiply the result with .7 to get the EPA range (a bit simplyfied but about like that).
The EPA range leaves quite some for the manufacturer to adjust the end result, but Tesla follows the US laws about this.
I actually took my old M3P and drove it a real life drive 100-0%. It was 1.5 year old and about 45K km on the ODO, so degradation already was a factor.
I drove from home, 240km to work, I kept the legal limit of 80/100km/h mostly. Parked with sentry off during the day.
Then drove home in evening, I did set the cruise control on the way home at the speed that would hit 0% when arriving at home. In this case the car estimated 0.%
From memory this was 93km/h (road speed 80 sometimes and 100 sometimes.)
In the last 30-40 km dense fog hindered to keep 80 km/h so I had to reduce the speed and arrived close to home after ~480 km but I still had energy left so I drove in the litjer parts of town, about 70-80 km/h.
Ended up with 513km driven, and the only part driven actually slower than normal was the ”fog drive” and the part to drive the battery to 0% displayed.
The EPA range for the M3P 21 is 315mi/507km, and my car did that and a little more, after 1.5 years/45k km.
From my logged data, the lowest consumption happens between 20-25C
(EPA test done at 23C with the AC off).
This was 15th of August and about 17C on the day and slightly less in the evening drive home. AC set as normal on 21 or 22C.
In my world the EPA range is correct and the car will do it if you drive at the EPA test temperature and with a moderate speed.
The EPA range is not “real world driving” in most conditions, but in some conditions/ moderate speed it is.
BTW, I have very much things logged from my M3P with teslalogger, and had this screen in fromt of the steering wheel:
In my case I have followed battery energy on board, energy used and SOC and range.
There is nothing fishy with the range display etc.
The car (most often) shows the full EPA range when new at full charge, this includes the buffer (at 100%), this is correct as the EPA test drives until the car stops = useing up the buffer also.
- Status