8% battery degredation after 16k miles!!
Discussion
gangzoom said:
The fact EV drivers seem to happily accept its OK for a car barely 12 months old with not that miles on the clock to loss 8% of battery capacity shows how mad things are.
But the owner is still getting better range than VW quote… Edited by gangzoom on Wednesday 17th November 23:33
Max_Torque said:
With an EV, the battery looses capacity as it ages, but the powertrain does not reduce in efficiency nor increase in consumption. The range simply goes down because you can't "fill up" with as much 'lecy as you could when it was new. This is analogous to the fuel tank of an ICE getting smaller as it ages
Yep, there is no perfect solution....While an EV might drop in its range over an extended period of time, an ICE forgets where it left its ponies... Your average 20 year old ICE car will have dropped in power (MPG isnt necessarily a great guide), but clearly its fuel tank isnt going to get smaller. It isnt perfect and its just how it goes.
Now, of course, as an ICE ages, small and incremental improvements can be made to the engine to make it more efficient and ultimately powerful - replace those lost ponies! We havent quite got there with EV's yet, but you never know - multiple manufacturers are doing updates over the air to improve range (Audi was the most recent I think, though Ford also upgraded their Mach-e with extra range). Hopefully we will see support from the manufacturers to improve things over time, but I am really hoping that the aftermarket steps in. Imagine upgraded battery management systems, more efficient swap in motors or even cost effective ways to replace dead packs / batteries efficiently. But lets see, I fear EV's will be throw away objects, which will be a shame.
gangzoom said:
The fact EV drivers seem to happily accept its OK for a car barely 12 months old with not that miles on the clock to loss 8% of battery capacity shows how mad things are.
We have a 2009 Mazda that works as well as today as it did in 2009, have had nothing on it replace but tyres and brake pads. I can pretty much bet everything I own our 2017 Tesla will last so well come 2030, infact I suspect the Mazda will still be going and Tesla might be off to the scrap heap unless I pay £20kish for a new battery.
The example given did 9k miles in 3 months, rapid charging from < 10% to 100% every couple of days. I don't think it's a scenario 99.9% of EV owners need to worry about somehow?We have a 2009 Mazda that works as well as today as it did in 2009, have had nothing on it replace but tyres and brake pads. I can pretty much bet everything I own our 2017 Tesla will last so well come 2030, infact I suspect the Mazda will still be going and Tesla might be off to the scrap heap unless I pay £20kish for a new battery.
Edited by gangzoom on Wednesday 17th November 23:33
The vast majority of 12 year old ICE cars are certainly not working as well today as they did when new, and haven't gotten that far without work being required.
MrGTI6 said:
My old Vectra claimed to do 28.5mpg combined when it was new in 2001. Still on its original engine 20 years later, it averages 33.9mpg. Obviously a lot of that comes down to driving style and the kind of journeys it does, but the point is that it's no less efficient than it was when new, or at least any difference is negligible. This is despite two decades of use.
I’d suggest you are mixing up engine efficiency with energy efficiency vs average speed.Over the last 20 years, average speeds and speed limits have been reducing anyway and it’s likely that your driving style will also have ‘matured’.
Lower average speeds deliver significantly higher economy, which has probably more than compensated for a probable DECREASE in engine efficiency during that time.
untakenname said:
I can see this being a minefield for second hand purchases, you won't know if the previous owner charged slowly overnight in a garage at 7kw charge rate or if they parked outside over winter and only used 50+kw fastchargers.
Simple enough to do a battery health check on most EV's. The available range shown when compared to SOC % will also be a pretty clear indicator?A lot easier than working out if an ICE car has been driven hard regularly from cold for example, or just done lots of short trips where nothing has had a chance to warm up.
GT9 said:
MrGTI6 said:
My old Vectra claimed to do 28.5mpg combined when it was new in 2001. Still on its original engine 20 years later, it averages 33.9mpg. Obviously a lot of that comes down to driving style and the kind of journeys it does, but the point is that it's no less efficient than it was when new, or at least any difference is negligible. This is despite two decades of use.
I’d suggest you are mixing up engine efficiency with energy efficiency vs average speed.Over the last 20 years, average speeds and speed limits have been reducing anyway and it’s likely that your driving style will also have ‘matured’.
Lower average speeds deliver significantly higher economy, which has probably more than compensated for a probable DECREASE in engine efficiency during that time.
As alluded to in my first paragraph, driving style and the kind of driving that the car does will have a significant effect on fuel consumption, but any actual difference in MPG is negligible after 20 years of use, meaning the car is no less usable than it was when new; it'll still go just as far on a tank.
Max_Torque said:
MrGTI6 said:
My old Vectra claimed to do 28.5mpg combined when it was new in 2001. Still on its original engine 20 years later, it averages 33.9mpg. Obviously a lot of that comes down to driving style and the kind of journeys it does, but the point is that it's no less efficient than it was when new, or at least any difference is negligible. This is despite two decades of use.
I guess buying a used electric car in another 20 years' time will result in ending up with something incapable of achieving the figures it could when new. Will the value of older electric cars therefore be primarily determined by remaining range capability as opposed to mileage, condition, etc.?
I'd suggest understanding the difference between efficiency and consumption before getting too ranty!I guess buying a used electric car in another 20 years' time will result in ending up with something incapable of achieving the figures it could when new. Will the value of older electric cars therefore be primarily determined by remaining range capability as opposed to mileage, condition, etc.?
SWoll said:
Simple enough to do a battery health check on most EV's. The available range shown when compared to SOC % will also be a pretty clear indicator?
A lot easier than working out if an ICE car has been driven hard regularly from cold for example, or just done lots of short trips where nothing has had a chance to warm up.
This is an interesting point and hopefully EVs will help reduce fraudulent behaviour as well.A lot easier than working out if an ICE car has been driven hard regularly from cold for example, or just done lots of short trips where nothing has had a chance to warm up.
Regular browsing of Autotrader suggests to me that mileage blocking is become more and more prevalent, particularly on the more desirable cars bought new on the lowest available finance package and now coming to the second hand market for the first time.
When I see a 2 year old car advertised with 6000 miles on the clock but with the drivers seat bolster looking like it has seen 100,000 miles, my spidey senses start tingling. Particularly if the car is being sold from a dealer in one of the more obvious locations for this sort of thing.
MrGTI6 said:
Thanks for pointing out the difference between engine and energy efficiency. I suppose what I mean is that in spite of being an old shed, the car is still capable of doing exactly what it could when it was new from an owner's point of view.
As alluded to in my first paragraph, driving style and the kind of driving that the car does will have a significant effect on fuel consumption, but any actual difference in MPG is negligible after 20 years of use, meaning the car is no less usable than it was when new; it'll still go just as far on a tank.
I've posted this graphic before, but here it is again to give you an idea of the difference speed makes to economy, i.e. energy consumption per mile.As alluded to in my first paragraph, driving style and the kind of driving that the car does will have a significant effect on fuel consumption, but any actual difference in MPG is negligible after 20 years of use, meaning the car is no less usable than it was when new; it'll still go just as far on a tank.
Max_Torque said:
I'd suggest understanding the difference between efficiency and consumption before getting too ranty!
You old ICE has in fact reduced both in efficiency and increased in consumption as it wears. Effects like piston ring wear, worn fuel injection components and worn valve gear, and increased parastic losses due to worn oil and water pumps all absolutely have an effect as the engine (and transmission too) wears.
However, because the vehicle was so catastrophically in-efficient even when in perfect working order when new, you mostly don't notice the difference, because day to day differences in environment, driving style and traffic flow make more difference. However it is absolutely measureable when tested under controlled conditions.
With an EV, the battery looses capacity as it ages, but the powertrain does not reduce in efficiency nor increase in consumption. The range simply goes down because you can't "fill up" with as much 'lecy as you could when it was new. This is analogous to the fuel tank of an ICE getting smaller as it ages
The other thing worth noting is that because our electricity grid is greening over time, the effective tailpipe emissions and CO2 of an BEV actually do reduce as it ages. Your ICE's do not, in fact, if we took your 20 year old car and ran it over the certification cycle, you would almost certainly find at it has tailpipe emissons massively higher than when new, precisely because lots of critical engine and aftertreatment parts have worn and reduced in efficiency.
Typical fleet buy-back studies by various OE's show emissions degredations of between 50 and 1000 percent for cars up to 5 years / 60k miles old and CO2 emissions sitting at around 10 to 15% higher than when new
How can you run a calculation that includes the greening of the grid over time on one side but opts to ignore the greening of the oil industry on the other? It's not as if the latter is negligible when you go back just a decade. You old ICE has in fact reduced both in efficiency and increased in consumption as it wears. Effects like piston ring wear, worn fuel injection components and worn valve gear, and increased parastic losses due to worn oil and water pumps all absolutely have an effect as the engine (and transmission too) wears.
However, because the vehicle was so catastrophically in-efficient even when in perfect working order when new, you mostly don't notice the difference, because day to day differences in environment, driving style and traffic flow make more difference. However it is absolutely measureable when tested under controlled conditions.
With an EV, the battery looses capacity as it ages, but the powertrain does not reduce in efficiency nor increase in consumption. The range simply goes down because you can't "fill up" with as much 'lecy as you could when it was new. This is analogous to the fuel tank of an ICE getting smaller as it ages
The other thing worth noting is that because our electricity grid is greening over time, the effective tailpipe emissions and CO2 of an BEV actually do reduce as it ages. Your ICE's do not, in fact, if we took your 20 year old car and ran it over the certification cycle, you would almost certainly find at it has tailpipe emissons massively higher than when new, precisely because lots of critical engine and aftertreatment parts have worn and reduced in efficiency.
Typical fleet buy-back studies by various OE's show emissions degredations of between 50 and 1000 percent for cars up to 5 years / 60k miles old and CO2 emissions sitting at around 10 to 15% higher than when new
Anyway, is the bulk of the front end battery degradation due to lower grade cells in the battery mix revealing themselves upon first contact with use?
Auto will just keep tightening their cell grading requirements as costs decline so packs should become better quality going forward.
Replacing old packs is just going to be part of the EV life cycle and a tipping point in each market will form where the vendor must carry out that replacement in order to find a buyer etc.
The real problem just remains the recycling. Most auto has committed to resolving this by selling an old pack on before it needs to be dismantled thus, they offload that risk like a short dated lease hold property. But genuine
, commercially viable recycling of duff cells doesn't exist yet. The most common treatment for a duff Li cell is to burn it. Seems quite incredible doesn't it that to dispose of kaput Li cells the default practice is to burn them.
China, being the oldest and largest EV market is still burning defunct Li cells despite having a growing market in old batteries. What will be interesting is that we in the West probably can't do what we normally do and dump the waste in a third world country as we seem to genuinely trying to get away from manufacturing in Asia, dumping in Africa as our long term eco solution which means an entity is going to have to bear the end cost of disposal in due course and we don't know if it will be pushed onto the user, manufacturer, vendor or the last entity to be holding them. It's an area the battery industry is a little too quiet on at present and we do need to start planning openly how end of life for these items is going to be dealt with. There's going to be lots of money made in ten/twenty years time in this area.
gangzoom said:
manracer said:
Beat me to it!
I know it levels off after an initial drop off
https://insideevs.com/news/525820/tesla-battery-ca...
Everyone seem to forget that Tesla have essentially handicapped every single 85kWh pack car in order to avoid having to replace them all under warranty.I know it levels off after an initial drop off
https://insideevs.com/news/525820/tesla-battery-ca...
The longevity of EVs is far from proven. In the surreal world on PH everyone buys a new car every week so who cares how long things work for. But look on the road and your see plenty of people are driving around in 10 year old+ cars.
EVs are looking like they simply don't has the lasting the potential of combustion cars. Add in the need for off road parking or you are faced with having to waste time with public rapid charging. EVs are going to cause a big step backwards for social mobility, that cannot be seen as progress by anyone.
Edited by gangzoom on Wednesday 17th November 23:33
Richard-G said:
Is this gangzoom guy for real? you’ve taken a sensationalist YouTube vid, linked from a sensationalist clickbait site and have started posting opinions from it as fact in a sensationalist style for attention and have just stated EV's are, and i quote, "going to cause a big step backwards for social mobility". Is everything ok at home gangzoom?
With respect to his comments about Tesla handicapping the 85 battery packs, its widely known that Tesla sent a software update which resulted in the BMS nobbling many of the 85 battery packs to protect them - some think it was linked to a number of fires caused by failing battery cells being charged too hard, others just to prevent the bricking of the battery during warranty (google chargegate and batterygate). Tesla have form, they did a similar thing with the MCU/big screen where they turned off logging to reduce the nuber of in warranty failures, the regulators got involved and Tesla were forced to extend the warranty. And if you want more information, take a read of the latest Tesla warranty documentation which provides a max degradation of 30%, however they explicitly exclude any losses caused by software updates, so if they deem the battery should adapt downwards due to say lots of rapid charging and change the algorythm to do so, they can with impunity. georgeyboy12345 said:
Sensationalist nonsense aside, it does raise an interesting point when all these EVs end up on the used market in a few years. Will terms like “home charged” or “never rapid charged” become key selling points?
Tesla Bjorn did 60k in a couple of years on his model 3 with a very large number of rapid charges, it has almost no impact on battery life 
Richard-G said:
Is this gangzoom guy for real? you’ve taken a sensationalist YouTube vid, linked from a sensationalist clickbait site and have started posting opinions from it as fact in a sensationalist style for attention and have just stated EV's are, and i quote, "going to cause a big step backwards for social mobility". Is everything ok at home gangzoom?
If you cannot charge your EV at home you have to rely on DC rapid charging. The more you DC rapid charger the more you suffer battery degredation, so you not only waste time, money (because DC rapid chargers are more expensive), and now you are left with a car that needs a new battery every few years.Versus right now a £1000 combustion car will get you to work and do the school run as well any £100k car with no increase in time wasted (like finding a public DC rapid chargers).
So who are going to suffer the most interms of personal mobility with EV?? Whilst on here people worry about driving none stop their European holiday homes, the reality is an EV with a knackered battery is no where near as useful as an old combustion car that most people buy.
None this affects me, with an choice of an eBike, EV, combustion car. But any one can see how it will effect alot of people less fortunate with access to less ££££.
Edited by gangzoom on Friday 19th November 11:37
Funny this should come up.
It’s likely that my next company car will be an EV. As I rent I don’t have the option of charging at home. But this doesn’t particularly bother me as I have/will have good access to public fast chargers, AND it seems the majority of my working locations have a mix of fast and slow chargers. It’s also likely the car will be of the Skoda Enyaq, Kia eNiro ilk. Again, no bad thing.
Setting aside the “It’s company car, who cares?!” thing, what impacts is near-daily fast-charging likely to have, assuming I’m charging/topping up from, say, 20-ish to 80-ish% rather than 0-100%?
It’s likely that my next company car will be an EV. As I rent I don’t have the option of charging at home. But this doesn’t particularly bother me as I have/will have good access to public fast chargers, AND it seems the majority of my working locations have a mix of fast and slow chargers. It’s also likely the car will be of the Skoda Enyaq, Kia eNiro ilk. Again, no bad thing.
Setting aside the “It’s company car, who cares?!” thing, what impacts is near-daily fast-charging likely to have, assuming I’m charging/topping up from, say, 20-ish to 80-ish% rather than 0-100%?
Dave Hedgehog said:
georgeyboy12345 said:
Sensationalist nonsense aside, it does raise an interesting point when all these EVs end up on the used market in a few years. Will terms like “home charged” or “never rapid charged” become key selling points?
Tesla Bjorn did 60k in a couple of years on his model 3 with a very large number of rapid charges, it has almost no impact on battery life georgeyboy12345 said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
georgeyboy12345 said:
Sensationalist nonsense aside, it does raise an interesting point when all these EVs end up on the used market in a few years. Will terms like “home charged” or “never rapid charged” become key selling points?
Tesla Bjorn did 60k in a couple of years on his model 3 with a very large number of rapid charges, it has almost no impact on battery life 
Edited by Dave Hedgehog on Friday 19th November 14:21
Bjorn isn't a scientist and while his tests of interesting, I can;t say I agree with his conclusions.
The example quoted - he knows that he did in terms of how much fast charging, but the challenge to his test was you need 2 identical cars and one rapid charged and one not rapid charged a lot fo compare.
Now some will race off to Teslafi and pull the stats, but Teslafi is wrong as that uses the more superficial data via the API and that is prone to BMS drift which often results in degradation seemingly appearing but a few simple steps reverses it.
Another example of Bjorn missing the point was the M3P cold weather and low state of charge performance. For those that don't know a year ago the latest M3P battery with heat pump cars when cold and at around 30% state of charge would take something daft like 8 seconds to hit 60. He repeated the test but rather than test the car when cold at 30% SoC he started full, and warm, and then kept repeating the tests as the battery cooled down. His conclusion was Tesla had fixed the issue, well it was kind of true, but it looked much more like Tesla had simply tuend off the heat pump so the battery stayed warm. From his test we have no idea what the car would do if you jumped in first thing in a morning with a 30 or 40% SoC and drove it which was what the complaint was.
All goes to show there's still lots to learn and amateur sluths using an app that shows them data but without the knowledge of what the numbers really mean, how accurate they might be, whats comparable to what, etc just add more noise rather than actually answer the questions.
The example quoted - he knows that he did in terms of how much fast charging, but the challenge to his test was you need 2 identical cars and one rapid charged and one not rapid charged a lot fo compare.
Now some will race off to Teslafi and pull the stats, but Teslafi is wrong as that uses the more superficial data via the API and that is prone to BMS drift which often results in degradation seemingly appearing but a few simple steps reverses it.
Another example of Bjorn missing the point was the M3P cold weather and low state of charge performance. For those that don't know a year ago the latest M3P battery with heat pump cars when cold and at around 30% state of charge would take something daft like 8 seconds to hit 60. He repeated the test but rather than test the car when cold at 30% SoC he started full, and warm, and then kept repeating the tests as the battery cooled down. His conclusion was Tesla had fixed the issue, well it was kind of true, but it looked much more like Tesla had simply tuend off the heat pump so the battery stayed warm. From his test we have no idea what the car would do if you jumped in first thing in a morning with a 30 or 40% SoC and drove it which was what the complaint was.
All goes to show there's still lots to learn and amateur sluths using an app that shows them data but without the knowledge of what the numbers really mean, how accurate they might be, whats comparable to what, etc just add more noise rather than actually answer the questions.
Jimbo. said:
Funny this should come up.
It’s likely that my next company car will be an EV. As I rent I don’t have the option of charging at home. But this doesn’t particularly bother me as I have/will have good access to public fast chargers, AND it seems the majority of my working locations have a mix of fast and slow chargers. It’s also likely the car will be of the Skoda Enyaq, Kia eNiro ilk. Again, no bad thing.
Setting aside the “It’s company car, who cares?!” thing, what impacts is near-daily fast-charging likely to have, assuming I’m charging/topping up from, say, 20-ish to 80-ish% rather than 0-100%?
We've been renting for 2 years and have always charged at home. 3 pin plug charger and an extension lead will give you 7-10mph of charge so an easy 50-100 miles overnight at very cheap rates.It’s likely that my next company car will be an EV. As I rent I don’t have the option of charging at home. But this doesn’t particularly bother me as I have/will have good access to public fast chargers, AND it seems the majority of my working locations have a mix of fast and slow chargers. It’s also likely the car will be of the Skoda Enyaq, Kia eNiro ilk. Again, no bad thing.
Setting aside the “It’s company car, who cares?!” thing, what impacts is near-daily fast-charging likely to have, assuming I’m charging/topping up from, say, 20-ish to 80-ish% rather than 0-100%?
Edited by SWoll on Friday 19th November 15:11
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff