At 200,000 Miles, This Tesla Model S Experienced Only 6% Battery Degradation

11 months ago by Steven Loveday 160

tesloop model s 2

Tesloop Tesla Model S

Tesloop, a California-based company offering transportation services. via a chauffeured Tesla, started with a Tesla Model S, back in July of 2015. That car has now exceeded 200,000 miles. While there are surely some others out there that have reached this pinnacle, with Tesloop, reliable, first-hand information about the vehicle is available.

Teslaloop Also Offers The Tesla Model X. We Will Check Back When It Hits 200,000 Miles.

Tesloop Also Offers The Tesla Model X. We Will Check Back When It Hits 200,000 Miles.

Tesloop began primarily transporting customers from Los Angeles to Las Vegas. However, there are now additional connections and routes. Checking the Tesloop website, we learned that new routes are being added and advertised.

Kristen Hall-Geisler from Techcrunch, was able to contact Tesloop employee, Rahul Sonnad, to inquire about the car. She points out that he made her aware that most of the miles were highway miles, in Autopilot Mode (Tesla assures that this should make no difference). Sonnad said that the Model S battery has only degraded six percent, and it’s been charged to full capacity on a daily basis. Note that charging to 90% is Tesla’s recommended default. He explained:

“For your daily driver, you don’t fully charge unless you’re doing a long trip. We’re doing a long trip every day. We save, like, three minutes in charging in Barstow if we fully charge beforehand. We decided that we’re gonna suck it up, fully charge, and let it degrade. We figured that if it degraded enough, we could take it off a Vegas route and put it on a local Orange County route.”

He admitted that there were some problems with the vehicle, however, if Tesla had not called and made them aware, the problems would have gone unnoticed. At about 30,000 miles the car alerted Tesla of low engine power. Tesla came and quickly replaced the front motor.

The other interesting problem occurred at the 200,000 miles mark. The range indicator was projecting estimated remaining miles inaccurately, causing the Tesla to power down shortly before it was out of miles. Tesla explained that this is caused by a change in the state of battery chemicals due to the high mileage. The car’s computer wasn’t set up to account for the change, but Tesloop was assured that a simple “over-the-air” software update would be a quick fix. Since the update wasn’t going to be ready for a few months, Tesla replaced the battery, solving the issue and giving us a window into the capacity lost at 200k.

“We got our 6% range back with the new battery,” Sonnad said with a laugh reports TechCrunch, “But had the firmware been updated, we’d be fine and plugging along.”

The only costs of ownership Tesloop has incurred are $190 to replace the 12-volt battery, and about $2,500 in tires. The 8-year warranty offered by Tesla has covered everything else. Sonnad pointed out that in 200,000 miles, Tesloop hasn’t even had to replace the brakes.

Check out Tesloop’s promo video.

Source: TechCrunch, Tesloop

Tags: , , ,

160 responses to "At 200,000 Miles, This Tesla Model S Experienced Only 6% Battery Degradation"

  1. Taser54 says:

    Telsa replaced the battery.

    1. floydboy says:

      The 12 volt battery.

      1. ffbj says:

        …and Tesla did not replace it, the owners did. So wrong on both counts.

        “The only costs of ownership Tesloop has incurred are $190 to replace the 12-volt battery…”

        It’s called reading and comprehension, for a reason. Zap! Tazer54

        1. ffbj says:

          Oops, I mean Taser54. Hoisted by my own petard.

          1. sven says:

            Yes you did, but not for the reason you stated . . .

            http://www.straightdope.com/images/art/1978/780714v.gif

          2. AlphaEdge says:

            LOL!

        2. speculawyer says:

          I believe they did change the main battery but AFTER it hit 200,000 miles.

          ————————-
          Then, just as the car hit 200,000 miles, the range estimator became inaccurate. Though the car didn’t actually lose any range, the estimator would say it could go another ten miles—and then power down. Tesla looked into the issue, and told Tesloop that there’s a battery chemistry state that high-mileage cars go into, and the software isn’t properly compensating for that change. There will be a firmware update in three months that will take care of the discrepancy, but Tesla just replaced the battery to solve the problem. “We got our 6% range back with the new battery,” Sonnad said with a laugh. “But had the firmware been updated, we’d be fine and plugging along.”
          https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/29/tales-from-a-tesla-model-s-at-200k-miles/

          —————–

          I don’t believe it only lost 6%, I suspect the software hid some of the decline. But either way, this is an amazing achievement!

          This should shut up all those people that constantly say “You are going to have to replace the battery in your EV in 3 to 5 years. Herp derp.”

          1. SparkEV says:

            Yeah, there is something strange about the whole battery replacement thing and 6%, but it shows that decently designed EV battery can certainly go 200K miles with many, many DCFC cycles.

            That 3 to 5 year thing came thanks to Nissan Leaf. It shows how poorly designed battery can be awful. Consumers should pay attention to this when they get EV. Unfortunately, I doubt Nissan will do better next go around.

            1. SJC says:

              GM did extensive testing on the Volt batteries, I have seen no accelerated life testing done by Tesla. There is 10 year 100,000 or 5 year 200,000, lithium ion have a calender life as well.

              What happens after 10 year 100,000 on 1000 cars? Who knows?

              1. SparkEV says:

                You can extrapolate based on past trends. My SparkEV with hundreds of DCFC and running it down many times and sitting in hot summer sun lost 2.2% in 1.5 years + 13K miles. Then 15 years, 130K miles would be

                0.978 ^ 10 = 80%

                Of course there are no no guarantees after 8th year, but this shows roughly what to expect with properly designed battery system.

                1. SJC says:

                  The 8 year warranty is for failure not fade,
                  It is prorated as well. People don’t know the facts but spend a fortune…odd.

                  1. The battery warranties are requirements of California law (and the dozen or so states that follow California vehicle emission laws).

                    8 year / 100,000 miles for EVs
                    8 year / 150,000 miles for hybrids (because everybody knows that an EV can’t go as far as an EV)

                    It does NOT cover capacity.

            2. speculawyer says:

              Yeah, only losing 6% of capacity after 200K miles seems like they are violating the 2nd law of thermodynamics. I suspect it was more like 10% to 20% but the software hides the decline by not giving you access to full capacity initially and then later allowing it to go to a deep depth of discharge.

              But as I said, I think the fact that it made to 200K miles on a single battery is a HUGE achievement. That has been one thing I’ve worried about with the new EVs . . . what would happen when you get over 100K miles . . . would the battery lose the ability to hold much charge? Apparently the answer is NO.

              1. SparkEV says:

                But also as I said, if you get something like Leaf without thermal management, you will lose range quickly. Same with eGolf, though I haven’t heard much about them (yet). Consumers should pay attention to battery tech before buying EV, but unfortunately, they don’t seem to do so.

                Also, I wonder about non-liquid cooled batteries like i3. While the car is parked and not plugged in (ie, TMS not active), liquid would provide thermal momentum, but gas cooled i3 (and SoulEV, iMiev, etc) won’t have as much.

                1. sven says:

                  IIRC, the new Prius Prime has an air-cooled battery but it doesn’t have DC fast charging ability. I’m guessing the cost saving lack of liquid cooling is one the reasons, aside from a small battery, why Toyota didn’t put DC fast charging into the Prius Prim. We’ll find out soon enough how it does in hot climates like Arizona, and in frigid climates when the battery is cold soaked. Supposedly, the Prius Prime can heat/condition a cold battery if it’s plugged in.

                  1. Jay Cole says:

                    Just a quick note, CHAdeMO DC fast charging is available on the car in Japan (but mostly because the ability to export energy is BIG in Japan given the grid/recent history and the lack of 240V home connections)

                    Toyota bills it as “80% in 20 minutes

                    1. ModernMarvelFan says:

                      80% of 8.8kWh is 7kWh.

                      7kWh in 20 minutes is kind of funny, isn’t it?

                      That is 21kW speed which is about what a Level 2 Tesla can do. =)

                    2. Jay Cole says:

                      It is less than that, as almost 3 kWh is reserve/not usable…but not an unexpected result. You just can’t have 5 kWh cars taking in full ~50 kW charge rates.

                      Basic maths on current battery chem charge profiling has an unwritten rule of a charge rate that is less than 2x that of the battery capacity. Off the top of my head, I think DC CHAdeMO peak is low double digits for the Prime.

                      The actual battery stress level (and thus the need for a decent BMS system) taking even say a 12 kW charge would be decently high…on the flip side, the time taking the peak charge would be relatively short.

                    3. sven says:

                      D’oh! That’s right, I had forgotten about CHAdeMO being an option in Japan.

                  2. SparkEV says:

                    Prime is a hybrid, and they don’t charge to high SoC. That may save them some (much) degradation. My Prius with NiMH and fan-cooled lasted 149.5K miles and 11 years by not (dis)charging to extremes. I suspect better engineered Prime would do at least as well and probably lot better.

                    Leaf has no cooling at all, not even fans, unlike Prius. And being BEV, many are charged close to 100% and allowed to sit in hot sun / garages. This is when liquid cooling might help when under hot sun.

              2. Tech01x says:

                The BMS can’t hide the decline. The owners/drivers are range charging almost every day, if not every day. They are using the entire battery. No place to hide the degradation. Tesla exposes 96.2% of the battery for a full range charge when new.

              3. William Howland says:

                This sounds like Pushi constantly invoking thermodynamic laws whenever he wants to sound important, I’m curious as to what part of the law is being violated here, as charging, and discharging of a secondary cell is basically a reversible process.

                A refrigeration compressor doing a constant-entropy compression, is useful when using refrigeration charts since it is directly observable what the heat-of- compression will be by following the constant-entropy lines on the refrigeration chart. And this process is clear irreversible, just as more rain makes more grass, but more fertilizer does *not* necessarily make more rain, and is as irreversible.

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  Err, refrigerant charts. The ‘lost work’ is truly lost, – one cannot get the low temperature suction gas back to where it was by putting the heat back into the compressor, nor expecting a torque ‘engine’ to suddenly appear at the compressor shaft. Whereas, a battery charging and a battery discharging are basically reversibles of each other, without too much percentage error.

                2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                  Hmmm, if I “invoke” the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, it’s because I think it’s relevant to the subject… and I don’t think it is here. The 2nd Law has to do with efficiency; the dumbed-down version is “No reaction is 100% efficient”.

                  The claim of only 6% loss of battery capacity when charging to 100%* daily, with 200,000 miles on the odometer, sounds like an outlier to me. As has been said in comments above, it appears likely that the car’s display was under-reporting the actual capacity loss.

                  Now, that’s not to say that such a low percentage of loss, despite regularly charging to 100%, is impossible. But I think it would be rather far from the average.

                  More on this subject here:

                  https://electrek.co/2016/06/06/tesla-model-s-battery-pack-data-degradation/

                  *As noted above, when a Tesla car’s display reads “100% charge”, it’s not really 100% of the full battery capacity. Rather, it’s 100% of what Tesla allows a driver to use; perhaps it’s best described as “100% of usable capacity”. Tesla reserves a few percent (a very few) of capacity on the top and on the bottom, to prevent premature aging.

                  * * * * *

                  Bill, it’s too bad that you think I post things just to “sound important”. But that says more about you than about me; it shows how very little you understand my motives for reading and posting on this website.

                  1. Bill Howland says:

                    2nd law of thermodynamics: ” It is impossible for a process to have as its sole result the transfer of heat from a cooler body to a hotter one.”

                    I’m sure you don’t understand what even that simple statement means. I already explained irreversibility.

                  2. bogdan says:

                    The second law of thermodynamics wasn’t violated because they didn’said that the capactiy remained 100% after 200k miles.
                    It had a degradation whitch is in conformity with the 2nd law.
                    On the other side: one should not just believe what other are telling. Don’t ever trust a chart, unless you faked it yourself!

                    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                      It’ sad to see so many people who fail to understand basic fundamentals of science, like the Three Laws of Thermodynamics.

                      It’s useful to remember C.P. Snow’s famous (and humorous) layman’s summary of the Three Laws:

                      1. You can’t win

                      2. You can’t break even

                      3. You can’t quit the game

                      The second law, which says that waste heat increases in a system or process, and no reaction or process is 100% efficient, certainly applies to charging batteries and using stored energy to power a car. Even with highly efficient electric motors, there is still some loss due to less than 100% efficiency. The same energy loss to waste heat applies to charging, also predicted by the Second Law.

                      But degradation due to battery deterioration from use and time isn’t a result of the Second Law. You can certainly have a system which doesn’t degrade in efficiency of energy use over time. Consider a hurricane or a tornado as a heat engine; does the efficiency of those degrade over time? Of course not.

                      The principle of entropy demands that batteries wear over time and use. But the Second Law isn’t at all applicable to that; it’s a different concept altogether.

                  3. Bill Howland says:

                    Bogdan: The charts are provided by chemical companies wanting to sell their refrigerants. I’ve never seen one that is inaccurate. They are trying to sell to serious people.

                    Pushi: 2nd law of thermodynamics: ” It is impossible for a process to have as its sole result the transfer of heat from a cooler body to a hotter one.”

                    Lets see if you even to remotely begin to understand the concept:

                    I just vigorously pumped up a tire with an old bicycle air pump. The bottom of the tube is so hot I burned myself touching it.

                    Why, exactly, is it hot?

          2. ItsNotAboutTheMoney says:

            RTFA.

            For well-managed batteries the number one factor in degradation is the age of the battery. The battery wasn’t very old.

            The car is only 15 months old. It was used in a limo service, so yes, 6% is reasonable.

          3. Martin Winlow says:

            Unless we are to assume that Tesloop are trying to deliberately mislead us, I would think they are in an *excellent* position to know how much the range has reduced over those 200k miles given they are driving it every day, wonky telematics or no!

      2. sven says:

        Nope, Tesla replaced the lithium-ion battery pack on their dime, and Tesloop paid $190 to replace the 12-volt battery.

        From the TechCrunch article:
        “There will be a firmware update in three months that will take care of the discrepancy, but Tesla just replaced the battery to solve the problem. ‘We got our 6% range back with the new battery,’ Sonnad said with a laugh. ‘But had the firmware been updated, we’d be fine and plugging along.'”

        “Tesloop has paid to replace the car’s 12-volt battery for $190, and it buys sets of . . .”

        1. speculawyer says:

          But of course you neglected to mention that the main battery was changed AFTER HITTING 200,000! Why did you leave that out? Hmm?

          More complete quote with very important context:

          Then, just as the car hit 200,000 miles, the range estimator became inaccurate. Though the car didn’t actually lose any range, the estimator would say it could go another ten miles—and then power down. Tesla looked into the issue, and told Tesloop that there’s a battery chemistry state that high-mileage cars go into, and the software isn’t properly compensating for that change. There will be a firmware update in three months that will take care of the discrepancy, but Tesla just replaced the battery to solve the problem.

          https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/29/tales-from-a-tesla-model-s-at-200k-miles/

          1. sven says:

            “Why did you leave that out? Hmm?”

            My comment was in response to floydboy and ffbj’s incorrect assertion that only the 12-volt battery, and not the battery pack, was replaced. The Tesla’s mileage was irrelevant with regards to whether Tesla replaced the battery pack or 12-volt battery. There was no nefarious intent on my part.

            1. RexxSee says:

              “There was no nefarious intent on my part.” as always… lol!

      3. pjwood1 says:

        I think the story, on TMC, is that battery mileage and age “changed the chemistry” in a way where Tesloop was getting whackier range estimations. Tesla volunteered that they hadn’t developed a software tweak to estimate range of such batteries, and offered to replace his (main battery) for free. This is why we stop and salute what’s been taken out of service.

        It wasn’t done for storage degradation.

        1. pjwood1 says:

          oops, should have read on.

  2. SparkEV says:

    Wait. If the battery lost only 6%, what issue caused them to replace the battery? And something with battery related software caused the car to “die?” that will take months of software development to update? Something sounds fishy.

    Also, if you’re driving 200K miles in 1.5 years, you’re driving in freeway with little stopping. Brakes won’t need replacement even for gas cars.

    1. philip d says:

      I guess the real takeaway is that this car is a real world data point showing that EV batteries can go 200,000 miles with not much degradation. There are still people out there arguing that EVs are too expensive and impractical because you will have to buy a new $1,000,000 battery every 4 years or 60,000 miles.

      As far as Tesla taking the battery there is also the possibility that taking this real world high mileage battery to study was more valuable to them than one new pack in the scheme of things.

    2. Mark B. Spiegel says:

      Exactly! This is LAUGHABLE! Tesla supposedly doesn’t warranty commercial use of its cars– did it replace this pack out of the goodness of its heart or as a cover-up? I vote #2.

      (Yes, I’m short TSLA AS A BUSINESS because I think it’s the biggest bubble-stock in the market and is led by a hugely deceptive CEO. No, I don NOT “hate EVs” and in fact think both the Volt and the Bolt are terrific cars.)

      1. ffbj says:

        If I were you I would begin to question my judgement on questions regarding Tesla
        (long ago actually). Your bias is so great that it cancels out your ability to quantify what the stock is really worth.
        Still I think it is overvalued, but better might be just to by GM, if you think the Bolt is so great. Of course when you are waist deep in the big muddy you just say to yourself, we’ve got to push on.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXnJVkEX8O4

      2. Nix says:

        Mark, you agreed to disclose your short sell stock position as a condition to posting on Tesla stories (the only stories you post on).

        Why are you not honoring that?

        1. sven says:

          He did disclose his short position.

          1. ffbj says:

            True. Goldman dg Tesla to neutral, chumming the waters, so all the sharks are circling, even the great white MBS, has surfaced, rising from the depths, attracted by the smell of blood.

            We can’t have a positive article about Tesla ruining the feeding frenzy.
            http://finance.yahoo.com/news/goldman-sachs-downgrades-tesla-due-112038547.html

            1. pjwood1 says:

              There’s a fine line where sellers have a purpose in a frothy market. Regarding GS downgrade, I’d take the move down, and expectation for not so bad Q3 earnings, and the idea that there’s more upside to SCTY falling through than downside of it not, and increase a long position. If the cap raise goes well and SCTY goes through, it’ll probably stay flat. So, this “long” is super-speculating GS just gave us an asymmetric upsided payoff 😉 .

              Whattya think, Mark. You have to lighten up that short every now and then.

          2. Nix says:

            My mistake. When he didn’t disclose prior to beginning his rant, I posted my response. Readers shouldn’t have to read through his rants to find the disclosure.

          3. Get Real says:

            And its too bad you won’t disclose your short position sven.

      3. speculawyer says:

        Always remember, the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

        Tesla has a HUGE fan base of millionaires in Silicon Valley that buy the cars and buy the stock. The will have no problem getting the capital they need to gear up for the Model 3. And if the Model 3 is good and sold at (at least close to) the target price then Tesla will keep on rolling.

      4. Sarahg says:

        You are an IDIOT

      5. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Mark B. Spiegel said:

        “Yes, I’m short TSLA AS A BUSINESS…”

        Obviously you also post anti-Tesla FUD “as a business.” Now, why you and other TSLA short-sellers think it’s actually worth your time to post obvious disinformation — obviously false propaganda — about Tesla Motors, is something beyond my comprehension.

        Surely you don’t really think you’re getting payback on the amount of time you spend posting FUD. Just how much influence do you actually think you make on stock price? Even as much as a single penny?

        Here’s an idea: Why don’t you quit wasting your time posting such cabbage, and we can quit wasting time reading it and counting the half-truths, outright fabrications, and fallacies.

        1. Get Real says:

          I’m pretty sure that Spiegel, tftf, zzzz, sven, etc are starting to get desperate as PEV sales are starting to pick up steam and especially as the months tick down to Model 3 production and sales as it will drive Tesla’s current BEV advantage to one of dominance.

          1. super390 says:

            Some of those guys are anti-EV trolls. Some of those guys are Tesla shorts. The Chevy Bolt should be an excellent test case to sort out most of them. Anti-General Motors trolls sound very different than those guys because they’re either mad at GM from the Left (people still upset about the EV1 abandonment) or the Right (still upset about the “Obama” bailout actually worked out under Bush). A successful Bolt rollout should elicit some kind of comments from everybody here and at the other EV boards.

            The best strategy is to concentrate on the shared virtues of all EVs and advocate for the cars you believe best advance those virtues. Real EV visionaries have been thinking about these matters for years, and disagree vehemently about what price, range, etc should be, but you’ll learn more from their arguments than anyone engaged in a campaign of sabotage.

    3. Bacardi says:

      This is an extremely congested 200 mile drive most times of the day…In the article it states they often stop in Barstow SC so idk how long they’re there but I’d imagine if there wasn’t any traffic during the time you booked this service you’d rather drive yourself and not stop to charge…I’d predict the majority of rides are during brutal traffic (you get a call from a text on Thursday evening that states you need to come to Vegas this weekend…You don’t want to take Friday off, last minute airfare is expensive so you use this service) so odds are most rides are very heavy on braking…

      1. SparkEV says:

        If you’re putting in 200K miles a year, you’re not stopping much. If it takes 12 hours to get to Vegas, you wouldn’t use this service.

        There’s congestion where you’re moving at slow speed and there’s stop-and-go where you’re constantly hammering the brakes. Vegas route is mostly congestion, not heavy braking stop-and-go. And even that is only on few areas, not the whole route.

        I just replaced the brakes on Astro van at 100K miles; it still had about 1/8 left, and this is a van often towing stuff in stop and go traffic. Had it been used for Vegas trips almost exclusively, brakes would have lots of life left even after 200K miles.

    4. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      SparkEV said:

      “Wait. If the battery lost only 6%, what issue caused them to replace the battery? And something with battery related software caused the car to ‘die?’ that will take months of software development to update? Something sounds fishy.”

      My reading of the article is that there was a growing discrepancy between the actual SoC (State of Charge) in the battery pack and what the SoC showed on the car’s screen. That is, when the battery got low on charge, the screen display showed more charge remaining than there actually was. This caused the driver to drive the car past its range, so the car shut down… despite the readout still showing some remaining miles left.

      And Tesla said they were working on updating the software to account for this increasing discrepancy in high-mileage cars, but that this update wasn’t scheduled for release for a few months.

      At least, that’s my interpretation of what was reported in the article.

      “Also, if you’re driving 200K miles in 1.5 years, you’re driving in freeway with little stopping. Brakes won’t need replacement even for gas cars.”

      Brakes shouldn’t need replacing, but brake pads certainly will. Remember that when you press the brake pedal in a Tesla car, it’s strictly mechanical braking; the brake pedal does not engage regenerative braking at all.

  3. bro1999 says:

    Meanwhile, Ford Energi batteries have been reported being degraded as much as 30% in less than 3 years/36k miles of driving.

    Because Ford doesn’t publish what the capacity warranty terms are (they say that info is proprietary…what?!) no one is sure they can ever get a HV battery replaced under warranty due to capacity loss.

    1. Dave R says:

      At least in a PHEV you have the gas engine to fall back on.

      On my 5 year old LEAF (55k miles) I can barely squeeze out 50 miles a charge. And because I dropped 9 capacity bars (70% capacity remaining) just after 5 years, Nissan won’t extend me any out of warranty assistance leaving me to either pay $6k for a new pack on a car worth slightly more than that or use the car only for shorter and shorter trips.

      1. bro1999 says:

        And that is why Leaf resale values have gone in the crapper. Air-cooled TMS just doesn’t cut it (Ford Energis are also air cooled).

        1. JP White says:

          Had Nissan admitted the error of using air cooled batteries with an inappropriate chemistry and simply replaced batteries, no questions asked, the resale value of the LEAF wouldn’t be the absolute worst of any new vehicle sold today.

          The only reason the replaced batteries for some people up to 60,000 miles is because they were sued as part of a class action lawsuit.

          My range is now under 40 miles at 96,000 miles. About 50% of original. Nissan will not provide assistance and want $6,000 for a replacement battery.

          Bolt EV here I come, the Model 3 when available.

          1. Someone out there says:

            Getting a new 24 kWh or even 30 kWh battery is probably not worth it but a 40 kWh upgrade might actually be, assuming it’s even possible. I guess we’ll know in January or so.

            1. William says:

              No way will Nissan allow a 30kWh battery or an upcoming 2017 41+kWh battery, be installed in an older 24kWh Leaf. They are NOT backward compatible. Nissan is “Innovation that excites”, when it comes to EV’s, and all of the “exciting surprises” that they let the early adopter (MY 2011 – 3/1/2013) customers “learn about” down the non “lizard battery pack” road.

          2. Dave R says:

            Thermal management would not do a thing for most of the 2011-2014 LEAF batteries. The number of times my battery pack has seen temperatures above 100F is very low, it spends most of it’s time between 70-90F according to CAN data. You’d have to keep the pack at 70F the majority of the time to manage capacity loss, which would take a great deal of energy, especially in hot climates.

            Tesla doesn’t even start actively cooling it’s pack until higher temps.

            Quite simply, the LEAFs chemistry can’t take any heat at all. You have to live in a very cool climate for the pack to last.

            The question is, how much did the so-called “lizard” pack introduced in 2015 and the newer 30 kWh packs improve upon this deficiency?

            1. SparkEV says:

              I’m curious how often you monitor CAN for temp. If you let the car sit out in the parking lot sun, do you monitor that? When you charge the car in the garage on a weekend and it’s baking in summer?

              I ask, because SparkEV TMS works every time it’s plugged in; I suspect for Tesla as well. That means if you’re charging under hot summer sun parking lot or over-heated garage, TMS will cool the battery, even if it’s 100% charged already. This is why SparkEV manual states that it should be plugged in when the temperature gets too high (I think 90F).

              With Leaf, leaving it plugged in will result in 100% battery and baking in heat, the worst combination. My suspicion is that this combination is what kills Leaf batteries: high state of charge + heat.

      2. Tom says:

        I feel for you Dave R. I dumped my LEAF after 25% loss over 3.5 years and 42k miles. I’ve got 45k+ miles on my MS and the capacity loss is 1%….. Go Tesla!

        1. William says:

          Your Model S is the standard by which all other EV’s are measured. Your Leaf 24kWh battery was probably manufactured before 4/1/2013 which is considered the unofficial “pre Lizard Battery Pack”. Just the size alone of your 85 kWh Tesla battery, compared to the 24kWh Leaf battery, will make degradation and depletion at least 3 or four orders of magnitude less. Throw in active cooling, and well, there you are!

      3. William says:

        You dropped, from the factory new 12 capacity bars, DOWN TO 9 capacity bars remaining. Recent model year Leafs get Salvaged all the time, and their batteries (24 kWh) can be purchased for less than half of your $ 6k Stealership quote from Nissan.

        Never buy new parts from an OEM Dealer, for any car, that is over 5 years old and depreciated more than 2/3rds. You can save OVER 50% ($ 3,000.00) by getting the exact same part only slightly (10%) used. You can buy a lot of electrons over the next 4 + years and 50k miles, for the $3k + in overall savings.

        1. Dave R says:

          There’s two main problems with getting a used pack to replace an old pack:

          1. There are a few variations of the LEAF battery pack and they aren’t interchangeable. Variations:
          2011-2012 with/without heater
          2013+ LEAF (new connector, only 3 temp sensors instead of 4)
          2015 LEAF (lizard chemistry)
          2016 LEAF (24 and 30 kWh variants)
          2. The age of the battery is the biggest predictor of capacity, so ideally you’d get the newest pack you could, but these don’t drop into the old LEAFs.
          3. If you can solve 1 and 2, the third problem is that you need a special programming card and the Nissan Consult diagnostics software/hardware to marry the new pack to the old car. Otherwise you can’t drive more than 25 mph.

          One other possibility is to drop the modules from a new pack into an old pack thus reusing the case and battery ECU, but Nissan changed the module design in 2013 so those modules don’t drop into the old case.

          I would seriously consider $3k for a new lizard battery pack. But even $3k for a used pack with the difficulties listed above and for a pack of unknown capacity is a gamble.

          1. Nix says:

            Dave — Thank you! That’s a great post. Very good information.

      4. Mister G says:

        Dave, why would you buy and not lease? I leased a 2012 Leaf on 9/2012 lease ended on 12/2015 with 36,000 miles, 3 lost bars, and about 50 miles of range. Going into the deal I was aware of battery degradation because it was no secret. Now I leased a 2016 Leaf SV for 3 years and will repeat until battery technology become better or model 3 is ready.

  4. David Murray says:

    Wow.. I find it hard to see how this company can be profitable. I went to their website and saw that it costs $59 per seat, and if they have all seats filled that is $177 revenue for a one-way trip. But that has to cover the cost of the driver and the car.

    1. sven says:

      David,

      The cost of the car may not have to be covered. Tesloop’s founder, a child at the time, had his rich daddy buy him a Tesla to start his business.

      I recall an article on InsideEVs a couple of years ago in which a 16-year old came up with a business plan for his rich father to buy him a Tesla so that he could start a ridesharing service from California to Las Vegas. At that time, the comment section was full of discussion on how this business couldn’t make a profit at the price charged, and that it would soon fail. I can’t seem to find that old story on InsideEVs, but I found it reported elsewhere in the links below.

      Warning! The interviewer’s voice is REALLY annoying.

      http://evobsession.com/tesloop-la-las-vegas-shuttle-service-using-a-model-s/

      1. sven says:

        Here’s a video of the kid’s dad and another co-founder/investor (with dual lip rings) explaining how the business started.

  5. sven says:

    I was going to write a comment praising the Models S’s reliability, until I came across the part where they had to replace not only the battery, but also one of the motors.

    1. speculawyer says:

      The issue with the motors has been known about for a long time. But supposedly it has been fixed although they will probably have to continue replacing some motors on early Tesla Model S cars.
      http://insideevs.com/tesla-model-s-drive-unit-failuresreplacements-still-an-issue/

    2. Sarahg says:

      sven don’t be fool we all know you are the biggest troll here, you are the sa CherylG and your only purpose is trolling Inside EVs. Again go back and watch Fox News.

      1. sven says:

        Nope, I was all set to write a positive comment about Tesla based on the title of this news post. But then I read the story and found out the battery pack was replaced and the software glitch put into doubt the 6% degradation figure, not to mention the front motor also needing to be replaced at only 30,000 miles.

        SarahG are you perhaps CherylG’s estranged sister? Inquiring minds want to know. LOL!

      2. Get Real says:

        Based on his recent unhinged, trump-like comments I’m beginning to think he might be the former troll See Through reincarnated.

    3. Tech01x says:

      Tesla doing a refurbishment of a drive unit is similar to Ford doing a recall for the fires on EcoBoost engines. Ford went through 6 recalls. I bet it cost Ford more per vehicle for those 6 recalls than it cost Tesla to refurbish a drive unit once.

    4. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      sven said:

      “I was going to write a comment praising the Models S’s reliability…”

      I see sven has picked up another basher’s tactic from Seeking Alpha: Pretend that he was gonna say something positive about something he always posts FUD about, and follow that by “but then…”

      Kinda like the way racists comments often start with “Some of my best friends are _____, but…”

  6. Evil Attorney says:

    I’m confused, if Tesla replaced the battery, how many miles did the battery actually have on it? Obviously not 200k. I think this article is potentially a little misleading.

    1. sven says:

      And what’s this about the car “alerted Tesla of low engine power”? Don’t all Tesla’s have no engine power? 😉

    2. alohart says:

      The battery pack had been used for 200k miles.

      If you read the original TechCrunch article, it states that the problem with the car thinking the battery pack was nearly discharged when it really wasn’t started occurring when the original battery pack had reached 200k miles of use. Maybe the change in battery chemistry after so much use results in the voltage at low charge levels dropping earlier than with a newer battery pack. Tesla was preparing a software update to deal with this problem, but it would not be ready for several months, so Tesla replaced the battery pack instead (maybe to learn more about what happens after so many charge/discharge cycles).

      1. Evil Attorney says:

        I see. The tenses in the article make it a little confusing. But the second issue is that if there were issues with the car accurately determining range, how do they really know they only had 6% degradation? Purely by mileage and when the car would power down? I guess regardless, if it was anything nearly as bad as some of the Leafs, it would be very obvious to a company like this.

      2. ffbj says:

        It’s interesting. It’s probably something that had not occurred to engineers as a consequence of extremely long term use. Not sure they test-bedded batteries equivalent out to 200k.
        Anyhow it’s useful information and a very successful pack.
        Engine maintenance on an ice would have probably run you around 5k or so if your were lucky, no major repairs, with that much mileage.

        1. sven says:

          If Tesloop had followed Tesla’s recommended maintenance guidelines their cheapest option would have had been to buy 2 of Tesla’s 8-year/100,000 service plans for $4,000 a pop for a total of $8,000.

          It appears Tesloop he missed the 4 batter-coolant replacements, and also 8 AC services and 8 brake fluid replacements. The lack of 4 battery coolant replacements would void the warranty if corrosion caused by weak battery coolant resulting in damage to other components. I don’t know if weak battery coolant would bring the cooling abilities of the coolant out of spec and fail to cool the battery sufficiently 100% of the time, especially in extreme heat. But to Tesla’s credit they didn’t play the “you voided the warranty on the battery” card by not getting the recommended battery coolant service. I think weak coolant can also raise the freezing point, which might be a problem in very cold climates but not in California.

          https://www.tesla.com/support/service-plans

          1. Bill Howland says:

            OUch!!

            This explains why there are few Teslas where I live. My service charge even during warranty service would be over $800 per visit.

            What I would probably do is, get the car, somehow, to Toronto.

            But if you live near a Service Center, Tesla’s current warranty policy is pretty golden.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              I”m glad they didn’t have this ranger policy in effect when I had a Tesla as it would have cost me an additional $15,000.

          2. Nix says:

            sven — Why do you ASSume that the coolant wasn’t changed? And why do you ASSume that Tesla service is the only way to get the coolant changed?

            They could have kept good coolant in it by simply checking with litmus strips and changed it themselves without ever having the car serviced by Tesla. Why do you automatically ASSume the worst?

            There is absolutely nothing in the story where anybody claimed there was battery damage due to a coolant leak. In fact, the story says exactly the opposite. It clearly states that the cause of the issue was a combination of battery chemistry changes with age, and software fixes that are needed to account for it.

            Nothing about coolant leaks causing the problem. Nothing about coolant leaks at all. Nothing about whether the coolant was serviced either by Tesla or by the owner or indy mechanic.

            Where do you get this crap?

  7. tftf says:

    “Since the update wasn’t going to be ready for a few months, Tesla replaced the battery, solving the issue.”

    And incidents like these show why Tesla as a BUSINESS has huge issues and more losses ahead (even more so after merging with cash-burning Solarcity).

    Tesla fans need to separate the business from the nice-looking car they enjoy as a customer.

    By 2020, all large car brands will offer long-range EVs – good for EV consumers, bad for Tesla (or other new entrants).

    1. Joshua Burstyn says:

      So you are suggesting that Tesla’s “put the customer first” strategy is a poor way to handle edge case faults? To my eye this paradigm gets the customer back on the road and allows them to analyze/fix components later. I’d argue the traditional model where the client’s vehicle remains in the shop until they’re good and ready to fix it is far worse.

      1. tftf says:

        Edge cases?

        Tesla and SolarCity combined will burn more cash than ever in 2017:

        http://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2016-10-06/goldman-sachs-cuts-tesla-price-target-hyper-feedback-loop

        Please have a look at the charts on that article.

        Even GS (who orchestrated most loans to Musk and capital rounds for TSLA in the past) ate getting cold feet…

        1. Rob Stark says:

          GS is not getting cold feet, they are getting angry they no longer have Tesla’s nor Elon’s business.

        2. Nix says:

          Meh. That article basically boils down to saying that Tesla is expected to do better than previously expected, but dilution will drop the stock price.

          So it comes down to what you care about.

          If you care about Tesla as a company growing and making more cars, this article shows that Tesla is going to continue to grow even faster than before.

          If all you care about is your shares of TSLA stocks, and don’t care about Tesla the business growing faster, expanding faster, and selling more and more cars, then you are going to be angry that your shares are going to be diluted.

          But any suggestion that Tesla is going down the tubes because TSLA shares are being diluted is absolutely false.

  8. Get Real says:

    LOL, this article has a whose who of serial Tesla-haters and shorters coming in to desperately post their self-serving FUD and unhinged conspiracies to try and bolster their failing short positions: Spiegel and tftf from Seeking Liars and the ever carpet-bombing anti-Tesla FUDSTER sven.

    Bottom line is more great news for the EV community, well designed battery packs like Tesla are good for hundreds of thousands of miles with little degradation.

    1. William says:

      Please note, that time also is a huge metric for battery degradation. Not only miles driven, over the long haul, are responsible for the depleting battery capacity. After 10 years, even the largest of current Tesla battery packs (100kWh), will have some significant loss of capacity, even with lower than the average 12k miles per year. I hazard to make any guesstimation, because either side of the Tesla Fence around here, is teaming with rabid, foaming at the mouth Tolling Pit Bulls!

  9. Bill Howland says:

    Too bad the article didn’t state the full maintenance history of the vehicle..

    So in 200,000 miles, the car has had 2 lithium batteries…. 100,000 on each? So how many miles does the ‘6%’ cover?

    I’m assuming Teslas still require a yearly maintenance fee, unless paid for up-front by the purchaser purchasing an ‘enhanced maintenace package’. If they did, then it should be included in the maintenance expenses.

    So this article ‘Reliably’ Reported that a drive motor was replaced at 30,000 miles, and Sven reported the main battery has also been replaced. Until there is more specificity, I’m not sure what to make of all this because Tesla owners in the past have exhibited exhuberance in describing their cars, such as the Roadster owner who in 4 years had ‘zero maintenance’, when the rear tires only last 4000 miles, the fronts 18,000 (if the car is driven gingerly) and a $750-800 (depending on taxes) yearly maintenance is REQUIRED.

    1. Nix says:

      No, it has had 1 12V battery, and one traction battery.

      All of which is in the story.

      Let me know if you need the difference between the 12V battery and the traction battery explained to you.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        You are just a clown.

        This is a serious issue regarding maintenance expense.

        You can make a snide remark when you’ve reimbursed me for all the cash I’ve spent maintaining my Tesla.

        1. Nix says:

          Bill, as we have gone over before, you have never owned a Model S. This story is about a Model S, which you admit you have no ownership experience in owning.

          You owned a Roadster that was based upon now decade-old technology. Stop falsely conflating the two vehicles.

          1. pjwood1 says:

            They both have the word “Tesla” emblazoned on them, Nix, and it would be fair if people talked more about what became of the Roadster owners, and if the crush for Model 3 won’t eventually challenge Model S service. They’re doing a great job on the production side.

            There’s a back story to something Tesla needs to address. There’s no aftermarket service culture, with any real access to drive train. The company, and its plans, cannot afford to be the care taker of its aging cars, but it also won’t let go of them. I’m not confident how this ends, even if they tend not to need service.

            Bill had a different model Tesla, that at some point became less important to the company. Will the ‘S’ transition to Model 3 become like the Roadster was to the Model S? I hope not, and believe they can’t afford to let it happen, but I also don’t dismiss the Roadster experience.

            1. Rob Stark says:

              Please, the Model S is not being discontinued. It will still sell 40k plus units per year with 2.5x the margins of Model 3.

            2. Nix says:

              pjwood1 — Wow. Now I’ve seen it all.

              Comparing the limited run Roadster to the Model S, like they are the same? You’ve got to be kidding.

              This is the exact problem I’ve been pointing out over and over. When you start pretending the Roadster and the Model S are the same, then you inevitably come crashing down on the rocks of logical fallacies, like saying:

              The Roadster was built by Tesla and the Roadster was discontinued when the Model S was introduced;
              Therefore because the Model S was also built by Tesla, the Model S will be discontinued when the Model 3 is introduced.

              You’ve simply proved my point, that blindly applying stuff that happened with the Roadster to the Model S just because they are both built by Tesla is absurd.

              You might as well claim that the Model S will have problems with the 2-speed transmission, because the Roadster had problems with the 2-speed transmission.

            3. Bill Howland says:

              The guy is just a creep. He has not had my experience of Tesla renigging on their warranty, twice. He just posts the exact same page full of blather 10X. I would need to read the COMPLETE warranty of a new Tesla product which is not on the website, or it is at least not easy for me to find it.

              If the August 2014 retroactive change in policy is really ‘for real’, the thing that still kills a new Tesla product is where I happen to live. The ranger cost is beyond excessive for my location.

              1. Nix says:

                Bill Howland is apparently the only person in the world who can’t type tesla limited warranty into any search engine!!!

                Bing, Google, DuckDuckGo, all either the first or second result.

                Or of course Bill could have simply followed the link to the warranty in the FIRST LINE of the Tesla Service Plan page. A page that he was given a link to right here in this comment section earlier in this discussion right here on this webpage:

                https://www.tesla.com/support/service-plans

                This is just yet another example of how Bill WILLFULLY remains uninformed about Tesla, while pretending that his Roadster ownership has anything at all to do with Model S battery degradation. It doesn’t Bill. Get over it.

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  What a SuperDope.

                  “If I choose not to service my Tesla vehicle, will this void my warranty or Resale Value Guarantee?”

                  “It is highly recommended that you service your Tesla vehicle once a year or every 12,500 miles. If you do not follow this recommendation, your New Vehicle Limited Warranty will not be affected. If you are financing your Tesla vehicle through Tesla Financing, you will only be eligible for the full Resale Value Guarantee if your Tesla vehicle is brought in for service per the above recommended timeline.”

                  “What is the New Vehicle Limited Warranty?

                  Your Model S is covered by the New Vehicle Limited Warranty, which includes the Basic Vehicle Limited Warranty, the Supplemental Restraint System (“SRS”) Limited Warranty, and the Battery Limited Warranty.

                  The Basic Vehicle Limited Warranty covers the repair or replacement necessary to correct defects in the materials or workmanship of any Model S parts manufactured or supplied by Tesla that occur under normal use for a period of 4 years or 50,000 miles (whichever comes first).”

                  “…Basic Vehicle Limited Warranty, the Supplemental Restraint System (“SRS”) Limited Warranty, and the Battery Limited Warranty….”

                  The Basic Vehicle Limited Warranty covers the repair or replacement necessary to correct defects in the materials or workmanship of any Model S parts manufactured or supplied by Tesla that occur

                  The Battery Limited Warranty covers the repair or replacement of any malfunctioning or defective Model S battery for a period of 8 years or for the number of miles specified below for your battery configuration (whichever comes first). If you have a 60kWh battery, your battery is covered for 125,000 miles and if you have an 70kWh or larger battery, your battery is covered for an unlimited amount of miles. To provide you with even more assurance, the Battery Limited Warranty will also cover damage to your vehicle from a battery fire even if it is the result of driver error, subject to certain exclusions.

                  See your New Vehicle Limited Warranty in the touchscreen in the car, or download it from the “My Documents” section of your Tesla account, for further details.

                  The Battery Limited Warranty covers the repair or replacement of any malfunctioning or defective Model S battery for a period of 8 years or for the number of miles specified below for your battery configuration (whichever comes first). If you have a 60kWh battery, your battery is covered for 125,000 miles and if you have an 70kWh or larger battery, your battery is covered for an unlimited amount of miles. To provide you with even more assurance, the Battery Limited Warranty will also cover damage to your vehicle from a battery fire even if it is the result of driver error, subject to certain exclusions.

                  See your New Vehicle Limited Warranty in the touchscreen in the car, or download it from the “My Documents” section of your Tesla account, for further details”.

                  Since I no longer have a Tesla account, I cannot get the fine print.

                  It says, if you don’t service your vehicle through them, you don’t affect the Basic new vehicle limited warranty. It says nothing regarding the OTHER 2 warranties – SRS and battery.

                  Interestingly, as I stated, there is a mileage limitation in the 60 kwh cars.

                  But again, let me read that fine print, that apparently you get only AFTER purchasing the car.

                  1. Bill Howland says:

                    The crux of the whole thing is the wording of the “NEW Vehicle Warranty”.

                    Will Tesla say that this is really the BASIC warranty? You CANNOT assume that since it says so in plain english in the ‘brouchure’ that it is actually in fact, covering all 3 warranties. I know – I had to fight Tesla on such splitting hair reasoning with my car until I shamed them into honoring it.

                    Somewhere in the ‘Official” warranty, which superdope has yet to supply me, there is no doubt the phrase “This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, expressly stated or implied”.

                  2. Nix says:

                    Wow Bill, even when I spoon feed you the warranty, and you post it yourself, you STILL can’t read it!!

                    “What is the New Vehicle Limited Warranty?

                    Your Model S is covered by the New Vehicle Limited Warranty, which includes the Basic Vehicle Limited Warranty, the Supplemental Restraint System (“SRS”) Limited Warranty, and the Battery Limited Warranty.”

                    All three warranty’s are obviously included in the “New Vehicle Limited Warranty”. What part of the word “included” don’t you understand?

                    Damn you work so hard to stay intentionally blinded to the truth!!!

                    1. Bill Howland says:

                      You’d never make it as a Tesla Salesman; Enough Romper Room for one article.

    2. speculawyer says:

      “So in 200,000 miles, the car has had 2 lithium batteries…. 100,000 on each?”

      No, 200,000 miles on the original battery with a new battery replaced at 200,000 because of some strange software problem.
      https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/29/tales-from-a-tesla-model-s-at-200k-miles/

      Yes, it had a motor replaced. That is a well-known issues that has been supposedly fixed.
      http://insideevs.com/tesla-model-s-drive-unit-failuresreplacements-still-an-issue/

      1. Bill Howland says:

        You just contradicted yourself. Let me read the techcrunch article and see if there is more meat on the subject. THanks for the link.

        1. speculawyer says:

          Yeah, I screwed up my wording. Should be:

          No, 200,000 miles on the original battery with that original battery replaced at 200,000 miles with a new one because of some strange software problem.

    3. Nix says:

      Bill, how many times does this need to be explained to you? Tesla does NOT require the vehicle be serviced in order to maintain the warranty. Stop outright lying and claiming service is required.

      Directly from Tesla’s website:

      “If I choose not to service my Tesla vehicle, will this void my warranty…

      It is highly recommended that you service your Tesla vehicle once a year or every 12,500 miles. If you do not follow this recommendation, your New Vehicle Limited Warranty will not be affected.”

      1. Bill Howland says:

        If no maintenance is required that is definitely a change in policy, and it is hard to believe since every manufacturer insists their cars be properly maintained.

        Again, you are a clown since you do not understand that policies change in time, and besides, I’m not here to waste my time with idiots. I’m trying to find details of the car.

        My Roadster was at once, both the most expensive, most troublesome, and most expensive to repair vehicle I’ve ever owned, and, should I have known what I was getting into in the first place, I wouldn’t have bought one, but I fell for the ‘hype’ of ev ‘s having zero maintenance.

        1. Nix says:

          Bill, it changed YEARS ago, as you have been repeatedly told. Your failure to keep up with changes at Tesla since you owned a Roadster is not my fault.

          Tesla doesn’t build the decade-old Roadster anymore. Your continued false conflation between your Roadster, and anything Tesla has done recently is again, your failure.

          You didn’t like your Roadster.

          We get it.

          Get.

          Over.

          It.

          Already.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            I always want to talk about the cars, and you always want to talk about me,which wouldn’t be so bad if you werent such a moron; Sven’s comment above leaves open the possibility they may have paid for the 2- $4000 packages, and seems to have found a way where Tesla will not honor a warranty if damage were to occur.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              THe change wasn’t years ago, it is apparently within the last year that all their vehicles have an unlimited mileage warranty.

              The 4 year , 50000 mile bumper to bumper warranty is also quite recent.

              Both are impressive warranties no doubt helping sales. Smart move.

              1. Nix says:

                2013 Bill. 2013.

                This is the exact problem I have with you Bill. You are YEARS out of touch with what has been going on with the Model S, and yet you keep pretending that you are some expert on the Model S, just because you once owned a Roadster based on now decade old technology.

                Here is a tip. If YOU stop getting stuff so badly wrong, I won’t have to constantly correct you, and you can stop whining about being corrected.

                Spring of 2013 is when Tesla announced that maintenance isn’t required Bill, before any Model S buyer had even made it to their first yearly maintenance. Not new at all.

                “the annual checkup is ENTIRELY optional”
                (emphasis added)

                https://www.tesla.com/blog/creating-world%E2%80%99s-best-service-and-warranty-program-0

                So when you say “If no maintenance is required that is definitely a change in policy, and it is hard to believe since every manufacturer insists their cars be properly maintained.” you are out of touch going all the way back to 2013.

                Sadly THIS IS THE THIRD TIME I’VE HAD TO CORRECT YOU AND POST THIS SAME LINK!!!!

                So if you would have learned either of the last two times I politely posted this link correcting you, I wouldn’t have to repeat myself and deliver the link yet again, but with a sledgehammer this time.

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  Nope. THe 60 kwh cars were mileage limited. Run along now and stop arguing arcane points.

                  1. David_Cary says:

                    I see nothing in that post about unlimited mileage. So why the comment about 60’s?

                    2013 is correct.

                    Service costs are a legitimate discussion. Why all the incorrect information? Tesla’s monopoly on service is an issue. But it is to be expected for awhile on EV’s. Nissan pretty much has a monopoly on the Leaf. The discussion above about putting a salvage battery in one illustrates that pretty well.

                    The monopoly on service will go away. Costs will fall.

                    Tesla has had a very good warranty for a long time and a track record of being pretty reasonable.

                    What happened here is that Tesla replaced a battery for free that it didn’t have to. Commercial exclusion and all. But it did – presumably because they realized there is an issue and it was the right thing to do. They get to analyze the battery and make sure it doesn’t happen to the next guy.

                    Of course, there are probably a couple of other 200k cars out there – or at least really close. Tesla probably wants the software fixed quite quickly or they might be replacing a few batteries.

                    I remember Toyota paid a pretty good sum for some 1,000,000 mile car a while back. Doubt it was a coverup….

                    1. Bill Howland says:

                      Why,? A few reasons.

                      1). Apparently the web site wasn’t updated since the retroactive policy didn’t come into effect until after Aug 2014 – the other auto mags didn’t comment on it until after that anyway, so I’ll stick with that date.

                      2). Nix just says the exact same ten posts in a row. And he’s speaking from a position of ignorance since he has no inkling of how I was treated by Tesla, both good and bad. I had to force the ‘good’.

                    2. Nix says:

                      Bill, Stop being intentionally ignorant. The topic you are trying to dodge is that https://www.tesla.com/blog/creating-world%E2%80%99s-best-service-and-warranty-program-0 shows that on April 26, 2013, Tesla clearly ended any service requirement.

                      April 26, 2013 Bill. This is now the FOURTH TIME I’ve had to post this link for you, Bill.

                      Stop falsely claiming that Tesla “requires” expensive service. They do not, and they ended that requirement BEFORE any single Model S owner hit their first 1 year anniversary.

                      Here it is again:

                      “Elon Musk, Chairman, Product Architect & CEO April 26, 2013 … $600 annual service now optional with no effect on warranty”

                      “Elon Musk, Chairman, Product Architect & CEO April 26, 2013 … $600 annual service now optional with no effect on warranty”

                      “Elon Musk, Chairman, Product Architect & CEO April 26, 2013 … $600 annual service now optional with no effect on warranty”

                      “Elon Musk, Chairman, Product Architect & CEO April 26, 2013 … $600 annual service now optional with no effect on warranty”

                      What part of that don’t you understand???

                    3. Nix says:

                      David, Bill brought up the 60 because he is incapable of ever admitting he is wrong. So he tries to change the topic and call me names in order to try and evade him being wrong.

                      Normal people would simple admit that his statement that Tesla requires expensive service was wrong, but that doesn’t fit his agenda of mindlessly bashing Tesla no matter what the facts are.

    4. SparkEV says:

      At least regarding the tires, had I driven SparkEV like I did when I first got it, tires wouldn’t have lasted more than 4K miles. I suspect similar with Roadster: driver enthusiasm causing premature tire wear.

      It’s little discussed topic, but I think new tire tech is needed for EV; otherwise, there will be wave of Bolt drivers new to EV complaining about rapid tire wear. It would be good to put such disclaimer on the car or train the sales staff to warn the customers as such, but I doubt that’ll happen.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        That is totally incorrect. Rear tire wear on the Roadster was due to Tesla’s overloading the Lotus spec’d tires.

        Tesla came to ME to ask what I had done to make the tires last so long.

        1. SparkEV says:

          You mean Roadster rear tires last less than 4K miles typically? Wow, that does suck.

          1. Doggydogworld says:

            OEM tires for my Lotus Elise are Yokohama Advans. Treadwear rating is 60!!! (most modern tires are 400ish). These are soft, sticky track tires. The rears last ~5000 miles, fronts a bit longer. That’s street miles, they wear a lot faster on the track.

            Tesla Roadster was based on the Elise and (at least some versions) also shipped with Advans.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              I got 18,000 miles on the front tires, and when I chose the tires, got as much on the rears. The elise was properly designed as it did not

              1. Bill Howland says:

                (cont.)) Have a 1/2 ton battery over the wheels.

            2. Nix says:

              As doggy said, Lotus owners report 9,000, 7,000, even 3,000 miles of tire life.

              http://www.lotustalk.com/forums/f91/looks-like-my-yokohama-a048-need-replaced-37000/

              http://www.lotustalk.com/forums/f91/looks-like-my-yokohama-a048-need-replaced-37000/

              The tire life of expensive sports cars is short. That is true of all high performance sports cars, including the Lotus the Roadster was built on. If you expected that buying ANY high performance sports car would return Honda Civic tire life, the problem is with you, not the sports car.

              And yet again, it has NOTHING to do with the Model S, so yet again you contribute NOTHING to a story about the Model S.

              The Model S isn’t a Roadster. Your incorrect ASSumptions about tires on the Roadster has nothing to do with the Model S battery.

              You might as well be interjecting a story about BMW M3 tire wear in the middle of a discussion about BMW 328i oil changes, and complain that the typical BMW M3 10K tire wear means that there is a problem with BMW 328i engines.

              You didn’t like your Roadster, and you obviously didn’t research tire wear on typical sports cars before buying. We get it.

              Get Over It Already!!!

              1. Bill Howland says:

                What a SuperDope.

                I’ve repeated stated I enjoyed the time (4 years) with my roadster. I didn’t invoke NYS’s lemon-law since I loved the concept of an electric car so much.

                It has just been explained to you why precisely the tires wore, although there were other big reasons.

                Unlike you, the people at Tesla, to their credit, are NOT MORONS. They came to me for advice on what type of tire I was using to avoid the tire wear problem.

      2. David_Cary says:

        D makes it a non issue. I full throttle my 70D all day long. Passed inspection at 25k on my original never rotated tires. Haven’t measured lately but they aren’t bald.

        But for FWD, it is an issue. Perhaps the TC could be better. The Leaf can rip tires pretty easily before it cuts in. The Tesla doesn’t – the extra torque may balance the D – but the TC is more aggressive in my estimation.

    5. JP White says:

      The first battery was replaced at 200,000 miles. You need to read more carefully.

    6. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Bill Howland said:

      “So in 200,000 miles, the car has had 2 lithium batteries…. 100,000 on each? So how many miles does the ‘6%’ cover?”

      Good grief, Bill. Look, I appreciate that you had a lot of problems with your Tesla Roadster. But that’s not a valid reason to post anti-Tesla FUD in response to so many articles about Tesla Motors’ cars here. Tesla has a 98% customer satisfaction rating. You’re in the other 2%. We get that; you don’t need to keep repeating your laundry list of problems every other week here. Your experience makes you an outlier, not something a new Tesla customer is rather unlikely to experience.

      The article is not written as clearly as it could be, but it seems pretty clear that Tesla replaced the battery pack at 200,000 miles, when the car’s display was reporting a range suggesting a 6% loss of capacity… which didn’t match the car shutting down due to being out of power.

      Perhaps the pack actually had more capacity loss than the range indicator showed, or perhaps the car was prematurely shutting down when it still had some energy left in the pack. Which of those two things was happening (or perhaps something else entirely) isn’t at all clear.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        The aforementioned link provided gave me the original article which more clearly laid out the sequence of events.

        Attempts to tie this into my unrelated ownership of a Roadster is an unveiled attempt to hitch yourself to that Moron Nix’s bandwagon.

        How about, since you are the self-appointed Thermodyanmics BIG EXPERT, answering my everyday tire inflating issue?

  10. ffbj says:

    This just shows the superiority of evs and Teslas in particular.
    No gas vehicle could transport people with such low cost, heck the maintenance alone would be prohibitive, and then add in the fuel.
    Trips would be at least 2x perhaps more expensive in a similarly accoutered ice.

    1. Bill Howland says:

      Not necessarily.

      If the drive motor had failed outside of warranty, the cost of repair would have been high.

      And, the 300,000 mile volt has low per mile cost of operation.

      Of course, if this commercial business does all of its charging hanging out at superchargers (whose cost ELON has said is ‘immaterial’), you could include free-fuel as a benefit.

      But, due to the exhuberance issue with BOTH cars, I’d like to see the complete maintenance histories of both this car, and the VOLT.

      1. Nix says:

        Bill, Tesla has an 8 year, unlimited mile battery and drive unit warranty. They could have done a million miles and they would still be under warranty.

        As for what will happen with a 10 or 15 year old car that might fail, the same thing will happen as with any other used car that is that age. People won’t put brand new parts in, they will get used or refurbished parts at a fraction of new. Do you think the owner of a decade old 200K mile BMW 535 owner will buy a brand new long block and turbos and get it installed at the dealership for $55K dollars if it happens to fail?

        The sad thing is that this entire FUD line of attack talking about battery replacement costs is literally decades old. This is the same attack that the haters used against the Toyota Prius back in the late 1990’s. Long debunked, only the haters grasping at straws still try to drag this old slander back up from the grave.

        You didn’t like your Roadster you had years ago. We get it. Tesla doesn’t make the Roadster anymore, and haven’t for years. Time to get a life and move on.

        1. vdiv says:

          Time to get a new Tesla 😉

          1. Bill Howland says:

            The retroactive policy (Per Musk) on the warranty is better; the ranger policy is much worse – it used to be free. I need to read some fine print because Tesla unsuccessfully tried to renig with me.

            1. Nix says:

              The warranty change for the better warranty is retroactive to all buyers. The Ranger program changes is NOT retroactive. Original buyers who bought under the free Ranger program still receive free Ranger service for their entire warranty period.

              Considering you have been wrong over and over about the current Tesla warranty and service requirements, I certainly don’t expect you to get that right.

              1. Bill Howland says:

                I called the Tesla Service Center near me yesterday to find out their current ranger pricing. Ah, its nice to speak with non-idiots for a change.

      2. ffbj says:

        There will always be exceptions. Sure the Volt is good care with good maintenance records.
        What I am saying is that on a fundamental level evs are a superior technology.

    2. Bacardi says:

      There are lots of motor coaches that make the trip for far less…Some have wifi and a bathroom, it’s popular to put some BACARDI into a gatoraide bottle and watch a movie…

  11. James says:

    Sounds right. 55k miles on our RAV4EV, 3 hot Phoenix summers, and negligible loss of range. Pretty amazing. Had a Nissan Leaf for less than a year and thought battery powered cars were doomed because of the massive loss of range. Tesla and Chevy did it right.

  12. ffbj says:

    Watch out for competition from Toyfloop.
    The Toyota FCV loop drive.

  13. Jonathan B says:

    I’m actually not that impressed by these numbers or perhaps better stated, I’m not sure that they are a fair representation of capacity at 200K miles under normal circumstances. The biggest impact to battery degradation is cycle count and age of the battery, other factors like temperature impact it as well, but since Tesla has a TMS, these aren’t as significant.

    This car has 200K miles, but has amassed that in a very short period of time. Because of the larger battery size (assuming this is an 85kwh or 90kwh model, there are fewer full battery cycles needed for this many miles. To compare this to a 24kwh Nissan Leaf, the tesla will have fully cycled its battery at less than a third of the rate as the Nissan. So 200K on this Tesla corresponds to about 60K on the leaf as far as cycle count. Also given time, this Tesla has done this many miles in less than 2 years, whereas the average owner of this car would do 200k miles in something more like 10-13 years. My point is that this 6% loss doesn’t mean that the average person can expect their Tesla to go 200k miles with only 6% degradation.

    I will openly state that my 2015 Nissan Leaf, with 36K miles, is about 8% down from new, which is admittedly much worse that what a Tesla would be even with all of the above factored in. To counter the above comment that Chevy did it right, I would point out that the Chevy Volt includes a good deal of unused capacity into their packs, such that as the battery degrades, this is freed up to keep the range at 100%. I’m not aware as to whether Tesla does the same, but given that the car above is a 2015 Model S, if it is an S85, it has the 90kwh battery with some unused capacity to eat away at. Even the present S60 Model actually has a 75kwh battery that could theoretically be eaten away at for degradation.

    I guess my overall point is that I’d rather see how a 2012 Model with 150K miles is doing than a 2015 Model with 200K. I would also point out that I think buying as big of a pack as you can afford in your Tesla would be a great use of money. If degradation is this minimal, your 90D would still have the range of a 75D after 10 years and 200K miles. The 75D owner on the other hand may find himself needing a new battery or not being able to make the journey between superchargers.

    1. Nix says:

      Jonathan — I agree with your post completely. Everything you said is dead on.

      I would just like to add a bit from where you said “My point is that this 6% loss doesn’t mean that the average person can expect their Tesla to go 200k miles with only 6% degradation.”

      and

      “I’d rather see how a 2012 Model with 150K miles is doing”

      I would even go further and say that (unfortunately) nobody can actually know what the degradation will be in 15-20 years, until there have been Tesla’s on the road for 15-20 years being charged normally overnight at home, like most Tesla’s get charged most of the time.

      There are factors that go both ways for this one example that make it an outlier statistically.

      1) Like you mentioned, shorter than typical years in service when it hit 200K.
      2) This car was regularly charged to max full battery daily, and most Tesla owners won’t do that.
      3) The car was regularly run all the way to the bottom of the battery capacity. Most Tesla owners wont’ do that.
      4) The car was regularly run through extreme desert heat conditions that most Tesla owners won’t experience.
      5) This car was fast-charged at superchargers much more often then typical Tesla’s.

      Most of those factors are associated with faster battery degradation (except the first one). So it is difficult to translate these exact results to what typical consumers will experience.

      Some consumers who slow charge in temperature controlled garages and live in temperate climates and park in a garage at work and rarely supercharge or charge/discharge the battery at max range setting may experience significantly LESS capacity loss doing the same 200K over a more typical 15 years.

      All this really tells us is that the battery definitely CAN make it to 200K under these conditions, and can only be loosely extrapolated.

    2. Tech01x says:

      Ah, this vehicle’s normal trip is a 270-280 mile journey where they range charge to 100%. That’s a full cycle each time.

      It’s actually much harder on the battery to be at the limits of the state of charge than many, much smaller cycles. This is basically the worst case torture test.

      And Tesla allows 96.2% of the battery to be used, so the holdback is very small. So to get this many cycles to 6% degradation is impressive. Also, they can pull the BMS information to know if the loss of range at the end is an actual battery issue or calculation issue.

      Basically, this is about 725-750 full charge cycles to 6% degradation. Of course, some people have it worst, and you can only get as much as your worst module. So for those that have much worse results, it would be interesting to note if it is a single module that can be swapped out.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Tech01x said:

        “Tesla allows 96.2% of the battery to be used…”

        May I ask where you found that figure? I’ve looked for the exact amount of capacity Tesla reserves in its packs, but haven’t found any authoritative source.

    3. AlphaEdge says:

      Good points!

  14. speculawyer says:

    ” Because of the larger battery size (assuming this is an 85kwh or 90kwh model, there are fewer full battery cycles needed for this many miles.”

    Actually, I think they do a lot of full battery cycles. I believe the Tesloop service is a transportation service from LA to Las Vegas and that would require full battery depletions.

    I doubt the 6% is accurate since I suspect the software hides the decline a bit.

    But I am very impressed that they got 200K miles of good useful service out of the main traction battery. I really wasn’t sure how long these batteries would last. I suspect they didn’t fully know either although they do perform tests of many charge/discharge cycles and put the batteries in ovens for accelerated aging.

    Hopefully this 200K is typical and not an outlier on the high end.

    1. ModernMarvelFan says:

      I agree.

      I found that 6% estimate to be baseless since its estimator were completely off due to “high mileage battery”.

      But 200K miles is about 800 full cycles which is still well within the 2,000 typical life cycles that a good quality battery can handle (if you don’t use 100%, the battery can last even longer than 2,000 cycles).

      But Tesla did replace the battery which makes me wonder if they will disclose the % it truly lost…

  15. ModernMarvelFan says:

    Then, just as the car hit 200,000 miles, the range estimator became inaccurate. Though the car didn’t actually lose any range, the estimator would say it could go another ten miles—and then power down. Tesla looked into the issue, and told Tesloop that there’s a battery chemistry state that high-mileage cars go into, and the software isn’t properly compensating for that change.”

    Did I read this correctly? If that is the case, then his claim of only 6% loss is completely off base since the car went into “shut down” mode even thought the estimator still said 10 miles range left. That implies that his estimate of so called 6% are completely off.

    10 miles on a 260 miles range is additional 4% of range. So, that means that car lost at least 10% of the range…

    Granted, I didn’t expect it to perform any worse. A 250 miles range would mean that 200K miles required only 800 full charge cycles.

    Most good quality li-ion battery should be able to handle 2,000 cycles with only 30% capacity loss due to natural aging/use. So, 10% is just on track.

    This is another vote of confidence for larger battery design and thermal protection.

    1. Jonathan B says:

      I completely agree. No doubt that there was some problem with the pack that was attributed to the loss of power with 10 mikes remaining. Probably more like 10% is correct.

  16. ModernMarvelFan says:

    I find something very interesting here.

    If I understand it correctly most PEV battery warranties don’t cover “commercial use” of the vehicle such as taxi (in fact, most PEVs have that exclusion in their warranty statement as far as use as taxi is concerned. Hyundai’s Unlimited miles battery warranty voids commercial applications).

    This vehicle is effectively used as a Taxi service. Based on 200K miles in about 400-500 days, it is using at least 1 Supercharging session per day. If it is a 85kWh version, it would cost Tesla at least $12 per session (60kWh at $0.20/kWh commercial electricity rate in California). That is about $12 per day for about 400 days or $4800 to $6000 in Supercharging fee in the last year alone!

    Now, on top of it, Tesla is paying for a brand new battery pack.

    I know that Tesla is awesome and fixing the car regardless. But Tesla warranty doesn’t clearly disallow the use of the vehicle as taxi service. If more and more vehicle is doing this, then Tesla will be paying both for the SC as well as new battery packs.

    I don’t know if the new battery would have any further issues. But if Tesla continues this every 200K miles, then before the 8 year warranty is up, Tesla potentially will need to replace 2 more packs at the current rate.

    Of course, Tesla might not replace the battery pack anymore if it can update the FW to “properly show” the range after battery starts to degrade.

    But I find cases such as this is really abusing the awesome Tesla warranty in certain extent…

  17. Zerbert Cakes says:

    Simple math. Almost all teslas go over 200 mi per charge. 200,000 miles on a tesla is 1,000 or less cycles. 400,000 miles is 2,000 cycles or less.

    A nissan leaf, bmw i3, or pretty much all other EV’s have to cycle 2,500-3,000 times to reach 200,000 miles. 5,000-6,000 cycles to reach 400,000 miles.

    Smart on Tesla to use more batteries and larger capacity to lower cycle count and increase range, that’s all

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Now here is someone who has been paying attention.

      1. Bonaire says:

        They used “more batteries” because NCA chemistry cannot do the same 2000-3000 cycles as with NMC used in Volts and others. But how many will “really” hit 200,000 in 8-years. So, the risk is “worth it” to use the cheaper NCA high-capacity, higher-volatility battery. For now. If they ever want to offer a 40-50kWh car (hmmm – wonder why the 40 was never done?) – they will need to use NMC

    2. Bill Howland says:

      Not so simple. Volts go thousands of cycles with no degredation. My 2012 volt I just purchased with 50,000 miles on it, 220 mpg over the last 15,000 miles, and 250+ on the 50,000 mile total means the car has gone at least 1300 charge cycles.

      Mr. Williams states he lost 4% on a year old vehicle and 16% on a 4 year old vehicle. I’m curious at to why the 12 volt battery was no good after only a year. The 12 volt battery in my 5 year old volt is fine.

      There was something along timeago that if there was a problemcharging the car, then it would make the 12 volt battery go dead. Going dead is one thing, but why the destruction?

  18. Michael Jennings says:

    We have 48,000 miles on our 2015 Model S 85D, no noticable max range loss over those miles at this time.

  19. My 2015 Tesla Model S-70D charges to about 230 miles with 45,000 miles on the car (4% loss, assuming that Tesla doesn’t fudge the numbers)

    My 2012 Toyota RAV4 EV is about 15% degraded at 77,000 miles. While the battery is manufacturered by Tesla with the same basic Panasonic 2600ma cells used in the Roadster and Smart ED, Toyota manipulates what is displayed to the consumer.

    *********

    New battery – loss of 5.1% SOC per bar until 48.1%. 35kWh for a Normal charge divided into 41.8kWh for an extended charge is 83.83% of usable capacity. With almost 7 kWh available in the “Extended” portion, it is about 21 additional miles above a Normal charge.

    Actual data from a 12% degraded battery – Loss of 5.4% SOC per bar until 51% SOC, then 4.5% SOC with variations per fuel bar below 51%. That means that a Normal charge is about 33kWh, with 37kWh for Extended. Only 4 kWh is now available in the Extended portion (maybe 12 miles worth).

    I can foresee that at 18% degradation, there will be 32kWh available in a Normal charge, and probably only 3kWh extra in the Extended portion (about 9 miles extra).

    Each fuel bar is worth about 2.2kWh when the car is new, and about 2kWh at 18% degradation, or about 6 miles extra for Extended.

    So, at 18% degradation, with an extended charge, you would have 2.0kWh in fuel bar 16, plus about 3kWh in the Extended portion, so 5kWh total (about 15 miles total)

    ————- 12% degraded — New

    Normal charge – 88.9% —- 84%

    FUEL BAR SEGMENTS:

    16 gone – 83.4 —- 78.7

    15 gone – 78.0 —- 73.6

    14 gone – 72.6 —- 68.6

    13 gone – 67.2 —- 63.4

    12 gone – 61.8 —- 58.3

    11 gone – 56.4 —- 53.3

    10 gone – 51.0 —- 49.1

    9 gone – 46.4 —- 43.7

    8 gone – 41.9 —- 39.5

    7 gone – 37.4 —- 35.3

    6 gone – 32.9 —- 31.1

    5 gone – 28.4 —- 26.9

    4 gone – 23.9 —- 22.5

    3 gone – 19.4 —- 18.3

    2 gone – 13.9% SOC (VLB)

    Flashing gas can – 12.9%

    LO – 8.4%

    1st gone – 7%

    Climate Control Limited (CCL) – 7%

    Turtle – 2.9%