This Tesla Model X 90D Covered 350,000 Miles On Original Battery

JAN 28 2019 BY MARK KANE 106

Tesloop proves that Teslas are built to last

Tesloop recently shared its experience with the highest mileage Tesla with an original battery in the fleet.

Currently, the highest mileage belongs to a Tesla Model X 90D “Deuxy”, which has 350,000 miles (563,150 km) on the odometer (since mid-2016).

This is amazing that all-electric not only can drive so much, but also that the battery degradation is estimated at just around 13% (the range indicated at 95% charge decreased from 247 miles to 215 miles / 346 km) with frequent Supercharging.

The Deuxy also didn’t experience any drive unit failure or replacement, according to Tesloop.

Another big positive is that both on the exterior and interior, after 7,000 users took a ride, the car is still in good condition.

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply

106 Comments on "This Tesla Model X 90D Covered 350,000 Miles On Original Battery"

newest oldest most voted

Wow, this is really amazing. I am even more amazed by the longevity of the falcon doors, considering how much they have been dissed by even hard core Tesla supporters, I think falcon wings are here to stay.

I hope those Falcon Wing Doors and the 6+ seats comes to the Model Y… if they don’t, I think I’ll be forced into getting a used Model X instead…

The way the doors open are hardly a selling factor, or should be.

We all need 4 wheels, not all need 7 seats, some need the hatch back, some need the bed (model y?)
But falcon doors are not a need

the only “need” in any/every car/truck/can/etc is the lack of greenhouse gas emissions.

The only issue with the falcon doors is the reliability. If they resolved the reliability then it wouldn’t have any cause for concern right? I wondered whether it may be possible to make falcon wing doors without electronic opening (e.g. gas struts) but not sure how it’d work as it has two joins and the various angles it may need to open up at would be difficult to control manually.

Another issue with the falcon doors is utility or in this case, lack of. The falcon doors preclude using the roof of the vehicle to carry things. For this reason, I hope that the Model Y has standard doors and not doors that limited the utility of the vehicle.

It makes it vastly easier for parents to get small children into/out of the car and for people with bad joints to get in and out.

For those without joint issues or children? Sure, no benefit.

For everyone else? It’s a must-have.

Sliding doors would do the same and be less complicated and expensive, though I have to admit they are very uncool

yep “minivan doors” would work too… barf! PS, I have owned minivans, I regret that.

Yes, but on the other hand we have had a Passat station wagon with rails on the roof which I thought would be really handy. In the 2 years we have had it I have yet to put anything on the roof. Seems like the Falcon doors would not be such a problem for me.

Those roof rails are sorta like a tow hitch. Reality is it has been years since I’ve seen anything but a truck or at least medium sized SUV pulling anything but the second something like a PHEV small SUV doesn’t have a tow rating everyone is ‘that’s never going to sell without at least a 5000 lb rating’. Yeah right. Then again I had a Jetta wagon for a decade with roof rails and never used them.

They are also a pain in the arse in the rain. The passenger is exposed immediately even before they exit the vehicle. Not real great if that passenger is a little kid in a car seat. But hey…with a $100,000 SUV in California the odds of that happening are low….it’s just not a mass market feature.

try it in the rain, you’ll see your wrong. I have to say they’re no worse than a regular door since you’ll say “but I got wet standing outside in the rain so Tesla is bad!”

The only other downside to the falcon doors is not being able to have a roof rack. For that reason I’d prefer sliding doors.

Exactly! With the possible exception of looking cool, there’s nothing that falcon wing doors can do that sliding doors can’t do better. And more cheaply.

With regard to falcon wing doors vs sliding doors, there is one benefit of falcon wing that may not be immediately obvious. They provide protection from rain, handy if a parent needs to use both hands to get their little one in a kiddy seat and can’t hold an umbrella at the same time.

One man’s benefit is another’s poison, don’t diss the door because your uee cases don’t warrant the doors

You missed the early Tesla Falcon doors vs sliding doors video showing that indeed their is another quite significant advantage. When two vehicles are parked next to each other, or a van equipped with sliding doors is next to a wall, you cannot easily walk alongside said vehicle rearwards with the door open. This is because the sliding mechanism pushes the door out and then back.

The video compared both and showed easier access alongside the X in tight situations, than the minivan with sliders. One could argue that the X owner could use the Summon feature to move their car so side access was easier, but again, advantage X. You may also argue that the point is moot because Falcon Wing Doors often do not fully deploy in really tight situations, making access awkward also. So entering alongside the Tesla would be easier, but actually entering the car, or fastening a child into a car seat would be frustrating or impossible.

Both points being valid, the Tesla wins the day with Summon operated by smartphone with app installed.

The sliding doors on our Sienna really don’t stick out that much when opened – I’d say <6 inches.

While I can appreciate the engineering and thought that has gone into the Falcon doors, I'm not quite (yet) sold on them. (That said, if I could get a good deal on a Model X, I wouldn't mind them at all).

To each his/her own (though only falcon doors if buying MX). They must, however, cost Tesla quite a lot. It seems odd to me how close the S and X are in price given this and size. Looked at this way the X is a bargain for those who are going to spend six figures on a car in the first place.


There are many issues with the falcon wing doors, and I would never buy a Model X or Y that has them. They should be optional for folks who don’t want to: a) overly complicate a car, b) prevent use of roof racks, c) violate the integrity of the roof without making open-top driving possible, and d) threaten to be forgotten and ruined by garage doors and door openers.

The big question is why they aren’t available on the new Tesla Roadster, as far as I know. That’s the kind of show car that needs to have attention-getting silliness to attract high rollers. Plus, the Roadster 2.0 is now supposed to fly, so wings seem obligatory. Sorry to be curmudgeonly, but this kind of thing does not “advance the transition to sustainable transportation”. It may be justifiable to the degree it draws in folks who might otherwise be purchasing Armadas, Escalades, Hummers, Navigators, Range Rovers, and the like.

The Falcon doors were akin to showing off. Are they cool? You bet. Do they impress a lot of people? Yes they do. These embellishments create buzz and gimmickry does sell cars. If there is a bit of P.T. Barnum in Musk besides being an impressive visionary and engineer, that trait may be what gets Tesla over the hump to lasting success.

Most of us are far more impressed with efficiency, range and the hope of petrol free cars being mainstream. If the doors are reliable, and help encourage high earners to buy electric SUVs, than God bless Falcon Doors! Elon later confessed to excessive hubris on his part to insist the doors make the final cut. Its obvious no such doors will make it to the more affordable Y.

While unconventional and initially problematic, any car guy must admit the story of those doors proves many things about Tesla, it’s tech capability and the nature of it’s CEO. The German firm they hired to make the doors failed so Tesla developed them in house.

In one sentence you say you don’t see how the “cool factor” of the doors helps toward the transition to alternate fuel vehicles and in the next say how it could draw in buyers of other vehicles that are purchased for their form over function. Make up your mind or are you just here to disparage a vehicle you can’t afford out of jealousy?

Any overhead storage severely limits the range of an EV.

Very impressive w.r.t. drivetrain (battery & motors), no question. Good on Tesla!
However, I’m really curious about the overall maintenance history & cost of the vehicle, drivetrain aside. People tend to forget that the drivetrain makes a fairly small part of the cost of a vehicle, ICE or BEV (in both cases, <25%).
Were there any failures in electronics, doors etc. during the period? There has to be a reason why Teslas tend to be so expensive to insure, and my understanding was that parts are very expensive.

Expensive to insure because they are very fast cars and people wreck them a lot? All of those Performance model Teslas out there can catch the unwary off guard and be wrecked before you know it.

They are actually easier to handle than most performance cars because the precise traction control of the electric drive makes it harder to lose control. The high insurance cost comes from the high replacement cost in a totalled situation and body repairs are admittedly expensive because of the aluminum construction

The lion’s share of cost in any electric car is the battery pack. By a very large margin.

This example proves that battery pack and those motors and reduction drive gear are rock solid.

Your “fairly small part of the cost of the vehicle”, comment is dead wrong.

Tesloop or possibly another Tesla taxi company(can’t remember) did a TCO on their Tesla fleet and they found they much were cheaper overall than operating ICE taxis.

How do you know the falcon doors didn’t have a problem? Nothing in the article about it.

If you watch the video, which I don’t recommend, he says falcon door problems cost less than $1000.

My bad, I watched the video. Still can’t believe they didn’t have issues with the door.

Yeah…he lied!


350k miles for Consumers might be 4-6 different owners. But then again that would be 23 years of drivability and still 87% battery capacity available.

This is not correct. Batteries degrade by usage and by age. Covering 350,000 miles in 3 years is very different than covering the same distance in 23, and the older cars which have much more battery degradation.

No, the older cars don’t show much more degradation.

400 miles every day? It is real?

They ran a shuttle service, with zero fuel cost thanks to free Supercharging. They shut it down last fall and are launching a car management app/service of some sort.

He says Deuxy has the most miles on the original battery. Rex was their first Model X to hit 300k miles, I wonder if it recently had its battery replaced? I read it did have a drive unit replaced. Their 2015 Model S has the most miles (400k+) but is on its 3rd battery and 2nd (at least) drive unit. All replacements were under Tesla’s unlimited mile warranty.

Note that all their cars (one S and six Xs) charged at Superchargers almost exclusively. So much for the theory that Supercharging will kill your battery!

I didn’t realize they chose to shut down the service – I assumed it was still going.

Should be noted that often times they’d supercharge to nearly 100%…

On their site, “in relation to California State permitting issues that are controlled by the Public Utilities Commission, we are suspending our operations of ‘Tesloop Shuttle’”

3 batteries for 1 car, and you say that SC did not impact it?

The first battery was replaced due to a software problem, there wasn’t anything wrong with the battery. Only 1 battery was replaced due to battery failure.

“there wasn’t anything wrong with the battery”

That’s almost certainly not true.

Two separate vehicles. The one reached 350K miles without needing changes to the battery or drivetrain. The other reached 400K miles but needed the battery and drivetrain replaced. Early issues – I think Tesla replaced them for free, because of the value of the data Tesla was getting out of seeing what happened to their vehicles when they accumulated so many miles.

Winbourne – their original 2015 Model S is on its 3rd battery. The original died at 200k then the replacement (rebuilt, salvage?) died closer to 300k. Despite claims the original had a “firmware problem”, it showed all the classic signs of a cycle life failure.

Tesloop later standardized on the Model X, buying a fleet of six 2016s. Four went 200k+ miles and two (Rex and Deuxy) went 300k+ all on the original batteries and drive units. Rex eventually had a drive unit fail at some point after 300k.

The 2016s may have a better battery chemistry. This was around the time they started talking about silicon anodes. Earlier batteries had no silicon, we don’t know about these 2016 Model Xs. Tesla may have tweaked cooling, charging or something else or Tesloop’s experience may just be random chance.

The good news is although the 2 other vehicles had their batteries replaced this one is newer and managed to outlast the older models. Goes to show that they are fixing and improving the vehicles to have less chance of failures.

It’s definately an indicator that charging cycles doesn’t affect battery life as much as feared if you have an active thermal management system. But I’m more interested in how those cells perform in 8 to 10 years because of natural degradation. 200.000 miles in 10 years is more common and have more practical relevance than cases of cars with 350.000 miles in just around 2,5 years.

“…. more practical relevance than cases of cars with 350.000 miles in just around 2,5 years”

True, but …

I think this sheds some light on why the OEMs seem to be looking so hard at owning/operating BEV autonomous taxi fleets. (even at the expense of cannibalizing their own POV car sales)

My understanding of battery decline is that it’s based on charge/discharge cycles. Length of time over which these cycles occur is not a factor, unless the battery is left sitting at a high SOC routinely, or depleted completely. What is this “natural degredation” you speak of?

I think he means Natural Degradation is just regular use.. or just aging in general. These LiON NMC type of batteries are still relatively new to markets and we haven’t seen these age more than 10 years… I’d be curious to see how they age. Also Model 3 uses the 2170 cells that are more power dense and have slightly different chemistry than 18750.. curious to see how they hold up.

Not correct. Batteries degrade just by sitting there. Yes high SoC and high temps make this faster, but the degradation happens even at low SoC and low temps, just more slowly.

“Length of time over which these cycles occur is not a factor”

Not true, both matters. Cycle count and absolute time matters.

Even if it is mildly cycled, for NCA, it would be hard to last past 15 years without at least 30% degradation.

@Maurus said: “…I’m more interested in how those cells perform in 8 to 10 years because of natural degradation. 200.000 miles in 10 years is more common and have more practical relevance than cases of cars with 350.000 miles in just around 2,5 years.”

Research/testing done on this topic suggests that compressing charge/discharge cycles to a shorter time period causes a near same amount of degradation if had those same profiled charge/discharge cycles been spread over a longer period of time. That is good news because it means that the testing benches often used to test battery degradation curves (back-to-back charging cycles to simulate multi year use) are a valid method to predict battery degradation. Of course this means testing the entire battery pack including active BMS cooling system (or lack thereof) and not just the battery cell.

Lithium cells even with no cycling lose capacity over time. Worse at high temps and high SoC, but happens to all cells.

+1 Thank you for that clarification.
Can you cite where you found that information?

Spelled “definitely” -5

From article:

“This Tesla Model X 90D Covered 350,000 Miles On Original Battery… battery degradation is estimated at just around 13%… with frequent Supercharging…

“didn’t experience any drive unit failure or replacement…”

Wow… That is amazing!

Meanwhile some traditional car makers continue to say battery tech is not yet ready for all-electric EVs… they waiting for the future magical “solid state” battery still in development.

Imagine the amount of R&M $$$ that would have been required to keep an ICE SUV alive for 350,000 miles… especially if it was a premium brand SUV (Mercedes, BMW, Porsche). That there is arguably the #1 EV negative for the traditional car maker independent franchise dealer network. For EVs to be embraced by traditional franchise dealers the traditional car makers will need to find a way to rebalance/adjust the franchise agreement to offset the much lower R&M revenue/margin opportunity for EVs which currently account for a large part of a dealers total profits.

… continued

So if it is true that for EVs to be embraced by traditional independent franchise dealers that the traditional car makers need to find a way to adjust the franchise agreement to offset the much lower R&M revenue/margin opportunity EVs (vs. ICE) represent… what is an example of how that could be done?

CDAVIS proposed solution:

Something modeled along the lines of a Costco Card membership benefits program where franchise dealer benefits from the forward subscription revenue.

Traditional car makers create an EV optional paid (monthly, yearly, or multi year pre-paid) “EV Service Subscription” that has franchise dealer maintenance benefits… perhaps also an extended warranty benefit… along with non-maintenance related EV owner benefits. Give the franchise dealer that has sold the EV (with an optional EV Serive Subscription attached or if later the original owner subscribes within the allowable after sale period) a % of the going forward subscription revenue for the ownership period of the original owner… same thing for used EV CPOs.

Today, car dealers make their money more on repairs and service than they do on new car sales. There is no money for dealerships in the price of a Tesla, and there is far less money to be made on repairs and service. Expect franchises/dealerships to disappear over the next decade.

Good idea but I think the greedy dealers won’t accept that.

Volvo is trying to do a subscription model but their dealers are suing despite being offered 8% commission, saying that it makes them more like agents and takes away their power to swindle (err, negotiate).

@stimpacker said: “…Volvo is trying to do a subscription model but their dealers are suing despite being offered 8% commission…”

The EV Service Subscription I’m proposing would be offered and sold by the franchise dealership (not offered directly by the car maker) as an optional add-on to the car sold by the dealership… the subscription would not include the car itself.

The “Volvo Care” subscription model is a subscription offered directly by Volvo and includes the car itself… with car delivery assigned to the nearest local dealership. Volvo Care is likely the eventual future direction for franchise dealerships… but perhaps ahead of its time. What the franchise dealerships are looking for is assurances that programs like Volvo Care are not a step towards downstream squeezing the franchise dealership out.

The thing franchise dealerships need to recognize is that the business of selling and serviceing cars is entering a radical shift with or without them… the franchise dealerships need to keep an open mind of what is required on their part today change wise to remain relevant ten years from now.

Or! Put in ultra fast charging infrastructure that burns out the battery every few years. That should keep the dealers happy!
Also helps the dealer to sell more cars because the customer thinks they are getting a better product.

If you don’t overdo it maintenance for an ICE to drive that far changing oil every 7500 miles is only like 50 oil changes, or maybe $1,500. Plus other fluid changes, you might be looking at maybe $5,000 in maintenance if you put miles on so quickly. This also assumes a reliable vehicle.

A co-worker has a Chrysler minivan quickly approaching 350,000 miles that hasn’t been very expensive in terms of repairs or maintenance. Gas is more expensive than maintenance on those vehicles, if that minivan averaged 19 mpg, that is like 18,400 gallons of gas. Depending on the price of gas you are looking at $40,000 to $80,000 in gas, less than $10,000 in maintenance, maybe $30,000 for the vehicle.

The free for life supercharging for this Model X has made it cost effective, as that saved like $60,000+ worth of gas in a similar gas vehicle. This is also why free for life supercharging went away. It was abused.

So many ppl, such as this business, not only used it for primary charging, but warranty should be different between commercial Vs private.

You forgot tune ups, alternator replacement, filter changes, muffler and catalytic convertor replacement…And a host of CV joint, PCV valve, timing belt, fan belt, fuel injector, thermostat and various expensive stops that 90% of consumers do not do, or have the skill to perform themselves. One other detail in my state is a required emissions test every other year.

In only calculating oil changes and gasoline costs, you lead me to believe you have never really owned a conventional gas powered vehicle or driven it over 100,000 miles.

On top of this, Chrysler products fall at the top of yearly high maintenance lists.

No, I (or my family) have owned numerous ICE vehicles to about 250,000 miles, and I have owned dozens of vehicles with more than 100,000 miles (all cheap $1000 car type cars). They rarely need the stuff you mention, and cheaper than you indicate. Our Honda cars we started needing CV joints and such around 200,000 or 250,000 miles. These repairs we did ourselves as you indicate, but a 3rd party shop could do them easily and cheaply as well.

Take for example a CRV for 250,000 miles. 3x timing belts at $600 each (less than $100 yourself) is $1,800. about $1,000 worth of oil changes, a coolant drain and flush ($200) and a transmission fluid change ($200?). A ball joint failed, what would that cost, $1200? Brake fluid, maybe, but the vehicle will still probably last if it gets miles quickly (might lead to more expensive brake repairs). A stainless muffler and cat should last the life of the vehicle if miles are put on more rapidly.

The problem is dealer recommending maintenance more often then expected. They are trying to tell me my Clarity PHEV needs a $600 30k mile maintenance of all fluids changed. I told them no.

Front Wheel Drive EVs have CV joint too. EVs have cabin filters as well.

Alternator? Ev got a big motor in there. =)

The amount of ignorance among some EV supporters in general on how cars work is just mind boggling.

“That is amazing!”

Any decent ICEV would do 350k SoCal desert highway miles in two years on original engine and transmission. It’s a pretty easy duty cycle. NYC taxis routinely do 400k+ grueling miles.

I seriously doubt maintenance and repairs for a Lexus, Acura, etc. would exceed $18k. A German sedan probably would, though.

It’s a myth that the franchised dealer model requires lots of repair and maintenance revenue. Toyota/Lexus R&M is a small fraction of vehicle cost and their dealers do just fine.

@ Doggydogworld said: “…It’s a myth that the franchised dealer model requires lots of repair and maintenance revenue…”

Seems dealers don’t think it’s a myth:

“When asked what area of the dealership was the most important for overall success of their business, dealers’ top response was fixed ops. Those of us that have invested a lifetime in parts and service have known that all along…” -source:

Here are the hard 2017 NADA stats for average dealer:

“Total service and parts sales: $6,793,905 (page 29)

“Service and parts gross profit as % of service and parts sales: 46.0% (page 29)

“Service and Parts Department Gross Profit by Year 2017: $3,125,196 (page 22)


P.S.: Im not suggesting here dealers should not make a profit… I’m suggesting dealer’s perceive EVs representing Service Department profits being negatively impacted as a real pain point for them.

It’s a myth. Dealers do make significant money on service today. Many choose to discount new cars aggressively to gain the service cash flow. When selling cars that need less service they simply won’t discount as aggressively.

Remember, dealers collectively have a monopoly on new car sales. They have to compete with many third parties on service and used cars. Their model works just fine with EVs, it will simply self-adjust.

landcruiser 100 series are still around. I have personally seen 1 with over 1 million miles, built in 1987 that is still running

I have seen several graphs showing how Tesla packs lose capacity quickly at first, losing 2-3% of capacity over the first 5-10,000 kms and then the loss of capacity really slows down, with the median remaining capacity at 250k kms still around 91.5%, which is very impressive. I hadn’t seen it expressed on calendar life until recently and I was curious as to whether the calendar life might be the problem, not distance driven.
But the news on calendar life appears to be good too, with a respectable 95% (median) of capacity remaining at 2 years and 94% at 5 years!
The interesting thing about the capacity loss is that it seems to slow after an initial loss of 2-3% in the first couple years. It really looks like the Tesla packs should have a median capacity of around 85-90% at 10 years of life, if the mileage driven is not much over 300k km/200k miles. And that is worst casing it a bit.
Maybe. There are a lot of unknowns, but the data looks good.
Hat tip to Maarten Steinbuch!

Too bad that database collection somehow got shut down almost a year ago (spring of ’18). So the real world battery life vs age info is limited to about 5 years.

My Model 3 is at 23 600 miles (38 000 km) and it still charges to 308 miles, so less than 1% degradation.

I’m hoping to hold onto it for another 10-20 years and see it reach 450-500K miles.

That could be a calibration error, I doubt its 308, there are steps to re calibrate the bms if you are interested. On the model 3 you will probably start seeing some degradation after the first 100 full/charge discharge cycles.

“I’m hoping to hold onto it for another 10-20 years and see it reach 450-500K miles.”

I would like to see your battery degradation curve at year 15.

again, mileage degradation curves aren’t the same curves as time based degradation curves. They are based on two different mechanism, so different curve. But the combined degradation from both impacts the battery life.

I wish we could get updated info on the Tesla S fleet and its current pack degradation plotted like Maarten did in the link above. We are getting to more than 6 years and his data only covers around 5 years. If calendar degradation is going to impact the S in a meaningful way, it will probably be manifesting itself fairly soon..

Taylor, I have a Model 3 too and I roughly estimate your battery will have between 84% and 90% capacity at 500K miles. For me, it will be awesome to the point of being hilarious if my Model 3 still has a range anywhere near 275 miles after a half million miles of driving. The fuel, maintenance and vehicle replacement savings over ICE vehicles will exceed the cost of the Model 3 itself. By vehicle replacement, I am guessing it will take more than one ICE vehicle to reach 500K miles.

BTW, I charge to 80% every night. If I am traveling, I charge to 90%, more or less.

I got some of my lithium battery data here:

Very impressive. I would love to see the total cost of repairs plus maintenance and what they encompassed.

While I would guess that the TCO figures are very good for this car, I’d like to see them, as well. After all, when I’m paying to own and operate a vehicle I have to pay all those costs, whether they’re immediate, obvious ones like recharging or delayed ones, like depreciation.

Also, the more of this kind of data we have in hand (assuming the data is high quality and reliable), the easier it is for us to use it to persuade people we know to go electric.

Check out the Tesloop blog. This post (linked below) even includes a link to a spreadsheet detailing their full service/maintenance record for an S with 400,000mi.

247 miles to 215 miles…
Good news for Tesla owners.

Actually not the highest milage. That one is past 440k miles and is a Model S 85D, eHawk.

highest milage (with the second battery, ehawk has the third one) is a
Tesla Model S P85 gem8mingen – 777.777km

Highest mileage *with an original battery*. eHawk has had its battery replaced (twice, in fact), though it was covered under warranty.

They are million mile batteries, I have heard!

That’s the goal, to develop a million miles drivetrain. My guess is that there are still a few bumps in the road before that goal is realized.

Because Big Oil companies want to ensure their status/cash flows, EVs and renewal energy tech will be under constant attack. After all this time of Oil subsidies, renewable energy tech and EV supporters must FIRST focus on eliminating the Oil subsidies. The general public needs to feel and know the “true” cost of gasoline for ICE vehicles. Doesn’t it seem strange that the cost of gasoline in the US is about half the cost versus the rest of the world? Just look at the EU gasoline prices. ALL oil subsidies from drilling, refining, transport etc. must end.

In spite of the oil subsidies and the Big Oil efforts, it’s great to see that the EVs and battery/battery management technology has evolved to prove ICE is soon to be dead.

It won’t work that way. People will never support major price increases for a product that is central to their needs, and has such clear public awareness.

People already behave with irrational price sensitivity regarding gasoline: i.e. they drive across town to save a nickel a gallon, or wait in long lines to save $3 on a tank full.

The viable means of attack are those already in progress: convert people to EV supporters even in the face of oil subsidies by making the cars more desirable.

Even if EVs and ICE cars are equally desirable, those with vested interest in oil will press for additional hidden subsidies (and get them) and EV support will be slowed. So the key is to always maintain a desirability advantage.

After a tipping point is reached, THEN attack the hidden oil subsidies. But don’t count on winning too easily at that point, either, because other products that are central to our economy are also from oil, and a wounded enemy fights more ferociously.

That’s amazing, it goes to show that battery longevity isn’t a major issue as long as you have a good TMS.
I would still be interested in seeing what would happen if the same mileage was done without using Supercharger, one would expect that lower C rate charging would put less wear on the battery…
And what would happen to a 100D, IIRC it’s chemistry is more durable than the 90D.
This car is definitely not as sexy as a model x, but is rumored to be the only Solid state battery on the road, wonder how many miles this so called Solid state battery lasts.

Is it wrong that I want to buy this used car? LOL

“Tesloop proves that Teslas are built to last”

I think they have proved the opposite, seeing as their other car required several battery and drive unit replacements.

This is an impressive record for lack of battery degradation. However, I hate to rain on everyone’s parade, but the maintenance costs are nothing to brag about. $18,000 in maintenance over 350,000 miles is equivalent to about $771 every 15,000 miles, which is nothing special. It is certainly no better than what you’d pay on an average ICE car.

Where did that number come from and what is it supposed to include?

It’s the time not wasted too. Not having to drop by dealer for service or gas station means I can get on with real life and do actual shizze that matters. Teslas are no drama auto updating pieces of marvelous engineering. That said it’s Luda Tesla charges $4k for 4 yr maintenance plan on top of $4k for extended warranty on S and X

350,000 miles and only 13% battery degradation – Nissan are you watching?

My 2014 LEAF 43,000 miles and 16% battery degradation – sucks to drive LEAF!

My 2013 Leaf 60.000miles 18%! Nissan, give me TMS!

My 2013 Leaf @70 k miles has 19% batt. So. Cal. Degradation!

750 L3 DC FC, and 1650 L1 / L2,
Build date (3/2013) , and in Service date (6/13)

Nissan Don’t Bother with an active TMS, i will just get a Tesla Model Y in 2021.

I am somewhat mystified by these stories–of which there are many–of 1st generation Leafs seeing extreme battery degradation in moderate climates (Arizona, with its 110 degree summer days, I get). I live in a moderate Midwestern climate and my 2013 Leaf saw no noticeable degradation after 32,000 miles. If some jerk hadn’t plowed into the back of me and totaled the car, I’d still be driving it.

I wonder if quick charging has something to do with it? My Leaf didn’t have a quick charger so that was never an issue for me. Considering the RapidGate scandal, it would seem that it isn’t just hot weather that contributes to premature Leaf battery aging, but repeated quick charging sessions as well. The fact that you had 750 quick charging sessions points to this problem.

Despite this, I am still considering the new E+. I would only quick charge approximately 20 times a year during long distance travel. The remainder would be L2 home charging.

That is true. To be fair, the amount of cycling and age is different.

That battery is only 2.5 years old. And your 2014 LEAF is 4.5 years old.

Sure, 1400 cycles is more than the 511 cycles that your LEAF experienced and battery thermal protection is better, but age also matters.

Oh NO! What will the FUDsters do now?

IMHO, as consumers come to the shocking realization that a Tesla battery can easily last this long, it will change everything. When we are talking about Total Cost of Ownership, one has to wonder how many comparable ICE cars it would take to travel the same distance as a Tesla? Two? Three? More? A lot more!?!

13% degradation for about 1400 cycles is pretty good..

bet theres going to be tons of comments from the FUDsters saying “wow, I was wrong, EV batteries do last longer than gas engines!”