Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla Model S battery degradation data

steinbuch.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 257 posts

Re: Tesla Model S battery degradation data

#211

Post by dom0 »

seszett wrote: post #53
sqeaky wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What percentage of car owners do this? There is some percentage of cars crashed in the first week. It only takes a few of these to cancel out the average of extreme outliers like your car. For reference I have never seen an odometer with more than 200 000 on it before. Even most classic rebuilds I have seen like 69 Corvettes have some high 100K count on them, some event have reset odometers.

I don't know, but if the average is 220 000 km (according to the article) I'd say a fair share of cars must go beyond that. If I had not bought my car (it was at 300 000 km) I'm pretty sure it would have been sold in Eastern Europe instead, or maybe Africa since it's a Peugeot (a 406). In the countryside, it's also very common to have both a nice recent car, and an old reliable one like mine for the dirty work. Most…

Gasoline engines can be plenty reliable. I think the main reason why a lot of cars from the 80s and 90s are able to go to 400k and more is (1) cheaper and easier maintenance, so more inclined to do it regularly (2) no fancy shit going on, no turbo chargers, no high-pressure fuel injection, thus far less wear on parts, no unreliable high-pressure pumps etc.

Replacement parts on these are also far more expensive. New turbo is a four-figure number just for the part. Injection pumps are bloody expensive, too.

Less optimized designs may also be a factor. CAD and FEM modelling has only become better with time, so back in the day engineers would rather make a more conservative design, nowadays that's not so necessary any more.

Re: Tesla Model S battery degradation data

#212

Post by zimpenfish »

jeffhuys wrote: post #210
TomMarius wrote: post #7

Average life of ICE vehicles can't be 266kkm, that's absurdly low. Most of people I know have bought vehicles with that mileage and used it for another 100kkm after that at some point in their life (think first/second car, second family car, etc.). It's important to know that especially in Central/Eastern Europe, you can never trust the car's odometer - even the cars I'm talking about had probably more than 350kkm wh…

kkm, is that kilo-kilometer? Could we also say megameter? I like that word.

With the side bonus that you can pronounce it "muh-gah-muhteh"[1] to really confuse people.

[1] I've never got the hang of IPA, sorry

Re: Tesla Model S battery degradation data

#213

Post by compute_me »

11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #123

This is pretty surprising. What it means is that most owners will not need to replace their batteries in the time that they own the car. In my 'total cost of ownership' models, I've assumed a battery replacement at 100,000 miles, but that appears to not be necessary. This changes the calculation considerably. Not to mention that if the drive train can go 400,000 miles without needing major repair, I can keep the car…

check this out: http://www.tesloop.com/blog/2017/8/30/tesla-model-s-hits-300...

Re: Tesla Model S battery degradation data

#214

Post by gpvos »

TomMarius wrote: post #7

Average life of ICE vehicles can't be 266kkm, that's absurdly low. Most of people I know have bought vehicles with that mileage and used it for another 100kkm after that at some point in their life (think first/second car, second family car, etc.). It's important to know that especially in Central/Eastern Europe, you can never trust the car's odometer - even the cars I'm talking about had probably more than 350kkm wh…

ICE = internal combustion engine

Re: Tesla Model S battery degradation data

#215

Post by exhilaration »

sitharus wrote: post #194
jakobegger wrote: post #182

Doesn‘t anybody find it curious that the source of data are range estimates displayed on the cars built-in dashboard? For all we know, Teslas might be programmed to show more „optimistic“ estimates as the batteries get older. I‘m not saying this is actually the case, but these stats are effectively manufacturer-provided numbers. Would you trust data like this if it came from any other car manufacturer? If you have a…

I trust my range indication in my petrol car to be conservative. It has about 30km more range than indicated - imagine the uproar if you planned a journey it said you could do but ran out of fuel? It’s quite handy as there are some areas I’ve driven through have no fuel stops for over 100km, and I’m sure the US has quite a few areas like that.

That's because of the "fuel reserve" in your gas tank. You can Google that term to learn more.

Re: Tesla Model S battery degradation data

#216

Post by 72deluxe »

dcustodio wrote: post #205
jakobegger wrote: post #182

Doesn‘t anybody find it curious that the source of data are range estimates displayed on the cars built-in dashboard? For all we know, Teslas might be programmed to show more „optimistic“ estimates as the batteries get older. I‘m not saying this is actually the case, but these stats are effectively manufacturer-provided numbers. Would you trust data like this if it came from any other car manufacturer? If you have a…

I fill up every time I refuel and I take notes of the quantity and odometer and the average matches the dashboard.

What manufacturer and model is that?

I had a 2008 VW Golf TDI Gt Sport (the 140PS PD engine) and that consistently lied. My newer 150 Euro6 (I think) engined VW Beetle TDO gives even better MPG so perhaps it is lying again... Potentially time to measure it versus how much I put in.

Re: Tesla Model S battery degradation data

#217

Post by obituary_latte »

jakobegger wrote: post #182

Doesn‘t anybody find it curious that the source of data are range estimates displayed on the cars built-in dashboard? For all we know, Teslas might be programmed to show more „optimistic“ estimates as the batteries get older. I‘m not saying this is actually the case, but these stats are effectively manufacturer-provided numbers. Would you trust data like this if it came from any other car manufacturer? If you have a…

Anecdotally, I run a 2016 model year ford fusion 4cyl turbo and its fuel economy gauge has never gotten above 14.5mpg in the year I've had it. Not exactly numbers to boast about. I trust it.

Re: Tesla Model S battery degradation data

#218

Post by 72deluxe »

sqeaky wrote: post #40
seszett wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

165 000 miles is 266 000 km, for the readers who might wonder. My car is at 350 000 km now, and I'm not planning on selling it anytime soon. It doesn't have any special problem, except for a malfunctioning electric window lifter on one side. It's only one data point of course.

What percentage of car owners do this? There is some percentage of cars crashed in the first week. It only takes a few of these to cancel out the average of extreme outliers like your car. For reference I have never seen an odometer with more than 200 000 on it before. Even most classic rebuilds I have seen like 69 Corvettes have some high 100K count on them, some event have reset odometers.

My 1972 VW Beetle has done 6000 miles apparently.

Turns out it has gone round the clock...

Re: Tesla Model S battery degradation data

#219

Post by sdoering »

dcustodio wrote: post #205
jakobegger wrote: post #182

Doesn‘t anybody find it curious that the source of data are range estimates displayed on the cars built-in dashboard? For all we know, Teslas might be programmed to show more „optimistic“ estimates as the batteries get older. I‘m not saying this is actually the case, but these stats are effectively manufacturer-provided numbers. Would you trust data like this if it came from any other car manufacturer? If you have a…

I fill up every time I refuel and I take notes of the quantity and odometer and the average matches the dashboard.

I take a look at my estimates in the dashboard on my Mazda2 (Germany) and also calculate the metrics manually every time I fill the gasoline. Funny thing is, that I tend to use less in the real world then my car makes me believe.

My car tends to value the long range drives on a highway way higher then my average driving habit while commuting. So the higher consumption outliers on the highway tend to skew my results.

Re: Tesla Model S battery degradation data

#220

Post by tobyhinloopen »

sitharus wrote: post #194
jakobegger wrote: post #182

Doesn‘t anybody find it curious that the source of data are range estimates displayed on the cars built-in dashboard? For all we know, Teslas might be programmed to show more „optimistic“ estimates as the batteries get older. I‘m not saying this is actually the case, but these stats are effectively manufacturer-provided numbers. Would you trust data like this if it came from any other car manufacturer? If you have a…

I trust my range indication in my petrol car to be conservative. It has about 30km more range than indicated - imagine the uproar if you planned a journey it said you could do but ran out of fuel? It’s quite handy as there are some areas I’ve driven through have no fuel stops for over 100km, and I’m sure the US has quite a few areas like that.

I have a Volkswagen Golf GTE. My dashboard claims it can run ~47km on a charge, and it adjusts whenever you change your AC settings. When I bought it, VW claimed 50km of range.

In the 60.000km's I've driven that car, I NEVER were able to get even close to 40km on a charge.

Post reply on HN