Charging to 90% as mentioned in Manual or 80% like others?

[ExCivilian]

When you DCFC, the step change drop occurs at 80% displayed SOC. I’ve watched it happen.

The charge rate will drop over the SOC. It doesn't, or shouldn't anyway, go full bore until 80% and then just drop down to minimal charging. It should taper...so you seeing it slow down at 80% on the UI doesn't refute what I'm pointing out, which is that it will slow as it gets closer to 80% SOC and then slow down even more the closer it gets to 100%.

The ER's UI is showing SOC based on a 131kWh battery.
The actual battery capacity is 143.2kWh.

When the UI is showing 80% the battery is at 104kWh, which is only 73% SOC.
So you will be able to charge faster than a 90% SOC charge rate for about 7% more of the battery albeit slightly slower than 80% SOC charge rate.

Sponsored

 

[Maquis]

The charge rate will drop over the SOC. It doesn't, or shouldn't anyway, go full bore until 80% and then just drop down to minimal charging. It should taper...so you seeing it slow down at 80% on the UI doesn't refute what I'm pointing out, which is that it will slow as it gets closer to 80% SOC and then slow down even more the closer it gets to 100%.

The ER's UI is showing SOC based on a 131kWh battery.
The actual battery capacity is 143.2kWh.

When the UI is showing 80% the battery is at 104kWh, which is only 73% SOC.
So you will be able to charge faster than a 90% SOC charge rate for about 7% more of the battery albeit slightly slower than 80% SOC charge rate.

 

[Maxx]

With all money being dumped into battery research, chances are by the time your battery warranty is up, you wouldn’t want to keep it because everyone else is charging at 4x the speed with half the mass.

 

[jefro]

The question is more how long do you expect to have it. If you want or need to have the most battery potential in some future date then I'd charge to 70-80%. If you will trade it in then you can keep at 75% or if you really need the range go to 100% everyday.

 

[Roy2001]

In extreme case, a Toyota hybrid NiMH battery with capacity around 1kWh, since it could charge/recharge tens of times a day, it needs to be optimized for longest life span possible, so Toyota only use 40-70% of the soc range.

For Toyota Prius Prime which is a plugin hybrid with 8.8kWh battery, the usable capacity is 6.3kWh, and usable soc range is roughly 15-90%.

For EV, assume you would drive 150k miles during the life span of the truck, and with EPA range 300 miles, it would be fully charged about 500 times. I would say, unless you really need to charge it to 100% every morning, try to keep it somewhere between 80-90%.

If there is one thing you definitely want to avoid, don't let EV sit with very low or even zero charge for long time. That hurts battery capacity very badly.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

With all money being dumped into battery research, chances are by the time your battery warranty is up, you wouldn’t want to keep it because everyone else is charging at 4x the speed with half the mass.

Don't bet on it. I bought a 2012 Tesla MS new. It had 7,104 Panasonic 18650 cells that were first introduced in 1996, and contained 85 kwh. In 2022, Tesla still uses the same pack format, with 7,104 cells in 16 units in the pack, and density has increased slightly, so teh MS and MX now have 100 kwh. The lithium battery tech we use today isn;t substantially changed since 1996 - my 26-year old antique Makita drill has essentially the same Panasonic battery that a new Tesla does. We haven't advanced chemistry or weight issues around EV travel vey much, which is why model-for-model, EVs weigh 30% more than their comparable ICE versions, and gasoline still has 100 times more embedded energy per pound. I love my EVs for features, functionality and quietness, but let's be real. They aren't replacing ICE anytime soon, especially in the third world or below the equator.

 

[TheRealDlo]

Wow this really blew up today :0 LOL

Overall, I got a LOT of good info from reading and listening to everyone.

 

[Maxx]

Don't bet on it. I bought a 2012 Tesla MS new. It had 7,104 Panasonic 18650 cells that were first introduced in 1996, and contained 85 kwh. In 2022, Tesla still uses the same pack format, with 7,104 cells in 16 units in the pack, and density has increased slightly, so teh MS and MX now have 100 kwh. The lithium battery tech we use today isn;t substantially changed since 1996 - my 26-year old antique Makita drill has essentially the same Panasonic battery that a new Tesla does. We haven't advanced chemistry or weight issues around EV travel vey much, which is why model-for-model, EVs weigh 30% more than their comparable ICE versions, and gasoline still has 100 times more embedded energy per pound. I love my EVs for features, functionality and quietness, but let's be real. They aren't replacing ICE anytime soon, especially in the third world or below the equator.

This was not meant to be EV vs ICE. My comment was about EV of 8 years from now vs EV of today. In 2012, Tesla was the only game in town. Number of manufacturers that are taking EVs seriously today is much higher than one. Lithium futures is a good gage for it:

Although people have been talking about the next revolutionary battery tech around the corner for decades and manufacturing these magic solutions at scale for a reasonable cost has always been a problem. What I am saying is that all the new tech from graphene to salt, aluminum and battery/capacitor combos and everything in between may make a great content for YouTube videos many of which will never see light of the day but the fact that you get a lot more next great new battery tech news today than you did in 2012 tells me statistically speaking there is a better chance next 10 years will give us something last 10 years didn’t. EVs are considered tech products. Expectations are different. 5 years ago 100 mile range was acceptable. Today not many look at anything under 250. They can’t keep jamming more batteries in there. They have to improve the performance. Market demand, expectations and competition drives technology. And we have all of them at full force today. My wife would laugh at your face if you call me optimist but on this one, I would bet on a better battery tech in 10 years (with current tech still in production).

 

[PungoteagueDave]

This was not meant to be EV vs ICE. My comment was about EV of 8 years from now vs EV of today. In 2012, Tesla was the only game in town. Number of manufacturers that are taking EVs seriously today is much higher than one. Lithium futures is a good gage for it:

Although people have been talking about the next revolutionary battery tech around the corner for decades and manufacturing these magic solutions at scale for a reasonable cost has always been a problem. What I am saying is that all the new tech from graphene to salt, aluminum and battery/capacitor combos and everything in between may make a great content for YouTube videos many of which will never see light of the day but the fact that you get a lot more next great new battery tech news today than you did in 2012 tells me statistically speaking there is a better chance next 10 years will give us something last 10 years didn’t. EVs are considered tech products. Expectations are different. 5 years ago 100 mile range was acceptable. Today not many look at anything under 250. They can’t keep jamming more batteries in there. They have to improve the performance. Market demand, expectations and competition drives technology. And we have all of them at full force today. My wife would laugh at your face if you call me optimist but on this one, I would bet on a better battery tech in 10 years (with current tech still in production).

I sure hope you are correct but based on both history and current trend lines, am not optimistic. You point out the historical folly of all the promised breakthroughs with battery technology, none of which have come to fruition - every one has had some Achilles heel. Elon mentioned this in a speech and said - “don’t bother wasting my time with something new that isn’t already proven - we have to build something right here, right now.”

Despite claims to the contrary, neither Tesla nor any auto manufacturer does any true battery tech development in-house. Elon wraps a lot into the royal “we” when he really means Panasonic, Samsung, et al. Panasonic isn’t nearly as optimistic as even Elon’s skeptical view when it comes to production scalability of just the incremental changes they are making to allow production of the still-heavy and not at all groundbreaking cybertruck batteries.

We shall see, but I would disagree with your statement that five years ago 100 mile range was acceptable. I bought my first EV ten years ago, a Tesla MS, and it had 265 miles range, was the first car to be able to claim near parity with ICE, so could be a reasonable vehicle to incorporate into my family’s garage. Four Teslas and now a Lightning later, it remains clear that what was required to bring mainstream EV driving forward was Elon’s three elements - Supercharging, range over 250 miles, and performance, the factors that essentially put EV driving on par with or superior to ICE. Since then progress has essentially stalled, with slight increments, but no breakthroughs. A breakthrough, like a battery at 1/3 the weight or twice the range is not even mentioned anywhere as being on the horizon - even in the dream labs. Instead they are working on single-casting formats for the exact same lithium heavy stuff we already have, with all the weight and other limitations.

Flying cars anyone? I still have my 1972 Popular Science magazine from when I was 15, promising we’d have them by 1980. Recently saw a magazine promising them in the NEXT ten years, only it’s 50 years later. Dream on folks.

 

[sotek2345]

I sure hope you are correct but based on both history and current trend lines, am not optimistic. You point out the historical folly of all the promised breakthroughs with battery technology, none of which have come to fruition - every one has had some Achilles heel. Elon mentioned this in a speech and said - “don’t bother wasting my time with something new that isn’t already proven - we have to build something right here, right now.”

Despite claims to the contrary, neither Tesla nor any auto manufacturer does any true battery tech development in-house. Elon wraps a lot into the royal “we” when he really means Panasonic, Samsung, et al. Panasonic isn’t nearly as optimistic as even Elon’s skeptical view when it comes to production scalability of just the incremental changes they are making to allow production of the still-heavy and not at all groundbreaking cybertruck batteries.

We shall see, but I would disagree with your statement that five years ago 100 mile range was acceptable. I bought my first EV ten years ago, a Tesla MS, and it had 265 miles range, was the first car to be able to claim near parity with ICE, so could be a reasonable vehicle to incorporate into my family’s garage. Four Teslas and now a Lightning later, it remains clear that what was required to bring mainstream EV driving forward was Elon’s three elements - Supercharging, range over 250 miles, and performance, the factors that essentially put EV driving on par with or superior to ICE. Since then progress has essentially stalled, with slight increments, but no breakthroughs. A breakthrough, like a battery at 1/3 the weight or twice the range is not even mentioned anywhere as being on the horizon - even in the dream labs. Instead they are working on single-casting formats for the exact same lithium heavy stuff we already have, with all the weight and other limitations.

Flying cars anyone? I still have my 1972 Popular Science magazine from when I was 15, promising we’d have them by 1980. Recently saw a magazine promising them in the NEXT ten years, only it’s 50 years later. Dream on folks.

We don't need new tech. We just have to go back to 1950's tech. 5k to 10k miles between refuelings!

https://www.hemmings.com/stories/article/1958-ford-nucleon

Note: Please ignore the radioactive waste spread around if there is ever an accident, or the copious lack of shielding!

 

[FlasherZ]

We don't need new tech. We just have to go back to 1950's tech. 5k to 10k miles between refuelings!

https://www.hemmings.com/stories/article/1958-ford-nucleon

Note: Please ignore the radioactive waste spread around if there is ever an accident, or the copious lack of shielding!

Yes, but then you have to deal with the Libyans!

 

[FlasherZ]

The ER's UI is showing SOC based on a 131kWh battery.
The actual battery capacity is 143.2kWh.

When the UI is showing 80% the battery is at 104kWh, which is only 73% SOC.

Where are you getting these numbers from? Not challenging them, but curious.

At 90.5% displayed SOC, the truck's internal diagnostics report ACTUAL SOC of 85.6%. As you reduce your SOC, the two numbers converge before diverging again, where ACTUAL SOC remains higher than DISPLAYED SOC to the bottom of the range.

Your 80%/73% is a larger divergence than the diagnostics-reported data, which would seem to be at odds with what truck is reporting for actual vs. displayed.

There's likely to be the "raw" capacity (143 kWh) based on the widest range of voltages from the manufacturer. Then there's the "usable" capacity based on what voltages Ford (or its subcontractors) is willing to use of that voltage range as part of the system. Then there's the "in-use" capacity that excludes any reserved capacity that Ford wants to keep for anti-bricking protection, etc.

I haven't seen any definitive documents or reference to make any assertions about it, other than what the truck reports via diagnostics.

 

[swesson]

While that is true, Ford tells people to charge to "less than 100%". Given that you rarely need 100% of the battery, I find it best to tell people to follow the manual, and only charge to 100% the night before the trip.

The reality is that no one is monitoring use and battery life to any point such that even 10 years down the road they'll be able to know the impact with any certainty. And most people, IMO, will sell these EVs well before 10 years because of changing technology and range.

I had a Tesla for 7 years. I was ignorant about all these things. I charged up to 100% often. I stopped by Superchargers often. Here were my results:

Range when new: 256 miles
Range after 7 years: 218 miles
Avg Range of my Model after 7yrs: 230

My penalty for years of not caring: 12 miles

 

[Maxx]

A breakthrough, like a battery at 1/3 the weight or twice the range is not even mentioned anywhere as being on the horizon - even in the dream labs

Whether something makes it to the market is certainly disputable but nothing in dream labs?

I am not in battery business but just googling stuff blows your mind on level of R&D going into this.

Claims 3X energy density increase, faster charging and longer life span.
3,250 mAh/g
https://onedsinanode.com/sinanode/

Battery business is too difficult and complex for car companies to get into but they provide the demand to push universities to do the research and industry to make it happen. Power density is not the only thing that matters. If they can dissipate heat faster they can be used in cars and charging stations to significantly reduce charge time.

These guys say they can charge 70X faster so you don't need more range:
https://graphenemg.com/energy-storage-solutions/aluminum-ion-battery/

But if you do want more, getting twice the range is matter of combining different technologies. Mercedes EQXX does 700 miles on one 80 KWh battery charge.

Progress often happen gradually. We may not see 2X or 3X increase in one shot but over time, it may add up to that and more.

These guys are saying 50% more dense and 5 times more capacity:
https://group14.technology/en/

on a more modest power density (20% - 40% improvement):
https://www.silanano.com/lithium-ion-battery-materials
Mercedes EQG is already planning to use it in 2025.

Skeleton's 4X to 10X power dense super-capacitors (Graphene) can complement existing battery tech.

I listed these as dream lab examples not mass market ready to go. My point is too many of them are throwing dart at the board, some of them has to hit the bullseye. Even if non of them do, it is fun to watch them try.

 

[FlasherZ]

I listed these as dream lab examples not mass market ready to go. My point is too many of them are throwing dart at the board, some of them has to hit the bullseye. Even if non of them do, it is fun to watch them try.

Elon has approached this pretty ruthlessly in the past - "please send a sufficient number of working cells for evaluation". That usually weeds out the science experiments and forces the lab folks to think about at least reasonable minimum production. They typically haven't thought about that, much less mass production on a very large scale. The news folks are just handed a press release from some excited researchers and don't know how to weed them out, so they pretty much read the PR straight into the record.

Sponsored