What percentage should I charge my battery to daily using the Ford Charge Station Pro?

[RickLightning]

Ford builds a SOC buffer onto the charger so that you can't really / truly charge to 100% capacity - I know that it really is less than 100% as the onboard chargers cut out well before then.

So after reading the owner's manual, I figured there was a reason why everyone was citing 80%, 90%, et al - found that Ford just says to charge just under 100% using L1/L2 overnight for longevity.

I knew Ford would never "allow" someone to charge to true 100% because they built in charge buffers for the on-board chargers.

The mysterious 80% figure seems to come from either Chevy/Bolt EV fires or the Ford recommendation for DCFC (L3).

So if it makes everyone happy, I'll charge at 99.9% on L2 - once a week.

The Mach-E manual said 90%. Then it was revised to say under 100%. Then it was re-revised to say 90%. I fully expect that the Lightning manual will be revised to say 90%. Under 100% is too non-specific, you get people saying things like you just did, which will then turn into "well, Ford said under 100% so 99.9% is fine". Of course since it shows no decimal points, you won't be able to do more than 99% to be compliant with your goal.

Sponsored

 

[Firestop]

Ford builds a SOC buffer onto the charger so that you can't really / truly charge to 100% capacity - I know that it really is less than 100% as the onboard chargers cut out well before then.

So after reading the owner's manual, I figured there was a reason why everyone was citing 80%, 90%, et al - found that Ford just says to charge just under 100% using L1/L2 overnight for longevity.

I knew Ford would never "allow" someone to charge to true 100% because they built in charge buffers for the on-board chargers.

The mysterious 80% figure seems to come from either Chevy/Bolt EV fires or the Ford recommendation for DCFC (L3).

So if it makes everyone happy, I'll charge at 99.9% on L2 - once a week.

There are way too many people on this thread smarter about battery technology than me, so quite frankly, I’m just going to follow Ford’s recommendation (whatever it is [less than 100%], or changes to [90%]) as they engineered and warranty it. As an analytical data geek, I will be interested in seeing any test data or forensic info that is developed

As to the origin of 80% charge limit, the only discussion backed by data I’m seeing so far is coming from Tom (extrapolated from Ford’s data supplied by them) and Kyle (from his 0-100 charge test). They have discussed recommendations for road charging within the 20-80% SoC based on time efficiency. Interesting that Tom’s theoretical extrapolation of Ford’s data is fairly close to Kyle’s actual experience.

 

[Jerry The Cowboy]

We really need rolling eyes as a like.

Yeah I almost fell asleep reading that back to myself before I posted it...

 

[FirstF150InCasco]

Fact-based answers? You have a direct Ford statement saying 90%.

The Mach-E manual says 90%. A version in-between (late 2021) said less than 100%, but that was revised back to 90% again. I expect the Lightning manual will get revised to 90% like the Mach-E did.

I charge to 90% every time I charge, which is after every usage. 100% before a trip.

@RickLightning You are right, there was the one statement from Ford. And there the opinions of one expert. Other than that, it was four pages of opinions of folks with no stated data points and no stated expertise/credentials. Hense, my comment that "most" (I didn't say "all") of the comments were useless.

 

[FirstF150InCasco]

So many of the answers point to about the same thing. If you can't come here and participate and learn and draw conclusions from history and other leading brands then maybe you should just go read your manual and drive your truck.

This truck has been on the road barely 6 weeks. There are no Ford engineers on this site (at least haven't identified themselves). So just what did you expect?

I expected (a) opinions from experts (like the one I referenced) and (b) factual data (like what has been gratefully added to the thread in the hours since my comment.) For non-experts to simply say, "I plan to do X,Y,Z" is not helpful.

 

[FirstF150InCasco]

Well everyone is different and situations are varied for each person's decisions.

I will be charging my Lightning up to 100% every weekend.
No, I don't charge everyday so 100% should not "hurt" the battery because of the buffers.

L2 charge at 100% once a week is safe IMO due to the SOC buffers in place.

Only time I will limit charge to 90% or less is when I drive distance to DCFC (L3) chargers.

BTW: my laptop is 7 years old and has been on a charger since day 1 and still works like a champ. I am typing this reply on it - 84% charge remaining after 7 years is good for me.

Very helpful. Thank you.

 

[FirstF150InCasco]

Looks like your MacBook has either a 15% buffer, 15% degradation, or a mixture of the two after 720 cycles. Seems pretty normal either way.

My Model S has 5% degradation and about 8% buffer after 7 years and 474 charge cycles. I charge to 90% daily and 100% on trips.

My Galaxy S20 has 1% degradation and a 9% buffer after 2 years and 330 charge cycles. I charge to 80 or 85% daily and rarely go above that.

A BMS without a full/empty buffer will boast longer battery life initially and then take its toll on longevity, often conking the battery out much sooner. A lot of consumer electronics are now building buffers into their software regardless of what the manufacturer does. My laptop now offers an option in BIOS to limit the max charge, and Android does the same.

With a sizable buffer you can probably charge the truck to 100% daily with no issues, but why bother maxing it out for daily use?

Very helpful data. Thank you.

 

[FirstF150InCasco]

Sorry if someone else already answered this.
I charge cycle is not counted each time you charge and discharge, but rather is the equivalent of one charge cycle per complete 100% depletion and replenishment of charge related to a given battery pack's capacity, regardless of how many times the battery was charged and discharged, assuming each charge/discharge cycle was not 100%
To use the waterglass analogy, if you fill an empty waterglass to the top, this is one complete fill (or charge) cycle. If you drink some and then fill again, then drink some more and fill again, a complete fill (or charge) is like drinking a little and filling a little until the overall amount is equal to a full glass, even though you drank and filled several times.

Very helpful (and great analogy.) Thank you.

 

[jefro]

Huge database of Tesla's and other existing cars suggest it can last longer if one keeps a range of 30-70%. I doubt Ford would be much different. If one needs to charge to 100% then you have to. You shouldn't fast charge past 75-80% unless you have to.

 

[FirstF150InCasco]

Huge database of Tesla's and other existing cars suggest it can last longer if one keeps a range of 30-70%. I doubt Ford would be much different. If one needs to charge to 100% then you have to. You shouldn't fast charge past 75-80% unless you have to.

@jefro Thanks for the Tesla data. Given @MickeyAO 's "like" to your post, I'm changing my Ford Pass settings to max at 80%.

 

[VTbuckeye]

Still need the rolling eyes as a 'like'!

I've typed and then deleted at least 4 sarcastic (but informative) replies to various posts on this thread. I will do my best to ignore this one thread until I actually take a Lightning pack down to the cell level...other than using like and laughing 'likes'. All you other battery experts who are basing your responses on your 'real world' experience (without knowing the actual capacity of the battery)...you do you!

The main fallacy of this analogy is sipping the water between 20% - 80% SOC for 131 kWh != drinking the full 131 kWh in one sitting. There are other factors at work as you go <20% and >80% SOC, but I really don't want/can't start in on the effects of Lithium Plating.

Some of us would love to read what you have to say.

 

[Pioneer74]

Some of us would love to read what you have to say.

I know I would.

 

[VTbuckeye]

Unfortunately, some of the sarcastic comments would have given hints about some of the proprietary cutting-edge work we are doing. Lithium Plating is already known in the industry but I can't risk giving hints about the areas we are studying there. The other things I almost mentioned have not yet made it into publication.

You have my recommended actions from this and other threads, but I really need to refrain from posting anything more than what I already have.

And Admins, can we PLEASE get the rolling eyes as a 'like'?

I like knowing as much as I can about as much as I can. Thanks for sharing as much as you do.

 

[Lightninorian]

I plan on charging to 200% and discharging to -200% that way I can get 920 miles out of my standard range. I'll let everyone know how it goes.
Yup, all this waiting for my Pro has made me lose my mind. Everything will become clear once it arrives.

 

[Firestop]

For the past three weeks I've been using a 350KWH DC Fast Charger with EA and today my Ford Charge Station Pro was installed . .

So I've been reading a lot here on everyone's different thoughts on charging limits, but the default settings on the Lightning are
90% when using a DC Fast charger
100% using the ford charge station pro .
- Many of you out here don't recommend charging daily to 100% even using a slower charger, and others of you say that the battery buffers are significant enough to not get near the true 100% so 100% is fine.

Who is correct here as I've read so many different opinions?.. Also, you would think Ford would not set the default setting to 100% if it didn't think the EV newbie would just leave the defaults if that truly effected the life of the battery.

So what should I do?

An interesting blog article from the fleet management perspective links to the site’s various articles on EV charging and battery health….based on real world use stats (Per their statement).

https://www.geotab.com/blog/range-anxiety/

Unfortunately, their online tools don’t include the ability to select the F-150 Lightning, but since they are tied to real world sample data, that would be expected. None the less, I find the data-based information provided interesting, and appears to support some previously stated views……

Sponsored