LFP battery degradation on 2024 Mach-E

[MadMatt]

I don't think 27% loss of range is justified (from 470 to 340). And it happened overnight!

again, stop paying attention to the GOM. its a meaningless number constantly changing even as you drive.

" 2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E Standard Range with the 72 kWh LFP (lithium iron phosphate) battery is 250 miles (approx. 402 km) for the Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD) model and 230 miles (approx. 370 km) for the All-Wheel Drive (AWD) model. "

you have RWD of AWD? brand new it was 370km. where did you get 470 from? the GOM? ....

you have a obd scanner. what is your cell voltage variation?

Sponsored

 

[Petros]

This

again, stop paying attention to the GOM. its a meaningless number constantly changing even as you drive.

" 2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E Standard Range with the 72 kWh LFP (lithium iron phosphate) battery is 250 miles (approx. 402 km) for the Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD) model and 230 miles (approx. 370 km) for the All-Wheel Drive (AWD) model. "

you have RWD of AWD? brand new it was 370km. where did you get 470 from? the GOM? ....

you have a obd scanner. what is your cell voltage variation?

This is what it is advertised and i had a range of 440-450 up until 2 weeks ago. I will post some forscan and carscanner images later

 

[cooltatts]

Wow, I've the 2024 MME4X with the NMC Lithium. Now at 31k km and its SOH is 97.5% I've charged at Lvl3 rapid chargers (mostly Flo or Tesla) less than 5% of my total travel. The rest being mostly Lvl2 in my driveway with the Tesla Universal Charger at 32Amp. Usually charging to a 85% charge limit and i try not to run it below 15%.

I'd be furious with a 20% loss. That's what my previous 2016 KIA Soul EV had after 60k km and 3 years. They refused to Service it unless it was under 70% SoH.

 

[MadMatt]

lol, your quote even says, Real World estimate 380 to 385. you didn't lose anything overnight other than a Christmas wish.

 

[dolvio]

I have a 2024 LFP. You were never getting 440. I get 340 on of guessing meter.

 

[inmyrightmind]

After my recent 100% monthly charging exercise, my GOM estimate is now up to 296 miles (476 km)!!! I only have 7k miles on my 24 MME, and I almost never use public L3 charging - I stick to my home Ford Pro charger v2 at 48A.

The specs on my model is 270 miles at 100%, and I haven't done much 70+ MPH driving lately.

 

[MadMatt]

After my recent 100% monthly charging exercise, my GOM estimate is now up to 296 miles (476 km)!!! I only have 7k miles on my 24 MME, and I almost never use public L3 charging - I stick to my home Ford Pro charger v2 at 48A.

The specs on my model is 270 miles at 100%, and I haven't done much 70+ MPH driving lately.

thanks for showing off.

your 98kWh (91 usable) NMC battery shares nothing with what we are discussing in thread.

 

[Petros]

July 11th - August 3rd

 

[Petros]

Car scanner images, before and after

 

[MadMatt]

Do the same screenshot after a drive. Around the 80% charge mark, I bet that variation drops to zero.

Look, if I were in your shoes I’d be very annoyed as well, I agree on paper that drop in health makes it look like something is off.

the problem though is that’s just not how batteries work. If there was a sudden change mechanically (or chemically?) there would be other symptoms. And the fact that this change is linked to ford doing a reset on the hv BMS further leans on a bad reading. That flat v curve of LFP makes it hard to know exactly how much energy is in there.

Your module variation is smaller than mine. (I have a lot more kilometers) and your at 3.4v which is the resting 100% charge v for lfp cells.

I’d also like to point out that at a full charge my GOM was showing me 344km or range with (apparently) 70.5kWH of stored energy which compared to your original number is way off as well.

To sum up, again I would also be freaking out to see that change. However you’re going to need to do more data logging to prove your point. Start at 100% and start logging the kilometers driven. Try and get the battery down to 5-10% over the next whatever days keeping track of both km’s driven and avg km’s/kwh. Come back with real world data that supports this low SoH and Ford will have to listen.

 

[Petros]

This is what i plan to do. Drive the car normally for say another 500-1000 km, do more full charges, and keep track of the trip meter as you correctly pointed above. Thanks for your input! I will come back when and if anything changes.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Hello everyone. Bought this car in Sep 2025, it was a year old with 6k km on the clock. The SOH of the battery was @ 92% at the time, which seemed a bit low but since the car was not driven much I assumed it was a mater of time and some regular driving before the SOH corrected itself. After a year and 14k km on the clock, the SOH dropped to 89%. I took it to the dealer to check the battery and he said it was healthy but he performed a software reset. After the reset ths SOH dropped to 81%! I have since performed two deep discharges and full charges to see if anything changes, but the 81% is not moving. The battery before the dealer had showed 69.5 kwh before emptying, after the dealer reset 62.8 kwh. I have never fast charged the car and try to fully charge a couple of times every month. Any thoughts or ideas on what's happening inside this car's software? The annoying thing is that before the dealer i had about 440 km range at 100% now i am down to 340km...and a final point, Forscan shows the battery age as being almost three years old, so the battery must have been produced in 2023 and the car was sold in 2024. Thank you in advance

Hi Petros!

You're not the first to mention this:

here's a user reporting similar numbers as you, with a very new car as well:
https://www.macheforum.com/site/threads/battery-degradation.43621/post-937683

and then there is me asking for others to report energy at full charge:
https://www.macheforum.com/site/threads/lfp-energy-to-empty.56784/

I bought my car used in early spring, and it had OK GOM range at the time. When it warmed up and the GOM range didn't improve (solid 300 to 310km after history reset all spring and now all summer the same) I checked with car scanner and see it at 85% SOH. I then began tracking all sorts of stats including SOH.

Ford says charge to 100% at least once a month. I've charged to 100% over 25 times in 5 months and done 3 "BMS resets" going to under 10% and letting it rest for 5 hours etc. The result was SOH went down to 83%.

BUT, the reality is my peak voltage and energy at 100% charge is gradually increasing - here's my 'rough' energy history.
April 100% ~360V 61kWh
June 100% ~370V 65kWh
July 100% ~375V 65kWh
Last week: ~385V, 67.7kWh (

After the 67.7kWh charge the GOM after drive history reset finally gave a decent number - 330km. This is at 24C. But the GOM is very poor measure, which is why I started recording energy.

The module delta at 100% is very high right after charging finishes, I've seen 240mV. But after about 3 minutes it settles to 80 or 90 mV (and about 385V), and after several hours might end up at 40 or 50mV. Turn on the car and drive even a little and the delta drops rapidly, for me to 2 to 3mV and stays there all the way down to low percentages.

I've concluded that the battery in my car is probably fine (67.7 is about 94%), but the BMS seems to be overly conservative and wants to keep me from getting too low on the charge curve. I'm just going to keep charging to 100% every time, and once in a while if I'm close to 10% let it sit a few hours before recharging.

The only negative of the low SOH (other than the very conservative GOM) is if you want to sell the car and a buyer checks it, it looks like the battery is shit! That's what bothers me about this.

 

[ex2bot]

This

This is what it is advertised and i had a range of 440-450 up until 2 weeks ago. I will post some forscan and carscanner images later

A lot going on here. The WLTP rating is the European standard (is it Canada’s too?), and it’s less realistic than EPA (U.S.). Whenever I see a WLTP range, I subtract 100 km off of it as a very, very rough conversion to EPA.

To further my point, EPA “highway range testing” is conducted between 48 and 60 mph (77.25 km/h to 96.5 km/hr). Weird, huh? Why not 70 or 75 mph? So, EPA is imperfect, too. ALL benchmark testing of any kind is imperfect.

** And WLTP range testing tends to be even less realistic. **

So, right there that tells us that measuring vehicle range is complicated and not necessarily super precise.

Your vehicle’s battery management system (bms) is often nicknamed the Guess O Meter (GOM). You can’t figure out “range loss” by comparing the GOM’s guesses. It doesn’t necessarily know how strong your headwind will be or how cold it will get on your drive. Or your 0-60 times. You *can* get a pretty good idea based on the vehicle efficiency in the Trips app.

I recommend reading some of the many posts talking about now it’s important to understand that the km range shown is just a guess. Yes, it can be frustratingly complicated and anxiety-inducing. Concentrate on the percentage.

 

[FrozenNorth]

A lot going on here. The WLTP rating is the European standard (is it Canada’s too?), and it’s less realistic than EPA (U.S.). Whenever I see a WLTP range, I subtract 100 km off of it as a very, very rough conversion to EPA.

To further my point, EPA “highway range testing” is conducted between 48 and 60 mph (77.25 km/h to 96.5 km/hr). Weird, huh? Why not 70 or 75 mph? So, EPA is imperfect, too. ALL benchmark testing of any kind is imperfect.

** And WLTP range testing tends to be even less realistic. **

So, right there that tells us that measuring vehicle range is complicated and not necessarily super precise.

Your vehicle’s battery management system (bms) is often nicknamed the Guess O Meter (GOM). You can’t figure out “range loss” by comparing the GOM’s guesses. It doesn’t necessarily know how strong your headwind will be or how cold it will get on your drive. Or your 0-60 times. You *can* get a pretty good idea based on the vehicle efficiency in the Trips app.

I recommend reading some of the many posts talking about now it’s important to understand that the km range shown is just a guess. Yes, it can be frustratingly complicated and anxiety-inducing. Concentrate on the percentage.

If you look at his screenshots you’ll see the energy at 100% charge dropped from 69.65 to 62.8 kWh while SOH dropped from 89 to 81%. That’s a significant loss of total energy for a car that new should show 72kWh. So it’s much more than a GOM or EPA vs WLTP issue.

 

[ex2bot]

If you look at his screenshots you’ll see the energy at 100% charge dropped from 69.65 to 62.8 kWh while SOH dropped from 89 to 81%. That’s a significant loss of total energy for a car that new should show 72kWh. So it’s much more than a GOM or EPA vs WLTP issue.

I was responding to the OP’s assumption that their standard range battery would do 470 km. The official standard-range Mach-E range looks to be around 402 km RWD or 370 km for AWD on WLTP. So, it’s possible that there’s something wrong with the vehicle, but the OP thinks the standard range battery will do better than official range. Sounds like a possible misunderstanding. Shouldn’t we sort out what appears to be unrealistic expectations before assuming hardware failure?

[edited]

Sponsored