Not getting expected rang on a 100% charge

[E90alex]

July 31 will mark one year in my possession. I will charge to 100% then and, assuming that outdoor temperatures are suitably equivalent, compare that new number to 306. If it’s down by more than 5% (about 15 miles) I will be disappointed but the car will still more than meet our daily needs.
I might then do a ‘reset’ of the driving history and see what it reads after say another 50 miles. I ‘assume’ that the car is constantly recalculating my average miles/KWh and using that to then calculate an expected range based. What I don’t know is how far back the mi/KWh calculation looks….is it hours, days, weeks or is it simply the totality of all miles driven since the last reset? If the latter, then my current GOM range includes months of colder weather when the 4.1 m/Kwh I enjoy in warmer weather has been diluted by months where it was as low as 2.7. If so, resetting the data when the weather is warm again will be the best comparison I can manage. I’ll post those results in another couple of months.

That won’t be a valid comparison because of various factors.

If you had reset the GOM when you first bought it charged to 100% and reset it 7/31 before you charge to 100% that might be a closer comparison but it still depends on the ambient and battery temperatures too.

Sponsored

 

[hprose]

Not exactly…I’d say the SOC is more like the fuel gauge and the GOM is more like miles to empty readout many ICE cars have. BTW, my post you’ve quoted was solely intended to illustrate the Ford navi’s evaluation of a route and making an adjustment to the GOM’s estimated range for that route compared to the GOM’s estimated range for my normal out and about driving.

I know all of that. Tired of the hysteria about batteries,

July 31 will mark one year in my possession. I will charge to 100% then and, assuming that outdoor temperatures are suitably equivalent, compare that new number to 306. If it’s down by more than 5% (about 15 miles) I will be disappointed but the car will still more than meet our daily needs.
I might then do a ‘reset’ of the driving history and see what it reads after say another 50 miles. I ‘assume’ that the car is constantly recalculating my average miles/KWh and using that to then calculate an expected range based. What I don’t know is how far back the mi/KWh calculation looks….is it hours, days, weeks or is it simply the totality of all miles driven since the last reset? If the latter, then my current GOM range includes months of colder weather when the 4.1 m/Kwh I enjoy in warmer weather has been diluted by months where it was as low as 2.7. If so, resetting the data when the weather is warm again will be the best comparison I can manage. I’ll post those results in another couple of months.

I have had my GT 2.5 years. It is rated at 270. I rarely see a number that low although I have recently needed to drive a higher percentage on the interstate where I generally run 70-75. I have also been a bit more lead footed recently. I’ve always had fast cars because, duh, I like to drive fast. Fastest I ever got to was 152, thought I was in 3rd when I redlined 4th. So today I am a touch over 260. But a couple of months ago my GOM showed 310. I took a picture of it. No I did not think my battery became bigger or better. And a few months prior when a drove 400 miles at 80 it was under 250. Same stuff happened with my ICEs. And, when I lived in Canada, I got dramatically lower mileage in January. It just seems that a lot of people are paying too much attention to minor differences.

 

[Doobster6]

That won’t be a valid comparison because of various factors.

If you had reset the GOM when you first bought it charged to 100% and reset it 7/31 before you charge to 100% that might be a closer comparison but it still depends on the ambient and battery temperatures too.

I picked up the car on July 27, 2024. It showed 7 miles on the odometer. The GOM range read 306 miles and 100% charge. That’s why, if I do a reset at the end of this coming July, and if the GOM extrapolates range based on the observed mi/KWh observed after that, then the number after say 7 miles (or 50?) should be a good comparison; certainly the best I can think of doing to have an apples-to-apples comparison.
Then again, I don’t know if some OTA update over this first year might have changed the GOM calculation, in which case all bets are off!

 

[Mach1E]

July 31 will mark one year in my possession. I will charge to 100% then and, assuming that outdoor temperatures are suitably equivalent, compare that new number to 306. If it’s down by more than 5% (about 15 miles) I will be disappointed but the car will still more than meet our daily needs.
I might then do a ‘reset’ of the driving history and see what it reads after say another 50 miles. I ‘assume’ that the car is constantly recalculating my average miles/KWh and using that to then calculate an expected range based. What I don’t know is how far back the mi/KWh calculation looks….is it hours, days, weeks or is it simply the totality of all miles driven since the last reset? If the latter, then my current GOM range includes months of colder weather when the 4.1 m/Kwh I enjoy in warmer weather has been diluted by months where it was as low as 2.7. If so, resetting the data when the weather is warm again will be the best comparison I can manage. I’ll post those results in another couple of months.

Yea weather will impact it as well as your driving habits.

Knowing these two things, why would you be disappointed?

It sounds like you know how the GOM works, but are somehow equating it with “range loss.”

 

[Doobster6]

Yea weather will impact it as well as your driving habits.

Knowing these two things, why would you be disappointed?

It sounds like you know how the GOM works, but are somehow equating it with “range loss.”

Whether an EV or ICE car, all modern cars seem to try to estimate remaining range based on how much ‘fuel’ they have in the tank and what it has calculated is your rate of using that fuel. My end goal here is not to validate the GOM but rather to try to gage how much of the battery’s original capacity has been lost over its first year. From what I understand, Tesla’s data for its cars manufactured within the last 8 or so years shows an initial (average drop) of around 2-3% in the first year followed by around 1-2z% each year thereafter, following a curve that kind of levels off around 85% after about 150k-200k miles. If my Mach-E is dropping faster than that, I want to know because it might influence what I do in July of 2027 when my lease is up.

 

[E90alex]

Whether an EV or ICE car, all modern cars seem to try to estimate remaining range based on how much ‘fuel’ they have in the tank and what it has calculated is your rate of using that fuel. My end goal here is not to validate the GOM but rather to try to gage how much of the battery’s original capacity has been lost over its first year. From what I understand, Tesla’s data for its cars manufactured within the last 8 or so years shows an initial (average drop) of around 2-3% in the first year followed by around 1-2z% each year thereafter, following a curve that kind of levels off around 85% after about 150k-200k miles. If my Mach-E is dropping faster than that, I want to know because it might influence what I do in July of 2027 when my lease is up.

We know what you’re trying to do, but you simply can’t accurately measure degradation of capacity using a metric that is variable.

It’s like trying to track your height from year to year by comparing your height to how tall your grass is on that exact date.

 

[Mach1E]

Whether an EV or ICE car, all modern cars seem to try to estimate remaining range based on how much ‘fuel’ they have in the tank and what it has calculated is your rate of using that fuel. My end goal here is not to validate the GOM but rather to try to gage how much of the battery’s original capacity has been lost over its first year. From what I understand, Tesla’s data for its cars manufactured within the last 8 or so years shows an initial (average drop) of around 2-3% in the first year followed by around 1-2z% each year thereafter, following a curve that kind of levels off around 85% after about 150k-200k miles. If my Mach-E is dropping faster than that, I want to know because it might influence what I do in July of 2027 when my lease is up.

In order to see if you have any battery degradation, you have to use a scan tool. That will give you an exact number.

The GOM is NOT an accurate “measuring stick.”

That said, there are people here with over 100,000 miles and still only a few percent of range loss.

 

[Doobster6]

We know what you’re trying to do, but you simply can’t accurately measure degradation of capacity using a metric that is variable.

It’s like trying to track your height from year to year by comparing your height to how tall your grass is on that exact date.

You are probably right; I like your analogy. That said, I think my approach to the problem has some merit. When my car was new and had only 7 miles on its odometer, there was scant data available for it to base its mi/KWh on. So a month later, when I had about 450 miles on the car, and we were in August, it was using a m/KWh figure that used my driving style and reflected warm weather driving conditions. I was seeing 303 miles of range implied by the GOM.
So then, if I’m right about a ‘reset’ erasing prior data and starting calculations anew, the car’s system should be able to recalculate a fresh mi/KWh number in the month of August and, with weather hopefully having a negligible effect on the range calculation, give me a number that is pretty much the best comparison I can have absent some sort of scanning tool. I am also assuming that the one thing that should be reliable is the moment-to-moment m/KWh calculation the car shows in the trip app, since it is controlling and monitoring the flow of energy over time vs. the distance traveled over that same time.
I think the whole reason for distrusting the GOM is that it a) uses a pre-calculated m/KWh figure that’s has been accumulated over however long its been since a reset and that may not be representative of current conditions and also b) the cold weather factor. I am HOPING that a fresh reset erases old, unrepresentative data and would then provide you a range ‘guess’ more representative of current ambient conditions and also current efficiency.

 

[Mach1E]

You are probably right; I like your analogy. That said, I think my approach to the problem has some merit. When my car was new and had only 7 miles on its odometer, there was scant data available for it to base its mi/KWh on. So a month later, when I had about 450 miles on the car, and we were in August, it was using a m/KWh figure that used my driving style and reflected warm weather driving conditions. I was seeing 303 miles of range implied by the GOM.
So then, if I’m right about a ‘reset’ erasing prior data and starting calculations anew, the car’s system should be able to recalculate a fresh mi/KWh number in the month of August and, with weather hopefully having a negligible effect on the range calculation, give me a number that is pretty much the best comparison I can have absent some sort of scanning tool. I am also assuming that the one thing that should be reliable is the moment-to-moment m/KWh calculation the car shows in the trip app, since it is controlling and monitoring the flow of energy over time vs. the distance traveled over that same time.
I think the whole reason for distrusting the GOM is that it a) uses a pre-calculated m/KWh figure that’s has been accumulated over however long its been since a reset and that may not be representative of current conditions and also b) the cold weather factor. I am HOPING that a fresh reset erases old, unrepresentative data and would then provide you a range ‘guess’ more representative of current ambient conditions and also current efficiency.

Still won’t work.

Not to calculate battery degradation.

A reset resets everything and you’ll just be looking at a range estimate based on preset data.

You could charge to 100% then drive until it dies, but you would have had to have done that when brand new and in the IDENTICAL conditions (which is impossible).

Even a couple mph wind difference or couple degree temperature change or couple mph speed change will skew the results.

Try driving the same route on the same day twice and you’ll get different numbers for your miles/kwh efficiency.

Bottom line? None of the “measuring sticks” you’re using are accurate enough and real world minor differences make it impossible to tell if you’ve lost a few percent of capacity or if it’s “just the wind.”

But in the end, if you can’t tell and the range doesn’t impact your daily driving, does it even matter?

In 3 1/2 years, I think the lowest my battery charge has even been was 40%. For me? Range is almost entirely irrelevant, same with a few percentage of loss. If you regularly get down below 10% charge……. Then it would matter.

 

[Doobster6]

Still won’t work.

Not to calculate battery degradation.

A reset resets everything and you’ll just be looking at a range estimate based on preset data.

You could charge to 100% then drive until it dies, but you would have had to have done that when brand new and in the IDENTICAL conditions (which is impossible).

Even a couple mph wind difference or couple degree temperature change or couple mph speed change will skew the results.

Try driving the same route on the same day twice and you’ll get different numbers for your miles/kwh efficiency.

Bottom line? None of the “measuring sticks” you’re using are accurate enough and real world minor differences make it impossible to tell if you’ve lost a few percent of capacity or if it’s “just the wind.”

But in the end, if you can’t tell and the range doesn’t impact your daily driving, does it even matter?

In 3 1/2 years, I think the lowest my battery charge has even been was 40%. For me? Range is almost entirely irrelevant, same with a few percentage of loss. If you regularly get down below 10% charge……. Then it would matter.

You’re not wrong, although the specifics of your argument point at the need for a ‘perfect’ analysis under identical, idealized conditions. Nothing is that perfect in life yet we must all find a way forward making decisions based on imperfect data and conditions. Statistics are a great example where virtually every predictive statistic is usually framed within an error margin (or ‘confidence interval’) of +/- 3%. I’m not trying to get a perfect answer here, just something reasonably close enough to make an informed decision, same as all of us do every day of our lives.

 

[roamtheworld]

Still won’t work.

Not to calculate battery degradation.

A reset resets everything and you’ll just be looking at a range estimate based on preset data.

You could charge to 100% then drive until it dies, but you would have had to have done that when brand new and in the IDENTICAL conditions (which is impossible).

Even a couple mph wind difference or couple degree temperature change or couple mph speed change will skew the results.

Try driving the same route on the same day twice and you’ll get different numbers for your miles/kwh efficiency.

Bottom line? None of the “measuring sticks” you’re using are accurate enough and real world minor differences make it impossible to tell if you’ve lost a few percent of capacity or if it’s “just the wind.”

But in the end, if you can’t tell and the range doesn’t impact your daily driving, does it even matter?

In 3 1/2 years, I think the lowest my battery charge has even been was 40%. For me? Range is almost entirely irrelevant, same with a few percentage of loss. If you regularly get down below 10% charge……. Then it would matter.

I love how everyone nerds out in all of the EV forums over battery loss ?‍ , and as we get more and better tools to evaluate battery health, we will have to wait to get that data. With so many variables, it will be hard to come to a number, but it's accurate to say that it doesn't really matter. Batteries and ICE engines will lose efficiency and capacity over time and use. Testing on EVs with 200K or more has shown that a few % of loss in the first few years, then a steady, slow amount of loss over time, is typical. EV batteries are covered under factory warranty for 8 years and 100K miles so any real defects will more than likely be found during that period. After that, it's not any different than an ICE car that burns more oil or has fuel injectors that get clogged up. The big issue will be the battery replacement cost in 10 years. Anything more that $10-15K would be out of line compared to ICE engine/transmission replacements and we aren't there yet with batteries. Until then I'm happy with the current Ford, Hyundai/Kia, GM, Tesla, and other brands' battery range.

 

[Doobster6]

I love how everyone nerds out in all of the EV forums over battery loss ?‍ , and as we get more and better tools to evaluate battery health, we will have to wait to get that data. With so many variables, it will be hard to come to a number, but it's accurate to say that it doesn't really matter. Batteries and ICE engines will lose efficiency and capacity over time and use. Testing on EVs with 200K or more has shown that a few % of loss in the first few years, then a steady, slow amount of loss over time, is typical. EV batteries are covered under factory warranty for 8 years and 100K miles so any real defects will more than likely be found during that period. After that, it's not any different than an ICE car that burns more oil or has fuel injectors that get clogged up. The big issue will be the battery replacement cost in 10 years. Anything more that $10-15K would be out of line compared to ICE engine/transmission replacements and we aren't there yet with batteries. Until then I'm happy with the current Ford, Hyundai/Kia, GM, Tesla, and other brands' battery range.

The reasons that this topic gets so much attention are that a) charging stations still are nowhere near as plentiful and convenient as gas stations and b) it takes 1/2 hour or more to recharge your car when you need to. And modern ICE cars maintained to even a minimal level won’t suffer from appreciable range decrease until they get well past 100k miles. But with every passing year, EVs lose some range which only exacerbates the problem, especially if you think your car might be losing range faster than expected. In another ten years EVs won’t have these issues either but right now, they are what keeps us from using our Mach-E for longer trips. And it might be what keeps me from staying with the Mach-E in 2027 when my lease expires.

 

[AliRafiee]

I don’t understand why there is so much back and forth on how to measure battery degradation. Just use car scanner already to get the value. Done.

 

[Mach1E]

You’re not wrong, although the specifics of your argument point at the need for a ‘perfect’ analysis under identical, idealized conditions. Nothing is that perfect in life yet we must all find a way forward making decisions based on imperfect data and conditions. Statistics are a great example where virtually every predictive statistic is usually framed within an error margin (or ‘confidence interval’) of +/- 3%. I’m not trying to get a perfect answer here, just something reasonably close enough to make an informed decision, same as all of us do every day of our lives.

Yes. But in this case the margin of error would be more like 10-20% using that method and basically meaningless.

The good news is that you can get an exact number of battery degradation from a scan. No need for complicated testing and math.

If it’s a determining factor when you decide to keep the car, it’d be worth getting a scan done. It’s literally a table value percentage in a scan. People post theirs here all the time.

 

[Mach1E]

I don’t understand why there is so much back and forth on how to measure battery degradation. Just use car scanner already to get the value. Done.

Because I suggested that in post 37 and they still had questions. ?‍

Sponsored