Tesla Battery Basics for Beginners

● $500 Off + 90 Days of FSD When Buying a Tesla: ts.la/britnee90532
0:00 Skit
0:50 Intro
2:07 Model S/X
4:07 Popular Cell
6:40 LFP
13:18 New Chemistries
14:35 Model Y Flavors
19:24 Cell Shape
20:33 Blade
21:38 Cybertruck
22:40 Outro
● Support: kzbin.infojoin
● Twitter: / tailosiveev
● Podcast: / @tailosiveevpodcast
Channel Art: Wouter-vA19 from our Discord
Music by: / randyvazquez

[@maxwellgarcia_]

more beginner videos plz! A video explaining charging speeds would be great as well!

[@BrokeMahWallet]

Intro was jokes asf

[@daveharris2884]

The skits in the beginning are seriously great! Keep them coming please.

[@McGruff8]

That was amazing. Great job explaining something that could be extremely complicated to explain.

[@hermanmoreno9217]

You did excellent describing everything!

[@zorlac72]

Great video! Thank you for the explanation. 😊

[@MegaLifeChanging]

Great video!! Best explanation on batteries ! Thanks!

[@Crunch_dGH]

⁠Remember, that LFPs take lots of energy to warm up after the iron cold soaks in freezing temps, overnight. Also, when preconditioning ahead of supercharging, which meant about 2% in my Sep ‘22 Fremont NMC MYLR on my recent, chilly, SoCal to Starbase drive, so I imagine it would be more dramatic for LFPs. Also, please report on doing the Battery Health Test in the password (“service”) protected Service menu. Hint: 1) Drain battery (well -depends on newness to avoid “charge state too high”) below 50%, 2) Disconnect & set max charge to 100%, 3) Reconnect making sure charging is underway before activating the test at highest rate available (low amps takes 24 hrs bc it discharges to near 0, then 100). My first attempt failed (thus the above) & when the test completed after 24 hrs, it just displayed a Green “Health Good” with no other information I could find. 😞 So, YMMV. After 10k miles (some, up to 142MPH) I’m showing 321 range, down from 329, delivered. I understand degradation hits batteries most at beginning & end of life, so that 2.5% doesn’t seem out of hand. I typically charge 20-80% at home, but on long trips often drag it out to 100% just to allow for more napping/relaxing. Btw, after lots of flooring past 100mph & regening back below 70 would turn preconditioning off & actually yield better than estimated (in freezing ambient) kWh used! I now do that whenever traffic conditions are sparse enough to not alarm those behind. Hopefully, new battery chemistries won’t have most EVs mimicking.

[@Nick-zy9tx]

Assuming you are driving and charging LFP batteries, I believe some of the research I saw called for charging to 100% not 80% like lithium ion as lithium iron phosphate has memory so if you don't use full range of charge, you might lose it. I'm not 100% sure, just might be a good idea to check your assumption that you should be charging 20-80% at home and not to a higher percentage. Lithium ion has higher discharge voltages than similar sized LFP, so the recommendation was to 80% to avoid high temperatures that can cause early degradation. LFP's are lower voltage so safer and lower temperature, so 100% from what I gathered isn't a problem. Someone correct me if i'm wrong

[@6YJI9]

Good job on the skit. Really enjoyed it, as those types of people/vibes/etc definitely translate to many topics/industries lol.

[@socalqol]

Such a great video! Always wonder about this 👍

[@ALRinaldi]

I'm never going to call them 1865's, always 18650 to me! :D

[@KelalaSeichi]

I appreciate the work put into clarifying the difference between battery cell types and generations as the models update and move forward. This is gonna help a lot of people decide which models to buy. It's definitely fast changing.

[@changomeister]

Great informative video!

[@SkystruckCrypto]

Love the bit at the beginning :)

[@litestuffllc7249]

The Tesla company originally planned to use the planned 4680 cell throughout the companies line because these "tabless" batteries were to be quicker to charge, be able to discharge with less heat and also have 16% more energy density. Now all those plans have had to be changed. First while Tesla is making some 4680 cells to do so they had to downgrade the energy density from +16% to +10%. This is a significant downgrade. Secondly they found the "tabless" design which actually have many tabs - was very hard to make; so they've had serious delays and slow production; with high rates of rejects - very costly. Now only they Cybertruck and Roadster was expected to use the 4680 and the slow rate of production is indicative of their problems producing them even now only 1000 cybertrucks a month are made.

[@lassewestvanghougaard4856]

Tailosive, I got a Model 3 LFP battery too. Watch the video made my CleanerWatts, he explains that the LFP battery deteriorate slower only COMPARED to the other battery times when charged to 80%. Tesla recommending them to be charged to 100% makes them deteriorate quicker than the rate based on nationwide batteryHealth scans. I recommend that LFP owners charge it to no more than 90% to prevent peak voltage, while still being sufficient to calibrate the BMS mileage range curve.

[@chuckles1357]

So you think that 90% is enough to calibrate the BMS? Could you tell me where you read that? I mean, if i don't have to stress the battery by charging it to 100% i sure don't want to.

[@Crunch_dGH]

@@TailosiveEV ​​⁠emember that LFPs take lots of energy to warm up after the iron cold soaks in freezing temps, overnight. Also, when preconditioning ahead of supercharging. That means about 2% in my ‘22 Fremont NMC MYLR, so I imagine it would be more dramatic for LFPs.

[@tyronemcgillick]

I'll stick with what Tesla advises.

[@lassewestvanghougaard4856]

@@chuckles1357 All Tesla's batteries are controlled by the same BMS. But the LFP battery voltage rise curve is more aggressive after 80%. (In fact there is little voltage difference between (20-80%) As long as it is charged around 90-95% you won't have to worry about battery overheating due battery material expanding when charged to 100%. The main factor is not necessarily the voltage, but how the batteries internal material structure is cracking due to heat. And it tends to internally crack up more closer to the 100%, as less energy goes to charging the battery and more energy goes to simply creating unnecessary heat in the battery. Another source of heat would be from supercharging.

[@rogerstarkey5390]

The emerging rule seems to be whichever cell type you have, take it to 100% periodically, but don't let it "Soak". Time the charge as close as possible to your journey. . Same applies to the low end. An occasional dip to 5%(?) is good for calibration. Don't forget that Tesla seems to leave a good buffer at the bottom and a few percent at the top (watch Bjørn charge to 101/102% then leave immediately on his distance tests, also he's run a model 3 40-50km past "Zero" in testing before the car cried "enough". That's a BIG buffer)

[@TheMedianGam3r]

Wow amazing video!!! Very informative

[@JcFiscus42]

Great job organizing and simplifying the complexity surrounding the various battery chemistries in Tesla batteries. When graphene super capacitors replace battery packs?

[@digarian007]

Loved the skit, because I just let those parts of everyones’ videos. Thanks for doing this.

[@Electric-Mania]

Thx 4 this!!❤

[@shaystern2453]

great info!

[@tommyvercetti7854]

This video was needed.

[@JayCAlan]

Thanks, this is a great explainer

[@chuckles1357]

I'd like more beginner videos! I've had an LFP battery Tesla since December 2022. I'm really confused because it seems like it's degrading.a lot faster than i thought i would... i've lost about three miles of range in five months. I've read that LFP degrades substantially faster, do you know if that's true?

[@chidorirasenganz]

LFP has a longer cycle life due to its molecular structure and lower voltage. Regardless of cell chemistry it seems the 5% degradation in the first year or two. LFP tends to be slower after the initial degradation

[@rogerstarkey5390]

@@chidorirasenganz It's mainly just the lower voltage.

[@chidorirasenganz]

@@rogerstarkey5390 I haven’t seen anything that shows that

[@Itsjrob_]

Man I don’t own a Tesla but I guess I’m a Tesla fanboy ! Love the videos man one day I will own that model y 🔥👌🏾

[@teslasnek]

One of the reasons the 4680 isn't as energy dense is because it doesn't have any silicon in it. They will probably add that back in once they solve the dry electrode conundrum.

[@Zeyek1]

🤓

[@aerostorm_]

The energy density is also a contribution of the pack design. The cell itself has a very high energy density. The pack (which matters) has a lower energy density. Theres unused space within the 4680 structural pack as well due to designing for safety tolerances. That unused space contributes to a loss of over 10wh/kg. Current 2170 packs are in the 180s for wh/kg. 4680 is about 160wh/kg.

[@SyntheticSpy]

@@Zeyek1 you’re watching a video breaking down the batteries in teslas cars, and you’re commenting that on someone talking about said batteries?..

[@rogerstarkey5390]

@@aerostorm_ Sorry, wrong (imo) If the cell material (chemistry) is the same, a "75 kWh pack" is just that. But The 4680 equivalent will have less metal in the "cans" holding that material. That would make a pack constructed in the same way, lighter. But..... The 4680 pack being structural means you can't compare the pack. You must compare the vehicle. The 2170 vehicle will have a lighter "battery box" containing heavier cells with a steel floor and heavier sides to the chassis. . The 4680 pack *when the chemistry is the same" will have necessarily heavier "battery box", lighter cells, but no floor and light frame on the chassis. As with most things Tesla, we must consider the *system* as a whole. The *vehicle* efficiency tends to be class leading? . Since the 4680 chemistry tested so far is not the same, there's no real compari (I'm not sure they've perfected the structural pack yet either) . Much more to come.

[@aerostorm_]

@Roger Starkey You must consider it's not just a "battery box" but a battery. There are voltage and thermal management systems separate the cans themselves. These effect efficiency, too. Though I do agree it comes down to efficiency more than anything, I was responding to why people say 4680 isn't as energy dense.

[@benjaminbenson8914]

What's the difference between the lfp battery and whatever other battery are in Tesla's is one better than the other

[@ANDR_U]

I have a 2021 Dual Motor Extended Range Model 3. What battery do I have and can I charge it to 100%?

[@ANDR_U]

@@TailosiveEV I usually do 90% charge because it says that for daily and then trip 90 to 100

[@FearTec]

Does the MYLR 2023 made in Shanghai for the Australia market have the 2170 or 4160 cells?

[@TailosiveEV]

I believe all long range Model 3/Ys use 2170s

[@SuperTipsLLCs35]

What are you guys doing in this video?

[@KyleHubb]

I love your skits. lol

[@MegaLifeChanging]

So are 2170 batteries better in cold weather?

[@jaxonsmith3633]

Weird to have a favourite battery now

[@johnkramer745]

from what i heard, MY RWD and LR have about a 200 lbs difference in total weight. whcih has led to the speculation (among other things) that both have the same battery capacity since 200lbs would account for the extra motor and not much else. However, MY RWD is software locked (10-20% of peak battery capcity) and hence the 100% battery on it has less range since it is locked. would you happen to know if the battery on both (2024 models) are 2170 hence? i doubt the MY LR in the states has 4680 NCM since the weight should be considerably higher then the MY RWD in that case (less energy dense and hence).

[@Milhouse77BS]

They are 2170. No longer 4860 in Model Y.

[@q2w8i9o]

Very informative video! Thanks for your good work!

[@rogerstarkey5390]

Model S/X still using 18650.... Probably more due to it being a relatively short production run, meaning a pack redesign to 2170 cells wasn't cost effective. Then there's the fact that at the time of the S/X rejig, they were still cell constrained. And The existing packet "worked".

[@cliffm8846]

Folks, if you like peace of mind about your battery (longevity & safety), for years to come, just charge your EV between 30% - 70% (and do 90% - 100% when going for a long Road Trip). (I own Tesla S & X, and I'm an Electrical Engineer) * High temperatures kill batteries. If you go on a holiday/vacation during the summer, leave your vehicle at a low SOC (state of charge). For example, at or below 30% SOC * Cycle within a narrow SOC range. For example: 40-60% rather than 10-80%. The cathode expands and contracts in a wider SOC range, which causes it to break apart. * On that note: The lower the narrower the SOC range, the better. That means charging frequently. * Avoid charging the vehicle above 75% SOC. Above 75% side reactions start occuring that cause degradation. This also reduces the volume expansion issues mentioned * Taking all variables into account, operating between 45-70% SOC, and storage at ~30% is ideal. * Occasional high SOC and wide SOC range are okay! For example, the occasional road trip. * With good thermal management hardware and battery management software, supercharging should have minimal negative effects on cycle life But even y'all will not follow those tips. The battery will not die tomorrow. it is just that there are some small (or big) consequences later on. Have a great day!

[@MrGooyam]

Thank you cliffm, for the charging percentages guidelines, and it's good to hear that from an engineer.

[@ripvanstinkle]

Do these apply to LFP battery? I have one and it seems like a special snowflake that needs its own set of rules.

[@cliffm8846]

@@ripvanstinkle Yes

[@ripvanstinkle]

@@cliffm8846 Thanks, I think it was specifically this note "Avoid charging the vehicle above 75% SOC." From what I've seen/read, charging LFP to 100% regularly doesn't seem to bother it. So maybe keeping the SOC range limited is still helpful, but it can handle it at a higher percentage? Also, I live in a climate with hot summers. I've seen the "store at lower SOC" but what do you mean by "store?" If it's being driven every day or every other day, should we keep it at a lower SOC %, or as long as it's not just sitting for a week at a high SOC, it'll be fine? I appreciate your specificity and time when explaining this to us noobs!

[@benjaminbenson8914]

What about cold weather does that affect the long-term health of the battery I live in the Boston area and I'm not going to have a home charger most likely

[@tyronemcgillick]

Great video 🎉

[@chasekelvington192]

Has there been a solid answer on whether the new long range 3 is an LFP? I am going to be ordering soon, and of course using that referral link 😁

[@maxmirkin7238]

Getting a new long range 3 on the 21st. Will let you know.

[@maxmirkin7238]

Not LFP confirmed.

[@RigaToeKnee]

@@maxmirkin7238 he was referring to the 2024 model

[@tyronemcgillick]

Don't forget LFP is now on the model Y (global audience)

[@tyronemcgillick]

@@TailosiveEV and that is the slowest Tesla :)

[@rogerstarkey5390]

@@tyronemcgillick "Slowest Tesla" That's irrelevant

[@bestman7776]

2024 m3 highland long range.. which battery does it use?

[@TailosiveEV]

2170s from Korea

[@bestman7776]

@@TailosiveEV thank you

[@nowdeconstructed]

22 m3 rwd LFP 16,000 miles and showing 262 miles when fully charged is that kinda drop normal at 16,000 only supercharged once

[@rogerstarkey5390]

4680. "Poor relative performance" is a red herring. . The main reasons they are desirable? It's a "Sweet spot" in 1) Size (fits the "box", not so tall that it removes cabin volume..... Ultium says "Hi!") . 2) Material use (From memory, it removes about 40(?)% of the steel used for the cell "cans" compared to a given pack capacity using the 2170. Result, lighter pack for the same amount of active material in the pack (combined cell energy density) IF you keep the chemistry the same...... Tesla *did not* in the early cells, but the 4680 pack still produced similar output / weight as the 2170 example.... Think about that. . 3) It's fewer *cells* leaving the factory for a given GWh *Factory* output (eventually TWh) 4) It's ±20% the number of "cans" to assemble. Smaller factory reason #1! .... Why was (is) the 4680 form factor difficult? Why did nobody make them before? (in High density form) . Because they couldn't move the electrons..... (I know, not strictly correct!) .... out of the larger cell through a single contact without causing too much heat. ("Resistive heating") . How is this being solved? By increasing the contact area using the "tabless" (actually many tab, but not *welded* ) design. . More contact, Easy current flow, No resistance, No heating. . Others are now "approximating" this by slightly different methods, they are also facing some challenges (ref Panasonic delay) These problems will be solved, it just engineering. . There's another discussion to be had on this topic.... ..... The "Dry Cathode" issue is not REALLY related to the 4680 *form factor* It's only relevance is that since Tesla chose to use it in the 4680, that's the cell seeing the delay. That doesn't mean "4680 bad". . "Cell density" As said by others.... Any reduction in the FIRST cells, as tested, is purely due to those cells not having silicon in the anode. . We don't know what's in the current production cells, or what will be in the Semi, CT packs. . If the exact chemistry used in the 2170 was applied to those cells, the density WOULD be greater at pack level, also the *cell* would perform better due to the reduced (eliminated?) Internal resistance. I believe this will result in a flatter charging curve. (ref the BYD vs CATL charge graph, probably better cooling/resistance?) That's a big deal for both "on the road" fast charge stop time and cell longevity. . THIS is why the 4680 will change the user experience even before more "exotic" chemistry is introduced to boost cell density. . Side note:- The "splash and dash" ability of cells/ packs (and charging cables!) is going to be a major talking point over the next year imo. Pack sizes may even *reduce* !

[@Flutentei]

😂 "is that you?"

[@Guerreropowerr]

Great video Drew

[@jontopham2742]

not all cylindrical cells are NMC, look at lucid air

[@jontopham2742]

@@TailosiveEV I would argue it's more about the chinese focus of trying to sell a cheap product which is less able to be thermally conditioned

[@Ed-jg3ud]

Surprised you didn’t make a video about the Silverado 450 mile announcement, does this change your opinion on cyber truck going for 500? No way Elon lets Mary beat him in mileage?

[@anonymousduck6735]

does turning off the ac make the car faster?

[@anonymousduck6735]

@@TailosiveEV wow, no one gets the Fast furious reference.

[@joekuhn2220]

Wait so do they still use NCA?

[@rogerstarkey5390]

Duh

[@du39104]

LFP is notoriously being not consistent thus creating a huge problem when it comes to battery power metering, which means LFP is prone to lose power suddenly and completely disabled when the cell consistency becomes too much when ageing, thus could never achieve the advertised long charging cycle. One more con for LFP is that the low temp discharging currency is literally non-existent, thus anytime the weather dip cold your range would almost be completely disappeared. Get your facts scientific before spewing out balonies, li-ion is still the only suitable battery for EV.

[@ApteraEV2024]

1:00 Nerds 🤓 OR TURDS 💩 😂😂😂

[@rogerstarkey5390]

Not until YOU arrived.... But now....... 💩

[@MegaLifeChanging]

Panasonic has a Great reputation with their batteries. Tesla is just STARTING to make 4680 batteries . With ANY new product, there will be a time of learning, problems and improvements. I'm glad that I have the 2170 road tested proven Panasonic made battery pack.

[@LauraQQuinto]

Model 3 LR does qualify for the $7500 tax credit FYI

[@JBean_COCR]

don't forget the lithium

[@paulgilbert2506]

Methotrexate batteries? Do they have cancer? Or an autoimmune disease?

[@bonbooty6611]

love the skits!

[@ricafragaa]

"LFP" Long Range..... One day...

[@markreed9853]

It's 18650 cells please!

[@markreed9853]

@@TailosiveEV ... Because you just need one extra 0 to designate a cylindrical cell, even 2170 are sometimes listed as 21700 cells.

[@scottbreseke716]

Don't worry about battery chemistry very much. Let Tesla worry about that. Just tell yourself you're going to upgrade your Tesla in 3 years anyway.

[@Crunch_dGH]

Teslas are lasting (strong) waaay longer than originally anticipated, even more so with each years’ iteration. You may be trading in for battery reasons every 6 years, if that.

[@rogerstarkey5390]

The overall system efficiency of Tesla vehicles is still very impressive.

[@littlesaigondulichsinhhoat6317]

upgrade in 10 years for me.

[@maxwellgarcia_]

sublime skit!

[@3DThrills]

Lithium-Ion is obsolete

[@ReetinEntertainment]

Man, the Cybertruck looks so dumb.

[@rogerstarkey5390]

Damn! That's only 1,799,999 reservations then...... 😒

[@jmt979]

Dude you don’t know what you are talking about. Energy density has nothing to do with cost. It is energy per unit volume. Also they are not 1865 cells. They are 18650 cells