Another Tesla With Over 400,000 Miles On One Battery
A week ago, I wrote an article about a guy in the UK with two high-mileage Tesla Model S sedans that are still using their original batteries. One has about 430,000 miles on its battery and the other has around 375,000 miles, also on one battery. They are both still operating as well — again, on their original batteries.
One of the anti-EV crowd’s falsehoods they proclaim is that EV batteries just die after a couple of years and the cost to replace is $60,000. Firstly, EV batteries typically do not die after 2–3 years. Secondly, EVs have warranties. For example, for the new Tesla Model S battery pack, it is: “8 years or 150,000 miles, whichever comes first.”
So, it’s quite obvious if a Model S under warranty experienced a battery pack failure after 2-3 years, the battery replacement would be covered. It would not and could not cost $60,000 — the replacement would be done by Tesla because they warranty that vehicle. Additionally, a guy I interviewed in 2019 about his Model S with over 220,000 miles, David Hoffman, made a good point recently when I emailed him to find out how long his Model S battery lasted. The answer is 269,000 miles. His point is that when a Tesla battery fails in an older vehicle that is not under warranty, it is not necessary to buy a brand new battery to install. There are sometimes gently used batteries available to utilize as a replacement at a lower cost than a brand new battery.
If the “proof is in the pudding,” let’s take a look at an example of another Tesla with a huge number of miles. Several months ago, Fully Charged posted a video about a 2018 Tesla Model S that has over 400,000 miles on one battery. At about 666,666 kilometers there was an error message. Tesla replaced the battery, which was the original and only battery. It powered a Model S for a little over 400,000 miles.
The owner generally drives 500–600 kilometers a day. He also said he is able to charge for free at home, without having a home solar power system.
Interestingly, he said his high-mileage Model S was charged with fast charging daily. Some people think EV batteries should not be charged frequently using fast charging because doing so can degrade the batteries more quickly
He was asked a question about service and he explained he actually was wondering why there wasn’t any when the car had about 200,000 kilometers.
The brake pads were only changed at 460,000 kilometers — about 287,000 miles.
The user comments echo the high-mileage owner’s experience.
“I have ‘only’ put 162,000 miles on my 10 year old Model S. Still has 90% of the original SOC. My wife and I plan on keeping another 10 years!”
“I truly don’t think people are understanding how significant this is. Going 410,000 miles on the original battery that was constantly being fast charged. That almost certainly means you should expect at least half a million miles from a newer model Tesla. Especially if you don’t fast charge all the time.”
“I had a model s 85D that has 340,000 kilometers on its original battery and motors. Had 93% of its original range. Amazing battery.”
“In Canada in Guelph Ontario a Model 3 owner has done well now over 500,000km on original battery brakes motors. This is fantastic though and love the number, some will take as a sign but 666,666 when error code appeared is very cool.”
An important point about EV batteries is that they are gradually improving. So, it is possible for a brand new Tesla today that its battery could last longer than one made in 2016 or 2018.
The UK guy with the two Model S sedans that have an average of 400,000 miles on them are from 2016. The one in the Fully Charged episode is from 2018.
It is possible that someone who buys a 2024 Model S today might be able to drive it even further than 400,000 miles on one battery.
Finally, there is a false notion that you might see in comments on EV articles. It goes something like this: “But my twenty-year-old Honda Civic has 260,000 miles.”
Well, that’s 260,000 miles and 20 years of spewing toxic air pollution that harms human health and contributes to climate change. Internal combustion engines emit more than just carbon emissions. Their exhaust has been linked to a multitude of human health problems and premature deaths, “Particulates under 2.5 microns, or PM 2.5, such as flecks of soot, can permeate the bloodstream, leading to stroke, heart attack, and changes in blood pressure and cholesterol levels.
“Doctors and researchers are still learning how far the effects extend. Exposure to fine particulates during pregnancy appears to raise the risk of premature birth, maternal and fetal death, and, in children, autism. Studies suggest that PM 2.5 can hinder children’s neurological development, contribute to type 2 diabetes, and speed cognitive decline in the elderly. Genetic and immunological underpinnings are still being unraveled.”
Doing that much damage is nothing for drivers of internal combustion engine vehicles to brag about when they point to the 200,000 miles on their fossil burners.
The cost of all the fuel is rather high for the lifetime of that gasmobile, and the cost to society might even be greater. Buying all that fuel also supports fossil fuel companies that have done a lot of damage to the planet and human health.
Chip in a few dollars a month to help support independent cleantech coverage that helps to accelerate the cleantech revolution!
Have a tip for CleanTechnica? Want to advertise? Want to suggest a guest for our CleanTech Talk podcast? Contact us here.
CleanTechnica uses affiliate links. See our policy here.
CleanTechnica's Comment Policy
