MG4 LFP/NMC batteries

[jpk]

---

I've read that if you get the SE LR it's therefore the NMC battery. But the motor is a 201HP. Whereas the SE SR with LFP is 168HP. Is this true? That's 31HP more. Almost 20% greater HP.

The one deciding factor that will affect efficiency the most is how you use that right pedal and to a lesser extent the settings you drive with

 

[Kithmo]

It's not a risk as such. If the vehicle was just sitting there not charging then it's not a worry. But when it's charging if anything is going to happen that's when it will. Hot day hot battery from driving in a hot day heating up the battery whilst charging no movement of air in the carpark nobody there to monitor anything. It can often be 36 degrees and up here in Sydney.

You do know HV batteries are safe from heat to well over 200 Deg C don't you ?

That's Break Horsepower by the way.

It's "Brake" horsepower actually.

 

[Tig170]

---

I've read that if you get the SE LR it's therefore the NMC battery. But the motor is a 201HP. Whereas the SE SR with LFP is 168HP. Is this true? That's 31HP more. Almost 20% greater HP.

My understanding is that the motor is the same, just the LFP has a different power delivery map. Having said that maybe its the same, apparently on the earlier versions the 0-60mph time was marginally lower on the LFP than the NMC version. I've only ever driven the LFP version, and even at 168bhp, its way quick enough. I'm approaching 20,000km with a battery State of health of (via car scanner) of 96.4% - I don't know how accurate this is though as its remarkably linear with mileage.

 

[siteguru]

The SE LR has the same battery (64 kWh) and motor (150 kW) as the Trophy LR (in UK spec). This is different to the battery (51 kWh) and motor (125 kW) in the SE SR. The SE SR reduction gearing is slightly different too - it's geared for a lower top speed which means it's faster off the line up to 30 mph than the LR models.

 

[Haggis]

This may help, and explain why I've opted short range. If charging the bigger battery most of the time to 80% [216 miles] to prevent degradation/damage then why spend thousands more for the trophy? if you're purely evaluating battery use, and not the extra toys [When you can also easily retrofit a heated seat pad, and reversing camera].

The base Standard Range model with its 51kWh (50.8kWh usable) battery offers a 218-mile WLTP range, which beats Stellantis cars such as the Vauxhall Corsa-e and Peugeot e-208. It’s also worth mentioning that this battery pack uses a Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) chemistry, which is more tolerant of charging to 100%. So you can happily use the entire capacity more of the time without worrying about damage.

The Long Range battery has a Nickel Cobalt Manganese (NMC) chemistry, however, so will be best kept between 50% and 80% during everyday usage, with 100% just for longer trips. This 64kWh pack (61.7kWh usable) enables a very healthy 281 miles with the SE Long Range, and 270 miles for the Trophy Long Range, since the latter is a little heavier and its spoiler causes drag.

All these figures are great, with the Long Range cars challenging the excellent larger battery versions of the Kia e-Niro / Niro EV and Hyundai Kona. They beat the non-Tour VW ID.3 and trounce Stellantis’s offerings.

You only get 7kW AC charging, with no 11kW option. A regular 7.4kW home wall box will charge the Standard Range battery in 7.5 hours and the Long Range in 9 hours. DC charging is excellent, however. The Long Range can charge at up to 135kW, so takes just 35 minutes to go from 10 to 80% – exactly what you need for a pit stop during a long journey. This drops to a still decent 117kW for the Standard Range, so this car takes a lightly longer 39 minutes to go from 10 to 80%. This will mean longer journeys remain possible, particularly as the LFP battery can handle 100% rapid charging more regularly

I've read that if you get the SE LR it's therefore the NMC battery. But the motor is a 201 BHP. Whereas the SE SR with LFP battery is 168 BHP. That's 31BHP more over the 168 BHP. Almost 20% more BHP.
Is this true?

 

[siteguru]

Why have you repeated your question, when I've already answered it?

 

[jpk]

My understanding is that the motor is the same, just the LFP has a different power delivery map. Having said that maybe its the same, apparently on the earlier versions the 0-60mph time was marginally lower on the LFP than the NMC version. I've only ever driven the LFP version, and even at 168bhp, its way quick enough. I'm approaching 20,000km with a battery State of health of (via car scanner) of 96.4% - I don't know how accurate this is though as its remarkably linear with mileage.

Which OBD2 dongle and software are you using?

 

[Haggis]

Why have you repeated your question, when I've already answered it?

Because I didn't see it before I wrote my question. I'm using a phone here. There is one thing from all this. It's been suggested if you get the NMC you only charge it to 50% to 80% and don't discharge it below 20%. That's if you want to care for the battery. That would bring the capacity of the NMC battery down below the LFP. It would also increase the cycles you are using if you have the NMC battery. This battery already has many less cycles than the LFP battery.

On the plus side there is the increased BHP as mentioned here if you get the NMC.
Questions in my head are:
As cycles are used up does the SOC reduce proportionally? As mentioned here an owner did 20,000 and a SOC reduced to 96.4% on a LFP battery. But to get the same 20,000 with a NMC battery if you were charging from 50% to 80% in order to care for the battery as suggested would require more cycles on a battery that has less cycles available in the first place. With that in mind the SOC of the NMC would be much less than 96.4% owing to the less cycles this battery is able to offer. Now this is assuming they both have a similar correlation of degradation. The NMC may start degradation later and more suddenly toward the end. I have no idea.

 

[jpk]

I believe the 50-80% is a guide for allowing the vehicle to stand a while to maintain battery health. If you're charging shortly after running it low and using it after charging to 100% then no noticeable damage is done. There's been some pretty well informed video's from real expert's describing this

 

[Tig170]

Which OBD2 dongle and software are you using?

NEXAS NexLink Bluetooth 5.0 OBDII Scanner for iPhone & Android & Windows, Code Reader Check Engine Light Smog Check Car Scan Tool for Vehicles After 1996 and Motorcycles Specially (link)?- It came from amazon approx 6 months ago

Software:- Car Scanner (but it currently doesn't report everything as it perhaps will) - as I was really wanting the HV battery energy content at 100% (as Bjørn Nyland does in some cars in his YT videos). ABRP (paid version) also gives the SOH (but I no longer have a subscription)

 

[MoDolph]

As mentioned here an owner did 20,000 and a SOC reduced to 96.4% on a LFP battery. But to get the same 20,000 with a NMC battery if you were charging from 50% to 80% in order to care for the battery as suggested would require more cycles

That's not how it works. A cycle is 100%-0%. If you go from 100%-50% instead that is only 0.5 cycles.

Since the SR battery has ~20% less capacity the number of cycles for a given mileage will also be 20% higher. 2000 cycles on the NMC would be equivalent to 2400 on the LFP.

 

[Rolfe]

---

I've read that if you get the SE LR it's therefore the NMC battery. But the motor is a 201HP. Whereas the SE SR with LFP is 168HP. Is this true? That's 31HP more. Almost 20% greater HP.

I don't think so. When I was buying my car I didn't read anything about the LR having a more powerful motor, and in fact the SR was said to be the faster car to 60 mph, by about the thickness of a cigarette paper.

Ah, the infamous rating to see how quickly you can break the car as opposed to how much power is required to brake it.

I'm sorry I fixed that spelling mistake now!

 

[siteguru]

Already covered in my earlier reply. SR has 125 kW motor, LR has 150 kW motor. (It's all in the published specifications - the NMC battery is also heavier overall, though not by the same ratio as the power density increase, so the stronger motor overcomes some of that increased inertia). The gearing of the SR is why it's faster 0-60, because it is noticeably faster 0-30 than the LR, and the rate at which the LR catches up 30-60 isn't enough to overcome the 0-30 loss.

 

[Tig170]

That's not how it works. A cycle is 100%-0%. If you go from 100%-50% instead that is only 0.5 cycles.

Since the SR battery has ~20% less capacity the number of cycles for a given mileage will also be 20% higher. 2000 cycles on the NMC would be equivalent to 2400 on the LFP.

Indeed : I do 1000 miles a month, so in 13 months, I've worked out that I've done 75 full cycles (13000 miles / 175 average range - 150 winter, 200 summer) (Standard LFP battery). At 6 months (6500miles), I had 2.8% degredation, and 6-7 months later (13000miles), I've now got a 3.6% degredation so it is curving in the right direction - for LFP they say around 10-20% degredation at 10 years - but who really knows?

 

[Haggis]

Really dont know, but the bigger the battery the less charge cycles needed to cover the same distance,

So 64 against 51 so the bigger battery has a 20% head start. on charge cycles over the same distance

My policy has always been to get the biggest battery there is as

10% Degredation on a 64kw battery leaves you with 57.6Kw
10% Degredation on a 51kw battery leaves you with 45.9Kw

So the bigger battery should have a longer useful range life.

So over 25000 Miles the Larger battery will use approx 100 Charge Cycles
the Smaller battery will use approx 125 Charge Cycles

Lets say after 50k miles its degraded 10% (Probably wont have going by other EVs but as worst case). 250 Miles Range on large battery car will drop to 225
200 Miles Range on small battery car will drop to 180 Miles.

That's correct IF both batteries are the same chemical composition. So both small and large are LFP or both are NMC. It does not work when comparing LFP to NMC because their life cycles are vary different. And if you were to treat a NMC like a LFP and charge it to 100% then battery degradation would be significantly accelerated.

 

[Robf]

That's correct IF both batteries are the same chemical composition. So both small and large are LFP or both are NMC. It does not work when comparing LFP to NMC because their life cycles are vary different. And if you were to treat a NMC like a LFP and charge it to 100% then battery degradation would be significantly accelerated.

No it wouldn't, it depends on usage. You really need to get your facts right, just for one of your posts would be good.

 

[Rolfe]

Let's keep this polite, guys.

 

[jpk]

You are right @Rolfe but it can become tiresome being bombarded with what sometimes feels like fake news or old non comparable research!

 

[Rolfe]

Educate, educate. It's helping all of us.

 

[Haggis]

Really dont know, but the bigger the battery the less charge cycles needed to cover the same distance,

So 64 against 51 so the bigger battery has a 20% head start. on charge cycles over the same distance

My policy has always been to get the biggest battery there is as

10% Degredation on a 64kw battery leaves you with 57.6Kw
10% Degredation on a 51kw battery leaves you with 45.9Kw

So the bigger battery should have a longer useful range life.

So over 25000 Miles the Larger battery will use approx 100 Charge Cycles
the Smaller battery will use approx 125 Charge Cycles

Lets say after 50k miles its degraded 10% (Probably wont have going by other EVs but as worst case). 250 Miles Range on large battery car will drop to 225
200 Miles Range on small battery car will drop to 180 Miles.

That's correct IF both batteries are the same chemical composition. So both small and large are LFP or both are NMC. It does not work when comparing LFP to NMC because their life cycles are vary different. And if you were to treat a NMC like a LFP and charge it to 100% then battery degradation would be significantly accelerated

No it wouldn't, it depends on usage. You really need to get your facts right, just for one of your posts would be good.

If you are comparing LFP to NMC then you are comparing apples with oranges. Think about it. You are saying and I quote '
So over 25000 Miles the Larger battery will use approx 100 Charge Cycles
the Smaller battery will use approx 125 Charge Cycles'. You know that you will only charge up the MNC to a maximum of 80% or less. (the advice is 50% to 80% and not let it discharge below 20%) if you want to care for that particular battery. You know that. Your learned that by reading about NMC batteries. You can't change the law of physics. So now when you do that both batteries are the same capacity. Only when you go on a long range drive will you fill the NMC 100%. And you know that the NMC has less cycles available. You know that. It's physics. So why attack me when all I'm doing is giving you the facts of physics which you already know by being here and reading about the difference in these two battery types. You can love whatever chemical composition battery you want to. But it won't change the law of physics. And attacking people on here won't change the law of physics either. If you want to dispute something do it in a mature sensible and intellectual way. Present evidence for consideration. Not attack someone for repeating the law of physics. We are here to learn about the MG4 and the difference between the models available. And there is a difference between the models with a LFP and NMC battery isn't there?