The second-generation Blade battery can charge from 10-70% in just about five minutes and from 10-97% in under 10 minutes. More impressively, the company showcased the battery charging flawlessly from 20-97% at -22°F (-30°C) in just about 12 minutes, only around three minutes slower than it charges in normal temperatures.
…
The EV was plugged in at 9% state of charge with 93 kilometers of range (57 miles). In 9 minutes and 51 seconds, it charged up to 97% with the range prediction in their gauge cluster displaying 1,008 kilometers (626 miles). This is likely calibrated for the China Light-Duty Test Cycle (CLTC), which tends to be more optimistic than the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) test cycle in the U.S.
Still, these charging speeds are way faster than the 20-40 minute charging stops on the latest EVs in the U.S. The new BYD EVs can basically recharge in nearly the same time it takes to refill a gas car. Even the new 1,500 kilowatt (1.5 megawatt) Flash charging stations are arranged like a traditional gas station for cars to quickly drive in and drive out.
Charge time sounds great, but what about the number of charge cycles (I.e. longevity), the article did not mention that.
They don’t mention it, but I highly suspect its actually not significant.
I used to think fast charging did the same thing, but it turns out that even the heaviest wattage implementations have negligible effects on cycles and health.
As long as your driver is smart enough to control or manipulate the voltage at certain capacities (<15% and >85%), the higher power won’t affect the cell quality.
You are correct. This is for phones, where it is worse than for EVs, but:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLS5Cg_yNdM
I feel like this is the important detail here…
When buying a car, you can’t have a clue whether that is the case.
I used to believe fast charging is harmless in phones too. It isn’t. I charge my phone only to 80%, and not daily. I haven’t lost a single % of battery health in almost a year. Meanwhile my friends charge to 100% and very often, always on fast charging. I got a friend to install accubattery to check their health and it was at 93% after only about 1.5 years.
Tl;dr: I suspect the driver will be dogshit and cause batteries to get destroyed in anything but the flagship car models to increase battery service revenue BY A LOT…
Do I understand correctly - you charge to 80%, have zero degradation, but also only use 80% of your battery at most because of that.
Your fast-charging friend, meanwhile, has been using all 100% down to 93% battery for these 1.5 years. Maybe, in a bad scenario his battery will degrade to 80% in 1-2 years and he’ll start using only 80% of his like you?
Where’s the upside in this, unless you’re both planing to use same phone in e.g. 5 years and you might get ahead in battery capacity finally?
There are many upsides.
One is my phone survives longer and when I sell it second hand to a less fortunate person, they get a phone with a battery in perfect condition.
Another is that my phone holds more value.
Another is that I remove a worry from my head. I’m no longer questioning whether I am destroying my battery.
Though I don’t see the upside of charging to 100%. I literally dont need to. An 80% charge lasts me like 3 days so I usually charge every 2 days in case I need my phone.
Not EVERYTHING is about having something better than someone else, jesus, I’m so tired of this mentality of “I gotta have just a little more than that other guy”. Why should I try to get more if I literally don’t need it?
Why would I want my phone to charge in 5 minutes if I spend 6-8 hours sleeping myself???
Why would I want to charge to 100% if 80% lasts me 3 damn days? (And that’s if I use my phone a decent amount)
If you need 100% charge daily by all means charge to 100% at full fast charging speed but I literally don’t need it.
Though I have no idea how anyone would go through 100% of their battery before they go to sleep for any less than 2-3 hours that it takes to “slow” charge a phone… I guess using the phone as a dash cam would do that as an example.
Every time I’ve seen someone test this hypothesis - as in doing a long-term experiment with the specific purpose of testing whether fast charging harms battery health - the result has come back that it doesn’t make much deference at all
It’s also worth pointing out that every battery is different and apps like Accubattery are imprecise. It’s entirely possible that your 100% and your friend’s 93% are actually exactly the same. It’s also possible that their battery would have displayed 93% when brand new
I crossreferenced my testing a lot though I cant 100% guarantee what I found is accurate.
Though I can say this: I don’t think built-in health monitors in phones are worth a damn. My gran’s phone was showing at 100% health when accubattery was at a whopping 73%. Testing the old and new battery, the new battery held up just about 30% more time than the old one on youtube playback.
I did other things that I wont get into
This is why I chose to trust accubattery and pretty much invalidate other testing in my head. I know it’s one single test and sample but this is my information and I trust it at lleast for now.
93% after 1.5 years works just fine for most users who do not prioritize longevity or sustainability over convenience, unfortunately.
It’s not even about convenience. They just have fast charging on by default and they never bother to check if they need it and what are the ups and downs
Some phones get over 70°C while fast charging, which is not healthy for the battery first.
Yea the temperature change is what kills afaik.
so after 1.5 yrs you’re at 80% and they’re at 93%?