Salvage cars: Tesla permanently disabling SC from supercharger

[M0rpH3x]

Hi guys, just drawing your attention to this tweet from @wk057

"Tesla really doesn't want people with salvage cars using superchargers. Aside from legal threats in their docs, they're blocking it in more ways now.

Seems even offline cars on semi-modern firmware can now have it perm disabled via a command from the supercharger itself."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1402357860621824012

I hope it never affects 3rd party DC charging, but I don't ser why they would spare it.

 

[WhiteWi]

Good

 

[beatle]

I hope it never affects 3rd party DC charging, but I don't ser why they would spare it.

They can make the case to restrict use of their own charging networksince they control it, but I'd say it's borderline illegal (or just straight up illegal?) for them to disable 3rd party DCFC as those systems do not belong to them. Clearly they would prefer people to scrap the cars to diminish the used market, driving up demand for new cars. The thin veil of "but muh safety" is only valid if Tesla didn't already have code implemented for determining the health of the HV system before the contacts even close. But they do. It's like they don't trust their own code.

 

[WhiteWi]

They can make the case to restrict use of their own charging networksince they control it, but I'd say it's borderline illegal (or just straight up illegal?) for them to disable 3rd party DCFC as those systems do not belong to them. Clearly they would prefer people to scrap the cars to diminish the used market, driving up demand for new cars. The thin veil of "but muh safety" is only valid if Tesla didn't already have code implemented for determining the health of the HV system before the contacts even close. But they do. It's like they don't trust their own code.

Or they don’t want idiots buying potentially unsafe cars that will be blamed on them if something happens.

 

[jelloslug]

Or they don’t want idiots buying potentially unsafe cars that will be blamed on them if something happens.

Exactly. With every news outlet, short seller, and FUD troll looking for any piece of bad news to latch on, having some half ass repaired Tesla burn down a Supercharger location would be huge. The only caveat I can say is that there should be a real, permanent way to get a car recertified. A car that was totaled from hail damage does not pose an issue verses one that was actually wrecked.

 

[beatle]

Or they don’t want idiots buying potentially unsafe cars that will be blamed on them if something happens.

I guess you didn't read my post.

Exactly. With every news outlet, short seller, and FUD troll looking for any piece of bad news to latch on, having some half ass repaired Tesla burn down a Supercharger location would be huge. The only caveat I can say is that there should be a real, permanent way to get a car recertified. A car that was totaled from hail damage does not pose an issue verses one that was actually wrecked.

Tesla is generating their own bad news by stripping features off their owners' cars.

At one point Tesla did offer a recertification process, but now they don't. I 100% agree with you on the hail damage scenario. In addition, ANY rebuilt car with any type of powerplant can have issues due to shoddy work. This doesn't trace back to the manufacturer - it's on the owner/shop. To say the manufacturer is the only one that can do it properly is incredibly narrow minded and corporately selfish.

 

[M0rpH3x]

No other manufacturer of electric cars does this. It has more to do with the salvage market and the extremely high repair costs of Teslas, I'm afraid. Safety is just a bad excuse. How many salvaged Teslas have ever caught fire?

The HV recertification should come with a reenabling of DC charge, if the issue were safety.

 

[M0rpH3x]

And the fact that a vehicle becomes unsupported when it is exported to a different country (and hence SC and DC charging are disabled) tells you how much Tesla cares about safety. Because, you know, charging a US Tesla in Europe with a Chademo adapter might make things explode. Or whatever.

 

[WhiteWi]

It’s theirs product and they do what they want. Including separating markets. Many companies do that to their products. If you don’t like it don’t buy Tesla or make your own product and control the policy on it.

 

[jelloslug]

I guess you didn't read my post.


Tesla is generating their own bad news by stripping features off their owners' cars.

At one point Tesla did offer a recertification process, but now they don't. I 100% agree with you on the hail damage scenario. In addition, ANY rebuilt car with any type of powerplant can have issues due to shoddy work. This doesn't trace back to the manufacturer - it's on the owner/shop. To say the manufacturer is the only one that can do it properly is incredibly narrow minded and corporately selfish.

The main difference here is that if a wrecked Tahoe blows a poorly repaired fuel line at their neighborhood Citgo station and burns it down:

1) It would never make anything more than local news
2) The Citgo is not owned by GM.

As crappy as the salvage car issue with Tesla can be perceived, the facts remain that the vast majority of people just don't care and Tesla really does not have any time or even any incentive to bother with it. The risk/reward for offering the recertification is staggeringly bad and all it will take is one botched inspection to cause another "outrage".

 

[M0rpH3x]

It’s theirs product and they do what they want. Including separating markets. Many companies do that to their products. If you don’t like it don’t buy Tesla or make your own product and control the policy on it.

It's my car and I do what I want with it. Including hacking it, exporting it and using it in any public charger I deem necessary. If Tesla doesn't like it, they can buy the car from me...

 

[M0rpH3x]

The main difference here is that if a wrecked Tahoe blows a poorly repaired fuel line at their neighborhood Citgo station and burns it down:

1) It would never make anything more than local news
2) The Citgo is not owned by GM.

As crappy as the salvage car issue with Tesla can be perceived, the facts remain that the vast majority of people just don't care and Tesla really does not have any time or even any incentive to bother with it. The risk/reward for offering the recertification is staggeringly bad and all it will take is one botched inspection to cause another "outrage".

Other EV automakers don't have any problems with salvage cars. No charger ever blowed up because a salvage car was using it. This is a cheap excuse they use to hide the real reasons behind their policy.

 

[WhiteWi]

It's my car and I do what I want with it. Including hacking it, exporting it and using it in any public charger I deem necessary. If Tesla doesn't like it, they can buy the car from me...

You didn’t buy software rights from them when you bought the car. So they do what they please to limit unwanted tinkering with theirs product.

 

[M0rpH3x]

You didn’t buy software rights from them when you bought the car. So they do what they please to limit unwanted tinkering with theirs product.

In the same spirit, I bought (I paid for) a car that can DC charge. If they want me to have a car that cannot DC charge, the very least they could do is a reimbursement. And if they don't like that my car can DC charge, maybe they can buy it from me, or recall it. Tesla has lost this kind of fights in the past (e.g. the case of a guy that bought a car with FSD, Tesla removed FSD afterwards, and in the end Tesla had to reinstate FSD and got a lot of this bad advertisement you all say it's trying to avoid).

On the other hand, this permanent disabling of supercharging (and potentially 3rd party DC charging) is NOT a software thing. It is a hardware thing. So your statement doesn't cover the original post of the thread.

 

[nativewolf]

We need national right to repair laws really, not just for this case but especially for farmers and heavy equipment folks getting f'd by JD and Cat. When teslas behavior mirrors that of the worst heavy equipment (Legacy of legacy) manufacturers ...we have a problem.

 

[stopcrazypp]

In the same spirit, I bought (I paid for) a car that can DC charge. If they want me to have a car that cannot DC charge, the very least they could do is a reimbursement. And if they don't like that my car can DC charge, maybe they can buy it from me, or recall it. Tesla has lost this kind of fights in the past (e.g. the case of a guy that bought a car with FSD, Tesla removed FSD afterwards, and in the end Tesla had to reinstate FSD and got a lot of this bad advertisement you all say it's trying to avoid).

On the other hand, this permanent disabling of supercharging (and potentially 3rd party DC charging) is NOT a software thing. It is a hardware thing. So your statement doesn't cover the original post of the thread.

It's both. Also in this case I believe only the SC is disabled. The CHAdeMO adapter still works as it's a different protocol.

And the previous criticism is that Tesla has no right to make software modifications to cars they don't own (which was previously how they disabled supercharger access, it was just toggling a bit on the car itself). People got around that by putting their cars offline and doing mods. Now Tesla is finally disabling things on the SC side, which is the "proper" way of doing it. Since Tesla owns the SC network, they are within their rights to do so.

 

[M0rpH3x]

We need national right to repair laws really, not just for this case but especially for farmers and heavy equipment folks getting f'd by JD and Cat. When teslas behavior mirrors that of the worst heavy equipment (Legacy of legacy) manufacturers ...we have a problem.

100% agree with you

 

[M0rpH3x]

It's both. Also in this case I believe only the SC is disabled. The CHAdeMO adapter still works as it's a different protocol.

And the previous criticism is that Tesla has no right to make software modifications to cars they don't own (which was previously how they disabled supercharger access, it was just toggling a bit on the car itself). People got around that by putting their cars offline and doing mods. Now Tesla is finally disabling things on the SC side, which is the "proper" way of doing it.

They change an EEPROM in the master charger and (I guess) make it read-only. The process to make it read-only is irreversible, as it changes hardware. If SC is disabled at the level of the master charger, I'm not so sure if any other kind of DC charging would work. I don't believe the master charger distinguishes between SC and other kinds of DC charging, most likely it knows it's getting some amps at some voltage and it plays along. I would say the distinction happens at a higher level in software.

 

[stopcrazypp]

They change an EEPROM in the master charger and (I guess) make it read-only. The process to make it read-only is irreversible, as it changes hardware. If SC is disabled at the level of the master charger, I'm not so sure if any other kind of DC charging would work. I don't believe the master charger distinguishes between SC and other kinds of DC charging, most likely it knows it's getting some amps at some voltage and it plays along. I would say the distinction happens at a higher level in software.

I never heard anywhere that it's a read only EEPROM (any link to sources?), and if it's read only, how can they change it remotely to disable supercharging?

As for other types others mentioned CHAdeMO still works.

Salvage fast charge

Hello to all forum users. Can anybody explain me from a legal point of view, why does DC charging is banned on salvage vehicles, not SC, but even CHADEMO. Why does Tesla don't leave legal ability to charge my vehicle? I think is just not right. Thanks!

teslamotorsclub.com

This discussion pointed to a Rich Rebuilds video that tested it still worked even with Supercharging disabled in a Model 3:

DC Fast charging after accident

www.chevybolt.org

From the Setec CCS adapter, we know the two protocols function differently (which is why Model 3 is limited to CHAdeMO speeds using the Setec Adapter).

 

[WhiteWi]

In the same spirit, I bought (I paid for) a car that can DC charge. If they want me to have a car that cannot DC charge, the very least they could do is a reimbursement. And if they don't like that my car can DC charge, maybe they can buy it from me, or recall it. Tesla has lost this kind of fights in the past (e.g. the case of a guy that bought a car with FSD, Tesla removed FSD afterwards, and in the end Tesla had to reinstate FSD and got a lot of this bad advertisement you all say it's trying to avoid).

On the other hand, this permanent disabling of supercharging (and potentially 3rd party DC charging) is NOT a software thing. It is a hardware thing. So your statement doesn't cover the original post of the thread.

Again if it’s salvaged car they can do as they please.