Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Droschke]

Then it would be nice for a non-impacted owner to actually show us the battery capacity they still have (not the rated miles)

Actually, a few have here. Even though, as you would agree, this particular thread is about the impacted cars.

or show us that they actually were able to get the rated miles on a long trip driving at rated consumption.

Good curious question. Would you start a new thread (or a poll) and link it to this one to find out? I think @sorka was thinking about the same idea as well.

 

[DJRas]

OK thank you for explaining. I understand all of that. Does that mean you believe that capping (as in 60 kWh batteries were actually capped 75s) was achieved by changing the cell voltage rather than restricting access to a certain number of cells?

The battery packs are made up of modules. The 85 packs have 16 modules wired in series. Each module is made up of 6 bricks also wired in series. Each brick is 74 individual battery cells wired in parallel. Each of the bricks has fuses so that it can be bypassed if necessary. But, i don't believe that is software controlled or could be reversed.
So, I don't know of any way Tesla could otherwise lock out capacity than limiting the charge voltage.
It also would not be good to have a bunch of batteries completely unused and then suddenly introduce them to the rest of a well used pack. That would severely unbalance the pack and cause bad charging/discharging behavior.

 

[Droschke]

Our early 2013 Tesla S85 has been limited to 88kW maximum supercharging rate from the beginning as we have the Original A battery spec.

This rate has been sufficient for 80000 km of supercharged driving.

I don’t understand the drama. We love our Tesla and it is clearly superior to the other options available. What other car charges as fast as our old 2013? Very few if any, and none in Canada.

No drama. Look at the title of this thread. That, plus a slower charging rate is the double whammy here.

You should offer some empathy.

 

[VT_EE]

The ironic thing is that some here are claiming that they DID change the way range is calculated because they lowered they wh / mile constant. If true, then tesla is CORRECT when they say they changed the range calculation but it's NOT what caused the reduction in rated range but rather what HID part of the reduction in range caused by capping the charge SOC. If this is indeed true, then it's a felony and the EPA needs to know about it.

It is certainly not a felony, and the EPA rating applies to the car when it is new, not when it is years old.

 

[Droschke]

If our Tesla has reduced that amount of range I’d be Ok with it.

Remind you, this thread is about the owners who are not OK with it

Your particular and highly positive ownership experience has nothing to do with the topic of this thread and the problems caused for the impacted owners.

 

[VT_EE]

Shrug. All analogies have some distinctions. Same basic thing: the performance of your car changed after you bought it caused by a software design (to address a hardware issue). Whether the software was there out the factory, or they flashed the ECU, or did an OTA doesn't much matter.

Anyway, wait till Porsche and others figure out OTA updates (and get around the ind dealer rules prohibiting it) so they can implement what they forgot to implement right out of the factory.

Are there really rules preventing OTA updates because it takes away work from dealers?

 

[Ferrycraigs]

The battery packs are made up of modules. The 85 packs have 16 modules wired in series. Each module is made up of 6 bricks also wired in series. Each brick is 74 individual battery cells wired in parallel. Each of the bricks has fuses so that it can be bypassed if necessary. But, i don't believe that is software controlled or could be reversed.
So, I don't know of any way Tesla could otherwise lock out capacity than limiting the charge voltage.
It also would not be good to have a bunch of batteries completely unused and then suddenly introduce them to the rest of a well used pack. That would severely unbalance the pack and cause bad charging/discharging behavior.

Thank you. Every day in every way etc.

 

[Droschke]

I have to say that’s not my understanding of it. I believe capping involves restricting access to a certain part of the battery. Achieved through software. As was seen when Tesla remotely made the capped portion available during hurricane Florence. Then reversed that again, remotely, afterwards.

The capping, as it has been exhaustively pointed out in this thread with evidence, is done through voltage capping. If I understand you correctly, you think it's done by excluding certain number of physical cells from being charged, yielding a "smaller" battery. That is incorrect.

The hurricane Florence example you have cited was also accomplished by capping voltage, as was the software locked 75's sold as 60.

 

[mjmiron]

I am hopeful we get some good news in the next two weeks about someone getting a battery cap reversed or a new battery.

Djras- hypothetical if they are capping the available capacity of our batteries is the charge fluctuating between the modules when charging now?

 

[tga]

Shrug. All analogies have some distinctions. Same basic thing: the performance of your car changed after you bought it caused by a software design (to address a hardware issue). Whether the software was there out the factory, or they flashed the ECU, or did an OTA doesn't much matter.

Not true. The 986/987 rev range counters were in the ECU code when the cars left the factory. Nothing was changed afterwards, other than the counter data stored (or, according to your article, Porsche's interpretation of the counters vis a vis extended warranty eligibility).

 

[Ferrycraigs]

The capping, as it has been exhaustively pointed out in this thread with evidence, is done through voltage capping. If I understand you correctly, you think it's done by excluding certain number of physical cells from being charged, yielding a "smaller" battery. That is incorrect.

The hurricane Florence example you have cited was also accomplished by capping voltage, as was the software locked 75's sold as 60.

Thanks. I didn’t think sections of the battery were not being charged, I thought that they were all being charged but only some were being made available. I was indeed grabbing absolutely the wrong end of the stick. But I think I have it now. And it’s good news. If I can indeed now charge to 90% or 95% without it being in the old 'danger zone', and thereby recoup the lost range then that is a MUCH better place to be than on my version of how it was achieved. Today is therefore a good news day.

 

[Droschke]

I am hopeful we get some good news in the next two weeks about someone getting a battery cap reversed or a new battery.

A new battery? I strongly doubt it.

Outside of this software capacity cap, Tesla has replaced batteries when they found charging issues with the pack. Example:

I know of a previous 2014 S60 owner who suddenly (in 2018) discovered that charging to 80% was giving him only 122 RM instead of the usual 158 RM in the past. Tesla found charging faults with his pack and, IIRC, he was given a loaner battery till his battery to be fixed/replaced.

 

[Droschke]

If I can indeed now charge to 90% or 95% without it being in the old 'danger zone', and thereby recoup the lost range then that is a MUCH better place to be than on my version of how it was achieved.

95% requires a strong chess game skill (less than 5 kw)

 

[Ferrycraigs]

95% requires a strong chess game skill (less than 5 kw)

I am going to have to conduct a brand new Supercharger timing test.

No probs with the chess issue. I am on 2019.16.3.2 and am staying there until I read conclusively that Tesla has resolved battery gate and chargegate. So chess remains unavailable. The labours we have to endure! Who would have thought.

 

[Lukez]

Well I was unaffected until I charged to 100% for a trip yesterday, have lost 1kwh since that charge. Will continue to monitor daily and take screenshot.

 

[Droschke]

I drive a Smart ED with only 100km range in perfect conditions. I have somehow been able to drive 50000 km in 6 years. How did I get by with such low range. It’s a mystery. Guess I charged up every night.

What does that have to do with the topic of this thread?

 

[Droschke]

Well I was unaffected until I charged to 100% for a trip yesterday, have lost 1kwh since that charge. Will continue to monitor daily and take screenshot.

1kWh? Not a bad news in comparison and seemingly not capped.

 

[Lukez]

1kWh? Not a bad news in comparison and seemingly not capped.

Agreed but I've been monitoring daily since June and it has been the same. I'm a afraid this is the beginning of the end but I'm hoping it's just a calculation error and comes back but we'll see.

 

[BigNick]

Then it would be nice for a non-impacted owner to actually show us the battery capacity they still have (not the rated miles); or show us that they actually were able to get the rated miles on a long trip driving at rated consumption.

I did a drive-until-shut-off last month. All one trip. I charged to 100% SOC immediately before.

 

[KArnold]

I'm hoping that starting the install and then pulling the power and then repeating until it gives up will do it but I don't want to try that until I'm back home which is not for another week

In my 100d a year ago, an update started. It ran for a while and then said "verifying update". Thinking that implied the actual installation was done I moved the car 10" into the garage. The update aborted, rolled back, and i wasn't prompted again for 3+ weeks which i assume was a new download. I actually asked support and they stated the obvious - you shouldn't drive while updating and I had to wait for a new deployment.

If it's helpful to anyone I'd be happy to try to repeat that process. I'm no longer intetested in updates. Of course I have no idea when that might be.