Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[ran349]

I think you’re confusing EPA rating with the number displayed on the vehicle display. Hell, the multiplier in my Model 3 changed earlier this year to “give” me more range. It’s completely arbitrary and has no effect on actual range.

Interesting, do you have a source for that information?

 

[Matias]

With the recent posts in the last few days from those that were previously not effected but are just now starting to be, it's clear this will eventually get everyone.

I’m still not affected. Majority is not.

 

[bhzmark]

I didn't dispute what you wrote but didn't understand what you were taking issue with. I see now and thanks for explaining. I was misremembering that I thought someone else explained the Porsche counter as resulting in some performance changes on the car, but I see now it was just used to deny warranty claims ? Or the purchase of extended warranties ?

Everything I wrote was correct. I'm not sure you are clear on how these counters work. The rev counters are not a limit of any kind; performance, range, or otherwise. They are simply a reporting/"tattle tale" mechanism that counts the number of times the spark plugs have fired in certain high rev ranges and records the total engine hours at the last one.

I have. Twice. They worked just fine. A 986 Boxster (bought new) and a 996 GT3 (used/CPO). Both have type 1 over revs from me bouncing off the rev limiter at autocrosses. The GT3 came with a small number of type 2's, but has had a few hundred hours of run time since the last one. It still runs like new.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

Great observation. So, this might be either a hoax/mistake, or we really have bad packs that Tesla knows about and instead of issuing warranty replacement Tesla has chosen the cheap route to "protect" and "prolong" till the 8 years expires.

I think this is quite an important/interesting point. Lots and lots of suggestions previously that this whole issue was related to frequent use of Supercharging. But there are many people that are affected that have not used supercharges frequently, yet others that use them more than any other method of charging yet are not affected. I agree with others that that seems to point to frequency of Supercharging not being the trigger.

I certainly don’t think it’s a hoax, but it may be a mistake. I assume the coding said something like 'search for X and if you find it, do A, else do nothing'. So my money is on a coding problem with 'search for X' finding false positives, or 'else do nothing' is being interpreted as 'do A'. (Please don’t criticise my clearly superior coding skills!)

Of course that is only one of a number of options, but it seems to answer the 'what’s the trigger' or 'why my car' question and I’m struggling to think of credible alternative reasons. On the positive side, if it is indeed poor coding, then a solution seems both possible and likely. Anyone know where to buy patience pills, mine seem to have run out.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

I’m still not affected. Majority is not.

It may be worth remembering that the battery capping issue (as opposed to slow charging issue) only affects, some, pre facelift cars with smaller batteries. So the numbers are always going to be a small % of the fleet. It would be interesting to know what % of pre facelift 85s and below, are affected.

 

[Matias]

It may be worth remembering that the battery capping issue (as opposed to slow charging issue) only affects, some, pre facelift cars with smaller batteries. So the numbers are always going to be a small % of the fleet. It would be interesting to know what % of pre facelift 85s and below, are affected.

Yes. My car is 85D -15 pre facelift. No change in max range. I don’t know about supercharging speed, since I rarely supercharge and I have not monitored it.

 

[BigNick]

So, I gather the car has not been supercharged (or very little)?

I may have Supercharged about 7 times in about 7K miles since I bought the car. I bought used with 23K on the odometer so I don’t know what the previous owner did. From the CarFax I know the car was originally registered near Houston, Texas - so not likely to have been charged (AC or DC) in temperatures under 50F/10C.

That my position as well. You never know what you would get.

With my luck I would get a 90 V1.
If I truly needed a replacement battery I would be willing to pay a pro-rated price to upgrade to a 100 or 90 V3. Most likely Tesla wouldn’t do the 100 since it isn’t a direct drop-in replacement. The 90 is.

Edit: fixed b0rked quote-reply structure

 

[VT_EE]

Interesting, do you have a source for that information?

Yes, I’m the source. My vehicle used to have have 310 miles 100% range. A software update last spring increased that to 325 (although I never got more than 321 due to degradation). The proof of a multiplier change for me was the moving of the “rated” line on the energy graph. Prior to the update, it was at ~240Wh/m. After the update the line dropped to around ~230Wh/m. It was well documented in various TMC threads that initially Tesla arbitrary reduced the EPA-filed max range for the M3LR RWD (probably to help sell AWD variants that had a legit 310 mile max range). My real world energy usage never actually changed as far as I could tell. This example is why everyone should take the battery meter range number with a grain of salt. Tesla can and does change the multiplier used on the battery meter. Use the Energy app to predict actual energy usage.

 

[jensk2]

Hmmm... all 74 cells in a brick are parallel wired together. So, if an individual cell fuse blows then only that brick has limited capacity (73 parallel batteries instead of 74). The 6 bricks are then wiired in series to make a module and 16 modules make up our 85kWh packs.

So, an individual cell failure would be 1/7104 (0.014%) reduction in capacity. It wouldn't affect brick or pack voltage. Just usable kWh.

While true that the maximum total cell energy would only fall 0.014% it cannot be utilized, without active and constant string/cell balancing

Example: If the disconnected cell was in your overall lowest capacity string, your total capacity could be reduced up to 73/74 and go to 98,6% (Loss 1,4%)
If it was in your highest capacity string degradation could be down to 0%


EDIT: Realized after posting, that others have commented similar, but they seem to ignore that if the cell taken out, happens to be in the best string, capacity loss could be down to 0 - so keeping comment

 

[DJRas]

Yes, I’m the source. My vehicle used to have have 310 miles 100% range. A software update last spring increased that to 325 (although I never got more than 321 due to degradation). The proof of a multiplier change for me was the moving of the “rated” line on the energy graph. Prior to the update, it was at ~240Wh/m. After the update the line dropped to around ~230Wh/m. It was well documented in various TMC threads that initially Tesla arbitrary reduced the EPA-filed max range for the M3LR RWD (probably to help sell AWD variants that had a legit 310 mile max range). My real world energy usage never actually changed as far as I could tell. This example is why everyone should take the battery meter range number with a grain of salt. Tesla can and does change the multiplier used on the battery meter. Use the Energy app to predict actual energy usage.

We all do know the rated range has little relationship to actual miles available.
The problem is that Tesla IS using that number for warranty replacement purposes while artificially manipulating those numbers in their favor and deceptively reassuring us owners see lower degradation than actually experienced.

 

[Droschke]

Not if the new slower supercharger charging reduces the dentrite growth

And, even better, having the BMS detect the need and have the superchargers automatically generate short bursts of current to flatten spiny growths on our lithium metal anodes ...

Fire-starting battery dendrites go with the flow

 

[SmartElectric]

I don’t think anyone is contesting Tesla makes great cars. It’s the fact that we paid for a battery and size with the expectation of a gradual degradation

Expectations.
That is at the heart of it, eh?

Whereas I drive two EV’s with vastly different maximum ranges and have always been able to go where I need to.
If you can drive to your needs, then expectations should be met, eh?

My S85 has less range than a new 100D, but yet I’m perfectly able to drive to my needs and put on tens of thousands of km per year.

Expecting gradual range loss for the life of the vehicle is at the heart of your concern.
Whereas the reality varies depending on many factors.
And yet you can still use the product you bought to a very effective end, getting where you need to go.

 

[Droschke]

I think this is quite an important/interesting point. Lots and lots of suggestions previously that this whole issue was related to frequent use of Supercharging. But there are many people that are affected that have not used supercharges frequently, yet others that use them more than any other method of charging yet are not affected. I agree with others that that seems to point to frequency of Supercharging not being the trigger.

I certainly don’t think it’s a hoax, but it may be a mistake. I assume the coding said something like 'search for X and if you find it, do A, else do nothing'. So my money is on a coding problem with 'search for X' finding false positives, or 'else do nothing' is being interpreted as 'do A'. (Please don’t criticise my clearly superior coding skills!)

Of course that is only one of a number of options, but it seems to answer the 'what’s the trigger' or 'why my car' question and I’m struggling to think of credible alternative reasons. On the positive side, if it is indeed poor coding, then a solution seems both possible and likely. Anyone know where to buy patience pills, mine seem to have run out.

Agreed with the entire post, except the "hoax" part disagreement. I used it as a noun (you don't see what Tesla has done here all over it?) and not as a verb:

Definition:

Noun: hoax

Something intended to deceive; deliberate trickery intended to gain an advantage
= dupery, fraud, fraudulence, humbug, put-on, spoof

Verb: hoax
Subject to a playful hoax or joke
= play a joke on, pull someone's leg

 

[SmartElectric]

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

Driving a low range EV and then getting back into a Tesla is an illuminating experience.
You wouldn’t feel so cheated and bitter if you realized range loss is a thing, and your expectations of gradual loss over the life of the car are not met, but that isn’t a problem, it’s just the nature of the propulsion method and technology of this age. Enjoy driving a car with 5x the range of my Smart. I do when I get in our S85.

 

[Droschke]

It may be worth remembering that the battery capping issue (as opposed to slow charging issue) only affects, some, pre facelift cars with smaller batteries. So the numbers are always going to be a small % of the fleet. It would be interesting to know what % of pre facelift 85s and below, are affected.

Exactly -

“a small percentage of owners”: Explain what that means, what's the percentage? Percentage of which total? All this needs to be communicated with this "small percentage of owners”.

 

[SmartElectric]

You should offer some empathy.

For what reason would I empathize when the entire thread is full of over blown hysterical owners with self generated expectations.

Gradual range loss. That is your expectation. Disabuse yourself of this false hope and embrace that the technology of our vehicles is a work in progress. Get in and drive. Stop with the drama.

 

[Lukez]

For what reason would I empathize when the entire thread is full of over blown hysterical owners with self generated expectations.

Gradual range loss. That is your expectation. Disabuse yourself of this false hope and embrace that the technology of our vehicles is a work in progress. Get in and drive. Stop with the drama.

I think the issue is communication from the manufacturer. They are lying/hiding/not forthcoming/whateveryouwanttocallit with information about this update. For example, if they released this software update to prevent battery fires, what happens to owners that have been refusing to go on V9 software and do updates? Are they now at risk of having a car fire in their garage while they sleep?
If it's not about the fires, then why do this cap at all? Prevent future degration? Well they just degraded them now instead of the future, what's the point in that?
I can't see how you can say this is about expectation. The manufacturer physically capped battery capacity of vehicles they do not own without an explanation. How can you possibly view this as being ok?

 

[Droschke]

Driving a low range EV and then getting back into a Tesla is an illuminating experience.
You wouldn’t feel so cheated and bitter if you realized range loss is a thing, and your expectations of gradual loss over the life of the car are not met, but that isn’t a problem, it’s just the nature of the propulsion method and technology of this age. Enjoy driving a car with 5x the range of my Smart. I do when I get in our S85.

You keep saying "gradual loss" and I keep telling you it's not gradual but a sudden loss by one software update. Very frustrating.

Also, this Smart vs. Tesla comparison/analogy is totally irrelevant to the topic being discussed here. Very annoying.

Please get back to us when you get impacted by 30+ miles loss with your Tesla

 

[SmartElectric]

You keep saying "gradual loss" and I keep telling you it's not gradual but a sudden loss by one software update. Very frustrating.

I am deeply informed on this topic. Read every post.
I understand this range loss is not gradual like owners expect.
That’s my point.

Stop expecting things. Live with what you have. Enjoy driving. Tesla has the safety and functionality of its fleet to manage and so far has shown a will to focus on safety above all other concerns.

I’d be totally fine with whatever Tesla needs to program on my car with respect to safety and long term function.

 

[Droschke]

For what reason would I empathize when the entire thread is full of over blown hysterical owners with self generated expectations.

Gradual range loss. That is your expectation. Disabuse yourself of this false hope and embrace that the technology of our vehicles is a work in progress. Get in and drive. Stop with the drama.

Irrelevant to the topic and an absolute nonsense insult to the impacted owners. Enjoy your range till it's taken away from you. Heck, you might end up with another Smart