-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
2012 P85 HV battery replacement options -- need perspective.
- Thread starter airsailor
- Start date
ElectricIAC
Good-Natured Rascal
Shouldn’t that have reset the battery warranty to 4/50 from install?
No, because all they have to do with a battery replacement under warranty is honor the original 8 year warranty, which in my case ended December of 2020. When someone pays out of pocket for a battery, the 4/50 warranty kicks in.
Did Tesla ever respond to you regarding the expected charging speeds and performance after a new battery install?
Did they give you any estimates on the differences between remanufactured and a new one?
What happens to your old battery? I wonder of it has any value?
Did they give you any estimates on the differences between remanufactured and a new one?
What happens to your old battery? I wonder of it has any value?
have you received new battery ? I have been waiting for mine for months !
A
A
ElectricIAC
Good-Natured Rascal
9 months in a loaner or uber credits? They could have just given you a replacement car at that point based on $100/day + cost of battery.
Edit: I read that as 9 months not for months.
@tlP85 ,@Droschke, @Slumpp1, So here's the update: Tesla did respond to my queries and assured me that the new battery capacity and supercharging rates would not be capped. They told me I could expect 100% SOC range of 280 rated miles. I dropped my car at the SC on Aug 24 and got a Model Y Performance for a loaner. The battery arrived and was installed by Sept 1 and I picked up car on Sept 2, so a wait of 10 days. Total cost with ancillary parts before NYS tax was $19,256. I have charged the car to 100% twice and it showed 269 mile and 270 miles, so 10 miles below what they told me to expect. Max supercharging rate has been 114 kW for 364 mi/hour, with the charging remaining above 104 kW and 330 mi/hr to at least 50% SOC and tapering to 80 kW until 100% charged, so this is a dramatic improvement in charging speed. I also noted that the cooling fan(s?) were not audible during supercharging where they had been very loudly running when charging the old battery pack.
So, very mildly disappointed not to see 280 miles total range. But, my understanding is that the 1014116 -00-C pack is actually the current 100 kW pack minus two modules, and if so that equates to 87.5 kW, not 90 kw. Interestingly, the label on the battery specifies 350V but doesn't mention kW capacity at all. If the original 85 kW packs had 265 miles at 100%, an increase to 87.5 should then be 273 miles at 100%, so what I am seeing is in the ballpark. In any case, the usable range is significantly better and I can now do the round trip into NYC from our home upstate on a 90% charge without the need to stop and supercharge on the way home, so this is a real-life benefit for my frequent commutes. Also worth noting that the MYP loaner had 100% range of 263, so now my 2012 MS has better range than that.
Overall, I'm pleased with this decision to go for the very expensive new battery. I enjoyed driving the MYP loaner for 10 days but had one of those "Ahhhhh...,." moments when I settled back into the seat of my own old MS P85 (Or should I say MS P87.5 ? ;^) We'll see how well the car holds up going forward...fingers crossed.
So, very mildly disappointed not to see 280 miles total range. But, my understanding is that the 1014116 -00-C pack is actually the current 100 kW pack minus two modules, and if so that equates to 87.5 kW, not 90 kw. Interestingly, the label on the battery specifies 350V but doesn't mention kW capacity at all. If the original 85 kW packs had 265 miles at 100%, an increase to 87.5 should then be 273 miles at 100%, so what I am seeing is in the ballpark. In any case, the usable range is significantly better and I can now do the round trip into NYC from our home upstate on a 90% charge without the need to stop and supercharge on the way home, so this is a real-life benefit for my frequent commutes. Also worth noting that the MYP loaner had 100% range of 263, so now my 2012 MS has better range than that.
Overall, I'm pleased with this decision to go for the very expensive new battery. I enjoyed driving the MYP loaner for 10 days but had one of those "Ahhhhh...,." moments when I settled back into the seat of my own old MS P85 (Or should I say MS P87.5 ? ;^) We'll see how well the car holds up going forward...fingers crossed.
If you're seeing 270 miles on a RWD S, then you have ~79 kWh.
The 265 on the original "85" was ~78 kWh.
The last one of these packs I have data on, pretty new from Tesla (built April'22) had 87 kWh available (with about 2000 miles on the pack) and showed 295 rated miles on a RWD vehicle.
I'll just add this note to the pile of occurrences that point to not every "new" pack is likely not actually "new", since a -10% difference from actually new seems pretty high.
Edit: In hindsight, this instance is more likely just a software locked pack if it is in fact new.
Last edited:
That's what I have with the same battery, except that My car is a non-P S85 and I believe my pack is locked at the top by some kWh.
Any idea what kW you were pulling right before 100% SOC?
Also, do you have substantial regen at 100%? (My car does)
Would you be willing to post a picture of that label?
Thanks for all the feedback.
@wk057 , This is very interesting info, thank you -- The car was first charged to 100% just as I picked it up from the SC. Since it showed 269, not 280, I had the rep put a note in the system that I am concerned that the range is not what I was promised. I think I will now go back to them about it and see if indeed it has been software locked. The labeling/sizing of the batteries is confusing, if the original 85kW pack was actually about 78kW -- does this mean that there is theoretically 85 kW capacity but only 78kW is actually usable/available? And, if so, I have what they told me is a "90 kW pack" but only about 79 kW is usable? Jeesh. I see that my invoice from Tesla states that it's a 90kW pack, even though the label on the pack does not. And, when you say "the last one of these packs you have data on," do you mean a pack with the same part number as the one I have, 1014116-00-C ? I will note that the case for the pack is pristine and clearly brand new. Thanks for you help with this.
@Droschke, I can't recall exactly what it was pulling just before 100% SOC -- I think it held 80 kW all the way to the end but maybe it tapered down from there in the last minute or two. I wasn't planning to charge it to 100% again soon but perhaps I will and will report back. I also didn't notice if I had regen available at 100% -- that would be interesting to know as I guess it suggests that there is more capacity if it's available. I'll report back if Tesla responds but I'm not holding my breath.
@Droschke, I can't recall exactly what it was pulling just before 100% SOC -- I think it held 80 kW all the way to the end but maybe it tapered down from there in the last minute or two. I wasn't planning to charge it to 100% again soon but perhaps I will and will report back. I also didn't notice if I had regen available at 100% -- that would be interesting to know as I guess it suggests that there is more capacity if it's available. I'll report back if Tesla responds but I'm not holding my breath.
Attachments
Last edited:
There's definitely some weird stuff going on over at Tesla with regard to the 100-type S/X modules. While I'm fairly confident as to what is actually happening, the problem is that 99% of the data and info I have is not 100% conclusive in this regard. Suffice it to say, I'm not convinced that the cells that are going into these "new" 14-module packs are actually new in every situation The chassis are easy to make. (If it's old stuff in a new shell is it still technically new?) The cells, not so much.
As for the labeling of the older packs, there's some huge threads (some started by me) from ages ago where this is discussed in length... but overall seems just to be unnecessary marketing BS. They could have just as well sold it as the Model S 80 and no one would have cared. At least then the rounding would have make some sense.
I'd suggest a CAN tool/CAN logger to validate.
As for the labeling of the older packs, there's some huge threads (some started by me) from ages ago where this is discussed in length... but overall seems just to be unnecessary marketing BS. They could have just as well sold it as the Model S 80 and no one would have cared. At least then the rounding would have make some sense.
I'd suggest a CAN tool/CAN logger to validate.
ElectricIAC
Good-Natured Rascal
Thanks for posting the label. It sure reads differently with no capacity mentioned. It does show it was made in August of 2022. On your next charge to 100%, note the kw being pulled at 98-99%. Also note kw regen right after 100% charge. On my 1014116-00-C, I pull 38 kw at 99% and get 270 miles range at 100%. My regen with a full battery is near 50 kw. I believe I'm locked at the top (I'm OK with it).
@Droschke , Thanks, very helpful. I will note these things and report back. It's definitely interesting that we both get precisely 270 -- this suggests to me that the batteries are software limited despite their assurance that it wouldn't be. I've messaged them and I'm going to press this issue, even though I'm fine with 270, simply because they told me 280, and I based part of my decision on that. One hurdle is that almost no one I talk to in the service department seems actually to know anything about this stuff.
The 270 does not seem to be uncommon. I've noticed two other recipients of 1014116-00-C besides yourself and me, reporting ~270 miles range as well. Also, a European owner who was initially locked to lower than 270 miles and paid extra to get the 270 range. Looks like it can go up to 297 miles, depending on what's in the pack and if they have locked some capacity or not. My curiosity is why your label lacks the kWh capacity notation.
My understanding is that this battery version has been around for just over 2 years - initially it labeled as a 350v / 85kwh pack. Folks here had concluded that it likely has 100 chemistry and has around 87 kWh total capacity. After some time, the part number changed and the label stated 90kwh/350v but folks were reporting the same capacity and charging profile as early installs. Then, a new part number came out without explicitly stating kWh, but Tesla service advisors came to call this the 90kwh replacement battery. Also, there were some reports of this battery going into 70s/75s with a software lock. In addition, folks started reporting that Tesla was adjusting the suspension with new battery.
For what it’s worth, here’s my CANBUS data from my classic 2012 when this battery was installed in 2020.
For what it’s worth, here’s my CANBUS data from my classic 2012 when this battery was installed in 2020.
Attachments
Similar threads
