"Acceleration Boost" option, discussion as to which models and how much quicker

[Knightshade]

It's very coincidental that Model 3 980s are failing in a seemingly similar manner.

Not really.

Tesla has sold hundreds of thousands of cars with 980s in them by now, and there's only so many ways such a relatively simple (compared to an ICE engine) unit can fail.

One member posted the part number of the replacement part: SAME AS THE Y.

Yeah- why wouldn't it be? The 980 DU being used today is the same in both cars so you'd expect a replacement part to be the same in both.


How you think that's relevant to, as you wrote it " I think it's quite a bit of the early one" on the Model 3 remains a mystery though.

The TSB clearly says it was one specific batch of Model Ys, in 2020. Essentially saying "Hey, this shipment got skipped by quality control"

So it only applies to those specific 2020 Model Ys made between certain dates using one specific shipment of parts.

That has nothing at all to do with early 3s, which are from 2018...

You appear to have constructed a much more complex narrative unsupported by any evidence (indeed contradicted by the LACK of such evidence- where's the TSB for the 3 from ANY year for this issue, let alone the "early" ones?)

.

 

[john5520]

Tesla has sold hundreds of thousands of cars with 980s in them by now, and there's only so many ways such a relatively simple (compared to an ICE engine) unit can fail.

Yes, but they ARE failing which is most important to note. They shouldn't be. Of course they are not ALL going to fail, or at the same time, but there's a disturbing trend that seem to be developing as they age.

Yeah- why wouldn't it be? The 980 DU being used today is the same in both cars so you'd expect a replacement part to be the same in both.

Thank you. And that's why I'm connecting the dots. My argument is only a hypothesis for the time being.

 

[Knightshade]

Yes, but they ARE failing which is most important to note. They shouldn't be.

This is complete and utter nonsense.

Nobody makes a motor or inverter that never, ever, ever fails.

You've so far cited 3 failed units.

For a car that has sold by now north of 700,000 units.

Of course they are not ALL going to fail, or at the same time, but there's a disturbing trend that seem to be developing as they age.

Only, it seems, in your imagination.

Especially when the document you cited doesn't even apply to roughly 90-something% of them ever made.

My argument is only a hypothesis for the time being.

That's...being very generous...

 

[john5520]

Nobody makes a motor or inverter that never, ever, ever fails.

This is about the only you said that made any sense. And you're right, but they shouldn't so early. Which is why there are TSBs:
As you can see, there have been a few 980 TSBs over the years for various things including the inverter:

Inverter:
SB-18-40-005 Tesla Technical Service Bulletin

Can Transceiver errors:
https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2018/MC-10142994-9999.pdf

Updated version of the 980:
https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2018/MC-10142979-9999.pdf

Replace Ground Strap:
SB-18-17-003 Tesla Technical Service Bulletin

Coolant Manifold Bolt:
SB-18-40-002 Tesla Technical Service Bulletin

Inverter fluid coupling:
SB-19-40-001 Tesla Technical Service Bulletin

Rear Drive Unit Breather:
SB-19-40-002 Tesla Technical Service Bulletin


Unfortunately, this isn't a complete list, and there very likely will be more to come. There are others, but tough to find. Some bulletins I'm sure are internal to Tesla only. But surely, some of these should apply to some members
with early 980s.

You've so far cited 3 failed units.

This comment is so laughable. Just like your arguments regarding Phantom Braking.


For anyone who even cares or have some time to kill, search this forum and the web for these terms and see how hit many hits you get for Failed Rear Drive Units - most in 2018 (some 2019s for sure).

-Your car suffered a failure and will no longer drive. Contact Service Center
-Rear Motor Disabled - ok to drive" "Vehicle shutting down"
-Vehicle may not restart' 'Service is required'. Car continued to be serviceable.
-cannot maintain vehicle power

Just like phantom braking, this is a much talked about subject. The good news though, is it seems that Tesla is doing something about it. It's not doomsday, but unfortunately, it was more prevalent in the early 980s

 

[Knightshade]

This is about the only you said that made any sense. And you're right, but they shouldn't so early.

And 99.99% of them aren't.

Which is why there are TSBs:
As you can see, there have been a few 980 TSBs over the years:
...

Unfortunately, this isn't a complete list.

Nor is it a useful one.

For example your first TSB is for 2017 Model 3s.

The Performance, the one you cited as thinking has an issue, didn't even exist in 2017.

Second one...huh...also predates existence of the P3D.... (and isn't even a problem with the motor OR inverter- it's a problem with a communication transceiver)

Third one...huh, ALSO predates the P3D and only covers 2017s...weird...

4th one...this is doubly embarrassing for you... not only is it AGAIN a 2017-only TSB, it's not even for a drive unit failure... it's for a noise problem related to a strap attached to the rear DU. The DU itself works fine in this situation.


Next one... oops... ALSO 2017 only... and also not an actual DU or inverter failure... this was a factory error where a specific production run didn't secure some bolts properly, which might cause coolant to leak. The fix? Install a missing bolt. OOH WHAT A TERRIBLE FAILURE OF DESIGN....no, wait, the opposite of that....

6th one... oops... ANOTHER 2017 TSB... and again it's a factory error where a specific batch of cars might've been built without the breather being installed...again not a mechanical failure of the DU or inverter AT ALL.



So to sum up... zero of those related to the P3D at all

In fact all of them predate it.

Mostly they're factory assembly mistakes from a few years ago on specific batches of LR RWD Model 3s only...not endemic design issues at all.

Most of them don't even lead to drive unit failures even ON the 2017 design they haven't used for ANY P3D or Ys that seem to be your concern.

There are others, but tough to find. Some bulletins I'm sure are internal to Tesla only

On what basis are you "sure" of that?

I ask because that would in fact be illegal, and has been since 2016, prior to the Model 3 existing.

So again you appear to be basing your ideas on imaginary things counter to known facts.

. But surely, some of these should apply to some members
with early 980s.

FLAG ON THE PLAY!

MOVING THE GOALPOSTS.


Here's your previous claim-

If you've got the cash, hold off and wait for the newer Performance 3s. There seem to be some issues Tesla is dealing with with the current 980s

So here you express claims the performance 3s are having issues (despite 0 of the TSBs you just posted relating to the P) and that it's issues with "the current 980s" when all your TSBs you just posted are for the 3 year old version of the 980, many revisions long since replaced... (and most of those weren't actually issues WITH the motor or inverter as you later suggest)


Now it's moved to the "early" 980s.... maybe you went back and noticed none of your evidence supports what you ACTUALLY said so you're trying to pretend you said something totally different now?

unfortunately, it was more prevalent in the early 980s

Then why were you telling a CURRENT potential P buyer to wait to buy, and claiming that CURRENT 980s have significant problems?

 

[john5520]

And 99.99% of them aren't.



Nor is it a useful one.

For example your first TSB is for 2017 Model 3s.

The Performance, the one you cited as thinking has an issue, didn't even exist in 2017.

Second one...huh...also predates existence of the P3D.... (and isn't even a problem with the motor OR inverter- it's a problem with a communication transceiver)

Third one...huh, ALSO predates the P3D and only covers 2017s...weird...

4th one...this is doubly embarrassing for you... not only is it AGAIN a 2017-only TSB, it's not even for a drive unit failure... it's for a noise problem related to a strap attached to the rear DU. The DU itself works fine in this situation.


Next one... oops... ALSO 2017 only... and also not an actual DU or inverter failure... this was a factory error where a specific production run didn't secure some bolts properly, which might cause coolant to leak. The fix? Install a missing bolt. OOH WHAT A TERRIBLE FAILURE OF DESIGN....no, wait, the opposite of that....

6th one... oops... ANOTHER 2017 TSB... and again it's a factory error where a specific batch of cars might've been built without the breather being installed...again not a mechanical failure of the DU or inverter AT ALL.



So to sum up... zero of those related to the P3D at all

In fact all of them predate it.

Mostly they're factory assembly mistakes from a few years ago on specific batches of LR RWD Model 3s only...not endemic design issues at all.

Most of them don't even lead to drive unit failures even ON the 2017 design they haven't used for ANY P3D or Ys that seem to be your concern.





On what basis are you "sure" of that?

I ask because that would in fact be illegal, and has been since 2016, prior to the Model 3 existing.

So again you appear to be basing your ideas on imaginary things counter to known facts.





FLAG ON THE PLAY!

MOVING THE GOALPOSTS.


Here's your previous claim-



So here you express claims the performance 3s are having issues (despite 0 of the TSBs you just posted relating to the P) and that it's issues with "the current 980s" when all your TSBs you just posted are for the 3 year old version of the 980, many revisions long since replaced... (and most of those weren't actually issues WITH the motor or inverter as you later suggest)


Now it's moved to the "early" 980s.... maybe you went back and noticed none of your evidence supports what you ACTUALLY said so you're trying to pretend you said something totally different now?







Then why were you telling a CURRENT potential P buyer to wait to buy, and claiming that CURRENT 980s have significant problems?

Blah, blah, blah, you bring nothing to the table as usual. Now you're trying to claim the 980s in the Performance are 'special'.

Right on this very forum, there are Performance 3s having their 980s / inverters replaced.
And they can be found all over the web.

The Rear Drive Units are ever evolving. The are always updates and new versions. Later Performance 3s will have updated versions.

And I clearly said that was not an exhaustive list, just what I could dig up. And early 980s would include 2017.

Plus, since you do NO research whatsoever apparently, you have no leg to stand on, as usual.

Bring something of substance to the table rather than BS.

 

[Apprunner]

Lets bring some rational thought into this. I read just about every Rear drive unit failure when i come upon it and there have been a few but the actual posts in this forum are very very rare. Given the number of P3Ds on the road, if there was a tendency to fail, you would see waaaay more posts about it. Have you seen the threads on fuel pump issues on the E90 3 series or the IMS bearing issues on the older Porsches or the tranny issues on the Acura TL? These were actual problems and soooo many threads were prevalent on the forums because many people had issues. Given the extreme infrequency of those issues here (and i wager most P3D buyers are enthusiasts so would visit these forums), i doubt its much of an issue. If there is an actual issue i expect many many threads on it and i can take action accordingly.

Edit...I do see one issue prevalent on all model 3s and its the 12V battery going kaput early. i see quite a few topics on the 12V battery through the forum which means...its probably a legit issue.

 

[john5520]

Lets bring some rational thought into this. I read just about every Rear drive unit failure when i come upon it and there have been a few but the actual posts in this forum are very very rare. Given the number of P3Ds on the road, if there was a tendency to fail, you would see waaaay more posts about it. Have you seen the threads on fuel pump issues on the E90 3 series or the IMS bearing issues on the older Porsches or the tranny issues on the Acura TL? These were actual problems and soooo many threads were prevalent on the forums because many people had issues. Given the extreme infrequency of those issues here (and i wager most P3D buyers are enthusiasts so would visit these forums), i doubt its much of an issue. If there is an actual issue i expect many many threads on it and i can take action accordingly.

Edit...I do see one issue prevalent on all model 3s and its the 12V battery going kaput early. i see quite a few topics on the 12V battery through the forum which means...its probably a legit issue.

The model 3 hasn't racked up enough miles across the board to know how much of an issue it really is. Some failures have been early, and some late. Places like Reddit have way more posts about it. The search terms used matter a whole lot.

It really comes down to potential. Early Model 3s with 980 (including the P) will more than likely have a greater potential for failure. Now, given that some bad inverters made into the Y and they share the same inverter as the 3, if I was
in the market, I'd wait. Does that mean you'll have an issue if you buy one now. Of course not.

Overall though, I would agree, it's still rare at the moment.

 

[Apprunner]

The model 3 hasn't racked up enough miles across the board to know how much of an issue it really is. Some failures have been early, and some late. Places like Reddit have way more posts about it. The search terms used matter a whole lot.

It really comes down to potential. Early Model 3s with 980 (including the P) will more than likely have a greater potential for failure. Now, given that some bad inverters made into the Y and they share the same inverter as the 3, if I was
in the market, I'd wait. Does that mean you'll have an issue if you buy one now. Of course not.

Overall though, I would agree, it's still rare at the moment.

The P3D has 120k mile, 8 year warranty. I wouldn't really worry about it to be frank.

 

[john5520]

The P3D has 120k mile, 8 year warranty. I wouldn't really worry about it to be frank.

And that's cool. And the repair is usually fairly quick. It's just the idea of possibly getting stranded is worrying.

 

[M109Rider]

And that's cool. And the repair is usually fairly quick. It's just the idea of possibly getting stranded is worrying.

I think this thread clearly shows your evidence around the 980 rear drive unit failures being a problem is exaggerated and inaccurate.
Yet, you ignore that, and continue to state otherwise.
Spreading non factual fear is not helping potential owners make good decisions.

I’m trying to figure out what your motivation is for trying to create inaccurate fear around these DU’s failures? Care to share

 

[john5520]

I think this thread clearly shows your evidence around the 980 rear drive unit failures being a problem is exaggerated and inaccurate.
Yet, you ignore that, and continue to state otherwise.
Spreading non factual fear is not helping potential owners make good decisions.

I’m trying to figure out what your motivation is for trying to create inaccurate fear around these DU’s failures? Care to share

Where have I exaggerated it and what's non-factual? Please specify if you're going to make an accusation.

 

[Knightshade]

Blah, blah, blah, you bring nothing to the table as usual.

You mean besides pointing out that:

Your list of reasons not to buy a 2020 Model 3 was 100% issues that stopped existing in roughly 2017.

Your claim there's 'secret' other ones internal to Tesla would be a violation of federal law so it's yet ANOTHER 100%-counter-to-fact claim from you.

Your goalpost moving of "Don't trust CURRENT 980s.... err... no, wait, now I mean EARLY ones..."



But yeah, besides pointing out nothing you said makes any sense at all I've brought nothing to the table.


Consider what that says about your own contributions to said table now

Now you're trying to claim the 980s in the Performance are 'special'

Not even slightly no.

I'm presenting the fact that the 980s in current performance (and all OTHER Model 3s) is not the same unit as installed in the 2017 Model 3s you actually found any TSBs for.

Thus your concern trolling for a new 2020 P buyer, with nothing to support the argument besides 2017 TSBs, rings pretty hollow based on the actual facts.


FACTS! TRY THEM SOMETIME!

Right on this very forum, there are Performance 3s having their 980s / inverters replaced.
And they can be found all over the web.

Do you have any evidence they're having them replaced at an unusually high rate from normal vehicle repairs (say, the rear DUs in the S/X for example)?

Because again- nobody makes perfect anything. Some small % of failures in any part is normal and expected[/B]

If you claim there's an unusually high failure rate you need to support that claim with evidence

"I heard a couple guys on a forum say..." is not evidence of that.

The Rear Drive Units are ever evolving. The are always updates and new versions. Later Performance 3s will have updated versions.

By that logic you should never buy one. It'll always be better "later"

(and hilariously, you're moving the goalposts AGAIN! trying to move them BACK from "uh I meant the early units!" to now trying to pretend there's an issue with current ones...)


Increasingly it does sound like your're some kinda TSLAQ FUD guy trying to talk people out of buying a Tesla at all and using desperate misunderstand and misleading claims to do so.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[john5520]

Not even slightly no.

I'm presenting the fact that the 980s in current performance (and all OTHER Model 3s) is not the same unit as installed in the 2017 Model 3s you actually found any TSBs for.

Thus your concern trolling for a new 2020 P buyer, with nothing to support the argument besides 2017 TSBs, rings pretty hollow based on the actual facts.


FACTS! TRY THEM SOMETIME!

You haven't presented anything, period. I haven't seen a single link from you. Fact is, a vast majority of failed 980s posted online have been from mostly 2018s (not 2017s). The other fact is what I posted was not all the TSBs.

Do you have any evidence they're having them replaced at an unusually high rate from normal vehicle repairs (say, the rear DUs in the S/X for example)?

Where have I mentioned anything about an unusually high rate? All I said is there a disturbing trend I'm noticing. Again my opinion.

By that logic you should never buy one. It'll always be better "later"

This is a fair point. But my motivation for saying wait on the 2020 was mainly fueled by the recent Model Y failures / TSB. Vehicles that share the same inverters.

Increasingly it does sound like your're some kinda TSLAQ FUD guy trying to talk people out of buying a Tesla at all and using desperate misunderstand and misleading claims to do so.

I could see where YOU would jump to that conclusion, but that's definitely not my motivation. The only car that I specifically told someone to wait on was the Performance 3 so to claim I'm trying stop people from buying a Tesla is bordering on ridiculous.

Again I simply said 'wait', not 'don't buy'.I own a Tesla. If stock manipulation was really my motivation, I'd be in the appropriate thread for that talking about all their cars and many other topics Tesla related.

And all their other non-performance cars (3 and Y) are now coming with the 990 or other motors that don't seem to be having nearly as many issues (not even close). And I'm basing this on not having seen any posts about them.

Let me state for the record that the advice I gave to a member to wait was strictly an opinion which I provided my reasoning for. It doesn't mean your new Performance 3s RDU is going to fail or that you should not get one. Also, IMO, one can safely assume that the newer Performance 3s would have improved RDUs.

 

[Knightshade]

You haven't presented anything, period. I haven't seen a single link from you

Instead, you saw me debunk your links by the mysterious art of actually reading them

Shame you didn't try that so I would've have had to

. Fact is, a vast majority of failed 980s posted online have been from mostly 2018s (not 2017s).

The vast majority of 980 cars built are from 2018, so that's expected normal results


But again- where's your numbers? "A few guys on the forums" isn't data.

Is the failure rate 10%? 1%? 0.01%? 0.001%?

You've no idea at all do you?

The other fact is what I posted was not all the TSBs.

Right.

You added you're "sure" there's SOOPER SEKRIT HIDDEN ONES somewhere.

Despite the fact that'd be illegal.

But again, if you have ones relevant to CURRENT P3Ds (the thing you originally raised as your "concern") then post them

Where have I mentioned anything about an unusually high rate? All I said is there a disturbing trend I'm noticing.

So a normal failure rate would be a "disturbing trend"?

I'm not sure those words mean what you think they mean.

. Also, IMO, one can safely assume that the newer Performance 3s would have improved RDUs.

That's why it's so weird the only actual Model 3 TSBs you posted were almost exclusively for 2017 built non-P cars, yet you still have "concerns"


(especially when even most of THOSE weren't actual problems with the motor or inverter at all)

They were mostly (though not exclusively) of the sort of: "Dude in factory had never built these before so forgot to tighten a screw during this one batch" or "This one part can sometimes make noise- if a customer complains about it here's how to make it quieter but it works PERFECTLY FINE EITHER WAY"

 

[john5520]

Instead, you saw me debunk your links by the mysterious art of actually reading them

Shame you didn't try that so I would've have had to

Here's what you asked:

where's the TSB for the 3 from ANY year for this issue, let alone the "early" ones?)

So I posted TSBs that I could find. And 2017 would surely fall into the category of 'any' wouldn't it? And rather than post a TSB just for that issue, I posted others that might be helpful to other members. You might be having a case of selective amnesia.

The vast majority of 980 cars built are from 2018, so that's expected normal results

You claimed what I posted only applied to 2017 making it seem like 2018s were not having issues. So, the failures I saw refuted that.

But again- where's your numbers? "A few guys on the forums" isn't data.

I wish it was a few guys. But you wouldn't know would you? That takes actually doing the research. Too much work for you and it would contradict your factless argument.

Is the failure rate 10%? 1%? 0.01%? 0.001%?

That's an excellent question we'll never really know the answer to unless someone at Tesla says something. All we can go on is what we see in the wild.

So a normal failure rate would be a "disturbing trend"?

Where's your evidence to support a 'normal' failure rate? Also, show me a single verifiable 990 failure on the forum. Or for that matter,
How many front motor failures have there been? I can't remember the last time I've seen one. I think we can agree if we compared the front motor
failure rate to the rear, we'll see vastly different numbers. So what is 'really' a normal failure rate? IMO, a normal failure rate should be so low as
not even make a blip on the radar. I can't say that about the 980 unfortunately.

 

[Knightshade]

You claimed what I posted only applied to 2017 making it seem like 2018s were not having issues. So, the failures I saw refuted that.

This is nonsense.

You've still provided no evidence 2018s are "having issues" outside of normally expected rates.

Another way we can tell is if there were abnormal issues with 2018s there's be TSBs for them.

Instead you only found 2017 ones (and even most of those weren't for actual DU failures either)

I wish it was a few guys. But you wouldn't know would you?

Sure I would.

Your inability to provide evidence otherwise is a great reason for that.

If you were right and could prove it you would have.

instead of handwaving, yelling "SOME GUYS ON FORUMS", and moving goalposts constantly.

That's an excellent question we'll never really know the answer to unless someone at Tesla says something. All we can go on is what we see in the wild.

Which you've provided no evidence for being in any way out of the norm.

But insist it's "concerning" and "unusual"

Without any ability to support that argument.

Where's your evidence to support a 'normal' failure rate?

Lack of TSBs on newer DUs would be one.

TSBs are specifically to address issues outside of normal procedure and concern.

The 2017 DUs had a few of these.

It appear one date-specific, Y only range of 2020s do too.

There's no such evidence for 2018-2020 Model 3 DUs having such issues though.


Also- we'd see abnormalities in Teslas warranty expenses if they had a "ton" of DU failures outside of normal expectations- we don't see that either.

YOU are the one making the OUT of the ordinary claim- so it's on you to provide evidence of it.

At which you have continued to utterly, and hilariously, fail.

Also, show me a single verifiable 990 failure on the forum

Wait... didn't YOU tell us it takes years for this to show up, and that's why you moved your goalposts from current Ps to "the earliest" 980s?

I ask because the 990 has only been in widespread use for about a year now.

So by your own logic we shouldn't be seeing any failures there yet even if they have the SAME imaginary issues you think current 980s do.

How many front motor failures have there been? I can't remember the last time I've seen one

Well, for one thing, a fair # of cars don't HAVE one. LR RWD, SR, and SR plus all lack them entirely.

For another, they handle significantly less power.

For a third they're an entirely different type of motor in the first place.

That's 3 all different reasons you'd expect failures on the rear far more often than the front normally

IMO, a normal failure rate should be so low as
not even make a blip on the radar. I can't say that about the 980 unfortunately.

Since you have no actual data on this, just a few forum anecdotes, you have no actual idea if you can say that or not.

But it's pretty hard to find any enthusiast car forum where you can't find at least SOME people with a blown engine (or equivalent) no matter how low the overall failure rate of the thing is.... so again- the plural of anecdote is not data.

 

[Sophias_dad]

I'm unfollowing this thread, but will check from time to time to see if we've reached 200 pages.

At this rate, that should happen roughly Monday

 

[john5520]

You know, you're right.

Knightshade was the same guy that said the car phantom brakes to prevent the driver from getting tickets. How can anyone reason with logic like that?

I'm satisfied that I made my point in this thread.

 

[Knightshade]

You know, you're right.

Knightshade was the same guy that said the car phantom brakes to prevent the driver from getting tickets

Well no, he wasn't.

He was the one who accurately pointed out the car slows down when it thinks the speed limit just dropped a bunch.

And sometimes the speed limit database is wrong- which is why Tesla is moving toward reading signs.


You are the one who keeps whipping out his Jumping To Conclusions Map without evidence.

Just so we're clear who is whom

I'm satisfied that I made my point in this thread.

Well, lack thereof, but yes