Firmware 6.1 - For Classic Model S

[HankLloydRight]

Mine feels like a loose U-joint. In stop and start traffic I can feel and subtly hear a small clunk as that car transitions from power to re-gen braking and back. In an underground parking lot with the windows rolled down, you can hear the clunk sound quite plainly as it echoes off of the concrete walls.

I have that also. I assumed its pretty normal. If not, I'll have to have it checked out upon next service visit.

Based on my 650 mile drive yesterday, it appears to me the energy prediction graph initial estimate is based on a 330 Wh/mile base, and then adjusted from there. Rated miles is based on 300 Wh/mile.

 

[tomas]

That was my guess too, so I'm assuming the prediction does not account for temperature. This is just my Day 1 observation, so I'll need to play around a bit more with it. I'll bet in summer I will actually do better than the projection, because on many days I will get better than Rated consumption on my commute (i.e. sub-300 Wh/mi).

I kicked the predictor's @$$ on a 40f day with climate off and seat heaters. In fact, got best ever for a 90 mi stretch I do year round. Heat is huge consumer.

- - - Updated - - -

I have that also. I assumed its pretty normal. If not, I'll have to have it checked out upon next service visit.

Based on my 650 mile drive yesterday, it appears to me the energy prediction graph initial estimate is based on a 330 Wh/mile base, and then adjusted from there. Rated miles is based on 300 Wh/mile.

dont think its that elementary. If you zoom you will see it adjusts for hills and speed limit changes. There's also conjecture it uses climate control consumption at time you initiate trip as a factor prxy for temp. That could explain why mknox's trip initiated in preheated car had low usage estimate. I'd be really bummed if a debate ensues about its wh/mi basis. It's more sophisticated thank goodness.

 

[Chipper]

So I finally got 6.1 yesterday afternoon and thought I would try the trip prediction feature of the energy display. Curious to know what is taken into account here, as I ended up doing "worse" than what was predicted. I started out with a fully pre-heated car and drove "gingerly" at or below the speed limit the whole way. The temperature was 10 F with no wind and the roads were clear and dry. I'm wondering if it's just an extrapolation of the normal "Rated" range estimate?

On an unrelated note, you will see that I start out with about 87% capacity. My car charged to 90% at 4:51 AM and I left at 7:30 AM. That's typical of my range loss while the car sits.

View attachment 70425

- - - Updated - - -



Mine feels like a loose U-joint. In stop and start traffic I can feel and subtly hear a small clunk as that car transitions from power to re-gen braking and back. In an underground parking lot with the windows rolled down, you can hear the clunk sound quite plainly as it echoes off of the concrete walls.

That "loose U-joint" feel was EXACTLY what mine felt and sounded like. Got worse on a 9,000 mile trek cross-country and resulted in an unscheduled overnight and repair in Scottsdale AZ.

 

[HankLloydRight]

I kicked the predictor's @$$ on a 40f day with climate off and seat heaters. In fact, got best ever for a 90 mi stretch I do year round. Heat is huge consumer.

- - - Updated - - -



dont think its that elementary. If you zoom you will see it adjusts for hills and speed limit changes. There's also conjecture it uses climate control consumption at time you initiate trip as a factor prxy for temp. That could explain why mknox's trip initiated in preheated car had low usage estimate. I'd be really bummed if a debate ensues about its wh/mi basis. It's more sophisticated thank goodness.

That's why I said it uses a 330 Whm as a BASE and adjusts up or down from there. I never said it was that simple.

 

[liuping]

I got 6.1 yesterday for my old grey P85 vin 6883. I like the trip energy prediction. My parking lines seem to be more accurate than the pics posted -- I tested them as well, but didn't take pictures. I wonder if the cameras can be aligned differently. Parking lines turn black/grey when the display is in night mode. Tried backing out of the garage (car was in night display mode because garage was dark), and was nearly impossible to see the lines on the blacktop.

I have the same issue in the mornings:

I assume there will be tweaks to the backup lines in future releases now that they have worked around the issue with graphics over live video.

 

[RiverBrick]

So I finally got 6.1 yesterday afternoon and thought I would try the trip prediction feature of the energy display. Curious to know what is taken into account here, as I ended up doing "worse" than what was predicted. I started out with a fully pre-heated car and drove "gingerly" at or below the speed limit the whole way. The temperature was 10 F with no wind and the roads were clear and dry. I'm wondering if it's just an extrapolation of the normal "Rated" range estimate?

I don't think it takes into account weather at all, except that it does look at current HVAC, which is of course weather related. If the HVAC is off in a heated garage, the initial estimation will assume that to be the case throughout the entire trip. It does factor in elevation changes well. Like the cruise control system, it's blind to regeneration being disabled (will graph an increase in energy for going down a big hill even with no regen). Here's an example of a short-trip where the actual consumption was 60% over the prediction. (Who knows how they round off, so internally the difference may have been as small as 40%).

-15C/+5F.
Hakka R2 which had been inflated earlier in the day to 48.5 psi after five hours in a garage heated to +5C/41F (admittedly perhaps slightly under the spec of 45 psi at -15C).
Car charging for three hours outdoors, including at least 1/2 hour of preheating to 25C/77F.
Regeneration limited to about 40kW.
Cruise control set to the posted limit of 100 km/h. (Over 90% of the trip was highway).
With Charging Complete to 90% and the car drawing just enough (24A at 205V) to run the heat, the estimator predicted I'd use 6% for the 17 km.
Turning the heat off, canceling the trip and resubmitting it dropped the predicted consumption to 5%. In fact, no heat was used since it was a trip of less than 15 minutes.
The Green Race site (which doesn't let you enter temperature) estimated usage of only 4% for the trip. Part of the difference may be that it defaults to a range of 437 km for the S, whereas my rated range is 415-423 km in range mode nowadays after 47,000 km.

EDIT: The system does take into account instances where regen is disabled at the start of a trip. It is a bit over optimistic about when regen will be restored in cold weather, though.

 

[scaesare]

I've had the dark lines too. I assumed it was a day/night thing and didn't think too much more about it.

 

[RiverBrick]

There's also conjecture it uses climate control consumption at time you initiate trip as a factor prxy for temp.

Definitely possible. Estimations were way too optimistic for trips when there was a difference of 40C/104F between outdoor and garage temps. So, I was thinking the car was measuring the ambient temperature of its starting environment. However, then I realized the estimator was off as much when the car was parked outside, as long as the heat was off.

 

[Gizmotoy]

Interesting. I have a clearly audible and consistent "clunk" from the drivetrain and was told it is "normal".

Mine feels like a loose U-joint. In stop and start traffic I can feel and subtly hear a small clunk as that car transitions from power to re-gen braking and back. In an underground parking lot with the windows rolled down, you can hear the clunk sound quite plainly as it echoes off of the concrete walls.

I have that also. I assumed its pretty normal. If not, I'll have to have it checked out upon next service visit.
Based on my 650 mile drive yesterday, it appears to me the energy prediction graph initial estimate is based on a 330 Wh/mile base, and then adjusted from there. Rated miles is based on 300 Wh/mile.

There's some kind of threshold for this that depends on how loud it is. My clunk has consistently increased in volume to the point where it's really loud, now. They're replacing my drivetrain whenever they can get the replacement parts. Threads on the issue have indicated in some cases it IS the u-joint, in which case simply tightening it up fixes the issue. Mine's exactly as you describe, though, and is apparently more serious.



I did finally get 6.1 (113). I've seen the grey lines once, but other than that it seems to be working well.

 

[JPP]

Interesting. I have a clearly audible and consistent "clunk" from the drivetrain and was told it is "normal".

Not normal. Note that the service tech is instructed to first try the TSB shim fix, then test drive the car and see if the clunk goes away. If not, the tech is authorized to replace the drive unit. And there is also an updated motor mount bracket that gets installed if necessary.

 

[Gizmotoy]

Not normal. Note that the service tech is instructed to first try the TSB shim fix, then test drive the car and see if the clunk goes away. If not, the tech is authorized to replace the drive unit. And there is also an updated motor mount bracket that gets installed if necessary.

And further note there appears to be at least a 3 month wait for drivetrains. I've been waiting since November, others early October.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

Interesting. I have a clearly audible and consistent "clunk" from the drivetrain and was told it is "normal".

What happens when you tell them that you are not satisfied with that response and that you insist on the noise being fixed? In my opinion, you the owner should be the arbiter of what is acceptable or not. If you aren't happy with the noise, insist on it being fixed. If they don't, escalate to the regional service manager. If that doesn't get you anywhere, go up the VP chain of command. My service center told me that their job is to make the owners happy, so if something isn't right they will keep at it until I am satisfied.

- - - Updated - - -

And further note there appears to be at least a 3 month wait for drivetrains. I've been waiting since November, others early October.

I finally have an appointment for next Wednesday to have my drive unit repaired or replaced due to droning noise above 70 MPH and new electrical buzzing noises that are starting to manifest themselves. I have been waiting on this appointment since Christmas Eve, so it would have been 1 ½ months. I was told that they were ordering a brand new drive unit for me from the factory, but I don't know if that came through or if they are going to give me a remanufactured unit. I just want the issue fixed and for it not to recur.

 

[kendallpb]

I have the same issue in the mornings:

...

I assume there will be tweaks to the backup lines in future releases now that they have worked around the issue with graphics over live video.

I thought (from when I saw darker lines) that it was based on the background; I thought I saw them when there was light snow on the ground. I didn't really pay attention, though.

In other news, I like the backup lines. I always expected them to be guides for things like backing into spots--not for pulling right up to something on one side, but more for centering. They're good for that (and one place to look, versus looking back 'n forth between the rearview mirrors). For backing up where I care about how close I am on one side, I love the auto-tilt mirrors. But I understand the desire to have them work the other way (I'd just always want to really see, not rely on lines, for that scenario).

Anyway, catching up on this thread makes me realize I forgot to check out the scroll wheel menus. I didn't understand what they were saying they were going to change, and I haven't looked...I fear I won't like that. (But admittedly, I rarely ever use them to pull up menus--mainly, I use the right for adjusting temp and the left for adjusting volume.)

Happy trails!

 

[mknox]

What happens when you tell them that you are not satisfied with that response and that you insist on the noise being fixed?

To be fair, I accepted their response. I was worried it spelled impending doom or some such thing but was reassured that it did not.

- - - Updated - - -

Not normal. Note that the service tech is instructed to first try the TSB shim fix, then test drive the car and see if the clunk goes away. If not, the tech is authorized to replace the drive unit. And there is also an updated motor mount bracket that gets installed if necessary.

Thanks. I will ask about that.

 

[RiverBrick]

Yesterday, I said the energy consumption estimator didn't take into account regen being disabled. I apologize and take that back because I wasn't able to reproduce that error. It does appear the tool will not credit you with gaining energy if you start out on a steep downhill without access to regen.

One thing I did notice though was that it predicted regen credits about 5 km into a trip when it turned out that the battery still wasn't warm enough to accept regen at that point.

 

[russman]

Just received .115 update to my .113 on my classic today. Don't know what the differences are.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

Just received .115 update to my .113 on my classic today. Don't know what the differences are.

0.002

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Just received .115 update to my .113 on my classic today. Don't know what the differences are.

Same here.

 

[JPP]

Reports are that the Energy Saving modes for night have been changed...I am on .113 so no idea.

 

[trils0n]

Installed 115 today. Looks like just bug fixes, but under additional improvements it says steering feel was changed, mostly at high speeds. Was this note in the 113 release or did I miss it?

Also, Elon just tweeted that a future software update will improve P85D 0-60 time by ~0.1 secs and P85s will also receive a speed boost, but not as dramatic. I like that my nearly 2 year old car will be getting faster by a software update!