Firmware 6.1

[wk057]

Since I have a trip coming up this weekend that would be wonderful in the P85D, it would be very nice if this firmware were pushed my way before then (and actually works as it appears to from other's postings). Otherwise I'll actually be instead riding with a friend in... his ICE SUV. *shudders* :scared:

At the actual consumption of the P85D the trip is impractical (no superchargers) with only 16A 120V charging available at the destination. As it stands based on my spreadsheet it would require an additional ~10+ hours of charging on that outlet vs my old P85 or the fiance's P85 (which is unavailable for my use this weekend... we have two vehicles for a reason). An extra 10 hours isn't practical when I'm already looking at a full 2 days of charging there to make the return trip, and my friend traveling with me has to be back on time. I've been here before in my P85 and all worked out nicely. No real way to get more power as they have 100A service, no public charging or RV parks within a reasonable distance that I could find that would be practical for this trip, and all of the outside and garage 120V outlets are on the same phase (go figure) so a 240V hack is out. Dryer outlet is on the top floor and would require using an adapter and running my two 50' 14-50 extension cables through the middle of his house to the other side, which is, well, not practical either.

Anyway, keeping my fingers crossed that I don't need to ride in an ICE so soon for the first time this year... that will definitely get me more irritated about this out-of-spec efficiency issue.

 

[donv]

You can want anything, but Tesla isn't obligated to give it to you just because you want it. They are obligated to deliver you a car which meets the advertised performance claims (in this case range), and putting torque sleep with range mode is how they do it.

The actual impact on your efficiency related to torque sleep will probably be less than the impact of you running the heater on high anyway...

No.. We would like added efficiency and like to keep the cabin warm. Heating is not an option up here and when it's stinkin cold we need the range the most.

 

[Andyw2100]

Since I have a trip coming up this weekend that would be wonderful in the P85D, it would be very nice if this firmware were pushed my way before then.

I would think there's a good chance you'll get it, since the P85D fleet isn't that big, and in general they've been getting all the P85Ds the updates pretty quickly.

That being said, the thing that worries me the most for you is the fact that you got this weird version .116 at the exact same time others were getting .139. I know others have shot down this idea before, but if Tesla wanted to test some things, and also wanted to use some of us as control subjects for the testing, they might do something like that by giving some of us one software version and others a different one at the same time. Before you received .116 I don't think anyone had seen or heard of .116, right? So .116 showed up at the same time (actually half a day later, as we had heard of .139 having been installed that afternon) that .139 did.

 

[scaesare]

If Tesla wanted to, they could just break out an option to preheat the battery. As long as this was something we could do from the app, this would be very useful to me. To be honest, for the most part if I'm travelling by myself, the only reason I preheat the car is to get the battery warmed up. I always immediately turn the temperature in the car way down once I get in, so I'm definitely wasting energy.

Aside from the overriding desire to generally keep things as simple as possible, can anyone think of any reason why Tesla wouldn't want to break out the option of preheating the battery without preheating the cabin? Doing so would also allow for more control, since right now the battery stops preheating when the cabin temperature is reached, or when the preheating times out. With a "preheat battery" option, the battery could stop preheating when it reached the proper temperature, and then just maintain that temperature, or timeout after whatever amount of time Tesla determines is appropriate if a trip is not started, but the whole process would be more efficient than basing it on cabin temperature.

I agree this would be useful, particularity because, as you point out, there's a big difference in how long it takes the air in the cabin to reach temp vs. getting the thermal mass of the 1500 lb. pack up to temp... I'd guess that being able to let the battery preheat for 60-90 minutes may be useful in some cases... can't do that today when it's tied to cabin heat.

 

[wk057]

the thing that worries me the most for you is the fact that you got this weird version .116 at the exact same time others were getting .139. I know others have shot down this idea before, but if Tesla wanted to test some things, and also wanted to use some of us as control subjects for the testing, they might do something like that by giving some of us one software version and others a different one at the same time. Before you received .116 I don't think anyone had seen or heard of .116, right? So .116 showed up at the same time (actually half a day later than, as we had heard of .139 being installed earlier that day) as .139 did.

Yeah, I found this quite odd. This is definitely the first time I've heard of multiple versions being pushed at the same time. The last several updates I've received have come in between 12AM and 2AM ET (I'm a night owl...), so, I've been keeping an eye out.

 

[Andyw2100]

Yeah, I found this quite odd. This is definitely the first time I've heard of multiple versions being pushed at the same time. The last several updates I've received have come in between 12AM and 2AM ET (I'm a night owl...), so, I've been keeping an eye out.

Also odd...I don't recall reading of anyone else getting pushed .116. I could be wrong, but if anyone else said they received it, there are certainly not many people reporting it. (On the upside, that may mean Tesla Engineering built a firmware release just for special-old-you! Or is that actually the downside? )

 

[wk057]

Also odd...I don't recall reading of anyone else getting pushed .116. I could be wrong, but if anyone else said they received it, there are certainly not many people reporting it. (On the upside, that may mean Tesla Engineering built a firmware release just for special-old-you! Or is that actually the downside? )

Somewhat unrelated, but I had been communicating directly with Tesla engineering about the slacker-while-sleeping issue for a bit prior. However, .116 doesn't seem to fix that particular issue, so, *shrugs*.

 

[sandpiper]

You can want anything, but Tesla isn't obligated to give it to you just because you want it. They are obligated to deliver you a car which meets the advertised performance claims (in this case range), and putting torque sleep with range mode is how they do it.

The actual impact on your efficiency related to torque sleep will probably be less than the impact of you running the heater on high anyway...

Sorry. Incorrect. Tesla advertised a certain range, and certainly they're obligated to meet that. I'd argue that they've already failed to meet the lofty claims of "no penalty for AWD" that were made on the date of the announcement and that we're already accepting something less than promised. But that's a moot argument now and I won't go further with it.

This "torque sleep" was further advertised to bring the P85D to within shooting distance of the range capabilities of the P85. Last I checked, the P85 does not require you to enter a crippled mode that disables key equipment within the vehicle. Yes we know that that adding heat or A/C reduces range -as it does for the P85. That's fine. But there is no reason for a customer to expect that the use of A/C or heat should prohibit the drivetrain from distributing load most efficiently between the two drive motors, and further increasing the penalty that you pay for wanting to sit in a comfortable car. The two systems are simply not interconnected.

Your argument is faulty.

 

[dickweis]

Also odd...I don't recall reading of anyone else getting pushed .116. I could be wrong, but if anyone else said they received it, there are certainly not many people reporting it. (On the upside, that may mean Tesla Engineering built a firmware release just for special-old-you! Or is that actually the downside? )

I was pushed .116 last night on my S85 with new hardware (late September 2014 pickup).

 

[wk057]

Received a response from Jerome on a few things. (Jerome seems to be the go to guy for answers these days)

Most notably:

Torque sleep and improved range for Dual Motor vehicles is included in versions 2.2.139 and later regardless of the selected Range Mode setting. However, the amount of this improvement will be increased by enabling Range Mode which has other vehicle control modifications in addition to the HVAC behavior.

So, no more complaining about it only working in range mode.

 

[morbot]

I finally got my 6.1 update last night, I think it was version .116 (I'm on an S86, not an 85D).

When I got in the car this morning, the notification stated that the update failed. I was bummed but figured it would just try to install again.

Then I noticed I had the reverse lines and checked my software version, it showed 6.1

A moment of happiness relief... followed by concern. Almost immediately a message popped up that Parking Assist was disabled. Sure enough, my parking sensors are failing Talked with service, they want me to come in so they can check it out and re-apply 6.1. Service was very helpful and awesome, but a bit bummed about the error.

Gotta say though, the adaptive cruise control is very nice and I look forward to using it on long cruises. I also got to try it out and test the collision warning on the way to work today when someone merged right in front of me (I was expecting the merge and ready to take full control, but wanted to see the collision warning hehe).

 

[Kalud]

Received a response from Jerome on a few things. (Jerome seems to be the go to guy for answers these days)

Release notes should provide that information... I don't understand why we would need to email a VP to get that info.

 

[wk057]

Release notes should provide that information... I don't understand why we would need to email a VP to get that info.

I certainly agree with this, since people who don't frequent the forums or proactively look for the info won't know otherwise.

But hey, at least he responded

 

[skilly]

Received a response from Jerome on a few things. (Jerome seems to be the go to guy for answers these days)

I just received the same...

[FONT=Calibri, sans-serif]with a little add on - "I have just checked and it appears that this firmware version is now installed on your car."[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, sans-serif]If only TM had the same accessibility of information as he clearly has...and could communicate it out, I bet his day to day job would change a LOT. [/FONT]

 

[chickensevil]

Received a response from Jerome on a few things. (Jerome seems to be the go to guy for answers these days)

Most notably:



So, no more complaining about it only working in range mode.

For the record I love that you can email a head VP at a Global company and get a response rather quickly. I emailed him once and got a response in 3 minutes!!! <3 Jerome

 

[wk057]

For the record I love that you can email a head VP at a Global company and get a response rather quickly. I emailed him once and got a response in 3 minutes!!! <3 Jerome

Yeah, it is definitely something I like about Jerome and Tesla. I had a back and forth with him of a half-dozen messages within 20 minutes a couple of months ago.

I wish the rest of the company had the information and responsiveness of him, however.

 

[internauts]

I am another that just received version .116. Maybe it is simple that .139 is only for the Ds. I am at the forum to see what is supposed to be different. The screen contained information on all the changes in 6.1, but nothing specific about .116. I previously downloaded .115 and the same long notice of all the changes made previously, but nothing specific about that change.

 

[STLBlue14]

I have ver 6.1 2.2.116. I do not see that version in the version history.
Who needs to be alerted to this version to add it to history?

Michael

 

[skilly]

I have ver 6.1 2.2.116. I do not see that version in the version history.
Who needs to be alerted to this version to add it to history?

Michael

its still just version 6.1 - if thats in your history, its current

 

[sandpiper]

Received a response from Jerome on a few things. (Jerome seems to be the go to guy for answers these days)

Most notably:



So, no more complaining about it only working in range mode.

So... I wonder if it works? If the "torque sleep" does as advertised then you should be able go against the P85 without either car in range mode and have similar range.