Firmware 6.2 press release info

[Rheazombi]

I really don't get people who complain that Tesla is TOO transparent. I don't mind knowing a little bit of what's going on in advance. Anticipation is what makes it fun, guys!

Also, LMAO at "meat and potatoes" including things like a photo next to your caller ID. I wish that post was satire...

 

[neroden]

"90% within 175 miles of a Supercharger"

Bad overselling on that "coverage" map. This is all very well if that's your destination, until you have to get to the next Supercharger 360 miles away...

Tesla needs to roughly double the number of Superchargers to get the coverage which the map is currently claiming. I know Tesla is planning to do this, but the overpromise / underdeliver pattern is still annoying.

"Eliminate range anxiety" is a good joke. Try again when there are more chargers. The anxiety in some areas really isn't from lack of information.

 

[rbergquist]

When the NYT article on running out of charge was topic de jour (NYT article: Stalled on the EV Highway), I posted the following and requested Tesla update the car to fix the underlying issue.

2013-02-11, 03:29 PM

From the NYT article, it is clear the author is not a EV enthusiast, but the author is part of the Mass market of car drivers.

The Mass Market doesn't want to to read manuals, they've been told the Tesla is "The Best Car in the World" and they know how to drive a car so they don't read a manual. They really don't want to learn a list of guidelines. And frankly there are too many factors that only Tesla knows the answers to and these will change with each firmware release [e.g. Vampire drain from 4.1 to 4.2]. When I tell my significant other I'm planning a long distance drive, I've mentioned factors affecting range like we're gaining 5000 ft over 200 miles, and there is more air resistance at night. The response is an eye roll and proclamation "this is your hobby, I just want a car that gets me there".


Since the EV infrastructure is sparse and EV training limited, Tesla should automate this to alleviate mass market concerns. Consider the following:
1) Trip Planner - set destination in Nav system [mass market knows how to do this already]. Then a Tesla Trip Planner can do the following in the background: a) knows route - get traffic data - use average speed for the highway - predict effects of stop/go traffic; use external car temp; get Weather forecast for longer trips to get temp by hour; get typography to calc gain/loss. You could have profiles by driver of avg kWh/mi so not dependent on hypothetical EPA ratings. Base range calcs on temperature settings of car. If you can't make it to the destination with the current charge, it should propose charge points optimized around charger capacity to minimize delay. Should check availability of chargers from charge site data (are they operational, available?). Give list of alternative sites. [Similar to Google maps giving you alternative road options]
2) Trip Monitor - Monitor trip as it is progressing and verify assumptions of kWh/Mi, AC load, etc are correct. If the occupants change any of the controls that affect range (e.g. turn up the heat), redo predictions. If there will be insufficient power to get to destination, provide early warnings to driver & suggest recourse (e.g. slow down to NN mph; change to Range Mode for heat/AC; Recharge at location xxx, ...).
3) Park monitor - when car is put in Park, look at temp & weather forecast. See what battery drop will be - pop up screen with factors for next N days - let user change N days so if they are at airport parking lot they can see if they can get home without plugging in.

These are the things that experienced EV people do, but the mass market doesn't want to become an EV person - they want the car to do this. Given the Tesla's instrumentation, connectivity & user interface, this should all be possible to automate. [And for those of you who think this is for sissies, you should have an OFF button in your profile to disable it. But I think the market for sissies is bigger than the market for EV enthusiasts.]

And then when someone ignores all of the warnings and instructions and has to get towed Tesla can at least say "Well the car told you NN times you weren't going to make it... Your flatbed has been ordered."

With 6.2 it looks like Tesla has provided a fix. I'm very happy to see it. Great things come with time.

 

[bob_p]

One benefit of the 6.2 charging features is that the new software may be able to reduce how much time each car is at a supercharger, by encouraging drivers to leave once their cars have sufficient charge to reach their destination or the next charger. Range anxiety is a factor in guessing how much charge the car should have before leaving a supercharger - and the new software (if it works) could eliminate that guesswork and provide a more reliable target for how much charge is needed.

Especially because the charging rates slow down as the charge approaches 100%, many drivers could be spending much more time at a supercharger than they really need to - not only lengthening their stay at a charger - but also slowing down other drivers who are trying to use the same supercharger.

Tesla should have a lot of data on actual supercharger and vehicle usage, and should be able to tell from that data how many drivers are overcharging at the superchargers. It's very possible that most drivers are overcharging - and if the new software helps to reduce the amount of time wasted at superchargers, this could be a significant benefit for trips with supercharger stops.

 

[NigelM]

It has been tested by Tesla and by private drivers, and the difference in charge time is no more than a few minutes.
<snip>
The difference you are pointing out just doesn't exist.

Sorry, but you're contradicting yourself.; a difference either exists or it doesn't.

This constant complaining about the inabilities of the A pack is silly to me.

Just like it makes no sense to continue to try to stir up discontent with the early Model S.

No need for throwing accusations around. I was neither complaining nor trying to stir anything, I was simply noting that there is a difference (which you agree with, sort of).

When the software tells you need xx minutes charging to continue your trip, I'm sure Tesla wants it to be accurate and not leave A battery pack owners thinking "Ah, yes now that must mean xx minutes plus y for me...". In the same way, Tesla software will need to account for paired chargers. I'm sure they've thought of both cases.

Peace.

 

[LetsGoFast]

I'm also curious to see how they will handle trips where my destination doesn't have charging capability. In those cases, I need to leave the supercharger with enough charge to make the roundtrip from the supercharger to my destination.

 

[deonb]

"90% within 175 miles of a Supercharger"

Bad overselling on that "coverage" map. This is all very well if that's your destination, until you have to get to the next Supercharger 360 miles away...

I agree. For me, the following is a much more accurate map - how far can you drive away from a SuperCharger before you will not be able to reach either the previous one, or the next one. (Aka. Point of no return).

It's actually not bad, but it's not 90% coverage.

 

[wk057]

I agree. For me, the following is a much more accurate map - how far can you drive away from a SuperCharger before you will not be able to reach either the previous one, or the next one. (Aka. Point of no return).

It's actually not bad, but it's not 90% coverage.

View attachment 75409

Aha! Someone else that uses this method.

This is the map I use all the time, setting the circles to ~100 miles. Makes sense because if the circle from the supercharger you're at overlaps with another supercharger circle then you can likely get from one to the other. If they don't, then you probably can't.

Now the Tesla-style map (200-ish mile bubbles) works if your destination is inside a bubble and has charging AND your next stop (supercharger or destination) is inside the bubble of your current stop. But that definitely takes more planning.

The 100-mile bubble map is pretty much the map to use if you just want to be able to safely drive on superchargers alone.

With that in mind, there is a lot of area completely impossible to cover on superchargers alone. Whole states still, like Arkansas and North Dakota have zero coverage on this map... even most of Maine, Mississippi, etc. A few states have near-100% coverage like Florida, California, New Jersey, Ohio, Delaware, Massachusetts, New York, etc etc...

 

[Cottonwood]

I agree. For me, the following is a much more accurate map - how far can you drive away from a SuperCharger before you will not be able to reach either the previous one, or the next one. (Aka. Point of no return).

It's actually not bad, but it's not 90% coverage.

View attachment 75409

Aha! Someone else that uses this method.

This is the map I use all the time, setting the circles to ~100 miles. Makes sense because if the circle from the supercharger you're at overlaps with another supercharger circle then you can likely get from one to the other. If they don't, then you probably can't.

Now the Tesla-style map (200-ish mile bubbles) works if your destination is inside a bubble and has charging AND your next stop (supercharger or destination) is inside the bubble of your current stop. But that definitely takes more planning.

The 100-mile bubble map is pretty much the map to use if you just want to be able to safely drive on superchargers alone.

With that in mind, there is a lot of area completely impossible to cover on superchargers alone. Whole states still, like Arkansas and North Dakota have zero coverage on this map... even most of Maine, Mississippi, etc. A few states have near-100% coverage like Florida, California, New Jersey, Ohio, Delaware, Massachusetts, New York, etc etc...

I agree with both of you. The posted map looks like it is using 80 mile radii, wk057 suggests 100 mile radii, and I like 85 mile radii. The truth is that for reasonable travel between Superchargers, you don't want to charge past 80-90% to keep charge times reasonable, and you don't want to have to hypermile drive under the speed limit. In addition, most actual road distances are greater than the straight line, as the crow flies distance that these radii imply.

Of course, 100% charges and hypermiling can be done. Many have made it from Flagstaff to Blanding, and I have done 300 miles on a charge in a P85D, but neither of those are normal, carefree, quick-charging scenarios.

 

[majorlance]

I can't find this map... I know I'm missing the obvious here!

 

[Cyclone]

I can't find this map... I know I'm missing the obvious here!

Supercharge.info in your web browser. No www.

 

[napabill]

Sorry, Nigel, I know how you feel, but my car is not throttled. I pull in and start charging at 90 kW. A "B" battery pulls in and starts charging at 120 kW. Within minutes, the B battery car has "throttled" down considerably, while my car is still putzing along at near 90. This is how it works. You know this is how it works. It has been tested by Tesla and by private drivers, and the difference in charge time is no more than a few minutes.

This constant complaining about the inabilities of the A pack is silly to me. I have never noticed any difference in charging between my car and any other. I have never noticed anyone pulling into a SC and running around distractedly because he/she has two minutes less to go hit the bathroom and grab a snack. How in the world can it be so important?!! It's not.

My A pack charges at home, as do most other packs Tesla makes. The SC is an event that happens once a week, once a month, maybe oftener, but no one is sitting around with a stop watch to see who has to wait a bit more to get their charge. It makes no sense.

Just like it makes no sense to continue to try to stir up discontent with the early Model S. My A pack is full every morning, just like everyone else's pack. If I have to charge at a SC, I charge to what I want, just like you. I take a break, read, eat, visit with other owners. Just like you. The difference you are pointing out just doesn't exist.

Even with new software, if the car says it will take 23.5 minutes to charge, who is going to watch, count seconds, and call Tesla to report errors? I have better things to do.

As I have said in the past, the issue of "A" batteries is the backhanded treatment of the very earliest of adopters, with no consideration. Certainly, if a battery upgrade occurrs a year later, I understand. But 2 months! But once burned, I have held back jumping on the MX bandwagon. Let others be the early adopters, knowing TM will not have your back. Sorry, but it was all a matter of trust, which is now gone.

 

[majorlance]

Supercharge.info in your web browser. No www.

Thanks. But just checked and I think it has gone missing...

 

[Cyclone]

Thanks. But just checked and I think it has gone missing...

From there, set the slider at the top at your desired range circle. The map shot in this thread I believe was with a 80 mile range. Basically, just those two steps show you had far you can go with only using that range from a supercharger. Playing with the numbers, for me it is a stretch from Charlotte to Atlanta, but doable if I'm careful. Similarly, coming to Miami is not a problem until I get to St. Augustine and head down I-95. Again, I can make it, but I will have to stop and charge in Riveria Beach if I want to make it down south.

 

[Cottonwood]

I can't find this map... I know I'm missing the obvious here!

Go to Supercharge.Info and set the range slider on the upper left to the radius you desire. I like 85 mile radius for 85's, and 60 miles for 60's as a good start.

 

[dandelot]

Cottonwood, your link to Supercharge.info is ok, but your spelling ... not so much :smile:

 

[Cottonwood]

Cottonwood, your link to Supercharge.info is ok, but your spelling ... not so much :smile:

Thanks! Post corrected...

 

[Bugeater]

Especially because the charging rates slow down as the charge approaches 100%, many drivers could be spending much more time at a supercharger than they really need to - not only lengthening their stay at a charger - but also slowing down other drivers who are trying to use the same supercharger.

This isn't right unless I'm reading you wrong. If the S on the other half of a supercharger is just trickle charging then your S will be charging at full capacity. You just lost some faster charge at the beginning if you were already charging and were limited.

 

[Wantap85]

Guess this is one of the bad things about living somewhere without a lot of tesla sales, very few superchargers. But it's a stretch, even supercharger to supercharger to make this route. Can't wait to see where 6.2 tries to route me on my next orlando trip.

 

[mpt]

GreenCarReports liken the update to the system BetterPlace had years ago: http://www.greencarreports.com/news...ate-echoes-better-place-system-of-3-years-ago