You state SC01 and SC05 are "Unlimited supercharging" on your code look up - why two codes for the same thing?
Tesla has dozens of duplicate codes that mean the same thing.
Isn't SC05 the current code they use whereas if you look back at your pre 2017 cars they had SC01 before they got relisted and the code was changed to pay per use? What happened back then? It stopped being transferable which would support the theory that SC01 is transferable and SC05 is not.
This is purely circumstantial and really a complete guess on your part. I do not trust made-up conclusions or "theories" based on a guess from an internet rando as actual, reliable, data. Correlation is not causation. Look it up.
And as I explained before, there are no currently listed cars on EV-CPO that have 'transferable supercharging" so reporting both codes as "Free Supercharging" is correct. And as I said before, my sources tell me that "transferable" might not mean what you think it means (i.e. you get a one-time transfer), so even calling the SC01 code as "Transferable Free Supercharging" might end up being wrong. So listing them both as simply "Free Supercharging" is actually more accurate, since the future status of "transferability" is actually unknown.
I fail to understand why you refuse to acknowledge others may have information you don't. I
I'm strange in that I require actual proof of something before I blindly accept it as a fact. Obviously you don't. If you can offer some actual, verifiable proof of what you're claiming, I'll gladly accept the information as fact.
I see you've now copied tesla-info in giving the depreciation on used cars which presumably you've got by summing the values of the option codes, something that only a few months back when I suggested the correct autopilot codes for FSD were the ones with a financial value against and you told me I was wrong and that data couldn't be trusted.
I have not copied anything, and again, you're completely making stuff up out of thin air just to slam me and EV-CPO. Please try to confirm or validate your baseless accusations before making a fool of yourself, again.
I'm not supplying any depreciation information, and certainly not on the aggregation of the inaccurate and outdated values in the option code lists used for leasing new cars. Please show me exactly where I'm copying anything from the other site. I've asked you before, and I'll ask you again, PLEASE STOP FABRICATING COMPLETELY FALSE INFORMATION JUST TO SLAM EV-CPO. You keep doing it, and each and every time I prove you completely WRONG.
And for the record, every other site out there is only copying what I first created in 2015. To quote Oscar Wilde: “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness.”
Perhaps you should take a chill pill, have some humility and say "thanks, I didn't know that, it seems to make sense at face value, I'll see if the data supports the theory" rather than try and rubbish me at every opportunity you can. Just a thought.
You're the one that takes the initiative at every opportunity to fabricate data and then use that against EV-CPO, as if somehow your made-up information is actual verifiable fact. Why don't you just give it up already? I've proven you wrong EVERY SINGLE TIME. I refuse to "take a chill pill" when you continue to tarnish the reputation of me and EV-CPO at every possible turn.
Last edited: