If you fast charge, Tesla will permanently throttle charging

[winfield100]

@neonak may want to ask Montana Skeptic on Seeking Alpha for a cut of the take on the article trashing Tesla since Montana directly references neonak in the article, perhaps to see if he was misquoted perhaps or something
Short Tesla Takes: Charger Choking, Evercore Confidence, Goldman Sachs Modesty, Conference Call Howlers - Tesla Motors (NASDAQ:TSLA) | Seeking Alpha

Seriously, Montana will probably get $300-$500 or more for the article if I remember correctly. You neonak were the lead in the article. You should ask for 10% cut. Did you give permission to be quoted? Were you portrayed honestly? Was your name sullied? Think what you are now joined with.
Have a nice day

 

[gowthamn]

When new !

Your 100k miles car rarely gets the gas mileage as when new. And not when you skimp on oil changes and maintenance

This is not natural degradation. Tesla is doing it itself.

 

[Shock-On-T]

Looks like the motherships master plan to curb SuperCharger usage IS going to work!!!!

Just kidding

No! I can't believe I'm being manipulated! Not a clever clogs like me?!

Actually funnily enough I had to supercharge today from about 20% to 50% to get home, and I was pulling the usual 98kW the whole time.

 

[EvanLin]

Tesla never guaranteed a SCing rate. I very much doubt you'll find 120 kWh anywhere in your paperwork.

How about 10%-80% in 40 min, on the website.
From torvalstrom's post on page 56, it's 43 min if throttled, which is almost 10% slower than promised.

 

[stopcrazypp]

How about 10%-80% in 40 min, on the website.
From torvalstrom's post on page 56, it's 43 min if throttled, which is almost 10% slower than promised.

Again, it says "actual charge times may vary" under the same statement. Really, I don't think Tesla is that dumb to guarantee a charge rate (neither does other manufacturers as far as I can tell). Too many other variables will open them up to liability regardless of this limiting algorithm.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

"Naonak detailed what he learned after inquiring why his Tesla was experiencing significantly decreased charging speeds after"

This is the kind of lies I hate. 'significantly decreased' ?

While I have no problem believing a site like Seeking Alpha has posters with interests in TSLA (not unlike TMC the other way around), I'm still pondering the significance part.

The best figure we have so far is that the impact of DC charging high peak throttling is ~8% on Supercharging speeds. That is not automatically an insignificant figure. I mean, this is not a rounding error kind of change.

If you Supercharge twice a year, then sure, but if this is impacting high-use Superchargers with certain batteries (90 kWh mostly?) - say those Supercharging twice a day for their commute - for those that's perhaps ten minutes a day.

Make it 300 days of commuting and it is 50 hours or ~2 days of extra waiting a year.

 

[torvalstrom]

To a point. I think Tesla had changed things such that if you start at 0-5% (not sure on the range) it actually starts really slow and then ramps up to full speed/power.

On my P90DL it's "slow" up to around 6% where it then is consistently above 80 kW before tapering later in the cycle.

I can drive down to at least -6% (long story which basically boils down to faulty grounding at a summer cottage and then a 10% distance to the nearest alternative power source...)

Was quite surprised there was such a big reserve than was usable for driving. I knew about the bricking buffer, but had now idea there was such a large drivable reserve.

Under 0% you charge even slower, similar to the trickle charging at the end of the charge cycle.

Tor

 

[torvalstrom]

When new !

Your 100k miles car rarely gets the gas mileage as when new. And not when you skimp on oil changes and maintenance

This is not an effect of wear. This is a software restriction placed by a manufacturer on a product they have sold.

They didn't lease me the car.

They didn't inform me of the restriction.

I'm convinced they did it to protect my investment and I thank them for their intent.

But I would like to know, I shouldn't have to research what happened when it was deliberately done. At the very least when I call the service center because I initially thought something was wrong they should be informed about why it's happening.

They should know their own products.

What I'm criticizing here - and obviously I can only speak for myself - is Teslas lack of communication internally as well as externally.

They need to pick up their game.

And I agree with you completely that there is an inherent risk that new potential owners will be scared off by something that could be of little to no impact for them. I know a lot of Tesla owners who would not be impacted by this at all, and some who would only be when then go on road trips in the summer where they won't notice or won't care anyway.

For me, I'd like to know why I'm away more from my family because the manufacturer of MY car, that I OWN, decided to modify how fast it charges without any explanation. Especially with ~20% in the part of the charge cycle I use on a daily basis to be able to get home from work.

Some owners may also want to opt out and accept the risk of the additional wear of their battery. Which they should be entitled to do, especially if they are willing to void their battery warranty.

You're of course entitled to disagree, but hopefully you at the very least can understand my point of view.

Tor

 

[AnxietyRanger]

@torvalstrom Your point of view is far more benign than some of us even have on this, so definitely nothing unreasonable about it at all IMO.

 

[krouebi]

Good morning, @mkjayakumar,

Of course a lot of pennies saved by not charging at home should alleviate some of the pain of having to stay 5 minutes more.

Why always so negative and aggressive?

You may know that there are people who can actually NOT charge in a sensible way at home, and some of these may have access to free charging points - why shouldn't they use them??

A little bit envious, maybe??

 

[smac]

Mark Twain said: "We should be careful to get out of an experience all the wisdom that is in it -- not like the cat that sits on a hot stove lid. She will never sit down on a hot lid again -- and that is well; but also she will never sit down on a cold one anymore."

Good, it's unhygienic having animals wandering around on food surfaces

 

[AnxietyRanger]

@smac I didn't say it at the time, but now that the actual debate has setlled down, I think a little humor is OK. So I agree, why on Earth would we want cats or anyone sitting on stove lids? Isn't it fire hazard 101 to not keep anything on stove lids except when cooking. We teach our kids to avoid sitting on stove lids as well because it can be bad for you sometimes.

Ergo, we can recommend avoiding unnecessary DC charging, because that too can be bad for you sometimes.

 

[sorka]

Beat me to it. It say "up to". I don't believe Tesla guarantees a minimum charge rate anywhere. It's impossible to given there are too many factors that can limit charge rate.

Not guaranteeing the maximum charge rate because sometime conditions won't be optimal for it is *NOT* the same thing as guaranteeing you will *NEVER* reach the maximum charge rate because you are being capped via a software based counter

 

[sorka]

The 694 HP issue, ....

First I've heard of that one

 

[smac]

You have the 75kwh pack so 90kw is roughly your max. The 90/100kw packs have extra modules in parallel so can take proportionally larger current, as the current is distributed to more modules simultaneously. So don't worry, you're good. One of the advantages of the larger packs from the beginning was always faster supercharging.

In general I agree. However: 120 kW * 14/16 = 105 kW (not 98kW) Given they share the same cooling system, it would seem the smaller packs are taking less per module.

So might be physical, might also be model differentiation in software to encourage people to buy bigger packs (for the marketed advantage of better SpC rates).

 

[yobigd20]

This morning.100%range charge (233) to 10 miles range (3%) then supercharging.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I'm guessing there are few 90 kWh owners on this forum wishing their cars with half or a quarter that mileage would be faring as well as the 85s...

 

[Dublin 'Eer]

This morning.100%range charge (233) to 10 miles range (3%) then supercharging.
View attachment 226344

Just curious--what was your range when new? 233 is impressive after 150K. How much DC charging have you done?

 

[schonelucht]

I think given how many testimonies we've seen from uncapped 85'ers, one thing is for sure: they aren't affected. The one reported exception may be something else entirely.

 

[Max*]

On my P90DL it's "slow" up to around 6% where it then is consistently above 80 kW before tapering later in the cycle.

I can drive down to at least -6% (long story which basically boils down to faulty grounding at a summer cottage and then a 10% distance to the nearest alternative power source...)

Was quite surprised there was such a big reserve than was usable for driving. I knew about the bricking buffer, but had now idea there was such a large drivable reserve.

Under 0% you charge even slower, similar to the trickle charging at the end of the charge cycle.

Tor

There is no reserve. Period. It's been proven over and over again.

The fact that you got to -6% is due to an unbalanced battery pack, since the percentage is an estimate. The estimate was off. Next time your car might run out of juice at 0%. Don't rely on the extra range.

There is no intentional reserve for driving beyond 0 miles/0%.