-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Kevin Sharpe's decreased Roadster range
- Thread starter Kevin Sharpe
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Roadster
djp
Model 3 Performance
To be fair, almost half of the $21k is the car ESA, not the battery ESA. He bought the ESA knowing that degradation was excluded, and the loss he's seeing is within Tesla's published guidance.
If Tesla covers the repair under warranty then they set a precedent for every other owner who isn't happy with their range to make a claim. I think the fair thing to do is for Tesla to give Kevin a quote on a sheet replacement, at Kevin's cost.
I think it's more frustration that there appears to be an obvious problem with a single sheet that Tesla doesn't want to or can't fix because they want to shift to new batteries and they don't have them.
Right, I think that's very reasonable. The more I think about it, degradation shouldn't be measured by a straight up percentage, but rather by a comparison of the bricks. I can't claim credit for this idea as it has been postulated many times before by several knowledgeable TMC members. In a nutshell:
Obviously bricks/sheets will age differently, but if there is one brick/sheet that is far out of line with the rest then that should be on Tesla to fix. That implies something abnormal (I.e. Outside of the limits of normal degradation).
Just my opinion if Tesla were ever to warrant degradation.
If a component is operating within design parameters, where's the issue? Range loss in an EV is hardly a new thing. If you disagree with the design parameters, that is a different problem altogether.
From the PIA chart, there seem to be data points that have performed worse. Anyone know what the history is for those?
So if 7/8 bricks report some arbitrary value 50 and then one brick reports 30, don't you think that would signal that there is perhaps a defect with that one brick out of 8? I do. It's just statistics. If we are to determine there is abnormal degradation in a pack and all bricks report 50, well then I could see Tesla saying that's normal degradation (I.e. Too many range charges, deep cycling, etc). But 1/8 is something I would define as abnormal event.
I'm not the only one with this view. As I said before, there are several other, more knowledgeable people than I, that have suggested this methodology. It makes sense. It holds water.
I'm not the only one with this view. As I said before, there are several other, more knowledgeable people than I, that have suggested this methodology. It makes sense. It holds water.
Tesla battery range degredation forcing return to gas
You have to remember these were off the shelf commercial cells too. They were not designed for cars like the Model S cells. 30% drop in 50,000 miles sucks but the car still works. He isn't at 30%.
You have to remember these were off the shelf commercial cells too. They were not designed for cars like the Model S cells. 30% drop in 50,000 miles sucks but the car still works. He isn't at 30%.
Something as important as the battery cannot be taken as a whole. If you observe a sheet to be failing and its the other sheets pulling up the numbers, then its a defecting component. Eventually, the sheet will die much faster than other sheets and will lead to shutdown of the entire ESS. By that time, the warranty might have ended.
If you observe a component to be failing, and you have warranty for the said component, then fix it.
If your iphone's wifi reception sucked, and the apple tells you, its okay though, cuz the LTE antenna is doing great and is faster than your home wifi anyways .... you'd tell them to shove it. And that's a $600 product. For a $40,000 product, you bet your butt the guy is pissed.
Tesla had a price for replacing sheets but not bricks. This was established practice thus we consider a sheet to be a component thus something to be warranted. To now say that the whole battery is the irreducible component is weaseling, it would seem to me.
--
--
supersnoop
Tesla Roadster #334
Don't know if it helps visualise the problem... I'm in the top 4 for range reduction in the PiA survey of 152 Roadsters...
- - - Updated - - -
As stated in my first post the Tesla Roadster Battery Extended Service Agreement explicitly excludes battery degradation and I'm not arguing that point. Whether an implied or stated Roadster battery warranty exists is subject to a legal review and will take sometime to unravel as I'm sure you can imagine.
For me personally the real issue is whether an electric car owner should expect anything from the battery in terms of a range guarantee. I believe it's critical for mass adoption to take this worry away from consumers and afaik Nissan do just that with their battery warranty.
- - - Updated - - -
As stated in my first post the Tesla Roadster Battery Extended Service Agreement explicitly excludes battery degradation and I'm not arguing that point. Whether an implied or stated Roadster battery warranty exists is subject to a legal review and will take sometime to unravel as I'm sure you can imagine.
For me personally the real issue is whether an electric car owner should expect anything from the battery in terms of a range guarantee. I believe it's critical for mass adoption to take this worry away from consumers and afaik Nissan do just that with their battery warranty.
djp
Model 3 Performance
The warranty is for the ESS as a whole and only covers complete failure, not degradation. The range loss Kevin is seeing is within Tesla's published guidance for degradation. You're also making an assumption that brick 8 is the only one that's dropping, other brick/sheets could be almost as low as #8. We need the ahr.log to see if #8 is an outlier or not.
How exactly do we know it's all attributed to degradation? The logs have shown a problem with a specific sheet for several years. There is absolutely no doubt about that.
- - - Updated - - -
This is pretty unlikely, as #8 has been a problem for years.
wiztecy
Active Member
I feel the best way to address some of these issues from this point on is to voice to Tesla professionally in a request to:
1) Have a similar battery warranty with the Roadster's new 400 mile pack, just as good or even better than the Model-S warranty.
2) To look into abnormal sheet degradation, have a % degradation per sheet and per brick spec that's easily measurable (a simple metric) that's considered a warranty repair item.
I found the ideal way to handle the issues (Roadster) in a professional manner is to:
Document (email is best) any issues you're Roadster is having, improvements, issues in range, performance, etc.. to your local Tesla service center. If you get no response or a response you don't like, feel free to escalate it higher up in Tesla where you live, and then finally to the US. Allow Tesla to respond and give their side. If they don't respond in a way you like, don't take it as they're ignoring you. The next time your Roadster is in for work they will remember you had a concern in other areas and may address that while their in there working on your Roadster.
Its great to document your experience on the forum, especially when the full loop and resolution has been resolved. However it can backfire on you and others in a big way. First of all this forum gets many visitors and others who have a Tesla, not a Roadster, but a Model S. Two different cars with similar but way different components and era of technology. The Model S owners may misunderstand some of the conversation and in turn work against you in the long run. Meaning less buyers, rumors getting spread, and then a negative spiral from there. I hope you understand what I'm getting at. I feel this thread is running in an out of control spiral in some sense, educational in others. But people will pick and chose through this which you need to read the entire thread to understand. The title is way to sensationalized too. Sorry but that was my opinion.
From my own experience about concerns I raised to Tesla:
I had very minor degradation at 8k miles in my Roadster (I bought it with 3k). 188 ideal std miles down to 182. CAC showed a drop. To me it seemed odd to have this type of drop after 4 months. Voiced it to the service center, even wrote emails to document it. I was heard and Tesla indicated this was not out of bounds but were very professional listening to me. Then when I had a fatal APS issue over a year later on my 1.5 (my car was a 2-3 months out of warranty) they flat-bedded my Roadster to their service center, diagnosed it, found and indicated the issue was in the pack. They had to drop the pack, and in doing the APS repair they also replaced my entire battery pack both under goodwill. They indicated that my Roadster was fixed on very personal phone call. They stated that they fixed the APS issue, but that they also put in a new (refurbished) battery pack since I had voiced a concern with my original battery pack. So I was blown away.
So in my own experience, Tesla is concerned but takes care of things that have a precedence. Second of all, if you voice your concern in a professional manner you will be heard. It may not be resolved immediately in the manner you like, but there most likely are credible reasons for that. And if you disagree with that, follow up with Tesla and state why you disagree stating you'd like to see a change in the future to address them in the product.
1) Have a similar battery warranty with the Roadster's new 400 mile pack, just as good or even better than the Model-S warranty.
2) To look into abnormal sheet degradation, have a % degradation per sheet and per brick spec that's easily measurable (a simple metric) that's considered a warranty repair item.
I found the ideal way to handle the issues (Roadster) in a professional manner is to:
Document (email is best) any issues you're Roadster is having, improvements, issues in range, performance, etc.. to your local Tesla service center. If you get no response or a response you don't like, feel free to escalate it higher up in Tesla where you live, and then finally to the US. Allow Tesla to respond and give their side. If they don't respond in a way you like, don't take it as they're ignoring you. The next time your Roadster is in for work they will remember you had a concern in other areas and may address that while their in there working on your Roadster.
Its great to document your experience on the forum, especially when the full loop and resolution has been resolved. However it can backfire on you and others in a big way. First of all this forum gets many visitors and others who have a Tesla, not a Roadster, but a Model S. Two different cars with similar but way different components and era of technology. The Model S owners may misunderstand some of the conversation and in turn work against you in the long run. Meaning less buyers, rumors getting spread, and then a negative spiral from there. I hope you understand what I'm getting at. I feel this thread is running in an out of control spiral in some sense, educational in others. But people will pick and chose through this which you need to read the entire thread to understand. The title is way to sensationalized too. Sorry but that was my opinion.
From my own experience about concerns I raised to Tesla:
I had very minor degradation at 8k miles in my Roadster (I bought it with 3k). 188 ideal std miles down to 182. CAC showed a drop. To me it seemed odd to have this type of drop after 4 months. Voiced it to the service center, even wrote emails to document it. I was heard and Tesla indicated this was not out of bounds but were very professional listening to me. Then when I had a fatal APS issue over a year later on my 1.5 (my car was a 2-3 months out of warranty) they flat-bedded my Roadster to their service center, diagnosed it, found and indicated the issue was in the pack. They had to drop the pack, and in doing the APS repair they also replaced my entire battery pack both under goodwill. They indicated that my Roadster was fixed on very personal phone call. They stated that they fixed the APS issue, but that they also put in a new (refurbished) battery pack since I had voiced a concern with my original battery pack. So I was blown away.
So in my own experience, Tesla is concerned but takes care of things that have a precedence. Second of all, if you voice your concern in a professional manner you will be heard. It may not be resolved immediately in the manner you like, but there most likely are credible reasons for that. And if you disagree with that, follow up with Tesla and state why you disagree stating you'd like to see a change in the future to address them in the product.
Last edited:
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
That's what I'm arguing too. From what we have so far we don't know if #8 is really a outlier or not. Also, if I'm understanding the log posted so far correctly, the min brick is 129.41Ah, average is 135.11Ah. So the weakest brick is still within 5% (4.22% to be more exact) of the average of the whole pack. It's entirely possible Tesla considers this within specs (esp. if the pack haven't been balanced in a while). The ahr.log will give us a clearer picture by showing the distribution among the bricks.
Also, looking at the example posted by the OP of a "normal" Roadster, numbers are min 147.59Ah, average 149.93Ah, so min was 1.56% off the average.
For his entry of "01/20/2012 15:34:11, 149.02, 151.70, 8", that was 1.77% off the average. So up to that point the pack was similar to the "normal" example. The numbers then jump to "04/16/2013 11:01:56, 143.71, 147.36, 8" or 2.48%.
I did some digging but couldn't find the logs for packs that Tesla decided to replace sheets under warranty. It would be helpful to know that Tesla considered a warranty item in the past.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
^^ This.
Twitter-shaming, threatening legal action on twitter, posting on various forums, naming Top Gear on some twitter posts ... and then dissing this forum because not everyone agreed with you because there are stock holders here and Tesla fans ... really? Can't people just disagree without being dismissed as stock holders or Tesla fans or whatever? Can't it just be a different opinion?
