The last time Tesla felt compelled to respond publicly regarding lawsuit claims, they managed to stay above the fray, but they didn't pull any punches either: Lemon Lawsuit
Last edited:
-
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
The last time Tesla felt compelled to respond publicly regarding lawsuit claims, they managed to stay above the fray, but they didn't pull any punches either: Lemon Lawsuit
I'd be careful with your mud slinging because it includes several members of this community. For the record I simply passed across the contact information and have no idea who was interviewed or what they said.
The story will be on the BBC tomorrow and then in the national papers on Sunday (or possibly the following weekend). I understand the focus will be on battery warranty issues but I don't control the editorial process.
You really need to stand back and understand that owners have legitimate questions and the constant shrill from a Tesla Cheerleader will have no impact.
Last edited:
I'm confused as to how 20% capacity loss has lead to 2-4 hours of additional charging - as others have mentioned as well.
Let's assume that you're getting rated mileage 245 miles which is about the maximum available at 55 mph when the roadster is new.
20% capacity loss would reduce that to about 195 miles or a loss of 50 miles of range.
I'm not familiar with UK charging stations, but a common station appears to be 230V/32A or 7.2 kW. At 245 miles range / charge that would be around 250 Wh / mile from the wall, so 7.2 kW should get you around 29 mi / hour.
I'm having a hard time envisioning how 20% capacity loss could be leading to anything more than 1h 45m of additional charging. Considering that you claim it was "easily done" previously, I am having a hard time envisioning that it should require more than an hour of additional charging or so. And if you had 70A+ charging available, certainly this should add even less time to the trip.
Jaff
Active Member
Kevin, I don't know nor have ever met you.
I do know that you have done much to advance the EV "cause" in the U.K. and you well deserve to be lauded for such.
However, this comment directed against Bonnie is beneath you Sir.
I do know that you have done much to advance the EV "cause" in the U.K. and you well deserve to be lauded for such.
However, this comment directed against Bonnie is beneath you Sir.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Eh, it's what I expect from Kevin. When someone disagrees with him or goes against him, it's not because they may be right. They are simply dismissed as a cheerleader or because they have financial concerns.
Yeh, I'm the only one who ever raises the financial conflict question...
Tesla battery range degredation forcing return to gas - Page 14
I really don't understand why you are so afraid... all OEMs will eventually have battery degradation warranties and thats good for both consumers and OEMs
- - - Updated - - -
If you take a look at my twitter stream over the last few months you'll get the full picture...
Mitrovic
Member
Not good, not good at all. I don't like this thread.
Kevin may be you are right, but I don't think that you have taken the right way. It feels like you are destroying your work of years.
It reads like you are making the plot for the new movie "The revenge of Kevin Sharpe".
It really looks to me that it is a personal thing.
I've read somewhere that you are a man on a mission. Your mission seems to be very personal, and that is ok, but things like that you do not take on social platforms.
If you are really fighting for the community, then take a lawyer go to court, but I do not appreciate a fight between two parties to be fought over media. Sorry, I am disappointed. Go to court, if you want to, there both parties can explain themselves and the judge can decide. Here it is just you throwing things at Tesla which can not defend themselves. That is not FairPlay.
( and I even do not have Tesla stocks, and have a Roadster which has a battery which is not at 100% level )
Kevin may be you are right, but I don't think that you have taken the right way. It feels like you are destroying your work of years.
It reads like you are making the plot for the new movie "The revenge of Kevin Sharpe".
It really looks to me that it is a personal thing.
I've read somewhere that you are a man on a mission. Your mission seems to be very personal, and that is ok, but things like that you do not take on social platforms.
If you are really fighting for the community, then take a lawyer go to court, but I do not appreciate a fight between two parties to be fought over media. Sorry, I am disappointed. Go to court, if you want to, there both parties can explain themselves and the judge can decide. Here it is just you throwing things at Tesla which can not defend themselves. That is not FairPlay.
( and I even do not have Tesla stocks, and have a Roadster which has a battery which is not at 100% level )
Lawsuits overwhelmingly favors the party with the unlimited resources. And even if you do win, its really the lawyers that win. Like Kevin, I don't understand the protectionism of Tesla. He's got a real/or perceived battery degradation issue. One which we ALL will face eventually as well. Lets get Tesla to provide a clear answer/statement on the matter. Nissan did.
Well said. There's no way you will ever convince me that starting an EV media FUD-fest, especially with the BBC, will ultimately be productive for EV adoption and reducing carbon emissions. And no, I'm not falling for this twisted logic about how we'll never have mass adoption without better warranties. We need better definitions in our warranties from Tesla and eventually we'll get them but you don't achieve that goal by cutting off your face in spite of your nose.
I agree with Kevin that his battery should be covered by his ESA. I think it's a defect. And I think Tesla should have better definitions in their warranty. But it's not the right way to ultimately promote EV adoption and reduce carbon.
Nissan woke up when faced with a class action lawsuit from owners and today they have a much more transparent battery warranty than Tesla. Legal action can clearly work if targeted in the right way even against a company the size of Nissan.
I'm not personally interested in the Model S but it is clear that some owners do not understand that they have no battery degradation warranty. Indeed I had an owner argue vehemently with me today that he had an "Infinite-Mile Warranty" which "covers everything".
If you want a prediction about the medium term future it is that the lack of a Model S battery degradation warranty will blow up in Tesla's face.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Yeh, I'm the only one who ever raises the financial conflict question...
Tesla battery range degredation forcing return to gas - Page 14
I really don't understand why you are so afraid... all OEMs will eventually have battery degradation warranties and thats good for both consumers and OEMs
- - - Updated - - -
If you take a look at my twitter stream over the last few months you'll get the full picture...
Where in the world did you get the impression I was 'afraid'? Please don't try to paint me a certain way. And just because someone else mentions financial concerns, what in the world does that have to do with this discussion? On the twitter feed, I said it was like trying to 'nail jello' (which EV Speak did correct to be non-brand specific to 'nail jelly', so I'll go with that
). Throwing out stuff like 'afraid' and 'cheerleader' and claiming you are just trying to make sure people are educated when even this thread was titled about your situation and not about education ... nailing jelly. It just keeps shifting.
And yes, please DO check the twitter feed. I encourage everyone to read the conversations there. Why you imply that by reading it 'people will get the full picture', I have no idea. Everyone has been completely polite, even with their uncomfortable questions ignored by you. For instance, I asked a question there & I asked it again here. Both places, unanswered: Why would you dramatically claim that you would have to now stop and charge for two hours because of a loss of 40 miles in range? And people will also notice in checking the twitter feed that the stated range loss varies from 'only having 199' to 'only having 129'. Quite the variance.
- - - Updated - - -
I think if you'd like to refocus this thread on future battery degradation warranties, everyone would be quite happy with that outcome - should I ask the moderator for this section to retitle this thread to help with that?
BBC Radio 4 "You and Yours" Consumer Affairs Programme (Audience 3.5 million)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04gcdt8
Interviews with Tesla Roadster owners discussing battery degradation and warranties (or lack thereof).
- - - Updated - - -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04gcdt8
Interviews with Tesla Roadster owners discussing battery degradation and warranties (or lack thereof).
- - - Updated - - -
No thank you... after 175 posts I think we all understand what we are discussing here.
Last edited:
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Wow. Just ... wow. I asked if you wanted the title changed because you were talking different times about how you were only bringing this up to educate and to help people out. Talk about casting in the WORST possible light. Just so you know, that never even occurred to me. But I guess if you have decided the world is out to get you, then you see everything through that filter. Tough way to live a life.
Look, I feel like I helped stoke the fire for this issue when I originally posted the 15 mile seeming loss in ideal range in our CPO 2008 1.5 #40 in this thread.
I agree with everything Henry is saying here. It always looked to me that brick 8 had problems. That it exhibited itself as degradation, but having a single brick be LOW brick for EVER just doesn't make sense. Tesla UK in trying to call this as degradation is what is the problem here.
After four years of trying to get the darn thing fixed and getting stonewalled, it's within Kevin's right to fight. Just hate that it could hurt the cause. But I understand it.
As someone who IS a shareholder, and, like many others, one who "doubled-down" on Tesla with both a Roadster and Model S, I appreciate the focus on the lack of degradation on the Tesla Battery Warranty (up to and including the much vaunted "unlimited / infinite" mile warranty that Tesla had recently announced.). I have always felt the need to save up to replace the battery. However, I was lulled by Tesla's marketing for both the CPO Warranty (which was sold as a "better than new" 37,000 mile/37 Month bumper to bumper warranty that (after reading these posts, etc.) effectively is out of coverage for any loss because the published 2006 blog specified 30% in five years. (and our car is a 2008 Vin #40, bought it ALREADY five years old) as well as the upgrade to the Infinite Mile warranty for the Model S.
Needless to say, caveat emptor, and now I know better. However, it would be nice for Roadster owners who decide to purchase the 400 mile upgrade to have some sort of degradation coverage. Additionally, if Tesla DID make this retroactive, it helps all of us. Heck, Nissan and BMW i provide some guidelines on battery degradation.
Just sucks that we get what we have. Batteries are consumables and Tesla needs to publish what the expected costs should be, should the degradation in a car's battery be something that is intolerable to the owner. (heck, even if the degradation is at 30% and we know that ahead of time, we can make the decision to get a new battery earlier, you know, like how TIRES are applied for their treadwear warranties.)
Yes please.
I agree with everything Henry is saying here. It always looked to me that brick 8 had problems. That it exhibited itself as degradation, but having a single brick be LOW brick for EVER just doesn't make sense. Tesla UK in trying to call this as degradation is what is the problem here.
After four years of trying to get the darn thing fixed and getting stonewalled, it's within Kevin's right to fight. Just hate that it could hurt the cause. But I understand it.
As someone who IS a shareholder, and, like many others, one who "doubled-down" on Tesla with both a Roadster and Model S, I appreciate the focus on the lack of degradation on the Tesla Battery Warranty (up to and including the much vaunted "unlimited / infinite" mile warranty that Tesla had recently announced.). I have always felt the need to save up to replace the battery. However, I was lulled by Tesla's marketing for both the CPO Warranty (which was sold as a "better than new" 37,000 mile/37 Month bumper to bumper warranty that (after reading these posts, etc.) effectively is out of coverage for any loss because the published 2006 blog specified 30% in five years. (and our car is a 2008 Vin #40, bought it ALREADY five years old) as well as the upgrade to the Infinite Mile warranty for the Model S.
Needless to say, caveat emptor, and now I know better. However, it would be nice for Roadster owners who decide to purchase the 400 mile upgrade to have some sort of degradation coverage. Additionally, if Tesla DID make this retroactive, it helps all of us. Heck, Nissan and BMW i provide some guidelines on battery degradation.
Just sucks that we get what we have. Batteries are consumables and Tesla needs to publish what the expected costs should be, should the degradation in a car's battery be something that is intolerable to the owner. (heck, even if the degradation is at 30% and we know that ahead of time, we can make the decision to get a new battery earlier, you know, like how TIRES are applied for their treadwear warranties.)
Yes please.
Some TMC moderators have a history of moving posts and changing threads which I consider at best unhelpful and at worst a crude attempt to filter difficult information.
I was discussing this today with a journalist from the Financial Times who commented on the hostility negative Tesla views receive on TMC. He was pondering an article on the subject so you might find yourself in The London Times :smile:
Personally I think the posting of tweets and regurgitating of old forum topics is an unnecessary distraction and I will no longer respond to those here.
- - - Updated - - -
Interesting article by AEdennis - Battery Degredation and Tesla's "warranty"
Battery Degradation and Tesla | My ActiveE made me Accidentally Environmental
tomsax
Member
I think the big issue here is about the lack of a capacity warranty and battery replacement options for the Roadster and Model S. Nissan stepped up and handled this situation, first with a battery capacity warranty given retroactively to all LEAF owners in December, 2012, then a price for an improved replacement battery pack in May of this year.
All EV automakers should be doing this. It's not reasonable for the consumer to take on the risk of getting an underperforming battery pack. It's easy for the automaker to pick up the cost for the few battery packs that don't perform to expectation, totally unreasonable for the individual unlucky consumers to get stuck with that cost.
I'm not saying this is easy. Putting a warranty on miles ignores differences in driver behavior affecting battery cycles. Data from Model S owners suggests there is nearly a factor of 2 difference among drivers in energy use per mile. Perhaps a warranty based on kWh cycled through the pack, with appropriate driver-visible instrumentation.
Easy or not, it needs to be done. Tesla should do it for Model S owners or stop gloating about the unlimited miles warranty. I keep hearing Musk thank Roadster owners for supporting Tesla and contributing to where they are today. I think we deserve more than occasional nice words. For those still under battery warranty, there should be a reasonable capacity condition. For all of us, there should be pack replacement options in line with what we were lead to expect when we chose to put deposits down on a car that didn't yet exist.
Of course, it's more complicated than miles driven because it's really about kWh cycled through the battery pack and although data suggests that the Roadster and LEAF are similar on energy efficiency, driver behavior and environment can have a considerable affect on battery-to-wheel energy use per mile driven.
Using the August 18th datapoint, brick #8 is 4.2% below the average. If a sheet swap raised the CAC to the current average, it will presumably raise Kevin's range from 199 to 208 Range Mode ideal miles. The relationship between CAC and range isn't exactly linear, but close enough for small perturbations.
It's possible that one bad brick lowers the pack average by keeping the pack from seeing the full capacity of the other bricks due to balancing constraints. We just don't know enough to be sure.
I can't claim causality, but I sent Nissan an advance copy of the Plug In America LEAF battery study in early December and when they announced the capacity warranty on December 27th, they not only mentioned the survey paper, Andy Palmer recommended all LEAF owners read it.
Of course in 2008 and 2009, Tesla's future was far from certain and there were plenty of reasons to consider other ways to invest that $12,000 expecting that batteries would continue to get cheaper. One could argue that this offer implies that most owners would not be in a position where a battery replacement would be viewed as necessary until 7 or 8 years had passed. In fact, this AutoBlogGreen article from 2009 does exactly that.
All EV automakers should be doing this. It's not reasonable for the consumer to take on the risk of getting an underperforming battery pack. It's easy for the automaker to pick up the cost for the few battery packs that don't perform to expectation, totally unreasonable for the individual unlucky consumers to get stuck with that cost.
I'm not saying this is easy. Putting a warranty on miles ignores differences in driver behavior affecting battery cycles. Data from Model S owners suggests there is nearly a factor of 2 difference among drivers in energy use per mile. Perhaps a warranty based on kWh cycled through the pack, with appropriate driver-visible instrumentation.
Easy or not, it needs to be done. Tesla should do it for Model S owners or stop gloating about the unlimited miles warranty. I keep hearing Musk thank Roadster owners for supporting Tesla and contributing to where they are today. I think we deserve more than occasional nice words. For those still under battery warranty, there should be a reasonable capacity condition. For all of us, there should be pack replacement options in line with what we were lead to expect when we chose to put deposits down on a car that didn't yet exist.
That's exactly right. All this technical detail about CAC, brick Ah, and everything else we're guessing about from partial understanding of log files is beside the point and a huge distraction. All we really need is ideal miles in Range mode (validated appropriately) and a specific capacity warranty.
As I understand it, that's not true. In a series of statements, Musk said that they would have something great for Roadster owners at the end of 2013 (Teslive), then spring of 2014, then at the end of 2014. The most recent statement was a 400-mile battery pack after the Gigafactory is up and running. That to me says they won't work on it at all until some nebulous point in the future and definitely not before the Gigafactory is done. Statements made at TMC Connect suggest that no one is actually working on it right now, it's just Musk talking. To me an announcement means: commitment to specific details about the product (400 ideal miles or rated miles?), price, and availability date. So far, we have none of those.
It's not reasonable to compare a LEAF at 50,000 miles to a Roadster at 50,000 miles. The LEAF's usable battery capacity is somewhere around 40% of the Roadster's. Thus losing 20% of battery capacity at 50,000 miles in a LEAF is comparable to losing 20% in a Roadster at 125,000 miles.
Of course, it's more complicated than miles driven because it's really about kWh cycled through the battery pack and although data suggests that the Roadster and LEAF are similar on energy efficiency, driver behavior and environment can have a considerable affect on battery-to-wheel energy use per mile driven.
Actually, Kevin's log data shows his pack's average brick Ah as well as the low brick Ah.
Using the August 18th datapoint, brick #8 is 4.2% below the average. If a sheet swap raised the CAC to the current average, it will presumably raise Kevin's range from 199 to 208 Range Mode ideal miles. The relationship between CAC and range isn't exactly linear, but close enough for small perturbations.
It's possible that one bad brick lowers the pack average by keeping the pack from seeing the full capacity of the other bricks due to balancing constraints. We just don't know enough to be sure.
Right, but they don't say anything about what your capacity will be during that use case.
Based on what I've heard from Roadster owners, and I hear a fair amount from people who don't want to post their experience publicly, most battery or sheet replacements were due to issues other than capacity loss: failing the bleed test or going completely dead. As far as I can recall, I've not heard of anyone getting a sheet or pack replacement for capacity loss without some other specific failure.
That's not quite right.LEAF sales did drop down below 500/month in April of 2012, but then steadily rose to 1,579 and 1,539 in the two months before the capacity warranty announcement on December 27, 2012. LEAF sales first hit 3,000 in May of 2014, but they didn't announce the favorable replacement pack pricing until June 27th. LEAF sales were actually lower in June and July than in May.
I can't claim causality, but I sent Nissan an advance copy of the Plug In America LEAF battery study in early December and when they announced the capacity warranty on December 27th, they not only mentioned the survey paper, Andy Palmer recommended all LEAF owners read it.
I believe the deal where you pay $12,000 for a new battery after seven (or eight?) years was offered to all original Roadster owners in the US.
Of course in 2008 and 2009, Tesla's future was far from certain and there were plenty of reasons to consider other ways to invest that $12,000 expecting that batteries would continue to get cheaper. One could argue that this offer implies that most owners would not be in a position where a battery replacement would be viewed as necessary until 7 or 8 years had passed. In fact, this AutoBlogGreen article from 2009 does exactly that.
Kevin, I assume by Plug In America, you mean me. What you're asking is beyond what our mission and funding support. I've given the log parser to the Roadster community to help us all understand our cars better and through Plug In America I have provided the Roadster battery survey so everyone can undertand our collective experience with the Roadster. Please use what Plug In America and I have provided to make your case, but don't expect us to do it for you.
Both ideal miles and rated miles are energy units, just more palatable to the average consumer than kWh. It would be nice if Tesla explicitly defined them in kWh.
Have you ever considered if you feel everyone is out to get you it might really be you instead of everyone else? 'Some moderators' work hard to keep this forum running smoothly. You are welcome to find a forum you feel more comfortable in. We have plenty of dissenting views and nothing is hidden or edited. You are making this up. Tesla is made up of human beings too. If you treat people like this in person maybe it is counterproductive to your goals.
Not at all... plenty of excellent posts have been moved into "snippiness" or whatever it's called these days.
Lets focus on the point of this thread... why my Tesla Roadster battery degradation is forcing a return to gas. This is not an academic question for me but real life this weekend :crying:
- - - Updated - - -
No problem and I really appreciate what you have posted here today.
Last edited:
