GPS Lat/Long has stopped working, any ideas?
two-scroll-wheel Rebooted ... no change.
Actually that did fix it, but (it seems) not until the car subsequently moved. Whilst it sat parked at work the Lat/Long didn't change, but on the drive home from work GPS was working again, and auto dip headlights.
Regen wasn't though. My supposition is that when the "regen to stop" update downloaded the car was on a different profile. Regen worked on that profile albeit regen worked at the way down to stop but that profile is set to ROLL and not HOLD. I didn't realise that, driving it I got the regen-to-stop and commented earlier that it would take some getting used to ... but the setting on that profile is definitely ROLL (the update must have added the new ones [
the new options were't there on the photos I took when collected] and set it to ROLL). I now think that the other profile (which correctly had regen set to Standard, not low, and also to ROLL not HOLD, wasn't working properly for some reason.
I changed the (other profile) Regen to HOLD and that definitely worked (although only tried it back-and-forth on the drive, so drive to work this morning will tell better).
So maybe most of this because I broke my own unwritten rule and didn't do a reboot after installing a new version ... although it seems there was definitely something screwy causing a difference between the profile that was active when the update was installed, and a different profile used [for the very first time] for yesterday's (drive (earlier in the list FWIW)
That would be 100% in line with my past experience of Tesla [
lack of] QA ...
I notice there was battery heating on in the most recent trip or is that just a difference in Teslafi between the dates of the logs?
TeslaFi update notes mentioned that Battery Heater icon now shows percentage of time that it was on for the trip. Previously it was just "If battery heater on at start of trip", and I have definitely seen battery heater icon before ... but I would have thought that could be retrospectively displayed on old data (battery heater is an attribute that is logged)
battery may have been colder, the "old car" comparisons are from several weeks ago, so although similar temperature that temperature may have been reached by falling later in the night, and now reached earlier in the night at this time of year, in which case new car battery would have been more "cold soaked". Car was not plugged in overnight, prior to departure, on any of these graphs.
But I'm pleased with the saving in energy. No attempt to do anything different other than just "drive to work" (no range concern on this trip). Its mostly dual carriageway, commuter traffic reasonably heavy, and big section of (40) roadworks, so about as comparable as I can get it. I could look for trips this-week-last-year (or two) for a better comparison, but I'm happy with 20% less consumption, and a battery that is a good 10% bigger
The traction is surprisingly different. I tried some Launches over the weekend. There is none of that "punch" from the P, and some hesitation / uncertainty in how the power is put down (at various points in the acceleration). Also traction control is not as convincing as the P model (no idea how that is able to do it better, same wheels and tyres I think?); maybe the bigger motor is able to deliver more power where it is needed, and non-P is having to make up for that my both pulling and pushing as hard as it can?
But in the mid range - e.g. overtaking - I'd be hard pressed to notice much difference. I actually need to overtake something coming out of the (30), near here, where the subsequent straight is very short to see if what used to be "can't believe it needs so little road" to ... brown trousers!
Also noticed that your average speed on the more recent trip is lower
Not sure there's enough in it to matter, Speed will have been up and down (the nature of the commute at that time). The bottom graph is only 2 MPH faster, and that used more energy than the one that is 3 MPH faster still and slightly colder. Very hard to get close-to-identical runs, and this, for sure, is a "one data point" test. But I'm banking-it