New 85kWH battery for my 2013 P85+

[dark cloud]

Here is something I don't recall anyone else reporting upon. There is another advantage to a new pack for those with cold winter climates : It's mostly smooth.

With these plastic sides, (sorry, a little salty/ sandy)

that I assume are sacrificial in the case of grounding the underside, like the model 3 (?)

instead of these many channels in the old one (below) which filled up with ice/snow and then melted a few gallons of water onto my garage floor on every single drive, which was a PITA. I guess Tesla determined the middle rails are not necessary? It is a welcome change for sure.

 

[Droschke]

@dark cloud - Do you know what those center rails are for on the older packs?

 

[Droschke]

On my way home with the new pack.
Yup, happy with the new pack

Did they replace your Upper Link Assembly as they have for some other 1014116-00-C recipients?

 

[dark cloud]

@dark cloud - Do you know what those center rails are for on the older packs?

I don't believe it is of a structural necessity, but I didn't engineer it, so guessing they are just for protection from bottoming out over large expansion joints/driveways etc.This one does have one in the centre, but not the two in between the edges and the centre.

Makes sense; I don't know what would strike the middle rails and yet not abrade the edge or centre ones. Curious though; can anyone fill me in on what they did for the bottoms of the 100 packs?

Also the edge rails don't seem to have those slots the old one did (can be seen in the picture above), as the plastic runner mates up against the metal rail, and the outside of the rail is smooth metal with no holes. AGain, hoping it collects much less snow

Did they replace your Upper Link Assembly as they have for some other 1014116-00-C recipients?

Nope. I guess mine are still fine. Especially since the whole front end suspension I had changed for new, and they didn't even suggest swapping out the rear.

 

[rns-e]

On my way home with the new pack.
Yup, happy with the new pack
Supercharging for the third time on this trip past the cars rolled in the ditch that went off the icy Coquihalla.
Don’t know if it is software limited yet or not, but the 2014 85 pack had a maximum of 404 km, so looking at this range means no, but even at 100% it was still supercharging at 17 kw, said “calculating” and I had regen, which means there is some buffer there. (?)

View attachment 871484

454 km @100% in a P85D, you diffidently have access to full capacity, no cap here. And it also indicates that your pack is a full 90 kWh and not the 87.5 kWh like the B revision. Can you get a Scan My Tesla to verify? 454 km is very impressive!

 

[dark cloud]

454 km @100% in a P85D, you diffidently have access to full capacity, no cap here. And it also indicates that your pack is a full 90 kWh and not the 87.5 kWh like the B revision. Can you get a Scan My Tesla to verify? 454 km is very impressive!

I've never scanned her, and don't really care to be honest. From what I have read I think the 87.5kwh is the max from this pack; don't know why this would have more?
But I’m going to test my less snow sticking to the underside theory today

 

[rns-e]

Well, I have a P85D with the B revision and have 87.5 kWh and 438 km, so if you have 454 (which is the most I ever heard for a P85D) then I guess you'll have more. I believe that 454 is significantly higher than a P90D originally had.

I appreciate that you don't really care about the capacity of the pack, but we are many that do ;-)

 

[Droschke]

Well, I have a P85D with the B revision and have 87.5 kWh and 438 km, so if you have 454 (which is the most I ever heard for a P85D) then I guess you'll have more. I believe that 454 is significantly higher than a P90D originally had.

I appreciate that you don't really care about the capacity of the pack, but we are many that do ;-)

@rns-e ... how do you explain this if you believe he is not capped:

but even at 100% it was still supercharging at 17 kw, said “calculating” and I had regen, which means there is some buffer there.

 

[rns-e]

The only explanation would be that it is not a 350V 90 kWh, but a 100 kWh

How else would you explain 454 km and still charging with 17 kW? Certainly not a 90 kWh or something was way off

You have the C pack in a MS85, what is your 100%?

 

[Droschke]

The only explanation would be that it is not a 350V 90 kWh, but a 100 kWh

I doubt it. None of his suspension components were replaced.

How else would you explain 454 km and still charging with 17 kW? Certainly not a 90 kWh or something was way off

The highest uncapped range for 1014116-00-C I've seen is 297 miles for 2013 S85. His P85D range with the same pack is 282 miles, and that's why he is pulling 17 kw at 99% and with regen. He must be capped at the top slightly.

What is peculiar is the omission of the capacity on his pack label. I've seen that in at least another instance but can not speculate on the reasoning.

You have the C pack in a MS85, what is your 100%?

My 100% charge gives me 270 miles. I'm capped at the top by ~7 kWh. Have full regen at 100% and pull 35 kw when supercharge at 99%.

 

[rns-e]

I agree that a 100 kWh is very unlikely. But the typical range, which I believe we are talking about, is it not set by a fixed formula? Is that formula taking into account which size wheels you are running?

So my car will say 438 km at 100% charge and I'm running 21" staggered, so if it takes into account that I'm running 21 and @dark cloud is running 19", the range would make sense. I can not make the 17 kW at 454 km make sense.

My 100% charge gives me 270 miles. I'm capped at the top by ~7 kWh. Have full regen at 100% and pull 35 kw when supercharge at 99%.

Have you had a SMT on your car? Are you running 19"?

 

[Droschke]

I agree that a 100 kWh is very unlikely. But the typical range, which I believe we are talking about, is it not set by a fixed formula? Is that formula taking into account which size wheels you are running?

So my car will say 438 km at 100% charge and I'm running 21" staggered, so if it takes into account that I'm running 21 and @dark cloud is running 19", the range would make sense. I can not make the 17 kW at 454 km make sense.



Have you had a SMT on your car? Are you running 19"?

19". My calculations are reasonably accurate and agree with the numerous 1014116-00-C I've kept track of.

 

[rns-e]

Ok would be interesting to see a SMT from a revision C battery

 

[maximizese]

The only explanation would be that it is not a 350V 90 kWh, but a 100 kWh

How else would you explain 454 km and still charging with 17 kW? Certainly not a 90 kWh or something was way off

You have the C pack in a MS85, what is your 100%?

It's possible that the pack might be:

• a new pack we haven't seen before
• an anomaly
• a battery pack that has yet to balance and calculate the true range based on capacity and energy/distance
• I think the other new "85" packs have been installed on RWD, this is one of the first dual motor vehicles I've heard of to receive an updated pack

We're working on assumptions here and we can make as many guesses as we can think of. I'm sure Tesla could tell us in 2 minutes what's going on here since they can see everything behind the curtain...but it's sure fun trying to figure it out.

 

[Droschke]

Ok would be interesting to see a SMT from a revision C battery

There are multiple postings on SMT data for 1014116-00-C. Have you not been able to search the forum?

 

[rns-e]

@Droschke Oh I have, but most search hits are your posts saying that there are multiple postings on SMT data for 1014116-00-C

So this SMT reading from 1014116-00-C corresponds with my experience, both capacity and range. A P85D with 454 km is abnormal in a space where everything is almost identical and on top of that charging at 17 kW at 100%. No skin off my back, I'm just curious about what that's all about.

@maximizese - I've had the 350V 85/90 both the A & B revision on my P85D for almost two years now. Plenty of P85D's with these packs around.

 

[Droschke]

@rns-e - First, you say:

Ok would be interesting to see a SMT from a revision C battery

That statement came across as you had not seen such data which have clearly been posted as I claimed. You then said:

I have, but most search hits are your posts saying that there are multiple postings on SMT data for 1014116-00-C

And I stick to my stated claim since you proved it by finding one instance so far:

So this SMT reading from 1014116-00-C

Now, if you are still curious, just for you and for a fee of $8 , I would be happy to provide the link to another P85D SMT data to back up my claim of "there are multiple postings on SMT data for 1014116-00-C". Deal?

 

[Droschke]

I think the other new "85" packs have been installed on RWD

Actually, many RWD S85's have received 90 kWh/350V 1014116-00-C, myself included. The revision A of this pack was labeled as 85 kWh/350V, but starting with revision B and the current C they have been labeled as 90 kWh/350v and given to model S 85's, RWD, Dual motors, P and non-P varieties. Also, just be be accurate, lately I've seen two examples of the C version with the kWh omitted on the label, @dark cloud 's new pack being one.

 

[rns-e]

I just think $8 is way to much, I can't even imagine how you come up with that amount ;-)

So no kWh label on @dark cloud 's pack, even more reason to see some SMT data from that pack ...

 

[HankLloydRight]

The only explanation would be that it is not a 350V 90 kWh, but a 100 kWh

I doubt it. None of his suspension components were replaced.

Not necessary. I have a 100kWh battery in my P85D (done by @wk057) and no suspension parts were replaced -- nor do they need to be replaced.

The weight difference between the smaller packs and the 100kWh pack is about 250 pounds, or the weight of one large passenger or a bunch of luggage.

BTW, I get 285 miles@100% out of my P85D.