New Rated Miles For P85Ds Also Negatively Impacts Promised Charging Rate

[Andyw2100]

Do you have a proposal to fix it? A web page with N different sliders to cover model, temp, altitude change on route, speed, etc, etc, etc. seems more confusing to new owners.

I don't, but Tesla doesn't pay me.

Right off the bat, though, if I were in charge I'd be adding disclaimers and asterisks --TODAY-- so more people aren't misled.

Long-term I think Tesla needs to come up with a plan. It may be to represent charging in terms of percentage of battery charged instead of number of miles of range added. I'm not sure. I'm expect they've got high-paid experts on staff that can figure this stuff out and come up with an excellent strategy.

 

[TexasEV]

Charging a 60 and a 85 both get about 29 miles/range at 240V,40A and 58 miles range at 80A. The difference in rated range between a 60 and 85 is much greater than between a 85 and P85D, yet their charging rates are about the same, so why would the P85D charge at a significantly slower rate?

 

[Canuck]

Not to make excuses for Tesla, but overstating range happens across the board with electric vehicles and it's much worse for low range vehicles, such as the Nissan Leaf. The range of the Leaf is close to being useless (especially in the winter) and no where near the advertised range.

 

[Johan]

Charging a 60 and a 85 both get about 29 miles/range at 240V,40A and 58 miles range at 80A. The difference in rated range between a 60 and 85 is much greater than between a 85 and P85D, yet their charging rates are about the same, so why would the P85D charge at a significantly slower rate?

Because the P85D has poorer Wh/mile figures, while the 60 and 85 RWD have very similar Wh/mile figures (60 slightly better). It wouldn't call the difference between the P85 and P85D significant though.

 

[ckessel]

Charge rates also change with the battery level, even on a 70amp or 40amp charge when the battery starts getting nearer to full.

Seems pedantic to be so vociferous about having Tesla add disclaimers to every possible page a number is shown.

 

[strider]

Simply put: Wh/mile is the equivalent of MPG, it will also vary with the same variables as MPG. Battry size in kWh is the equivalent of tank volume.

This is the ultimate solution. People will need to think in terms of battery size in kWh and charge rate in kW. That will give them a good idea of how long it will take to charge instead of using miles per hour.

But the journey from here to there will be messy. Honestly if someone has that great of a problem if they get 53mph from an HPWC instead of 58 then they should stick w/ their ICE until the technology matures some more.

 

[Andyw2100]

Seems pedantic to be so vociferous about having Tesla add disclaimers to every possible page a number is shown.

But the journey from here to there will be messy. Honestly if someone has that great of a problem if they get 53mph from an HPWC instead of 58 then they should stick w/ their ICE until the technology matures some more.

You guys are being pretty cavalier with Tesla's money. There are a lot of lawyers out there with not that much to do. Class action suits have been filed over smaller issues than this one. I, and I expect most people posting here, would hate to see anything like that happen.

 

[ljwobker]

And what makes you think Tesla doesn't also have an army of lawyers who vet and approve anything that gets posted to the web page? It's nearly impossible for me to imagine that Tesla is engaging in "marketing stretch of the truth" here any more than a million other companies....

 

[andrewket]

I'm going to start a rumor that tesla secretly started using the newer cells with more capacity and that the P85D packs are actually 100kWh and that tesla is hiding it with firmware as a surprise.

Oh wait, it only comes with cars with the heated steering wheel

 

[Andyw2100]

And what makes you think Tesla doesn't also have an army of lawyers who vet and approve anything that gets posted to the web page? It's nearly impossible for me to imagine that Tesla is engaging in "marketing stretch of the truth" here any more than a million other companies....

We know that communication is not Tesla's strong suit. When the new EPA numbers became public, around the time the first P85Ds were coming out with their new stickers, there were some quick changes made to some of the mileage information on the website. There were no changes made to the charging information. So I strongly suspect this isn't a case of lawyers approving anything, but rather a case of no one thinking to make the change that goes hand-in-hand with the rated mileage change.

 

[cantdecide]

The epa should change their range estimation to be 30 miles of city driving and the rest highway instead of 50.50 ... Realistically if you are stretching the range of a Tesla then you aren't doing 50pc city driving.

 

[jerry33]

We know that communication is not Tesla's strong suit. When the new EPA numbers became public, around the time the first P85Ds were coming out with their new stickers, there were some quick changes made to some of the mileage information on the website. There were no changes made to the charging information. So I strongly suspect this isn't a case of lawyers approving anything, but rather a case of no one thinking to make the change that goes hand-in-hand with the rated mileage change.

Tesla's website appears to only occasionally be up to date. It's about 1000 on the list.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

Right now, until Tesla corrects the website, I expect they are opening themselves up to problems that none of us want to see them have to deal with. These may be molehills to us, but Tesla's enemies could easily turn these molehills into mountains. I'm sure none of us want to see that happen.

So why start a thread about it? Doesn't that elevate the issue to the forefront and provide the media and enemies with all the pertinent details they need to write a hit piece? If I wanted to write such an article, I wouldn't even need to visit the Tesla web site. Everything I need is right here in the thread that you started.

- - - Updated - - -

You guys are being pretty cavalier with Tesla's money. There are a lot of lawyers out there with not that much to do. Class action suits have been filed over smaller issues than this one. I, and I expect most people posting here, would hate to see anything like that happen.

I think it's funny that you keep pointing this out. Almost like you want it to happen. And the more you talk about it, and point out all of these little details, the more likely it will happen. I also find it amusing that you respond to every single post, which conveniently puts this thread at the top of the page. It's almost like you want the media to pick up on this. I don't want to imply that you have an agenda here, but judging by your posts and the frequency of your posts, one might draw the conclusion that you might have an ulterior motive.

Also, if anyone is being "cavalier" about Tesla's money it's Tesla. None of us have a say over how Tesla spends its money. And you are jumping up and down waving a flag about an issue that nobody else is talking about and nobody else really sees as an issue. Methinks there is a self-fulfilling prophecy at work here.

May I suggest, if you really do have Tesla's best interests at heart, that you send an email to the executive management team expressing your concerns and then come back here and share the contents of your email. Starting a thread about Tesla's liability, then saying that the reason you started the thread is to keep Tesla from being sued, and then updating the thread constantly with more details of how and why they could be sued, then bumping it up to the top of the page multiple times per day, would seem to be a lot of unnecessary effort when you could more easily get your message across by sending a note to Tesla.

I don't think that what you are doing here is serving Tesla. Quite the opposite.

 

[Andyw2100]

So why start a thread about it? Doesn't that elevate the issue to the forefront and provide the media and enemies with all the pertinent details they need to write a hit piece? If I wanted to write such an article, I wouldn't even need to visit the Tesla web site. Everything I need is right here in the thread that you started.

- - - Updated - - -



I think it's funny that you keep pointing this out. Almost like you want it to happen. And the more you talk about it, and point out all of these little details, the more likely it will happen. I also find it amusing that you respond to every single post, which conveniently puts this thread at the top of the page. It's almost like you want the media to pick up on this. I don't want to imply that you have an agenda here, but judging by your posts and the frequency of your posts, one might draw the conclusion that you might have an ulterior motive.

Also, if anyone is being "cavalier" about Tesla's money it's Tesla. None of us have a say over how Tesla spends its money. And you are jumping up and down waving a flag about an issue that nobody else is talking about and nobody else really sees as an issue. Methinks there is a self-fulfilling prophecy at work here.

May I suggest, if you really do have Tesla's best interests at heart, that you send an email to the executive management team expressing your concerns and then come back here and share the contents of your email. Starting a thread about Tesla's liability, then saying that the reason you started the thread is to keep Tesla from being sued, and then updating the thread constantly with more details of how and why they could be sued, then bumping it up to the top of the page multiple times per day, would seem to be a lot of unnecessary effort when you could more easily get your message across by sending a note to Tesla.

I don't think that what you are doing here is serving Tesla. Quite the opposite.

I started the thread because I thought it was an issue that warranted discussion. I've responded when people have made comments that I felt I should respond to.

As for my comments about liability and lawsuits, they have been in response to forum members who seem to think this is no big deal, and/or that any one bothered by this should just not buy a Tesla. In my mind they just don't understand the issue, and why it could be a big deal, and I was trying to get them to understand why I see the current situation as a potential problem for Tesla.

I agree with you that at this point it would probably be better if I did try to take these concerns directly to Tesla. I'll write them a letter, and will include a link to this thread. I won't, however, come back and post that letter here, since as you suggest, I wouldn't want to risk bringing even more attention to this thread.

Finally, you wrote: "I don't want to imply that you have an agenda here, but judging by your posts and the frequency of your posts, one might draw the conclusion that you might have an ulterior motive."

I take offense to that. You said you don't want to imply it, and then you went ahead and did exactly that. Perhaps you may want to check the frequency with which I was posting yesterday (a day I happened to be around quite a bit) to other threads and what I was posting in those threads before making an accusation like that. You owe me an apology.

 

[breser]

I think it's funny that you keep pointing this out. Almost like you want it to happen. And the more you talk about it, and point out all of these little details, the more likely it will happen. I also find it amusing that you respond to every single post, which conveniently puts this thread at the top of the page. It's almost like you want the media to pick up on this. I don't want to imply that you have an agenda here, but judging by your posts and the frequency of your posts, one might draw the conclusion that you might have an ulterior motive.

It really bothers me sometimes how protective of Tesla this forum is at times. This forum doesn't exist in my opinion to just sing the graces of Tesla. It exists to discuss Tesla among owners and enthusiasts. Whenever someone posts something critical of Tesla someone always accuses the person of posting that information of trying to hurt Tesla. Tesla doesn't get better by people always telling them they're doing everything right when they aren't. Tesla is not perfect.

If the media writes about this subject and does so truthfully (as Andyw2100 has been doing) then I don't really see the problem with it. The problem comes when they distort the truth to make Tesla look worse than it really is. Sometimes that happens due to misunderstanding on the part of the reporter, sometimes it happens because they have an agenda. Andyw2100 doesn't control that. The mere existance and posting about potentially negative information (if truthful) does not make a poster on this forum responsible for how the media writes about it.

I'd much rather see that these sorts of things are debated on the merits of the issue and not shut down by posters trying to blame other posters for what the media does.

 

[stevezzzz]

I think you're aiming your firehose at someone who doesn't deserve it, breser. AmpedRealtor has written plenty of posts about what he perceives as Tesla's failings, as well as many others praising its accomplishments. Based on that knowledge, I tend to take what he writes pretty seriously.

The OP stated his case and defends his position against all comers. In so doing, he's repeating himself, because most responders seem to find his premise lacking in merit. It's time to agree to disagree, and move on.

 

[Archer]

In a nutshell, am I correct that the whole point of this thread is because the OP feels so strongly that "average" and "future" consumer "may" get confused about charging rate versus rated miles in their P85D that he feels a disclaimer / asterisk is necessary to avoid a "potential" lawsuit?

 

[Andyw2100]

The OP stated his case and defends his position against all comers. In so doing, he's repeating himself, because most responders seem to find his premise lacking in merit. It's time to agree to disagree, and move on.

Not really sure what you're referring to there, Steve. There are more posters in this thread that agree that what I wrote about in the original post is an issue than the couple that posted that said they think it isn't.

In a nutshell, am I correct that the whole point of this thread is because the OP feels so strongly that "average" and "future" consumer "may" get confused about charging rate versus rated miles in their P85D that he feels a disclaimer / asterisk is necessary to avoid a "potential" lawsuit?

I posted about something I thought was an issue that warranted discussion. I didn't realize that by doing so, and then by defending my stance on the issue I'd be opening such a huge can of worms. But once the discussion got started I wasn't going to let misinformation about the issue or misstatements about me stand without attempting to correct what I thought was wrong.

On a related note, since this thread has now seen plenty of bumping anyway, I have written Jerome Guillen at Tesla, asking him to please pass along my note to the proper person if this issue falls outside his range of responsibility. He wrote me back exactly seven minutes after I sent the e-mail thanking me for bringing the matter to his attention, and saying that he would look into it.

 

[strider]

This obsession with suing and being sued is one of the main problems w/ America. As I stated in my previous post, if someone gets 53 mph charging instead of 58 it's just not a big deal. If someone were to sue over that a delegation of citizens should be selected to go up to that person and beat the tar out of them.

As others posted there are simply too many variables. At a commercial building you only get 208V instead of the 240V you get at home. That will affect charge times. Also the ambient as well as battery temps will affect charge times as more power may need to be diverted to HVAC to keep the battery cool (or warm if it's cold outside). Could they have put "up to" in front of the 58 miles per hour? I suppose. But if you had your way every product webpage in the world would be 25% content and 75% disclaimers. Use some common sense (which Americans seem to be losing by the day).

On ICE web pages where they list power output or performance numbers there isn't an asterisk that says "at sea level." As jerry33 said, in the list of things that Tesla needs to be working on, this is at least number 1,000. Let it go.

 

[Andyw2100]

As jerry33 said, in the list of things that Tesla needs to be working on, this is at least number 1,000. Let it go.

I'm not going to address most of what you wrote, strider, for fear or being chastised for making the same arguments over and over again. But I'm also not going to allow you to take another poster's words, twist them around, and use them against me, as you have above. This is what jerry33 wrote:

Tesla's website appears to only occasionally be up to date. It's about 1000 on the list.

Now if you can read Jerry's mind, that's an awesome skill. If that's how you came to the conclusion that Jerry meant that working on the website --SHOULD BE-- a low priority perhaps you could put your mind-reading skills to some more profitable use. If not, I'd love to now how you concluded that, and not that Jerry might have just meant that the website clearly was not a priority for Tesla.

Note I don't know what Jerry meant either. He may have meant either thing, or something entirely different. But I did not choose to infer meaning from his words that was not there and use that meaning to attempt to strengthen my own argument and weaken someone else's.