Older Teslas limited to 90kW Supercharging

[Vger]

I agree. All tech quickly becomes obsolete. In some cases it's as soon as you buy it.

This thread reeks of entitlement.

To me, As a long term member of this community, and a founding customer in Canada, what I find most depressing in this thread is the insistence of those unaffected by this issue to label those of us who are affected, "entitled."

One could just as easily say that those who came along safely and easily later in Tesla's development feel "entitled" to that security, unmindful that without the huge investment of capital, faith, and time that we earliest adopters made, Tesla would have collapsed, and you would never have had the the opportunity to own the world's best car.

Mutual respect and forbearance, please.

 

[bonnie]

Well said, vger. I've been staying mostly silent, because I am one of those currently unaffected.

My position here is simple ... Did people get what they paid for? Yes. Should Tesla make it right for those who plunked money down for the first Model S? Yes. But I don't know what that 'make it right' should look like. I am waiting to see what Tesla responds with and I believe they WILL respond.

 

[ModelS1079]

My position is simple - I would just LOVE to be able to SC at 120kW. And this is really bad for Tesla, everyday the doubt is allowed to linger.
Many big trips planned. Enjoying my pre-2000 VIN Model S, but this is just frustrating.
The car is a year old and...outdated? That is NOT what Tesla wants prospective buyers to hear. I feel that just runs in contradistinction to Tesla's promise that - otherwise - this car will keep getting better with each soft/hard/firmware update - which it has. I'll be frustrated if there is not an easy fix. For me. For you. For Tesla.
Let's get this fixed and behind us.
There are a well-defined, limited number of cars this affects, and they are owned by Tesla's most enthused early adopters. This is exactly the reason others will hesitate to put a deposit on a Model X now - fear that "the kinks are not worked out yet". So a Model S delivered in March of 2013 can Supercharge 33% faster than a Model S delivered in February 2013? If this hits the general press it'll be painful. They need to put this to rest, now. The upfront cost is clear to them. Nip it now! You all know I love this company.

 

[scaesare]

How about this for a possible solution. TM sets up a couple of battery swap facilities, as planned. Then allows the first 2,000 MS's to swap there battery for a fee that would be computed based on the number of miles "consumed" on the battery. Tesla then uses that battery in the swap program, with disclosure.

I think proximity of owners to the stations would be a factor...

 

[reddy]

If I were to visit a battery exchange station instead of a supercharger, would there be a possibility that my new battery pack would be an older 90kWh limited pack?

That would pretty much torpedo my interest in ever using the battery pack swap service to refuel the car.

 

[ckessel]

This thread reeks of entitlement.

So you think it's appropriate people before and after my car got 120kwh while I didn't, even though we paid the same price?

 

[100thMonkey]

My position is simple - I would just LOVE to be able to SC at 120kW. And this is really bad for Tesla, everyday the doubt is allowed to linger.
Many big trips planned. Enjoying my pre-2000 VIN Model S, but this is just frustrating.
The car is a year old and...outdated? That is NOT what Tesla wants prospective buyers to hear. I feel that just runs in contradistinction to Tesla's promise that - otherwise - this car will keep getting better with each soft/hard/firmware update - which it has. I'll be frustrated if there is not an easy fix. For me. For you. For Tesla.
Let's get this fixed and behind us.
There are a well-defined, limited number of cars this affects, and they are owned by Tesla's most enthused early adopters. This is exactly the reason others will hesitate to put a deposit on a Model X now - fear that "the kinks are not worked out yet". So a Model S delivered in March of 2013 can Supercharge 33% faster than a Model S delivered in February 2013? If this hits the general press it'll be painful. They need to put this to rest, now. The upfront cost is clear to them. Nip it now! You all know I love this company.

Have to agree. I asked my wife the other day if she wanted to get a reservation for the X and she said, without any prompting, "lets wait till they add on all the cool options and work out all the bugs". We intended to be a post 10,000 vin P85 with the S and ended up in the 4Kish Vin and we were sorry we took an early car. long story short, ended up trading up. it is unfortunate that the most devoted are the ones getting the short end. I don't really have a stake in the 90 vs 120 kW charging but I can understand why folks would be pissed given that the upgrade wasn't just a matter of a new model year or even 6 months, it turns out that for at least some, it was a matter of weeks in deliver dates. seems like Tesla would be best to make this right for their biggest fans, many of which put in way more time waiting for their car than I did and some who have probably taken their car back in for service on the early bugs enough times to seek lemon law protection if they got pissed enough. ...keep em happy and they'll keep waving the flag for you Tesla! BTW, thank you to all who took on all the risk and shelled out the start up cash early on, we all owe you a ton of gratitude!!

 

[dirkhh]

So a Model S delivered in March of 2013 can Supercharge 33% faster than a Model S delivered in February 2013?

Utter nonsense. It's about 5 minutes difference when charging from empty. No difference at all when arriving with about 40% or more. Look at the data.
There is so much whining and complaining about something that is fundamentally a marketing gimmick. You can't charge at 120kW with any Model S for more than a few minutes. You cannot do 200 miles in 30 minutes. Regardless of whether you have a Sig or a December 2013 car.

 

[Ditpixs]

So you think it's appropriate people before and after my car got 120kwh while I didn't, even though we paid the same price?

Thank you, ckessel. It seems to me that the only folks who have made comments suggesting us early owners are "entitled" are those who are not affected. I have no doubt the opinions would be different if they found out their cars were affected by a similar type of issue based on the luck of when they purchased.

So yes, I feel entitled to have my Tesla be equal in performance and capacity to those of like model which were made. I paid the same amount, so I should have the same product. Actually, I loaned Tesla $5k (much less than the Sigs) for 2 years at no interest because of my faith in the company and product.

I would ask that the future of this thread be used to create a list of questions/concerns for Tesla which we can respectfully submit to them for a response. I would like to keep this positive and hope that Tesla responds in a similar manner. Our goals should be the same - making Tesla better.

Here are the things which I believe should be answered/addressed by Tesla now and going forward:

1) Full disclose of material differences between vehicles - either based on VIN or Date. There should be no element of luck to purchasing a vehicle with regard to features and capabilities. If things are changing, they need to be published.
2) What, exactly, does "Hardware Upgrades" mean in the Service contract? Where are these upgrades published?
3) How they plan on resolving past discrepancies between vehicles which should be IDENTICAL since there was no DISCLOSURE of any differences nor any discounting of price? Specifically this current battery issue, but potentially others which have not been discovered yet.

Respectfully,
Aaron

 

[MikeC]

I agree that it is easy to call people entitled when you are not affected yourself. And I'm hoping this thread can focus more on the problem and solution than people judging and arguing the same points over and over.

 

[apacheguy]

Utter nonsense. It's about 5 minutes difference when charging from empty. No difference at all when arriving with about 40% or more. Look at the data.

False. Please look at the data yourself. Cottonwood and I have both posted our own charge curves that demonstrate a 10-15 minute difference to reach 80%. And, yes even at 40% there is a difference in charge rate.

Source (my own post):
Finally 120KW Supercharging! - Page 21

I agree that it is easy to call people entitled when you are not affected yourself. And I'm hoping this thread can focus more on the problem and solution than people judging and arguing the same points over and over.

Agree, but the same points keep coming up largely because people are misinformed and I feel compelled to set the record straight.

 

[woof]

I feel compelled to set the record straight.

I've looked at what you and cottonwood posted, and am having a hard time converting those data into something I can understand.

Would someone please post the amount of time it takes--for both 90 kW and 120 kW--to SuperCharge a Model S from 0-20%, 20-40%, 40-80% and 80-100% SOC.

Perhaps a simple table with these numbers would suffice to show if it's worth getting upset about or not.

Thanks in advance.

 

[aviators99]

I've looked at what you and cottonwood posted, and am having a hard time converting those data into something I can understand.

Would someone please post the amount of time it takes--for both 90 kW and 120 kW--to SuperCharge a Model S from 0-20%, 20-40%, 40-80% and 80-100% SOC.

Perhaps a simple table with these numbers would suffice to show if it's worth getting upset about or not.

Thanks in advance.

The big difference will be at the 80%-100% where the new SCs charge at (allegedly) multiples faster than the old, but (reportedly) not for the old battery. I agree that from 0-80% it doesn't make much of a difference.

 

[walla2]

This thread reeks of entitlement.

Go read my other posts before you label me or others. I already posted I am content with 90 kW in my car in this thread. I just point out a problem they have with my most recent post. I suggest you read a little before you label people and pass judgment on things you lack the ability to understand.

- - - Updated - - -

the only type of supercharger that existed and was promised was 90kW. They made some statements that 120kW may be available

FACTS:
120 kW announced in Sept.
My car was delivered in December.
I did not have my car months before.
I received my car months after.
I have accepted my car as is.
Law has nothing to do with obligation or right or wrong.

 

[ckessel]

FACTS:
120 kW announced in Sept.
My car was delivered in December.

This is worth reemphasizing. There wasn't anything in the Sept announcement that said *only applies to cars delivered January 2013 or later, which is effectively the cutoff since my delivery was 12/30/2012 and was in a mix batch of 90 and 120 support, so probably the last batch that had 90s.

Here is the link, and here is a snippet of Tesla's press release.

Tesla Motors Launches Revolutionary Supercharger Enabling Convenient Long Distance Driving | Press Releases | Tesla Motors

The Supercharger is substantially more powerful than any charging technology to date, providing almost 100 kilowatts of power to the Model S, with the potential to go as high as 120 kilowatts in the future.

So, Tesla announces charging rate information over 3 months before I got my car. There is nothing saying >90kwh charging rates weren't going to apply for models built in 2012.

Again, I got my car 3 months after this announcement. Why on earth would I think the capabilities in the announcement wouldn't apply when my car finally arrived?

 

[Canuck]

Mutual respect and forbearance, please.

Agreed. I feel bad for those early buyers who bought into far more risk than I did, as a recent buyer, and it now seems they are almost being 'punished' for it when they should be commended. If the cost to replace these batteries is too expensive for Tesla to take on, then perhaps they should charge a bit more on the base price to make up for purchasing new batteries for those who bought in early and can't supercharge. I, for one, would be willing to pay a bit more.

 

[stopcrazypp]

FACTS:
120 kW announced in Sept.
My car was delivered in December.
I did not have my car months before.
I received my car months after.
I have accepted my car as is.
Law has nothing to do with obligation or right or wrong.

Well, here's the exact quote from late September 2012: "The Supercharger is substantially more powerful than any charging technology to date, providing almost 100 kilowatts of power to the Model S, with the potential to go as high as 120 kilowatts in the future."
http://www.teslamotors.com/about/pr...y-supercharger-enabling-convenient-long-dista

What I'm saying is that people affected likely were locked in already by the time of that announcement and was not under any assumption that the car would have 120kW ability when they ordered the car and the statement itself makes no hard promises about anything (the current situation is not at odds with the statement: it purposely gives enough leeway with the use of "potential" that even if 120kW doesn't occur at all it's not a broken promise). Tesla only made concrete statements about 120kW ability being rolled out to customers in the summer in May 2013, which happened months after those affected had their cars:
http://www.teslamotors.com/about/pr...arger-network-delivering-convenient-free-long

In the context of a lawsuit as suggested in your original post, I think Tesla will win because of this.

But you are right that law has nothing to do with "right or wrong".

 

[wycolo]

My understanding is that there isn't a renewal required. To stop the program they would have to specifically vote to stop it, otherwise it just continues.

But as I recall there was a bit of a panic toward the year's end as to the Credit's viability come 2013. A bunch of us went for the 'bird in the hand'. In my case I sensed that 2013 would be a 'no tax year' for me, and indeed that has occurred. So I'm cheerful getting my MS during 2012, to the tune of $7500- which is a lot of lunches. TM pulled thru for us big time.


> I agree that from 0-80% it doesn't make much of a difference. [aviators99]

I ran my test under 4.5(1.33.61) from 15 miles up to 220 miles and it took exactly one hour. 220 miles divided by 260 miles (~100% SOC) equals 84%. Why would an MS want to take the extra time to charge above 84% unless facing a hyper-miling situation.

Today I'll try to upgrade to 5.8+ and re chart an SC session taking it up to 220 miles rated. I still don't see any reason to bother with the ~80% to 100% segment.
--

 

[Cottonwood]

Today I'll try to upgrade to 5.8+ and re chart an SC session taking it up to 220 miles rated. I still don't see any reason to bother with the ~80% to 100% segment.
--

It only matter when you have a long way to go between Superchargers, or distance to go to your destination. For example, before the 70 Amp J1772 was in Salida, and I wanted to make it from Silverthorne to my place in Pagosa, the distance is 237 miles. I wanted every mile I could get into that battery pack and still needed to do some hypermiling to make it to Pagosa.

Even now, with the 70-Amp charger in Salida, I charge in Silverthorne until the charge rate equals Salida. Turns out 70 Amps at 240 Volts AC is about the same charge rate as 37 Amps at 400 Volts DC; I know that is a different power, but DC is more efficient. Turns out at that 50 mph charge rate, I am at 97.5% full. Because of this case, that I often do, the charge rate into the taper still matters to me. Total time, charging Silverthorne and Salida, and driving is faster now without hypermiling, but would be faster still if the taper was a little less gentle.

 

[Ugliest1]

As someone who cannot yet afford a Model S, I want to thank all the Roadster and Model S owners and those with reservations who have collectively helped to make the Gen III possible, per Elon's long-stated strategy. This thread has also reminded me, since I had been planning on being one of the probably tens of thousands who would vie for Gen III Reservation #1, that perhaps it might be prudent to wait 6 months for some of the inevitable early bugs to be worked out.

I test drove an S last week in the Vancouver snow, and my god, what a vehicle. I finally *FELT* what the game-changer was like. Then I get back into my Infiniti M35, and was stuck unable to exit the Tesla parking lot until the Owner Advisor helped give me a push. LOL. A perfect ending.