Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Older Teslas limited to 90kW Supercharging

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
What happens when Tesla introduces 150 Kwh charging next summer? Is every one of the current 25k owners going to be up in arms that they were cheated by getting Supercharge-lite ?

Would we all be better off if Tesla does not roll out an innovation unless and until everyone gets the benefit of it ?

Just wondering...

Every new entrant to this thread says this same thing. Let me make it really simple: people are upset because they didn't or don't know the full specifications of the car they purchased. Full stop.
 
I was told something different several months ago. More specifically, S1=40 S2=60 S3=85. S1 never reached customers. This characterization was directly from a service center employee when I had an S2 sitting in front of me. Additionally, the S2 crate I was looking at said 60 kWh on it.

Certainly possible, but the Tesla person who told me this is extremely experienced and knowledgeable, and has always been correct in the info they have passed on. Either way, it is clear there was a distinct design and specification change to the packs one year ago.
 
P.S.: I was told separately that there are three generations or specifications of battery packs so far: "S1", "S2", and "S3". I do not know how long S1's were produced, perhaps just the Founder cars and beta demos. S2 packs are what all the Signatures and 2012 production cars got; these are the 90 kW-limited packs. The current generation (as of a couple weeks ago, at least) is S3. These are the 120 kW-capable packs.

Based on this info, I'll bet that the S3 pack WILL support 150 kw Supercharging when it is announced later this year. Meanwhile, S2's will continue to be 90 limited. Then there will be an even greater time difference. Something to consider since we have solely been focused on the current reality.
 
For me the most interesting part of this and other threads relating to battery pack is this: the battery pack is replaceable, the battery pack determines the charging rate, the battery pack also determines overall longevity, the S2 battery pack (per Vger's nomenclature) is being limited for a reason that I'm interpreting as being related to cooling issues. At 90kW charging I've felt the heat pour off the front wheel wells as the fans kicked to full. The S3 packs are prolly made of cells that are better at scrubbing heat, possibly the packs themselves are better optimized for the task as well. I'm making an overall guess, but I'd suspect you could measure that by taking an S3 P85 to "track day" and it'll go faster for longer than an S2 P85.

Follow up questions relate to battery longevity, but I'm guessing the relative limits placed on supercharging keeps the battery longevity roughly equivalent. The issues aren't really around normal driving, they are around the limits.

Regarding the importance of the packs being replaceable -- I'm looking forward to plugging in a 500 mile pack in 10 years but by the same token I don't think I'll need to because the charging infrastructure will be so much better. :smile:

This is very interesting and I may have some anecdotal information to support your view. Tesla contacted me last week and asked to schedule a pickup of my car so that 3 coolant pumps could be proactively replaced because a "newer and better" part became available. Service specifically said that "my particular car has three coolant pumps", implying that other Model S variants don't necessarily have the same number of coolant pumps. I wonder if the number and type of coolant pumps vary with the battery version (S1, S2, S3)? I have a P85 delivered in late August 2013.

A few weeks before taking delivery of my Model S, an owner from Palm Springs stopped at my house to charge and take my HPWC for a spin. He left the car at my house overnight while it charged. This was a 2012 model. While the car charged happily at 80A, the cooling system would run almost the entire time while the car was charging. It was July in Arizona (temps over 105ºF) and I assumed that was partly the reason. It wasn't until I took delivery of my car in late August that I realized my car did not exhibit this behavior at all. At generally the same ambient temps, my car charges at 80A and produces no sound whatsoever. I cannot hear any fans or other noises that would indicate the car is cooling itself or the battery.

Of course this is purely from observation and with only one other vehicle with which to compare, but there may be something more to this. I also read Jerome's response and I find it curious that he specifically mentioned that the early cars were limited to 90 kW out of an abundance of caution and because Tesla is constantly being attacked. That tells me, without actually spelling it out, the limitation may be related to thermal issues. Allowing those cars to charge at a higher rate might pose an elevated fire risk. However, it also sounds like part of Tesla's motivation to limit early cars to 90 kW was PR - why else mention attacks on Tesla?
 
Everything that it's possible to purchase has features that aren't exactly the way you would like them to be. Tesla is no different in this regard. The only real decision is whether the parts you don't like are significant enough to cause you to wait until they are changed or purchase something else.
Except with Tesla, you have no idea what you're actually buying, so you can't make an informed decision about whether to "wait until they are changed" or not. Elon has spoken several times when asked about the batteries and said they didn't expect to change the battery until probably Gen3. And yet, it's been changing.

If they're not going to do model years, then Tesla needs to rev some publicly available version number each time major items are changed such as battery specs and power (motor) specs. If people are going to make informed buying decisions, that information needs to be available soon as Tesla has the implementation plan (much like previews for new model year cars).

If Tesla wants to iterate differently, that's fine, but that doesn't excuse being opaque about the drive train capabilities. If I went shopping for a used Model S right now, I have NO way to know its supercharging capabilities.
 
This $100MM that keeps getting mentioned strikes me as straw man politics and assumes that the current batteries have little to no value when they are swapped out. It sort of proves the other side of the argument's point.

Those old packs would be (a) used, (b) sitting in a warehouse with over 2000 of their friends, (c) extremely hard to unload, and as a result of all that (d) worth a fraction of their original cost.

Everyone with a car already has a working pack. These packs wouldn't be suitable for warranty replacement as no one will be willing take a hit on charging speed. They're not about to build a couple of thousand new cars to sell with used battery packs - not economically viable. The fact is, they'll end up sitting around for years until eventually people start buying replacement packs. So, yeah, it would absolutely be a $100 million hit.
 
They're not about to build a couple of thousand new cars to sell with used battery packs - not economically viable. The fact is, they'll end up sitting around for years until eventually people start buying replacement packs. So, yeah, it would absolutely be a $100 million hit.
If Tesla is really going to roll out battery swapping, that's a hit they'll have to take at some point regardless. And if you're swapping batteries, super charging capacity is mostly irrelevant. They probably wouldn't need 3000 battery packs though for the swap stations.
 
For the topic of the service plan, please someone point me to anything that says there is a difference in hardware upgrades for those on the service plan and those who pay annually.

The only difference is that those who bought the pre-paid plan received a contract describing the coverage and limitations of coverage in great detail. Those of us who have the pre-paid plan have written contracts stating that we will receive hardware upgrades. Those who pay at the door are doing so without the benefit of a contract describing what, if anything, is covered. I believe Tesla makes some general, high level statements about the $600 annual service and says that it includes "hardware upgrades" on the web site. However, as we all know, web site verbiage can change overnight but a contract cannot.
 
Those old packs would be (a) used, (b) sitting in a warehouse with over 2000 of their friends, (c) extremely hard to unload, and as a result of all that (d) worth a fraction of their original cost.

Everyone with a car already has a working pack. These packs wouldn't be suitable for warranty replacement as no one will be willing take a hit on charging speed. They're not about to build a couple of thousand new cars to sell with used battery packs - not economically viable. The fact is, they'll end up sitting around for years until eventually people start buying replacement packs. So, yeah, it would absolutely be a $100 million hit.

What about using them for "grid buffering" at SuperChargers? I thought that was part of Teslas plans?
20 per Supercharger site is 1.7 Mw of storage, 2000 packs would cover 100 SC sites. Since they are recharged during non-peak hours, their rate of charge isn't critical. Just a thought.
 
What about using them for "grid buffering" at SuperChargers? I thought that was part of Teslas plans?
20 per Supercharger site is 1.7 Mw of storage, 2000 packs would cover 100 SC sites. Since they are recharged during non-peak hours, their rate of charge isn't critical. Just a thought.
This is exactly the kind of solution I used to expect from Tesla. Sadly the key phrase is "used to".
 
The only difference is that those who bought the pre-paid plan received a contract describing the coverage and limitations of coverage in great detail. Those of us who have the pre-paid plan have written contracts stating that we will receive hardware upgrades. Those who pay at the door are doing so without the benefit of a contract describing what, if anything, is covered. I believe Tesla makes some general, high level statements about the $600 annual service and says that it includes "hardware upgrades" on the web site. However, as we all know, web site verbiage can change overnight but a contract cannot.

Very simple, by getting the service contract, you paid early for a discount. That is it. Zero differnece from someone that decided not to give tesla extra money for a service.
 
If Tesla is really going to roll out battery swapping, that's a hit they'll have to take at some point regardless. And if you're swapping batteries, super charging capacity is mostly irrelevant. They probably wouldn't need 3000 battery packs though for the swap stations.

I'm not sure I believe they'll actually roll out battery swapping. Maybe in a few high volume locations, or maybe far in the future. I've heard that swapping batteries now requires a few parts to be changed, etc., so I don't think current cars are fully configured for swapping. Could the battery swapping demo really have been about ZEV credits?
 
What about using them for "grid buffering" at SuperChargers? I thought that was part of Teslas plans?
20 per Supercharger site is 1.7 Mw of storage, 2000 packs would cover 100 SC sites. Since they are recharged during non-peak hours, their rate of charge isn't critical. Just a thought.

+1. I have previously expressed my support for this option. Great PR move as it shows packs can have a much longer life cycle even when deemed unsuitable for automotive use.

I'm not sure I believe they'll actually roll out battery swapping. Maybe in a few high volume locations, or maybe far in the future. I've heard that swapping batteries now requires a few parts to be changed, etc., so I don't think current cars are fully configured for swapping. Could the battery swapping demo really have been about ZEV credits?

Oh well that's just dandy. Also, first swapper was supposed to be completed by the end of 2013. Well so much for that milestone.

My confidence in TM is quickly eroding.
 
Very simple, by getting the service contract, you paid early for a discount. That is it. Zero differnece from someone that decided not to give tesla extra money for a service.

How do you know that? Without purchasing a service plan, you have no contract with Tesla as to what's covered. You say that there is zero difference between those who pre-paid (have a contract with specific language with regard to what is covered, including hardware upgrades) and those who pay at the door. Those who don't have a pre-paid plan, can you point me to your contract that says you will get the same thing?

This is the same type of assumption that early VIN holders made about 120 kW supercharging capability. It's an assumption. Where is the actual written statement from Tesla? And don't point to the web site, because Tesla previously promised on their web site 4x USB, on-board music storage, lighted vanity mirrors, etc. And as we all know, specifications on the web site can change overnight. However, those of us with contracts have a specific commitment that cannot be changed.
 
I was told something different several months ago. More specifically, S1=40 S2=60 S3=85. S1 never reached customers. This characterization was directly from a service center employee when I had an S2 sitting in front of me. Additionally, the S2 crate I was looking at said 60 kWh on it.
I'm pretty sure that pack differentiation is noted by using letters like A, B, C, D ect. Look at the battery serial tag.
 
I'm not sure I believe they'll actually roll out battery swapping. Maybe in a few high volume locations, or maybe far in the future. I've heard that swapping batteries now requires a few parts to be changed, etc., so I don't think current cars are fully configured for swapping. Could the battery swapping demo really have been about ZEV credits?

Somewhere I remember hearing that the initial rollout would be between the SF and LA corridor, to see how widely utilized battery swapping would be and to learn more about the customer usage model ... and if used, then other markets would be looked at.

I thought it was Elon, but I could be wrong.
 
IMHO, at the very least, they NEED to change the ramp-down algorithm to provide the benefit of the improved taper curve. It's totally unacceptable that we are forced to take a double whammy on this one. Give us the improved taper, please!
Not likely if both the higher charge rate of the newer packs is due to improved cells and pack design. For example, if the newer packs have cells that have lower impedance, they will accept a faster charge while heating up less. And if the cells are cooled better, they'll also be able to be charged faster with less of an effect on battery life and safety.

Those old packs would be (a) used, (b) sitting in a warehouse with over 2000 of their friends, (c) extremely hard to unload, and as a result of all that (d) worth a fraction of their original cost.
Solar City could easily use the packs for their grid storage project.

My confidence in TM is quickly eroding.
People have been saying this about Tesla for years - since before the Roadster was launched. Their behavior today is nothing new.