-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Fedderman
Original: 2012 Model S (85); Current: 2024 Model S
Very nicely presented and informative empirical data for 'B' battery charging - thanks!
IF the 'A' and 'B' batteries had the same taper below 90kW, then one could conclude that the worst case difference (given your exact conditions) would be <2 minutes (Buellton). However, the tapers are different and my understanding is that 'A' batteries will charge at a lower rate than 'B' batteries throughout the charging cycle. This is why side-by-side comparisons are needed.
Wait a minute, I see two codes here. You have '-A' on the right hand side, and '-B' on the left hand side. I wonder what the difference is. I wonder if you can do 120kW or not. This was a replacement pack so it looks like a mix of two versions. How does this compare with others that have had early versions with replacement packs? need..more...data!
From 90%-100% you are charging substantially slower than an HPWC (for the 90kW packs). For me it's the difference between being able to go from Miami to Tampa for a meeting round trip without staying overnight. Which a guy who ordered on the same day is able to do it no problem.
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
60kWh pack from a car bought in July but manufactured in May (bought the showroom model the day after my test drive - not willing to wait 3 months):
SN: T13E0012909
PN: 1020422-00-B
This battery can do the full 104kW (120kW*350V/400V).
So if I compare with what youlikeadajuice posted and some of the other pictures I'm concluding that the SN is "T"YYM# where the number is just a linear count regardless of 60 or 85 (for those where we can see the VIN and the battery SN it seems that the Sigs have a slightly higher # than their VIN (accounting for Beta, Founder, and other pre-production models) - and the production cars have a higher offset, but not enough to account for the ~1200 Sigs... (or am I confused assuming that the first production car was P00001... was it P01201 ? )
youlikeadajuice... now I'm really curious how fast yours will charge at a supercharger... my guess would be 79kW (90*7/8)
SN: T13E0012909
PN: 1020422-00-B
This battery can do the full 104kW (120kW*350V/400V).
So if I compare with what youlikeadajuice posted and some of the other pictures I'm concluding that the SN is "T"YYM# where the number is just a linear count regardless of 60 or 85 (for those where we can see the VIN and the battery SN it seems that the Sigs have a slightly higher # than their VIN (accounting for Beta, Founder, and other pre-production models) - and the production cars have a higher offset, but not enough to account for the ~1200 Sigs... (or am I confused assuming that the first production car was P00001... was it P01201 ? )
youlikeadajuice... now I'm really curious how fast yours will charge at a supercharger... my guess would be 79kW (90*7/8)
Like I said, my 60 kWh pack as the exact same part number as youlikeadajuice, and my serial number is earlier. I've seen my car charge at 104 kW, so I'm almost certain that youlikeadajuice's will, as well.
- - - Updated - - -
BTW, just posted lots of data from my last roadtrip over here:
Supercharging on 60kWh - Page 3
Last edited:
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
I had missed that... so even the 'A' 60kWh packs can charge fast. What's the SN on your pack? How does it compare to the highest numbers posted from people with 85kWh packs that are limited to 90kW?
Nice. I posted some of mine in the "finally 120kW" thread a few weeks ago. We see very similar patterns when getting the full 120kW.
SN: T13A0003991 (so less that 100 higher than my VIN)
PN: 1020422-00-A
Left number: 1011721-00-B
Ok - here's mine
85kW, Vin 9328, End of Apr '13, highest charge so far - close to 90kW at Gilroy - new SC's - alone.
85kW, Vin 9328, End of Apr '13, highest charge so far - close to 90kW at Gilroy - new SC's - alone.
Wow, an April delivery with A an pack. And I thought I got unlucky with an A at the very end of December...
That means 4 months of mixed packs and that seems to go beyond "incremental changes". A change might have a switch over point where folks like me can debate if we got unlucky, but if you've got 4 months of mixed packs then there are bunch of folks over a period of months with some seriously legitimate (in my mind) complaints that they paid the same price for a lesser car than their fellow owners taking delivery within that time frame.
Is it settled that the A/B suffix represents different pack architecture? I find it hard to believe that Tesla had >4 months of mixed packs. Could it signify multiple shifts or multiple "lines" that built the specific pack? Normally, that's signified on the SN rather than the part number but just seems strange that there was so much overlap.
yeah but his is another B-A. 'B' on the left, 'A' on the right. There are 'A-A', 'B-B', and 'B-A'. So far I think 'A-A' is 90kW, and 'B-B' is 120kW, and 'B-A', I think is 120kW. Is that correct? smartypnz, when did you last supercharge? On 4.5 or 5.8?
youlikeadajuice
P 9130
Unfortunately I'm out of town for the next week and a half and can't do a test, hopefully it's as Markb1 says and I'll get the increased charge rate anyway. If it's still a mystery by the time I get back, I'll definitely make a trip to Darien to test it out!
Vger
Active Member
I still contend, and have seen no data to the contrary, that the small code to the left is only a revision code for the label. The only "A"-A"'s are very early cars-- US-only Signatures. I believe they rev'ed the label first for Canada shipments, which began with "A" series packs ("B"-"A" in your parlance), then they shifted to the 120 kW-capapble "B" packs. I have seen no evidence that anyone with an "A" in the main "(1P) PN" can charge above 90 kW. I have seen no evidence that part numbers with "B" and above cannot charge above 90 kW.
So specifically, there are many examples above, including my own car, that are "B-A" (bilingual label, but "A" PN). All of those posted are 90 kW-limited.
If I am wrong, by all means correct me with specific evidence!
- - - Updated - - -
Correction: I forgot that Doug_G's Canadian Signature has an "A-A" label, but I think that was a mistake, and will probably get him banned from Quebec. :wink:
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
I believe that at least for 60kWh packages mark1b has proven your theory wrong. His "A" PN S60 charges at 104kW
Another data point.
VIN 05837
Reserved: 10/31/2012
Finalized: 01/08/2013
Recv'd Msg 'Your order is it's way to factory': 01/10/2013
Assigned VIN: 02/19/2013
Car finished Prod Line & Ready for Delivery: 02/27/2013
Delivered to me on the east coast: 03/06/2013
Car door is showing manufacture date of 02/2013.
The sticker is cut off on the left a little bit, but you can clearly see both stickers show '-B'. I haven't supercharged since October when I was on 4.5, so can't confirm whether or not 120kW charging works, but I'm assuming it does based on the '-B' type.
Now the weird part is comparing it to:
ModelS8794 VIN 3440, Jan 2013 delivery, TYPE 'B' battery
Turbofroggy VIN 6556, MFG Date 2-15-2013, TYPE 'A' battery
Smartpnz: VIN 9328, End of Apr '13, TYPE 'A' battery
and theres me, VIN 5837, Feb/13, TYPE 'B' battery.
Turbofroggy seems to have hit the prod line before mine based his MFG date regardless of his higher VIN #? and smartypnz is waaayy after mine, but both of them have higher VINs and show 'A' batteries?? Plus we have ModelS8794 wayy earlier with a type 'B' battery? Are we sure about the type A vs type B? If so, perhaps during certain points Tesla was getting short on batteries and was just grabbing whatever they could? bottom of the pile?
or is this a P85 vs S85 issue? Do we have any P85s with type 'A' battery? The theory I'm grabbing at here is that P85 needs a greater power draw, so perhaps they were given priority on the 2nd generation battery packs if they were safer for larger discharge rates....actually looking at Turbofroggy's his is a P85 too so that theory is shot...
VIN 05837
Reserved: 10/31/2012
Finalized: 01/08/2013
Recv'd Msg 'Your order is it's way to factory': 01/10/2013
Assigned VIN: 02/19/2013
Car finished Prod Line & Ready for Delivery: 02/27/2013
Delivered to me on the east coast: 03/06/2013
Car door is showing manufacture date of 02/2013.
The sticker is cut off on the left a little bit, but you can clearly see both stickers show '-B'. I haven't supercharged since October when I was on 4.5, so can't confirm whether or not 120kW charging works, but I'm assuming it does based on the '-B' type.
Now the weird part is comparing it to:
ModelS8794 VIN 3440, Jan 2013 delivery, TYPE 'B' battery
Turbofroggy VIN 6556, MFG Date 2-15-2013, TYPE 'A' battery
Smartpnz: VIN 9328, End of Apr '13, TYPE 'A' battery
and theres me, VIN 5837, Feb/13, TYPE 'B' battery.
Turbofroggy seems to have hit the prod line before mine based his MFG date regardless of his higher VIN #? and smartypnz is waaayy after mine, but both of them have higher VINs and show 'A' batteries?? Plus we have ModelS8794 wayy earlier with a type 'B' battery? Are we sure about the type A vs type B? If so, perhaps during certain points Tesla was getting short on batteries and was just grabbing whatever they could? bottom of the pile?
or is this a P85 vs S85 issue? Do we have any P85s with type 'A' battery? The theory I'm grabbing at here is that P85 needs a greater power draw, so perhaps they were given priority on the 2nd generation battery packs if they were safer for larger discharge rates....actually looking at Turbofroggy's his is a P85 too so that theory is shot...
5.8... but will try to get back to Gilroy with low miles remaining and see what it can do. May not be till early next week.
So my April 29 delivery (and built in April cuz that's when the reds started - label says T13D which we believe to mean April 2013) is considered an 'early model' according to the note from Tesla? I doubt it - I think we need more investigation as to the assumption A or B indicates the charge level.
Vger
Active Member
But I see that his whole part number (1020422-00-A) is completely different, so it is possible that 60 kWh packs have their own "A", "B", ... suffix sequence. All evidence is that all 60 kWh packs can charge above 90 kW (up to ~105 kW), so they seem to be a different case, built from the first with the fast-charge cells and electronics. He did not post a photo of his label, so his case does not fully bear on my "label code" (left side) hypothesis.
oh and so far I think I have the dirtiest looking sticker...if that means anything. Then again I'm at 33.8k miles so I've probably drivin circles around most of you 
oh and my driveway is mud too, that could explain it. 4800lb car + a stone driveway + rainy weather + insane torque = no more stones in the driveway and now it's just a mudfest. In fact, it's bad enough that I'm starting to manufacture my own ghetto bridge so that my tires don't look like a 4 wheeler that just finished a tour of duty every time I pull out of the garage. LOL
View attachment 39653
View attachment 39652
(side note: I'm having a contractor out tomorrow to give me a quote on some drains into a dry well to stop the pooling and then restoning the whole thing.)
oh and my driveway is mud too, that could explain it. 4800lb car + a stone driveway + rainy weather + insane torque = no more stones in the driveway and now it's just a mudfest. In fact, it's bad enough that I'm starting to manufacture my own ghetto bridge so that my tires don't look like a 4 wheeler that just finished a tour of duty every time I pull out of the garage. LOLView attachment 39653
View attachment 39652
(side note: I'm having a contractor out tomorrow to give me a quote on some drains into a dry well to stop the pooling and then restoning the whole thing.)
Just to throw out more data for my 'A' on right sticker
Finalized 3/13
Delivery button 4/4
VIN 4/20
Pick up notice 4/26
Finalized 3/13
Delivery button 4/4
VIN 4/20
Pick up notice 4/26
Similar threads
