JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I was thinking of most, hopefully more rational, people. There will always be outliers.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Actually it does, both of you are interpreting the original statement wrong.
It says:
While the newer superchargers are capable of delivering 120 kW, please note that the increased benefit is to be able to charge more cars per day and reduce the potential waiting times at the supercharge stations - a benefit shared by all customers.
Emphasis on "superchargers". 120kW superchargers decrease wait times compared to 90kW superchargers regardless of the ability of a single car being able to charge at 120kW. The statement is not talking about 120kW cars vs 90kW cars, but rather 120kW superchargers vs 90kW superchargers. The original mention about 120kW superchargers in the future had people make the same assumption (that split charging at 60kW instead of 45kW is one of the main benefits, not that one car would be able to charge at 120kW).
So if in the future Tesla upgrades their superchargers to even higher power, there is still benefits to overall wait times even if a single car can't use all of that power by itself.
Last edited:
OK. Fair point. If that was the point then it is not terribly relevant to the question about whether a particular car can charge at 120kW or not. However, I seem to recall that even original 90kW chargers (i.e. superchargers that could only deliver a max of 90kW for one car) still had 120kW of total power available per car pair. Is that not true? Shop, help me out here as I believe you were the original person that figured this out way back when.
ok, made it to Gilroy this AM 6 miles left. Only one there, Went to the new chargers (3rd from left as you look at them). Tried for 6 minutes - ramped up to 250A 351V rate 271/hr. Switched to #4 for the rest of the time.Took readings every 5 min. Bottom line - max was 89.9 kW AT 60 Miles or 9 minutes in. Reached 150 at 31 minutes : 200 at 52 minutes - but add 6 min to those for the first charger. And remember I had 6 miles to start.
Actually, if distance to next SC is planned at around 150, I am happy just charging to that plus 10% on a trip. That means 35 - 40 min. In this case - Atascadero is 117, Harris is 91, Fremont 39, Folsom 114, Vacaville 95. So all I really need is 130ish or 25-30 min.
BTW total charge to 252 took 1;30.
Actually, if distance to next SC is planned at around 150, I am happy just charging to that plus 10% on a trip. That means 35 - 40 min. In this case - Atascadero is 117, Harris is 91, Fremont 39, Folsom 114, Vacaville 95. So all I really need is 130ish or 25-30 min.
BTW total charge to 252 took 1;30.
Owner
Active Member
BTW..Gilroy is not running till after the holiday period at 100% capacity… From my blog from Tesla
“Two of the Superchargers (Buellton and Gilroy) were running at less than rated capacity due to internal components taken offline. There are a series of components in parallel, for redundancy: no offline component will prevent the Supercharger from working, but it will reduce the power out of the Supercharger. In these 2 instances, the max power out of the Buellton and Gilroy Superchargers was 112 kW (not the nominal 120 kW). The Buellton Supercharger was restored to full power on the 20th of December. Work on the Gilroy Supercharger at post 2 has been scheduled for January to avoid causing disruption at the site during the busy holiday travel period.”
“Two of the Superchargers (Buellton and Gilroy) were running at less than rated capacity due to internal components taken offline. There are a series of components in parallel, for redundancy: no offline component will prevent the Supercharger from working, but it will reduce the power out of the Supercharger. In these 2 instances, the max power out of the Buellton and Gilroy Superchargers was 112 kW (not the nominal 120 kW). The Buellton Supercharger was restored to full power on the 20th of December. Work on the Gilroy Supercharger at post 2 has been scheduled for January to avoid causing disruption at the site during the busy holiday travel period.”
Elon stated multiple times at the Norway event if you want the latest and greatest buy the latest car. He could not guarantee retrofits or upgrades. Tesla is not following tradition of a one year upgrade cycle and is continually making small tweaks no one has caught. Deal with it. Sucks for resale value I know.
If in fact the latest cars got the last gen of battery packs....that is a huge problem and we have a right to be mad. But remember you cant simply rely on vin number and we don not know how Tesla defines the latest. Is it by order date or build date?
If in fact the latest cars got the last gen of battery packs....that is a huge problem and we have a right to be mad. But remember you cant simply rely on vin number and we don not know how Tesla defines the latest. Is it by order date or build date?
Fedderman
Original: 2012 Model S (85); Current: 2024 Model S
smartypnz has an 'A' battery, so the SC maintenance which limited charging to 112 kW wasn't a factor. This seems to confirm that although he has a April '13 build, the 'A' battery is limiting his charge rate to 90kW.
58 minutes from empty to 200 miles is exactly what I reported on my 90 kW limited A pack (vs 41 minutes with a B pack). Further evidence that you are hardware limited. Really scratching my head over this one considering you took delivery April 2013.
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
I'd love to get more entries into the battery table wiki - especially from people with an 85kWh battery that took delivery between Dec 2012 and May 2013.
It seems crazy that smartypnz got such an 'old' battery... the SN on yobigd20's battery is 3161 lower - yet he has a 'B' pack in his car...
a lot of early batteries have been swapped out/replaced. makes me wonder if some of them are ending up getting reused. I was told a bad inverter in my first S blew a fuse in the pack, so both had to be replaced as they only open the pack at the factory for repairs. hmm, makes me wonder, could those batteries with replaced fuzes be making it into brand new cars? might explain some of the randomness of the battery types that made it into newer cars.
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
So I went back all the way to page 62 of this thread and tried to add all the data I could find in the posts to the battery table wiki.
Maybe someone else could spend some time staring at pages 61 and earlier? My head hurts.
If they were slow on supplies and this was limiting production rate numbers then yea this wouldn't surprise me if they recycled some used battery packs. If they do do this at all, at least this should be limited to loaner cars and not customer purchased vehicles.
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
From the data we've collected here we've seen 'B' packs as early as VIN 2547 (JakeP) in Dec 2012 and 'A' packs as late as VIN 9328 (smartypnz) in Apr 2013...
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Can't find it right now, but you are right that a lot of the superchargers had 120kW in them already (they were labeled "120" in the back and only need a software update to enable 120kW charging to a single car; however, previously they could do 60/60 or 90/30 split even before being updated). But I remember there were also some older supercharger "90" which only had 90kW in them and can't be software upgraded to 120kW (it would need new hardware or be swapped out). But I would have to dig a bit to find the actual pictures of the labels.
Just to follow up on my visit to Gilroy today. At the end of my charging 5 others showed up almost together (my guess is they were on the factory tour) - but the one I did talk to had a 3 month old 85 - they were charging at 70 kW, but had over 100 miles at start - plus they may have been sharing a charger.
I collected a lot of data - stayed till fully charged at 252 rated. Took readings every 5 miles till 50, then every 10 miles. Interesting dropoff curve. Not sure how to post it all, or if it's of any interest. It does follow Wraithnot's curve of data that he posted yesterday on page 21 of 'Finally 120 kW Supercharging' thread for a 90kW charge.
I collected a lot of data - stayed till fully charged at 252 rated. Took readings every 5 miles till 50, then every 10 miles. Interesting dropoff curve. Not sure how to post it all, or if it's of any interest. It does follow Wraithnot's curve of data that he posted yesterday on page 21 of 'Finally 120 kW Supercharging' thread for a 90kW charge.
Read this article, and immediately thought of this thread. Microsoft quietly upgrades the Surface Pro 2's processor | PCWorld
I agree that could be more relevant but the statement doesn't even acknowledge the slower taper in older cars. Kind of weird to avoid taking responsibility for something negative while taking credit for the cases where it is improved.
It's not really a negative in this sense, is it? That would imply it actually got worse. It's simply stayed the same. Yeah it sucks to not quite get the same speed as newer cars (or in the rarer case, some cars that are older than yours), but it's really not as big a deal as many are making it I think.
Similar threads
