mknox
Well-Known Member
Wonder why they didn't rotate mine? (I have the plan)
It's supposed to be exactly the same thing. You just get a bit of a discount for paying up-front.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Wonder why they didn't rotate mine? (I have the plan)
It's supposed to be exactly the same thing. You just get a bit of a discount for paying up-front.
While I'd agree in general and it'd (mostly) be fine if that were actually the case.
I paid the same and got less Supercharger capability than people who took delivery the same week. Less even than someone whose car was built before mine.
Agreed. If Tesla rolls out (say) 150 kW supercharging next year, and my car won't be able to charge at that rate, I won't be expecting Tesla to retrofit my car for free. If we want the latest equipment we need to buy a new car, or else pay for a retrofit (if a retrofit is available).
Let's put this straight once and for all. What you get on the annual $600 visit vs the $1900 prepaid plan for 4 visits is exactly the same. It says so on the web site. It has always said this. Either you misread it, or someone at Tesla told you wrong.
Also, I've highlighted the "necessary hardware upgrades." IMO the "hardware upgrades" that we'll get is only going to things Tesla deems necessary. They are not going to retrofit us for free with newer fog lights, power folding mirrors, parking sensors, etc etc. If you want any of that stuff, you'll have to pay for those retrofits. None of them are "necessary".
No. What we are getting when we bring the car in for a "non-service visit" is that while the car is there, they are going to apply all the TSBs applicable. so it may "seem" like a service visit, but really this is not related to the annual service at all. You could bring your car in anytime and get those done.
IMO you're really not getting much for the $600. I don't know if I'll pay for it again. If you look at their checklist, http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/17061-Model-S-Annual-Service-Checklist everything is "visual inspection" except for wiper blades, key fob battery, cabin filter, receiver/drier, and brake pads (but only if needed). That's much more expensive than any other service visit I've had for any other car. I don't see the value in $600 there for some wiper blades ($20), key fob battery ($2), and filters (maybe $10-$20). brake pads will only need to be replaced every 100k+ anyway so that's moot. I've had one service already and I wish I could take back my $600 (technically $650 after tax) because they really didn't do anything at all and in fact a few things I'm annoyed at (lied about tread depth on the report, their shim TSB for the clicking sound doesnt work but instead it muffles the sound, and applied TSBs for wind noise that I didn't have, but after the service I hear a lot more wind...).
Now the question here in this thread is whether or not early 85kw vins(pre-2000?)/sigs are "entitled" to this 120khw charging and whether or not Tesla deems this as a "necessary" upgrade. I'm on the fence about that myself. As the months pass and the Model S's coming off the line are including new hardware that we didn't get, why should we be entitled to get free retrofits? I don't think we are. And I don't think this case is any different as it's not really "necessary." ...
Last edited:
Well, we have confirmed that there is something limiting older VINs to 90 kw. We don't have official word from Tesla on what that is. I'm guessing that your VIN is low enough that you are affected as well. Welcome to the club!
Nope, a lot of people paid the same for their cars and yet one had 120 support and the other did not. Tesla has never stated that supercharging upgrades are only available to newer cars. In fact, they have done the opposite. They told us that software updates alone would bring 120 support. No mention about hardware.
Everyone else - please stop comparing power folding mirrors and parking sensors to supercharging. They are not equivalent and nobody is expecting to get parking sensors as part of the service plan.
Last edited:
Kraken
Member
I found at least one of the spots where we've confirmed 120kw charging only saves 5 minutes over 90kw:
Finally 120KW Supercharging! - Page 5
page 7 has more info too... It was like 3 weeks ago, so I think that is what I was remembering (specifically the stuff on page 7). More notably, if you are above 100 miles when you start charging an 85 kwh battery there is 0 difference. I think that thread is where people started to notice earlier vins not getting 120. Interestingly, dirkh seems to get over 102 kw in his 60 kwh battery at somepoint in the discussion.
The biggest benefit to 120 kw charging appears to be that 2 cars on one charger gets 60 kw for longer. This should be good for anyone including vins/models tha are limited to 90kw charging.
further, it seems the actual benefit of 120kw helping speed a single car up is not really all tha material and more of a marketing showpiece (slightly misleadi one too, like battery swapping, kinda). 120 is slightly faster, but only slightly, the best benefit is the ability to keep two cars charging faster for longer.
From my experience, the difference is much more than 5 minutes. The taper curve on my car appears to be the same as 4.x. Under 5.8 my car ramps down to ~70 kw by 80 rated miles. Newer cars seem to be getting ~90 kw until around 120 miles.
Also, it's strange that my car doesn't even reach 90 anymore (it used to). It maxes out at 85 kw even with < 50 miles SOC.
sorry, wrong. (well unless vin 4000 was really before new years) But i have neither # exactly. My car would be over $18K more today than it was last December. Service, I agree with Yobigd, hardware upgrades is why i really pre paid for service(using up my state rebate + some). But also most of my service stuff to this point was covered under warranty and I have had rangers come 300 miles several times with no charge ( and no ranger service either ?) new front brakes and several newer things like the trunk uppers and rear seat belt fix etc. Supercharging should be one of the hardware items that is upgraded if the car doesn't support it (but batteries can)
I am sooo far away from SC's and my car right now ( it says 3600 miles and 2 days 14 hours to get there!!!) but I'd be happy to drive 340 miles when I get home to see what Grants Pass will do on my 'old' Model S. Or complain to service some...
I want to highlight one side point of the supercharging discussion for 60kWh Model S that dirkhh researched here: Finally 120KW Supercharging! - Page 5
He got more than 90kW on a 120kW enabled supercharger with his 60kWh Model S. However, the total time spent above 90kW was less than 10 minutes. I estimate the amount of additional energy (the blue area) due to supercharging at more than 90kW to be around 10kW x 6 minutes = 1kWh. That saves less than 1 minute.
Conclusion: the raise in max supercharging power rate from 70kW to +90kW that came with v5.8 firmware was far more beneficial for the 60kWh pack owners than the deployment of 120kW superchargers.
My point is, I would like to see similar graphs that compare 85kWh supercharging limited to 90kW with unlimited.
He got more than 90kW on a 120kW enabled supercharger with his 60kWh Model S. However, the total time spent above 90kW was less than 10 minutes. I estimate the amount of additional energy (the blue area) due to supercharging at more than 90kW to be around 10kW x 6 minutes = 1kWh. That saves less than 1 minute.
Conclusion: the raise in max supercharging power rate from 70kW to +90kW that came with v5.8 firmware was far more beneficial for the 60kWh pack owners than the deployment of 120kW superchargers.
My point is, I would like to see similar graphs that compare 85kWh supercharging limited to 90kW with unlimited.
Last edited:
Elon claimed the newer fog lights were necessary, when he said that the older ones (which I have) were unacceptable. They need to watch what their CEO says in public.
- - - Updated - - -
If Tesla didn't have a nasty habit of false advertising, there wouldn't be an issue.
- - - Updated - - -
If Elon had simply said "The original fog lights are fine, but we've got a better model", I wouldn't complain. He specifically insulted the earlier model of fog lights, claiming that they were not acceptable quality to him.
This is communications again.
For what it's worth -- I was at the Santa Monica Service Center this morning, and I asked my service rep if any cars were limited to 90kW instead of 120kW. He said unequivocally "no."
He then pointed out two things:
1. A lot of people don't realize the Superchargers work in pairs, so it may be that if there's another car charging at the same time they're not going to get the full 120kW.
2. A lot of the Superchargers say 120kW on them, but they still actually only charge at 90kW.
(We also chatted about parking sensors - he did confirm that there's a "VIN breakpoint" at which earlier cars don't have the necessary wiring harnesses... that's a conversation for another thread, I presume, but it speaks to his level of knowledge and insight.)
He then pointed out two things:
1. A lot of people don't realize the Superchargers work in pairs, so it may be that if there's another car charging at the same time they're not going to get the full 120kW.
2. A lot of the Superchargers say 120kW on them, but they still actually only charge at 90kW.
(We also chatted about parking sensors - he did confirm that there's a "VIN breakpoint" at which earlier cars don't have the necessary wiring harnesses... that's a conversation for another thread, I presume, but it speaks to his level of knowledge and insight.)
This gets us back to Tesla's core problem: communications. Why was the OP *told* -- incorrectly -- that his car was hardware limited to 90kW charging?
Sorry, what the tech told you is generally non-responsive to what numerous others have reported. There are numerous reports from handful or more of different 85 owners (all Sigs or early VIN numbers) who have repeatedly used newer, 120kW Superchargers (Centralia, Woodburn, Colorado, etc.) without any other cars sharing the same Supercharger. These folks have consistently reported 90kW max when other people with later VINs have reported getting 120kW from the same Superchargers. This isn't a question of using older 90kW SCs, or sharing load with other cars. I believe all of these people charged at new SCs with no other cars present. Moreover, one Sig owner was specifically told by Tesla his car was limited to 90kw.
The key questions that remain to be answered are 1) is the 90kW limit in these early 85 cars a hardware or software issue; 2) what is the VIN cut-off, assuming they kept track of that information; and 3) will a fix or upgrade be provided to these early 85 owners? I highly doubt any tech from a local service center is going to be helpful in any of these questions, but it doesn't hurt to be trying.
Last edited:
Fair enough, but hey, I was trying.
The second point he was making was that it seems a lot of the SC's that are actually able to handle 120kW aren't actually working at 120kW yet... So for us truly to figure this out (short of getting an "official" answer from Tesla), I think we need to compare apples-to-apples. We need someone to confirm someone actually getting 120kW, and then an earlier-VIN 85 to charge solo at the exact same charger.
Personally, I've charged at a bunch of SC's labeled 120k and only gotten 90k. We're in the low 6000's, so I'm pretty sure from the conversation here that we should be able to get 120k without a problem...which makes me think that the SC isn't operating at full capacity.
I agree with you, their communication sucks. Someone over at TM Forums was told by his service center that tire rotations were not included in the annual pre-paid service, when according to my printed documents they very clearly are included. I would presume that the person you refer to was provided with incorrect information and should probably contact Ownership again to clarify. An email to Jerome Guillen should get a swift response from Tesla regarding this issue, has anyone gone that high up the management chain?
I am generally wary of anecdotal reports because there could be other variables in play. The fact that some superchargers only function at 90 kW even though they say 120 kW is another data point to consider. I would not immediately jump to the conclusion that Tesla has done something wrong or underhanded here.
My 2¢.
Similar threads
