Older Teslas limited to 90kW Supercharging

[gimp_dad]

Seems like some people are still not happy at the rate they get their free energy...

Seems like a pretty lame statement. I value my time a lot more than the cost of electricity. This isn't about the cost of the energy.

On the other hand I am extremely happy with my very early P85 (Aug 2012) and would certainly not go back and wait a year to get a slightly better car than the car I have loved for the last 16+ months. After test driving an early mule with the P85 drive train and not much else I would probably have bought the car if it didn't even come with seats!

But, like others, I would probably not jump too quickly into the head of the line (and brave those nagging feelings of having paid full price for a beta version of the vehicle) for a Model X knowing the birthing pains that can happen (especially since I already have the most fun sports sedan on the market to keep me happy).

And, if Tesla offered me an upgrade to higher charge rates than 90kW I would probably pay for it if it wasn't crazy numbers like the P+ retrofit. I don't even use the superchargers simply because the wait and lack of flexibility are not something I would consider today. Eventually that may change but 120kW is not a game changer vs 90kW. That said, anything that increases the probability that I would drive my MS rather than one of my ICE cars is a plus in my book and I would pay for it.

 

[jiaotong]

This isn't about the cost of the energy.

Correct. The complaint is about the rate they get their free energy. That is, ppl seem upset at having to wait longer for their free energy and are demanding Tesla supply their free energy at a faster rate (90kwh vs 120 kwh)

 

[Trnsl8r]

Quick data point from VIN 17xx. Stopped at Fremont supercharger this past weekend. Initially charge seemed stuck at 89-90 kwh before tapering about 15 minutes later. There were other cars charging but from what I could tell my charger's "partner" was unoccupied.

 

[Stoneymonster]

This isn't about the cost of the energy.

Correct. The complaint is about the rate they get their free energy. That is, ppl seem upset at having to wait longer for their free energy and are demanding Tesla supply their free energy at a faster rate (90kwh vs 120 kwh)

It is not free. It is baked into the price of the car, and we can even evaluate the hidden cost by seeing what 60kWh owners have to pay to enable it.
This is like saying Medicare is "free" healthcare.

Edit: Oops, just saw ckessel's post.

 

[jiaotong]

It is not free. It is baked into the price of the car, and we can even evaluate the hidden cost by seeing what 60kWh owners have to pay to enable it.

Does "This is a complaint about how fast people get their pre-paid energy" sound better/more correct?

 

[ModelS1079]

Just saw this thread. Need to check - am one of the first couple of non-sig 85's made. honestly, I would/will be really disappointed if I am limited to 90kWh and there's no fix. Really.

Else will call Tesla and ask, and await word from them...and all of you.

 

[Beaker]

As a stockholder and a big fan of Tesla, what I'm most concerned by here is the fact that signature owners, those that supported the company early on with a significant deposit, seem to end up holding the short end of the stick more frequently than the general population. It's items like this that made me cancel my sig X reservation in favor of a general production. If it turns out that all sigs are impacted (assuming original battery) and a few number of production cars, I would recommend Tesla swap out the packs of all impacted cars. Maintaining the brand value of signature is important moving forward.

The old packs can be used at the super chargers to store energy from solar and to remove the demand-charges from the utilities. Or maybe retrofitted and used elsewhere.

We have a Sig S, but have not jumped in on a Sig X, because it just seems less stressful to wait a year or two... we'll see though once pricing is released and how this unfolds.

 

[tomas]

Just saw this thread. Need to check - am one of the first couple of non-sig 85's made. honestly, I would/will be really disappointed if I am limited to 90kWh and there's no fix. Really.

Else will call Tesla and ask, and await word from them...and all of you.

As an early Model S owner (but not sig), I would be extremely disappointed if Tesla did not swiftly implement every battery capacity, longevity, charging, management improvement they can develop and test. Tho disappointed if it is not on my car, I'd be more disappointed if they "held" technology away from current Model S/X/etc buyers. I would hope these improvements would be offered to me at a reasonable price, after all there have been a couple of price increases since I bought, so I can still spend a bit before I've sunk as much as today's buyers.

 

[napabill]

Just saw this thread. Need to check - am one of the first couple of non-sig 85's made. honestly, I would/will be really disappointed if I am limited to 90kWh and there's no fix. Really.

Else will call Tesla and ask, and await word from them...and all of you.

i'm 74 spots before you (1741) and sent an email to [email protected] this morning. Will post the reply when received.

What is your recent range charge rated miles? I was getting 270 miles early on, but now struggle to get 260, more like 250-255.

 

[ckessel]

i'm 74 spots before you (1741) and sent an email to [email protected] this morning. Will post the reply when received.

The cut number seems to be right around VIN 2300. I'm out at 2310, but 2281 did have it and we took delivery the same day. Seems fairly clear that batch was where the changeover occurred and had mixed supercharging hardware.

 

[GDH]

Love the fast charge that Tesla provides, my only minor complaint is that it charges most of the battery super fast then it slows way down..it seems like it takes forver to fully charge,especially when you need to get back on the highway. One can only sit at an Arby's waiting for so long lmao.

 

[SFOTurtle]

I'd bet TM fixes it

All the superchargers I visited are now 120kW. Centralia to Hawthorne on I-5


Confirmed.View attachment 38238

Out of curiosity, if you did any 100% charges on your trip, what did your rated range numbers look like? Wondering if you saw any balancing or improvement in the rated range numbers over the course of your trip?

 

[apacheguy]

Does "This is a complaint about how fast people get their pre-paid energy" sound better/more correct?

No. Simply put, we are upset about the fact that TM has always billed 120 kw SC as a software driven change. There was no previous mention about older cars requiring a hardware upgrade. It goes like this:

Customer: I've heard Tesla plans to roll out 120 kw superchargers. Will my car be able to take advantage of this new tech?
TM (actual quote):
"Currently our Super Chargers have an output lower than its full potential. When our Engineering team in charge of Super Chargers are ready to increase the output it should increase power output to an ideal potential of additional 30% (speculation and not fact at this time). This upgrade will likely come inform of firmware and hardware (not on the Model S but on the Super Charger units) but details will likely not become public, but if it does it will be available on our web site or made public by Elon Musk."

Serveral months later...
Customer: I still cannot charge at 120 kw despite your assurance that I would be able to do so.
TM: Oh yeah, it turns out your car is incompatible.

Personally, I'll wait to hear back regarding their "big plan" and reserve judgement until then, but hopefully this gives a clearer picture as to why we are upset.

 

[scaesare]

It is not free. It is baked into the price of the car, and we can even evaluate the hidden cost by seeing what 60kWh owners have to pay to enable it.
This is like saying Medicare is "free" healthcare.

Edit: Oops, just saw ckessel's post.

Well to be pedantic, in bold large type on the Tesla Supercharger page it says:

Charge in minutes, for free

It then goes on to describe the cost associated with enabling it on the cars (not the cost of the energy):

Supercharging is included in every Model S with an 85 kWh battery, and can be added to any 60 kWh Model S for $2,000, or $2,500 if enabled after delivery

Elon has talked about offsetting the energy usage (and cost) with solar generation. I'd suspect the "enabling fee" has much more to do with helping in offsetting the cost of getting hardware infrastructure in installed than paying for the energy itself over the long haul.

All of which is somewhat besides the point here, in my opinion. I don't really see anyone knocking the issue of the idea of the supercharing model/free-energy itself much at all. And relatively few people feel the speed difference is that huge of a deal (although for some that's important).

What I see more so is those who paid a premium for a car that was supposed to be "a cut above" (a Signature edition), and in doing so helped subsidize Tesla's early years, feeling somewhat that they are getting the short end of the stick. Folks aren't complaining that they should get things like parking sensors, folding mirrors, or any other option that was introduced later. What they'd like is for the options they DID pay for be up to snuff as compared to cars that were sold a short time later with no differention made as to their capabilites.

Now I don't have a sig and therefore don't have a personal dog in this hunt... but I rather see their point and can sympathize.

 

[ChadS]

Yeah, as a Sig owner I've got some definite mixed feelings. I don't expect hardware upgrades as Tesla improves their cars, 90kW was all I was promised when I ordered, and the speed difference doesn't seem that huge. In many ways, the whole issue seems overblown.

But on the other hand, when Tesla first mentioned 120kW, my first thought was...will it work with my car? I realized there might be some hardware upgrades required. But I read the statements from Tesla...and as apacheguy noted, they were very clear that the upgrade was on the Supercharger side. So it was a pretty unpleasant surprise to excitedly charge at a 120kW Supercharger for the first time...and get only 90kW.

If it really takes a new battery to enable 120kW on my car, forget it, I'm fine. But if there's a small piece of hardware - even if I have to pay for it - I sure the heck would like to know about it. As usual, all of this angst could be calmed if Tesla would just put out an official statement.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

Yeah, as a Sig owner I've got some definite mixed feelings. I don't expect hardware upgrades as Tesla improves their cars, 90kW was all I was promised when I ordered, and the speed difference doesn't seem that huge. In many ways, the whole issue seems overblown.

But on the other hand, when Tesla first mentioned 120kW, my first thought was...will it work with my car? I realized there might be some hardware upgrades required. But I read the statements from Tesla...and as apacheguy noted, they were very clear that the upgrade was on the Supercharger side. So it was a pretty unpleasant surprise to excitedly charge at a 120kW Supercharger for the first time...and get only 90kW.

If it really takes a new battery to enable 120kW on my car, forget it, I'm fine. But if there's a small piece of hardware - even if I have to pay for it - I sure the heck would like to know about it. As usual, all of this angst could be calmed if Tesla would just put out an official statement.

BUT it was clearly stated that buying the service plan included both hardware and software upgrades too
I expect my car to charge at the speed of the cars coming out today

the 120 over 90 shouldn't reduce charge time much since it is only in the peak charging range that you get the advantage
so it isn't a huge deal, but still 'necessary'

 

[Doug_G]

Yeah, as a Sig owner I've got some definite mixed feelings. I don't expect hardware upgrades as Tesla improves their cars, 90kW was all I was promised when I ordered, and the speed difference doesn't seem that huge. In many ways, the whole issue seems overblown.

But on the other hand, when Tesla first mentioned 120kW, my first thought was...will it work with my car? I realized there might be some hardware upgrades required. But I read the statements from Tesla...and as apacheguy noted, they were very clear that the upgrade was on the Supercharger side. So it was a pretty unpleasant surprise to excitedly charge at a 120kW Supercharger for the first time...and get only 90kW.

If it really takes a new battery to enable 120kW on my car, forget it, I'm fine. But if there's a small piece of hardware - even if I have to pay for it - I sure the heck would like to know about it. As usual, all of this angst could be calmed if Tesla would just put out an official statement.

I was in the audience when Elon said that Supercharging will be upgraded to 120 kW. There were no disclaimers, no weasel words. Nothing about Signature and early Production owners not getting it.

 

[arremgee]

I am not saying it doesn't suck to be the last person without an upgrade. It does. But Tesla didn't treat you poorly. You were unlucky. Tesla would be making more people unlucky if they held back improvements until they could announce them. And you still will anger people who buy the day before the announcement.

Or you were super lucky, because you were one of the first to get a Model S!

- - - Updated - - -

If it really takes a new battery to enable 120kW on my car, forget it, I'm fine. But if there's a small piece of hardware - even if I have to pay for it - I sure the heck would like to know about it. As usual, all of this angst could be calmed if Tesla would just put out an official statement.

From what it looks like, yes, it really does take a new battery. Which is why it must not be an easy fix. It's not as if we didn't expect battery engineering to get better. I feel a twinge of disappointment, but I don't feel like it's 'owed' to me or anything like that. It's not something that went wrong in my car. It's just that technology improved. Personally, it just makes me even more excited for the next generation.

 

[joefee]

I talked to CExp today ...they have no official communication yet!

 

[Discoducky]

Sorry, the closest I got too 100% was 198 rated and it still showed 20 min remaining


TE=SFOTurtle;525717]Out of curiosity, if you did any 100% charges on your trip, what did your rated range numbers look like? Wondering if you saw any balancing or improvement in the rated range numbers over the course of your trip?[/QUOTE]