Older Teslas limited to 90kW Supercharging

[brianman]

Not to mention free FIRE INSURANCE to keep the insurance rates lower for ALL OF US.

I mentioned this earlier: What makes you confident this fire-related-to-battery coverage applies retroactively to cars delivered before the announcement?

- - - Updated - - -

I just re-read my service contract and there is no mention of hardware upgrades! :scared:

I was certainly convinced the language was included there, but apparently I am mistaken. The language is actually on the web page describing the service agreements, where it shows this:

Tesla Service | Tesla Motors

View attachment 39363

I apologize for getting this one wrong, but I knew it was written somewhere. The fact that it's on the web site but not in the actual contract does not sit well with me. Ultimately Tesla is responsible for what's in the contract, and it would appear that the web site is selling a feature that's not actually mentioned in the document that describes the coverage. Oh dear.

Sadly this is not abnormal for Tesla. Also, it's normal for Tesla to update the web page to remove that line with zero notification to current or pending owners.

 

[Lloyd]

I mentioned this earlier: What makes you confident this fire-related-to-battery coverage applies retroactively to cars delivered before the announcement?

Well, when Elon announced that they would cover fire damage, it was subsequently indicated that it would mitigate any insurance increase for current owners. I dont think anyone would have any issue collecting if it ever happens.

 

[brianman]

Tesla may want to brand anything above 90kw as Super Supercharging (or similar). Then they could say that that early owners were promised Supercharging but not Super Supercharging.

This would be an improvement, yes. But it would still suck. Put another way, it would suck somewhat less than the current state of affairs.

 

[joefee]

Where is George B when you need him…

George please call in and tell Tesla/Elon to do the right thing and enable all 2012 cars @120 so the company can put this issue to bed NOW before any more good will is squandered!

 

[SUPRKAR]

Where is George B when you need him…

George please call in and tell Tesla/Elon to do the right thing and enable all 2012 cars @120 so the company can put this issue to bed NOW before any more good will is squandered!

It's over. Tesla has moved on and the early followers are no longer needed. It sucks but time moves on and we are no longer important. Just as the Roadster owners were left behind now so are we. All this do the right thing make it right you are wasting your breath. It was nice when our input was important but it isn't any more and we need to get used to it.

 

[yobigd20]

I'd shop around. My plan renews at the end of January and had virtually no change (State Farm).

That's because your probably already paying the highest of all rates lol. When I had shopped around for insurance, State Farm was by far the worst and more than triple my current rate.

 

[Dave EV]

The following is information direct from someone I trust has the some of the best information at Tesla:

'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.'

I was thinking about this issue while on the way to the gym this morning and then suddenly realized that this excuse is not going to make any significant difference on potential waiting times based on current SuperCharger deployment.

Why?

If you are at a busy SuperCharger (SC) location, you are sharing a SC stack with another Model S. You are not going to be charging even at 90 kW if this happens - you'll be stuck at a much lower rate.

A single SC (two plugs) is going to be limited to 120 kW no matter what. If a 2nd car happens to show up, a 120 kW capable MS might be further along in it's charge than it would be otherwise, which might let it leave earlier, but it's still not going to have any noticeable affect on throughput at a busy SC location where there's a line of people waiting to charge.

 

[ken830]

I am the other outlier and posted above. Unfortunately @ken830 earlier said he is stuck at 90kW. Ken, can you confirm your firmware is OK for 120? I will summarize in a table.

Should be. I have 1.49.57 now. It was installed before my return trip from Disneyland to the Bay Area. I was on the early v5.8 (forget the exact version number) for the first half of the trip. With either version, the car very obviously ramped up to 90 kW and was pegged there.

 

[apacheguy]

Should be. I have 1.49.57 now. It was installed before my return trip from Disneyland to the Bay Area. I was on the early v5.8 (forget the exact version number) for the first half of the trip. With either version, the car very obviously ramped up to 90 kW and was pegged there.

Well this certainly puts an interesting spin on things. An 8,000 VIN is 90 limited and has photographic evidence of an "A" battery pack? Maybe Tesla refurbished a broken Sig pack and put it in your car? Don't mean to fan the flames, but I'd be pretty upset if I were you.

 

[ckessel]

I can't imagine why ken830 got an A battery. I'll be very interested in finding out what Tesla says about that.

 

[PatP]

It's over. Tesla has moved on and the early followers are no longer needed. It sucks but time moves on and we are no longer important. Just as the Roadster owners were left behind now so are we. All this do the right thing make it right you are wasting your breath. It was nice when our input was important but it isn't any more and we need to get used to it.

+1 - this is exactly the feeling I have. One of the reason I sold my Roadster is the lack of support (ex. no AC charging at superchargers, feeling somewhat abandoned). As for my Sig S, I think we should get more consideration than just a sport bag. This doesn't have to be that much, but they should work on the perception side of it.

However, Tesla is now a successful company and they sell more car that they can produce... So their goal is accomplished.

 

[yvesn7]

Notice the similarities in Musterion's and Ken830's labels... indeed both say "A" with a 13D (April 2013) date, but both also say "B" in the smaller serial number at the bottom left, and interestingly both have a green hand-painted check mark in the upper right corner. Maybe some "A" batteries did pass some "B" qualification test?

 

[ken830]

I emailed Tesla Ownership while I was sitting in the car at Gilroy charging at 90kW last weekend and the reply on Monday had been that they are looking into it and will contact me when they have an answer. No follow-up yet.

 

[Odenator]

I've noticed a pattern. The older batteries have no QR code on the left side. Also the bottom left says "1011721-00-A".

Examples here:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...super-charging?p=536061&viewfull=1#post536061

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...super-charging?p=536338&viewfull=1#post536338

The newer ones with the QR code all say "1011721-00-B" on the bottom left side, no matter if the right side has an "A" or a "B".

People who have not made a note about the existence of a QR code and what the bottom left says should probably check and update their posts.

I believe this is incorrect. I have vin2607 and I am restricted to less than 90kW. My battery has a QR code. When I scan the code this is what shows up: ST12L0002530:1P1014114-00-A

It looks like its just an identifying code for the battery.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm wondering if a smarter and more industrious forum member than myself could consolidate the vin#, max charge 90vs120 and battery labels together and see if an obvious trend emerges?

 

[Fedderman]

I've noticed a pattern. The older batteries have no QR code on the left side. Also the bottom left says "1011721-00-A".

Examples here:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...super-charging?p=536061&viewfull=1#post536061

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...super-charging?p=536338&viewfull=1#post536338

The newer ones with the QR code all say "1011721-00-B" on the bottom left side, no matter if the right side has an "A" or a "B".

People who have not made a note about the existence of a QR code and what the bottom left says should probably check and update their posts.

I took delivery on 9 Dec '12. I have 90 kW-limited charging, with an 'A' battery (left and right sides), but also have a QR code. So, seems the only consistent indicator is the 'A' on the bottom left.

 

[Vger]

Despite the weird lack of correlation between VIN and battery S/N, at this point, I believe we have no evidence that any "A" batteries can charge above 90 kW, and no "B" batteries are unable to charge up to 120 kW.

Everyone agree?

 

[Lyon]

Data point:

VIN 02595

Built 12/12, Delivered 1/4/13 (around 3:00pm... hey, I was excited)

I should point out here (so folks don't have to dig) that I HAVE been able to charge at 120kW

 

[apacheguy]

I took delivery on 9 Dec '12. I have 90 kW-limited charging, with an 'A' battery (left and right sides), but also have a QR code. So, seems the only consistent indicator is the 'A' on the bottom left.

Check out Odenator's post above. He has a B battery according to the bottom left corner and is 90 limited. Maybe both have to say B in order for 120?

Also, ken830 is consistent with this interpretation. B in the lower left, A in the part # and yet he is 90 limited.

 

[dcopperfield]

Here's mine: VIN# 1836
Limited to 90kw

 

[bonnie]

I think it was Mrs. White in the kitchen with the wrench.