Older Teslas limited to 90kW Supercharging

[Edgewood Dome]

My battery was replaced in mid 2013 due to an 'impedance issue'. P1895. Did I get an A or B?

That's an "A" battery pack Chris.

 

[Dave EV]

Now from Tesla's May 2013 press release:

The new technology, which is in beta test mode now and will be fully rolled out to customers this summer, will allow Model S to be charged at 120 kW, replenishing three hours of driving in just over 20 minutes.​

You forgot to highlight one important word there - "fully".

Given that Tesla is well known to push out over-the-air updates, "fully rolled out to customers" clearly means that _all_ customers will get an update the enables 120 kW charging.

I don't even have any skin in the game (no Model S yet) and can clearly see how Tesla screwed up fully here.

 

[Zythryn]

So you aren't upset that you got something other than what was promised at the time you bought your car, you are upset that Tesla raised your hopes about something after you bought your car, based upon your interpretation of the word "customer", that turned out not to be true. Disappointment doesn't rise to the level of deserving a new battery, as others are suggesting. I'm not picking on you, just using your viewpoint as an example as it is probably shared by others. I'm trying to be logical here and to separate facts from emotion.

I think the most common interpretation of those releases would be that the superchargers are being upgraded and all cars capable of supercharging would be able to get the full 120kW rate.
That, along with the poor communication to customers calling and asking for information as well indicates a problem.
Add to that, that some people purchasing their car at the same time as others, got a slower battery (thinking of those who got April cars). No notice, no discount, and no follow up info.

Their communication needs to improve dramatically.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

How about this? nothing new here, just a spin
from:
Teslas Supercharger page FAQ's:

Q:I am Supercharging, but not as quickly as I expected, what could be wrong?

A:The Supercharging rate may vary due to battery charge level, current use of the Supercharging station and extreme climate conditions.


or an old version battery maybe? without knowing what we know I would be concerned if my car was only getting 90kW at a 120 station and temps were Ideal and I was at ~ 20% SOC. I know this is exactly what happened to a few people and they were told firmware upgrade would bring 120kW charge rates.

 

[Tupelo]

You forgot to highlight one important word there - "fully".

Given that Tesla is well known to push out over-the-air updates, "fully rolled out to customers" clearly means that _all_ customers will get an update the enables 120 kW charging.

I don't even have any skin in the game (no Model S yet) and can clearly see how Tesla screwed up fully here.

I respectfully disagree. The word "fully" means that starting in the summer the technology will no longer be a beta trial, but will then be a steady-state deployment ("beta" is limited release, "fully" is...well, full release.) What is actually missing is the word "all", as in all customers, past and future, will get the new functionality. I read these words to clearly say that the new functionality will be fully deployed for customers starting in the summer, not fully deployed retroactively for all customers starting one year ago.

 

[ken830]

I think all Tesla really needs to do is acknowledge that they screwed up in their announcement of the Supercharger improvement and mislead all of their existing customers into thinking that the improvement applied to them. Instead, the rep was just too defensive of their position, even going as far as saying I got the car before so and so price increase so they should use the older parts. It's just an uncomfortable feeling. I honestly didn't think it was a huge deal before they called me.

(Emphasis mine.) Bingo. When that happens I'll stop reading this thread.

Me too.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

No.

I personally talked with engineers about Supercharging as far back as 2011. I had a very clear understanding of what they were working on, and what they were testing, and it was not just 90kW, long long before the May 2013 announcement. You may not have been in "the know" but that does not mean that it was some top secret item that was just unveiled and those of us prior to May 2013 didn't know anything about it.

Every person here, and just about every Tesla Employee, expected my car to charge at 120kW. Trying to parse the words from the May 2013 announcement to show that we shouldn't have expected anything from our cars is disingenuous as every person that heard it expected all cars to support 120kW charging. It is only with 20/20 hindsight that you can make such an argument. Furthermore, I would be careful with that type of argument because Tesla tends to be very loose with it's statements and the number of questions that type of viewpoint brings up would bring the forum to a standstill.

You speak of the vocal members of this thread. Perhaps you should take a moment to see that many of those that are very vocal here are some of Tesla's oldest and longest supporters. Many for between 5 years and a decade. Each has personally helped to sell dozens of cars. The fact that many of those supporters see such a large issues with the communication and handling of this should give you pause to take off your fanboy hat and ask yourself if the company is heading in the correct direction. It certainly has me.

Peter

I'm sorry if my view differs from yours, but that hardly makes me a "fanboy". I don't think anyone who has followed my posts here and over at TM Forums would agree with your characterization, but that's just an aside. I happen to side with Tesla's position and disagree with people getting bent out of shape over something that was never promised as a vehicle feature until May 30th, 2013. Now with all due respect, informal conversations with engineers hardly constitute a promise from Tesla and would never rise to the level of a commitment. If you talk with Apple engineers, I'm sure they would tell you all kinds of things about your phone... but those conversations do not change the marketing promise that was made to you at the time you bought your phone.

Just because you talked with the engineers and they expressed some forward looking statements to you in the past, does that create a promise and official representation about the features of a vehicle that was not even offered for sale at the time you had those conversations? The only thing you or I as a customer can expect to receive is the product that we ordered. The product that you ordered was not advertised to have 120 kW charging prior to May 30th, 2013. You can talk with as many Tesla engineers as you wish, but that does not create a contract or rise to the level of a marketing or feature promise. You took the information that was told to you during informal conversations and created an expectation in your mind. Please don't be offended, I'm just trying to be logical about this and getting to the bottom of the argument.

If I hit my local supercharger and a Tesla engineer is sitting there and he tells me, "you know, we are going to upgrade all of our customers - every single one of them - to 500 kW supercharging in the next 6 months"... does that give me a right to be upset if it never comes true, or does not apply to my vehicle which was purchased months ago and without the promise of 500 kW supercharging? I'm just saying... When Tesla sells a product, its obligations are not bound by what a few engineers may or may not be saying to owners. Tesla is bound by the features that were represented at the time you purchased your vehicle.

I'm sure Tesla thanks you and other early adopters for selling dozens of cars for them, as well as supporting Tesla all of these years. That's all wonderful and great, I tip my hat to you and kudos to everyone else who falls into the same group. Really, I think it's wonderful and I'm so thankful for everyone's early support of Tesla. You and others have sold a lot of cars for Tesla because you love the car and want others to see the light. I'm surprised to hear the opinion that doing this - acting out of your own heart - would impose some expectation upon Tesla? Again, just trying to be logical.

- - - Updated - - -

You forgot to highlight one important word there - "fully".

Given that Tesla is well known to push out over-the-air updates, "fully rolled out to customers" clearly means that _all_ customers will get an update the enables 120 kW charging.

I don't even have any skin in the game (no Model S yet) and can clearly see how Tesla screwed up fully here.

Fully rolling out to customers is not the same as rolling out to all customers. There are many steps to a product rollout, most of them having nothing to do with the customers. You have product development, marketing, infrastructure, software, etc. All of those are components of any "rollout". So yes, Tesla did fully roll out to customers in the summer. They got their marketing in place, implemented the hardware upgrades to the superchargers, updated the car's firmware to allow for the higher rate if the battery is capable, etc. That is decidedly different than saying all customers are going to receive this feature.

- - - Updated - - -

I respectfully disagree. The word "fully" means that starting in the summer the technology will no longer be a beta trial, but will then be a steady-state deployment ("beta" is limited release, "fully" is...well, full release.) What is actually missing is the word "all", as in all customers, past and future, will get the new functionality. I read these words to clearly say that the new functionality will be fully deployed for customers starting in the summer, not fully deployed retroactively for all customers starting one year ago.

BINGO!

 

[100thMonkey]

How about this? nothing new here, just a spin
from:
Teslas Supercharger page FAQ's:

Q:I am Supercharging, but not as quickly as I expected, what could be wrong?

A:The Supercharging rate may vary due to battery charge level, current use of the Supercharging station and extreme climate conditions.


or an old version battery maybe? without knowing what we know I would be concerned if my car was only getting 90kW at a 120 station and temps were Ideal and I was at ~ 20% SOC. I know this is exactly what happened to a few people and they were told firmware upgrade would bring 120kW charge rates.

I like solutions approach, lets help them solve this. maybe an upgrade path is possible, which seems unlikely or they would have said it by now, but I like the idea of coming up with wording that would clarify the issue and see if Tesla responds. here's my addition to what you wrote:

Q:I am Supercharging, but not as quickly as I expected, what could be wrong?

A:The Supercharging rate may vary due to battery production, state of charge level, current use of the Supercharging station and extreme climate conditions.[/I]

 

[JakeP]

What if we gave them the benefit of the doubt here? What if there is a 110kWh battery pack coming soon, and they plan to upgrade the Sigs and early adopters with A batteries to that? Perhaps that is unlikely, but wouldn't it make complaints about having an A-model 85kWh battery pack that cannot Supercharge quite as fast as more recent 85kWh packs seem petty?

 

[ken830]

AmpedRealtor... I don't think you understand that most of us agree with you that Tesla did nothing wrong from a legal/contractual standpoint. After the sale, they don't owe us anything that wasn't promised in writing. That is clear. But what they did do was mislead (perhaps unintentionally) their existing customers with the Supercharging improvement announcement. And the fact that nearly every owner and many Tesla employees expected that the improved charge rates applied to existing vehicles shows that this isn't just some quirky mis-interpretation of their announcement by one or two individuals. It's clear that it was misleading. And I (and many of us) don't demand a replacement/upgraded battery. We just demand that Tesla acknowledge their screw-up and take steps improve in the future.

The early-supporters "sold" a lot of cars because they honestly believed in Tesla. You say they shouldn't expect anything in return. But that's not true. They have a right to expect that the company stay true to their values and retain the integrity and honesty that moved early-supporters to emphatically recommend the company and its products.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

AmpedRealtor... I don't think you understand that most of us agree with you that Tesla did nothing wrong from a legal/contractual standpoint. After the sale, they don't owe us anything that wasn't promised in writing. That is clear. But what they did do was mislead (perhaps unintentionally) their existing customers with the Supercharging improvement announcement. And the fact that nearly every owner and many Tesla employees expected that the improved charge rates applied to existing vehicles shows that this isn't just some quirky mis-interpretation of their announcement by one or two individuals. It's clear that it was misleading. And I (and many of us) don't demand a replacement/upgraded battery. We just demand that Tesla acknowledge their screw-up and take steps improve in the future.

The early-supporters "sold" a lot of cars because they honestly believed in Tesla. You say they shouldn't expect anything in return. But that's not true. They have a right to expect that the company stay true to their values and retain the integrity and honesty that moved early-supporters to emphatically recommend the company and its products.

Your view is balanced, but others are not. Others are saying that Tesla are liars, some are talking about wanting a battery replacement, and others are talking about a conference call to get affected owners together. For what purpose? You don't need a group of owners to get together to ask Tesla to change its communication strategy - something else is afoot. If I were Tesla, I would immediately issue firmware 5.8.5 to limit every vehicle shipped prior to May 30th, 2013 to a supercharging rate of 90 kW to make this go away. Is that what we want? Because that's what other companies do. Tesla is different and is allowing some, who received their cars prior to the May announcement, to access the higher charge rate because their vehicle hardware supports it. That is acting differently than most other companies would have, at least allowing some the benefit. But apparently now Tesla has to level the playing field otherwise they are going to piss off those who bought earlier cars... so now we push Tesla to become more like other companies by crippling functionality in order to keep the peace.

 

[umuhk]

After wading through all 105 pages of postings, I just realised that I actually have something to contribute to this thread.

I've got a recent build, with a D-type battery. I've gotten ~120kW charging at Superchargers before, so I know my car is completely capable of it. Yet, at exactly the same Supercharger, I've gotten 120kW just once out of four charges. The other times, I topped out around ~90kW. There may be a broad systemic benefit to 120kW-capable Superchargers. The actual benefit to me, as a driver, has been minimal. I don't know how representative that experience is, but I'm willing to believe it's probably not too far off the norm. And I'm OK with that.

Tesla as a company (and Musk as an individual) has made lots of claims and promises through its history. Some of them have panned out, some have not. By absolute count, and with careful parsing of these statements, it's certainly possible to make the case that Tesla has misled, mischaracterised, and otherwise prevaricated at least as much as (if not more than) other car companies. But weighting those claims by actual impact to me and the world at large, I'm forced to conclude that Tesla has largely delivered -- and certainly more so than I would expect any other company to manage. I'm missing lighted mirrors on my visors, my car doesn't crouch as much on the freeway as it used to, and some owners can't make full use of a charging feature that occasionally saves some time. But I have a fully-electric vehicle that I can drive from Seattle to Las Vegas, by any measure in more comfort and elegance than I have a right to be used to, for virtually no cost in energy, and with a comparatively minimal impact on the environment -- and which I used yesterday to bring home a 170lb package that was 7 feet long, a feat that would have eluded my other vehicle (a Hybrid Escape).

For what it's worth, I'm a happy customer (A+++++, would buy again, etc).

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

haha, ya , compared to other auto companies claims I think Tesla is Golden. They are super scandalous

Anyways, the worst part of the SC's is the topping off, not the middle /beginning of charge
Summer time temperatures will probably limit many SC's(or cars) below 120kW due to the heat and this problem will be very minor.

 

[liuping]

After wading through all 105 pages of postings, I just realised that I actually have something to contribute to this thread.

I've got a recent build, with a D-type battery. I've gotten ~120kW charging at Superchargers before, so I know my car is completely capable of it. Yet, at exactly the same Supercharger, I've gotten 120kW just once out of four charges. The other times, I topped out around ~90kW. There may be a broad systemic benefit to 120kW-capable Superchargers. The actual benefit to me, as a driver, has been minimal. I don't know how representative that experience is, but I'm willing to believe it's probably not too far off the norm. And I'm OK with that.

Tesla as a company (and Musk as an individual) has made lots of claims and promises through its history. Some of them have panned out, some have not. By absolute count, and with careful parsing of these statements, it's certainly possible to make the case that Tesla has misled, mischaracterised, and otherwise prevaricated at least as much as (if not more than) other car companies. But weighting those claims by actual impact to me and the world at large, I'm forced to conclude that Tesla has largely delivered -- and certainly more so than I would expect any other company to manage. I'm missing lighted mirrors on my visors, my car doesn't crouch as much on the freeway as it used to, and some owners can't make full use of a charging feature that occasionally saves some time. But I have a fully-electric vehicle that I can drive from Seattle to Las Vegas, by any measure in more comfort and elegance than I have a right to be used to, for virtually no cost in energy, and with a comparatively minimal impact on the environment -- and which I used yesterday to bring home a 170lb package that was 7 feet long, a feat that would have eluded my other vehicle (a Hybrid Escape).

For what it's worth, I'm a happy customer (A+++++, would buy again, etc).

I'm with 100% you one this Umuhk.

I have supercharged 5 times now, and only once have I gotten full 120kW charging (even when visiting the same exact charger). The one time I got the full 120kW was when I arrived with the perfect conditions of an nearly empty, warmed battery, a cold day (34 degrees), and a non shared SuperCharger. If I cannot use upgraded 135kW superchargers at full power later this year, so be it. That does not take away the amazing (and free) charging I have now. I absolutely love my Model S, and can't imagine going back to any other car now.

 

[Gear]

I'm with 100% you one this Umuhk.

I have supercharged 5 times now, and only once have I gotten full 120kW charging (even when visiting the same exact charger). The one time I got the full 120kW was when I arrived with the perfect conditions of an nearly empty, warmed battery, a cold day (34 degrees), and a non shared SuperCharger. If I cannot use upgraded 135kW superchargers at full power later this year, so be it. That does not take away the amazing (and free) charging I have now. I absolutely love my Model S, and can't imagine going back to any other car now.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[Canuck]

... my mom has been ill...

Sorry to take the thread off topic, but I hope your mother gets better soon epley.

 

[epley]

Sorry to take the thread off topic, but I hope your mother gets better soon epley.

Thanks!:biggrin:

 

[Fedderman]

AmpedRealtor... I don't think you understand that most of us agree with you that Tesla did nothing wrong from a legal/contractual standpoint. After the sale, they don't owe us anything that wasn't promised in writing. That is clear. But what they did do was mislead (perhaps unintentionally) their existing customers with the Supercharging improvement announcement. And the fact that nearly every owner and many Tesla employees expected that the improved charge rates applied to existing vehicles shows that this isn't just some quirky mis-interpretation of their announcement by one or two individuals. It's clear that it was misleading. And I (and many of us) don't demand a replacement/upgraded battery. We just demand that Tesla acknowledge their screw-up and take steps improve in the future.

The early-supporters "sold" a lot of cars because they honestly believed in Tesla. You say they shouldn't expect anything in return. But that's not true. They have a right to expect that the company stay true to their values and retain the integrity and honesty that moved early-supporters to emphatically recommend the company and its products.

+1
Completely agree Ken - I think we concluded many pages ago this boils down to a communication problem.

Tesla needs to do better, and we know they can do better. They are pioneers in so many ways, including the continuous vehicle improvement (vs. model years). Most of us here feel a personal connection to this company (even those who are not TSLA investors)... and we want them to improve. Staying silent on issues like this brings them no benefit.

 

[aviators99]

I think it's time for some tough love...

From Tesla's September 2012 press release:

The Supercharger is substantially more powerful than any charging technology to date, providing almost 100 kilowatts of power to the Model S, with the potential to go as high as 120 kilowatts in the future.​

This statement clearly says that 120 kW is a potential future functionality. Not only is it in the future, it's potentially in the future - that hardly rises to the level of a promise, feature, or commitment. The only existing capability mentioned is "almost 100 kW" which is absolutely correct. I'm not sure how anyone reading this press release would expect to receive 120 kW supercharging. The press release clearly delineates current capability from potential future capability.

Now from Tesla's May 2013 press release:

The new technology, which is in beta test mode now and will be fully rolled out to customers this summer, will allow Model S to be charged at 120 kW, replenishing three hours of driving in just over 20 minutes.​

Again, the language is clear. 120 kW was in beta testing as of May 2013 and Tesla's plan was to roll it out to customers in the summer. That doesn't mean all customers, past customers, Sig customers, or anyone who bought before this announcement customers. It says "rolled out to customers this summer". That means customers who buy the car "this summer". Really the only people who should be upset are those who received A batteries after May 30th... oh wait, there aren't any.

At the risk of offending some of the vocal members of this thread, it seems that those who are most upset are angry because others got a newer part at the same time and are now trying to go back in time to parse Tesla's words in an attempt to have their part upgraded. There are undoubtedly many other components in your cars that have seen later iterations that you don't even know about. Later shipments may have received touch screens with lower latencies, later shipments may contain slightly different cellular radio configurations based on whatever was the newest shipping part from the distributor, etc. Are you going to demand that Tesla update every component once you learn that someone in your time frame received a better or more capable component, even though the one everyone received performed to the specifications promised by Tesla?

You can't become retroactively upset over something that was never promised, can you? Nothing Tesla has done is decreasing your charging rate or increasing your charging time. Nothing Tesla has done has taken away your ability to charge at the rate that was promised and which you have been enjoying since taking delivery. Tesla never promised anyone prior to May 2013 that they would get 120 kW supercharging - it was clearly stated as a future functionality. I don't know how anyone could interpret that same press release and construe it as a promise or commitment of some sort, unless that interpretation was performed in hindsight and with the intent to find a wording technicality or ambiguity to construe in the owner's favor. Unfortunately, that's disingenuous.

To those who are claiming that Tesla's position rises to the level of a lie, I suggest you take a deep breath and calm yourselves. That's a lot of drama over having received exactly what Tesla promised you at the time you ordered your vehicle. The only complaints that are legitimate, in my opinion, are from those who received A batteries after the May 30th, 2013 press release announcing the summer rollout. Except, there are none that we know of. Everyone else got what was promised.

Can we move on?

Nope. Not once did you mention the tapering improvements, and the context in which Elon Musk promised that. As I said before, it's the only part I care about.

- - - Updated - - -

haha, ya , compared to other auto companies claims I think Tesla is Golden. They are super scandalous

Anyways, the worst part of the SC's is the topping off, not the middle /beginning of charge
Summer time temperatures will probably limit many SC's(or cars) below 120kW due to the heat and this problem will be very minor.

Yep, and Elon promised a fix for the "topping off" issue, but now we come to find out that it will not be fixed for early cars (or late, unlucky cars).

 

[jerry33]

The new technology, which is in beta test mode now and will be fully rolled out to customers this summer, will allow Model S to be charged at 120 kW, replenishing three hours of driving in just over 20 minutes.

I too read this to mean that all cars would be able to charge at 120 kW and it was just the Superchargers that would be upgraded. However, as the alternative is an RV park I'm not all that unhappy. I can see why they didn't say "allow future Model S to be charged" because everyone would have held off purchasing, or demanded a significant discount (25%). However, tactics like this don't leave a good taste.

The correct way to roll this out would be to say nothing about it, and then introduce the higher rate of charging with a pricing change--then there would be no confusion and no hard feelings (because everyone knows, or should know, that any time you purchase a high-tech product it's already obsolete).