Older Teslas limited to 90kW Supercharging

[brianman]

You don't think full charge means to charge the car fully?

I know what Standard, Range, Daily, and Trip charges are. Whenever used near the word charge "full" has either been non-helpful (throwaway word), confusing ("full standard charge"), or worse.

- - - Updated - - -

That is what I mean by full charge, 100% maximum range charge.

Thanks, Larry. No worries.

To elaborate on dsm's question:

If you've done a full 100% charge (Range or Trip mode), please enter your rated range:
Full Range/Trip Mode/100% Charge:______ rated miles

Both of the underlined examples fit in the "throwaway" category. I've never heard anyone say "full 100%" and mean anything different from "100%". Similarly for "Full Range" and "Range". Perhaps if Tesla introduces a "partial Range" charge of 95% then it might have some additional differentiation/meaning. Heck you could argue "Full Standard" charge as different from "50% Standard" charge but I think that's rarely a point of confusion -- usually people specify 90% vs. 50% in such a case.

 

[bluetinc]

No, I don't know for sure but I suspect that driving to zero ideal miles would be different than driving to zero Rated miles and therefore your results in energy used will likely differ.

The fact that you haven't actually followed your suggested methodology to drive to zero suggests that in real life this may not be feasible for most of us to do on a repeated and consistent basis every time we charge to 100%. In other words in real life most of us are not going to be able to drive down to exactly zero each and every time and that will introduce inaccuracies in results.

Larry

Larry,

I can confirm that 0 miles is at the identical point for both Ideal and Rated miles. From that point up (Setting aside corrective factors) they simply count differently.

Peter

 

[brianman]

I can confirm that 0 miles is at the identical point for both Ideal and Rated miles. From that point up (Setting aside corrective factors) they simply count differently.

I did a quick scan of my REST streaming data for "D,0," and all occurrences of that look like "D,0,0". Put another way, all the REST data points for my car agree with bluetinc's assertion. YTMV (your telemetry may vary) of course.

For the "statistically significant" crowd and the "zomg you drove to zero" critics, I have 2276 matching entries so roughly 569 seconds of this data over ~1.5 years of ownership. Every one of these experiences was avoidable with one of better human behavior, better weather, and more charging locations* (and typically some combinations of all 3).

* I don't define 110V/12A as a charging location. It's a charging emergency stop.

 

[bluetinc]

Brianman,

Forgive me if you already have stated this on the forum, but have you upgraded to 5.9 yet? If so, do you by chance have 100% charge range data from both 5.8 and 5.9 where you could compare your ideal and rated miles for both versions of software?

Peter

I did a quick scan of my REST streaming data for "D,0," and all occurrences of that look like "D,0,0". Put another way, all the REST data points for my car agree with bluetinc's assertion. YTMV (your telemetry may vary) of course.

For the "statistically significant" crowd and the "zomg you drove to zero" critics, I have 2276 matching entries so roughly 569 seconds of this data over ~1.5 years of ownership. Every one of these experiences was avoidable with one of better human behavior, better weather, and more charging locations* (and typically some combinations of all 3).

* I don't define 110V/12A as a charging location. It's a charging emergency stop.

 

[brianman]

Brianman,

(a) Forgive me if you already have stated this on the forum, but have you upgraded to 5.9 yet? (b) If so, do you by chance have 100% charge range data from both 5.8 and 5.9 where you could compare your ideal and rated miles for both versions of software?

Peter

(a) Yes, my car has 5.9 firmware (.94 I think).
(b) The highest charge since taking ownership was 96% (due to a bug in earlier firmware, which I reported to Tesla). My charge setting has remained at Standard/Daily-max (93% / 90%) so no data on 100%. Sorry.

 

[JohnQ]

No, I don't know for sure but I suspect that driving to zero ideal miles would be different than driving to zero Rated miles and therefore your results in energy used will likely differ.

The fact that you haven't actually followed your suggested methodology to drive to zero suggests that in real life this may not be feasible for most of us to do on a repeated and consistent basis every time we charge to 100%. In other words in real life most of us are not going to be able to drive down to exactly zero each and every time and that will introduce inaccuracies in results.

Larry

While 0 range remaining would be the best measure, I agree that it's not necessarily realistic. As mentioned above, my comfort threshold is crossed when into single digit miles remaining. So I arbitrarily used 10 rated remaining as my measuring point since I get there at least twice a year on road trips. And yes, as you noted, that will introduce inaccuracies depending on how many Wh/mi rated range really is (subject of another thread, of course). But, regardless of all that, I now have a better feel for the available energy in my battery and how that's changing over time.

 

[Dave EV]

You can always use HVAC to drain the last few miles.

Turn the heater up to maximum temperature with maximum vent speed and defroster on with the windows down.

That's Nissan's recommended procedure for bleeding off excess charge for certain battery tests for the LEAF, anyway.

 

[Kraken]

FYI, my b pack only gets 120kw on 135kw chargers at Roseville. Likely the extra kw are for better sharing between multiple cars. Strangely, I couldn't find any paired charger markings. Maybe the new ones have a way to share 4*135 to all 7 spots? I noticed that no matter where I plugged in, the same supercharger was making noise like it was the one powering my charge.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

... Maybe the new ones have a way to share 4*135 to all 7 spots? I noticed that no matter where I plugged in, the same supercharger was making noise like it was the one powering my charge.

cool, that is great if true! No need to educate about the pairing in that case.

 

[bhuwan]

FYI, my b pack only gets 120kw on 135kw chargers at Roseville. Likely the extra kw are for better sharing between multiple cars. Strangely, I couldn't find any paired charger markings. Maybe the new ones have a way to share 4*135 to all 7 spots? I noticed that no matter where I plugged in, the same supercharger was making noise like it was the one powering my charge.

possible that we're still SW limited to 120kW

 

[gg_got_a_tesla]

possible that we're still SW limited to 120kW

Yeah. Most likely a 6.0 feature.

 

[Kraken]

possible that we're still SW limited to 120kW

Yes very possible. Just noting that as of now, no charging higher Han 120 with my b pack on a 135kw charger.

 

[spentan]

Yeah. Most likely a 6.0 feature.

I wonder if 6.0 will increase A batteries to above 90kW, even 105 or 120kW would be awesome.

 

[Joel]

I wonder if 6.0 will increase A batteries to above 90kW, even 105 or 120kW would be awesome.

It's a battery chemistry issue for "A" batteries. Any charging above 90kW will come at the expense of damaging the "A" batteries. That is why Tesla has decided to limit the "A" batteries. Essentially, it is a "hardware" problem, not a software problem.

 

[FlasherZ]

possible that we're still SW limited to 120kW

Or... you need a D pack to do 135 kW.

Cue the "Middle-age Teslas limited to 120 kW Supercharging" thread with threats about B packs.

 

[apacheguy]

I wonder if 6.0 will increase A batteries to above 90kW, even 105 or 120kW would be awesome.

That would be awesome indeed, but I doubt it will ever happen for the reasons already noted.

Cue the "Middle-age Teslas limited to 120 kW Supercharging" thread with threats about B packs.

Although I have been very vocal on this issue, I would not be disappointed if I had a B and it did not support 135 kW charging. I was always under the impression that my car would support 120, but certainly not anything beyond that as Tesla did not set that expectation. Nevertheless, I anticipate that B packs will support 135 kW supercharging. Only time will tell.

 

[Gear]

I wonder if we 60's will get another charging upgrade. We're already charging at a higher C-rate at 105kW than the 85's are at 120kW.

 

[gekkota]

I'm surprised no other 60's have chimed in with results similar to what I have seen - two weeks ago on road trip from Chicago to MN, we saw 111kW and 112kW initial charge rate at two different Superchargers. Was quite impressive. Pics available if I have to. :smile:

 

[dirkhh]

I'm surprised no other 60's have chimed in with results similar to what I have seen - two weeks ago on road trip from Chicago to MN, we saw 111kW and 112kW initial charge rate at two different Superchargers. Was quite impressive. Pics available if I have to. :smile:

I'd love to see pix, Vin, and battery label...

 

[gekkota]