Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

[Andyw2100]

Hey, I'm not saying I agree with it. I'm just suggesting that if Tesla has realized at this point that they screwed up, and if they believe a class action suit is likely, not providing any additional information may be the correct route for them to take, from that standpoint. I don't , though, think it is the right approach for them to take from a "let's keep our best and most loyal customers happy" standpoint.

 

[SDRick]

. All else is FUD and inconsistent or vague messaging from Tesla.

More data needed before pitchforks and jihad.

Assume you are correct in your assumption(s) above.

Would you drop $150,000 or so for a performance version or are the concerns brought out in this thread credible enough to cause you to wait for some clarity and a definitive response from Tesla?

 

[bhzmark]

The fact that all we've heard from Tesla is inconsistent and vague messaging is why "pitchforks and jihad" are occurring. Tesla is not handling this appropriately.

I agree. Incomplete info and fear and uncertainty and doubt are the usual causes of pitchforks and jihad. That is the human condition -- for many anyway. Others prefer to wait for data and evidence and specific real information. The energy and enthusiasm for this topic shld be directed to acquiring more info, not making conclusions that are simply not supported by the evidence to date.

Until we know what the counter limits are, and what the remedy is (eg replacing battery pack to get less fatigued wire bonds?) all the upset generated on this thread is based on ignorance.

I'm simply not offended by the creative design choice to control the aging and fatigue of key components. It would preserve the longevity , including well past the warranty period. I suspect that if the design were implemented through Hardware rather than software people would be a lot less offended. For instance the total battery capacity already the grades based on the function of use. More 100% charges and 0% discharges the grave over time based on the amount of use, the battery capacity. It just so happens that that is implemented in the hardware rather than in the software.

suppose the battery pack output also degraded not just as a function of full recharging Cycles but as a function of high output discharge Cycles. Would everybody be waging holy war against that Hardware design choice?

Assume you are correct in your assumption(s) above.

Would you drop $150,000 or so for a performance version or are the concerns brought out in this thread credible enough to cause you to wait for some clarity and a definitive response from Tesla?

Seriously think that out. If someone really wants a 10 second sedan or SUV EV, there are no other options. If someone wants 300 mile range EV there are no other options.

If I was buying a race car to take to the strip every day, id guess i wld pause and realize that if certain (still unknown!) events occur if have to replace parts that degraded or bypass them and face the consequences.

I also take comfort in the fact that like the AP functionality, these software choices can be continually refined. Nothing is set in stone. But let's still see exactly what the current facts are.

 

[JRP3]

I'm simply not offended by the creative design choice to control the aging and fatigue of key components.

Again, you completely miss the point. IF Tesla disclosed such at the time of purchase there would be no problem. They did not. Hence, problem. It's quite simple.

 

[smac]

@bhzmark I have thought this out.

What about someone that just wants a special car? (And at P100D money it's bang in that territory.)

I don't care if it's a sedan, two door, EV, hydrogen or Mr fusion powered. I'm not even particularly fussed if it does 10 seconds or 6 seconds. Heck I'm not even bothered about range.

For me the what this potentially does is taint the car's reputation, because you just know if this hits the mainstream media lots of people will mock your "special" car.

For that reason I have indeed cancelled my order, and yes it's a vanity thing, but then it was always a vanity purchase. (Otherwise I'd buy the 90D).

 

[AWDtsla]

Again, you completely miss the point. IF Tesla disclosed such at the time of purchase there would be no problem. They did not. Hence, problem. It's quite simple.

I think he's missing the point on purpose. I don't see what there is to argue here anymore, just to find out how deep the rabbit hole goes.

 

[Sunlight]

As someone without a dog in the fight, I watch this thread with similar bemusement as I read Seeking Alpha articles!

Is this the longest thread by the fewest people on TMC ever? And with only one actual factual case (or did I miss something?) and a confusing mass of speculation...!

But it does bewilder me that Tesla has not supplied a 'definitive clarification' (passive aggressive or 'keeping their powder dry'?)

At the moment it feels like a monumental frothy in a tea cup - real first world problems!

But then, hell, I don't have many $1000's invested in that last 0.01 sec to 60............

"Hell hath no fury like a Tesla Fanboy jilted"

 

[Andyw2100]

And with only one actual factual case (or did I miss something?)

You missed something:

Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

I'm on a 2015 P85DL, and I'm seeing 415kW max with a clean launch and 99% SoC with max battery 'ready.' Seems like something screwy is going on here.

 

[AWDtsla]

But then, hell, I don't have many $1000's invested in that last 0.01 sec to 60............

"Hell hath no fury like a Tesla Fanboy jilted"

For me, ~$35,000, ~8% compromise in range, charging speeds, and economy, and personal pride and reputation.

I've already started the ball rolling on an exit strategy, trying to find out how much it's going to cost me...

 

[msnow]

As someone without a dog in the fight, I watch this thread with similar bemusement as I read Seeking Alpha articles!

Is this the longest thread by the fewest people on TMC ever? And with only one actual factual case (or did I miss something?) and a confusing mass of speculation...!

But it does bewilder me that Tesla has not supplied a 'definitive clarification' (passive aggressive or 'keeping their powder dry'?)

At the moment it feels like a monumental frothy in a tea cup - real first world problems!

But then, hell, I don't have many $1000's invested in that last 0.01 sec to 60............

"Hell hath no fury like a Tesla Fanboy jilted"

You missed a LOT. In addition to at least one more additional case, we have emails from Tesla admitting the issue, a new Tesla disclaimer on their website that applies to even the newest cars and Tesla service personnel circling the wagons and refusing to discuss the matter. Sounds very bad to me. I wouldn't buy a Performance version until there is clear and unambiguous communication from Tesla protecting and agreeing to honor warranties.

 

[SDRick]

If I was buying a race car to take to the strip every day, id guess i wld pause and realize that if certain (still unknown!) events occur if have to replace parts that degraded or bypass them and face the consequences.

Your racecar analogy is a red herring. We are not buying racecars. I can only speak for myself, but I agonized more than several weeks on how high up the performance chain I should go. You will find many threads over the years asking for guidance on the value and prudence of the upgrades.

We are talking a significant amount of additional money unless you are very wealthy (or you do not mind spending other people's money). I would suggest that most on the fence would air on the side of caution and wait until the rules of the performance game are disclosed.

 

[azdryheat]

I emailed my service rep 4 days ago. Since it was early Friday and today is a holiday, I am giving him a couple more days to respond.
Does anyone have a contact for a regional/division manager in the AZ region?
Also I have emailed the board through the link on the website. No response there either.

 

[msnow]

I agree. Incomplete info and fear and uncertainty and doubt are the usual causes of pitchforks and jihad. That is the human condition -- for many anyway. Others prefer to wait for data and evidence and specific real information. The energy and enthusiasm for this topic shld be directed to acquiring more info, not making conclusions that are simply not supported by the evidence to date.

Until we know what the counter limits are, and what the remedy is (eg replacing battery pack to get less fatigued wire bonds?) all the upset generated on this thread is based on ignorance.

I'm simply not offended by the creative design choice to control the aging and fatigue of key components. It would preserve the longevity , including well past the warranty period. I suspect that if the design were implemented through Hardware rather than software people would be a lot less offended. For instance the total battery capacity already the grades based on the function of use. More 100% charges and 0% discharges the grave over time based on the amount of use, the battery capacity. It just so happens that that is implemented in the hardware rather than in the software.

suppose the battery pack output also degraded not just as a function of full recharging Cycles but as a function of high output discharge Cycles. Would everybody be waging holy war against that Hardware design choice?



Seriously think that out. If someone really wants a 10 second sedan or SUV EV, there are no other options. If someone wants 300 mile range EV there are no other options.

If I was buying a race car to take to the strip every day, id guess i wld pause and realize that if certain (still unknown!) events occur if have to replace parts that degraded or bypass them and face the consequences.

I also take comfort in the fact that like the AP functionality, these software choices can be continually refined. Nothing is set in stone. But let's still see exactly what the current facts are.

Ok so to summarize, people that are impacted by this bought a" race car" and "take it to the strip every day" and are a bunch of "jihadists" for expressing their opinions on the matter. Got it.

 

[bhzmark]

Again, you completely miss the point. IF Tesla disclosed such at the time of purchase there would be no problem. They did not. Hence, problem. It's quite simple.

You again completely miss the point. This is just a engineering design choice. Did they disclose all their design choices to you? E.g., How often the batteries degrade relative to Full Charge and Zero Charge events?

It's quite simple.

I will concede however, that it would have been better for them to not even bother with Launch Mode since it doesn't provide any benefit, and apparently stresses the powertrain more than Foot Pedal Mode. I do feel bad for people like hostman who used Launch Mode indiscriminately, without knowledge of the stresses and the resulting engineering choice to mitigate that stress over the lifetime of the battery (or other powertrain component).

I also suspect that they are not ready to disclose exactly what those engineering choices are because since they are implemented through software, they can change them, just as they do AP design choices. Let's see what they eventually settle on (for the time being) and what those choices are. But need more info to determine what they are.

 

[bhzmark]

Your racecar analogy is a red herring. We are not buying racecars. I can only speak for myself, but I agonized more than several weeks on how high up the performance chain I should go. You will find many threads over the years asking for guidance on the value and prudence of the upgrades.

We are talking a significant amount of additional money unless you are very wealthy (or you do not mind spending other people's money). I would suggest that most on the fence would air on the side of caution and wait until the rules of the performance game are disclosed.

OK, but suppose worst case scenario? What are you going to buy INSTEAD? Nothing. Nothing comes close. Whatever the worst case scenario is, Tesla still has the best option. If the idea that 1000 Launch Mode events (some other, still unknown trigger) will cause a power degradation so offends you, then the next buy option is to buy a 90D. And then you will still be blown away buy P100DLs -- even those that are power limited. And if that doesn't bother you then you probably really didn't want the fastest EV anyway.

 

[drewsny]

I encourage everyone with a PL car to call their service centres and report back what they say. If this is something that not even service center managers have heard yet or ave any info on, it means implementing these limits are pretty much a "big red button" and implemented by higher up engineers and they aren't telling anyone until they figure it out completely.

 

[AWDtsla]

I encourage everyone with a PL car to call their service centres and report back what they say. If this is something that not even service center managers have heard yet or ave any info on, it means implementing these limits are pretty much a "big red button" and implemented by higher up engineers and they aren't telling anyone until they figure it out completely.

From an engineering standpoint I think they've already figured it out completely, they're protecting the packs against catastrophic failure. Now this is about business end.

 

[drewsny]

From an engineering standpoint I think they've already figured it out completely, they're protecting the packs against catastrophic failure. Now this is about business end.

Could be very possible. I just mean it kinda has to be something that was just discovered or just figured out otherwise it would have been disclosed to us all at the time of purchase and as soon as ludicrous mode was announced.

From a business perspective they would have never had a separate option to buy ludicrous mode if they even thought that eventually they would have to limit it. In a legal battle it would be along the same lines of of a turbo or a factory tune eventually limiting itself after a short time of use, which is why tuning your car or modifying it will void the warranty because it will cause more wear and damage eventually. So from a business perspective tesla has to either remove the limit and take the eventual warranty hits down the line, or upgrade people's car for free or a reduced cost to a pack that won't ever limit itself. The later option obviously would be the one that would make customers happiest.

 

[n2mb_racing]

OK, but suppose worst case scenario? What are you going to buy INSTEAD? Nothing. Nothing comes close.

Already started looking at the Porsche 911 Turbo S to replace my S when my lease is up. Should be as fast as the P100D.

 

[drewsny]

To reiterate with a bit more coherent thoughts, it would be like buying a VW golf R which is essentially just a tuned golf, and having the car within the warranty period have the tune taken off. Tesla essentially went overboard with the tune, went too aggressive and now they are trying to save themselves on future warranty claims probably because they think the future but inevitable class action lawsuit will cost much less than the cost of half the PL cars needing new batteries.