Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
#3,461
n2mb_racing said:
Ugh. Response from my SA:

The data that customer is using is not supported by Tesla and may not be relevant. Customer cannot rely on that data. There was no FW changes that would reduce power. The vehicle log data shows no power output difference between 12/21 and 3/6. Dyno data would have showed no power changes.​
Click to expand...
Wow. So that explains the response my SA had when I stated I had logs showing the power loss - saying something like "we don't support third party tools".

Is this Tesla's way of claiming "Fake News" ???

This is REALLY getting interesting. We need to setup an unbiased intelligence committee... where the chairman is not affiliated with Tesla. Run some power measurements between this release and say 7.1 ? But, which tools can owners use that Tesla will stand behind? And will the data be valid, or will Tesla provide the data they want us to see? To get completely un tainted power data, do we need to do dyno runs?

If Tesla is actually telling the truth - and they didn't reduce power ( compared to LM and MB mode) . Then this whole counterGate 2 fiasco could simply be a software bug? But Jon did state something like, full power would be achieved via LM and MB, which is what logs are showing.

I would hope they have tested the prior software against the current software to see if they can repeat power measurements, to verify there really is no power lost? If they are simply going by what the engineers are telling them? Trust me, that is not the way to confirm what the software is actually doing. It can be a way to know what they "meant" the software to do...
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Andyw2100, davidc18 and hostman
#3,463
completely derailing the current conversation with this but do we have any more data for the SoC spectrum in sport, ludicrous, and max bat modes? ive been logging my daily sport mode usuage and m getting 380-390 all the way down to 62% the lowest my SoC has gotten since receiving the new pack.
 

Attachments

  • TeslaPwrLudPlus.jpg
    TeslaPwrLudPlus.jpg
    169.5 KB · Views: 52
  • Informative
Reactions: davidc18
#3,464
jerjozwik said:
completely derailing the current conversation with this but do we have any more data for the SoC spectrum in sport, ludicrous, and max bat modes? ive been logging my daily sport mode usuage and m getting 380-390 all the way down to 62% the lowest my SoC has gotten since receiving the new pack.
Click to expand...

Those numbers seem really low, lower than a P85DL.....
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: davidc18 and hostman
#3,471
Tesla is funny......

Direct CAN bus logging of battery voltage/current throughout a run at different SoCs will provide data on this topic. If Tesla then says that the tools/methods are not supported they are basically saying yea, its true but you are not allowed to look. The company continues to reinforce the conclusions I have come to.

In my opinion, Tesla has shown us exactly who they are. We have tried to point out that their behavior is not consistent with the market impression they originally developed or consistent with who I think they want to be. They have considered this feedback and are doubling down by questioning the source of the data as opposed to addressing the data itself.

Fool me once, same on you.... Fool me twice and, well, you know how it goes. I've tried to move on. Tesla is what it is and they appear unwilling to change paths unless the PR impacts sales. They are the only game in town so sales are fine. My conclusion is they are not going to change.

For the record, and as if we really need any proof, WK is smarter than me. He came to this conclusion a very long time ago. I was just too stubborn to follow his lead.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Love
Reactions: MikeBur, GSP, Andyw2100 and 8 others
#3,472
n2mb_racing said:
Great. Can you also estimate your 0-60 time from the data for both with and without launch mode? If what Tesla says is true, there should be no difference in 0-60...
Click to expand...
0 to 60 mph times (includes 1 foot roll out):
with launch mode 2.67s
without launch mode 2.73s

My best time before all this counter stuff happened was 2.58sec.
My 45 to 65 mph time used to be 1.24sec. Now it's 1.32sec
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: davidc18 and hostman
#3,473
lolachampcar said:
Tesla is funny......

Direct CAN bus logging of battery voltage/current throughout a run at different SoCs will provide data on this topic. If Tesla then says that the tools/methods are not supported they are basically saying yea, its true but you are not allowed to look. The company continues to reinforce the conclusions I have come to.

In my opinion, Tesla has shown us exactly who they are. We have tried to point out that their behavior is not consistent with the market impression they originally developed or consistent with who I think they want to be. They have considered this feedback and are doubling down by questioning the source of the data as opposed to addressing the data itself.

Fool me once, same on you.... Fool me twice and, well, you know how it goes. I've tried to move on. Tesla is what it is and they appear unwilling to change paths unless the PR impacts sales. They are the only game in town so sales are fine. My conclusion is they are not going to change.

For the record, and as if we really need any proof, WK is smarter than me. He came to this conclusion a very long time ago. I was just too stubborn to follow his lead.
Click to expand...
Very true @lolachampcar - I agree.

Last night I got a call from my SA - he bubbled my power reduction complaint up the ladder - and they responded that nothing is wrong. They are acting like they have the upper hand relating to this recent power reduction complaint. Wagons have circled.

I am so tired of dealing with Tesla and their alternative facts. The battle is over. I will accept that though my power was reduced in normal driving mode, I still do have a 10 second car, just not a car where I will ever use that level of performance ( don't like using LM ). I will not buy another performance version of their cars. Fool me once... and all that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andyw2100, AnxietyRanger, davidc18 and 2 others
#3,474
Walta said:
Very true @lolachampcar - I agree.

Last night I got a call from my SA - he bubbled my power reduction complaint up the ladder - and they responded that nothing is wrong. They are acting like they have the upper hand relating to this recent power reduction complaint. Wagons have circled.

I am so tired of dealing with Tesla and their alternative facts. The battle is over. I will accept that though my power was reduced in normal driving mode, I still do have a 10 second car, just not a car where I will ever use that level of performance ( don't like using LM ). I will not buy another performance version of their cars. Fool me once... and all that.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm done talking with my SA as well. I'm ready to give up. If anyone plans a class action lawsuit, I will take part in it. I will also make it clear to my SA that they are losing over $200k in future sales from me, not to mention the lost referrals since I have stopped recommending the S to everyone I talk to. I was planning to buy a P100D when my P90D lease was up and I was planning to get a loaded 3 for my wife. Now, likely a Porsche 911 Turbo S or whatever else is interesting when the time comes. Too bad.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Funny
Reactions: GSP, AnxietyRanger, davidc18 and 5 others
#3,475
lolachampcar said:
Tesla is funny......

Direct CAN bus logging of battery voltage/current throughout a run at different SoCs will provide data on this topic. If Tesla then says that the tools/methods are not supported they are basically saying yea, its true but you are not allowed to look. The company continues to reinforce the conclusions I have come to.

In my opinion, Tesla has shown us exactly who they are. We have tried to point out that their behavior is not consistent with the market impression they originally developed or consistent with who I think they want to be. They have considered this feedback and are doubling down by questioning the source of the data as opposed to addressing the data itself.

Fool me once, same on you.... Fool me twice and, well, you know how it goes. I've tried to move on. Tesla is what it is and they appear unwilling to change paths unless the PR impacts sales. They are the only game in town so sales are fine. My conclusion is they are not going to change.

For the record, and as if we really need any proof, WK is smarter than me. He came to this conclusion a very long time ago. I was just too stubborn to follow his lead.
Click to expand...
Agreed, this is very Volkswagen-y...
 
  • Like
  • Funny
Reactions: AnxietyRanger, davidc18, FlatSix911 and 1 other person
#3,476
Walta said:
Very true @lolachampcar - I agree.

Last night I got a call from my SA - he bubbled my power reduction complaint up the ladder - and they responded that nothing is wrong. They are acting like they have the upper hand relating to this recent power reduction complaint. Wagons have circled.

I am so tired of dealing with Tesla and their alternative facts. The battle is over. I will accept that though my power was reduced in normal driving mode, I still do have a 10 second car, just not a car where I will ever use that level of performance ( don't like using LM ). I will not buy another performance version of their cars. Fool me once... and all that.
Click to expand...
Unless you don't have the patience for it, it seems to me you could go the lemon law route again. You guys have a strong case IMHO.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: davidc18
#3,479
the powertools data is the exact same as what is shown on the dash in Ludicrous Plus mode in the 100's....





n2mb_racing said:
Ugh. Response from my SA:

The data that customer is using is not supported by Tesla and may not be relevant. Customer cannot rely on that data. There was no FW changes that would reduce power. The vehicle log data shows no power output difference between 12/21 and 3/6. Dyno data would have showed no power changes.​
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: hostman, davidc18 and jerjozwik
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lasttoy
Buying a 85 pack from Tesla??
Replies
10
Views
538
Model S: Battery & Charging
Lasttoy
Lasttoy
Electric700
Making the Model Y Battery Cells Easily Replaceable
Replies
5
Views
418
Technical
Mike_TV
Mike_TV
T
Tesla wants to replace my Model Y Standard Range battery pack with an LFP pack
Replies
74
Views
4K
Model Y
FatFalcon
F
Recell
Vendor CAC is King
Replies
14
Views
1K
Battery Discussion
ArgusIII
A
M
BMS Balancing - Current Understanding
Replies
12
Views
2K
Model S: Battery & Charging
jensk2
J
Top
Back
Blog
New
Forum list
Marketplace
Menu