-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits
- Thread starter Ingineer
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Tesla Inc.
jerjozwik
Active Member
i was in line with everyone else. first max bat and launch mode had no noticeable difference. then they update software and max bat on added more power, then they update again and power limits came in. i had the battery service warning within weeks of the limits removal update so could not test the v2 on that software.
St Charles
Tesla, not TSLA!
I, and I suspect most people except people like TRC, have done most of their WOTs in just everyday driving around, where you never charge above 90 and avg SOC is probably around 80 and have a cool battery. So the SOC limit and cool battery limit applies more than the LM limit for most cases.
And for the rare case where you want to beat ICE guys at the drag strip or your neighbor with a M5, you can take the extra time to SOC to 100, wait for MBR, and (in less time than the first two steps) do the LM shuffle.
I agree that theoretically there could be an effect for passing from 40-70, but I haven't seen any data on the times (as opposed to iPhone app kW) for that to assess what the actual effect is. But as long as it is in spec, I expect and hope that they will make any changes to minimize my risk of time spent in service.
You keep acting like this is a cap on power. That it just puts a hard limit on max power. That is not the case. In your example of wide open throttle at 80% soc, you still have less power available to you with 1500 amps than you would have had at 1600 amps. I'd like to have the nearly 7% extra power. You know, 1/3 of the extra power I paid $10,000 for, and Tesla removed after I took delivery.
After driving for a few minutes, your battery temperature will be fairly close to max battery temp, especially if you've just charged. It's greatest effect is at 100% soc in lowering the internal resistance of the battery. It's a relatively small effect unless the battery temp is significantly less than 20 degrees C. The internal resistance actually gets lower until 90% soc. This is why there is little change in track performance until about 85 % soc.
St Charles
Tesla, not TSLA!
I did some preliminary WOT testing over the weekend. Here is what I found:
First run:
This was intended to be a baseline run. No surprises. Power flattens out at ~450kW until about 70MPH where it begins to taper to about 420kW. I ended the run at 100MPH. I suspect that this is at 1500A which is no different than 7.1
Second Run:
This is a bit more interesting. I made this second run almost immediately after the first. I enabled Max Battery and Launched the car using Launch Mode. I did not wait for max battery to be ready but noted that MBR was about 20 minutes away. SoC was 86% at this point. The car was noticeably more powerful. This is reflected in the second graph where the car made it to 100MPH a half second faster than the first run. I do not have any CANBUS logging but I suspect that this run was at 1600A. To me this strongly indicates that 1600A is locked behind Launch Mode still:
Third run:
On the way home I wanted to verify that 1600A was behind the Launch Mode wall still. Ludi was enabled as was Max Battery. Again, I did not wait for MBR. I did not use Launch Mode. This run was at a lower SoC (80%). As you can see, Power flattens out at ~450kW and holds to roughly 70MPH. I ran out of room and shut down earlier but this run was mostly a mirror of the first run. To me, this confirms that 1600A is still behind launch mode:
Extra notes:
Ludicrous without Max battery seems to be the same as it was back on 7.1 where 1500A is available at all times. Something to note from these runs is that the benefits from 1600A taper from a 20kW power advantage at 40MPH down to no advantage at 100MPH. Passing power from 40-60MPH seems to be about 0.25sec faster with Launch mode. 0-60 seems to be the same overall, but I strongly feel that this is discrepancy is due to low fidelity capture. A lap timer and timeslip from a drag strip will provide much more data resolution.
Keep in mind that this is really only one datapoint and data fidelity is not the best as tesla servers log at low intervals. I did not dig out my CANBUS cable. Also, I do not have a vBox. I do have an older 10Hz lap timer which will provide more accurate 0-60 times. Once I can get to the Drag Strip I will hook up my CANBUS cable and old lap timer. Three separate datapoints will provide a much better impression on what is going on.
A fun note, Ludicrous power levels are good down to at least 80% SoC. If I were a betting man, I would wager that 450kW is available down to ~75% SoC.
Battery: 1071394-00-A
Firmware: 17.26.76
[LUDICROUS OPINION MODE]
My personal opinion, I don't care. I almost never charge above 85% and try to keep the overall SoC at around 70%. While 1600A is more power across the board, I do not feel it would make the difference between fife and death on the road. In my opinion, if a quarter second of acceleration makes the difference in avoiding an accident then we are either in an extreme use case or the driver is WELL OUTSIDE the realm of safe and defensive driving.
From a drag racing perspective The only time I want 1600A is when I am at the strip where I'll be using Launch Mode. This is really only useful for obtaining vanity timeslips. Launch mode introduces complexity and inconsistency at the tree that I don't want. For my style of drag racing (index and bracket) i'll take a consistent 11.2 all day long. I also don't need to have a battery above 90% to ensure that I have the power I am expecting. Launch mode introduces more lag that I have to predict and a bad reaction time can erase a whole hell of a lot of power advantage.
THAT SAID, I certainly do not fault those who are upset about the loss of power. Attempting to address a weakness discovered in an engineered solution post facto in this way is shady as hell. To me, this is a clear business decision to protect against expensive warranty claims at the expense of customer satisfaction.
A bunch of muckety-mucks at Tesla sat in a room and made a decision. It's completely OK for us consumers to agree or disagree with it. What we should do is strive for understanding rather than talk past each other. Lets boost signal rather than add noise.
[/LUDICROUS OPINION MODE]
First run:
This was intended to be a baseline run. No surprises. Power flattens out at ~450kW until about 70MPH where it begins to taper to about 420kW. I ended the run at 100MPH. I suspect that this is at 1500A which is no different than 7.1
Second Run:
This is a bit more interesting. I made this second run almost immediately after the first. I enabled Max Battery and Launched the car using Launch Mode. I did not wait for max battery to be ready but noted that MBR was about 20 minutes away. SoC was 86% at this point. The car was noticeably more powerful. This is reflected in the second graph where the car made it to 100MPH a half second faster than the first run. I do not have any CANBUS logging but I suspect that this run was at 1600A. To me this strongly indicates that 1600A is locked behind Launch Mode still:
Third run:
On the way home I wanted to verify that 1600A was behind the Launch Mode wall still. Ludi was enabled as was Max Battery. Again, I did not wait for MBR. I did not use Launch Mode. This run was at a lower SoC (80%). As you can see, Power flattens out at ~450kW and holds to roughly 70MPH. I ran out of room and shut down earlier but this run was mostly a mirror of the first run. To me, this confirms that 1600A is still behind launch mode:
Extra notes:
Ludicrous without Max battery seems to be the same as it was back on 7.1 where 1500A is available at all times. Something to note from these runs is that the benefits from 1600A taper from a 20kW power advantage at 40MPH down to no advantage at 100MPH. Passing power from 40-60MPH seems to be about 0.25sec faster with Launch mode. 0-60 seems to be the same overall, but I strongly feel that this is discrepancy is due to low fidelity capture. A lap timer and timeslip from a drag strip will provide much more data resolution.
Keep in mind that this is really only one datapoint and data fidelity is not the best as tesla servers log at low intervals. I did not dig out my CANBUS cable. Also, I do not have a vBox. I do have an older 10Hz lap timer which will provide more accurate 0-60 times. Once I can get to the Drag Strip I will hook up my CANBUS cable and old lap timer. Three separate datapoints will provide a much better impression on what is going on.
A fun note, Ludicrous power levels are good down to at least 80% SoC. If I were a betting man, I would wager that 450kW is available down to ~75% SoC.
Battery: 1071394-00-A
Firmware: 17.26.76
[LUDICROUS OPINION MODE]
My personal opinion, I don't care. I almost never charge above 85% and try to keep the overall SoC at around 70%. While 1600A is more power across the board, I do not feel it would make the difference between fife and death on the road. In my opinion, if a quarter second of acceleration makes the difference in avoiding an accident then we are either in an extreme use case or the driver is WELL OUTSIDE the realm of safe and defensive driving.
From a drag racing perspective The only time I want 1600A is when I am at the strip where I'll be using Launch Mode. This is really only useful for obtaining vanity timeslips. Launch mode introduces complexity and inconsistency at the tree that I don't want. For my style of drag racing (index and bracket) i'll take a consistent 11.2 all day long. I also don't need to have a battery above 90% to ensure that I have the power I am expecting. Launch mode introduces more lag that I have to predict and a bad reaction time can erase a whole hell of a lot of power advantage.
THAT SAID, I certainly do not fault those who are upset about the loss of power. Attempting to address a weakness discovered in an engineered solution post facto in this way is shady as hell. To me, this is a clear business decision to protect against expensive warranty claims at the expense of customer satisfaction.
A bunch of muckety-mucks at Tesla sat in a room and made a decision. It's completely OK for us consumers to agree or disagree with it. What we should do is strive for understanding rather than talk past each other. Lets boost signal rather than add noise.
[/LUDICROUS OPINION MODE]
n2mb_racing
Active Member
Great post!
Agreed. It is a minor point and not at all a matter of life and death. It really would have been fine if they shipped the car this way. It's more the frustration of having had more power and Tesla taking it away after the fact with a software update, rather than fix their mistake with a hardware fix.
I guess we'll see if they end up offering V3 battery upgrades to those of us with V1 and V2 batteries who complain the most. I think that would be a fair compromise and would bring back most of the performance my car had from when I bought it.
St Charles
Tesla, not TSLA!
I feel like this is somewhat where we are headed. That said, 1500A will always be less than 1600A. I would love to see Tesla acknowledge this change and offer something to affected owners. IMO, I would totally take an extended warranty as a peace offering for the loss in capability.
n2mb_racing
Active Member
I wonder if the V3 batteries have a higher current limit? Or just less voltage sag that allows them to still have more power.
I'm leasing the car, so an extended warranty doesn't appeal to me. If they offered me a discount for when I upgrade to a P100D at the end of my lease, that would work!
0.25 secs out of 1.4 secs while passing could be a difference between life and death. There are passing accidents that could be avoided with just a little more time to return to your lane. I'll take it. Anyway, I don't get all this relativism here. When did it become alright for a company to steal $3,300 from its customers? I bought 300 extra amps and only have 200, now.
They'd have to give v3 buyers a 100kWh battery to restore our power at the lower cell current levels. I don't know why v2 buyers would be ok being restored to a power level that was inadequate to meet the original 10.9sec 1/4 mile. That's just restoring you to being screwed once from being screwed twice.
They'd have to give v3 buyers a 100kWh battery to restore our power at the lower cell current levels. I don't know why v2 buyers would be ok being restored to a power level that was inadequate to meet the original 10.9sec 1/4 mile. That's just restoring you to being screwed once from being screwed twice.
jerjozwik
Active Member
its all about that sag. my v1 loaner still kicked out 1500 but the voltage was super low to the v2 or v3. getting around 286v at 85% and greater SoC.
St Charles
Tesla, not TSLA!
Hey man. I get you. For my part, these changes do not affect my general use case so it's difficult for me to show damages. This doesn't legitimize other arguments or de-legitimize yours. I do not think it's reasonable to take the action that Tesla did. At the same time, I don't see a path for me if I were trying to make a case to anyone on my own behalf.
I would say your damages are that you bought three of something, and Tesla took one of them back. Who cares if you might not use all three. That's how many you bought, and the car is diminished from when you purchased. Not to mention that v2s were never 10.9 sec 1/4 mile cars.
St Charles
Tesla, not TSLA!
The rebuttal is that I still have all 300A. I think my second run more or less proves that 1600A is still very possible in my car. The change in use case is perhaps where damages can be proven or not. I am not a lawyer but I do not see how I can claim that the change in use case is grounds. Perhaps this is why I am not a lawyer.
Again, others are slighted and I do not fault then for their opinions.
n2mb_racing
Active Member
I agree, most of the 1600A are still there with LM (though reduced by 1%), but they are now much less usable and accessible. It's really hard to get LM to engage during normal driving situations, so the number of times I can use it is drastically reduced. That's the annoying part... Before, I could charge up to 100%, turn on MB, and hit some twisty roads and always have 1600A available... Now, it's only from a stop, under certain conditions. :-(
So, launch mode still works correctly, but standard mode is broken which is used much more by customers.
Tesla says launch mode is too dangerous to use other than at a race track. But if you use it there, your warranty is void. So you really can't use it as they recommend.
From your earlier comments, you seem to be saying that the power available with 1500 amps is all anyone would ever need. You just can't see the need for the extra power that 1600 amps provides. As for me, I want all the power I paid for available all the time.
n2mb_racing
Active Member
Similar threads
