Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

[MP3Mike]

My theory about individual cell fuse link fatigue was based on work wk057 did years back. Just for grins, I went back and dug up one of the posts. Reading this and assuming the cell interconnect wire diameter was not changed, you can see problems with 1600+ amps coming like a freight train!

But we know that in the P90D V2/V3 packs that they did change the fusible cell links. They now use two bonding wires per cell instead of one. What I haven't heard is what the size of those new wires are. (I assume smaller.)

It could be that using two smaller bonding wires to reduce internal resistance didn't turn out to be durable enough under the high load.

 

[n2mb_racing]

Should feel bad for anyone that bought one of those super-discounted inventory P90D's.. Nearly every moment of that car's driving time was spent with the throttle to the floor.

One of those people would be me. I bought an inventory P90D w/ 5700 miles. I'm still at 490 kW, but I have an email in to my service manager to find out more...

 

[smac]

Tesla are gaming lots of things.

I'm 99% positive my 60 uses a far higher Wh/mi figure in it's internal calculations (something reflected on the typical consumption line in the consumption screen.) A similar vintage "original" 85 is around 325, and my 60 now around 345 (a friend's 90D shows 300).

This too changed via an OTA update (A very,very early one). Think about that for a second the 85 which weighs more, but otherwise is identical get's more miles PER watt? It's a nonsense.

I know it doesn't sound much, but it properly screws over the range assurance stuff. I have to laugh when it's going nuts at me to slow down to reach the next Supercharger when I am <100 ft away with 25 miles on the dash....

....it seems even the car won't admit when it's made a mistake

 

[AWDtsla]

Tesla are gaming lots of things.

I'm 99% positive my 60 uses a far higher Wh/mi figure in it's internal calculations (something reflected on the typical consumption line in the consumption screen.) A similar vintage "original" 85 is around 325, and my 60 now around 345 (a friend's 90D shows 300).

This too changed via an OTA update (A very,very early one). Think about that for a second the 85 which weighs more, but otherwise is identical get's more miles PER watt? It's a nonsense.

I know it doesn't sound much, but it properly screws over the range assurance stuff. I have to laugh when it's going nuts at me to slow down to reach the next Supercharger when I am <100 ft away with 25 miles on the dash....

....it seems even the car won't admit when it's made a mistake

Yup... This stuff is difficult for an owner to figure out because you don't exactly know where the fudge factor went in. If your math and science skills are weak, you just assume the error is yours. Embarrassingly, I was fooled by it for quite a while.

 

[n2mb_racing]

Yup... This stuff is difficult for an owner to figure out because you don't exactly know where the fudge factor went in. If your math and science skills are weak, you just assume the error is yours. Embarrassingly, I was fooled by it for quite a while.

I haven't followed this one, but is it just that the range estimate is off? Are they limiting the range of some cars? Or just being more or less conservative with their Wh/mile estimate?

 

[AWDtsla]

I haven't followed this one, but is it just that the range estimate is off? Are they limiting the range of some cars? Or just being more or less conservative with their Wh/mile estimate?

Sorry for going off-topic on this thread but..

Seems different for different cars. You can see some posts I made near the end of Lifetime Average Wh/mi Basically, the issue is that the trip meter reports a certain consumption values, but the actual energy that appears to leave the pack is significantly higher that what was reported. They way I was fooled for so long, is that I used to use evtripplanner to compare estimates of medium-length trips I did versus what the trip meter reported, so I could double check my estimates and prepare for long trips. Seemed close enough. What I didn't do was check how much energy remained/went missing during the trip. It's difficult for me to now see how someone could have ever have achieved 270 miles range in my car, unless they were hypermiling, close to "ideal miles" driving.

Does anyone know if the EPA's EV range rating uses independent equipment to measure energy or do they trust what the car is reporting?

 

[n2mb_racing]

Sorry for going off-topic on this thread but..

Seems different for different cars. You can see some posts I made near the end of Lifetime Average Wh/mi Basically, the issue is that the trip meter reports a certain consumption values, but the actual energy that appears to leave the pack is significantly higher that what was reported. They way I was fooled for so long, is that I used to use evtripplanner to compare estimates of medium-length trips I did versus what the trip meter reported, so I could double check my estimates and prepare for long trips. Seemed close enough. What I didn't do was check how much energy remained/went missing during the trip. It's difficult for me to now see how someone could have ever have achieved 270 miles range in my car, unless they were hypermiling, close to "ideal miles" driving.

Does anyone know if the EPA's EV range rating uses independent equipment to measure energy or do they trust what the car is reporting?

I just assumed the lost mileage was due to my use of cabin pre-heating, the overnight loss of 3-5 miles, and the fact that I speed. The rated range is based on going 55 or something ridiculous.

 

[smac]

@n2mb In my case the range estimate is under real world miles. I _think_ it's a peculiarity of the original UK 60's, of which mine is one of only a handful.

I did a 100% to 0% test, and got > 56kWh displayed on the screen so I don't think the amount of energy stored has been capped, just the number it divides that 56kWh by to give you a predicted range was changed.

I've had the car long enough now to know how to deal with it (and it's rare I use more than 15% a day anyway), so the biggest downside is the route planning, which is off* and sends you on mad detours, or is constantly telling you to slow down.

(* off = off even by Tesla's route assurance standards)

 

[Snerruc]

I haven't followed this one, but is it just that the range estimate is off? Are they limiting the range of some cars? Or just being more or less conservative with their Wh/mile estimate?

I don't understand what you are talking about on range estimates. My 75 is extremely accurate on reporting usage and remaining range. The car trip planner is always dead on ( and evtripping agrees within 2-3 watts/mile.). I average 289 lifetime and 260 on a recent trip with numerous climbs of 2500 and 4000 feet. There are people reporting 250-260 watts/mile on previous threads lifetime. EPA range is based on 65 mph.LL

 

[AWDtsla]

I just assumed the lost mileage was due to my use of cabin pre-heating, the overnight loss of 3-5 miles, and the fact that I speed. The rated range is based on going 55 or something ridiculous.

I've compensated for all those. Still missing energy. Ideal miles are supposed to be based on 55 mph, flat ground, warm day, no wind. But that's much much higher than rated miles. Rated miles are supposed to be based on the EPA 5-cycle test, which includes starting the car from heat soaked and cold soaked, averaged in to one algorithm. Should it SHOULD be roughly representative of a real drive, assuming you stay out of ludicrous power. Even when I used the "perfomance" code to degrade my car to a 70D power/throttle map, I STILL have a discrepancy.

 

[AWDtsla]

I don't understand what you are talking about on range estimates. My 75 is extremely accurate on reporting usage and remaining range. The car trip planner is always dead on ( and evtripping agrees within 2-3 watts/mile.). I average 289 lifetime and 260 on a recent trip with numerous climbs of 2500 and 4000 feet. There are people reporting 250-260 watts/mile on previous threads lifetime. EPA range is based on 65 mph.LL

Try a 3rd party tesla logger like teslafi.com. Regardless, I think the P models are the ones that (appear to me to) have the largest fudge factors.

edit - (appear to me to)

 

[sorka]

Sorry for going off-topic on this thread but..

Seems different for different cars. You can see some posts I made near the end of Lifetime Average Wh/mi Basically, the issue is that the trip meter reports a certain consumption values, but the actual energy that appears to leave the pack is significantly higher that what was reported. They way I was fooled for so long, is that I used to use evtripplanner to compare estimates of medium-length trips I did versus what the trip meter reported, so I could double check my estimates and prepare for long trips. Seemed close enough. What I didn't do was check how much energy remained/went missing during the trip. It's difficult for me to now see how someone could have ever have achieved 270 miles range in my car, unless they were hypermiling, close to "ideal miles" driving.

Does anyone know if the EPA's EV range rating uses independent equipment to measure energy or do they trust what the car is reporting?

I'm seeing slightly more in actual used vs average wh / mile but chalked it up to heating/cooling, lights, and stereo. For instance, a typical 130 mile (one way) commute for me uses 53% of the battery(driving 75 mph). Wh / mile reports around 300 yet actual consumption was around 310. This is in a P85DL.

 

[n2mb_racing]

I'm seeing slightly more in actual used vs average wh / mile but chalked it up to heating/cooling, lights, and stereo. For instance, a typical 130 mile (one way) commute for me uses 53% of the battery(driving 75 mph). Wh / mile reports around 300 yet actual consumption was around 310. This is in a P85DL.

I don't know, my recent 14 mile trips are 455 Wh / mile. It's cold here. 13.86 Miles Driven, 19.96 Rated Miles Used

I'm less concerned about the range estimator being off, as long as they aren't artificially limiting how far the car can drive. I've done long trips in it and had no trouble reaching superchargers with reasonable miles left.
I am very concerned about Tesla limiting the car's acceleration.

 

[smac]

Does anyone know if the EPA's EV range rating uses independent equipment to measure energy or do they trust what the car is reporting?

As an aside BEVs don't need to do the 5 cycle, they are permitted to do a 3 cycle test (excluding A/C and cold conditions cycles). They then multiply by 0.7 as a fudge. Arguably this suits Tesla as they don't use a heat pump like some other EVs so as a % cabin and pack heating requires more energy. Certainly when I see lifetime Wh/mi on here it's clear those guys live somewhere warmer than I

How the EPA determines an electric vehicle’s range - not as simple as it sounds - Torque News

 

[AWDtsla]

As an aside BEVs don't need to do the 5 cycle, they are permitted to do a 3 cycle test (excluding A/C and cold conditions cycles). They then multiply by 0.7 as a fudge. Arguably this suits Tesla as they don't use a heat pump like some other EVs so as a % cabin and pack heating requires more energy. Certainly when I see lifetime Wh/mi on here it's clear those guys live somewhere warmer than I

How the EPA determines an electric vehicle’s range - not as simple as it sounds - Torque News

I read that article before and it didn't have enough technical details for me to determine if there was a gap in what they did, that could be thrown by vehicle reporting, i.e. how they measured the pack energy post-DC conversion.

 

[davidc18]

Tested yesterday at 95+ % charge - 489 max output with Max Power, 450 w/o

 

[smac]

@AWDtsla Personally I would imagine the test was done to the exact requirements, upsetting a few customers (and so far we only have one with direct consequences of power limiting) is one thing, upsetting the EPA is a completely different ball of wax.

As to if what the screen says matches or if it is viewed as "guide information purposes only", I would think Tesla have some leeway here. I'm not even sure if it is 100% accurate in knowing SOC. It's pretty darn good, but things like temp variations will throw it off, so it's only as good as the model.

I'm not sure Tesla are alone in this, certainly in ICE's I've had the MPG on the trip computer is often optimistic vs taking a reading from the pump and odo and calculating the exact figure. (Presumably so when asked how many MPGs do you get people blindly read off the screen).

One thing is for sure, us over in the EU where we use the NEDC testing, have long ignored any mpg claims from anyone. They are gamed so ridiculously as to be meaningless.

The worst example I heard was Porsche even tried to submit the 916 as an "Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle" because it originally pipped the magic 75g CO2 / km. After discussion with various bodies Porsche on purpose changed the figures as it was seen as politically unpalatable the owners could claim £5k tax refund, pay no road tax, and get London congestion exemption on such a car. It now officially produces 76g CO2/km

 

[Andyw2100]

The worst example I heard was Porsche even tried to submit the 916 as an "Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle" because it originally pipped the magic 75g CO2 / km. After discussion with various bodies Porsche on purpose changed the figures as it was seen as politically unpalatable the owners could claim £5k tax refund, pay no road tax, and get London congestion exemption on such a car. It now officially produces 76g CO2/km

Sure. Sure it does!

 

[Walta]

Tested yesterday at 95+ % charge - 489 max output with Max Power, 450 w/o

So since you are still on version 7 - you should not be impacted by any power reduction... though the counters will still increment. With a V2 battery your power looks close enough to what you would expect ?

I am still in the back and forth stage with my Tesla SA. Trying to get as much data as I can, so I can present my case to protect against any power reduction.

One consideration is to roll back to version 7. It will block the reduction in power, and give me back the equalizer settings that will stay set.

Anyone ever get Tesla to load a version of software that you wanted?

 

[n2mb_racing]

Tested yesterday at 95+ % charge - 489 max output with Max Power, 450 w/o

Same here with the v2 battery and version 8.0.