Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

[sundoc]

Just read all these posts... wow!
The most telling is the post containing the email from Tesla, essentially confirming all this.

As many others above posted, I love my car! But such company practices are starting to wear thin. Sigh.

 

[HebrHmr]

Just read all these posts... wow!
The most telling is the post containing the email from Tesla, essentially confirming all this.

As many others above posted, I love my car! But such company practices are starting to wear thin. Sigh.

I agree, I read every post despite some early ones stating my P100D is not part of launchgate.

As this is a relatively recent exposure I'm not sure enough noise has been generated at a high enough level yet but I look forward to how, if at all, Tesla responds to this. If any of the P90DL2 owners gain traction and need more support in any way, I'll be glad to help if at all possible.

 

[n2mb_racing]

What's JB Straubel's email or twitter name? Let's email him and Elon.

 

[Tech_Guy]

It would be nice if teslamotorclub tweeted about it or sent him a message as Elon is following them and more likely to see the message.

 

[tezzla]

More like email Fred at Electrek

 

[TSLA Pilot]

I long ago came to the conclusion that Tesla is (1) smart and (2) too smart for their own good when it comes to the business side of things. There were signs of this as early as my very first purchase from them in early 2013.

I bring this up not because I'm special or have any great insight but because Tesla does not need this type of ding on an otherwise exemplary record. Yea, I know their promise dates have issues as well but that comes from a good place. This playing fast and loose with the truth does not. Anyway, my goal is to get as much sunshine on the collection of these issues (and the collection is likely to grow) so as to make the practice impossible.

Concur 100%.

It is possible that this "Launch Countergate" is simply the result of a well-meaning change made after-the-fact to enhance reliability.

Regardless of how it came about, it's time for Tesla to make it right. You can't loan "A" cars to magazines for their reviews, and then sell "B" cars to customers, and not expect a little backlash.

This needs to be fixed.

 

[whitex]

Concur 100%.

It is possible that this "Launch Countergate" is simply the result of a well-meaning change made after-the-fact to enhance reliability.

Regardless of how it came about, it's time for Tesla to make it right. You can't loan "A" cars to magazines for their reviews, and then sell "B" cars to customers, and not expect a little backlash.

This needs to be fixed.

What if the magazine cars also had the limit, they just never hit it? Then everyone got the "A" car, no?

 

[azdryheat]

This is unacceptable to pay this money and then it get pulled. Either Tesla has to back down on this or I agree that it should go to a class action. And I really detest having to use an attorney.

 

[yak-55]

Regardless of how it came about, it's time for Tesla to make it right. You can't loan "A" cars to magazines for their reviews, and then sell "B" cars to customers, and not expect a little backlash.

This needs to be fixed.

If history is any guide you will wait a long, long time. Tesla has already "fixed this." Its called the P100D. In their world, "Fixing" the v2 P90D isn't going to generate new sales of 100Ds, and the "fix" they have provided *is* going to limit their warranty liability. Unfortunately Tesla is too focused on (the short term) sales to people who've never owned a Tesla to care about those of us who will never by a second one.

 

[Matias]

IIRC P90 was not capable to deliver the promised specs. So they made P90DL and some owners upgraded to that with great cost. Now after the launchgate they offer uppgrade P100D to old owners, again not for free.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

 

[Matias]

I just got tweet from Fred Lambert (as a response when I asked him to make a story about launchgate), that there will be a story on Electrek tomorrow about it.

 

[msnow]

IIRC P90 was not capable to deliver the promised specs. So they made P90DL and some owners upgraded to that with great cost. Now after the launchgate they offer uppgrade P100D to old owners, again not for free.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Neither the v1 or v2 P90DL were ever able to reach the 10.9 quarter mile spec (although Motor Trend did). V3 which came out this summer did I think.

 

[davidc18]

Add me to the list of owners willing to force a resolution with Tesla over this.

 

[bswn1]

@Ingineer are these newer packs with higher current / performance you reference only performance (90 / 100) batteries or all including 75s?

 

[Ingineer]

Only Ludicrous equipped cars can be affected by this. I also don't think the early 90 packs have it. Basically when the counter trips, it makes a V2 90 pack behave like a V1 (you lose ~100A capability).

 

[number12]

Is there a wiki anywhere on this topic?

Are only p90D cars effected by launch limits?
If you "floor" a 60 or 75 is there any sort of counter?

 

[Ulmo]

If it is max amps, I too am in its sights. I really do not launch much but full throttle is almost a daily occurrence.

It may be time to bring back the data logger

Me too. If Self Driving capability really is comfortable, I might splurge to get it (it's about $10,000 outside my budget right now, though), and I wouldn't have to worry about all this driving stuff; meanwhile, getting stuck behind the everywhere slow driving Toyotas of the world, once I've positioned the vehicle in an opened up lane, I occasionally connect the batteries and the motors very thoroughly.

 

[Ulmo]

It is a literal counter. It's not related to thermals. I don't (yet) have any exact data on which packs have the counter enabled and what increments it. Tesla has literally told owners that complain that it's put in to "protect driveline components". This would be acceptable only IF THEY DISCLOSED IT up front! On top of this, they have also stated that upgrading to a P100DL will remove this limitation. Hmm....

I agree about the upfront part. If you knew you were spending $45,000.00 to get this limitation lifted, among a couple other things (faster charging, longer range, more towing, faster car, and more prestige), it would make that $45,000 seem more worth it and explain how Tesla recoups some of the wear and tear costs. Also, anyone with max performance cars knows they chew up mechanics quicker. It would be nice to let people know about the limitation upfront so they can know what they're in for. Also, how it's triggered.

 

[Ulmo]

I also heard a rumor that the new 2.4 second easter-egg for the P100DL may require you to agree that using it will void your driveline warranty. Now that is the right way to do something like this. The people that want the risk can agree up-front rather than having something unexpected happen.

Yes that does seem like the right way to do it, but someone getting that $150K car will have to be ready to keep shelling out $40K or so every once in a while due to wear and tear, which in that bracket makes sense, but it is a huge commitment.

 

[dandurston]

Maybe I'm being too soft here, but it sounds like Tesla secretly rolled out improved V2 packs that offered additional performance and then in some instances is downgrading those back to V1 specs.

Considering that Tesla didn't do any additional hype for the V2 packs, and considering most buyers didn't even know they were getting the improved V2 pack when they ordered, I'm not so sure buyers are owed this additional performance. It sounds more like a free bonus that has been taken away.

That the V1 packs arguably didn't meet the performance specs seems like a legit complaint, whereas arguing that Tesla can't retract something they secretly over delivered seems less legit. Perhaps anger about the former is getting people more worked up about the latter.