Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

[TSLA Pilot]

I own a P100DL Model S.
I Contacted tesla today to see if I was affected.
Here is Tesla's response after making them.them aware of which model I have

"Using Launch Mode places an increased stress on the entire powertrain accelerating aging and fatigue of various components. The computer systems automatically track Launch Mode usage and continually estimate fatigue damage. Depending on how Launch Mode is used, the computer may eventually limit the available power during Launch Mode to protect the powertrain. Note that this is a common strategy also employed in other high performance cars."

So it looks as if P00DL models may also be affected. I have a detailed list of questions sent after this that have been unanswered in this thread I am awaiting a response on right now. Will report back then.

And this sort of non-answer again serves to underline the variable stories some have received from Tesla--P100's aren't affected, but now they are.

Note the lack of any specifics as well: the actual "count" that triggers the loss, the permanence (or not?) is not mentioned (but only alluded to), the "everybody else is doing it" defense (untrue, based on the permanence of the loss, but who knows as we've heard a variety of stories).

At the end of the day we have a dearth of information and various posters here have to fill it in ourselves with what we can glean from Power Tools and other sources.

THIS SHOULD NOT BE THE CASE, especially when the upcharge for a "P" with "L" is as massive as it is.

Tesla knows better, but their "circle the wagons" mentality (as indicated in the "answer" above) is only adding to the problem. They need to come clean with ALL of the facts, and how they'll be making us whole, and do so NOW.

 

[smac]

I am so infuriated that I am very close to dumping the car at Tesla's absurd trade in value ($11k in "reconditioning" for a 14-month old car with under 10k miles? $42k in total lost value? Wow, just wow.)

I appreciate the sentiment, but isn't that cutting your nose off to spite your face?

You are at the absolute worst point in the depreciation curve, and frankly even without ludicrous mode at least 0-60 not many cars are going to touch you. That being the case you are into another expensive car right at it's depreciation peak if you want 3 years remaining warranty.

Besides if rumors* are true that CPO'd cars are soon to lose unlimited supercharging, holding on to it for a while you might get more privately.


(*I've heard this multiple times from different sources here in the UK, while I can't vouch for their validity, I guess we will find out in a month or so.)

 

[lolachampcar]

Wow....

So now the update (read, spend a butt load more money with us) to the P100DL because it does not have a limit may be complete and utter crap. Who'd of thunk?

 

[bhzmark]

I own a P100DL ...
Here is Tesla's response ...
"Using Launch Mode places an increased stress on the entire powertrain accelerating aging and fatigue of various components. The computer systems automatically track Launch Mode usage and continually estimate fatigue damage. Depending on how Launch Mode is used, the computer may eventually limit the available power during Launch Mode to protect the powertrain. Note that this is a common strategy also employed in other high performance cars."

Note: "Depending on how Launch Mode is used, the computer may eventually limit the available power during Launch Mode to protect the powertrain."

Thanks for posting this useful information.

So the limit is only applied when using LM. And can be avoided by simply not using LM, even if you used it a lot before.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Oh dear, now the specific Launch Mode warning is being applied to P100D as well by Tesla...

This just really goes to show what is really lurking behind the "terrible comms" of Tesla: a tendency to muddy the waters instead of really coming clean, when the topic is unpleasant for them. Instead they formulate generic explanations, vague disclaimers and - well put, guys - circle the wagons. There are enough examples to suggest this is likely policy, not merely tendency.

This problemacy of this fits with this thinking: Tesla say the logs show ...

It does make one wonder if there is some inherent technical limitation in the Ludicrous drivetrain - spanning multiple models - that they have uncovered after the fact and are now scrambling to handle?

 

[Impulse20110]

Note: "Depending on how Launch Mode is used, the computer may eventually limit the available power during Launch Mode to protect the powertrain."

Thanks for posting this useful information.

So the limit is avoided by simply not using LM, even if you used it a lot before.

That is one of the questions I asked. If power was ONLY reduced during Launch mode.. Will provide info as received.

 

[AWDtsla]

I am so infuriated that I am very close to dumping the car at Tesla's absurd trade in value ($11k in "reconditioning" for a 14-month old car with under 10k miles? $42k in total lost value? Wow, just wow.)

Now imagine paying $20k plus tax for a 100kWh battery pack on a car you just paid $140k on. How many of those dollars do you get back at trade-in time? (As if the 100kWh pack solved all the problems anyway)

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Note: "Depending on how Launch Mode is used, the computer may eventually limit the available power during Launch Mode to protect the powertrain."

Thanks for posting this useful information.

So the limit is only applied when using LM. And can be avoided by simply not using LM, even if you used it a lot before.

But that is a misleading statement according to other data we have. Basically it seems wrong and not useful information at all. (Fits with the precedence of Tesla seemingly shrouding unfortunate issues within vague statements.)

@Tech_Guy has been limited in other modes than just Launch Mode - and his predicament has been confirmed by Tesla engineers and @Ingenieur here, whom we have come to trust due to past performance.

Our current understanding this is this: Not using Launch Mode is not enough, as once the car's performance has been taken away, it affects all modes. So anyone who did not know about this (as Tesla did not tell and still has not full told), could be heading to permanent limitation in any mode by using Launch Mode (or possibly whatever other circumstances may increase the relevant counters).

 

[smac]

Wow....

So now the update (read, spend a butt load more money with us) to the P100DL because it does not have a limit may be complete and utter crap. Who'd of thunk?

Let's assume for a second that the 100 does indeed fix whatever the problem is that the counter is intended to guard against.

If Tesla are in damage limitation mode then putting the disclaimer on all variants publicly on the website could just be a way to prevent people demanding upgrades at discount.

(Not that this excuses them btw, just playing devil's advocate.)

 

[AWDtsla]

Let's assume for a second that the 100 does indeed fix whatever the problem is that the counter is intended to guard against.

If Tesla are in damage limitation mode then putting the disclaimer on all variants publicly on the website could just be a way to prevent people demanding upgrades at discount.

(Not that this excuses them btw, just playing devil's advocate.)

It probably has the same problem. Bottom line is the car can't handle that much power, and I'd put my bets on the cells/pack being the limiting factor. So every car is a ringer, for a while. Would it have really hurt anyone to take the tenth or two of the car that it can't handle, then advertise the right amount? Digging a hole for no reason.

 

[P85DEE]

You are again missing the point.

Car was sold with no information re: a launch counter.

Hitting the arbitrary (and secret) counter limit PERMANENTLY limits performance.

Indeed I do know of this point that the power loss appears to be not only permanent, but in addition to that, and that which you left out, appears in the one example that we do have, to also be "progressive".

I was among the first in here to point out that this appeared to be what we were seeing with regard to the description that Tech_guy gave regarding his own experiences.

Here's a metaphor: I am making huge payments on a car with a burning fuse and once the fuse hits some magic number, the car's performance is PERMANENTLY degraded.

If this is what has happened to you, well then I'd be the first to condemn that act and denounce those responsible.

Indeed, I'm calling for people to be dismissed at Tesla just for the new addition of the verbiage we're seeing on their website regarding this and brand new cars, and taking an even harder line towards those who had a hand in it IF it is discovered that cutting power extends to cars which have long since been sold and have been in owner's possessions.

We know that one person has been affected. Tesla should do right by him. But it could turn out that he is the only pre existing owner out there who has been hit by this. We just don't know yet.

However you have no proof, or more accurately have presented no proof, that this is what is happening in your particular case. You have no proof that this is what has happened to you.

When you can prove that this has happened to you, then I encourage you to seek other more effective avenues than trying to convince people in here that you are suffering.

You have no proof that this metaphor applies to you. Nor do you know which, if any other owners making that same payment you're making on the same type car, are affected.

It could turn out that owners of cars with certain build dates, certain battery part numbers, etc., are the P90DL and P85DL owners who are affected by it, and that group could include or exclude you.

How are you sure that your car is included in that group.

Queries to Tesla Service have been, effectively, ignored as they simply provide the legal, boilerplate BS that says nothing. (It's "circle the wagons" time at Tesla because they know that legally, they have nothing to back up their position.)

Have you attempted to contact them with regard to your car?

Do you have documentation, dates as to when you made attempts to contact them?

Did you keep a record of whom you spoke with?

Better yet, forget the phone calls...... have you made a written inquiry to them regarding whether your car is at risk for, or has already been affected by, that which you speak of above?

If so, then when? Have they been given a reasonable amount of time to answer your inquiry?

Do you have any written correspondence regarding if, or how this affects your car?

How do you not understand this?

Oh, I fully understand it.

Do you?

The part that you are leaving out..................is that you have no concrete proof, or at least to this point have not presented any, that your car is even affected.

And if I am wrong about that, well then what concrete proof do you have that your car is affected as you describe? And if you have such, well then why aren't you suing, or in the process of suing Tesla at this minute.

I am so infuriated that I am very close to dumping the car at Tesla's absurd trade in value ($11k in "reconditioning" for a 14-month old car with under 10k miles? $42k in total lost value? Wow, just wow.)

Until you have absolute confirmation from Tesla, that using launch mode in your car puts you at risk for a loss in power in your piece of property, after your purchase, and without your consent, and without prior agreement that this would be the case, well then you have nothing other than this internet discussion describing one vehicle.

However if you were to find out that you are in fact at risk for what is being described in this thread, and without your consent, well then it would seem that you would have options aside from what you describe.

It would be a shame for you to be spooked into acting the way you're describing, only to find out that you are not even at risk.

The fact that there's a UNDISCLOSED counter is the issue. My use and enjoyment of this remarkably expensive Tesla Model S "Performance" 90D "Ludicrous" has been negatively affected

OK, well then show a court of law just how your "use and enjoyment" of this remarkably expensive Tesla Model S "Performance 90D Ludicrous" has been negatively affected.

We don't "doubt" that you are in fear of using launch mode right now. But in your case are those fears justified?

based on the PERMANENT loss of power upon reaching some secret "magic number," also undisclosed. ...

Based upon "whose" PERMANENT loss of power upon reaching some secret "magic number"?

Yours??

Ok well then show where that has happened to you.

I'm not saying that it isn't the case. But what proof do you have that it is the case?

 

[scaesare]

I own a P100DL Model S.
I Contacted tesla today to see if I was affected.
Here is Tesla's response after making them.them aware of which model I have

"Using Launch Mode places an increased stress on the entire powertrain accelerating aging and fatigue of various components. The computer systems automatically track Launch Mode usage and continually estimate fatigue damage. Depending on how Launch Mode is used, the computer may eventually limit the available power during Launch Mode to protect the powertrain. Note that this is a common strategy also employed in other high performance cars."

So it looks as if P100DL models may also be affected. I have a detailed list of questions sent after this that have been unanswered in this thread I am awaiting a response on right now. Will report back then.

This reinforces the suspicion I posted earlier that this may be to prevent damage to hard parts rather than to protect the pack.

 

[lolachampcar]

Tesla is still promoting (prominently) a 2.5 second 0-60 with the P100DL yet I had to go looking for the disclaimer. I wonder why Tesla did not put 2.5 0-60 for X amount of times if using Launch Mode and maybe Y amount of times if we find something else that requires us to "optimize" your power?

I'm trying to use (weak) sarcasm to get past my utter disgust.

 

[P85DEE]

Tesla is still promoting (prominently) a 2.5 second 0-60 with the P100DL yet I had to go looking for the disclaimer. I wonder why Tesla did not put 2.5 0-60 for X amount of times if using Launch Mode and maybe Y amount of times if we find something else that requires us to "optimize" your power?

I'm trying to use (weak) sarcasm to get past my utter disgust.

How's that working for you?

I'm disappointed that Tesla is using this verbiage in their order page for the P100D.

And beyond disappointed to know that this might be the case in some previously purchased cars as well.

 

[smac]

Would it have really hurt anyone to take the tenth or two of the car that it can't handle, then advertise the right amount?

I agree that would have been more sensible.

However (IMHO) the target was set for a reason and that was to gain column inches by besting the 911 Turbo S. (Thereby claiming P90D in ludicrous mode is the "fastest accelerating car on the market", something they later had to water down to "fastest accelerating sedan on the market".) That is why the tenths were so important to them.

TBH As a potential buyer it is important to me too. I already have a fast ICE for track work, and for day to day the 60 is more than fast enough for my city commute. To get me to buy a P car (for a HUGE premium most of which goes straight into GM) it needs to have that badge of honor (meaningless as it is without a timed strip). I'm embarrassed to admit it, but it's a vanity thing.

 

[NSX1992]

I found some useful information today. I stopped at a local service center and asked "How many more launch modes do I have in my P85DL before you reduce the power?" I was escorted to the service manager who initially said 625 runs(but could not substatinate it) were needed before power reduction. Then he looked into the computer using my vin to find out. There was apparently a lot of vins listed randomnly but he concluded that my information was not available to him.

He did inform me that there are 2 separate counters, 1 for launch mode and the other for full pedal. He did not know how long the full pedal had to be pushed or if the 2 counters were additive. As far as the P100D the battery is ok but drive train can still be damaged resulting in power cutbacks. Other P models can suffer battery and drive train damage. Then he proceded to read from the official line in the computer which basically said that drive train damage is to be expected from abuse and is common with other manufacturers. It was obvious that Tesla is now aware of the turmoil and has published guidelines for service.

The above helps explain Teslas response to Tech_Guy that a P100D is the answer but left out the part that the drive train could still suffer damage even if using full pedal only.

 

[Andyw2100]

He did inform me that there are 2 separate counters, 1 for launch mode and the other for full pedal. He did not know how long the full pedal had to be pushed or if the 2 counters were additive. As far as the P100D the battery is ok but drive train can still be damaged resulting in power cutbacks. Other P models can suffer battery and drive train damage.

Well, @bhzmark? Still sticking to your line about "don't use launch mode, and everything will be fine?"

Many of us have been saying all along that with the broad disclaimer Tesla added, we had reason to be concerned about more than just launch mode usage. You kept attempting to disparage us, saying we were being ridiculous, etc., etc.

Care to apologize?

 

[AWDtsla]

Just to put it into perspective, if the P100D can do 100 runs before it's power limited, that's $400 per run over the 90D. Who would still buy the P100D?

 

[msnow]

I found some useful information today. I stopped at a local service center and asked "How many more launch modes do I have in my P85DL before you reduce the power?" I was escorted to the service manager who initially said 625 runs(but could not substatinate it) were needed before power reduction. Then he looked into the computer using my vin to find out. There was apparently a lot of vins listed randomnly but he concluded that my information was not available to him.

He did inform me that there are 2 separate counters, 1 for launch mode and the other for full pedal. He did not know how long the full pedal had to be pushed or if the 2 counters were additive. As far as the P100D the battery is ok but drive train can still be damaged resulting in power cutbacks. Other P models can suffer battery and drive train damage. Then he proceded to read from the official line in the computer which basically said that drive train damage is to be expected from abuse and is common with other manufacturers. It was obvious that Tesla is now aware of the turmoil and has published guidelines for service.

The above helps explain Teslas response to Tech_Guy that a P100D is the answer but left out the part that the drive train could still suffer damage even if using full pedal only.

Wow! Really good info George. This keeps getting worse.

 

[Az_Rael]

Other P models can suffer battery and drive train damage. Then he proceeded to read from the official line in the computer which basically said that drive train damage is to be expected from abuse and is common with other manufacturers.

We are still only talking about P models after the D was released, though? The ones eligible for the Ludicrous upgrade? Not those of us with "classics" I hope.