Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

[vgrinshpun]

It is absurd that I have NEVER used launch mode yet have consumed 92 uses, 15% of my launch counter, before my vehicle gets nerfed.

I feel bad for the P100DL+ guys. We don't know how the counter increments. Since my mixture score was 311.6, it is possible that the counters do not increment by "1". Every + launch could cost you all 5 or 10 or 100 increments. We don't know. And once you hit the limit, you no longer have an Insane or Ludicrous car.

Can you give more information on your launches without "launch mode":

• were they mostly "perfect" traction launches, i.e. traction control did not engage to pull power off from the max level?
• were they mostly, say, 0 to 60mph, or much longer, i.e. 0 to 120mph (insert your number)?
• were there significant quantity of back-to-back launches?
• were your launches mostly mash of the go pedal as hard as you can, or more gradual push?

 

[SDRick]

Has it been determined up thread or elsewhere whether we need to physically go to the service center to have the counters read or can this be done by Tesla over the air?

 

[Andyw2100]

As I pointed out few times, they really did not address his situation as what is happening with Tech_Guy's car is not consistent and is not explained by Tesla correspondence. At this point (at least for Tech_Guy) the issue is very much what is happening with his car, not the Tesla policy.

Whether or not --WE-- believe Tesla has addressed his situation or not, --THEY-- think they have. He can certainly try again, but I fear that Tesla will now be treating his concerns as a policy issue and not a mechanical one.

 

[qwk]

He hasn't yet denied that he did get a service invoice. You may think it is irrelevant and a fruitless waste of time. I disagree and want to either encourage him to share his service invoice or obtain one

I agree that those who only traffic in rumour, speculation and FUD, and have no interest in facts and evidence will have no interest in the certainty of a service invoice response.

You must not own a Tesla. The SC's have always been the last to learn when it comes to things like this. They also will omit things on a work order if they can't fix it. Thy don't exactly put incompetence in writing.

 

[qwk]

Delivery Orientation Specialist.

Ummm good luck with that.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

As I pointed out few times, they really did not address his situation as what is happening with Tech_Guy's car is not consistent and is not explained by Tesla correspondence. At this point (at least for Tech_Guy) the issue is very much what is happening with his car, not the Tesla policy.

Not really. That is just one theory. On the other hand, another theory is that is happening with @Tech_Guy's car is 100% explained by Tesla's policy of both counter limitation and deflective communication. After all, Tesla's only answer to him remains the same and has been complemented by others offering their counter data/info. What is not explained, would be explained by intentional vagueness.

After all, Tesla is being so vague (and other times silent) about it that almost anything is possible - but what most definitely is possible is that not only launch mode increments the counter, as others have gathered. The selective silence is deafening and quite intentional I imagine. Perhaps the counters really kill 100 hp at some point. If so, it would certainly be in Tesla's short-term interest to remain mum about it.

So, both are quite valid theories and there may not be anything wrong in particular with @Tech_Guy's car. For all we know, it is just one known example of a car following Tesla's counter limitation policies.

That said, I do agree with others that @Tech_Guy should take the car in for loss of 100 hp and get it checked out, beucase such a loss is completely unreasonable. Failing a fix, I would agree with you that seeking legal advice at this stage would probably be a good idea. I think in his case it has gone on long enough.

For many others, publicity and other avenues are still perfectly valid of course. (Mind you, I'm not suggesting Tech_Guy should necessarily remain silent - his lawyer could weigh in on that of course - I'm just saying it is a game of diminishing returns in his case by now.)

 

[AnonNJ]

I am unable to give account as asked as I was not launching or using the car in any way other than intended for normal driving at reasonable flow of traffic speeds.

Quick merge. Sure. Hole shot from a traffic light. Ok. How do I know if "perfect" traction?! How can anyone know?!

I just drive the car.

Can you give more information on your launches without "launch mode":

• were they mostly "perfect" traction launches, i.e. traction control did not engage to pull power off from the max level?
• were they mostly, say, 0 to 60mph, or much longer, i.e. 0 to 120mph (insert your number)?
• were there significant quantity of back-to-back launches?
• were your launches mostly mash of the go pedal as hard as you can, or more gradual push?

 

[AnxietyRanger]

@Tech_Guy - with the total summary of info available:

1. Your power reduction and statements directly to you from Tesla
2. My direct witness of 3 counters for my vehicle tied to above issue (page 60 of thread)
3. Tesla's sudden disclaimers
4. New L+ disclaimer

We are highly dependent on you, the most affected party, for what the resolution to this horrifying issue will become.

The way I see it, the path to resolution is this:

1. All P90DL owners should inquire of their service manager (highest authority at service center) for the counts from the performance counters on their car. We need this data.
2. Tech_Guy should either consider legal assistance or submit car for warranty repair. His car is broken. Please continue to share your progress. We need this data.
3. All P90DL owners should inquire high level Tesla directly, through twitter, and through automotive journalists about the matter until we are able to obtain a full policy statement or resolution on the matter.

It is absurd that I have NEVER used launch mode yet have consumed 92 uses, 15% of my launch counter, before my vehicle gets nerfed.

I feel bad for the P100DL+ guys. We don't know how the counter increments. Since my mixture score was 311.6, it is possible that the counters do not increment by "1". Every + launch could cost you all 5 or 10 or 100 increments. We don't know. And once you hit the limit, you no longer have an Insane or Ludicrous car.

I think @FredLambert and Electrek should do an updated exploration article on this, since clearly this is no longer about launch mode only and the previous story has turned to be false.

Fred has a good investigative touch. The silence on this is starting to be a bit uncomfortable, really, as well.

 

[bhzmark]

You must not own a Tesla. The SC's have always been the last to learn when it comes to things like this. They also will omit things on a work order if they can't fix it. Thy don't exactly put incompetence in writing.

Not in my experience and others. They have always recorded the customer concern, even when their reply is performing as designed. But at least that documents their official response to that specific concern. For those inclined to threaten legal action, it would help on that front as well.

The aversion to collecting more information is baffling.

Techguy: approx how many times did you use launch mode?

 

[scaesare]

Has it been determined up thread or elsewhere whether we need to physically go to the service center to have the counters read or can this be done by Tesla over the air?

Tesla has a VPN link to the car, as well as root access. Technically than can read everything that's part of the car computer/management systems over the air, provided they opt to open an individual session with a car.

Now, as to if the service folks can do this, as opposed to Tesla HQ, I don't know. It's unclear if this is information that is part of the logs (I suspect not, based on some posts above), or must be individually probed/read.

I also believe that Tesla's service system aggregated data that is collected on each car. I tend to suspect such data would include firmware revision levels, hardware status, last errors noted, mileage, perhaps SoC, etc... In one case when I asked about my nav map revision level, the service folks looked at their computer console, and were able to get that info pretty quickly... it didn't seem as if they were initiating a remote session with the car, so I think that is part of ongoing car data they maintain at their end. I don't think we know if this counter data is collected within that.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Not in my experience and others. They have always recorded the customer concern, even when their reply is performing as designed. But at least that documents their official response to that specific concern. For those inclined to threaten legal action, it would help on that front as well.

The aversion to collecting more information is baffling.

Techguy: approx how many times did you use launch mode?

I doubt most guys here are anti @Tech_Guy taking his car in for service and posting the results. But is not really our's to tell him what to do.

What people like @qwk seem to dislike is your apparent suggestion that having failed to do so would somehow be material and make his provided info less accurate/less relevant. I tend to agree with them. Your continuous pushing of this detail just creates noise IMO.

What Tech_Guy does as his next step(s) is his personal decision as he has to live with the consequences as well. I'm sure most of us would love more of any kind of data, papers received or papers filed, but we should IMO also respect his choice in his own process.

 

[AWDtsla]

Hey guys, the stock is down by -6 dollars! You better all be quiet and live with the L falling off, or Tesla will go under....

/s

 

[lolachampcar]

Just under $235
You're making it go up!!!!

 

[P85DEE]

@Tech_Guy - with the total summary of info available:

1. Your power reduction and statements directly to you from Tesla
2. My direct witness of 3 counters for my vehicle tied to above issue (page 60 of thread)
3. Tesla's sudden disclaimers
4. New L+ disclaimer

We are highly dependent on you, the most affected party, for what the resolution to this horrifying issue will become.

The way I see it, the path to resolution is this:

1. All P90DL owners should inquire of their service manager (highest authority at service center) for the counts from the performance counters on their car. We need this data.
2. Tech_Guy should either consider legal assistance or submit car for warranty repair. His car is broken. Please continue to share your progress. We need this data.
3. All P90DL owners should inquire high level Tesla directly, through twitter, and through automotive journalists about the matter until we are able to obtain a full policy statement or resolution on the matter.

It is absurd that I have NEVER used launch mode yet have consumed 92 uses, 15% of my launch counter, before my vehicle gets nerfed.

I feel bad for the P100DL+ guys. We don't know how the counter increments. Since my mixture score was 311.6, it is possible that the counters do not increment by "1". Every + launch could cost you all 5 or 10 or 100 increments. We don't know. And once you hit the limit, you no longer have an Insane or Ludicrous car.

Your second point regarding the path to resolution, definitely stands out to me.

Only thing I'd do differently is I would seek legal assistance now.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Huh? I thought that what they actually promised was 1/4 mile times of 10.9 which can't even come close to being achieved with 1500 amps.

Let me try to phrase this in another way: there are way more independent variables in the 1/4 mile time than just the amps. For example: existence of the pano roof (and other weight adding options), was the car at 100% SOC and max battery mode off the line (because the MotorTrend test was), environmental factors like headwind/tailwind/slope/track surface, tires/wheels (wheel diameter, weight, specific tire, psi, temperature), and probably more I'm missing.

To address a 0.2 difference in 1/4 mile, Tesla can for example offer a different tire/wheel combination to squeeze out the last 0.2 seconds. Going above 1500A is not the only solution.

However, if they promised 1600A explicitly then that can easily be held against them. That's why I keep bringing up the point about 1500A. If Tesla does cut to below 1500A, then it should be relatively straightforward to say that is a defect that should be remedied by warranty. However, for currents above that, it's not so straightforward because you have to go through the 1/4 mile spec which can be addressed in many different ways.

 

[AWDtsla]

Let me try to phrase this in another way: there are way more independent variables in the 1/4 mile time than just the amps. For example: existence of the pano roof (and other weight adding options), was the car at 100% SOC and max battery mode off the line (because the MotorTrend test was), environmental factors like headwind/tailwind/slope/track surface, tires/wheels (wheel diameter, weight, specific tire, psi, temperature), and probably more I'm missing.

To address a 0.2 difference in 1/4 mile, Tesla can for example offer a different tire/wheel combination to squeeze out the last 0.2 seconds. Going above 1500A is not the only solution.

However, if they promised 1600A explicitly then that can easily be held against them. That's why I keep bringing up the point about 1500A. If Tesla does cut to below 1500A, then it should be relatively straightforward to say that is a defect that should be remedied by warranty. However, for currents above that, it's not so straightforward because you have to go through the 1/4 mile spec which can be addressed in many different ways.

The car cannot do 10's in the quarter at 1500A, period. Motortrend car was a cheater car.

 

[P85DEE]

The obstacle is that they have already addressed his situation and told him why his car is behaving as it is. At this point his issue is with Tesla policy, not finding out what is wrong with the car.

Good point.

As I understand it, they're not conceding that there is anything "wrong" with the car and that what has happened to it, in terms of its power loss is "normal" and expected as a result of the counter or counters having reached a certain point, whatever that point is.

 

[Andyw2100]

As I understand it, they're not conceding that there is anything "wrong" with the car and that what has happened to it, in terms of its power loss is "normal" and expected as a result of the counter or counters having reached a certain point, whatever that point is.

Exactly.

Which is why I believe at this point getting some sort of service invoice from Tesla would be anything but straight forward.

 

[Walta]

I was doing pretty good not using Pedal Mashing of late... but the latest software update fixed the equalizer settings so now they save, and it sounds so good.
Everything started out fine on my way in to work, then Deep Purple - Highway Star came on the radio. I must be down about 3 counts on my rolling PM's! I can't control myself.... epic song !

 

[Impulse20110]

Latest response from tesla to me. I'm a p100d owner as well btw.
It seems aflyer reading this using launch mode is not required. Just driving vehicle hard until ludacrous mode will result in artificial power loss over time. BS!

" Using Launch Mode, max battery power mode or to a lesser degree ludicrous settings with full accelerations places an increased stress on the entire powertrain, accelerating aging and fatigue of various components. The vehicle monitors these factors and adjusts available power accordingly to protect the systems. This is the normal operation of the vehicle as it is designed"