Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

[davidc18]

bhzmark is welcome to come drive with me and my two boys (3-6) to understand the type of pressure they can exert to get their parents to "launch" the car. It is better than any ride at Disney World. Two launches on the way to school sounds suspiciously low to me.

 

[lolachampcar]

Not evidence based.


Of course your own post to carry out your own jihad against Tesla on this point fails to make the quite important distinction.

The problem here is that we are forced to make assumptions based on little evidence (or in some cases ignoring the evidence).

If you want to complain about Tesla doing something wrong, complain that they havent given us good info. We are forced to quibble about which assumptions are better supported by the evidence, but based on very little evidence.

Instead simply ask Tesla to describe with precision what type of use does cause what type of wear or risk of failure on which components. Convert your jihad into a factual and evidence- based line of inquiry.

You're just plain funny.......

We put in limiters based on vehicle use and did not tell you about it but its ok because other manufacturers do it. That is (1) untrue from the calibration data and firmware I have worked with on MB, BMW and Porsche and (2) is unilaterally reaching out and remove something people bought and paid for. If calling that out is a jihad, so be it. I prefer to see it as a simple matter of right and wrong open for discussion amongst owners and interested parties. Tomatoes or Tomotoes, I guess it depends upon you agenda and flair for the dramatic.

As for your distinction, you started off by saying it was just one person and it was that one person's fault. I think we have seen three or more here on this thread which would indicate to me there are likely more (not on this forum or unwilling to say something because they might be attacked by a ranting lunatic). I do not buy your "its the customer's fault" excuse for Tesla's behavior. Notice I did that without an AK47

 

[Redmiata98]

Maybe I missed it somewhere in the last 148 pages but does this ALSO apply to the model X?

 

[bhzmark]

You're just plain funny.......

We put in limiters based on vehicle use and did not tell you about it but its ok because other manufacturers do it. That is (1) untrue from the calibration data and firmware I have worked with on MB, BMW and Porsche and (2) is unilaterally reaching out and remove something people bought and paid for. If calling that out is a jihad, so be it. I prefer to see it as a simple matter of right and wrong open for discussion amongst owners and interested parties. Tomatoes or Tomotoes, I guess it depends upon you agenda and flair for the dramatic.

As for your distinction, you started off by saying it was just one person and it was that one person's fault. I think we have seen three or more here on this thread which would indicate to me there are likely more (not on this forum or unwilling to say something because they might be attacked by a ranting lunatic). I do not buy your "its the customer's fault" excuse for Tesla's behavior. Notice I did that without an AK47

Without knowing exactly what the use case is that triggers the limit, you don't even know what you are lamenting. Being self-satisfied with agitating the removal of the limit, while still ignorant of the problematic use case that causes the problem, is an empty victory.

I wasn't blaming those who reported the limit but just trying to discern what exactly it was about their use that caused the limit.. those who refused to share are not helping what I think is a more interesting effort --- seeing what exactly the problem is, rather than just being outraged at something that may not affect 99.99% of use cases -- we don't know.

I'm truly mystified by the lack of intellectual curiosity about the underlying cause, and relevant use cases, and the only concern being focused on the fact (and moral status) of the limit itself.

 

[bhzmark]

Maybe I missed it somewhere in the last 148 pages but does this ALSO apply to the model X?

Probably only affects those model x owners who use launch mode daily, or multiple times every few weekends. Which may be a grand total of zero model x users with that type of outlier use pattern.

But we don't know for sure so this is just speculation based on facts helpfully shared by two of the grand total of three cases we know about.

 

[lolachampcar]

and I continue to be truly mystified (well, not really) by a person that can not operate with, or is paralyzed by, less than a complete set of facts.... There is sufficient information for a reasonably intelligent person to form an opinion. This is a forum which is a place for discussion and consensus. The opinions are honed by debate and additional information from other owners; again, what I thought forums were for.

Your opinion is noted. You do not think it is fair to forum a conclusion based on limited facts. I understand and accept that. It is right for you but, if you are going to challenge my points, you may wish to do so with logical argument and not "you can not say that because you do not have all the facts". The fact is that I can say it

 

[3mp_kwh]

This is not push back for posting the screen shot but an observation that you should never have been put in the position in the first place. They KNEW you had a problem and KNEW they were going to be taking responsibility for the condition of your car. Why on earth let you go through this part of the process when it was known you would go through it. It adds no value yet does tremendous damage.

I'd venture they estimated only a small subset of "counters" were going to generate the message, and that handling those people on a case bases would be a safe way to go. It would nice, but perhaps beyond Tesla, to send an invite for service of cars whose "counters" were known to have passed the limit. This part doesn't bother me as much, as coming to terms with updates in general.

I was another Dad, with four school kids, repeatedly being asked for launches this morning.

 

[JonMc]

Hi Everyone -- The software update that removes software performance reductions tied to frequent max battery power usage is being deployed now. With this update, maximum power output will be achievable anytime both Launch Mode and Max Battery Power Mode are engaged.

 

[MP3Mike]

Hi Everyone -- The software update that removes software performance reductions tied to frequent max battery power usage is being deployed now. With this update, maximum power output will be achievable anytime both Launch Mode and Max Battery Power Mode are engaged.

@JonMc Thanks for the update! Is there anything you can share with us about the "Battery Needs Service" warning?

How worried should one be about that? (How quickly does it need to be resolved?) What kind of service is necessary?

 

[Andyw2100]

Hi Everyone -- The software update that removes software performance reductions tied to frequent max battery power usage is being deployed now. With this update, maximum power output will be achievable anytime both Launch Mode and Max Battery Power Mode are engaged.

@JonMc --

Unless I am mistaken, this is the first time you, or anyone from Tesla has mentioned a connection between the software performance reductions and Max Battery Power usage. In the past, there were references to counters, wide open throttle, launches, etc. Does your statement above mean that it was really the Max Battery Power that was the issue all along?

And a related question: I know some people use Max Battery Power as a way to heat the pack, to get rid of the regen limit when the pack is cold. These people generally make sure to turn off the Max Battery Power after just a few minutes, to prevent possible negative affects on their packs. (I've never done this, as I was more concerned with my pack's health than avoiding a regen limit.) Would these people have also been affected by the limits, or would the fact that they generally didn't let Max Battery Power complete the heating of their packs save them and their packs from any issues?

Finally, since we're on the topic, any chance of offering a "pack preheating" option that safely warms a cold pack to a temperature where there would be no regen limit?

Thanks in advance for your answers!

 

[JonMc]

@JonMc Thanks for the update! Is there anything you can share with us about the "Battery Needs Service" warning?

How worried should one be about that? (How quickly does it need to be resolved?) What kind of service is necessary?

@MP3Mike -- hard to know precisely. Please bring to service and we'll diagnose quickly for you.

 

[JonMc]

@JonMc --

Unless I am mistaken, this is the first time you, or anyone from Tesla has mentioned a connection between the software performance reductions and Max Battery Power usage. In the past, there were references to counters, wide open throttle, launches, etc. Does your statement above mean that it was really the Max Battery Power that was the issue all along?

And a related question: I know some people use Max Battery Power as a way to heat the pack, to get rid of the regen limit when the pack is cold. These people generally make sure to turn off the Max Battery Power after just a few minutes, to prevent possible negative affects on their packs. (I've never done this, as I was more concerned with my pack's health than avoiding a regen limit.) Would these people have also been affected by the limits, or would the fact that they generally didn't let Max Battery Power complete the heating of their packs save them and their packs from any issues?

Finally, since we're on the topic, any chance of offering a "pack preheating" option that safely warms a cold pack to a temperature where there would be no regen limit?

Thanks in advance for your answers!

Hi Andy -- Max Battery isn't the only issue, but a combination of factors which vary widely by usage. As my first post stated, we're actively monitoring the pack and drive train for any issues and will give a service notification. Pack pre-heating is a common request and on our road map. Stay tuned for that. Will update the forums when we release it.

 

[Andyw2100]

Hi Andy -- Max Battery isn't the only issue, but a combination of factors which vary widely by usage. As my first post stated, we're actively monitoring the pack and drive train for any issues and will give a service notification. Pack pre-heating is a common request and on our road map. Stay tuned for that. Will update the forums when we release it.

Thanks very much for the thorough and detailed answer. I am thrilled to hear that pack pre-heating is on the Tesla road map. I know it will please many owners!

Thanks again!

 

[Redmiata98]

Re: 2983, my question has been answered.
This DOES apply to the Model X also. I just installed Version 8.0(7.6.15) update now. In the notes, it explains the removal of limitations and monitor as shown in #2922 previous page.

 

[hostman]

Hi Everyone -- The software update that removes software performance reductions tied to frequent max battery power usage is being deployed now. With this update, maximum power output will be achievable anytime both Launch Mode and Max Battery Power Mode are engaged.

Hi @JonMc, thanks for the update! Does this mean that the car is still limited when Max Battery Power is not enabled or Launch Mode is not being used? Or will it still perform to the same level as it was before the 8.0 update?

 

[Tech_Guy]

Thanks @JonMc for the attention to this issue and the resolution, I really feel Tesla made the right move for everyone on this!

Any chance we could get performance oriented displays on all P model cars for example like the ludicrous plus displays in a p100dl but for the p85 p85+ p85d p85dl p90d p90dl... It would be a nice touch to see more performance data across the line of the performance model cars as I'm sure the owners would be interested. I also think it would be nice to be able to select this data as another option on the dashboard display without the requirement to select Ludicrous plus or max battery modes. It also might reduce damage to cars if performance model owners could monitor the battery temperatures and motor temperatures in the non max battery power modes... I think there is an opportunity here for Tesla to offer more data to performance model cars to help owners to monitor their cars! It would be fun for us as well to be able to see that data!!

I'm also very interested in the p100d upgrade. Any further news you could share with us on this including the timing as to when it might become available would be very much appreciated.

Thanks

 

[PaulC]

I'm also very interested in the p100d upgrade. Any further news you could share with us on this including the timing as to when it might become available would be very much appreciated.

+1

Please 1) let us know if older "v1" P90DLs can be upgraded, and 2) take my money.

 

[apacheguy]

Hi @JonMc, thanks for the update! Does this mean that the car is still limited when Max Battery Power is not enabled or Launch Mode is not being used? Or will it still perform to the same level as it was before the 8.0 update?

My read of his statement is that there is no software restriction whatsoever (other than BMS limiting due to SOC/battery temp, etc.). However, in order to achieve maximum power at the wheels you should enable both max battery power and launch mode.

 

[hostman]

My read of his statement is that there is no software restriction whatsoever (other than BMS limiting due to SOC/battery temp, etc.). However, in order to achieve maximum power at the wheels you should enable both max battery power and launch mode.

Was hoping that was the case. Also @JonMc, any chance of a 100 kWh battery upgrade for P85DL? Service center tells me my battery needs to be pulled out and get fixed at the factory... Thanks!

 

[bhzmark]

and I continue to be truly mystified (well, not really) by a person that can not operate with, or is paralyzed by, less than a complete set of facts.... There is sufficient information for a reasonably intelligent person to form an opinion. This is a forum which is a place for discussion and consensus. The opinions are honed by debate and additional information from other owners; again, what I thought forums were for.

Your opinion is noted. You do not think it is fair to forum a conclusion based on limited facts. I understand and accept that. It is right for you but, if you are going to challenge my points, you may wish to do so with logical argument and not "you can not say that because you do not have all the facts". The fact is that I can say it

The meager data suggests that the limit seemed to be triggered by extreme outlier use cases, and the limit seemed to be a reasonable engineering trade-off. You seemed to come to different opinions: namely that the software limits were a moral wrong against every buyer of PxxDs (whether it did or could or was even likely to affect them or not) and buyers should be outraged, and Tesla was a lesser company and untrust worthy because of it. I was merely pointing out that the data doesn't support your position but if you were eager to support those opinions -- you need more data.

It seems that your jihad to criticize Tesla and conclude that they did something morally outrageous with the software limits forces you to have blind spots to the reasonable conclusions to be drawn (or at least reasonably entertained) from the incomplete, but still useful, data points that we do have.

Separately, (a different point!) I suggested that if you yearn to be outraged against Tesla for something, pick a better issue. Namely the issue re disclosure about what is really going on with our cars -- what sort of use causes what sorts of risk of failure or wear etc. That would be a better topic to agitate for. And that would be helpful to us to know how to best drive our cars to strike best balance between performance and risk of excessive wear.

I suppose you can continue to carry out your jihad against Tesla engineers trying to balance giving us both kick ass acceleration and experiment with software and maintenance trade-offs to help us not break our cars for those who operate in outlier use cases. I'm just trying understand and consider things from their perspective.