Pack Swap on 70D to 90kWh HP?

[jaguar36]

There are lots of other things that *could* be different between a P DU and a S DU that wouldn't show up simply by looking at temperatures and would just be related to increased longevitiy under the higher loads. Off the top of my head different alloys could be used, different bearings or even just different bearing liners, the shafts could be balanced better, or the tolerances could be tighter. Similarly its possible that the certain components are built to the same drawing but then just binned based on the final dimensions with the better parts being allocated for the P DUs.

Note that I'm not claiming they are different, just that there could easily be differences that aren't immediately obvious even if you tore-down the inverters and motors and compared the two.

This also doesn't mean that flashing a S85 to a P85 wouldn't be quite successful for the long term, quite similar to how you can overclock many cpus without issue.

 

[apacheguy]

You cannot flash the P firmware into an inverter with non-P hardware. The bootloader will not permit it. Try it.

Right, as I suspected it's more than just a config setting in the diagnostic screens. Tesla did the right thing by hard coding it into the inverter firmware.

Wk - What exactly was done with the S60 -> P85 conversion? How did you verify P85 performance?

 

[wk057]

You cannot flash the P firmware into an inverter with non-P hardware. The bootloader will not permit it. Try it.

I have. It worked fine... wonder what you did differently? Maybe we should compare notes.

Right, as I suspected it's more than just a config setting in the diagnostic screens. Tesla did the right thing by hard coding it into the inverter firmware.

Wk - What exactly was done with the S60 -> P85 conversion? How did you verify P85 performance?

Was an S60. Car was fully repaired, but the pack was damaged beyond reasonable repair, so it was swapped with an 85 pack from another salvage. The car functioned at this point with no software changes, albeit with a bit of complaining. I modified the car's configuration to match the 85 donor car's pack configuration, and redeployed the firmware. All was happy and it was a happy little S85. After a bit of test driving, for s***s and giggles, I figured it'd be fun to see what it'd do when telling the car it was a P85, with a P85 motor, and then redeploying the firmware. Much to my surprise the car didn't complain, no firmware errors in the log, and it did indeed flash a P85 firmware to the motor. A quick test drive and it was immediately apparent that the car was performing like every P85 I've driven before. The improvement was very obvious.

I figured to be safe temperatures should be monitored to see how things worked out. I did several 0-~100 runs with the car, among other things, while CAN logging and watching the thermal data screen. Nothing unusual. I went back and compared this with CAN data from my wife's P85 and the temperature rises were basically exactly the same. If, for example, the IGBTs in the real P85 were beefier than the IGBTs in the S60 turned P85, then the latter should have a quicker temperature rise under the same load. Same for the stator; if the stator were somehow less robust in the S60->P85, then it should have heated up faster. In both cases the rise in temperature was pretty much identical.

That car has been on the road as a P85 for... two months now? And the owner drives it pretty hard. If there was something that would fail because of a real hardware spec difference, it would have failed by now for sure.

Heck, he's even got a "P85" badge on the back now. If that doesn't make it go faster, then I don't know what will.

 

[snooper77]

That car has been on the road as a P85 for... two months now? And the owner drives it pretty hard. If there was something that would fail because of a real hardware spec difference, it would have failed by now for sure.

Does the car get OTA updates for a P85 as well?

 

[wk057]

Does the car get OTA updates for a P85 as well?

The car doesn't get OTA updates period, since it's a salvage that Tesla won't touch. It currently only gets wk057 updates. lol.

 

[techmaven]

I have. It worked fine... wonder what you did differently? Maybe we should compare notes.



Was an S60. Car was fully repaired, but the pack was damaged beyond reasonable repair, so it was swapped with an 85 pack from another salvage. The car functioned at this point with no software changes, albeit with a bit of complaining. I modified the car's configuration to match the 85 donor car's pack configuration, and redeployed the firmware. All was happy and it was a happy little S85. After a bit of test driving, for s***s and giggles, I figured it'd be fun to see what it'd do when telling the car it was a P85, with a P85 motor, and then redeploying the firmware. Much to my surprise the car didn't complain, no firmware errors in the log, and it did indeed flash a P85 firmware to the motor. A quick test drive and it was immediately apparent that the car was performing like every P85 I've driven before. The improvement was very obvious.

I figured to be safe temperatures should be monitored to see how things worked out. I did several 0-~100 runs with the car, among other things, while CAN logging and watching the thermal data screen. Nothing unusual. I went back and compared this with CAN data from my wife's P85 and the temperature rises were basically exactly the same. If, for example, the IGBTs in the real P85 were beefier than the IGBTs in the S60 turned P85, then the latter should have a quicker temperature rise under the same load. Same for the stator; if the stator were somehow less robust in the S60->P85, then it should have heated up faster. In both cases the rise in temperature was pretty much identical.

That car has been on the road as a P85 for... two months now? And the owner drives it pretty hard. If there was something that would fail because of a real hardware spec difference, it would have failed by now for sure.

Heck, he's even got a "P85" badge on the back now. If that doesn't make it go faster, then I don't know what will.

Way cool.

Could be that Tesla slammed a P85 drive unit into the S60 at some point? After all, no one complains if they get a better than spec new or refurb.

 

[glhs272]

Jason (a.k.a. Whiz kid aka wk057) or Phil (a.k.a Ingineer),

Someday I sure hope you publish methods on how to get a pack upgrade into a Tesla. Even if under a pseudonym, cause we all know who you are ;-).

I would be happy to pay Tesla to upgrade mine. First they say "go pound sand" when I ask, then later they say sure give us the money. When I come up with the cash, they have gone back to saying "go pound sand". A bit frustrating to say the least. At this point, I just want to get a used pack and throw it in my car once the battery warranty expires (about 2 more years). I don't think I am the only one either.

 

[snooper77]

The car doesn't get OTA updates period, since it's a salvage that Tesla won't touch. It currently only gets wk057 updates. lol.

Ah ok, thanks, so the VIN isn't serviced anymore, makes sense.

 

[GregRF]

Now the front DU's are all the same on all cars that have them.

Have you seen the inside of these motors/inverters? I have yet to find any pictures of their insides and am curious to see the changes vs. the large motors.

 

[Mike K]

I have. It worked fine... wonder what you did differently? Maybe we should compare notes.



Was an S60. Car was fully repaired, but the pack was damaged beyond reasonable repair, so it was swapped with an 85 pack from another salvage. The car functioned at this point with no software changes, albeit with a bit of complaining. I modified the car's configuration to match the 85 donor car's pack configuration, and redeployed the firmware. All was happy and it was a happy little S85. After a bit of test driving, for s***s and giggles, I figured it'd be fun to see what it'd do when telling the car it was a P85, with a P85 motor, and then redeploying the firmware. Much to my surprise the car didn't complain, no firmware errors in the log, and it did indeed flash a P85 firmware to the motor. A quick test drive and it was immediately apparent that the car was performing like every P85 I've driven before. The improvement was very obvious.

I figured to be safe temperatures should be monitored to see how things worked out. I did several 0-~100 runs with the car, among other things, while CAN logging and watching the thermal data screen. Nothing unusual. I went back and compared this with CAN data from my wife's P85 and the temperature rises were basically exactly the same. If, for example, the IGBTs in the real P85 were beefier than the IGBTs in the S60 turned P85, then the latter should have a quicker temperature rise under the same load. Same for the stator; if the stator were somehow less robust in the S60->P85, then it should have heated up faster. In both cases the rise in temperature was pretty much identical.

That car has been on the road as a P85 for... two months now? And the owner drives it pretty hard. If there was something that would fail because of a real hardware spec difference, it would have failed by now for sure.

Heck, he's even got a "P85" badge on the back now. If that doesn't make it go faster, then I don't know what will.

Two questions:

1. Are OTA firmware upgrades similar to supercharging in that the car decides whether or not it is allowed to receive them? If so, is there any way to re-enable updates?

2. On that S85/ P85 now that the car thinks it's a P85 would that change in the future with a firmware update? Would that firmware again treat it as an S85 or continue to treat it as a P85? Or is there just completely different firmware files for the two models?

3. Let's say one day this is something people do. They take their S85's and turn them into P85s. Is Tesla currently set up to find this out automatically or would they need to due some snooping?

4. I understand if you don't want to answer this one... How do you come upon the firmware? I assume you've just found a way to sneak it off the car? I've followed your posts pretty closely but don't see any reference to any of this.

 

[wk057]

Two questions

I count more than two.

1. Are OTA firmware upgrades similar to supercharging in that the car decides whether or not it is allowed to receive them? If so, is there any way to re-enable updates?

Not directly, no. The car requests firmware be prepared for it, and the server either has an update for you and does so, or it does not. Once Tesla revokes the car's VPN keys there isn't even a way to ask if there is an update, let alone have their server put a package together.

2. On that S85/ P85 now that the car thinks it's a P85 would that change in the future with a firmware update? Would that firmware again treat it as an S85 or continue to treat it as a P85? Or is there just completely different firmware files for the two models?

The car would continue to be a P85 until the configuration was changed. Updates don't touch the configuration.

3. Let's say one day this is something people do. They take their S85's and turn them into P85s. Is Tesla currently set up to find this out automatically or would they need to due some snooping?

While connected to the internet and Tesla's VPN, the car periodically sends status to Tesla's servers. The status includes the configuration. So they would have that information pretty much immediately automatically.

4. I understand if you don't want to answer this one... How do you come upon the firmware? I assume you've just found a way to sneak it off the car? I've followed your posts pretty closely but don't see any reference to any of this.

The CID and IC are just computers running Linux. Once you have root you can do anything with them pretty much. The way Tesla's firmware works is pretty straight-forward, so imaging one machine and then getting another to apply the new firmware isn't impossible.

 

[apacheguy]

So am I correct in my understanding that the previously downloaded firmware is stored on a separate partition? And reflashing the firmware merely entails executing an install command? Wonder why Tesla doesn't allow the owner to retry failed updates. From posts around the forum, failed updates are a source of major headaches.

 

[Mike K]

While connected to the internet and Tesla's VPN, the car periodically sends status to Tesla's servers. The status includes the configuration. So they would have that information pretty much immediately automatically.

One question this time, I swear. Is there any hope of perhaps spoofing this so that the car thinks it's a P85 but reports that it's an S85?

If the components are indeed the same then truly there's no harm to Tesla since the car would be under the same warranty regardless of whether it thought it was an 85 or P85.

Wishful thinking for the future I suppose. I've had images dancing through my head of replacing the inverter some day far in the future so this info is exciting to hear.

 

[apacheguy]

Well the easier avenue I suppose would just be to bring down the VPN interface. Once folks wander into this sort of territory they'll also have to consider unintended consequences. Like Tesla refusing to service the car and blacklisting the VIN at SpC. I suspect it's only a matter of time before they crack down on this sort of thing. Don't know about anyone else, but having the SpC network is a much greater asset to me than have a hacked P DU.

 

[Max*]

If the components are indeed the same then truly there's no harm to Tesla since the car would be under the same warranty regardless of whether it thought it was an 85 or P85.

Except monetary damage, right? They charged, what $10k (?), to upgrade from the S85 to a P85.

On one hand it's your car, you should be able to do whatever you want with it; on the other hand, it doesn't feel ethical...

 

[jaguar36]

Except monetary damage, right? They charged, what $10k (?), to upgrade from the S85 to a P85.

On one hand it's your car, you should be able to do whatever you want with it; on the other hand, it doesn't feel ethical...

Upgrading your car from an S85 to a P85 is one thing, that I would consider questionable. Upgrading it and then still expecting Tesla to warranty it or support it any way as Mike K suggested is hugely unethical.

 

[No2DinosaurFuel]

I have. It worked fine... wonder what you did differently? Maybe we should compare notes.



Was an S60. Car was fully repaired, but the pack was damaged beyond reasonable repair, so it was swapped with an 85 pack from another salvage. The car functioned at this point with no software changes, albeit with a bit of complaining. I modified the car's configuration to match the 85 donor car's pack configuration, and redeployed the firmware. All was happy and it was a happy little S85. After a bit of test driving, for s***s and giggles, I figured it'd be fun to see what it'd do when telling the car it was a P85, with a P85 motor, and then redeploying the firmware. Much to my surprise the car didn't complain, no firmware errors in the log, and it did indeed flash a P85 firmware to the motor. A quick test drive and it was immediately apparent that the car was performing like every P85 I've driven before. The improvement was very obvious.

I figured to be safe temperatures should be monitored to see how things worked out. I did several 0-~100 runs with the car, among other things, while CAN logging and watching the thermal data screen. Nothing unusual. I went back and compared this with CAN data from my wife's P85 and the temperature rises were basically exactly the same. If, for example, the IGBTs in the real P85 were beefier than the IGBTs in the S60 turned P85, then the latter should have a quicker temperature rise under the same load. Same for the stator; if the stator were somehow less robust in the S60->P85, then it should have heated up faster. In both cases the rise in temperature was pretty much identical.

That car has been on the road as a P85 for... two months now? And the owner drives it pretty hard. If there was something that would fail because of a real hardware spec difference, it would have failed by now for sure.

Heck, he's even got a "P85" badge on the back now. If that doesn't make it go faster, then I don't know what will.

SO I am assuming your "salvage" S60 -> P85 isn't supercharging either right? It's just a fast electric car with > 200 miles range like the upcoming chevy bolt with a lot of Tesla's defects if it was an older S60. Sounds like there might be a market for your hacking. I would imagine people who don't have a lot of cash would probably just get a salvage S60 for cheap and hack it to a P85 or so. Sure they don't have warranty and what not, but I am sure a steady supply of salvages will ensure a steady supply of replacement parts.

I say if you can convert a salvage S60 to a P85 for 1/2 to 2/3 of what the new bolt cost, I think you will have a solid business in the short term.

- - - Updated - - -

Upgrading your car from an S85 to a P85 is one thing, that I would consider questionable. Upgrading it and then still expecting Tesla to warranty it or support it any way as Mike K suggested is hugely unethical.

I think he needs to do what people are doing in the cellphone industry. Root and hack the car with P85 Firmware. Disable internet so it doesn't report to the server. Once service is needed, reflash back to the old firmware and resume internet connection. Yes unethical, but that is one way around the problem.

 

[wk057]

SO I am assuming your "salvage" S60 -> P85 isn't supercharging either right?

Why wouldn't it? According to the logs the 60 had supercharging enabled before it was crashed, so the original owner paid for an option to be added to the car. Tesla reached in while it was being repaired and stole that option back with no compensation to the new owner. I turned it back on. I don't see the problem. Again, if Tesla wants to block it on the supercharger side and have the charger deny access, not many people are going to argue. But when they reach into the car without permission, I have a serious problem with that.

 

[Ingineer]

Excerpt from the service manual on DU replacement:

1. Refill the gearbox fluid.
2. Inspect any components to be reused for wear or damage before transferring them to the new drive unit. Replace any damaged components.
3. Use Toolbox to reset the immobilizer.
4. If using this procedure to replace the Performance drive unit, perform a break-in procedure. During this procedure, a “zinging” or “zipping” sound can be heard in the vehicle cabin near the drive unit area.

Note: This procedure is not required for Base drive units.
​

a. Ensure that the battery state of charge is 70% or higher.
b. Accelerate from 0 mph to at least 30 mph (48 kph) at wide open throttle 2 to 6 times or until the zinging/zipping sound has disappeared.

Warning: Be sure to comply with all local traffic safety laws and only perform such maneuvers in a suitable location such as a large empty parking lot or nonresidential side street with little to no traffic.
Note: Do not deliver the vehicle to the customer until the sound is completely gone.​

Now, why, if the physical hardware is identical, would this procedure exist, and why would different sounds emanate from the DU? Even if you got the firmware to work, you are probably going to cause DU failure. Temperatures are not a good enough indicator.

As it is, we know the 1st gen DU's are "fragile". Making one put out more power is just asking for it.

BTW, I recently did a pack swap of a 90 into a P85D and now it's a P90D. That is totally fine and doesn't stress anything out beyond it's original design.

 

[jaguar36]

Why wouldn't it? According to the logs the 60 had supercharging enabled before it was crashed, so the original owner paid for an option to be added to the car. Tesla reached in while it was being repaired and stole that option back with no compensation to the new owner. I turned it back on. I don't see the problem. Again, if Tesla wants to block it on the supercharger side and have the charger deny access, not many people are going to argue. But when they reach into the car without permission, I have a serious problem with that.

Who was the owner when this was done though? Wouldn't it have been done when it was owned by the insurance company? Whatever "paperwork" is given to Tesla to tell them that the title is being changed may include the agreement that some features such as connectivity and supercharging are removed.