There was a user here on TMC that had the on-board charger portion of his Model 3 PCS destroyed by using the Setec adapter with the experimental firmware. Are you asking about incidents of damage with "safe" Setec firmware?
I appreciate the link, I'm sure others will find it useful.
The experimental firmware was available directly from Setec. You seem to be implying that Setec is not responsible for the damage caused to vehicles. They clearly did not understand what their experimental firmware would do and how the car would respond.
I'm not defending Setec. I don't know who is more "responsible" if a user decides to use "experimental" firmware - I have no idea how that is obtained, because I've only ever used the website to get firmware - although I did once DM a user to get an older firmware that was no longer listed on the website.
This is my issue with blaming the experimental aspect of those firmwares.
So you are suspicious of it because the wording is "weird". Well, I find that the wording seems sensible and on purpose.
That's called contrast. If they didn't say anything about it, someone might just assume that it was the bad firmware. So they mentioned that they are aware that is a thing that exists and then contrasts it with saying that they were not using that, but were using a "safe" one. It's very clear and obvious why they said it that way.
"Nth" just means they were not keeping a log book of every single time, so they don't remember exactly if this was the 23rd or 24th or whatever time that he had used it where the problem popped up. That means that he had used it some times before, but then this time it had a problem. And as specifically mentioned, this time was not using the non-experimental one. I do agree that it might have been helpful to mention if he had ever used that experimental one at all, but it's a detail he didn't remember to include.
It gives me the impression that you are just being overly nitpicky with someone not giving enough of the details that you want.
Ugh, whoops, you messed me up with the wording using non- and then using the word not, and I ended up getting this backward with a double negative. I meant not using the experimental one.
Just received an email from Setec. No one has submitted capture files showing the issue. My car has not updated firmware, and not sure I want to at this point. Anyone out there that has 2021.40 able to run the diagnostic and get to Setec?
I’m interested to see if anyone who has the new update has imported the official Korean CCS1 adapter and tried it out. The update adds a line in the information page about CCS adapter compatibility.
