Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Starting to see 2015s with BMS_u029 and 018

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.

NV Ray

Active Member
Sep 7, 2020
1,001
900
89434
Up until now the BMS_029 and BMS_u018 alerts have affected the 2012-14 Model S. There was some conjecture that the 2015 MS would be immune due to better batteries.


VINs above and below 75000 have chimed in.

20221016_114813.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yep, current owner of my old June '15 85D is getting pack replaced at only 64k miles in SoCal climate and gentle driving.

It could be Tesla knew these cars would not last much more that the warranty period, but kicked that can down the road.

How many early owners would have bought knowing the car would be worthless in 8-10 years?
 
Yep, current owner of my old June '15 85D is getting pack replaced at only 64k miles in SoCal climate and gentle driving.

It could be Tesla knew these cars would not last much more that the warranty period, but kicked that can down the road.

How many early owners would have bought knowing the car would be worthless in 8-10 years?
Just still under warranty, right?
 
Up until now the BMS_029 and BMS_u018 alerts have affected the 2012-14 Model S. There was some conjecture that the 2015 MS would be immune due to better batteries.

Unfortunately, over at Tesla BMS_u029/BMS_u018 | Facebook are starting to hear about some 2015's being affected as they come off warranty and owners are having to pay for repairs.

VINs above and below 75000 have chimed in.

View attachment 940631

What a coincidence that the 2015 battery warranties are also expiring this year.
 
It's almost as if things like batteries fail more as they age.

Who could have predicted such madness?
You make a good point, thx. In this case it's possibly more than simply batteries failing due to age. If it is solely due to age, then folks will be hesitant to buy a new or used EV if they are faced with $10-20k replacement pack cost after 8 years.

As far as numbers affected, my best guess is 120 (40% of current 300 members). Further, everytime I've talked with Pete @ Gruber and Chad @ Recell, and anecdotally from 057, they field numerous calls a day on this 029/018 issue. And that's the numbers we know of. Probably higher.

The unexplained conundrum with all these BMS_u029/018 alerts is many folks have opted for the <$1000 solution of resetting the 029 alerts (the 018 alert is not resettable). In all 6-10 such owners I've personally talked to, this reset option has restored range and charging speed to pre alert status, as long as no further software updates are allowed by the owner. And their cars have been running just fine for 6-10 months after reset.

This reset option is a cornerstone of one of the four plaintiffs in the recent lawsuit, which I am not a party to. I opted for 5 figure new out of pocket pack replacement from Tesla.

Yes, I know folks will say if the reset option is so good why doesn't Tesla, 057, or Recell do it? The latter two will tell you it's not safe. Pro reset owners will tell you the other guys have an economic interest in the reset option not succeeding.

Unfortunately, the reset option has surfaced with a darker side - dealers/private sellers use the reset option, then sell MS to unsuspecting buyers who inherit the alerts. These dealers/private sellers stand to probably make $10-20k or so in this flipping scenario (basically the current cost of replacement pack.) My dollar figure based on either (1) current owner using reset option and still getting $25-30k for their MS or (2) dealer/private seller buying known 029/018 alert MS for $7-11K, using reset option, then selling MS for $25-30k.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TMC was down last night when I got the fiery news from my would-be client. I was actually working on posting here first and was going to link from Twitter, but went back to Twitter when I couldn't.

Update: @wk057 has reported his first knowledge of vehicle fire potentially attributed to unrepaired BMS_u029 alert reset.

Let's be 100% clear here in that this that it's NOT the error itself that is the issue. If you have the error present, you're safe.

This is ONLY an issue for people who have had the error "reset" in some way without addressing the root cause (which requires actual non-trivial physical work).

The unexplained conundrum with all these BMS_u029/018 alerts is many folks have opted for the <$1000 solution of resetting the 029 alerts (the 018 alert is not resettable). In all 6-10 such owners I've personally talked to, this reset option has restored range and charging speed to pre alert status, as long as no further software updates are allowed by the owner. And their cars have been running just fine for 6-10 months after reset.

This reset option is a cornerstone of one of the four plaintiffs in the recent lawsuit, which I am not a party to. I opted for 5 figure new out of pocket pack replacement from Tesla.

Yes, I know folks will say if the reset option is so good why doesn't Tesla, 057, or Recell do it? The latter two will tell you it's not safe. Pro reset owners will tell you the other guys have an economic interest in the reset option not succeeding.

And here once again advocating for this completely unsafe practice AND trying to discredit those of us who know better?

The "economic interest" argument is completely ridiculous and uninformed. If it were in fact safe to offer a reset of these errors, that's effectively a service with nearly 100% profit margin. Instead, we're doing an incredible amount of work to be able to offer complete pack replacements with razor thin margins. You mean to tell me it's in my company's best interest to do all of that when we could be just offering a service that effectively costs us no capital or time instead and could probably charge about the same as we make in profit on a pack replacement? That's probably one of the most illogical things I've ever heard.

Plus, at least on my end, it'd be well in 057's economic interest to be able to just reset these errors. We offer an extended service plan for Tesla Model S/X battery packs. If we could safely do a no-cost reset of these errors, which are by far the most common encountered under our service plan program, then our service plan program would be a literal money printer, since the fixes would cost us nothing. Instead, we have a reserve and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of battery packs being processed so that we can do proper repairs/replacements of failing battery packs, which is quite expensive and a massive undertaking.

I'm sure @Recell and Tesla themselves are in pretty much the same boat. Why expend resources on something like this, face the PR backlash, etc etc if you can just reset the error and carry on safely?

So yeah, I'm not getting the motivation for continuing to push this, and frankly it's getting kind of annoying and absurd to have to keep correcting you on this. I'm really getting tired of having to chase you around this forum spreading this incredibly careless advice. At what point are YOU going to be liable for damages when someone follows that advice? Especially after you've been directly informed by multiple third party experts that it shouldn't be done? IANAL, but that seems incredibly reckless.

At least here on TMC, I'm reasonably certain my credibility in this field speaks for itself and folks here will pretty likely take my advice over yours, so there's that. But I'm unsure what your agenda is at this point aside from using TMC to drive people towards an external competing forum of sorts (your Facebook group that you administer), which I believe is in direct violation of TMC's ToS, by the way. It's one thing to post a link to something that may be of interest to members here, but another to keep driving people to an external forum you administer. (I would know, I was actually banned for doing something like this years ago.)

Bottom line, again, is that if you reset these errors without correcting the underlying physical issue, and then charge above the limit originally imposed, you're pretty much just striking a match every time. You might not get ignition immediately, but you're quite literally playing with fire. You do not want a Model S with this error reset sitting in your garage. You do not want your family in one of these cars that's had this error reset.

And like I said on Twitter, if you've done this "reset" or had it done by the third party or whatever the case may be, I highly suggest seeking a proper repair or replacement. If you've lucked out and managed to drive a bit afterwards without issue, you've also probably increased the repair cost by damaging the battery further. Seriously, park it. Away from anything important, discharge to < 50% (use climate keeper, HI setting, windows open, fan at 9 on not-recirculate), and seek help. I don't care if that's from me. Safety first. Get help from 057. Get help from Tesla. Get help from @Recell ... I don't care, but don't keep using the car. While I knew the odds of a catastrophe were non-zero, it's worse than even I estimated, and now have in-the-wild data to point to on it.
 
Last edited:
TMC was down last night when I got the fiery news from my would-be client. I was actually working on posting here first and was going to link from Twitter, but went back to Twitter when I couldn't.



Let's be 100% clear here in that this that it's NOT the error itself that is the issue. If you have the error present, you're safe.

This is ONLY an issue for people who have had the error "reset" in some way without addressing the root cause (which requires actual non-trivial physical work).



And here once again advocating for this completely unsafe practice AND trying to discredit those of us who know better?

The "economic interest" argument is completely ridiculous and uninformed. If it were in fact safe to offer a reset of these errors, that's effectively a service with nearly 100% profit margin. Instead, we're doing an incredible amount of work to be able to offer complete pack replacements with razor thin margins. You mean to tell me it's in my company's best interest to do all of that when we could be just offering a service that effectively costs us no capital or time instead and could probably charge about the same as we make in profit on a pack replacement? That's probably one of the most illogical things I've ever heard.

Plus, at least on my end, it'd be well in 057's economic interest to be able to just reset these errors. We offer an extended service plan for Tesla Model S/X battery packs. If we could safely do a no-cost reset of these errors, which are by far the most common encountered under our service plan program, then our service plan program would be a literal money printer, since the fixes would cost us nothing. Instead, we have a reserve and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of battery packs being processed so that we can do proper repairs/replacements of failing battery packs, which is quite expensive and a massive undertaking.

I'm sure @Recell and Tesla themselves are in pretty much the same boat. Why expend resources on something like this, face the PR backlash, etc etc if you can just reset the error and carry on safely?

So yeah, I'm not getting the motivation for continuing to push this, and frankly it's getting kind of annoying and absurd to have to keep correcting you on this. I'm really getting tired of having to chase you around this forum spreading this incredibly careless advice. At what point are YOU going to be liable for damages when someone follows that advice? Especially after you've been directly informed by multiple third party experts that it shouldn't be done? IANAL, but that seems incredibly reckless.

At least here on TMC, I'm reasonably certain my credibility in this field speaks for itself and folks here will pretty likely take my advice over yours, so there's that. But I'm unsure what your agenda is at this point aside from using TMC to drive people towards an external competing forum of sorts (your Facebook group that you administer), which I believe is in direct violation of TMC's ToS, by the way. It's one thing to post a link to something that may be of interest to members here, but another to keep driving people to an external forum you administer. (I would know, I was actually banned for doing something like this years ago.)

Bottom line, again, is that if you reset these errors without correcting the underlying physical issue, and then charge above the limit originally imposed, you're pretty much just striking a match every time. You might not get ignition immediately, but you're quite literally playing with fire. You do not want a Model S with this error reset sitting in your garage. You do not want your family in one of these cars that's had this error reset.

And like I said on Twitter, if you've done this "reset" or had it done by the third party or whatever the case may be, I highly suggest seeking a proper repair or replacement. If you've lucked out and managed to drive a bit afterwards without issue, you've also probably increased the repair cost by damaging the battery further. Seriously, park it. Away from anything important, discharge to < 50% (use climate keeper, HI setting, windows open, fan at 9 on not-recirculate), and seek help. I don't care if that's from me. Safety first. Get help from 057. Get help from Tesla. Get help from @Recell ... I don't care, but don't keep using the car. While I knew the odds of a catastrophe were non-zero, it's worse than even I estimated, and now have in-the-wild data to point to on it.

TMC was down last night when I got the fiery news from my would-be client. I was actually working on posting here first and was going to link from Twitter, but went back to Twitter when I couldn't.



Let's be 100% clear here in that this that it's NOT the error itself that is the issue. If you have the error present, you're safe.

This is ONLY an issue for people who have had the error "reset" in some way without addressing the root cause (which requires actual non-trivial physical work).



And here once again advocating for this completely unsafe practice AND trying to discredit those of us who know better?

The "economic interest" argument is completely ridiculous and uninformed. If it were in fact safe to offer a reset of these errors, that's effectively a service with nearly 100% profit margin. Instead, we're doing an incredible amount of work to be able to offer complete pack replacements with razor thin margins. You mean to tell me it's in my company's best interest to do all of that when we could be just offering a service that effectively costs us no capital or time instead and could probably charge about the same as we make in profit on a pack replacement? That's probably one of the most illogical things I've ever heard.

Plus, at least on my end, it'd be well in 057's economic interest to be able to just reset these errors. We offer an extended service plan for Tesla Model S/X battery packs. If we could safely do a no-cost reset of these errors, which are by far the most common encountered under our service plan program, then our service plan program would be a literal money printer, since the fixes would cost us nothing. Instead, we have a reserve and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of battery packs being processed so that we can do proper repairs/replacements of failing battery packs, which is quite expensive and a massive undertaking.

I'm sure @Recell and Tesla themselves are in pretty much the same boat. Why expend resources on something like this, face the PR backlash, etc etc if you can just reset the error and carry on safely?

So yeah, I'm not getting the motivation for continuing to push this, and frankly it's getting kind of annoying and absurd to have to keep correcting you on this. I'm really getting tired of having to chase you around this forum spreading this incredibly careless advice. At what point are YOU going to be liable for damages when someone follows that advice? Especially after you've been directly informed by multiple third party experts that it shouldn't be done? IANAL, but that seems incredibly reckless.

At least here on TMC, I'm reasonably certain my credibility in this field speaks for itself and folks here will pretty likely take my advice over yours, so there's that. But I'm unsure what your agenda is at this point aside from using TMC to drive people towards an external competing forum of sorts (your Facebook group that you administer), which I believe is in direct violation of TMC's ToS, by the way. It's one thing to post a link to something that may be of interest to members here, but another to keep driving people to an external forum you administer. (I would know, I was actually banned for doing something like this years ago.)

Bottom line, again, is that if you reset these errors without correcting the underlying physical issue, and then charge above the limit originally imposed, you're pretty much just striking a match every time. You might not get ignition immediately, but you're quite literally playing with fire. You do not want a Model S with this error reset sitting in your garage. You do not want your family in one of these cars that's had this error reset.

And like I said on Twitter, if you've done this "reset" or had it done by the third party or whatever the case may be, I highly suggest seeking a proper repair or replacement. If you've lucked out and managed to drive a bit afterwards without issue, you've also probably increased the repair cost by damaging the battery further. Seriously, park it. Away from anything important, discharge to < 50% (use climate keeper, HI setting, windows open, fan at 9 on not-recirculate), and seek help. I don't care if that's from me. Safety first. Get help from 057. Get help from Tesla. Get help from @Recell ... I don't care, but don't keep using the car. While I knew the odds of a catastrophe were non-zero, it's worse than even I estimated, and now have in-the-wild data to point to on it.

TMC was down last night when I got the fiery news from my would-be client. I was actually working on posting here first and was going to link from Twitter, but went back to Twitter when I couldn't.



Let's be 100% clear here in that this that it's NOT the error itself that is the issue. If you have the error present, you're safe.

This is ONLY an issue for people who have had the error "reset" in some way without addressing the root cause (which requires actual non-trivial physical work).



And here once again advocating for this completely unsafe practice AND trying to discredit those of us who know better?

The "economic interest" argument is completely ridiculous and uninformed. If it were in fact safe to offer a reset of these errors, that's effectively a service with nearly 100% profit margin. Instead, we're doing an incredible amount of work to be able to offer complete pack replacements with razor thin margins. You mean to tell me it's in my company's best interest to do all of that when we could be just offering a service that effectively costs us no capital or time instead and could probably charge about the same as we make in profit on a pack replacement? That's probably one of the most illogical things I've ever heard.

Plus, at least on my end, it'd be well in 057's economic interest to be able to just reset these errors. We offer an extended service plan for Tesla Model S/X battery packs. If we could safely do a no-cost reset of these errors, which are by far the most common encountered under our service plan program, then our service plan program would be a literal money printer, since the fixes would cost us nothing. Instead, we have a reserve and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of battery packs being processed so that we can do proper repairs/replacements of failing battery packs, which is quite expensive and a massive undertaking.

I'm sure @Recell and Tesla themselves are in pretty much the same boat. Why expend resources on something like this, face the PR backlash, etc etc if you can just reset the error and carry on safely?

So yeah, I'm not getting the motivation for continuing to push this, and frankly it's getting kind of annoying and absurd to have to keep correcting you on this. I'm really getting tired of having to chase you around this forum spreading this incredibly careless advice. At what point are YOU going to be liable for damages when someone follows that advice? Especially after you've been directly informed by multiple third party experts that it shouldn't be done? IANAL, but that seems incredibly reckless.

At least here on TMC, I'm reasonably certain my credibility in this field speaks for itself and folks here will pretty likely take my advice over yours, so there's that. But I'm unsure what your agenda is at this point aside from using TMC to drive people towards an external competing forum of sorts (your Facebook group that you administer), which I believe is in direct violation of TMC's ToS, by the way. It's one thing to post a link to something that may be of interest to members here, but another to keep driving people to an external forum you administer. (I would know, I was actually banned for doing something like this years ago.)

Bottom line, again, is that if you reset these errors without correcting the underlying physical issue, and then charge above the limit originally imposed, you're pretty much just striking a match every time. You might not get ignition immediately, but you're quite literally playing with fire. You do not want a Model S with this error reset sitting in your garage. You do not want your family in one of these cars that's had this error reset.

And like I said on Twitter, if you've done this "reset" or had it done by the third party or whatever the case may be, I highly suggest seeking a proper repair or replacement. If you've lucked out and managed to drive a bit afterwards without issue, you've also probably increased the repair cost by damaging the battery further. Seriously, park it. Away from anything important, discharge to < 50% (use climate keeper, HI setting, windows open, fan at 9 on not-recirculate), and seek help. I don't care if that's from me. Safety first. Get help from 057. Get help from Tesla. Get help from @Recell ... I don't care, but don't keep using the car. While I knew the odds of a catastrophe were non-zero, it's worse than even I estimated, and now have in-the-wild data to point to on it.
@wk057 you have, and will continue to be one of the most credible members. Appreciate all you do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aerodyne
I've been asked by several and seen posts questioning how we can know for sure that the reset was the core issue.

It's 100% the fault of the reset. Again, there's going to be a lawsuit against the resetter and seller on this, so I'm not going into details. If the media does pick up on it (not sure if they have or will), that's on them, but I'm respecting the privacy of the owner on this.

However, to the fault point, I asked a friend who is in a position to do so to pull the vehicle logs and BMS debug info immediately when this would-be client informed me that they'd charged the car to 100% and had found out this error had been reset. The only reason this person still has a house to live in right now is because I managed to parse this information in time and told him to park the car outside his garage and away from his home. Also gave them instructions on how to attempt to discharge the battery, which unfortunately did not happen in time to avert disaster.

The vehicle logs contained the brick ID of the originally pre-reset offending brick triggering u029, and u029 was clearly and successfully protecting the the vehicle from a catastrophic issue up until the logs showed the error disappearing and other BMS data shifting inappropriately and inexplicably towards virgin values.

By the time the latest info was pulled, that same brick was already an issue and the BMS was trying, futilely unfortunately, to deal with it. From what I can tell based on data obtained this morning (the car tends to send and log a lot of data as errors pop up), the BMS tried quite valiantly to protect the car, and even made a last ditch effort to avoid disaster by commanding the chiller to 100% at 100% coolant flow, managing to feed coolant at 5C/41F into the pack as a result.

Again, I'm not going into many specifics for a multitude of reasons, but suffice it to say that resetting of the u029 error and subsequent charging above the originally imposed u029 limit was 100% the root cause of the fire. Zero doubt. The car would have been completely safe with the imposed limitation had that error not been fake-fixed.
 
Yep, current owner of my old June '15 85D is getting pack replaced at only 64k miles in SoCal climate and gentle driving.

It could be Tesla knew these cars would not last much more that the warranty period, but kicked that can down the road.

How many early owners would have bought knowing the car would be worthless in 8-10 years?

But you can get it fixed for close to $5k from a few third-party places. I would not call that worthless, and I don't think all of the older packs are failing. I do hope that the 2016+ main batteries are a lot more reliable now. I remember that close to 2020, Tesla was planning to launch the million mile+ main battery but am not sure if that is standard across their lineup now. It would make a lot of sense if it is the standard.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: ucmndd
Could someone explain what are the observed indicators in your car would be prior to seeing these u029 or u018 alerts? Are we talking about a sudden reduced rated range? A sudden large cell voltage imbalance? What would you expect to see? I'm curious because the warranty in my car just ended, but the battery seems fine from everything I can see. My rated range is OK for a car with 8 years and over 150k miles, and my voltage imbalance is about 25mv.
 
Could someone explain what are the observed indicators in your car would be prior to seeing these u029 or u018 alerts? Are we talking about a sudden reduced rated range? A sudden large cell voltage imbalance? What would you expect to see? I'm curious because the warranty in my car just ended, but the battery seems fine from everything I can see. My rated range is OK for a car with 8 years and over 150k miles, and my voltage imbalance is about 25mv.

For BMS_018 on my end the indication turned out to be severe degradation over the course of a year.

1685038252251.png