Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Evoforce]

I get that it's frustrating to be left in the dark, but you would rather Tesla give owners a choice in whether their batteries are being dangerously overcharged?

Everyone would opt out of the battery safety switch, and the problem would persist.

If this is to protect against fire, I am for it. But, they better tell us what is for sure going on. Some sort of compensation may be in order also. If this is their miscalculation or mistake, be upfront about it and compensate accordingly. Do not hide and ignore... Explain exactly what is going on, and for what justification or reason...

 

[RobPet]

Cannot see the info in your link without signing up.

Sorry, my bad. This one should work: TeslaFi.com Firmware Tracker

 

[DJRas]

Where are you getting 70% from? The chart above is from a Model S 85, which is meant to have 265 miles of EPA range. The final point on that chart shows 217 miles of range. That's only about a 22% reduction in range after over 130,000 miles put on the odometer. And the vehicle was bought used when it had 32,000 on the ODO. The first datapoint on the chart shows 260 miles of range at 100%, but nobody knows how hard the vehicle was driven by the first owner. 260 could have been an over-estimation of remaining capacity at 32,000 miles.

The ranges are based on the Rated range which is based on kWh battery capacity.
The range at 132,000 miles and 2 more years was 247 miles.
Two weeks later is was 217 purely from battery voltage limiting from software updates

 

[sixela]

"It is not degradation" is interpretation. It could be seen as degradation that had been happening all along on some batteries, but was not properly detected, with more recent firmware correctly recognizing that certain batteries have become unsafe to charge to the same voltage as new ones (or older ones that have not degraded in the same way). No one unfamiliar with the battery chemistry and the monitoring software can really tell.

I give this class action suit exactly zero chance of success, frankly, unless its aim is to make Tesla finally spill the beans on exactly why they decided to make the firmware behave as it does (it doesn't even have to go very far to succeed in that -- I can imagine that even in discovery Tesla could be compelled to provide the information, but possibly not in a way that would allow public dissemination).

 

[willow_hiller]

IT IS NOT DEGRADATION.. Sorry to yell, but you do not seem to get what the issue is.

I see you have a model 3. Do you even own an affected model?

You realize this thread was linked in the lawsuit, right? And many TMC members were quoted. Anyone who's interested in Tesla doing well is going to visit this thread. I just bought my 3 in March and I really don't want the people who delight in harming Tesla to use this as another piece of ammunition against them.

And forgive me if I'm misunderstanding, but how is this not about battery degradation? The plaintiff is suing for the value of their lost range. All Tesla needs to prove is that the reported loss in range is within normal parameters. It doesn't matter if it was sudden or not, the software changed how the hardware behaved and that led to the sudden drop. 4.2v could have been a dangerous level due to normal degradation, and Tesla has now adjusted the firmware to bring it back in line.

 

[DJRas]

Are you more likely to get a favorable outcome in the class action lawsuit by publicizing it? You seem to be oddly gleeful about this news. Surely most affected owners would prefer a settlement to a ton of PR.

Publicizing it seems to be the only way to get Tesla to respond at all.
We have waited 12 weeks and 6 software updates with no effects on the problem.
Individually we are lied to and insulted by Tesla's "Nothing is wrong with your battery" and "tips for better range"

 

[AmpedRealtor]

You realize this thread was linked in the lawsuit, right? And many TMC members were quoted. Anyone who's interested in Tesla doing well is going to visit this thread. I just bought my 3 in March and I really don't want the people who delight in harming Tesla to use this as another piece of ammunition against them.

So you put the interests of some nebulous group of shady people you don't know above fellow owners who are experiencing a hardship?

 

[mjmiron]

This fight is to get Tesla to be honest as to the reason why they reduced the available charging capacity and speed which negatively impacted owners. This was NOT theirs to take period. This is a car not a computer owned by Tesla ok maybe a little computer. I think their is one side that feels it’s ok if it was for safety and another saying why didn’t you tell me and give me the choice. Once we find out why they reduced the charging space if ever then we will know the reasoning.

I need the range and to be honest this entire fight is to keep Tesla honest and in line with HOW they treat us early adopters. We are standing up for others in the future, heck only 2.1% of the population owns a true EV according to PlugShare. I don’t want to see Tesla fail but I am not a moron either. No pun intended since my last name is Miron.

 

[willow_hiller]

Glad to know your true motivation here.

Thanks for editing your post. That was awfully rude asking me to leave the thread.

I'm actually having some pretty reasonable discussions with most of the other members here. I'm also interested in how my battery will hold up into the future, but I don't think litigation is the best way to handle this. I don't have all the answers, though.

 

[KarenRei]

Half of the argument in the lawsuit is predicated on the fact that the slope of the decrease is too steep to be natural degradation. That rate of decline appears much faster in the chart attached to the lawsuit because of the choice of axis limits. I'm not going to begrudge someone visualizing data in a way that makes their case, but I wanted people to see that it's not as steep as that chart makes it out to be.

Nothing about how a ranges read out is some inherent measure of what a battery holds. Battery charges are measured via coulomb counting - e.g. tracking electrons in vs. electrons out. This drifts over time and has to be recentered, by a variety of means. The driver in theory never charges / discharges it across its entire limits (because parts of the SoC range are locked off), and in practice, rarely if ever charges / discharges it across the portion of the cell that they have access to. So there's a lot of guesswork.

It's Tesla's BMS software that determines what to tell you your range is. If they change their software, it can readily tell you a different figure. And have various new driving constraints based on that figure. Even though nothing physically changed with the cells. That doesn't mean that the changes are wrong. They can be for accuracy. They can be to make sure that you don't run out of charge above 0%. They can be to make sure that you're keeping enough of the upper end of the charge range locked off to minimize degradation. There's all sorts of reasons.

 

[Evoforce]

You realize this thread was linked in the lawsuit, right? And many TMC members were quoted. Anyone who's interested in Tesla doing well is going to visit this thread. I just bought my 3 in March and I really don't want the people who delight in harming Tesla to use this as another piece of ammunition against them.

And forgive me if I'm misunderstanding, but how is this not about battery degradation? The plaintiff is suing for the value of their lost range. All Tesla needs to prove is that the reported loss in range is within normal parameters. It doesn't matter if it was sudden or not, the software changed how the hardware behaved and that led to the sudden drop. 4.2v could have been a dangerous level due to normal degradation, and Tesla has now adjusted the firmware to bring it back in line.

I want Tesla to do well. In fact, I want every EV manufacturer to do well. I get aggravated by negative unfounded issues being generated by those who only wish to disrupt the advancement of EV's. This battery capping incident and reasoning wasn't communicated to affected owners. Tesla needs to fix it's communication problem not on just this issue but others too. Tell us why our car batteries ranges have changed after a software update and what does that mean for our affected vehicle/battery.

 

[lightningltd]

Thanks for editing your post. That was awfully rude asking me to leave the thread.

I'm actually having some pretty reasonable discussions with most of the other members here. I'm also interested in how my battery will hold up into the future, but I don't think litigation is the best way to handle this. I don't have all the answers, though.

Your views are welcome here. We are all adults here .. All we ask is to put yourself in our shoes...
Unfortunately, Tesla is not being straight forward with explaining what the reasons are. Some owners are being told they abuse their battery. Others are told it is normal degradation. Some others are told it is to mitigate the possibility of a fire.
We fight this fight not only for ourselves, but for you in the future. If they get away with this with us, they will be able to do it to you later when it suits them.
There seems to be no pattern to the charging and usage patterns of the affected vehicles, which points to some kind of malfunction or defect.
Many many attempts have been made to talk to Tesla, but they will not come clean and explain what is happening.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE my 2013 S85. It is my baby. I am NOT giving it up, I just want what I paid extra for

And by the way, Welcome to the Tesla family. We may be dysfunctional at times, but hey, we are still family

 

[Evoforce]

Thanks for editing your post. That was awfully rude asking me to leave the thread.

I'm actually having some pretty reasonable discussions with most of the other members here. I'm also interested in how my battery will hold up into the future, but I don't think litigation is the best way to handle this. I don't have all the answers, though.

You may be right, but other avenues have failed thus far to yield any true result. Personally I feel that the attorneys' make all of the money and the affected barely get squat in these class action suits.

 

[willow_hiller]

You may be right, but other avenues have failed thus far to yield any true result. Personally I feel that the attorneys' make all of the money and the affected barely get squat in these class action suits.

In terms of communicating with Tesla, there's got to be a middle ground between tweeting at Elon Musk and hiring a lawyer.

I think half of the frustration comes from the fact that the customer facing Tesla employees have no agency to solve most of our problems. Elon can fix a Dog Mode bug within 24 hours after reading a tweet about it, but it does seem like you folks have had radio silence from them.

 

[mymagiccarpet]

And forgive me if I'm misunderstanding, but how is this not about battery degradation? The plaintiff is suing for the value of their lost range. All Tesla needs to prove is that the reported loss in range is within normal parameters. It doesn't matter if it was sudden or not, the software changed how the hardware behaved and that led to the sudden drop. 4.2v could have been a dangerous level due to normal degradation, and Tesla has now adjusted the firmware to bring it back in line.

It is not about battery degradation. It is about degrading the product that was sold to us purely at seller's will without any compensation. We all paid for the car with particular battery capacity. That is the main difference between any S models. It is the main driver of price delta, and most owners first decided on the battery capacity before their purchase. Then that capacity was intentionally reduced, therefore reducing the value of the product, and without approval of the owner. Note that Tesla does not own those cars. Tesla was paid for those cars, and provided promises spelled out in purchase agreement, including product enhancement through SW updates. Nothing in there says they can degrade the product at their own will without compensation.
Surely, it would be easier if they were forthcoming about why exactly it was done - meaning, what would or could happen if it were not done (safety, excessive warranty claims, etc), but they have not, so what we have now is we paid for one thing, 2 months later it turned into something else, and lesser at that. Easter egg I guess.
No-one here can tell if it was done for safety reasons at this time, but if yes, I'm glad they figured how to reduce/remove that risk, and acted on it. That is the proper short term response (in addition to proper and truthful communication, which did not happen). For long term solution, batteries should be replaced - they are defective, it is as simple as that.

 

[DJRas]

In terms of communicating with Tesla, there's got to be a middle ground between tweeting at Elon Musk and hiring a lawyer.

I think half of the frustration comes from the fact that the customer facing Tesla employees have no agency to solve most of our problems. Elon can fix a Dog Mode bug within 24 hours after reading a tweet about it, but it does seem like you folks have had radio silence from them.

I have been to the Service Center 3 times.
I have emailed customer support.
I have talked to mobile and phone support.
I have even tweeted Elon.

Al I am told is that this is "normal degradation" and won't be covered by warranty.
I have also been told that they MAY address this in a future software update.

To date there have been 7 (including one last night) updates over the last 12 weeks (I have installed them all hoping that they made a difference).
So far nothing.

I will not wait patiently for 3 more years until my warranty expires.

I do tend to believe it IS related to the fires and that there is a detected defect in my (our) batteries that present a fire danger.
I want someone other than Tesla to investigate the link to this update to the fires.
I want them to certify that my battery will not burn up in my garage.
AND IF my battery has a defect then it is NOT NORMAL DEGRADATION and should be replaced under warranty and NHTSA should issue a recall for ALL the affected owners. ONLY Tesla knows who they all are (and they DO know that).

 

[lightningltd]

In terms of communicating with Tesla, there's got to be a middle ground between tweeting at Elon Musk and hiring a lawyer.

I think half of the frustration comes from the fact that the customer facing Tesla employees have no agency to solve most of our problems. Elon can fix a Dog Mode bug within 24 hours after reading a tweet about it, but it does seem like you folks have had radio silence from them.

Throughout the thread, MANY affected owners have made several attempts to get Tesla to explain it. So far none have succeeded.

 

[Skipdd]

In terms of communicating with Tesla, there's got to be a middle ground between tweeting at Elon Musk and hiring a lawyer.

I think half of the frustration comes from the fact that the customer facing Tesla employees have no agency to solve most of our problems. Elon can fix a Dog Mode bug within 24 hours after reading a tweet about it, but it does seem like you folks have had radio silence from them.

Not sure if you saw @wk057 posts earlier in this thread. If not, suggest you review them. Based on some sleuthing he suggested he identified what the firmware updates may have done, and why. And contacted Tesla for clarification. Unless I missed it, his last post was that as of yet, there was no response. I’m not crazy about going to a class action to have a meaningful dialogue, but the affected owners and others with technical skills have done pretty much everything except stand on their heads and spit nickels (maybe that too) with no result. What other approach would you suggest? How about Tesla rehires a Sales and Service VP and empowers them to communicate effectively with their customers. Puts processes in place to do that. Might be cheaper than dealing with arbitration (yellow border on MCU) and this law suit.

I echo @lightningltd that your views are welcome here. I read some of your posts in the investor’s forum and learned some things. Since you are in Maryland, who knows we might actually end up meeting one day. I imagine we’d both learn some things from our respective experiences.

 

[lightningltd]

This Why Audi lies to Dumb people with 90+KWH and 240 mile range... Audi knows dumb people will sue about battery life.

That same DUMB person should sue HP, Dell, Apple for there laptop charging life.

Tesla’s is not at fault, people in 2013 should have understand its a computer laptop on wheels.

Again. This is NOT about battery degradation. PRIOR to the update, we had the FULL battery KW available and usable (less 3-5% degradation) and were using it. Overnight, after the update, the capacity that was WORKING the day before was locked out. NOT degraded. Tesla still has given NO REASON for the SUDDEN change. There is a TON of evidence on this.

 

[willow_hiller]

Not sure if you saw @wk057 posts earlier in this thread. If not, suggest you review them. Based on some sleuthing he suggested he identified what the firmware updates may have done, and why. And contacted Tesla for clarification. Unless I missed it, his last post was that as of yet, there was no response. I’m not crazy about going to a class action to have a meaningful dialogue, but the affected owners and others with technical skills have done pretty much everything except stand on their heads and spit nickels (maybe that too) with no result. What other approach would you suggest? How about Tesla rehires a Sales and Service VP and empowers them to communicate effectively with their customers. Puts processes in place to do that. Might be cheaper than dealing with arbitration (yellow border on MCU) and this law suit.

I echo @lightningltd that your views are welcome here. I read some of your posts in the investor’s forum and learned some things. Since you are in Maryland, who knows we might actually end up meeting one day. I imagine we’d both learn some things from our respective experiences.

Totally my fault for jumping into this thread without reading the main points beforehand. Honestly it may be worth starting a new thread with some bullet points and locking this one. There's literally a link to the thread at the bottom of the lawsuit that hundreds of people will be reading in the morning. I imagine the number of posts like ElectricLee's above will increase exponentially.

Also, in the interests of transparency I'm not a professional investor. I'm a Data Scientist for a DC non-profit, and I bought a few shares hoping that one day they'll be worth enough for me to afford FSD.

And who knows, we may have already waved at each other! I only ever get waves back from people with MD plates; those VA Tesla drivers just tend to stick up their noses...