Not if you never charge that high anyways except for the rare times when you must which is how most of us manage our own degradation. We paid for it.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software
- Thread starter Dutchmeeuw
- Start date
Not if you never charge that high anyways except for the rare times when you must which is how most of us manage our own degradation. We paid for it.
lightningltd
Member
Where did you read that they sent DJ an update right away? I don't see that.
Except that before the update, the packs were performing fine and INLINE exactly with previous packs that had many more miles. There's tons of fleet data to prove that most if not all of those packs would have continued at the same rate of degradation that identical packs with many more miles had already experienced along the same fleet degradation graph.
This will be the case with the VAST majority of those effected. This is why a class action is so important in this type of case because the firm will be able to notify all potentially effected customers. Most of the customers...basically all that aren't on this thread....will have been told by Tesla that it is normal degradation and they'll all just accept it because they won't know any better.
The Service Manager has leeway with regards to everything. Since you are basing your posts of of what tesla technicians say, no wonder you are confused. They are nothing more than parts swappers.
Plus hundreds of thousands of potentially effected customers who are non the wiser at this point getting a letter telling them that if they saw a sudden decrease in range around (this time or software update) then it's likely due a range robbing update from Tesla rather than actual degradation.
That they will make the reduction in range "less severe, serious, or painful." (Saying it would be reversed is saying that it would be 100% undone.)
So maybe they will reduce the range cap by 50%, 75, or 90%. But WK057 thought they would have to do something, but that it wouldn't be significant.
The only reliable fact that we currently know is that Tesla software limited S85 packs to the equivalent of S60 packs, in some cases, and they have made NO formal announcement as to why
I wouldn't want the extra weight unless it came with extra power.
This is the third time that Tesla has stolen what was paid for throught software. Its not going to stop until they get punished. Its probably no big deal to them, because they are not the ones driving these crippled cars.
The worst part of this is even though they say they will restore whatever it is they stole, they never do. Its all lip service, backed with more nonsense through number manipulation. Attached is my cars Rated range calculation for an 85kwh pack, which is different than everyone elses, and has changed with these different software versions, to make degredation appear lower than it is. No. big deal really, but it shows how they have manipulated stuff for their own benefit, and will continue to do so, until they are held accountable.
And just to be clear you don't really know what your 100% range is since you can't actually charge to 100%
lightningltd
Member
I am not gate keeping. I was trying to get the point across unsuccessfully that it is not normal degradation, but Karen keeps saying it is. I will now keep my mouth shut and allow the argument to distract from the original issue.
Have fun.
Guy V
Member
So, it's up to Tesla then to respond. After all, she said potentially. They have the data to narrow that if they can.
The natural consequence of charging to 100% is natural degradation i.e. the battery actually loses capacity. This is not a dangerous thing to do but it's not advisable. Still degradation from this behavior is not covered and if someone is doing it intentionally, then it is their choice. They paid for it.
That said, there are limo and rideshare companies that supercharge to 100% multiple times every day and many of those batteries still managed to last to 150K+ miles before they were replaced and most the ones that were replaced were due to contactor issues, not because they had anything but normal degradation.
Last edited:
You're trying to make a joke and it might be funny if it weren't just flat out false. Tesla packs were never capacity software limited until 2019.16.1 (excluding packs where the consumer paid for a smaller pack than is physically in the car).
None of those apply. Even vehicle configuration only applies to options you might add at the time of delivery that result in a different range than what the configured vehicle was used in the test loop. They don't test all possible configurations.
It does NOT include a software update that restricts access to existing range.
You just keep repeating BS that is totally wrong.
if the lawsuit gets upgraded to class action, I will definitely join as chopping off the range is not what I signed up for and would like battery replacement.
The only reliable fact that we currently know is that Tesla software limited S85 packs to the equivalent of S60 packs, in some cases, and they have made NO formal announcement as to why
yea thats about the best i've seen too, when going from 100% charge to 0% charge my display shows about 57-60kWh used...far short of 85kw.
Pretty much. All my 18650 hobby charges charge my cells to 4.2 volts regardless of how degraded they are. The good ones charge cells that have higher IR at slower rates to prevent them from overheating, but you can always safely charge an 18650 cell to full unless it's defective even if you have to charge it slower to get there.
