Let’s recap.
Prompted by vehicles with 85KWH packs catching fire, Tesla pushed an update that attempted to diagnose affected packs. Once that was done, Tesla pushed another OTA update to place a limit the maximum charge voltage (dropping Vmax from 4.2 to 4.07V) on affected vehicles.
This had the effect of removing 10%+ of range from the affected vehicles. When questioned by owners, Tesla asserted that these updates were to protected the longevity of batteries and that the range loss was due to normal battery degradation.
Subsequent updates appear to have also reduced Supercharging speeds for those affected users.
The driving and ownership experience has changed as a result of these updates. I cannot get as far on a single charge anymore, and I have to spend longer charging.
Because this happened overnight (literally) and was instigated by Tesla, it is Tesla’s responsibility to resolve. So, what does a resolution look like?
EITHER A. Remove the Vmax capacity limit restoring the previous range for affected vehicles immediately
OR B. Replace the affected battery packs under warranty. These pack are not operating as they were before the update.
Tesla have said that the range loss only impacts a few customers. If this is true, then Tesla could have got ahead of this really quickly by reaching out to affected owners and offering replacement packs under warranty.
Would it have cost a fortune? Possibly not, because Tesla has options to mitigate the financial impact:
a. Repair the pack if that’s possible (e.g. it has one bad module)
b. Replace with a >255 mile 100% range 85 pack
c. Replace with a 90 pack and software lock (voltage capacity limit!) to 85KWH equivalent
d. Replace with a 100 pack and software lock (voltage capacity limit!) to 85KWH equivalent
In the cases of b, c and d Tesla can either recycle the batteries in the packs, or sell them in the 2nd user market as there is a high demand for Tesla batteries with the explicit proviso that the cells MUST not be charged greater then 4.1V
In the cases of c and d, Tesla could recoup a proportion of the replacement cost by offering to unlock the extra battery capacity for a fee to owners receiving these high capacity replacement packs. I would certainly consider paying in the future to unlock my battery to make the vehicle a 100D if the opportunity arose.
History is littered with examples of companies that handle “crisis” situations well by putting the customer first and doing the right thing by them. Tesla have behaved very poorly in this situation, and are still dragging their feet about doing the right thing by customers. Those same customers, many of whom supported them when they needed it in the early days.
I’d like to see the service centres proactively reaching out to affected customers offering resolution A or B above at the earliest possible moment as it’s still not too late for Tesla to win back customer loyalty and trust. But I do believe that the window for that is closing fast.
Prompted by vehicles with 85KWH packs catching fire, Tesla pushed an update that attempted to diagnose affected packs. Once that was done, Tesla pushed another OTA update to place a limit the maximum charge voltage (dropping Vmax from 4.2 to 4.07V) on affected vehicles.
This had the effect of removing 10%+ of range from the affected vehicles. When questioned by owners, Tesla asserted that these updates were to protected the longevity of batteries and that the range loss was due to normal battery degradation.
Subsequent updates appear to have also reduced Supercharging speeds for those affected users.
The driving and ownership experience has changed as a result of these updates. I cannot get as far on a single charge anymore, and I have to spend longer charging.
Because this happened overnight (literally) and was instigated by Tesla, it is Tesla’s responsibility to resolve. So, what does a resolution look like?
EITHER A. Remove the Vmax capacity limit restoring the previous range for affected vehicles immediately
OR B. Replace the affected battery packs under warranty. These pack are not operating as they were before the update.
Tesla have said that the range loss only impacts a few customers. If this is true, then Tesla could have got ahead of this really quickly by reaching out to affected owners and offering replacement packs under warranty.
Would it have cost a fortune? Possibly not, because Tesla has options to mitigate the financial impact:
a. Repair the pack if that’s possible (e.g. it has one bad module)
b. Replace with a >255 mile 100% range 85 pack
c. Replace with a 90 pack and software lock (voltage capacity limit!) to 85KWH equivalent
d. Replace with a 100 pack and software lock (voltage capacity limit!) to 85KWH equivalent
In the cases of b, c and d Tesla can either recycle the batteries in the packs, or sell them in the 2nd user market as there is a high demand for Tesla batteries with the explicit proviso that the cells MUST not be charged greater then 4.1V
In the cases of c and d, Tesla could recoup a proportion of the replacement cost by offering to unlock the extra battery capacity for a fee to owners receiving these high capacity replacement packs. I would certainly consider paying in the future to unlock my battery to make the vehicle a 100D if the opportunity arose.
History is littered with examples of companies that handle “crisis” situations well by putting the customer first and doing the right thing by them. Tesla have behaved very poorly in this situation, and are still dragging their feet about doing the right thing by customers. Those same customers, many of whom supported them when they needed it in the early days.
I’d like to see the service centres proactively reaching out to affected customers offering resolution A or B above at the earliest possible moment as it’s still not too late for Tesla to win back customer loyalty and trust. But I do believe that the window for that is closing fast.
