Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[FairFrank]

... I believe that's the underlying problem here that Tesla is trying to avoid. ...

Might be. However the way they do that is significantly compromising long distance driving via SuCs and other DC-chargers.
It’s closing one gap with another. If this battery really drops dead another pack is a possibility to comply with their functionality promise. And the brand promise.

 

[mjmiron]

I think we will have more info in the coming weeks with all of these arbitration hearings stay tuned.

If your getting increased miles for those affected please keep updating us.

 

[st50maint]

I think we will have more info in the coming weeks with all of these arbitration hearings stay tuned.

If your getting increased miles for those affected please keep updating us.

2015 70D
90% was 182 miles.
It has increased 5 miles to 187 miles with version 2019.28.2 software.

 

[Leeboy22001]

Maybe worth adding a column to the spreadsheet to include new range with version 2019.28.2 ?

 

[Guillaume]

Maybe worth adding a column to the spreadsheet to include new range with version 2019.28.2 ?

Done. I've added two columns F and I and renamed the other columns.
Do these changes fit your needs?

 

[Droschke]

Done. I've added two columns F and I and renamed the other columns.
Do these changes fit your needs?

Yes, excellent. Would you lock the column I, so no one can override the formula?

Thanks.

 

[Leeboy22001]

Done. I've added two columns F and I and renamed the other columns.
Do these changes fit your needs?

Perfect, and very clear

 

[Leeboy22001]

From the few that have entered mileage, reduced has increased to -8% from -11%.

 

[sorka]

I found it almost humorous that some are getting back nearly 1/3rd of the range they lost because it reminds me of 691-gate and the discounted Ludicrous upgrade Elon offered to head off the those who were forming together in a class.

The advertised power was 691 but later revised down to 463. The advertised power was based on the individual maximum capability of each motor being added together even though the combined output maxed out at 463 hp because that's all the supplied battery could provide. The car could have produced 691 hp with a larger more capable battery and indeed, the P100D when introduced with the exact same motors really did make nearly 691 hp.

The heavily discounted Ludicrous upgrade offered to P85D owners who bought before the 691 hp claim was changed to 463, was certainly welcome, but it also only closed the gap between what was actually sold and vs what was advertised by about 1/3rd the difference.

So all you whiners(apply facetious here) out there that don't think getting back 1/3rd your range for free when we 691-gate vicitms had to pay $5K just to get back 1/3rd of our promised horsepower should realize you have it great

 

[Droschke]

I found it almost humorous that some are getting back nearly 1/3rd of the range they lost because it reminds me of 691-gate and the discounted Ludicrous upgrade Elon offered to head off the those who were forming together in a class.

The advertised power was 691 but later revised down to 463. The advertised power was based on the individual maximum capability of each motor being added together even though the combined output maxed out at 463 hp because that's all the supplied battery could provide. The car could have produced 691 hp with a larger more capable battery and indeed, the P100D when introduced with the exact same motors really did make nearly 691 hp.

The heavily discounted Ludicrous upgrade offered to P85D owners who bought before the 691 hp claim was changed to 463, was certainly welcome, but it also only closed the gap between what was actually sold and vs what was advertised by about 1/3rd the difference.

So all you whiners(apply facetious here) out there that don't think getting back 1/3rd your range for free when we 691-gate vicitms had to pay $5K just to get back 1/3rd of our promised horsepower should realize you have it great

Optimist (n.) - Someone that knows that taking a step backward after taking a step forward is not a disaster, it's cha-cha.

Tesla Optimist (n.) - MS owner that thinks getting 1 mile forward after giving 3 miles backward is not a disaster, it's Tesla cha-cha

 

[fbitz777]

I was checking on the Bolt EV forum as to why my car get sizable Regen (40KW) after a full charge and someone pointed out that Bolt is top limited to 96% and about 4.17V per cell.
Yet none of the Bolt owners is upset as far as I can tell. Very little signs of battery degradation on these cars.

 

[sorka]

I was checking on the Bolt EV forum as to why my car get sizable Regen (40KW) after a full charge and someone pointed out that Bolt is top limited to 96% and about 4.17V per cell.
Yet none of the Bolt owners is upset as far as I can tell. Very little signs of battery degradation on these cars.

If a true 96% is what they started at, then they're not missing something they had before. I'm sure that if GM decided to cap it down to 76% from 96% you'd see the same sort of reaction you see here.

 

[fbitz777]

If a true 96% is what they started at, then they're not missing something they had before. I'm sure that if GM decided to cap it down to 76% from 96% you'd see the same sort of reaction you see here.

Yes but GM does not do OTA (although the car is capable of it)

 

[sorka]

Yes but GM does not do OTA (although the car is capable of it)

I'd be happy if I could just refuse the OTA and not have it forced.

 

[Droschke]

Yes but GM does not do OTA (although the car is capable of it)

Would you happen to know why GM doesn't do OTA?

 

[MikeyC]

I'm a new member who has been following this thread for some time. I just got a Bolt last month as it was a better fit for me/family currently but I'm a fan of Tesla and I know one is in my future in a few years when the kids are out on their own. As I'm currently an outsider looking in, I see Tesla as a company who is pushing the limits of technology. In doing so, I think you open yourself up to the possibility of realizing "we pushed a little too hard" and having to dial things back a bit. Contrast this to the mainstream car manufacturers who's mantra seems to be "underdo everything" in a more conservative approach. It's why I get reactions like "Wow, that's a pretty cool little car" in regard to my Bolt but my friend who owns a M3P gets "HOLY ----" reactions.

It makes me wonder what would have happened if Tesla had known about the long term limits when they built the cars. Seems like they could have coded an algorithm to examine battery performance over time and make the system slowly reduce battery capacity (and charge rate) over time, distributing that 10% chunk over the years rather than all at once. Would people have just accepted that as normal battery degradation? I also wonder if, over time, Tesla will realize that charging the Model 3 at 250kW is too much and will dial that back? Personally, I think other manufacturers will end up having to push the envelope a little harder to keep up, but maybe the answer lies somewhere in between. After all, how will we know what the technology is truly capable of unless you push the envelope? Maybe I wouldn't be happy if I was an owner of an affected car, being a "test bed" for the technology, but in the end it benefits us all.

Mike

 

[bhzmark]

Would you happen to know why GM doesn't do OTA?

Most states prohibit OEMs (either through laws, or weird franchise contracts that are themselves protected by special laws) from servicing their cars directly by the OEMs, forcing owners to go through independent dealers or service shops. OTA is arguably service.

What is the car industry’s problem with over-the-air software updates?

 

[bhzmark]

Would people have just accepted that as normal battery degradation?

all v good points, and almost certainly yes.

 

[st50maint]

2015 70D
90% was 182 miles.
It has increased 5 miles to 187 miles with version 2019.28.2 software.

Upped another 2 miles this morning.
A low of 182 to now 189 miles at 90%.

 

[swegman]

Since installing 2019.28.2.5 on my 2013 P85 with about 64K miles (now), I’ve charged my car several times. To recap, my 89% charge PRIOR to the installation of 2019.16.x was 227 miles, with an indicated 74kWh battery capacity per Tesla Remote (formerly Remote S). AFTER 2019.28.2.5 was installed, my 89% range dropped to 199 miles with a 66kWh indicated battery capacity. Thus, I experienced a range drop of 28 miles at a 89% charge (approximately 31 mile drop at 100% charge level) and lost 8kWh of indicated battery capacity.

I have driven multiple trips of approximately 40 miles/trip and then charged using a HPWC charging at a 64 Amp rate. My range has increased as follows:
1st charge - 89% yielded 200 mile range;
2nd charge - 89% yielded 201 mile range;
3rd charge - 89% yielded 202 mile range; and
4th charge - 89% yielded 204 mile range.
Tesla Remote (formerly Remote S) indicates a battery capacity of 67kWh.

I’ll update as I do more charging. Range us increasing, but painfully slow. How much total range will be recovered is unknown. I do have another appointment for Tesla to examine my battery (again) in light of the fact that error messages appeared that the battery voltage was too low, even though the car indicated the battery had a 154 mile range on it.