DJRas
Member
And what does that have to do with top end limiting?
My 85 is now at 62kWh.
Not that it ever had 85 kWh
Last edited:
-
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
My 85 is now at 62kWh.
Not that it ever had 85 kWh
DJRas
Member
You said that Tesla can do anything they want with the BMS at any time as long as it doesn't violate the warranty.
So, again, what if they made that change one week after you purchased the car paying extra for a larger battery?
Degradation is not covered.
So no warranty issue.
10 Types of Internet Trolls You'll Meet Online - Lifewire
Reading all thousands of posts here, not meeting any "type" in this long thread is quite shocking
Last edited:
This is something I brought up some pages ago. The standard for EVs is a bit "loose" on that topic. I think most people realize that batteries don't last forever so they expect some amount of degradation over the years. But as EV owners, how much are we willing to accept? Does the fact that batteries degrade over time open the door to allow manufacturers to take range beyond that which is expected due to typical battery degradation and then just throw it in the "degradation" bin? Given the current "climate" in the EV world, I don't even think it would be illegal for a manufacturer to sell cars based on EPA range and then reduce that range by 10% a week after delivery! There really has to be some accountability for "reduced range beyond degradation", else who knows how far they can go and just claim that it is part of normal battery degradation.
To make matters worse, Tesla is the only company that basically does whatever it wants with your car without your knowledge or consent. In order to make a change related to operation or driveability in a car from any other manufacturer, notices are sent out and/or you have to take your car to the dealer which signifies consent of the change. Tesla treats their cars more like cell phones and my fear is that their ability to make changes remotely both allows them to make their own rules (and see what they can get away with before there's an associated law) and also allows them to skirt what would otherwise have had to be handled as a recall by other manufacturers.
Mike
Ferrycraigs
Member
With little real enthusiasm to step in between the two of you, for me it is a Warranty Issue because there must be a reason Tesla decided to cap my battery. I assume they didn’t just select cars at random. So there must be a reason. And I reject their notion that it was done simply as a good husbandry action. If so, why did they only apply the capping to less than 1% of the fleet? Given that there are so many contra examples of style of ownership as being a credible reason, that only leaves the car, by which I mean battery. But in either case that is surely a hardware issue, and so a Warranty issue.
So either there is a problem with the battery (unlikely) or there are elements of the battery that have a problem, or are showing signs of developing problems (more likely) and Tesla have limited the battery to ease the stress on those parts. Whatever the problem/issue is, Tesla view it as serious enough to take pre-emptive action and to suffer the consequences of bad press, customer rebellion and legal action. I accept that all of that is supposition, but then we all agree that Tesla's silence does not help; quite the reverse.
What I do know is I was taking very good care of my battery. After 3 years the degradation was slight. Then they capped the battery. And at my 50K mile average of 328 Wh/mi my car now has a range of less than 180 miles, barely over 160 with any buffer. And I don't feel like I have done anything wrong.
Last edited:
That's right. And batteries one week old wouldn't show the issues that would cause the BMS to manage the battery. Those issues only appear after time.. that is because the batteries degrade. Sounds like you are starting to get it now.
The fleet got the same software. The software responds to the specific battery in the car. Some batteries have more or less degradation depending on usage, environment, and random quantum wave collapses etc.
The BMS was given revised instructions to reduce pack voltage by Tesla programmers for certain (supposedly low) number of vehicles without permission, and it has not been communicated or approved by owners why they have downgraded the effected vehicles. These have been recent and revised software instructions to change the BMS that is causing downgrade for affected customers.
Last edited:
It isn't tied to the vehicle generally. It is reading metrics of the specific battery and adjusts its BMS control of the battery based on the metrics of the battery, different batteries age differently.
Similarly the BMS wont cool batteries that aren't hot and wont heat batteries that are not cold. It will allow higher and lower rates of charge and discharge based on the condition of the battery. The BMS adopts to the condition of the battery in probably 100 different ways. This is another way.
How do any of us know just what pill they are giving us? How would you or I know what they are or aren't doing?
By paying attention to this thread, especially the posts of wk57 where he described in general terms that the new battery software was measuring elements of the battery condition.
Last edited:
DJRas
Member
Hiw do you KNOW that to be the case?
Tesla has not said WHAT the conditions are. They HAVE said this is to improve longevity. Well, EVERY battery would get improved longevity if they capped the top end by 10%.
Therefore a 1 week old bartery could just as easily fit that definition.
I agree the BMS detected sn issue. But I believe that issue is a manufacturing defect. NOT a normal degradation issue. A one percent anomaly cannot be considered normal.
That is on the order of 3 sigma defect.
Too general. Not enough information and lots of speculation all around. There seems to be a need for better communication and more control given to customers to pull back the curtain and reveal the true wizard behind the curtain. Things may not be as they seem. Wizard of OZ must be decloaked. Things must be made more transparent. More laws may need to be instituted to protect the consumer.
wk57 didn’t seem like he was speculating. It seemed like he knew more than he shared but he also realized the information was proprietary trade secrets and not something that Tesla would appreciate getting out to their competitors. Teslas BMS is likely its one of its biggest advantages over other EVs and Tesla has a fiduciary duty to shareholders to protect the continued advances that it makes in its BMS.
Last edited:
Agreed, and based on my car (126K miles) I don't see any particular issue. (1-((222/80*100)/300))/6.5 = 1.15% degradation per year. Note that if you're calculating using rated range, Tesla has messed with the algorithm several time. Ideal range has been consistent.
For the posters who persist that the capped batteries are "degraded" higher than the non-capped batteries, requiring this capping:
- There is no evidence we have been given by Tesla and YOU have no evidence to offer
- You can only speculate but don't present it as a fact
- Consider the experimental BMS (trial and error model) can actually fail in avoiding battery damage (not impossible at all)
- Since you only can speculate, consider hardware issues (battery damaged by faulty BMS, or just bad battery manufactured to start with, etc.)
- Consider if a manufacturer (for what they perceive to be the preferred tactic at this time) has chosen to mask a safety issue (aka, fire) with a software capping fix
That's nice to have as an objective start, and only then you establish credibility. Otherwise, and sadly I must say, one of those "10 types" would apply.
On Edit: Took one extra period out.
- There is no evidence we have been given by Tesla and YOU have no evidence to offer
- You can only speculate but don't present it as a fact
- Consider the experimental BMS (trial and error model) can actually fail in avoiding battery damage (not impossible at all)
- Since you only can speculate, consider hardware issues (battery damaged by faulty BMS, or just bad battery manufactured to start with, etc.)
- Consider if a manufacturer (for what they perceive to be the preferred tactic at this time) has chosen to mask a safety issue (aka, fire) with a software capping fix
That's nice to have as an objective start, and only then you establish credibility. Otherwise, and sadly I must say, one of those "10 types" would apply.
On Edit: Took one extra period out.
Last edited:
Absolutely, to benefit everyone. A major issue we are facing is the novice nature of the EV revolution. A manufacture's behavior as we have seen demonstrated here by Tesla should not be allowed.
You are wrong. The fleet has not gotten the same software. I just had Tesla do a CAC test of my battery a few days ago. The Tesla person told me that my car received 3 different BMS firmwares since July (was told the BMS is currently on firmware version 2.15) and that he has nit seen any other car in the FL area with that BMS version.
This really is just an annoying semantic dispute. You seem to use degradation to mean only a single thing (I’m not sure what that is though — perhaps you might try to specify exactly what you think you mean by “degradation”?). Whatever it is for you it can’t be (why not?) battery condition Z.
I use the plain English dictionary definition to mean any degradation in performance metrics of the battery that tends to degrade over time and all the things that happen over time. Sometimes the time might be the time of a random quantum wave collapse. Who knows.
I don’t know of any one week old battery that has been affected. So by induction (not speculation) it only affects aged batteries. In fact well aged batteries. But: all swans are white — find a black swan to make your argument to weaken the induction.
Meanwhile, it’s degradation. And adding “period” to your denials, or underlining words, or saying “for the millionth time” aren’t persuasive in denying that it is degradation.
And for every single software version he ever saw in his life, there was always a first time.
