Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Droschke]

I don't think it'd be "healthy" to discharge a pack with mis-matched modules that have a different cap, which is why most EVs do balancing from time to time. As I understand it, the BMS can do balancing per-module. From what I've read on the subject, there is a circuitboard that can at least report the minimum and maximum cell voltage in each module but cells can't be balanced individually.

More speculation on my part but I figure, we don't have anything but speculation at this point so... it's my guess that after the update, the BMS looks at the min and max individual cell voltage in each module and if it finds a module that has a high enough delta (difference between the lowest and highest reported cell voltage in that module), it labels the module as having at least one cell that is "out of spec" and caps you. If there are 444 cells per module and you try to charge that module to spec voltage for the whole module and there are some individual cells in that module that have reduced capacity, you'll end up with some cells overcharged to reach that overall module voltage. It may be that they reduced the max charge voltage to avoid this, thus "limping" the entire pack to the weakest link (module).

Mike

Nice write up. That pretty much sums it up.

 

[Droschke]

After reading the latest from wk57 and the ensuing comments, is my inference plausible?

We do not have batterygate for our 2014 S85. However, we do have chargegate. The software update(s) that restricted the charging capacity of the individual cells did not affect us because the software did not detect the issue at the time of the installation. However, to reduce or mitigate the possibility of our battery cells developing this condition in the future, it installed chargegate to throttle the Supercharging rate throughout the session.

Yes, plausible, at least for now and by the conflicting/ambiguous information at hand.

 

[DJRas]

@boywonder Just in: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.345967/gov.uscourts.cand.345967.10.0_1.pdf

Tesla has waived the summons requirement, so the 21-day clock for their initial response starts today. So we should see their initial response on/before October 1st. (Or maybe the 21-day clock started on 9/4 and we will see the initial response by 9/25.)

In the case of waiver of service they have 60 days from when they were notified... Nov 4.

 

[Droschke]

If anyone bought their car used from Tesla this year and suffers from battery or charge gate work with your local service center and complain to them. It took two months but they finally caved and are replacing my battery with what size pack not sure but it’s been since June. Maybe it’s luck or PR not sure but it worked for me.

Miron - Would you please take a picture of the pack's label of the new battery and post it here? Thanks.

 

[swegman]

It would be a safety issue if the battery should have been capped but is not because the owner does not update.QUOTE]

The software in my car (and others) was forcibly updated by Tesla and then the battery was immediately capped. Yet Tesla tells me my battery (which the CAC test indicated to have 219Ah (a new battery has 230 Ah)) is 30% better than batteries of similar age and mileage. So was it capped to some unknown safety issue or was it capped for another reason? I would like to know.

 

[mjmiron]

Miron - Would you please take a picture of the pack's label of the new battery and post it here? Thanks.

Yes I will it’s not scheduled for replacement till November

I also asked what pack I was getting and they could not tell me till it ships hoping for a 90.

 

[VT_EE]

@boywonder Just in: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.345967/gov.uscourts.cand.345967.10.0_1.pdf

Tesla has waived the summons requirement, so the now 60-day clock for their initial response started on 9/4. We should see their initial response on/before November 3rd.

edit: corrected initial response window.

This should be interesting. We should start a poll on possible responses.

 

[dhanson865]

There is no acceptable level for that risk.

you don't understand risk then.

Lets say there was a 0.00000000000000000001% chance with a car that has condition Z and software 7.
Lets say there was a 0.0000000000000000000000001% chance with a car that has condition Z and software 8.
Lets say there was a 0.00000000000000000000000000000000001% chance with a car that has condition Z and software 9 pre 16.x.
Lets say there was a 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance with a car that has condition Z and software 9 pos 16.x.

there is nothing any manufacturer can do to get risk to 0.0 flat, there is always some degree of risk. Gas, Diesel, Battery Electric, RP-1, Methalox, Coal, Wood, no matter the power source there is some risk. There is always a level where that risk is considered acceptable.

If you think you can eliminate risk you don't understand what risk factors are and how to calculate risk.

 

[meomyo]

what can you do? If you bought a 60d and updated to 75d for extra 2k later and this happens under 50k?

50k miles on car

 

[meomyo]

Can confirm. Supercharging times more than doubled. I can't charge over 70kW any more and it tapers sooner - 2 hours is probably being optimistic. My car sounds like a harrier jet landing too, other tesla owners have told me to get my car serviced for the noise on many occasions.

Just did a trip to milwaukee wisc from denver and back to denver. Made this same trip last winter when my mom dies before christmass and temps were crazy cold and semi's were flipped all over on i-80 thru nebraska and iowa. We drove straight thru there and back in that crap and charging was way faster and our 100% was alot higher( 2017 60d we paid 2k and updated to 75d)
This trip was miserable with low kw charging(yea even with noone else at the sc. AND 100% was alot less. We paid 2k to get more miles not the same as the car had when we bought it or a few miles higher. I think out 100% after 60-75d upgrade was 250-259 in that ballpark. nOW 100% IS 230-240.!!!!!!!!!!!! i BET our car is capped and its taking longer in summer weather to charge and make the trip...why? it should be the other way around. We visited the same people(my dad in milw) and my gf college friend in madison who took our dog for a week while we were at my dads. This time we were charging like mad and more often and waiting longer for the fill up. why?

 

[⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️]

This is making me nervous. Just placed a stop-loss order. Hope Tesla doesn't really screw us and announce a massive battery recall after hours. I have a lot more to worry about than my car's range and charging speed.

 

[T.R.T.e.s.l.a.]

This is making me nervous. Just placed a stop-loss order. Hope Tesla doesn't really screw us and announce a massive battery recall after hours. I have a lot more to worry about than my car's range and charging speed.

I guess that depends on your position, either as a stock buyer or as a costumer... If Tesla doesn't make a battery recall and just keep this batterygate and charginggate, then the screwed ones are Tesla costumers.....

 

[Chaserr]

Chaserr,

I am just trying to get a handle on some of your comments over the past weeks. You have used the word "illegal" with frequency. /QUOTE]

Cpa, when I use the term "illegal" it is in regards to the accusations that the reason Tesla stole from us is because they are covering up a safety issue. If - and only if - that is their reason, the crimes they have committed are massive in scope and federal in nature. So far, the crimes are essentially just thefts against us that are extremely similar in execution to Dieselgate (software manipulation intended to defraud EPA ratings) which was sufficiently illegal to have placed a n umber of VWAG employees in prison. If the suggestions that the reason behind our thefts is because there is a suppressed safety recall, the crimes are much worse. Theft is a small matter - money is only money - homicidal intent is another issue entirely.

 

[Chaserr]

you don't understand risk then.

You misunderstand my response. If the issue is safety related, there is a 100% chance Tesla is subjected to $1,000,000,000+ fines and a less than 100% but far over 1% chance that Tesla employees go to prison.

Safety recalls can't ever be intentionally hidden from owners or government agencies. When that happens, they respond harshly 100% of the time.

 

[MP3Mike]

You misunderstand my response. If the issue is safety related, there is a 100% chance Tesla is subjected to $1,000,000,000+ fines and a less than 100% but far over 1% chance that Tesla employees go to prison.

Safety recalls can't ever be intentionally hidden from owners or government agencies. When that happens, they respond harshly 100% of the time.

I think you are exaggerating quite a lot. For example hiding a fatal ignition-switch defect tied to at least 174 deaths, General Motors employees faced no criminal charges and the automaker paid a $900 million fine. Yes the fine was big, but there were deaths involved.

 

[Droschke]

I think you are exaggerating quite a lot. For example hiding a fatal ignition-switch defect tied to at least 174 deaths, General Motors employees faced no criminal charges and the automaker paid a $900 million fine. Yes the fine was big, but there were deaths involved.

Look up "projection bias", and in meanwhile don't let the facts distract you, "For example":

VW executive given the maximum prison sentence for his role in Dieselgate

Ex-VW CEO charged over Dieselgate, faces millions in fines and 10 years in prison

 

[Chaserr]

Look up "projection bias", and in meanwhile don't let the facts distract you, "For example":

Was this directed at me? I don't see any posts between yours and mine but I've blocked the agitators that only post here to create arguments. If you're responding to me - please explain. If not, please block the bad actors. I wasn't projecting, I was trying to explain how there is no possible way there is not going to be a massive federal investigation if there is a safety cover up. It's why I don't believe this was ever safety related - the risk of punishments severe enough to bankrupt Tesla is a 100% certainty. There's no guarantee of fine values or prison time, but the response to an investigation would be massive and the stock impact and loss of buyers would be sufficient to destroy the company even before any sentences were levied. The risk is far too great to calculate based on the hopes that they'd just get away with it. The person I replied to was claiming microscopic risk values that make no sense in the context of global federal investigations that would absolutely wreck the company.

Repeating again for clarity - I don't believe there is or ever was any safety issue because the crimes are far too great for Tesla to have willingly committed and incompetently covered up like this.

 

[Droschke]

Was this directed at me? I don't see any posts between yours and mine but I've blocked the agitators that only post here to create arguments. If you're responding to me - please explain. If not, please block the bad actors.

No. There is an agitating post between mine and yours I was responding to.

 

[Chaserr]

Click the name and then click ignore. Upsetting people is their purpose and they won't stop.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

Click the name and then click ignore. Upsetting people is their purpose and they won't stop.

they were super annoying since I rarely block anyone...