Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Chaserr]

If Tesla stole 5kwh from Bjorn's Model 3 that's really bad - it means even the new cells are at risk of whatever secrets Tesla is keeping from us that they felt is worth theft and defrauding the NHTSA & EPA. Bjorn has probably reached every TEsla owner and a huge amount of future owners.

Bjorn needs to check his volts ASAP - his losses are similar to what we've observed but range is not proof - voltage is. There are many reasons range estimates can be different, but only one reason voltage is capped. It is suspicious that they altered his numbers but I'd love to see his volts.

What was the officially rated watt hours per kilometer on the Model 3? I know they voluntarily reduced range - does the reduction from 150 to 145 make that rating a fraud or is it still within bounds?

TESLA, OPEN A DIALOG WITH US. YOU DON'T NEED TO FIGHT YOUR BASE.

 

[qwk]

Nobody here actually thought they would just cap $100k+ cars but leave the cheap ones alone, did they?

I wonder how those Model 3 owners that were taunting in this thread about 150 pages back, feel about this? How will they feel when Tesla takes more back through software downgrades? You know the downgrades just stop here, right?

 

[Chaserr]

Call me naive, I deserve it, but I thought the newer batteries were safe.

THis explains why they're fighting all of us. They're screwed. We need to open a dialog before they take this down the drain.

 

[lightningltd]

Interesting.... He only has 23k miles, and in ONE software update Tesla locked out ONLY 5%. Lucky him. I got hit for 16.02% in one update
Guess the sacred model 3 must have condition 'X or Y' after less miles than ours?
Wonder how fast Tesla will send an OTA update to stop the outcry?
Of course, I am sure they will tell him its normal degradation due to the way he plugged it in or something.
Or offer them 40% of what they just paid for the 'newer and better' Tesla cars

 

[MikeyC]

I watched the whole video and this is a bit different. It looks like they increased the bottom buffer instead of reducing Vmax. They could have done that for any number of reasons. For example, maybe they discovered that the average driver expects the car to perform normally all the way down to 0% yet they got complaints that the car would enter reduced power mode early or shut down with 2% still reported. If that's all they did, it might mean that you can comfortably drive to a lower SOC than before; possibly even beyond 0%. And if they made some changes to make it a little more efficient to mitigate the difference in reported range, it may actually be 144 Wh/km now instead of 149. I think Bjorn needs to do a little more testing, namely run it down to zero and also test and compare efficiency now vs before the update.

Mike

 

[lightningltd]

I watched the whole video and this is a bit different. It looks like they increased the bottom buffer instead of reducing Vmax. They could have done that for any number of reasons. For example, maybe they discovered that the average driver expects the car to perform normally all the way down to 0% yet they got complaints that the car would enter reduced power mode early or shut down with 2% still reported. If that's all they did, it might mean that you can comfortably drive to a lower SOC than before; possibly even beyond 0%. And if they made some changes to make it a little more efficient to mitigate the difference in reported range, it may actually be 144 Wh/km now instead of 149. I think Bjorn needs to do a little more testing, namely run it down to zero and also test and compare efficiency now vs before the update.

Mike

Or plug in and check the voltage and what KW is now being reported in the high and low area.

 

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

If Tesla has really started to cap Model 3's now.... i say bring on the pop corn smile

 

[bijan]

Nobody here actually thought they would just cap $100k+ cars but leave the cheap ones alone, did they?

I wonder how those Model 3 owners that were taunting in this thread about 150 pages back, feel about this? How will they feel when Tesla takes more back through software downgrades? You know the downgrades just stop here, right?

I'm currently affected by this. I never taunted anyone, but I can tell you that the current reaction to mentioning this on model 3 forums or on reddit is skewed somewhat towards the advice of set display to percentage instead of miles and ignore the problem... So a lot of ostrich sticking its head in the sand. It doesn't help that new owners will post about their 100% charge being 2 miles short of 310 every day or so, and confuse the issue with those seeing an actual 5-10% decrease in range.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

Just the place to drop a comment about Tesla sticking their fingers into our batteries. Too late if you want to be No 1. I have already done it. Bjorn has a LARGE following. Lots of comments on there about capping will gets the message out there quicker than a quick thing.

 

[Chaserr]

They all need to show volts. Rated range is a red herring taht does change and the % is the cure... but volts is undeniable proof that both power and range are being capped. If I see one capped voltage Model 3 I'm selling my car that day while I can still get a few dollars.

I still choose not to believe that every Tesla battery ever built is faulty, even though this perfectly explains why Tesla's "small number" of impacted batteries was too expensive for them to honor anyone's warranty. They knew all along this was coming, and that's why the incoming $billion fines over intentionally hidden NHTSA safety violations were chosen over doing "the right thing"

It's also probably why @wk057 was advised to participate in hiding the safety issues from us and not go ahead with what he said - Tesla would probably make up any old charges they could to shut him up if they needed to stop him, and his livelihood relies on Tesla remaining in business so he had no reason to speak up, and only came back to drop hints when we were all discussing the logic behind Tesla not being suicidal enough to conceal dangerous flaws. I want to thank Jason for that - he's the reason I stopped parking indoors. We haven't been told there's a danger but his insistence that all of the negatives are worth the update made me realize the danger is massive.

 

[lightningltd]

I'm currently affected by this. I never taunted anyone, but I can tell you that the current reaction to mentioning this on model 3 forums or on reddit is skewed somewhat towards the advice of set display to percentage instead of miles and ignore the problem... So a lot of ostrich sticking its head in the sand. It doesn't help that new owners will post about their 100% charge being 2 miles short of 310 every day or so, and confuse the issue with those seeing an actual 5-10% decrease in range.

Welcome to our world

And Thank you Tesla. I was just informed that I am now required to park 25 feet from any occupied buildings at work until they can confirm that there is no danger

 

[bijan]

Rated range is a red herring taht does change and the % is the cure...

It was almost flat 100% of stated range for me (within a mile or two) from when I got my car in October 2018 to June 2019 (and that was about 22k miles of driving). Since then it's down 6 or 7%. Most others I was on the forums with saw 0 degradation to about same period and 5-10% is now typical (especially AWD owners that didn't get the range boost of RWD owners). How does setting it to % cure the 5-10% that is gone (I can see how it would do so if it was fluctuating around the original mileage but not if it is consistently lower).

This is separate from the issue of whether this is voltage capping or a different mechanism for reducing range/capacity. You are right that there is no evidence that this is voltage capping, but either way some of my range is gone probably through a software update or some other tweak from Tesla's end, just possibly through a different mechanism.

 

[DJRas]

I received a surprise this morning.
Tesla refunded the $253.50 that I had to pay for my battery test.

I had filed a complaint with the California Bureau of Automotive Repair.
I let them know that I paid for the test but they would not provide written results for me to review.

I also let them know that others were charged nothing (including my company's CFO at the same service center).

So, money credited back to my credit card.
But, no explanation.

 

[BPeter]

This is not good

 

[BPeter]

They all need to show volts. Rated range is a red herring taht does change and the % is the cure... but volts is undeniable proof that both power and range are being capped. If I see one capped voltage Model 3 I'm selling my car that day while I can still get a few dollars.

I still choose not to believe that every Tesla battery ever built is faulty, even though this perfectly explains why Tesla's "small number" of impacted batteries was too expensive for them to honor anyone's warranty. They knew all along this was coming, and that's why the incoming $billion fines over intentionally hidden NHTSA safety violations were chosen over doing "the right thing"

It's also probably why @wk057 was advised to participate in hiding the safety issues from us and not go ahead with what he said - Tesla would probably make up any old charges they could to shut him up if they needed to stop him, and his livelihood relies on Tesla remaining in business so he had no reason to speak up, and only came back to drop hints when we were all discussing the logic behind Tesla not being suicidal enough to conceal dangerous flaws. I want to thank Jason for that - he's the reason I stopped parking indoors. We haven't been told there's a danger but his insistence that all of the negatives are worth the update made me realize the danger is massive.

I'm going to wait and see how this plays out for the Model 3 over the next few weeks but this is definitely very concerning. If it's not just early S packs which have the issue, this isn't good. Maybe all the other manufactures know something that Tesla didn't because everyone else doesn't let the batteries cycle anywhere as deep. Tesla used the deep cycling to advertise higher range but if they have to cap batteries like everyone else they lose that advantage. Will the capped voltage fix the safety issue? Hopefully. They're just going to need to put more cells in future batteries. But taking away this much capacity could cost Tesla a lot of money and bankrupt them if they lose the upcoming class action lawsuits, including the one already filed. It does make me concerned and I never thought I'd even consider it, but this does put that initial thought in my head of if I should sell my car.

Although there is still some hope, if you recall this post

I guess to clarify a little more: The mitigation in place meant to combat X does also effectively mitigate Z. However, Z should get a more refined mitigation than is required for X.

I personally wouldn't consider X or Z to be "normal degradation." Tesla seems to recognizes that X would not be normal. Jury is still out on Z at the moment, on Tesla's side, with a proper detection correction. A proper mitigation of Z shouldn't be nearly as noticeable, in any case, so may be a non-issue... not really sure how that'll eventually pan out.

Edit: If you're lost: Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software and Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

Edit: Oh, another interesting thing is that they do seem to care about Z. I specifically asked why don't they pull the update until they can get a better grip on the situation, and was told that if the update is protecting owners as it is, "we'll deal with it" in order to keep safety first.

 

[Droschke]

Tesla used the deep cycling to advertise higher range but if they have to cap batteries like everyone else they lose that advantage.

Correct. And, I paid $10,000 more for that range upgrade.

 

[BPeter]

Correct. And, I paid $10,000 more for that range upgrade.

To be fair, you paid $10,000 more for the 85kWh pack over the 60kWh pack right? You did get almost 25kWh more capacity. If the 85kWh pack has to be restricted to operate safely, the 60kWh pack should be too.

I am not saying you don't have a loss, you definitely do.

 

[Droschke]

To be fair, you paid $10,000 more for the 85kWh pack over the 60kWh pack right? You did get almost 25kWh more capacity. If the 85kWh pack has to be restricted to operate safely, the 60kWh pack should be too.

I am not saying you don't have a loss, you definitely do.

How many more miles is that additional range of 85kWh (over 60kWh)?

 

[Johnii__82]

Hmm. This is pic from Finnish users. We have witnessed it too on model 3. Which are 5-6 months old.

Second drop is for the: 2019.32.2.2 software.

 

[BPeter]

How many more miles is that additional range of 85kWh (over 60kWh)?

I'm not sure but if the 85kWh packs have the issue and the new Model 3 packs also have the issue, it seems to suggest that ALL batteries have this issue and eventually all of the batteries will be capped. The 60kWh will also lose range once that happens, so the 85kWh will still have significantly more usable range than the 60kWh. Now of course that is dependent on the 60kWh getting capped.

That means everyone will have been sold more range than their car would be capable of after this charge depth reduction. And this will be a big issue for Tesla.