Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Context is wrong. You are showing it as if it's Tesla specific, and unusual - all other auto companies are much worse.

For example, I've had few Porsches, and there is not one that didn't have major issues that company refused to fix (from the exploding engines on 996/997, need to rebuild top end often and early on previous generations, to coolant spilling out on Metzger engines, Turbo/GT3, causing the car behind you to crash if you were on the track, hydraulic pump overheating and causing engine fire (turbo) etc, etc... BMW is much worse story, and Mercedes too...

So your righteousness is misplaced. It's like complaining that life isn't fair - yeah, it isn't...

I feel that Tesla has the right to manage battery based on new info, and if that means you lose some range on 50 or 100Kmiles car, so be it. Especially that it seems to have been the case for ones that used mostly fast charging, which one knew is harder on the battery.
I mean, loss of 10% range isn't equal to your engine exploding rendering your car worthless, is it? Like it would happen with the Porsche...

Zhelko - In your opinion, would you explain the scenarios under which Tesla is indeed obligated to replace Model S batteries under warranty?
 
Geesh, it's just like the same crowd that came out of the woodwork back in 2015 that said it was perfectly fine for Tesla to advertise 691 hp when the car could only
make 463 hp with the battery supplied:rolleyes:
..you mean 2012, '13 ... 85 kWhr battery 'rounding error'

(although my 2012 managed to pull 337 kW on a drag pass a couple of weekends ago...it is a bit above rated from '12 if I remember?...oh derp, well 2016 data shows 350 )
 
Last edited:
Geesh, it's just like the same crowd that came out of the woodwork back in 2015 that said it was perfectly fine for Tesla to advertise 691 hp when the car could only make 463 hp with the battery supplied:rolleyes:

I was just about to write that. People with no skin in the game and always finding some backwards way to justify why it's ok for Tesla not to act truthfully.

When summer is over Tesla will have received letters from lawyers in Norway and Denmark I'm sure, and it will not be from individual owners, but owners acting as larger groups.

There is no scenario where it's ok what Tesla is doing in this case, their usual lack of information and explanation just shows that Tesla knows exactly what they are doing and that it's wrong.

If it's a safety thing, just say so in advance or at least in the release notes and do a recall on the batteries affected. By the way, is Tesla not legally obligated to issue a safety recall if they know the HV battery can cause a fire or at least obligated to inform owners affected?
 
I was just about to write that. People with no skin in the game and always finding some backwards way to justify why it's ok for Tesla not to act truthfully.

Actually, one of the recent entrants to this discussion and the guy who's giving him thumbs up when nobody else would both have skin in the game. Just go look at their posts in the investor section of this forum:rolleyes:
 
I was just about to write that. People with no skin in the game and always finding some backwards way to justify why it's ok for Tesla not to act truthfully.

When summer is over Tesla will have received letters from lawyers in Norway and Denmark I'm sure, and it will not be from individual owners, but owners acting as larger groups.

There is no scenario where it's ok what Tesla is doing in this case, their usual lack of information and explanation just shows that Tesla knows exactly what they are doing and that it's wrong.

If it's a safety thing, just say so in advance or at least in the release notes and do a recall on the batteries affected. By the way, is Tesla not legally obligated to issue a safety recall if they know the HV battery can cause a fire or at least obligated to inform owners affected?

Tesla can issue a safety recall or the NHTSA can do an investigation. By reducing charging speeds and amps Tesla made the cars safer, but doing so maybe Tesla is trying to avoid a government investigation.
 
I spent 2 days reading every post and want to post my experience and thoughts. My 2014 P85DL after the software update went from 238 to 218 and today 209 at 100% charge. I only charge to 100% before drag racing at the strip. I was very concerned after previous posts in Facebook, particularly if my performance would be affected. Therefore, I went to Irwindale Raceway last Thursday with other LATesla Club members to run the 1/8 mile. Surprisingly my times were as good as before the update.

However, I totally agree that this reduction in range is totally unacceptable. Losing 29 miles of range in one week means I now own a 70Tesla, not an 85. I bought a P85D Tesla because it had 691 hp only to find out that the motors were capable of 691 but not with the 85kw battery. Then the claimed 10 second time for the new P90DL that no one could duplicate Motor Trends time until new versions of the 90kw battery were produced. I am/was an avid Tesla fan and still hold the quickest times for a P85D in Dragtimes. On May 2nd I even ordered a new performance Raven but had to cancel because I could not sell my P85DL for a decent price. Now, what do I do when a prospective buyer asks the most common question "how far can it go?". Tesla has really devalued my car.
 
0C517921-E8A8-4585-844E-27A5D6B20ED3.jpeg
My 70D still knows its 90% is about 206 miles. 10 hours remaining times 4 miles per hour equals 40 to be added to the 169 equals 209.
But charging is complete at only182 miles (I assume about 3 hours later).

C2D6777A-1E8B-4DB1-ABEB-6D91B8E9617E.png
 
  • Informative
Reactions: jaitch
I spent 2 days reading every post and want to post my experience and thoughts. My 2014 P85DL after the software update went from 238 to 218 and today 209 at 100% charge. I only charge to 100% before drag racing at the strip. I was very concerned after previous posts in Facebook, particularly if my performance would be affected. Therefore, I went to Irwindale Raceway last Thursday with other LATesla Club members to run the 1/8 mile. Surprisingly my times were as good as before the update.

However, I totally agree that this reduction in range is totally unacceptable. Losing 29 miles of range in one week means I now own a 70Tesla, not an 85. I bought a P85D Tesla because it had 691 hp only to find out that the motors were capable of 691 but not with the 85kw battery. Then the claimed 10 second time for the new P90DL that no one could duplicate Motor Trends time until new versions of the 90kw battery were produced. I am/was an avid Tesla fan and still hold the quickest times for a P85D in Dragtimes. On May 2nd I even ordered a new performance Raven but had to cancel because I could not sell my P85DL for a decent price. Now, what do I do when a prospective buyer asks the most common question "how far can it go?". Tesla has really devalued my car.

That is exactly the point I have been making all along. Tesla devalued our cars with an update
 
I just received a software update and I'm terrified to accept/install. What should I do?

I'm currently on 2019.20.1, was previously on 2019.16.2. I have a 2013 P85 and I have not experienced range loss like others have reported. I don't know whether or not to accept the update.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xveys
I just received a software update and I'm terrified to accept/install. What should I do?

I'm currently on 2019.20.1, was previously on 2019.16.2. I have a 2013 P85 and I have not experienced range loss like others have reported. I don't know whether or not to accept the update.
What positive thing do you expect from this update? Do the potential upsides balance the potential downsides?
 
That is rubbish. 100% is always 4.2 volts. You're splitting hairs. Not a true 100% still means 99.99% or close to it. The point being that Tesla has always used mapped a fully charged cell at 4.2 volts to 100% and now they're not depending on how much capacity they're stealing from you. In some cases, they still display 100% when it's only really 85%.

If they need to limit the charge on a very few cars for safety reasons, I'm 100% all for that as long as they tell the user that they are being limited so that they can come in and get their battery replaced. Tesla is trying to change the rules after the fact to save money on warranty replacements.
Not true. 100% indicated charge never equals a full charge as Tesla purposely leaves unused overhead to maintain battery health. Same is true on the low end. The size of this buffer is whatever Tesla decides it is to maintain health. Whatever their new and improved algorithm is doing, is causing this buffer to grow in order to maintain health. The 100% on the display is merely an indicator that you have charged to the max the system will allow. As previously stated, Tesla is obviously working on this so getting bent out of shape at this stage is a little premature.