-
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
Yes, the tech told me I put my pedal to the floor too much and that it isn't good for the battery
In the thread I quoted, it was said to be 2500, but I'm positive I exceeded that by at least 5 or 6 times.
Yes, there was. Tesla put it in early in the P90DL life, and after a lot of people complaining about it, and Tesla learning how the batteries performed, they removed in a software update. @sorka is still on a really old firmware version, so he still gets the warning.
Ludicrous upgrade was done at 19K miles....85K miles ago in December of 2015 which was 4 years ago. I WOT an average of 6 time a day easily which is over 8000. If the counter only starts when the L upgrade is done, then it's at least that. If it's since mile 0, then it's easily 10K WOT. Heck, I did it at least 5 times driving the 10 miles from Tesla to work. That 6 times a day estimate is SUPER conservative.
And this isn't just WOT from a start. The alert occurred exactly when I did a WOT increase in speed from 50 to 75 MPH.
Not Sure
Member
Anyone else noticed that the Tesla app now displays (some kind of) range value when you change the charge limit?
The value only appears while holding or moving the charge limit slider.
This is for an 85D and the app estimates 214 miles @90% and 238 miles @100%
The value only appears while holding or moving the charge limit slider.
This is for an 85D and the app estimates 214 miles @90% and 238 miles @100%
Attachments
Ferrycraigs
Member
We do use epiphany. Indeed I had an epiphany when I first realised Tesla were a bunch of double faced swindlers.Full marks, Ferrycraigs, for this locution. (You even sent me scrambling to my 1958 Funk & Wagnalls!)
Don't the Scots use epiphany? Or is there a subtle difference between hither and yon?
Keep up your fine composition!
Ferrycraigs
Member
It appeared on mine after the 19.32.12 update. An improvement, of sorts.
Funny that whenever I see an improvement like this, or perhaps a new 'game' I start thinking, 'really? Is this the most important improvement that needs their attention?' Look what Tesla have done to me. Such things used to make me smile. I’m now that grumpy old man down the street that grumbles about everything.
Ferrycraigs
Member
In a car they advertise as getting from 0-60 in 2 seconds. Yep, who would have thought owners might buy such a car then floor it?Yes, the tech told me I put my pedal to the floor too much and that it isn't good for the battery
What’s the mileage and age of your 85D? I get 202 miles at 90% on an S85 Nov 2014 117k miles
jaitch
Member
Don't forget only the front side louvres are visible for an easy operation check. There are two internal ducting louvres that open to allow air to be drawn through the centre front battery cooling radiator and out through the side aircon condenser elements. I guess if these internal louvres fail that would cause all types of cooling issues. I presume the car can check the operation of these but if you want to do it yourself you are going to have to remove the frunk and check for cycling operation when you open the car. The other way would be check that when supercharging, and battery is hot, air is actually being drawn in from the centre front - use a bit of smoke for example. ScanMyTesla reports louvre values but I can't work out what the odd numbers mean.
Last edited:
For info I have a 2016 85D with 68K miles on the clock and got 230 miles at 90% before the software update and now get 203.
One caveat however, I now show 210 miles at 90% following more recent updates, however utilising TM Spy I note that Tesla have changed my wh/mi from 290 to 281, which only makes it look like I have slightly better range. My actual battery capacity is still down at 65.7 Kwh when before the update I had 74.31 kWh. At 290 wh/mi it returns to 203.
Last edited:
Maybe Tesla’s solution to returning range is to monkey around with the wh/mi constant instead of actually fixing the battery cap.
Reducing that number only gives the illusion that range is being restored !
Isn’t it interesting that from new to just before the ‘capping’ update I went from 76.85 kWh (useable) to 74.31 kWh - a total loss in just over 3 years of about 2.54 kWh (3.3%).
‘Capping’ update took me from 74.31 to 65.7 kWh - so a loss of 8.61 kWh overnight (11.6%).
Yet since the update over half a year ago (yes it’s been that long almost), I have only gone from 65.7 kWh to 65.6 kWh - so normal degradation of only 0.1 of a kWh (0.15%).
How can Tesla explain their software capping as normal degradation ???
‘Capping’ update took me from 74.31 to 65.7 kWh - so a loss of 8.61 kWh overnight (11.6%).
Yet since the update over half a year ago (yes it’s been that long almost), I have only gone from 65.7 kWh to 65.6 kWh - so normal degradation of only 0.1 of a kWh (0.15%).
How can Tesla explain their software capping as normal degradation ???
Zhelko Dimic
Careful bull
I would think that previous algorithm version was wrong, and that it was underreporting needed loss/degradation values for safe behavior of battery, so you shouldn't have had access to 74.31KWh when you had it. If you bought the car used with that assumption of range, I can see how that could be frustrating.
If you are owner from the new, I personally would think that 85% of range after 68K is acceptable. But we all don't have same expectations. I've lost 5% on 18K miles for S60, but I calculated what 85% would be, and while not great, it didn't sound to me too jarring.
But again, it could be that my expectations are too low after having truly bad experiences with BMW(3 of them), Mercedes(2) and Porsche(4), so they numbed me...
Ferrycraigs
Member
I think your expectations may indeed be too low. I have never been a fan of the X Range at Y% figures, other than to compare that figure from a similar test from the previous year(s). I bought the car from new (as did Liam according to his post) and took great care with the battery. Like Liam, I was seeing minimal degradation, or to be more accurate, minimal reduction in the range figure. A few, single digit miles lost per year. I was happy that my cosseting was working. My figures also reflected the results many other owners were seeing, and being reported. I don’t share your view that 15% loss after 68K miles is about right. I would regard that level of loss as exceptional. It would seem to fly in the face of the results of many experiments (mainly on YouTube so easy to find) by people that I consider know what they are doing. Almost without exception they reported, after testing, that Tesla batteries were suffering from extremely small levels of degradation. As is the norm with Li ion batteries, a chunk in the first couple of months, but thereafter almost nil.
Then after the download, POW!, 30 miles lost and 10 kWh smaller battery. Not quite overnight, but pretty close. Those sort of figures are of a completely different order of magnitude and time scale.
Last edited:
You are probably correct about original algorithm behaviors. The problem is recognizing the issue years later and imposing immediate, sometimes rather draconian limits, is a hard pill to swallow for those affected. This is a great way to piss people off and sour them on the brand. Not a great way to run a business regardless of the technical merits of battery voltage capping. Hopefully Tesla will do something to make these people happy.
Similar threads
