Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Guy V]

Yes. They are all somehow connected. Aggressive regen limits, voltage capping, 36kw charging at 50% Soc and loss of power, all point to one direction: these batteries are not holding up as they were supposed to.

I am not a Tesla apologist here, but I think that's more on the order of these batteries are not holding up as well as they thought they were and appeared to be for the first few years. The total loss of capacity we are seeing is still within the range of expectations early on. As I recall there was speculation of as much as 5% loss per year, and everyone was delighted when it looked like it was much less than that.

I am as disappointed as anyone that the bubble was popped suddenly for some of us, but early buyers at least shouldn't be shocked at this level of capacity after 5 or 6 years. Later purchasers, after the glowing reports of capacity retention which Tesla certainly did nothing to temper, have more reason to feel dissatisfied.

Still, this does not mitigate Tesla's failure to transparently communicate what is going on here, and what if anything they plan to do to fix or ameliorate the situation for those affected. Their repeated statements that nothing is wrong, that everything is "normal" with the affected battery packs even while contradictorily claiming it is only a small percentage is enough to infuriate.

What they owe us is an explanation and a cost-effective battery refurbishment/replacement option, one that doesn't cost as much as the street value of the used vehicles. While we weren't promised a specific capacity loss projection at the start, we were told that Tesla would always be forthright with us, uphold our interests and that we could expect a reasonable cost battery exchange program when we needed it.

It is promising that original Roadster owners are finally receiving some attention again; perhaps a turn will eventually come for early Model S adopters. Of course, cynically, one might think they are just warming them up in anticipation of Roadster II, but then first wave Model S buyers are probably a lucrative demographic worth some cultivating as well.

 

[lightningltd]

I submitted a service request through the app complaining about slow supercharging (I'm a chargegate victim, 2014 S85 that wont supecharge over 60 kwh any more) . I am sure I will get the canned denial back from them. But i want them to know we are aware and it is unacceptable.

UPDATE- took them 20 minutes to call me and cancel the appointment saying there was nothing they could do. I asked the tech about the chargegate situation but he wasn't interested in discussing it. Honestly of all the issues and scandals that Tesla has gone through, most of which I felt was no big deal or overblown, this issue could be the one that brings them down. If people know that the car they buy today with the capabilities stated on the window sticker can be neutered at any time by Tesla with a software update, they will think twice. I know I am.

At least they didn't add in a link to the new model 3 like they did to me

 

[lightningltd]

I am not a Tesla apologist here, but I think that's more on the order of these batteries are not holding up as well as they thought they were and appeared to be for the first few years. The total loss of capacity we are seeing is still within the range of expectations early on. As I recall there was speculation of as much as 5% loss per year, and everyone was delighted when it looked like it was much less than that.

I am as disappointed as anyone that the bubble was popped suddenly for some of us, but early buyers at least shouldn't be shocked at this level of capacity after 5 or 6 years. Later purchasers, after the glowing reports of capacity retention which Tesla certainly did nothing to temper, have more reason to feel dissatisfied.

Still, this does not mitigate Tesla's failure to transparently communicate what is going on here, and what if anything they plan to do to fix or ameliorate the situation for those affected. Their repeated statements that nothing is wrong, that everything is "normal" with the affected battery packs even while contradictorily claiming it is only a small percentage is enough to infuriate.

What they owe us is an explanation and a cost-effective battery refurbishment/replacement option, one that doesn't cost as much as the street value of the used vehicles. While we weren't promised a specific capacity loss projection at the start, we were told that Tesla would always be forthright with us, uphold our interests and that we could expect a reasonable cost battery exchange program when we needed it.

It is promising that original Roadster owners are finally receiving some attention again; perhaps a turn will eventually come for early Model S adopters. Of course, cynically, one might think they are just warming them up in anticipation of Roadster II, but then first wave Model S buyers are probably a lucrative demographic worth some cultivating as well.

For those who want to purchase a NEW pack, they NEED to uphold their PROMISE to provide a $12,000.00 NEW replacement pack rather than quoting $20,000.00. Its freaking still on TESLAS website! (blog post)

 

[eye.surgeon]

I am not a Tesla apologist here, but I think that's more on the order of these batteries are not holding up as well as they thought they were and appeared to be for the first few years. The total loss of capacity we are seeing is still within the range of expectations early on. As I recall there was speculation of as much as 5% loss per year, and everyone was delighted when it looked like it was much less than that.

I am as disappointed as anyone that the bubble was popped suddenly for some of us, but early buyers at least shouldn't be shocked at this level of capacity after 5 or 6 years. Later purchasers, after the glowing reports of capacity retention which Tesla certainly did nothing to temper, have more reason to feel dissatisfied.

Still, this does not mitigate Tesla's failure to transparently communicate what is going on here, and what if anything they plan to do to fix or ameliorate the situation for those affected. Their repeated statements that nothing is wrong, that everything is "normal" with the affected battery packs even while contradictorily claiming it is only a small percentage is enough to infuriate.

What they owe us is an explanation and a cost-effective battery refurbishment/replacement option, one that doesn't cost as much as the street value of the used vehicles. While we weren't promised a specific capacity loss projection at the start, we were told that Tesla would always be forthright with us, uphold our interests and that we could expect a reasonable cost battery exchange program when we needed it.

It is promising that original Roadster owners are finally receiving some attention again; perhaps a turn will eventually come for early Model S adopters. Of course, cynically, one might think they are just warming them up in anticipation of Roadster II, but then first wave Model S buyers are probably a lucrative demographic worth some cultivating as well.

Keep in mind that my S85 was supercharger-limited to half the former speed at only 40k miles. I could understand if I had 100k on the battery and it was showing signs of aging. 40k miles! That would barely get through a lease for many people.

I roll my eyes when telsa brags about the new faster supercharging speeds and million mile battery. Reality check, those faster speeds are gonna smoke these batteries after a few years, or less.

 

[Droschke]

I am not a Tesla apologist here, but I think that's more on the order of these batteries are not holding up as well as they thought they were and appeared to be for the first few years. The total loss of capacity we are seeing is still within the range of expectations early on. As I recall there was speculation of as much as 5% loss per year, and everyone was delighted when it looked like it was much less than that.

I am as disappointed as anyone that the bubble was popped suddenly for some of us, but early buyers at least shouldn't be shocked at this level of capacity after 5 or 6 years. Later purchasers, after the glowing reports of capacity retention which Tesla certainly did nothing to temper, have more reason to feel dissatisfied.

Still, this does not mitigate Tesla's failure to transparently communicate what is going on here, and what if anything they plan to do to fix or ameliorate the situation for those affected. Their repeated statements that nothing is wrong, that everything is "normal" with the affected battery packs even while contradictorily claiming it is only a small percentage is enough to infuriate.

What they owe us is an explanation and a cost-effective battery refurbishment/replacement option, one that doesn't cost as much as the street value of the used vehicles. While we weren't promised a specific capacity loss projection at the start, we were told that Tesla would always be forthright with us, uphold our interests and that we could expect a reasonable cost battery exchange program when we needed it.

It is promising that original Roadster owners are finally receiving some attention again; perhaps a turn will eventually come for early Model S adopters. Of course, cynically, one might think they are just warming them up in anticipation of Roadster II, but then first wave Model S buyers are probably a lucrative demographic worth some cultivating as well.

Hi Guy -
Are you sure the expectation for the "normal/gradual" degradation (keeping in mind the capping is NOT degradation at all) was 5% per year?

According to the chart below, my car, for example, should have had 5% "normal" degradation by now. After capping my loss is 12% at this time.

 

[Guy V]

Nothing was sure in the first year or two. Discussion definitely included potential range losses from 1% to 5% per year. Remember at that time there pretty much weren't any Superchargers to have any impact on charging speed and capacity. First hopes were maybe 5% in year one and leveling off to optimistically 2%/year after, but with some fear of going off a cliff at some point 5+ years out like phone batteries do. Tesla reassured that the BMS wouldn't allow the batteries to deteriorate as fatally as phone and other consumer lithium batteries managed, and pointed to their "best warranty" based on that confidence. I certainly did the math with 5% as as my worst case downside risk, short of Tesla going out of business which seemed even more likely then than early battery failure. The power-train issues were a bigger concern back then, leading to Elon enhancing that warranty too. I think just about everyone was pleased then at how Tesla stepped up and handled warranty repairs. Sadly it looks like those days are long gone, but I'd truly love to a semblance return if their frantic scaling up ever stabilizes.

 

[Chaserr]

They will have to in a few years. Tesla absolutely can't survive if the current standard practice of downgrading after a few years continues on cars built since this thread began. They will have millions of their loudest cheerleaders - many of whom have participated in this thread trying to shut up anyone who noticed the problem - personally impacted and suddenly having a change of heart. Those owners are the ones already shouting us down, they will be at least as enthusiastic when they have a legitimate reason to care and aren't just picking sides for the sake of shouting alone. And when millions of those screeching fanatics are doing what they do best in the opposite direction it's going to be hard for Tesla to sell cars considering the reputation for unreliability and deception they will have been building for years at that point.
They will have a turn of heart, if only because it will be court ordered.

 

[sorka]

They will have to in a few years. Tesla absolutely can't survive if the current standard practice of downgrading after a few years continues on cars built since this thread began. They will have millions of their loudest cheerleaders - many of whom have participated in this thread trying to shut up anyone who noticed the problem - personally impacted and suddenly having a change of heart. Those owners are the ones already shouting us down, they will be at least as enthusiastic when they have a legitimate reason to care and aren't just picking sides for the sake of shouting alone. And when millions of those screeching fanatics are doing what they do best in the opposite direction it's going to be hard for Tesla to sell cars considering the reputation for unreliability and deception they will have been building for years at that point.
They will have a turn of heart, if only because it will be court ordered.

If Tesla had their way:

 

[Ferrycraigs]

I am not a Tesla apologist here, but I think that's more on the order of these batteries are not holding up as well as they thought they were and appeared to be for the first few years. The total loss of capacity we are seeing is still within the range of expectations early on. As I recall there was speculation of as much as 5% loss per year, and everyone was delighted when it looked like it was much less than that.

I think it is true to say our initial expectations of battery degradation was that it was going to be higher than it actually turned out to be. If car companies had forecast an initial annual loss of up to 5%, with less in later years, some people may have found that OK. Perhaps that’s why battery warranties quickly went up to 8 years to allay the fears. But in practice what happened was, very little degradation. Which is a good thing. An unexpected bonus. But I don’t take the view that that should be sufficient reason for us to say the current situation is not so bad. Why? Because the current situation has nothing to do with degradation. Nothing whatsoever. It is to do with Tesla going into our cars, I repeat OUR cars, without permission, without even asking for permission, and without telling us afterwards that they had been in and reduced the Usable capacity of our batteries by 15% or so. So whilst I agree with the premise we might have been happy to accept a degradation rate of around 5% pa, for me, that is a completely different point. That was not what was on offer at the time I bought my car. And my car is no longer the car I agreed to buy. It is no longer the car they advertised. I paid for a car with a 70 kWh battery, albeit in the knowledge that its capacity would deplete over time. I didn’t agree to a stranger coming in the night and replacing my fuel tank with a smaller fuel tank. My battery was doing just fine with me taking special care of it. I don’t share the belief that if the battery is going to deplete, best I make it deplete all in one go now, and get the pain over and done with in one fell swoop. I didn’t agree to that, ever.

 

[raphy3]

Actually the warranty does cover that situation specifically, and it would put him at risk:



And he has been told that the repair is a firmware update.

I don't know 100% that that was in the old warranties but I think it was.

Actually no it doesn't specifically cover that situation at all. Where in your big dramatically bolded text does it say that he must take an update? No. Here we go again with you people claiming a software update is a repair. Even the SC techs don't believe that. At least I'm lucky enough not have SC techs suggest it to me. In fact, I've never seen them suggest an update as a repair. Do the random guys answering the phone and scheduling appointments claim that firmware updates are repairs for hardware problems? Sure. Then when you get a tech outside who knows what hes talking about its another story. It's always suggested as a hail Mary to see if it'll make things better.

Say "fix my car without updating the firmware unless the new or repaired piece of hardware requires a firmware update to work." It has worked countless times over the years for many model S owners across this forum, and for normal people in the real world, and is business as usual. Meanwhile, you've proposed an unprecendented idea - that a repair is a firmware update. It definitely isn't for a failing battery. Software only papers over hardware problems. We've already been over this countless times in the thread.

Let me sum up by saying that Tesla owners obtain repairs while refusing updates routinely every day in the real world. Meanwhile on the internet, we have the magical wishful thinking that older owners must take updates just because newer ones have to. That isn't how it happens and I have yet to see it happen that way.

 

[Droschke]

Nothing was sure in the first year or two. Discussion definitely included potential range losses from 1% to 5% per year. Remember at that time there pretty much weren't any Superchargers to have any impact on charging speed and capacity. First hopes were maybe 5% in year one and leveling off to optimistically 2%/year after, but with some fear of going off a cliff at some point 5+ years out like phone batteries do. Tesla reassured that the BMS wouldn't allow the batteries to deteriorate as fatally as phone and other consumer lithium batteries managed, and pointed to their "best warranty" based on that confidence. I certainly did the math with 5% as as my worst case downside risk, short of Tesla going out of business which seemed even more likely then than early battery failure. The power-train issues were a bigger concern back then, leading to Elon enhancing that warranty too. I think just about everyone was pleased then at how Tesla stepped up and handled warranty repairs. Sadly it looks like those days are long gone, but I'd truly love to a semblance return if their frantic scaling up ever stabilizes.

I agree with your assertions. Some clarifications:

As I recall there was speculation of as much as 5% loss per year,

I do not remember 5% per year was ever discussed anywhere.

First hopes were maybe 5% in year one and leveling off to optimistically 2%/year after

This ^ I remember hearing, which I was fine with, but that is not what has happened here.

Whatever the expected "normal" or "gradual" degradation was and is supposed to be for our cars' batteries (and I'm totally fine with it), what has been done here is an intentional voltage capping of our battery packs due to the presence of certain adverse condition (s), called X and Z (hopefully we still remember those terms, right?) which was not expected at this time. Any battery "issue" outside of the expected normal/gradual degradation (for instance, condition X and Z or else) was supposed to be on Tesla to take care of during the warranty window short of crippling the affected packs (in the owners' expense) in order to avoid replacing the batteries under warranty. That was the expectation, as naive as we have now found it to be. My gas tank is rusting under warranty and the manufactures, without my knowledge, clips the rusted part overnight, leaving me with a much smaller tank and says it's all normal now and the issue has been fixed!!! That was not expected from Tesla, a company which was superposed to be different than others, and that, to you and I along with all other impacted owners, is not acceptable.

 

[Gixx1300R]

They will have to in a few years. Tesla absolutely can't survive if the current standard practice of downgrading after a few years continues on cars built since this thread began. They will have millions of their loudest cheerleaders - many of whom have participated in this thread trying to shut up anyone who noticed the problem - personally impacted and suddenly having a change of heart. Those owners are the ones already shouting us down, they will be at least as enthusiastic when they have a legitimate reason to care and aren't just picking sides for the sake of shouting alone. And when millions of those screeching fanatics are doing what they do best in the opposite direction it's going to be hard for Tesla to sell cars considering the reputation for unreliability and deception they will have been building for years at that point.
They will have a turn of heart, if only because it will be court ordered.

I was one of those (loudest cheerleaders) but no longer. I own a substantial amount of Tesla stock, have a Model S, Tesla Solar panels/power walls and reserved the CyberTruck. Every Tesla sold has the potential to have the battery capacity and charging speed nerfed unless the court order comes in our favor.

 

[MP3Mike]

Actually no it doesn't specifically cover that situation at all. Where in your big dramatically bolded text does it say that he must take an update? No. Here we go again with you people claiming a software update is a repair. Even the SC techs don't believe that. At least I'm lucky enough not have SC techs suggest it to me.

In this case it was indeed an SC tech that told him that the firmware update was the fix for the error message. And in fact it is, as the error message is something they no longer consider an error, so the only way to make it go away is to install the newer firmware.

I agree in most cases a software update isn't a repair, but this is one where it was. (There was also the case back a while where to auto-folding mirrors wouldn't fully move and they had to update the software to allow the motor to draw more power before it stopped. Again, a firmware update was the fix.)

 

[Droschke]

I think it is true to say our initial expectations of battery degradation was that it was going to be higher than it actually turned out to be ... the current situation has nothing to do with degradation. Nothing whatsoever.

Absolutely.

The only thing we need to keep in mind, and keep reminding others to do the same, is that after 8600 posts and gazillion of turns and twists, the issue here is not about the normal (or even abnormal) degradation as you and others have pointed out repeatedly.

The voltage capping has nothing to do with the normal and gradual degradation of the batteries, as understood, and any degradation discussion at this point of time should be considered off topic in this thread. The voltage capping is a band-aid, it's a short term workaround at best for the condition X or Z and with no ultimate solution in sight, so the warranty replacement of the problematic packs can be avoided.

Degradation does not happen overnight unless a software malware makes it appear so to some. The whole thread, as it's titled, is about "Sudden" loss. Not a gradual one we all expected no matter what percentage we all understood it to be.

 

[Az_Rael]

The new regen stuff applies to the 3 as well. Pulled out of my garage the other day with a garage temp of 64 degrees at 90% and was regen limited pretty significantly for a good 10/15 minutes. It is normally masked by the new departure charging, but this time we were starting with a "cold" battery if 64 degrees is cold.

Our S does that now too, when previously we wouldn't see temperature based regen limits until below 50ish.

So the regen stuff appears to be fleet wide.

Additional regen data: cold soaked 3LR battery at my work in 43 degrees ambient. SOC maybe 70%ish. Took 34 miles and 40 minutes of my mostly highway commute to gain full regen back.

I am guessing folks in actual cold climates won’t see full regen until spring.

 

[Guy V]

I agree with your assertions. Some clarifications:


I do not remember 5% per year was ever discussed anywhere.



This ^ I remember hearing, which I was fine with, but that is not what has happened here.

Whatever the expected "normal" or "gradual" degradation was and is supposed to be for our cars' batteries (and I'm totally fine with it), what has been done here is an intentional voltage capping of our battery packs due to the presence of certain adverse condition (s), called X and Z (hopefully we still remember those terms, right?) which was not expected at this time. Any battery "issue" outside of the expected normal/gradual degradation (for instance, condition X and Z or else) was supposed to be on Tesla to take care of during the warranty window short of crippling the affected packs (in the owners' expense) in order to avoid replacing the batteries under warranty. That was the expectation, as naive as we have now found it to be. My gas tank is rusting under warranty and the manufactures, without my knowledge, clips the rusted part overnight, leaving me with a much smaller tank and says it's all normal now and the issue has been fixed!!! That was not expected from Tesla, a company which was superposed to be different than others, and that, to you and I along with all other impacted owners, is not acceptable.

Tesla itself was careful not to promise us anything specific, just that we should not worry, the battery was very robust and their technology would make it last a long time. I remember the possible 5%/year discussions though because I used that to decide to purchase what might be the last car I ever would buy. The 60 at the time seemed adequate, but if degradation occurred at that rate it would no longer be after a few years, so I would have to step up to an 85.

What I apparently bought into over-optimistically were the rosy projections of battery technology improvements and cost declines that aimed at better, higher capacity replacements being available based on an under $100/kWh production target. That, with the fast-swap engineering and Elon's promise that service wasn't to be a profit center, we could expect quick and easy 100+ kWh pack installations when we needed them in 8 years or so for around 10% of our original purchase price. Come on Tesla, the time is ripe, as it looks like we are going to be needing those real soon now.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

Tesla itself was careful not to promise us anything specific, just that we should not worry, the battery was very robust and their technology would make it last a long time. I remember the possible 5%/year discussions though because I used that to decide to purchase what might be the last car I ever would buy. The 60 at the time seemed adequate, but if degradation occurred at that rate it would no longer be after a few years, so I would have to step up to an 85.

What I apparently bought into over-optimistically were the rosy projections of battery technology improvements and cost declines that aimed at better, higher capacity replacements being available based on an under $100/kWh production target. That, with the fast-swap engineering and Elon's promise that service wasn't to be a profit center, we could expect quick and easy 100+ kWh pack installations when we needed them in 8 years or so for around 10% of our original purchase price. Come on Tesla, the time is ripe, as it looks like we are going to be needing those real soon now.

The irony is, having bought into the over optimistic rosy projections, they turned out to be true. Well for 95% of owners it did.

 

[doctorwho]

For those who want to purchase a NEW pack, they NEED to uphold their PROMISE to provide a $12,000.00 NEW replacement pack rather than quoting $20,000.00. Its freaking still on TESLAS website! (blog post)

I can't even see the point in spending $12,000 on a new battery pack when it's likely to require replacing every 4 years

 

[Newscutter]

this issue could be the one that brings them down.

And here's where many of us will diverge. I **LOVE** that an entrepreneur-driven, innovation-centered AMERICAN company set the automotive world in a panic trying to chase us down (and failing). It's salve to my soul to have a gleaming Tesla in my garage after spending my childhood loathing American cars and everything about them... with only dreams of German metal in my garage being acceptable.

They changed the landscape.

BUT.

They did it by promising to stand by those of us who bought into the dream when it was still tenuous vapor, effectively pledging to always do right by us... and if they don't, then break that sucker up and toss it on the trash heap of capitalism. You're Betamax, not VHS. Doesn't matter to me if warranty claims/recall sink the company-- you live up to your promises and obligations or you are dead to me either way. I will love my Model S to its grave (and I truly adore it), but it will be the last Tesla I buy because I follow my principles even if the company does not.

Those bemoaning "the mission" over loyalty to the customer are missing the greater point: You can't "save the world" by cheating your way to the top. You can't be the catalyst of a hopeful future by being the thief of today, ignoring legitimate complaints. That's not how inspirational leadership works, by being tone deaf to your loyalists. The mission will go on with or without Tesla, or Tesla will go on without its loyalists... but it won't last long. Word will get out.

"The mission" will fail if Tesla doesn't fix this or die trying.

 

[DJRas]

Charging last night.
The cliff was an M3 pulling in next to me.