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.
If you were Tesla, what would you do about the fire danger associated with batteries that are showing indications of some Li plating?

Lets go a step further...

What happens if one of these failed batteries does catch fire? What if someone dies because of it? what happens then the NHTSB uncovers that Tesla not only knew there was a dangerous fault in the battery but provided an inadequate solution through a software update? What happens to your precious TLSA investment then?
 
Replacement isn't even necessary. In past examples, tesla has shown that they provide loaners while they repair the damaged cells / module in a faulty battery. They aren't honoring their own warranty processes, and are risking too much. Honda was fined a $billion over a seat belt safety recall they tried to similarly avoid like Tesla here. Nobody wants this to escalate, and nobody wants a theft class action. They just want Tesla to do the right thing by law. It didn't have to get this bad, it doesn't have to keep escalating. The small amount of affected batteries (Per tesla's statement) won't be a financial or logistical problem for them, they can easily handle a tiny number of battery repairs.
 
Looks to me like a "100%" charge in a Tesla P85D is actually only 95% of capacity. Are you saying that all of this unaccessible capacity is at the low end and that Tesla allows it's cells to be charged completely full?

"Now the data is directly from Tesla’s software and not a calculation based on the capacity of cells from a tear down of a pack. He gathered similar data from other Tesla models. Here’s a list he sent to Electrek:

  • Original 60 – ~61 kWh total capacity, ~58.5 kWh usable.
  • 85/P85/85D/P85D – ~81.5 kWh total capacity, ~77.5 kWh usable
  • 90D/P90D – ~85.8 kWh total capacity, 81.8 kWh usable
  • Original 70 – ~71.2 kWh total capacity, 68.8 kWh usable
  • 75/75D – 75 kWh total capacity, 72.6 kWh usable
  • Software limited 60/60D – 62.4 kWh usable
  • Software limited 70/70D – 65.9 kWh usable"
Tesla’s hacked Battery Management System exposes the real usable capacity of its battery packs - Electrek

You're confusing and conflating all sorts of unrelated things. The 85 battery is really PHYSICALLY an 81(or 81.5) kWh battery. The 85 has nothing to do with anything except for the model designation / marketing.

4 kWh of that is reserved by the BMS for anti bricking. My battery brand new had a usable capacity of 77.5 after subtracting the anti brick buffer which apps like scan my tesla and tm-spy will already do for you.

Edited: to change typo of "and" to "an" before @SmartElectric thumbs me down for lack of accuracy
 
Last edited:
What positive thing do you expect from this update? Do the potential upsides balance the potential downsides?

It might prevent your car from catching on fire and burning to a crisp.

As y'all may know, I've been avoiding updates for literally *years*. They finally (just last update) fixed the worst regression with USB music -- you can now play folders in the correct order, yeehaw. But this one seems to be an actual safety update (unlike most of 'em) so I kind of wanted to get it.

And I got lucky, my cars were apparently not among the affected / range-reduced cars (can't be *sure* but it seems like it). My second car was actually driven back from Toledo, and Supercharged to 100% more than once, while on the new software, and its range is still fine.

It seems that Tesla is using the DVA (differential voltage analysis) detection system to detect lithium plating.

I started doing some research on this. Lithium plating apparently is much more likely with high speed charging, which I do very rarely, and also more likely in colder temperatures. While I drive in cold temperatures a lot, I have only Supercharged during the summer, since road trips in the winter are not my idea of fun. I have high regenerative braking loads because there are very steep hills here, but Tesla was always limiting regen a lot with cold batteries, and I'm guessing they were probably limiting it enough to prevent lithium plating. So my odds of having significant lithium plating are low. The previous owner of my second car Supercharged more often, but again primarily in the summer, and had no hills; and he seems to have avoided charging to 100%.

However, the DVA system appears to be unable to detect the plating until some charging cycles have passed, and I tend to be charging very shallowly through a narrow range, so I might end up with noticeable range loss later. I doubt it though -- it appears to primarily affect people who do a lot of Supercharging particularly in cold weather (and of course with the original all-graphite anodes).

Those of you whose range has dropped -- I understand why you're frustrated. But you don't want your cars to catch fire, I assume.

Most of you also probably don't have a warranty claim. Back when I bought my car in 2013, nobody knew how much range degradation was going to happen. Tesla wrote their warranty to avoid covering degradation unless it was extreme. At the time, the chatter was of degrading to 70% of rated range over the course of 8 to 10 years. (Tesla *has* replaced batteries where the range dropped below 70% of original rated range during the warranty period; they had to admit that those were flat out defective.)

Teslas have, on the whole, done better than that projection on range degradation over time. Even for owners with this "overnight" 10% - 15% drop,... they're mostly still doing about as well as that, so people with older cars who got hit with a range reduction still have more range than we expected back in 2013. That's going to make a warranty claim pretty hard.

And furthermore, it isn't really an overnight drop -- the safe range has been dropping slowly and continuously, due to a deterioration mode which was known and expected back in 2013, but Tesla's system wasn't detecting the drop in range. So it was a continuous drop in range, due to lithium plating, but Tesla's software wasn't detecting that, and now it is, so the reported drop is sudden.

Someone with a more recent car who saw a sudden drop may have a better claim since nobody should be seeing a 10% drop in range after 1-2 years.

Anyone whose range is less than 70% of original EPA rated, and still within the 8-year warranty period. probably does have a claim too. While there was no specific "70% warranty" (as there was with Model 3), 70% was what people were talking about when the cars were originally delivered, and it's a good benchmark.

TL/DR: in my opinion, those who see range drops have actually had slow deterioration from lithium plating over time, but the Battery Management System wasn't detecting it properly before, and now it is. The update actually is a safety matter. If you don't update, the BMS may believe that it's safe to charge the battery higher than its actual capacity -- overcharging is, of course, a standard way to set lithium-ion batteries on fire, so if you don't update, don't charge your car to 100%. If your rated range goes below 70%, you probably have a warranty claim, if not you probably don't.
 
Naive question: On a trip where the range between two superchargers works out to 75%:
is it better to charge at the first supercharger to 95% and arrive at the next one with 20%,
or to charge at the first one to 90% and arrive at the next one with 15%?

(Please feel free to include considerations associated with ambient temperature in your response.)
 
I can’t believe you have the same performance as before 2019.16.2, having observed capacity reduction. That’s not the case for me.

Keep in mind that performance is also heavily impacted by SOC. As the battery drains, the voltage drop increases under the same 1500 amp load(1350 if you're Insane and not Ludicrous).

Since you're software induced fake degradation was induced, if you charge to 100% to get the equivalent of the old 85%(or whatever it is on yours), you'd see the performance that you'd have previously seen charging to 85%.

I think we've already gotten confirmation that Tesla didn't lower the current draw on the battery but we only have one sample CURRENTly.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: Chaserr
If you were Tesla, what would you do about the fire danger associated with batteries that are showing indications of some Li plating?

IF it is related to fire prevention (conflicting information provided by Tesla) then yes, those cars that they determine are at risk should be software limited WHILE THEY WAIT FOR A SAFETY RECALL.

I am STILL waiting for the airbag replacement - physical danger possible. I received a card saying my car is at risk and they would let me know when to bring it in... for 8 months now.
 
I’ve come around a bit on my initial stance about this over the week as it’s unfolded. I still think the premise - making changes to the battery pack in the name of safety, even after the sale, even those that affect range or performance - is fair game and frankly the responsible thing to do.

But the way it was handled and (not) communicated is typical Tesla dumpster fire and is not excusable.
Yeah, Tesla communications are still a dumpster fire, gotta agree on that.
 
It might prevent your car from catching on fire and burning to a crisp.

As y'all may know, I've been avoiding updates for literally *years*. They finally (just last update) fixed the worst regression with USB music -- you can now play folders in the correct order, yeehaw. But this one seems to be an actual safety update (unlike most of 'em) so I kind of wanted to get it.

And I got lucky, my cars were apparently not among the affected / range-reduced cars (can't be *sure* but it seems like it). My second car was actually driven back from Toledo, and Supercharged to 100% more than once, while on the new software, and its range is still fine.

It seems that Tesla is using the DVA (differential voltage analysis) detection system to detect lithium plating.

I started doing some research on this. Lithium plating apparently is much more likely with high speed charging, which I do very rarely, and also more likely in colder temperatures. While I drive in cold temperatures a lot, I have only Supercharged during the summer, since road trips in the winter are not my idea of fun. I have high regenerative braking loads because there are very steep hills here, but Tesla was always limiting regen a lot with cold batteries, and I'm guessing they were probably limiting it enough to prevent lithium plating. So my odds of having significant lithium plating are low. The previous owner of my second car Supercharged more often, but again primarily in the summer, and had no hills; and he seems to have avoided charging to 100%.

However, the DVA system appears to be unable to detect the plating until some charging cycles have passed, and I tend to be charging very shallowly through a narrow range, so I might end up with noticeable range loss later. I doubt it though -- it appears to primarily affect people who do a lot of Supercharging particularly in cold weather (and of course with the original all-graphite anodes).

Those of you whose range has dropped -- I understand why you're frustrated. But you don't want your cars to catch fire, I assume.

Most of you also probably don't have a warranty claim. Back when I bought my car in 2013, nobody knew how much range degradation was going to happen. Tesla wrote their warranty to avoid covering degradation unless it was extreme. At the time, the chatter was of degrading to 70% of rated range over the course of 8 to 10 years. (Tesla *has* replaced batteries where the range dropped below 70% of original rated range during the warranty period; they had to admit that those were flat out defective.)

Teslas have, on the whole, done better than that projection on range degradation over time. Even for owners with this "overnight" 10% - 15% drop,... they're mostly still doing about as well as that, so people with older cars who got hit with a range reduction still have more range than we expected back in 2013. That's going to make a warranty claim pretty hard.

And furthermore, it isn't really an overnight drop -- the safe range has been dropping slowly and continuously, due to a deterioration mode which was known and expected back in 2013, but Tesla's system wasn't detecting the drop in range. So it was a continuous drop in range, due to lithium plating, but Tesla's software wasn't detecting that, and now it is, so the reported drop is sudden.

Someone with a more recent car who saw a sudden drop may have a better claim since nobody should be seeing a 10% drop in range after 1-2 years.

Anyone whose range is less than 70% of original EPA rated, and still within the 8-year warranty period. probably does have a claim too. While there was no specific "70% warranty" (as there was with Model 3), 70% was what people were talking about when the cars were originally delivered, and it's a good benchmark.

TL/DR: in my opinion, those who see range drops have actually had slow deterioration from lithium plating over time, but the Battery Management System wasn't detecting it properly before, and now it is. The update actually is a safety matter. If you don't update, the BMS may believe that it's safe to charge the battery higher than its actual capacity -- overcharging is, of course, a standard way to set lithium-ion batteries on fire, so if you don't update, don't charge your car to 100%. If your rated range goes below 70%, you probably have a warranty claim, if not you probably don't.
Good answer. :)
 
Has this happened to others beyond the OP in that long thread in the S forum? I honestly haven’t been following the thread too closely.

As I said above, likely immaterial as you’ve consented to OTA updates at purchase...
FYI, nobody consents to OTA updates at purchase (it's not even clear that would be legal).
Late (post-2016 IIRC) purchasers consent to OTA updates as a condition for getting warranty repairs. Earlier purchasers did not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Droschke
It might prevent your car from catching on fire and burning to a crisp.

As y'all may know, I've been avoiding updates for literally *years*. They finally (just last update) fixed the worst regression with USB music -- you can now play folders in the correct order, yeehaw. But this one seems to be an actual safety update (unlike most of 'em) so I kind of wanted to get it.

And I got lucky, my cars were apparently not among the affected / range-reduced cars (can't be *sure* but it seems like it). My second car was actually driven back from Toledo, and Supercharged to 100% more than once, while on the new software, and its range is still fine.

It seems that Tesla is using the DVA (differential voltage analysis) detection system to detect lithium plating.

I started doing some research on this. Lithium plating apparently is much more likely with high speed charging, which I do very rarely, and also more likely in colder temperatures. While I drive in cold temperatures a lot, I have only Supercharged during the summer, since road trips in the winter are not my idea of fun. I have high regenerative braking loads because there are very steep hills here, but Tesla was always limiting regen a lot with cold batteries, and I'm guessing they were probably limiting it enough to prevent lithium plating. So my odds of having significant lithium plating are low. The previous owner of my second car Supercharged more often, but again primarily in the summer, and had no hills; and he seems to have avoided charging to 100%.

However, the DVA system appears to be unable to detect the plating until some charging cycles have passed, and I tend to be charging very shallowly through a narrow range, so I might end up with noticeable range loss later. I doubt it though -- it appears to primarily affect people who do a lot of Supercharging particularly in cold weather (and of course with the original all-graphite anodes).

Those of you whose range has dropped -- I understand why you're frustrated. But you don't want your cars to catch fire, I assume.

Most of you also probably don't have a warranty claim. Back when I bought my car in 2013, nobody knew how much range degradation was going to happen. Tesla wrote their warranty to avoid covering degradation unless it was extreme. At the time, the chatter was of degrading to 70% of rated range over the course of 8 to 10 years. (Tesla *has* replaced batteries where the range dropped below 70% of original rated range during the warranty period; they had to admit that those were flat out defective.)

Teslas have, on the whole, done better than that projection on range degradation over time. Even for owners with this "overnight" 10% - 15% drop,... they're mostly still doing about as well as that, so people with older cars who got hit with a range reduction still have more range than we expected back in 2013. That's going to make a warranty claim pretty hard.

And furthermore, it isn't really an overnight drop -- the safe range has been dropping slowly and continuously, due to a deterioration mode which was known and expected back in 2013, but Tesla's system wasn't detecting the drop in range. So it was a continuous drop in range, due to lithium plating, but Tesla's software wasn't detecting that, and now it is, so the reported drop is sudden.

Someone with a more recent car who saw a sudden drop may have a better claim since nobody should be seeing a 10% drop in range after 1-2 years.

Anyone whose range is less than 70% of original EPA rated, and still within the 8-year warranty period. probably does have a claim too. While there was no specific "70% warranty" (as there was with Model 3), 70% was what people were talking about when the cars were originally delivered, and it's a good benchmark.

TL/DR: in my opinion, those who see range drops have actually had slow deterioration from lithium plating over time, but the Battery Management System wasn't detecting it properly before, and now it is. The update actually is a safety matter. If you don't update, the BMS may believe that it's safe to charge the battery higher than its actual capacity -- overcharging is, of course, a standard way to set lithium-ion batteries on fire, so if you don't update, don't charge your car to 100%. If your rated range goes below 70%, you probably have a warranty claim, if not you probably don't.

All of this is fine...BUT...owners still have a compromised battery with a known failure condition. The module needs to be replaced. If this means replacing the entire battery, so be it.
 
So, let's run through what's wrong here:

I went to my local service center on the 18th because I had b-day event to attend nearby. I complained weeks ago through their support number and unable to reach my local service center.
Not OK.

So while I charged I went in to complain to service about how noone returns calls even though there are notes that request they do so.
Not OK.

They finally ran a remote diagnostic and say my battery is fine but I've lost 23 miles since 2019.16.x update. I asked why was I not informed as I've stated multiple times through phone, chat and e-mail I wanted someone to get back to me but I hear nothing.
Not OK !!!!

Tesla's communications failures are killing goodwill towards the company.
 
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.
Therein lies the rub. This affects any owner wanting to get rid of their car and it further depreciates due to range. Perhaps this is why they stopped using battery sizes with the model number as they saw this coming?
 
it appears to primarily affect people who do a lot of Supercharging particularly in cold weather (and of course with the original all-graphite anodes).
Great post neroden.
When did the change(s) away from all-graphite anodes occur? Is the problem with Li plating pretty much gone with the new anodes, or is it still a good idea to limit supercharging to high SoC in cold weather?
Can you get Li plating charging charging to just 85% or less at a supercharger?
 
Therein lies the rub. This affects any owner wanting to get rid of their car and it further depreciates due to range. Perhaps this is why they stopped using battery sizes with the model number as they saw this coming?
I don't think Tesla actually devalued your car. They just made is more transparent for buyers to see the actual value of your car.
 
It's my public opinion that the Tesla software engineering department has all but fired their QA team, and they are now adding functionality that only serves Tesla, and not me.

Let me state that that has been my public opinion since 2016, when they broke the track order indexing for USB music, among other regressions.

They finally fixed this regression bug with the latest version (.20.2.1). So I updated yesterday in order to have a working version before they break it again.

Let this be a lesson to all hiring managers: when you hire enough people from Apple, you get their corporate culture of treating owners like sheep.
Ha! Perhaps that's the reason.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Vexar
I don't think Tesla actually devalued your car. They just made is more transparent for buyers to see the actual value of your car.

I don't disagree with the statement in a vacuum. I do disagree with the logic leading up to the above statement. Tesla made a change to the vehicle, post production, to reduce the chances of catastrophic failure. This change caused a loss in functionality. Furthermore, Tesla never released any guidance to allow owners to avoid this condition. This alteration was pushed to owners 'overnight' rather than slowly over time. This is also an indication that Tesla themselves were not aware of this condition. All of which points to a failure which must be corrected.

Limit batteries which are failing, until they can be replaced. They MUST be replaced!
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind that performance is also heavily impacted by SOC. As the battery drains, the voltage drop increases under the same 1500 amp load(1350 if you're Insane and not Ludicrous).

Since you're software induced fake degradation was induced, if you charge to 100% to get the equivalent of the old 85%(or whatever it is on yours), you'd see the performance that you'd have previously seen charging to 85%.

I think we've already gotten confirmation that Tesla didn't lower the current draw on the battery but we only have one sample CURRENTly.


Yes, of course, but I’m speaking of “best” performance which would be at cell voltages near 4.2v.