Xfiniti is an ISP - anyone else with the same ISP can join that wifi. Meaning if they are saving passwords like the post I responded to mentions they could use another tesla's credentials to connect. It's illegal access, but Tesla breaking laws is the purpose of this entire thread which is why several hacking complaints are included in the class action.
-
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
DJRas
Member
Are you saying they are not charging the newer models to 4.2V? Never heard that 4.2V was harmful and a mistake!
Interesting to read the C&D's critics on the status of the customer service and the slow charging complaint (50kW on M3).
That is what Tesla said before they changed their minds and sold us cars charged to 4.2v and they still are to my knowledge. The old Tesla blog post says they weren't because it is bad for batteries, then they did it anyway, then they downgraded us by capping after sale.
@Droschke
C&D will get the celebrity Elon tweet treatment and white glove rapid service that actual tesla owners don't get.
aerodyne
2 of 3 EV's - Defect Free!
Maybe one solution to the lawsuit would be to return us to version 8 or 9, and promise no more updates..
eye.surgeon
Active Member
Sadly Tesla PR is too disorganized and/or mismanaged to give special service to the automotive media. One of the biggest automotive youtube channels was having trouble getting parts for their new Model 3 that had been in a minor accident and Tesla did nothing. The negative videos went on for 2 months while their car sat in the shop and they couldn't even gen anyone to answer the phone at tesla. This is a channel that has millions of views a month.
Version 8 when the features were working and with popup disclaimers on charging best practices, etc. for those cars with healthy batteries. The damaged batteries need to be addressed separately. Reverting the software is not the cure for these batteries.
Last edited:
aerodyne
2 of 3 EV's - Defect Free!
My suggestion would be for the 85 and smaller packs, who have not seen any changes other than reduced SuC speeds. For those that have been voltage capped, resulting in reduced range and power, I agree there needs to be another solution. I think the most those folks can hope for is a case settlement of a few grand, like the performance cars got in Europe.
I do not think, nor expect, to get my 116 Kw peak SuC speed back. l don't mind that change, if it will help preserve the pack. I really want to keep the car more than 15 years...
"Regengate" is another issue. Not going to update until they fix this one. I can see it causing several accident scenarios.
This would be the end of Tesla. We paid $10,000 to upgrade capacity. Others paid $20,000 for Performance. Others paid even more for Ludicrous. It's not even about the money either - we paid all that money because we wanted the range and power upgrades, not because we wanted to spend more money. We never agreed to sell it back it was stolen. We aren't asking for money back we want what we own returned. If Tesla can get away with removing $35000+ without permission and get slapped with a tiny fraction as "punishment" nobody will ever buy a car from them again. They would have no reason to let anyone keep what they paid for - Performance increases warranty overhead costs! Range does too! Everything will be downgraded for profitability. The end result is no sales - people expect to own what they paid for. If a car sale was a random roll of the dice lease where you don't know when it will expire, would you sign that MVPA?
"Although it’s possible the timing is purely coincidental, the service department at Tesla’s Toledo, Ohio, facility contacted C/D within three hours of this story's initial publication, offering a loaner car, a rental, or $100 per day in Uber credit while our Model 3 is in the shop."
I was under the impression that Tesla didn't give loaners or uber credit for the Model 3
They do, but it seems to be dependent on the SC and availability. Hopefully this C&D experience will prod them to be more consistent.
Those changes are being implemented for a reason, presumably to protect the pack in some manner, so, IMO a simple rollback is not a fix. From a SW development perspective, it's also not all that practical (i.e expensive) to maintain two branches of code like that.
I don't know if I'd use those characteristics but it is most certainly true that charging to 4.2 volts is not good for the battery and doing so causes some damage and degradation. But it's a SMALL amount and cumulative over time, so if you charge to 100% every day, you will see pretty severe degradation over a shorter period. But if you rarely charge to 100%, say once a month, you should be able to go for years without seeing any significant degradation.
This is why you should only charge to 100% or close to it when you really need the range as I do twice a year.
A rollback is a fix. The cheapest most instant fix.
If they can't safely or legally roll back, they need to comply with the law and repair our batteries, or replace them if repair is not possible. Capping was never a fix it was an attempt at deception that failed. What needs to be fixed is the deception. If the deception was intended to cover up something else that needs to be fixed that they don't want to fix they will be forced to fix it.
I don't see how you can say that with the info we have. If rolling back to v8 gives me back miles and faster charging, but puts my house at higher risk for burning down, I would't really see that as a fix.
