Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Chaserr]

In any case, this should not be our problem :-/

It's Tesla's problem although Tesla has been trying to shift its problems onto our shoulders for months.

There was a discussion of Panasonic delivering "improperly cured" cells to Tesla as they were trying to meet delivery deadlines. (I think, I don't know the process of making calls and may be misusing terms). I don't know where that discussion would up but I remember it because it was one of the few suggestions that could account for the totally random selection of infected batteries. People keep showing up assuming it is related to supercharging quantity, miles, age, and so on but the evidence shows no common point of commonality. Improperly manufactured cells could explain why some cars are capped and others aren't.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

What is your guys take on the role of Panasonic? Did they deliver a cell-/cell-chemistry according to Tesla spec, or do we have 18650s primarily being based on Panasonics' cookbook? In any case, this should not be our problem :-/

Tesla has leverage over Panasonic, who is no longer the only game in town. If it were Panasonic's issue Tesla would not be fighting this in the courts. If Panasonic is involved in any way it's by giving Tesla curing recommendations for the batteries that Tesla did not follow. There were also media reports of a whistle-blower in the Nevada gigafactory claiming Tesla was ignoring safety issues and intentionally building packs with defects.

There are plenty of dots which create an ugly picture once we connect them.

 

[JRP3]

Pretty sure any "curing" is part of Panasonic's process, and certainly would be regarding the 18650s from Japan. Nevada whistleblower was talking about model 3 packs as I remember.

 

[Battpower]

I believe the marketing promise back then was 150 miles in 20 minutes-30 minutes. My car delivered on that promise until very recently, when Tesla decided to renege on that promise.

And because Supercharging rate is decided by Tesla only, they effectively have control over how soon batteries are likely to start failing. Not only planned obsolescence, but controllable planned obsolescence.

Not only are there no clear statements in owner documentation that specifically and directly cover likely earlier and faster battery deterioration, but the principle cause is outside of the owner's control if they make use of Supercharging - which is also one of the brand's primary selling points.

Before you reply that this is all either above or below anything Tesla would or could do, just listen for a moment for the stampede of Tesla rushing to provide information about what is going on. However they came to be in the situation, there is zero valid excuse for complete lack of meaningful and helpful information

 

[Guy V]

I don't see the EPA thing happening. Unlike VW, I think few, if any, here believe Tesla intentionally set out to mislead anybody.

It certainly seems they made that decision at some point.

 

[supratachophobia]

Pretty sure any "curing" is part of Panasonic's process, and certainly would be regarding the 18650s from Japan. Nevada whistleblower was talking about model 3 packs as I remember.

If I recall during the gigafactory tour, curing is on the Tesla side of the hallway. So Panasonic makes the cell, then literally moves it across and it becomes Tesla's. The curing takes some time before the cells can be charged and made into packs.

 

[supratachophobia]

It certainly seems they made that decision at some point.

What about those 90kwh packs that only had 84kwh in them?

 

[Guy V]

Tesla has leverage over Panasonic, who is no longer the only game in town. If it were Panasonic's issue Tesla would not be fighting this in the courts. If Panasonic is involved in any way it's by giving Tesla curing recommendations for the batteries that Tesla did not follow. There were also media reports of a whistle-blower in the Nevada gigafactory claiming Tesla was ignoring safety issues and intentionally building packs with defects.

There are plenty of dots which create an ugly picture once we connect them.

Tesla still desperately needs Panasonic, which is now promising to step up from 35 to 54 gigs of production, probably still at little to no profit. It's just not in the cards for Tesla to try to hammer them at this point.

 

[supratachophobia]

If the EPA investigates it can still be Dieselgate... Tesla falsified our EPA test results using a software cheat, just like VW. Let's not report them to the EPA just yet - I think the NHTSA's safety audit should be sufficient to fix our cars without going that far and we can always revisit the option later as a last resort.

In a way, they did. By including the 4kwh reserve in their tests, but not in their actual driving, they lied. Don't believe me? Miles remaining @ full charge includes the reserve in the calculation as available to drive on, but when you actually hit 0%, the reserve is still there.

 

[JRP3]

If I recall during the gigafactory tour, curing is on the Tesla side of the hallway. So Panasonic makes the cell, then literally moves it across and it becomes Tesla's. The curing takes some time before the cells can be charged and made into packs.

So the huge storage rack system is on the Tesla side? In any case this would not apply to the 18650's from Japan used in S/X.

 

[mymagiccarpet]

Is there a way to get an update with NHTSA investigation? Tesla had 30 days to respond after initial inquiry, but haven't seen anything from NHTSA side after that.
How far does the logging history go in the car? I bought mine in March. Two months to the day i got the new FW in May and lost 27mi in <50mins that it took to flash the FW. Up to that point, the two times I charged it to 100% during the trip, the car charged to 239 and 240 (expected max range for 70D). It had 22k miles at that time. I was very happy.
Unfortunately, I don't have any proof to what range it charged at 100% before FW upgrade. I had a picture too that showed 100% charged range at 239, but I deleted it. I do have witnesses though.
Is there a way to still recover that data somehow? I'm guessing not, but at least want to close on that.

For me personally, there is a reason why i got 70D and not eg. 60, and I suspect for many of you as well is the same. It's so I can easily make trips that I expect to make frequently without having to charge. With MS 60, that would not be possible. But now with battery capped, I apparently own a 60D instead. (well own is a stretch here, it has become apparent).

So in summary, and i think this is the part that is missed by frequent parachuters in this thread:

• those of us affected, paid willingly and knowingly for something, and then seller took it away later without permission and compensation

Try applying that concept to any other product, and it'll have a legal designation - theft.
The reason does not make ANY difference. If it's safety, then it's thank you, but you still owe me difference b/c I paid you for it, and I'm happy you are proactive. If not safety, then there could be additional penalties.There is no case where this becomes non-issue.

Let me draw a parallel: Car is sold with 4 cylinder and 6 cylinder engine. A person decides to buy one with 6 cylinders and pays for it. Then two months later, the manufacturer turns off 2 cylinders. Doesn't that person at that point of time have a 4 cylinder car that they decided they didn't want, and ended up paying more for a 6 cylinder car?
Shouldn't they be:
1. told about it?
2. offered something in return?

Going through this part of ownership experience, there won't be another Tesla in my garage until and if this is resolved to satisfactory manner. And we were going to get an X this year also. So yes, Tesla, that's a "-1" unit on a car that's very expensive, and is not selling so well. Resolve the issue at hand in satisfactory manner, and I would definitely consider an X again.

 

[omarsultan]

It certainly seems they made that decision at some point.

Sure, but there is world of difference between an intent to defraud and simply making bad decisions. Again, I don't think there was ill intent and I think that would be very hard to prove otherwise.

The more interesting piece will be what decisions Tesla made once they recognized something had gone amiss.

 

[JRP3]

Claimed GF worker says aging racks are now gone, the aging process just happens during normal operations

As stated before, M3 cells are shipped to Tesla with 30% or less charge. Then they go thru manufacturing process to be combined into essentially a battery pack. That ships to Fremont, then installed into a car. In essence, there is a ‘cure time’ between cell manufactured and initial charge. It just happens during manufacturing....and isn’t 2 weeks or 30 days.

Much like any other manufacturing, testing can be done at various states to indicate a potential failure. Once a module is assembled, there is no turning back. So we need to know just before that point whether it’s good or not. And when you process over 3 million cells a day, you have a lot of data...

Tesla Gigafactory

 

[sorka]

So I know my pack is not out of balance. The other thing is the proposed procedure. That's just nonsense. It doesn't take the pack 6 months to balance. I interpret that as, go away we need time to figure out out problem.

What SOC is that 4mv at? The lower the SOC, the larger the difference gets.

 

[sorka]

One possible solution would be to replace all old batteries with new 100 packs and software limit them. For an extra fee the owner can unlock the extra capacity. This would create some income that would at least in part pay for the new batteries. That's assuming the new cell used in the 100 packs are not going to develop the same issue. If that's the case Tesla is seriously in trouble because the same cell Chemistry is used in the Model 3.

I wouldn't want the extra weight of the 100 unless I had more than enough extra power from it to compensate.

 

[supratachophobia]

So the huge storage rack system is on the Tesla side? In any case this would not apply to the 18650's from Japan used in S/X.

Exactly, as far as we all should know, the 18650's aren't made at Gigafactory 1.... or are they? The tour did specifically cite the 2170's as being used in the production example.

 

[Battpower]

Sure, but there is world of difference between an intent to defraud and simply making bad decisions. Again, I don't think there was ill intent and I think that would be very hard to prove otherwise.

The more interesting piece will be what decisions Tesla made once they recognized something had gone amiss.

And the only thing I can see at present to indicate which of those it is is Tesla's willingness to give owners some guidance, information, instructions.... anything. What I have picked up is that they want to gag anyone who might know something and spill the beans.

I can only judge by what I see not by what I wish. What I wish is that Tesla fix an honest mistake by whatever it takes to do the right thing.

 

[AQQU]

... and wouldn't TSLA also be obligated to file a risk-statement of sorts to the SEC in due time?

 

[islandbayy]

It's nice to see you still driving a Tesla after all of the issues you've had. Tesla really owes people like yourself for creating so much positive media for them when they needed it the most. Now they piss on those who helped them get to where they are today. This is so upsetting to watch.

.

Thank You for the Kind Words! I won't deny that its been a rocky ride. At this point, for lack of better words, After 7 years, I feel pissed on by the Company. Thankfully, the great people at the service center are still taking care of me. My 90D is in for a snapped ball joint, and other associated damage (Had to curb the car). Also thankfully, my 90D is still on firmware 8.1, so my supercharging speeds are still as good as they can be (94kW max, but can be sustained through 50% SOC). Now, my Model X on the other hand, has a 50mv imbalance on one brick of cells, and it's reported back my battery is in excellent health. Also, the X (it's a 75D), which supercharged at decent rates from start to finish, will hit as much as 132 kW charge rate, for approximately 1-3 minutes, then quickly drop to around 60kW. By 50% SOC, i'm down to 50kW, by 65% SOC, I'm down to 35-40kW, and by 75% soc, I'm chugging along at about 20kW charge rate, on a WARM battery.
So it looks like my AP2, November 2016 Model X 75D has been Charge-gated now. That car is on latest firmware. With it's smaller battery, I've now ruled out my Model X for any long distance driving, other than between home and my parents, which is 125 miles with a supercharger at the 75 mile point. I cannot make it, on a 100% charge anymore either. My Full 100% charge is 214 miles. When I bought it, it was 222. That was last april. lost the range with 10.1 firmware.
Even displaying a 100% charge with 214, I cannot make the 120 mile drive on one charge. The lowest consumption with heat off I can get is 450 Wh/mile.
My battery is the new chem, same as my 90D Model S.

 

[islandbayy]

Exactly, as far as we all should know, the 18650's aren't made at Gigafactory 1.... or are they? The tour did specifically cite the 2170's as being used in the production example.

The Model S and X Cells, the 18650's, are made in Japan. Model 3, Y, are made at the GF in Reno.