Why don’t you guys start a thread on Teslas own forum then and monitor it’s „survival“
No need to speculate. I stopped posting there years ago because threads mysteriously vanished.
-
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
No need to speculate. I stopped posting there years ago because threads mysteriously vanished.
trayloader
Member
CuriousG
Active Member
I bet they failed to mention that you MUST surrender your current battery for the replacement.
CuriousG
Active Member
CuriousG
Active Member
The problem is your 97% now is probably below the true 90% and takes much longer to charge to that range.
The thing is.
Obviously this is not Tesla forgetting or ”failing” to communicate about this openly.
This is Tesla being their usual secretive self when it suits them, ethics be damned.
bhtooefr
Active Member
Is the Tesla BMS able to isolate strings of cells? Looks like the organization is 74 in parallel, then 6 in serial within a module - if you knock out a string, you reduce the maximum voltage by 4.2 volts, but if that lets you increase the maximum voltage per cell from, say, 4.15 to 4.2, you come out ahead. (But, that requires being able to isolate strings.)
DJRas
Member
The 295 multiplier is related to USABLE... NOT nominal.
REMEMBER... Original "85kWh" was actually 81kWh with 77.88 USABLE 77.88/0.295=264 rated range
DJRas
Member
All of the range loss occurred with 16.2. The later ones have been adjust charging algorithms and will likely REDUCE the chance of damaging your battery.
I have just finished installing 2019.24.2 in hopes they restore some of my range.
DJRas
Member
No, they DID say that... "core charge". Tesla will then "recondition" the old pack and recycle defective modules.
DJRas
Member
ScanMyTesla data shows Rated miles and SOC which match you dash displayed numbers.
Those are calculated from USABLE kWh not NORMAL.
SOC UI is what TMSPY displays and ScanMyTesla says SOC UI is not used.
MY numbers show the constant changed.. Usable 60.4/218=0.277 (~0.276 since we don't have enough significan digits in our calculations to be accurate to 3 decimal places).
I came up with the 0.276 by using multiple points along the USABLE Remaining divided by rated miles.
Last edited:
davidc18
Active Member
islandbayy
Active Member
They won’t let you keep it. Exchange or nothing. weather your paying for it or it’s warranty. Doesn’t matter. Now you may have legal case to keep your old battery if they forget to tell you they keep it as a core.
All cores have a charge associated with them if you opt to not return the used part. Sure they could say the core charge is $20k, but they have to set that price.
This is on my monroney:
85 kWh Battery $10,000
Fuel Economy
89 MPGe
City = 88
Highway = 90
kW-hrs per 100 miles = 38
Driving Range = 265 miles
So,
1) I did pay $10,000 for the 85kWh
2) The wh/mile on the sticker is (38/100)x1000=380 wh/mi
Not sure how they got 265 driving range based on 380 wh/mi? Furthermore, even tough we know the basis for the 295 wh/mi value discussed here there is no official wording about 295 wh/mi on the sticker itself.
The sudden range loss (with the emphasis on the word sudden) is the result of a software update. Since Tesla is mute on it's findings, there is no evidence to suggest my "sudden" range loss is due to my 4 years of "charging habits".
And the Tesla's BMS failed to detect it much earlier and to take corrective action before the damage done and deciding to drop my range by 30 miles?
"in spite of some possible misuse"?
Many impacted owners, and per their posts here, have their cars tested by Tesla after the software induced sudden range loss. Tesla has told them their batteries are just fine and the loss is normal. For example, this is what Tesla has told me:
"reviewed your cars data to ensure there are no other issues that are occurring with your battery or the charging system and everything is working as it should."
So, when there no evidence that Tesla itself is pointing to any misuse of the batteries by the owners, why should you?
I really appreciate this thread and feel like I have learned a lot from reading it. Additionally, I appreciate that most of you bought cars from Tesla quite a few years ago and thereby helped a very important company, one that could tangibly influence global warming, to grow and thrive. In my view, you are people who deserve a lot a respect.
I don't think you have a warranty case here. The batteries are presumably not unsafe, and the total loss of range over the last 5 years or so, as I understand it, is not sufficient to justify a warranty replacement. Whether the loss of range was sudden or gradual, and just recently diagnosed and addressed: I don't see how that matters.
Presumably most, or all, of you have batteries with pure carbon anodes and these batteries are more susceptible to Li plating at the anode than post 2016 batteries are. The technology has improved and Tesla has been on the forefront of that. I don't see any negligence on Tesla's part. They sold the best batteries they could in 2015 and they are doing so now. If Tesla were to replace some batteries, that could tend to encourage other owners of older model S cars to try to cross some threshold and get $10,000 to $20,000 of new battery in their 5 year old cars. That doesn't seem like a good plan for Tesla either in terms of the $$ outlay, the time commitment or the pubic perception and distortions that would inevitably follow.
I don't think you have a warranty case here. The batteries are presumably not unsafe, and the total loss of range over the last 5 years or so, as I understand it, is not sufficient to justify a warranty replacement. Whether the loss of range was sudden or gradual, and just recently diagnosed and addressed: I don't see how that matters.
Presumably most, or all, of you have batteries with pure carbon anodes and these batteries are more susceptible to Li plating at the anode than post 2016 batteries are. The technology has improved and Tesla has been on the forefront of that. I don't see any negligence on Tesla's part. They sold the best batteries they could in 2015 and they are doing so now. If Tesla were to replace some batteries, that could tend to encourage other owners of older model S cars to try to cross some threshold and get $10,000 to $20,000 of new battery in their 5 year old cars. That doesn't seem like a good plan for Tesla either in terms of the $$ outlay, the time commitment or the pubic perception and distortions that would inevitably follow.
I see your point and I apologize for using the word "misuse". Maybe I could have said:
"in spite of some possible charging practices that, in retrospect, seem less than ideal".
and maybe charging practices are completely irrelevant? I was just wondering and hoping to find out more about why some older Model S cars with pure carbon anodes have this issue and others apparently do not.
Similar threads
