Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[St Charles]

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.

Since you seem to think it doesn't matter, how about you swap batteries with an affected owner. After all, Tesla says the batteries are working just fine and there is nothing wrong with them...

 

[ran349]

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 38 kWh per 100 miles number includes charging losses, whereas the 295 Wh/mi is what Tesla uses to calculate a rated mile.
Good observation you had that they don't actually state that 295 number. But it was verified by wko57 in his detective work on the car.

 

[Droschke]

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.

Then, what's the purpose of having 8-year, unlimited battery warranty?

Looks like you own a model 3 which comes with the similar battery warranty. I hope you do not consider your warranty a joke!

 

[Droschke]

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.

Thank you for the correction

On Edit: Thanks for not using the word"abuse". But, I believe you are still missing the point because by your replacement sentence, "in spite of some possible charging practices that, in retrospect, seem less than ideal", you are stating an unsubstantiated opinion which completely contradicts what Tesla has told the impacted owners per my post#1005. Tesla is telling us our batteries are just fine, nevertheless they cut 30 miles of our range overnight.

 

[faughtz]

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.

Much of your post is unfounded conjecture.

Best effort doesn’t count; this isn’t some Kickstarter activity. I want the car performance and battery capacity which I paid for, minus expected degradation, based on several years of data. If my car is one of a small number impacted, as tesla has claimed, why should I bear that burden, having no insight as to cause? I have zero trust in tesla, I have been deceived too many times.

I know where my threshold is; where’s yours?

 

[Droschke]

The 38 kWh per 100 miles number includes charging losses, whereas the 295 Wh/mi is what Tesla uses to calculate a rated mile.
Good observation you had that they don't actually state that 295 number. But it was verified by wko57 in his detective work on the car.

Yes, correct. But I was just pointing out the 295 wh/mi might not have a legal standing because it's not on the monroney.

 

[Icer]

For those that missed it, DJRas post 922
Tesla does offer warranty coverage for degraded battery pack
Hopefully DJ was given correct info

 

[sorka]

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.

In 2015, the $10K was the upgrade fee over the 60.

 

[Droschke]

In 2015, the $10K was the upgrade fee over the 60.

Correct. And, this why the value loss here is so explicit.

 

[sorka]

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.

First, of all, the only semi official word from Tesla (official if you believe Eletrek is telling the truth) was that the update that software locked the top end of capacity was to prolong battery life. There was nothing in their statement to Eletrek about it being a safety concern.

Then a month later, Tesla says they're rolling out a software update(starting that day) to prevent batteries from combusting.

Are these REALLY the same update or different updates?

Any properly charged Lithium Ion battery will not develop excessive Li Plating. It only happens under certain conditions a properly programmed BMS should prevent it.

Any cell that has excessive Li Plating is damaged and unsafe and slapping a software fix on it to lock out capacity is a terrible idea for the long run and still a ticking time bomb. For the short run, it's a great idea to limit range and slap a message up on the display to tell the consumer to come to the service center as soon as possible.

This is not even a warranty issue. It's a safety issue and would apply to batteries even beyond the 8 year warranty. It should be a safety recall which has NO TIME OR MILEAGE LIMIT.

 

[sorka]

But it was verified by wko57 in his detective work on the car.

057, not o57. Remember, accuracy

 

[sorka]

For those that missed it, DJRas post 922
Tesla does offer warranty coverage for degraded battery pack
Hopefully DJ was given correct info

I found that very interesting but I doubt you'll find that in writing from Tesla anywhere. It could be that an employee was relaying info to the customer out of their own internal guidelines for warranty replacement based on non normal degradation since the warranty excludes "normal battery degradation" and they have some internal guidelines for what that is. But it's not official. Only the Model 3 has an official degradation threshold published in the warranty.

 

[Droschke]

... these batteries are more susceptible to Li plating at the anode than post 2016 batteries are...

... I don't see any negligence on Tesla's part.

Again, Tesla is telling us our batteries just fine (the word Li-Plating has never been spoken by Tesla). But, if you claim our batteries are suffering from Li-Plating condition (a major safety concern), then I do see negligence on Tesla's part (its highly advertised enhanced BMS) by not detecting the condition early on and take the necessary corrective actions to prevent a safety issue.

I'm not sure what you wee told when you took the delivery of your model 3, but I was told to charge to 90% for the daily usage, don't worry, be happy. That I did. Had no clue that the warranty was a joke (you have alluded to that) and I might lose 30 range miles overnight for a 4 year old car with only 43k low miles on odometer.

 

[surfaholic]

I thought I would throw in my degradation after the update. It went from 400km(248mil) 3 weeks ago(charged to 97% and calculated the rest) After update 393km(244mil)(Charged to 70% and calculated the rest). I will be charging to 90% later this week for a longer trip and will update if needed.
Purchased
Sep 2018 with 400km at 100% @56.3K
June 2019 was still 400km @68.5K
July 2019 393km @ 69.7K

 

[lightningltd]

15% drop is the highest I've seen. I wish more owners populate the Gsheet to get a better sample.

Got that one beat
Populated the sheet, still losing range.
Down 18.11% from new, 15.23% from where it was pre-update. 134,000 miles, 2013 S85. I am NOT amused!

 

[Droschke]

In my view, you are people who deserve a lot a respect.

If you are still reading this thread, would you tell Tesla that?

Appreciate it.

 

[Droschke]

Tesla battery degradation at less than 10% after over 160,000 miles, according to latest data

Published just a year ago.

From the article, notice the wording "gradual energy or power loss with time and use". Heck, my car is 4 years young and with only 43,000 miles. My loss after the 2019.16.x update is a minimum of 12% and I still have a long way to go to reach 160,000 miles.

Edit: typo fix.

 

[CuriousG]

Then, what's the purpose of having 8-year, unlimited battery warranty?

Looks like you own a model 3 which comes with the similar battery warranty. I hope you do not consider your warranty a joke!

Yeah about that. I have early VIN Model 3LR and they have since raised the range to 325 miles. During that time when they updated the range through a firmware update, I only noticed I think a 2-3 mile increase.

I believe currently 90% is 279 for me which means 13-14 mile degradation for a year and a half old car with ~26k miles. I believe I have only Supercharged twice and both times were short stints of around 10 minute sessions. I'm not too worried at this point since the car does over 300 miles on a full charge. If they pull the same s*** on Model 3, there will certainly be hell due it appealing to a wider audience.

 

[MaryAnning3]

Thank you for the correction

On Edit: Thanks for not using the word"abuse". But, I believe you are still missing the point because by your replacement sentence, "in spite of some possible charging practices that, in retrospect, seem less than ideal", you are stating an unsubstantiated opinion which completely contradicts what Tesla has told the impacted owners per my post#1005. Tesla is telling us our batteries are just fine, nevertheless they cut 30 miles of our range overnight.

I am trying to look at it from a scientific perspective. Tesla is an amazing technology company, but there is no authority that can dictate the scientific basis for understanding this. Also, I don't think that you believe that your battery is just fine. (maybe I am wrong about that). So I am wondering, and trying to learn about, why some batteries have developed this issue.

 

[MaryAnning3]

Tesla battery degradation at less than 10% after over 160,000 miles, according to latest data

Published just a year ago.

From the article, notice the wording "gradual energy or power loss with time and use". Heck, my car is 4 years young and with only 43,000 miles. My loss after the 2019.16.x update is a minimum of 12% and I still have a long way to go to reach 160,000 miles.

Edit: typo fix.

Wow. I am really sympathetic. You have 12% loss after only 4 years and 43,000 miles? That just seems really unexpected. I was assuming way more miles? Are you an outlier, or is this typical? Are your anodes pure carbon?