Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Ferrycraigs]

Ran349,
While the graph looks good, when I use the formula listed on the original post (1page) and canbus info, it reflects 72kWh pack not 85kWh.

Am I wrong?

The 85kWh pack was only ever 81.5kWh total, 77.5 kWh usable. But I would agree with @ran349, if your average Voltage is 4.193V at 99%, that’s not far off 4.2V @ 100%, so I would tend to agree that you’re unlikely to have been capped.

 

[omarsultan]

Take a photo of this thread on its browser in the left trunk cubby! Free iPhone! (or whatever you prefer)


For anyone still clinging to the myths that Tesla didn't institute batterygate and chargegate over fires and nothing else, I implore you to read exactly what they told you about the fires and why they were instituting chargegate and batterygate to try and reduce how many Teslas were burning. Here are their exact words:



Lets explain this to those of you that want Tesla's words to be "misinterpreted":

This was said the same day Tesla released 2019.16 - It is no coincidence "we are revising charge and thermal management settings on Model S and Model X vehicles via an over-the-air software update that will begin rolling out today" refers to 2019.16 or that 2019.16 had some seriously problematic revisions to charge and thermal settings. This update instituted batterygate and chargegate - charge and thermal settings - and we see it in our cars.

This entire press statement is about fires. Absolutely no other topic is mentioned. It starts with Tesla's fire safety. It tells us Tesla is internally investigating root causes for parked car fires, and it tells us they are taking direct action to try and stop it.

Tesla is not conjecturing. This is not an opinion or a hypothesis, it is Tesla's plain English explanation of why they felt they had to implement OTA updates that capped nearly every aspect of our cars' performance.

Several people are claiming Tesla "misinterpreted that sentence" or something. That is unfortunately out of touch - for starters the press release is long and thorough about its discussion of fires and actions taken to bring down the number of cars that catch fire, with no room to interpret individual sentances among the whole. It doesn't matter what any of us try to claim, we can't take back their words. Tesla said exactly those words, there is no misinterpretation possible and their words were carefully crafted to deliver the news with as soft a blow as possible while acknowledging they were responding to a rash of fires. This is not an interpretation, it is the English language at its simplest. The only interpretation going on is inside your skull, in your Broca's Area where language is interpreted.

None of us wanted Tesla to cause damages to our cars, but they did. Unfortunately, denying what they said will not undo what they did. Denial is a natural part of the reaction cycle, but it should be shorter term. For anyone new to this topic or still not past Denial, I urge you to read Post #1 as the majority of us are long past that stage of grieving over what Tesla did to us. We're all sympathetic to what they did to you, but it can't be undone as simply as claiming their actions and words are "misinterpreted." I wish it could.

Sure, and if you read all the words and not just the big ones, it *could* mean they started off worrying about the worst case scenario (i.e. spontaneous battery fires") and *after* the referenced investigation/analysis was complete, found out that fires were not a concern but uncovered faster than expected pack degradation which they would need to do something about.

 

[omarsultan]

So, two tidbits from the earnings call yesterday. First of all the company is doing really well and the stock is on a tear. I think this is helpful t our cause for two reasons: first, it means they have money to devote to funding and fixing pack issues, every dollar does to have to go token the company of life support. Second, with so much glowing coverage, I think Tesla is incented to keep the positive momentum and will be more inclined to find a solution that keeps, instead of this surfacing as an issue that kills the post news cycle.

Second is this answer from Elon when questioned the S/X will ever get 2170 cells:

Sure. Well, actually the core chemistry inside the 18650 cell has improved many times over the years. So, it's really just a form factor as opposed to a core technology. So it's -- yes, I think we're pretty happy with where the -- with the energy content of the cell and the improvements in efficiency of the vehicle. The -- we're rapidly approaching a 400 mile range for Model S, for example. So, this is -- it won't be long before Model S is 400 -- has 400 mile range.

For those of us that end up with reman packs, I think this is an important point, that, even if not new, the replacement pack is probably better (better cell chemistry) than our older packs.

 

[omarsultan]

In other interesting news, apparently Tesla changed the battery warranty on new S/X - there is a 150K mile cap, but now with a 70% retention guarantee:

UPDATE: So, I noticed the warranty link for my car now links to the new warranty coverage language, so I expect new excitement to spawn from that change.

 

[Jcarlson]

They cannot retroactively change the warranty conditions for already sold cars, but that new limit probably now applies for used cars sold by Tesla.

 

[Droschke]

So, two tidbits from the earnings call yesterday. First of all the company is doing really well and the stock is on a tear. I think this is helpful t our cause for two reasons: first, it means they have money to devote to funding and fixing pack issues, every dollar does to have to go token the company of life support. Second, with so much glowing coverage, I think Tesla is incented to keep the positive momentum and will be more inclined to find a solution that keeps, instead of this surfacing as an issue that kills the post news cycle.

Second is this answer from Elon when questioned the S/X will ever get 2170 cells:



For those of us that end up with reman packs, I think this is an important point, that, even if not new, the replacement pack is probably better (better cell chemistry) than our older packs.

This is a disposition to look on the more favorable side, expecting the most favorable outcome. Kind of the believing that goodness pervades reality. The company has already lost the trust of lots of owners, many of whom used to be promoters.

 

[Chaserr]

They eliminated the unlimited mile warranty?

Sure, and if you read all the words and not just the big ones, it *could* mean they started off worrying about the worst case scenario (i.e. spontaneous battery fires") and *after* the referenced investigation/analysis was complete, found out that fires were not a concern but uncovered faster than expected pack degradation which they would need to do something about.

You're misinterpreting. @bhzmark was talking about your misunderstanding above - you're clearly not reading the words fire many times and in the same thought Tesla connects fire to batterygate and chargegate. If you're not reading any of the words you might have missed all of them but they are still there. I can point to them but I can't guarantee the reader can comprehend them. You've suggested words that are not there are the reason for your misinterpretation but I'm afraid nothing you think you read is written.

They cannot retroactively change the warranty conditions for already sold cars, but that new limit probably now applies for used cars sold by Tesla.

Can they remove a warranty after the sale? It should carry its original warranty forever, even when sold used I don't think Magnuson Moss has provisions allowing the retroactive reduction of an existing warranty while it is still active. I don't think it matters if Batterygate is still ongoing when 2020 Model S have 200,000 miles - NHTSA recalls over fire safety have no expiration date or mileage limits.

And I'm in a position to rather easily escalate in other ways

What is that position specifically? Us "regular" owners don't have any kind of position to escalate, under any amount of effort. Your position of power within Tesla is substantial and we need you. Why do you have inside access to Tesla that allows you to escalate this problem and get it resolved for us? Why DON'T you want to end this debacle as easily as you claim you can from your position of power? We need your help and so does Tesla before it's too late.

 

[omarsultan]

You're misinterpreting. @bhzmark was talking about your misunderstanding above - you're clearly not reading the words fire many times and in the same thought Tesla connects fire to batterygate and chargegate. If you're not reading any of the words you might have missed all of them but they are still there. I can point to them but I can't guarantee the reader can comprehend them. You've suggested words that are not there are the reason for your misinterpretation but I'm afraid nothing you think you read is written.

Yeah, my wife regularly questions my comprehension too, so maybe you're on to something.

 

[omarsultan]

This is a disposition to look on the more favorable side, expecting the most favorable outcome. Kind of the believing that goodness pervades reality. The company has already lost the trust of lots of owners, many of whom used to be promoters.

I don't disagree with the second sentence. They look to be making moves to address the issue, so maybe let this play out a bit more.

 

[bhzmark]

What is your position within Tesla that allows you to escalate this problem and get it resolved for us? We need your help and so does Tesla before it's too late.

I dont have a position within Tesla in any way except as a customer. Customers who are not otherwise connected with Tesla can and do escalate with various degrees of effort. My required effort would be less than most.

And thanks again for proving my point that you focus on the personal in lieu of a more relevant topic.

 

[Droschke]

... so maybe let this play out a bit more.

Fine, and that's what we are doing. I wish I was as optimistic as you are.

 

[Droschke]

So, two tidbits from the earnings call yesterday. First of all the company is doing really well and the stock is on a tear. I think this is helpful t our cause for two reasons: first, it means they have money to devote to funding and fixing pack issues, every dollar does to have to go token the company of life support. Second, with so much glowing coverage, I think Tesla is incented to keep the positive momentum and will be more inclined to find a solution that keeps, instead of this surfacing as an issue that kills the post news cycle.

Second is this answer from Elon when questioned the S/X will ever get 2170 cells:



For those of us that end up with reman packs, I think this is an important point, that, even if not new, the replacement pack is probably better (better cell chemistry) than our older packs.

One more question, if I may. Does your optimism cover the "ill" battery replacements or just the "terminally ill" ones? You know the "ill" ones can remain ill till the warranty is over and they then are really screwed, don't you think?

 

[MP3Mike]

UPDATE: So, I noticed the warranty link for my car now links to the new warranty coverage language, so I expect new excitement to spawn from that change.

They cannot retroactively change the warranty conditions for already sold cars, but that new limit probably now applies for used cars sold by Tesla.

Can they remove a warranty after the sale? It should carry its original warranty forever, even when sold used I don't think Magnuson Moss has provisions allowing the retroactive reduction of an existing warranty while it is still active. I don't think it matters if Batterygate is still ongoing when 2020 Model S have 200,000 miles - NHTSA recalls over fire safety have no expiration date or mileage limits.

Tesla specifically covers that in that actual warranty document:

Note: It irks me that Tesla has turned on protections that prevent us from copying the actual text from the warranty PDF now. Why? Is a competitor going to steal it?

 

[tga]

@ohmman, looks like another thread cleanup is due...

 

[Jcarlson]

Can they remove a warranty after the sale? It should carry its original warranty forever, even when sold used I don't think Magnuson Moss has provisions allowing the retroactive reduction of an existing warranty while it is still active. I don't think it matters if Batterygate is still ongoing when 2020 Model S have 200,000 miles - NHTSA recalls over fire safety have no expiration date or mileage limits.

They can do whatever they want with used cars they buy back, such as stripping unlimited free supercharging or altering the warranty.
However, the problem with our unlimited mileage warranty is that there does not seem to be a clear definition of when the pack is considered faulty due to capacity loss.

No problems copying and pasting text from the PDF file for me, they are being pretty clear on the conditions regarding what is considered degradation now:

*For warranty claims specific to Battery capacity, the replacement Battery will be in a condition appropriate to the age and mileage of the vehicle sufficient to achieve or exceed the minimum Battery capacity for the remainder of the warranty period of the original Battery. Note that the vehicle’s range estimates are an imperfect measure of Battery capacity because they are affected by additional factors separate from Battery capacity. The measurement method used to determine Battery capacity, and the decision of whether to repair, replace, or provide reconditioned or re-manufactured parts, and the condition of any such replaced, reconditioned or re-manufactured parts, are at the sole discretion of Tesla

 

[What Gas]

The 85kWh pack was only ever 81.5kWh total, 77.5 kWh usable. But I would agree with @ran349, if your average Voltage is 4.193V at 99%, that’s not far off 4.2V @ 100%, so I would tend to agree that you’re unlikely to have been capped.

So do you think it is degradation?
This equates to a loss of 9% or 22miles. It dropped 10-miles overnight after the download.

 

[omarsultan]

One more question, if I may. Does your optimism cover the "ill" battery replacements or just the "terminally ill" ones? You know the "ill" ones can remain ill till the warranty is over and they then are really screwed, don't you think?

I think, perhaps, you have part of your answer in the re-wording of the warranty--anything below 30% loss is terminally ill. However, that is is a very imprecise gate. A pack might be at 20% loss but wildly out of balance and, so, also terminally ill. I am assuming Tesla has or will have more precise criteria for "terminally ill" which the new HV diags help flag, but I also thing there is a snowballs chance in heck we will ever see them.

 

[kavyboy]

@ohmman, looks like another thread cleanup is due...

I thought I heard Thor swinging Mjölnir around, but I think it was just the mods with their ban hammer.

 

[What Gas]

model 85 is not a 8kW pack.

I always thought the number on the car represented the kWh.

So then I chewed the SC out for nothing...LOL.

 

[MP3Mike]

However, the problem with our unlimited mileage warranty is that there does not seem to be a clear definition of when the pack is considered faulty due to capacity loss.

The only thing that warranty says is that a gradual loss of capacity and power are not covered, but there is no definition of gradual.
Tesla pretty much only covers the actual failure of the battery under the unlimited mileage warranty. (I.e. the inability to charge and/or drive the car.)

Though I have seen one person report successfully getting their battery replaced because of a large, and sudden, loss of range/capacity. But that was a long time ago.