-
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
Probably cannot.
This super secret information.
They did show me their screen woth the data. But refused to allow me to either get a printout or take a photo of the screen.
I agree 100%, if Tesla does nothing to fix this I can see lawsuits being filed. If the old batteries are prone to catching fire after a certain amount of charging cycles the only to fix this is to install batteries with the new cell chemistry.
I don't understand the secrecy part of it. These are OUR batteries. The data they have about our batteries should be shared with us freely. In fact, that information, similar to what exist under the 3rd party apps, should be available on the Tesla app and/or the car's display screen for the owners to monitor.
DJRas
Member
They consider their battery technology and battery management 'trade secret". This is counter to Elon Musk's statements that he would openly help other EV companies to help getting the world off ICE.
I will look into pursuing legal action.
I PAID for this test yet they would only share details of the results verbally without allowing me to have any documentation of the details.
Any help in selecting a Southern California legal service would be appreciated.
DJRas
Member
For you Model 3 owners that can access V3 Supercharging at 250kW... be very afraid!!!!
If Tesla is now telling us early adopters with "unlimited lifetime Supercharging" yet now tell us "rapid charging destroys the battery" and now restricts our cars max charging current (mine 97kW).
Imagine what they tell you in a few years after you have done a few hundred (or dozen) 250kW charges.
If Tesla is now telling us early adopters with "unlimited lifetime Supercharging" yet now tell us "rapid charging destroys the battery" and now restricts our cars max charging current (mine 97kW).
Imagine what they tell you in a few years after you have done a few hundred (or dozen) 250kW charges.
Yes, I see what they view. But aren't we entitled to see the stats of our batteries based on what they have been collecting?
They say they don't accept the 3rd party stats and at the same time they refuse to share their own stats about our batteries (which they use to defend their own position) with the owners! Not sure how legally this argument would stand!
We are not asking for the secret chemistry formulas of their battery production, which is their intellectual property.
Last edited:
There are specific voltage characteristics that appear with Lithium plating. These characteristics are plenty large to be measured by the BMS and most of them are detected during the charging cycle.
What is Lithium Plating? - News about Energy Storage, Batteries, Climate Change and the Environment
Also earlier in this thread some posts were made showing the specific state of charge versus voltage indicators on a graph, and the deltas from a "normal" cell are substantial. I am sure some items are more nuanced but even then, the car knows exactly how much energy is going into the pack so it can easily calculate SoC and it can easily read voltages all over the pack quite accurately. This is enough data to get them well on their way to looking for Lithium plating in the cell groups.
First off, I’m not emotionally engaged in this issue so my point of view may change if I have issues in the future. I bought my M3 with the expectation that the battery will lose up to 20% of its capacity in the first 100k miles. I’ll be very happy with less degradation of course. I’m not too worried about charging loss from Supercharging with Tesla’s new cells. They have far more data these days than when the early model S came out. I also realize that EV technology is not mature meaning I fully expect updates in the future that may have impact to my current range and power (both positive and negative). Audi nerfed the E-Tron to such an extent that they may not have any battery issues, but the vehicle has crappy specs as a result.
Nothing in this thread is regarding normal degradation. Tesla can remove 100% functionality from your car at any time, using the same update procedure and justifications they are using to remove paid options to everyone here. They can disable your autopilot "to protect the battery" - they can downgrade you to SR- with a software cap "to protect the battery" - they can remove navigation "to protect the battery" - they can reduce acceleration to 30 horsepower "to protect the battery" - and so on.
What you are reading here is proof Tesla feels they can and will remove absolutely anything you have paid for. It's easy to pretend you're unique from everyone else but you aren't. Regarding your M3 - BMW has never removed fuel capacity or performance post-delivery so that car is safe. But your Model 3 is at risk as every other Tesla. This is not a technology problem, it is a policy problem.
As you are now so once was I. As I am now so shall you be, Prepare yourself to follow me.
I hope nobody is surprised.
This is perfectly in line with how the secretive Tesla operates. We have seen this so many times.
The theory that I think is driving them goes something like this:
Tell nothing, put nothing in writing and adjust all the time in silence and through sudden moves. It leaves their options open, limits claims and allows them the superior position over their customers when it comes to knowledge, so the customers are always somewhat in the dark and thus — I think the theory goes — making uneducated choices that Tesla feels will benefit them.
Even when they do put something in writing (say on Elon’s Twitter...) they are too often changing its interpretation and meaning later.
That’s my theory on their thinking anyway.
I must add, one thing that I think let’s Tesla get away with it is their charismatic leader and the overall leadership and fame the company enjoys.
These types of companies get the benefit of the doubt much longer than your average company would.
These types of companies get the benefit of the doubt much longer than your average company would.
DJRas
Member
Also, somewhere along the trail of software updates Tesla HAS changed the rated range constant from 295 Wh/mile to 276 Wh/mi.
This has occurred on all cars that I have seen ScanMyTesla data from - including cars that have NOT been affected by the sudden range reduction.
This change to 276 Wh/mi artificially inflates your rated range.
I know of NOBODY that can average under 300 Wh/mi. My average over the last 2 years is 317 Wh/mi. The ONLY time I get below 300 is on the downhill half of my commute from 3,000 ft elevation to 4,240 ft and down to ~1,000 ft.
I tried to use this information to show that MY car now exceeds their 10% beyond normal degradation limit for warranty replacement.
But, they will not even look at my data from 3rd party apps.
Note below that TM-Spy data uses Nominal Full Pack and Nominal Remaining (includes to 4 kWh "brick buffer").
Their SOC is the SUC UI info in ScanMyTesla data.
I asked the author of TM-Spy about this and they believe showing the total battery capacity is the "truest" information. Even though the SOC does not track the vehicle's SOC display.
This has occurred on all cars that I have seen ScanMyTesla data from - including cars that have NOT been affected by the sudden range reduction.
This change to 276 Wh/mi artificially inflates your rated range.
I know of NOBODY that can average under 300 Wh/mi. My average over the last 2 years is 317 Wh/mi. The ONLY time I get below 300 is on the downhill half of my commute from 3,000 ft elevation to 4,240 ft and down to ~1,000 ft.
I tried to use this information to show that MY car now exceeds their 10% beyond normal degradation limit for warranty replacement.
But, they will not even look at my data from 3rd party apps.
Note below that TM-Spy data uses Nominal Full Pack and Nominal Remaining (includes to 4 kWh "brick buffer").
Their SOC is the SUC UI info in ScanMyTesla data.
I asked the author of TM-Spy about this and they believe showing the total battery capacity is the "truest" information. Even though the SOC does not track the vehicle's SOC display.
I guess it’s about managing expectations. I don’t expect this car to be like a BMW ICE with regard to lifetime range and am generally more forgiving to companies pioneering new technologies than ones peddling old ones. I find I am happier going in with low expectations with the possibility of being pleasantly surprised later on. This mindset may be tested now that my car is in the body shop after getting rear-ended
I bought my model S not because of quality workmanship or a long track record in manufacturing. But because there were three differentiators, I thought, being unique about Tesla at that time:
- Software and OTA updates
- Customer service
- Battery and the BMS
All three have become problematic and disappointing, the battery situation being the last straw.
FWIW, and I'm not just trying to be contradictory, but I'm at 280 Wh/mi over 27,000 miles on my 2015 S70. That's probably 3/4 local city driving and 1/4 long-range driving at 5 MPH above speed limits. Almost all warm-weather drives.
I also haven't updated in over a year.
faughtz
Model S P85DL
I'm at 285 wh/mi lifetime @43k miles.
Similar threads
