Yes, true and accepted. But where is that disclosure from Tesla that the supercharger speed will be cropped to a point that will make the car useless for long trips after X number of supercharging? Even more frustrating is that this has happened even to people that did not abuse the battery. But even for people that were supercharging say to 100% once per week, the drop should have been increased by a few minutes as Tesla suggests on their site. We instead witness Model S genocide.
-
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
Please go ahead and read as much as you can from this thread. Do not bet that you do not suffer from batterygate. I have exactly the same car with the same mileage and pretty much get the same supercharging speed. Go ahead and charge to 100%. Start driving at 100% and check if you get any regerative braking. I get around 20kw. It should be 0. If you get regenerative at 100%, then welcome to batterygate team
One caveat: the battery must be "warm" to get Regen at 100% indicated SOC (i.e the old 90%)
Also your message would confirm that Tesla has changed the Wh/mi constant used to display the rated range (talking rated as understood in the USA).
Last edited:
They did that to my car. My rated range hasn't moved a bit. But I get regen at 100%, so the range calculator is more aggressive. I can see that the range calculator doesn't make much sense anymore even though it would be almost impossible for people to understand their capacity has been capped only due to the range calculator. They are indeed that sneaky. I do not want to get scanmytesla numbers yet before my last apointment with them before the upcoming lawsuit. But the regen at 100% is an undeniable fact that Vmax is capped.
You and me are the only two people who have seen/mentioned Regen at "100%".... I suspect most people are scared to charge to 100 percent (or it takes forever)...I am not because I need the range and I know it's not really 100%.
I think this observation should be added to Post#1 as it is the most clear signal of vmax capping...that does not require scanmytesla (which Tesla will never admit as evidence)
Sometimes, I wonder if Tesla people are that smart. Just setup BMS to do 0 regen at 100% and show the same rated range with Vmax at 4.05V
Ferrycraigs
Member
I have had a similar conversation. When I asked why my car had been capped, one version of the answer was because of my DC charging history. When I explained I had deliberately public DC charged (38-40 kW) in preference to Supercharging (90+ kWs) their reply was 'slow DC charging for a longer time is just as bad as fast DC charging for a short time'. They seemed unable to see just how ludicrous and scientifically flawed that statement was. They also conveniently ignored the unhelpful fact that my charge rate capping by them is around 60-70 kWs, about a third more than the public DC network in UK. That conversation, together with many other examples on here, just confirms that they don’t want to tell you the what or the why. They are prepared to make it up as they go along, use sound bites in the hope you may have as little understanding of the issue as them. Conclusion. Don't rely on what people at Service Centres tell you. Most times, in relation to batterygate or chargegate, it’s complete bluff and bluster. I have often suspected they have been instructed along the lines of 'don't explain, don’t agree to do anything'.
Ferrycraigs
Member
Vmax Capping just means they have lowered the rate at which the BMS stops more charge going into the battery. 100% does not mean 100% full. It did not mean 100% full before capping. 100% only means At Vmax. ie the charge level is at whatever level Vmax has been set at. Prior to that point BMS should have been slowing down the charge rate. At Vmax BMS should prevent ANY further charge going into the battery. Even Tesla mention it in the Drivers Manual. I have absolutely no idea therefore how on earth you manage to get regen at 100% unless your BMS is faulty. Technically it should not be possible. At least not at 100%. It will regen slightly at 99% and below. And increasingly more as the SoC reduces.
Nor am I very clear why you would think most people would be scared to charge to 100%. (Perhaps that was just a throwaway comment, not meant seriously). Brave call on here if so! I charge to 100% whenever I have to. Sadly more often these days now that I have been capped, as I do often need the range between 80-100% now. And it ALWAYS takes me by surprise when I take my foot off the accelerator and it keeps on coasting.
And I don’t think it should be added to Page 1, as I can’t see how it shows capping; only ScanMyTesla or TMSpy can prove capping; anything else just indicates reduced capacity, which could be for a variety of reasons.
Last edited:
Just heard that Tesla plans to disable Supercharging and any 3rd party rapid (CCS/Chademo) on rebuilt and retitled salvage Teslas.
I’m sure it’s driven by safety concerns but how convenient that it removes one of the big incentives for owning a Tesla... namely fast (DC) charging.
While I’m pretty sure that capping and charge-gateing batteries is also safety driven, how wonderful (for Tesla) that affected owners now have crippled cars that in some cases no longer meet their requirements and must seek a new alternative vehicle.
Like salvage vehicles, there is no incentive for Tesla to make good. They obviously don’t care about the negative publicity, and would rather sell a new vehicle to that percentage of owners that would trade up to a new Tesla.
I for one hope that Tesla gets it act together and starts honouring the spirit of warranty commitments in the way that it used to, or that it gets royally roasted in court and is forced to make good.
I’m sure it’s driven by safety concerns but how convenient that it removes one of the big incentives for owning a Tesla... namely fast (DC) charging.
While I’m pretty sure that capping and charge-gateing batteries is also safety driven, how wonderful (for Tesla) that affected owners now have crippled cars that in some cases no longer meet their requirements and must seek a new alternative vehicle.
Like salvage vehicles, there is no incentive for Tesla to make good. They obviously don’t care about the negative publicity, and would rather sell a new vehicle to that percentage of owners that would trade up to a new Tesla.
I for one hope that Tesla gets it act together and starts honouring the spirit of warranty commitments in the way that it used to, or that it gets royally roasted in court and is forced to make good.
There is going to be a battery replacement program. I doubt there was much urgency to have a replacement program until the early batteries were out of warranty. I suspect there is more urgency now that they realize some of these batteries aren't holding up as well as planned.
The wiki fpr this thread links to Keils Paper on 'Aging of Lithium-Ion Batteries in Electric Vehicles' The paper investigates means to proplong BEV battery life to 'wanted' 2000 Equivalent Full Cycles in Year 2025 and concludes that 1000 EFC is already possible for a BEV charged at reasonable rates at reduced Cycle Depths and at low StateOfCharge.
Worst was simulated SUC charging, which revealed degradation to 75% capacity in less than 120 EFC, at which time test were stopped. Paper states: 'Due to the poor cycle life performance, the cycling sequence was terminated already after ca. 120 EFC.'
These are tests that measure TRUE remaining capacity frequently, whereas the Tesla BMS has to largely do guesswork. So the assumption that your battery did not degrade due to SUC is an indication of BMS unable to determine degradation. Eventually Tesla discovered and immediately capped your battery.
The left graph shows degradation IF charging to 100% at the SUC, right shows when charging to 4,1 V, which is still high. In the latter test capacity was still above 84%, but then, 120 EFC in a Tesla Model S 85 is around 120 x 78 kWh / 0,219 Wh/km == 42.700 km!!
Attachments
They've been doing this for years. You need to pay for a HV system inspection before they will re-enable.
Yes a very bad SC answer!
Lots of Panasonic Li-Ion 18650 cells are tested and certified for 1C CCCV charging, which would be 78 kW on a Model S 85. High Energy Density cells improve lifetime when charging slower, but most flattens below 1/3 C, so going lower brings little. Charging at 38 kW would be a swaet spot offer for SUC's, with low wear and decent waittime. But would mean that the car would occupy the charger for a full hour for an optimal SUC session from 10 to 60%,
Yes, they have been doing it for years, but no they will not turn it back on even after passing an HV inspection. Their policy is that it is disabled permenantly.
That I knew about, thanks.
The new report seemed to indicate that Tesla would not reinstate DC charging.
If that’s true (and this is the point I was trying to make) then Tesla could be actively looking for ways to retire vehicles, ours and others that just generate costs for them by tying up service depts, free Supercharging use, and warranty claims.
That's because Supercharging happens at a higher kW rate than AC charging. It has nothing to do with AC vs DC.
You could not charge at 47kW at home. There is no wall connector, J1772, or other EVSE that can deliver that level of AC power to the car. The max the J1772 spec supports is 80A. At 240V, that's 240V*80A=19.2kW available. Even if you could somehow offer 47kW (nearly 200A@240V), the car can't draw that much AC power. Today's cars can't pull more than 48A AC (11.5kW). The max AC charging ever supported was 80A@277V = 22kW on an old dual-charger car.
The onboard charger's role is to convert AC to DC to feed the battery. It is completely bypassed during Supercharging/DC fast charging. You couldn't feed DC into it and expect it to do anything useful. Best case, nothing would happen. Worst case, it would be destroyed/catch on fire.
Agreed with model S genocide, they seem to want the old cars off the road asap. Now they claim they will seek compensation if you reactivate dc fast charging even on non tesla chargers. Interesting that they think they can seek compensation on a car that isn't their property for dc fast charging on a non Tesla charger, talk about 'evil corp'. This is incredibly unattractive! I have stated this a few times now but there doesn't seem to be a supercharging counter that just cuts supercharging speed after X number of supercharging sessions. Because some cars with significantly lower milage and fewer supercharging sessions have had their supercharging speed reduced significantly more than cars with almost double the milage and supercharging sessions. I believe each supercharging session likely reduces how fast future supercharging sessions will be but I don't think it's as simple as a counter. I believe there is something else being counted and measured.
Last edited:
Because as mentioned Tesla's software people probably forgot to program that Regen limit in my car! This only happened a few versions back. Probably a case where BMS firmware knows (correctly) I can add more Energy to the battery but the rest of software is capping battery.
Note that my Bolt get substantial Regen at 100 percent SOC BUT that is because vmax is at 4.17V from Day 1 (never had OTA updates)
Potentially a little side track here
Tuesday, while driving a constant 110 km/h with AC1 engaged the Trip Consumption meter showed the attached, that is full throttle for approx 10% of the 25 km shown. 2,5 km at 110 km/h is around 80 seconds and calculating backwards, to reach Avg Consumption of 508Wh/km the 10% needs to take > 285 kW, which is max for my S 70D.
At first I assumed a measuring error, but the entire trip ended with average consumption of 349 Wh/km a lot more than the normal 220 Wh/km (at 110 km/h and 6 C Temp)
Are Tesla Load testing my car, it is a D model so Could do reverse in front and forward in rear to extract ++285 kW
My battery is not Voltage Capped and has the standard mildest ChargeGate.(SoC + kW == Average 104 and peak 119)
View attachment 511775
Tuesday, while driving a constant 110 km/h with AC1 engaged the Trip Consumption meter showed the attached, that is full throttle for approx 10% of the 25 km shown. 2,5 km at 110 km/h is around 80 seconds and calculating backwards, to reach Avg Consumption of 508Wh/km the 10% needs to take > 285 kW, which is max for my S 70D.
At first I assumed a measuring error, but the entire trip ended with average consumption of 349 Wh/km a lot more than the normal 220 Wh/km (at 110 km/h and 6 C Temp)
Are Tesla Load testing my car, it is a D model so Could do reverse in front and forward in rear to extract ++285 kW
My battery is not Voltage Capped and has the standard mildest ChargeGate.(SoC + kW == Average 104 and peak 119)
Last edited:
Similar threads
