-
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
OMG I've been quoted!
I noticed a more aggressive ramping down of current after 90% several months ago, not sure after which update. I typically charge at 80A and saw the amperage ramp down more rapidly above 90%.
Tesla cannot retroactively make a change like this, at least not legally.
What you are referencing might be fine if it does not remove, reduce, or otherwise restrict a function for which one paid.Unfortunately, Magnuson Moss wasn't written with software in mind. I suspect it's a trivial argument for Tesla to state that all software updates must be applied as part of a warranty repair in order to ensure proper vehicle operation. I think there are other avenues to explore with regards to software restricting vehicle capability without notice after purchase. I think what Tesla is doing here is wrong, but I don't think Magnuson Moss is what we are looking for.
IANAL, i'm just and internet person so what the hell do I know...
In other words, Tesla wanted to advertise as high a range as possible in order to benefit from the resulting sales so it pushed the boundaries. Five years later, Tesla decides that it doesn't want to incur the cost of fixing batteries damaged by its own, previous decisions? We are forced to speculate because Tesla is not forthcoming. There is only one logical reason for Tesla not being transparent or communicative here: It would be damaging to do so.
Last edited:
And, the belief at the time was if it doesn't work well we have you covered with our warranty policy. Apparently not.
It's been a long thread, but I think at one time we believed you must supercharge after the infamous 2019.16.x update to trigger the range loss.
Low PHEV DOD's made more sense, because why chance cycle-life when you can run a motor? Taycan supposedly uses less of the available 90KWh, as well. WK057 can correct, but I think the MS "85" packs would load up to around 73, of their total 81-82KWh, per his discoveries. That's ~90%. This isn't to say measured IR isn't a function of other things, like random manufacturing, or super-charging, or chronic cell imbalance. Yup, we're speculating.
Umm, apparently other manufacturers don't think that is scandalous:
"When he was taking delivery of the vehicle, Shah noticed that the I-PACE was only showing 201 miles of range despite the battery being at 100%. Jaguar informed Shah that the range in the vehicle was “adaptive,” and that it would update over time as the crossover gets driven. Over the next 24 hours, the new EV owner drove his I-PACE, and it quickly became evident that the 201-mile range quoted in the vehicle during delivery might even be optimistic."
Needless to say this gentlemen never saw more than 201 miles range. Who knows what "adaptive" means, but I get the feeling all manufacturers are learning as they go adjusting just about everything.
Jaguar I-PACE buyer shares ownership experience: range issues, regrets, Teslas, and why EV training matters
Zarwin
Member
While not the primary topic of this thread, I've seen multiple mentions of the range calculation changing from 295 Wh/mile to 276 Wh/mile. My S85, which is a March 2014 build running 2019.16.2 still appears to calculate based on 295 Wh/mile. Is it possible that a calculation with a particular model (D maybe?) is being conflated with a fleetwide firmware change?
Though not related, I have not experienced loss of range and I have supercharged from 2% to 95% just yesterday on a trip.
Though not related, I have not experienced loss of range and I have supercharged from 2% to 95% just yesterday on a trip.
DJRas
Member
Zarwin
Member
From TeslaFi data. Last night's charge showed:
Is that a proper way to calculate it?
Also the energy screen itself shows the rated line above the current line when I drop just below 295, but that's not necessarily accurate if they updated the calculation on the backend without updating the front, but the teslafi data has been consistent at 295 looking back at several charges on different versions.
An easy way would be to look at the numbers during a charging session. The power (kW) divided bij distance per hour (km or miles) gives you the kW per km or per mile constant that is used for this calculation. My range cropped P85+ still indicates 200 Wh/km (~321 Wh/mile) unchanged from before this mess got started.
OMG I've been quoted!
I noticed a more aggressive ramping down of current after 90% several months ago, not sure after which update. I typically charge at 80A and saw the amperage ramp down more rapidly above 90%.
Tesla cannot retroactively make a change like this, at least not legally.
What you are referencing might be fine if it does not remove, reduce, or otherwise restrict a function for which one paid.
In other words, Tesla wanted to advertise as high a range as possible in order to benefit from the resulting sales so it pushed the boundaries. Five years later, Tesla decides that it doesn't want to incur the cost of fixing batteries damaged by its own, previous decisions? We are forced to speculate because Tesla is not forthcoming. There is only one logical reason for Tesla not being transparent or communicative here: It would be damaging to do so.
Just charged from ~90 miles (could be 89 don't remember this morning) to 90% SOC showing 230 miles on my 2013 P85+. Chargepoint app shows i used 45.26 kwh so it looks like i'm still at 320 Wh/mile but my supercharging speeds have drastically decreased. ~35kw at less than 50% SOC. Tried a chargepoint DCFC station and got 40kw using the chademo adapter at less than 50% soc which is similar to what i got before.
DJRas
Member
Not exactly the way to calculate what the car is using. There are additional current draws durinv charging that may otherwise raise the Wh/mi.
I use a CANBUS scanner to read the car's battery and use the rated mikes by the kWh usable. For all State of Charge on all cars that I have seen data from show this changed constant (though it may have occurred prior to 2019.16.1.1).
My constant has not changed for my 2013 85 using scan my tesla. It's still 295. I posted the data previously in this thread. Can you post screenshot of what you see?
I'm on 16.2 and range has not been affected
DJRas
Member
Is there any chance that one of the updates changed the nominal pack value reported by the BMS to not include the reserve, and Scan My Tesla is still taking 4kwh off to compute it's usable remaining value?
It just seem odd that the nominal pack divided by the rated range is almost exactly 295.
faughtz
Model S P85DL
“Rated” has never been adaptive, but has been a constant, unless tesla has now deceptively changed that constant.
DJRas
Member
Nope... that is purely coincidental.
If you look at the red column of calculated data you see the results including the 4kWh buffer. The Wh/mi diverges from 295 to 325 by 30% SoC.
But, 276 is constant through all SoC.
Two things:
- I don't think the cost today is $20k for an 85kWh battery.i am guessing it is less
- The old battery still could have a 2nd life in battery storage. That could count for something, May be around $5K or so. Or it could be repurposed for S60 or S75 cars.
Mind you though that in my case the range loss happened with the fw update at SC when they did a warranty hv battery replacement (refurbished).
Since the warranty repair I have been driving very carefully with a spare tire (destroyed 21” alloy wheel and waiting a replacement) and mainly charging at 8A rate (max at summer house).
So dont know if its because of new battery got adjusted to warranty battery of because of my user profile change.
Similar threads
