Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[JRP3]

@Droschke What was factually wrong with my comment that caused you to disagree?

 

[raphy3]

I don't follow this as closely as many others here but I certainly haven't seen this on the front pages of the media as it is with Tesla.

Don't worry, Electrek has been all over it, like a fly on **** as soon as any issue with any other electric car company arises in a heartbeat.

But had they just been honest they could have gained/kept us early adopters as free evangelicals of the brand. But by obviously being quiet and misleading many of us will no longer buy a Tesla and instead share our bad experiences

I think Tesla did the math and realized it's pretty simple in that they passed the stage in their lifecycle where the word of mouth of early adopters matters. All they needed was for the fanbase to get people buying Model 3's with positive hype. After that, it became a self-sustaining machine. It's similar to apple in that sense. At this point it doesn't matter how many people hate Apple or how many they piss off with anticonsumer practices. A larger portion of the population will put up with it. IOW, they can easily afford to make essentially all of their early adopter base angry. The folks who have been buying since 2018 consider themselves to be early adopters on top of us, TBH (and the average new Tesla owner pretty much doesn't know anything about the trail roadster and model S owners blazed). So in summary, it doesn't matter

Maybe one day we will find out if there was actually an interoffice email sent to service centres to instruct them to tell owners the range loss was normal after the famous software update,

I suspect settling had something to do with not wanting certain questionable ways of handling things to come to light.

 

[Droschke]

I assume that meant wrong about hiding what was going on

Which must be humiliating to the Tesla fanbois in this thread.

 

[Gixx1300R]

Then your car, like mine, is possibly part of the 21 "Vehicles with data unavailable to access". Look at post#1 under "the Latest" right on top of the page.

So 21 cars that Tesla nerfed and aren't able to fix with a software update.

 

[Droschke]

So 21 cars that Tesla nerfed and aren't able to fix with a software update.

I'm not sure what that category means. They need to clarify it.

 

[cpa]

I assume that meant wrong about hiding what was going on, (voltage capping and range loss) instead of being forthcoming about what was going on.

Or wrong about doing anything in the first place, instead of just letting more batteries die naturally and warrantying them?


Maybe one day we will find out if there was actually an interoffice email sent to service centres to instruct them to tell owners the range loss was normal after the famous software update, or is that what they just all came up with on their own as an appropriate answer to satisfy the owner.

Yeah, I read between the lines and Musk's penchant for vague statements and draw the same conclusion. I might add that the engineers may have predicted that any software fix would be easy and done quickly. So, any loss of range would have been mostly, if not completely, restored within a matter of weeks when the corrected software was installed. It is entirely plausible that only a handful of people would have noticed this reduction in range before restoration.

Instead, the fix was neither easy nor swift. Ten miles were restored about six months or so later, but it took many more months before they were able to resolve the issues satisfactorily.

So, on the one hand, if the fix had been easy and quick, Tesla was probably better off keeping silent instead of broadcasting their concerns. Instead, Tesla did not devise a satisfactory solution in a short period of time. They then doubled down and obfuscated, lied, and distracted. As they say, the cover up is worse than the crime.

Even though the Chargegate matter was not related to the battery capping, the timing of reducing the SC rates was always suspicious. And doubtless there is some sort of correlation between charge rates, temperature, and battery longevity.

In sum, these sorts of technical issues will arise again, whether by Tesla or by others. The lessons here are not to downplay it; tell the truth; don't make wild promises via Twitter or other platforms that might have to be rescinded when all the cows finally come home. The last one might be the hardest of all.

 

[cpa]

I suspect settling had something to do with not wanting certain questionable ways of handling things to come to light.

We have a winner!!

Let's recap: One thousand seven hundred forty some-odd owners had their range reduced by 20-30 miles for about a 20-month period before regaining most, if not all, of it back. To put a dollar amount on something that has no concrete value (seriously, whether you can drive X miles maximum or .9X miles maximum when for all intents and purposes normal usage will always be ~.75 - .8X of maximum) cannot be worth that much after owning the car for 4-7 years. And since this usurpation was restored quietly, there is just not much financial damage to compensate.

So, in order for Tesla to keep any unsavory business practices out of the sunshine, we receive $625. To my way of thinking, this is more punitive that compensatory.

For those souls who still have not had their range restored, perhaps there will be a silver lining down the road. We can hope.

 

[BPeter]

Question for those who haven't had their range restored. Have you contacted Tesla about it since this settlement was announced?
Seems like they don't have reason to be secretive about this anymore. Are they willing to admit something is wrong?

 

[Droschke]

Question for those who haven't had their range restored. Have you contacted Tesla about it since this settlement was announced?
Seems like they don't have reason to be secretive about this anymore. Are they willing to admit something is wrong?

It's a proposed settlement pending a court hearing in December. Since it's not final there is no demand/question to based it on. I'm hoping for it to be amended to cover the owners, like me, with no restoration in place.

 

[bhzmark]

Because of David’s hard work and his dedication to this legal pursuit, while we were all sitting around and watching/arguing, many impacted owners have their lost capacity restored or their packs replaced (see the stats under "The latest" in post#1, right on the top).

And thank the rooster for the morning sun rising

 

[Droschke]

LoL

 

[maximizese]

We have a winner!!

Let's recap: One thousand seven hundred forty some-odd owners had their range reduced by 20-30 miles for about a 20-month period before regaining most, if not all, of it back. To put a dollar amount on something that has no concrete value (seriously, whether you can drive X miles maximum or .9X miles maximum when for all intents and purposes normal usage will always be ~.75 - .8X of maximum) cannot be worth that much after owning the car for 4-7 years. And since this usurpation was restored quietly, there is just not much financial damage to compensate.

So, in order for Tesla to keep any unsavory business practices out of the sunshine, we receive $625. To my way of thinking, this is more punitive that compensatory.

For those souls who still have not had their range restored, perhaps there will be a silver lining down the road. We can hope.

I agree that it is very difficult to put a concrete value on the range loss and I'm still confused as to what really happened and the reasoning behind it; I'm also convinced that more than 1,740 owners were affected by the range limitation. I can share that our 11/2013 built S85 had a rated range of 256 miles from Winter 2018 through early Spring 2019 with about 60K miles on the odometer. After a software update in June 2019, the range dropped to an inconsistent spread between 236mi and 244mi. In addition, the Supercharging rate curve changed numerous times since Spring 2019, and I was never quite clear if there was something wrong with my specific car or if it was the Supercharger stall/site. Coming in with a low %SOC and the car warmed after tens of miles of driving to V2 sites, I'd see some initial charging rates as high as 128kW just as often as seeing rates no higher than 72kW. One time it would charge no higher than 32kW (unfortunately, I needed at least 60% SOC to comfortably get to the next SuC so I had to wait just under an hour).

My car is currently on the most recent software, has 102K miles, and shows 242mi of range on the app range slider if full. From the criteria stated in the proposed settlement, my vehicle is probably not in the class even though I'm positive my car was limited. My car went from a range degradation of 3.4% to 8.68%, assuming 265 rated miles was the starting point. Just a reference point, but I believe my 2013 Fiat 500e battery has a 14% range reduction after 72K miles (still on the original 12V battery though).

As for compensation, I suppose you could take the sales price difference between the 60kW battery pack and the 85kW battery pack (though it's said to really be 77kW pack) and use that as metric. Then I suppose you could divide the 20-month period by the average expected lifespan or ownership of the vehicle as use that a metric as well. In the end, I think $625 is fair. Some people were greatly inconvenienced while others just rolled with it. I'm just glad that more information got out to the public and I hope more information is to follow.

 

[lightningltd]

Well, I am now down to 217 miles at 100%. That puts me at -15.23% after the so-called restoration, and the highest on the spreadsheet.
I cannot even get Tesla to check the remote logs for any BMS faults. They want me to drive the 5 hours each way and pay $250.00 for a diagnostic fee.
I had an appointment set up in the app with the request to do a remote check of the logs, but they never responded. Had to change the appointment.
They don't even let you talk to a human any more.

Was there nothing in the settlement covering those of us who are still getting hosed by Tesla, or are we the 21 'expendable' customers?
What a cluster Tesla has created.

 

[Gixx1300R]

Well, I am now down to 217 miles at 100%. That puts me at -15.23% after the so-called restoration, and the highest on the spreadsheet.
I cannot even get Tesla to check the remote logs for any BMS faults. They want me to drive the 5 hours each way and pay $250.00 for a diagnostic fee.
I had an appointment set up in the app with the request to do a remote check of the logs, but they never responded. Had to change the appointment.
They don't even let you talk to a human any more.

Was there nothing in the settlement covering those of us who are still getting hosed by Tesla, or are we the 21 'expendable' customers?
What a cluster Tesla has created.

I am a little above you with mileage

 

[Evoforce]

Well my range never came back. I am not happy with the settlement. My charging speed never came back either. I haven't visited this thread in quite some time so I may have missed something. I have a loaner pack that they refused to swap back out after changing policy about swapping back in the origonals after repair. They lost mine by the way. Claim that I have a better battery but after so much range loss and much longer charging times....I wanted a new battery. What is $600 going to get me when it is a minimum $2000 just to nose into the service bays. The last motor replacement cost me over $6,000. They had only replaced the one under warranty a year earlier. I am a Tesla enthusiest but feel like this is far from what we should have received in the range settlement...

 

[fbitz777]

To this day I find your claim that your car is capped to be highly dubious, and your evidence for such to be lacking. You are literally the only person with a 75kwh battery thinking you’re part of this class.

I obviously don't claim to be part of the class (I did get the sudden loss of range). I am probably the only one who gets full REGEN at "100" percent SOC, so yes something is going on!

I did get my charge curve back 3 weeks ago with 2020.48.37.6.

 

[raphy3]

I obviously don't claim to be part of the class (I did get the sudden loss of range). I am probably the only one who gets full REGEN at "100" percent SOC, so yes something is going on!

I did get my charge curve back 3 weeks ago with 2020.48.37.6.

What year/model is your car? In my car (2013 P85) every update brings worse charging time, and I'm at the point of avoiding installing them, because i know it's going add "just another 5 min" to my charge time. The latest is waiting to be installed and I can't think of any positive reason to let it go through.

 

[fbitz777]

What year/model is your car? In my car (2013 P85) every update brings worse charging time, and I'm at the point of avoiding installing them, because i know it's going add "just another 5 min" to my charge time. The latest is waiting to be installed and I can't think of any positive reason to let it go through.

April '17 X75D ....I am starting at 110KW empty and down slowly from there....better than when new.

 

[Cheese Guy]

Well, I am now down to 217 miles at 100%. That puts me at -15.23% after the so-called restoration, and the highest on the spreadsheet.
I cannot even get Tesla to check the remote logs for any BMS faults. They want me to drive the 5 hours each way and pay $250.00 for a diagnostic fee.
I had an appointment set up in the app with the request to do a remote check of the logs, but they never responded. Had to change the appointment.
They don't even let you talk to a human any more.

Was there nothing in the settlement covering those of us who are still getting hosed by Tesla, or are we the 21 'expendable' customers?
What a cluster Tesla has created.

My 2013 S85 is also at max 217 miles at 100% but then again my reman battery pack has 191,000 miles on it.

 

[raphy3]

April '17 X75D ....I am starting at 110KW empty and down slowly from there....better than when new.

that explains it. 75s seem much less limited in quality than 85s