Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Mjsais]

It sounds like Tesla is not the brand for you. There are pros or cons to every vehicle out there. Some view the constant stream of updates that change vehicle functionality as a plus, some view it as a con. I personally like change, my wife not so much. She'll continue with Toyota

I see you have a model 3. I understand where your coming from. That was me prior to June 2019. But imagine that 2 or 3 years from now, Tesla pushes a FW update in your car that lowers your battery capacity by 5 to 10% and reduces your supercharging speeds by 30-50% without any explanation. How would you feel about software update? This is what happened to many Model S 85kWh owners. It’s even worse, because we didn’t have degradation clauses in our warranties. Therefore, Tesla did everything in their power not to fix or replace the batteries.

 

[VT_EE]

I see you have a model 3. I understand where your coming from. That was me prior to June 2019. But imagine that 2 or 3 years from now, Tesla pushes a FW update in your car that lowers your battery capacity by 5 to 10% and reduces your supercharging speeds by 30-50% without any explanation. How would you feel about software update? This is what happened to many Model S 85kWh owners. It’s even worse, because we didn’t have degradation clauses in our warranties. Therefore, Tesla did everything in their power not to fix or replace the batteries.

I'm well aware of the capacity reduction fiasco having followed this thread since it's inception. I was merely stating that Tesla's are not good vehicles for people who don't like functionality change. Having said that, not all change is acceptable including the capping of batteries without explanation or compensation.

 

[WhiteWi]

I see you have a model 3. I understand where your coming from. That was me prior to June 2019. But imagine that 2 or 3 years from now, Tesla pushes a FW update in your car that lowers your battery capacity by 5 to 10% and reduces your supercharging speeds by 30-50% without any explanation. How would you feel about software update? This is what happened to many Model S 85kWh owners. It’s even worse, because we didn’t have degradation clauses in our warranties. Therefore, Tesla did everything in their power not to fix or replace the batteries.

By many you mean just 1000 something owners?

 

[tga]

By many you mean just 1000 something owners?

So, it's OK for Tesla to screw over 1000 owners? What's the cutoff? Is 1000 OK? 10,000? 100,000?

Plus, your premise is flawed. Even though a (small) subset of 85kWh cars had their capacity reduced, ALL had their supercharger speeds unilaterally reduced by a firmware update, with no advanced warning.

 

[WhiteWi]

So, it's OK for Tesla to screw over 1000 owners? What's the cutoff? Is 1000 OK? 10,000? 100,000?

Plus, your premise is flawed. Even though a (small) subset of 85kWh cars had their capacity reduced, ALL had their supercharger speeds unilaterally reduced by a firmware update, with no advanced warning.

Do you have real data on how many people have reduced supercharging speeds? What is theirs battery age, mileage, how often did they use supercharging? Please I want to know!

 

[Battpower]

Do you have real data on how many people have reduced supercharging speeds? What is theirs battery age, mileage, how often did they use supercharging? Please I want to know!

Several posts to specific examples, but dig around here:

Fleet Charging AVG

teslalogger.de

Where you can see some evidence for a particular subset of cars.

 

[tga]

Do you have real data on how many people have reduced supercharging speeds? What is theirs battery age, mileage, how often did they use supercharging? Please I want to know!

And your point is what, exactly?

Even though a (small) subset of 85kWh cars had their capacity reduced, ALL had their supercharger speeds unilaterally reduced by a firmware update, with no advanced warning.

I'm not sure what's so hard to understand there. If you disagree, post a counterexample. We'll wait.

 

[WhiteWi]

Lol I asked simple question and got disliked. Classic

 

[WhiteWi]

And your point is what, exactly?

I'm not sure what's so hard to understand there. If you disagree, post a counterexample. We'll wait.

Oh no that’s on you to prove your claims.

 

[Battpower]

Lol I asked simple question and got disliked. Classic

The attached are from pre and post capping f/w for S85.

Averages, peaks etc all make difference. Take a while to poke around.

 

[cpa]

The two factions seem to align like this:

The Pro-Tesla side says there are two rules when it comes to Tesla. Rule #1 is that Tesla can do no wrong. Rule #2 says that if you think Tesla did something wrong, see Rule #1. They invite the straw man (Word paper clips, really?) to the discussion. In the end, Tesla has only the interests of its customers at heart. If a TV show were made about Tesla, "Tesla Knows Best" would star Elon Musk as Jim Anderson. We customers would vie for the supporting roles of Margaret, Bud, Betty, and Kitten. We'd be schooled by the wise and omniscient Elon at the end of each episode.

The Anti-Tesla side says that Tesla does things that are not customer-friendly. Tesla also makes unilateral decisions about the functionality of our cars that we may not grasp or want without our knowledge or consent. Tesla giveth, and Tesla taketh away. And that is not OK.

What is apparent with both groups is that we are totally ignorant of the machinations that occur in Palo Alto, Fremont, and Hawthorne. The Pro group gives Tesla a large, almost unfettered benefit of the doubt. Maybe they are easily seduced by all technological advancements and changes, and are quick to excuse failures as part of learning. After all, Mark Zuckerberg thinks that it is OK to suggest that liking pictures of African Americans would infer that the viewer would like to see more pictures of primates, no?

Meanwhile the Anti group has put up with Tesla's peccadilloes for many years. We have given them many benefits of the doubt as Tesla worked its way from start-up to adolescence to near adulthood. But the accumulated effects of these peccadilloes culminated in the instant discussion we are having. Adding fuel to the Anti fire is that Tesla is conspicuously absent from any and all communication with its customers. Generally, as a course of human nature, evasiveness equates to guilt.

To sum up: I believe that the utter failure of Facebook's software in the example cited above and Tesla's issues with its battery management software/hardware are similar in nature. Things work well for a period of time, but then the unexpected happens. And both Facebook and Tesla were unprepared for these events.

 

[Gixx1300R]

Several posts to specific examples, but dig around here:

Fleet Charging AVG

teslalogger.de

Where you can see some evidence for a particular subset of cars.

Do you have real data on how many people have reduced supercharging speeds? What is theirs battery age, mileage, how often did they use supercharging? Please I want to know!

The battery's age doesn't matter since it was still under warranty. Mileage doesn't matter since there is an unlimited 8 year warranty on the battery pack. The frequency of supercharging doesn't matter since Tesla provided the parameters of supercharging that the customer has no control over. All battery packs that were effected had an unlimited warranty 8 year until 2020. tesla nerfed the packs to prevent fires until the warranty period was over with and re established the capacity on some packs but not all

 

[Battpower]

The battery's age doesn't matter since it was still under warranty. Mileage doesn't matter since there is an unlimited 8 year warranty on the battery pack. The frequency of supercharging doesn't matter since Tesla provided the parameters of supercharging that the customer has no control over. All battery packs that were effected had an unlimited warranty 8 year until 2020. tesla nerfed the packs to prevent fires until the warranty period was over with and re established the capacity on some packs but not all

I think all your points are on the mark, especially regarding warranty, mileage, supercharging etc. I think the fire connection remains unproven but the absence of communication and official justification for actions taken speaks loudly. Hiding behind an often unwelcome / unwanted / unnecessary battery life extension update isn't very reassuring.

Adding fuel to the Anti fire is that Tesla is conspicuously absent from any and all communication with its customers.

like he said ^^^^

 

[AmpedRealtor]

THIS Tesla owner will be getting a Mercedes EQE when they roll off the line next year. I expect to have a much more traditional, predictable, and enjoyable ownership experience versus the Tesla BS. And a much nicer car than anything Tesla could ever hope to make.

 

[Battpower]

predictable

ownership experience

ahhhhhh..... .mmmm

 

[bhzmark]

straw man (Word paper clips, really?)

We'd be schooled by the wise

That’s not what a straw man is. It was simply to illustrate the point that complaining that the UI is different is a silly complaint. You made the complaint, not me.

The point is not that Tesla can do no wrong. Rather it is Our purchase of the vehicle is governed by laws and warranties that have specific terms in the purchase documentation and in the underlying law.

Condition X is likely a manufacturing defect, and all batteries with condition X have been replaced. And it made sense to restrict all the batteries that were thought to have this condition and get more information about what it is and what can done with it. Sometimes you have to make decision based on incomplete information.

Condition Z is not really a defect at all, or to the extent it is, it is only the degradation of sensor usually based on corrosion which is a wear and tear item. And condition Z isn’t even really a problem and all these batteries that only had Condition Z should be back in play.

So there is no warranty claim for Condition Z people and their biggest injury is that their battery was restricted while they were figuring out whether they were Condition X or Condition Z people.

But some people make themselves upset by not appreciating the details on condition x and condition z and the need to distinguish them and the fact the remedies for each were very different, both technically, and legally.

 

[Droschke]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1421324932076773378

 

[Battpower]

that have specific terms in the purchase documentation

The only defined term in the battery warranty was 'unlimited miles'. I still don't know what the warranty from that period actually guaranteed and for some even the 'unlimited mileage' miles didn't mean much in practice because of some other convenient (for Tesla) cap like use of supercharging.

I guess you can have specific terms without the terms being specific.

If the purchaser of the car recognizes a specific list of performance claims and representations (including how the car performs at the time of delivery) then Tesla have a clear obligation to maintain that performance other than relating to normal wear and tear. Any sudden change caused by software update is not wear and tear. Sudden changes in charging performance resulting from software update is not wear and tear.

 

[WhiteWi]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1421324932076773378

Thanks so less than 2k were temporarily affected and now they got whole 600 + bucks. Wow Tesla is bankrupt for sure.

 

[Battpower]

2k were temporarily affected

Maybe, and specific to the terms of that particular case. Pretty limited but even within that case the loss is recognized just not compensated for the real benefit of the complainants.