Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
For what it's worth here is a data point. My 2013 Model S 60 has ~150K miles. Original battery. I charged it to 100% today and it got 192 rate miles (208 when new). So it does not appear to be affecting my battery as of yet. As far as charging history, I usually AC charge. Always charge to 90%. I supercharge less often these days but approximately 1-2 times a month.
 
Moderator note: it’s clear that there is a pretty wide range of opinions about this issue, especially about what Tesla’s motives are, and what they should or should not be doing. I understand that many of us feel the need to express our opinions. However, please also consider that if there’s a lot of chatter and argument, it makes it hard to find hard data points and actual findings, in addition to making the thread hard to follow. This is not a prohibition on discussion, just an appeal for a moment of thought before hitting the “Post Reply” button. In any case, please keep your comments respectful.

Thanks,

Bruce.
 
Pre facelift S70, 53,000 miles, range loss on Typical is 216 to 192. Capacity dropped overnight from 68.5kWh to 58.2kWh, but has remained pretty steady since then. Vampire Drain drifts erratically from 1%-4%. % Consumption varies dramatically, and erratically. Difficult to forecast SoC for journey.

My charging history over past 3 years is approx:
Low DC (CHAdeMO) 80%
Fast DC (Supercharging) 15%
AC 5%

Thanks for the detail info. We are in the same boat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ferrycraigs
For what it's worth here is a data point. My 2013 Model S 60 has ~150K miles. Original battery. I charged it to 100% today and it got 192 rate miles (208 when new). So it does not appear to be affecting my battery as of yet. As far as charging history, I usually AC charge. Always charge to 90%. I supercharge less often these days but approximately 1-2 times a month.

@Leeboy22001 has S60, but has lost 11.6%. This just adds to the mystery of who is and is not impacted.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: neroden
In my opinion it makes a huge difference, if it’s done for safety, or longevity. If it’s done for safety, then it’s really just a different form of degradation. And with an EV you need to expect degradation within the limits of warranty.

If it’s done for longevity, then it’s not ok. If you want longevity you can charge your car always to 70%, which has more impact than their smaller limit. But you don’t have to. And since it’s your car, Tesla can’t force you to have a long lasting battery.

This is different than the Apple thing. The judge agreed, that a customer can’t expect the battery to last longer than a year. And the phone would go back to normal operation with a battery replacement. But that doesn’t apply to the Model S battery.

Agreed 100%. That's what we paid for and I've made the point over a dozen times in this thread and the tesla-wasn't-wrong-to-advertise-691-hp fan boys are still repeating the same "tesla should be allowed to lie and mislead us" rhetoric.

But on top of that, the vast majority of those who were MOST effected by this update had very little degradation before because they were already doing the right thing.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Droschke
Agreed 100%. That's what we paid for and I've made the point over a dozen times in this thread and the tesla-wasn't-wrong-to-advertise-691-hp fan boys are still repeating the same "tesla should be allowed to lie and mislead us" rhetoric.

But on top of that, the vast majority of those who were MOST effected by this update had very little degradation before because they were already doing the right thing.

Looking at the confused picture of who is/isn't impacted, I'm now thinking the triggers used by the algorithm seem to be either highly generic or just poorly tuned. Not surprising given the mediocre SW update quality we have seen in the recent years.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: neroden and sorka
I think that Li Plating and "dendrites" are something they have been looking for from day 1. Dendrites also is not a very specific term.
There's different types that have different impacts on the batteries performance.
You can find an interesting article about the topic here: Whiskers, surface growth and dendrites in lithium batteries

Disclaimer: while being a physicist with interest in li-ion technology, I'm far from an expert.
Usually a single small short in a battery won't cause the battery to fail. The short circuit will melt itself and disconnect. You're only really in trouble if short becomes big enough to reach thermal runaway. Lithium plating, fingers, dendrite - this all should at first only affect very small parts of the large surface area of a li-ion battery. As the issue accumulates over time, problems get worse though.

The plating happens at a *cell* voltage of 4.2V or higher. So when you're charging either to a high SoC or with a lot of power, your charging voltage ideally would be exactly 4.2V once you reach a high enough SoC not to overcurrent the battery, since current = voltage differential * resistance. -> The higher the differential, the higher the charge current.
The trouble is, you don't charge every cell on it's own but a module with many cells in serial and you want to keep every cell below 4.2V. The voltages are distributed according to the internal resistance of the cells (see voltage divider), which again is also dependent on the amount of plating and other internal cell factors and even slightly varies across the surface of the cell. Even more it can change while you're charging if the lithium ions cannot intercalate into the electrode fast enough.

Long story short: my only slightly educated guess would be that they were looking to mitigate a certain failure mode related to Li fingers (X) and found something completely different (Z), maybe some previously unknown interaction between the electrolyte and the electrodes. It might be something really minor that is no big deal but might extend the life of the cell if handled properly.

These issues are usually really really complex and deeply researched though, so I don't think chances are high that some random guy on a forum with zero to no information guesses even close to correct.

If you wanna keep your battery free of metallic lithium, I guess it's a good idea to always keep the charging voltage a good bit below the maximum. For my (unaffected) P85D my latest data shows: if I want to stay below 4.1V / cell (~394V total, which should hopefully be plenty), I should stop charging at 75% with 32kW or slightly above when charging on 22kW.

Excellent feedback I finally got the chance to read thoroughly. I suppose you mostly charge at home, correct?
 
  • Like
Reactions: neroden and Guy V
In my opinion it makes a huge difference, if it’s done for safety, or longevity. If it’s done for safety, then it’s really just a different form of degradation. And with an EV you need to expect degradation within the limits of warranty.

If it’s done for longevity, then it’s not ok. If you want longevity you can charge your car always to 70%, which has more impact than their smaller limit. But you don’t have to. And since it’s your car, Tesla can’t force you to have a long lasting battery.
I find myself in a very similar position to many on here, in that I have taken particular care of my battery, followed Tesla’s advice, not only to the letter, but beyond, yet still have a car that has been affected by Condition Z.

I am conscious that
Tesla designed the battery.
Tesla designed the BMS
Tesla have given advice on battery husbandry.

As an owner, I have no control over any of this. When I plug into a Supercharger, or a Rapid, or an AC Chargepoint, the rate of battery protection such as tapering etc happens automatically.

If now, some years later, Tesla discover that the BMS design, or their advice, has, in some circumstances, been wrong, and that it should have been stricter, and as a result some damage, or conditions that might lead to damage have occurred, then I think the responsibility for that rests with Tesla, not me. Further, if as a result of their, let’s call it miscalculations, they decide they are going to restrict 15% or so of my battery to mitigate the effects of their miscalculations, then I find that wrong, and unfair on me as the dutiful owner. I have some difficulty accepting any of it was my fault, and that having paid some thousands more for an S70, I struggle to agree that I should just accept that I now have a S58. Whether it is for safety or longevity.
 
What do you agree with? egn1 is 100% wrong, if the battery is unsafe, for any reason, Tesla should call the owner in and change the battery under warranty. End of story.
Just limiting the battery at their own discretion is a slippery slope with no end.
It is not written anywhere that your 8 years limited warranty on the battery will void if you have a certain charging pattern. So Tesla should just own up to the problem, learn from the experience and change the batteries affected.
Tesla has decided that the battery is safe under the limits of the updated software. It is their right and responsibility to determine what battery management is safe and appropriate.

They also are currently standing firm that the new resulting range drop some of us are seeing is within reasonable battery degradation warranty guidelines. They have never specifically published those for S and X. Using the Model 3 warranty as insight to their thinking, 30% is their idea of reasonable. Nothing indicates a line or curve for that, and no Model S has yet reached the 8-year end point, so unless we have experienced greater than 30% loss we really have no legitimate argument against their position.

Tesla must be fully aware however, that this is counter to the very positive impression of Tesla battery performance to date. I am sure that they do not want to undermine that by limiting range any more than they believe they must, and will do all that they can to maintain it as high as they decide they safely can. I really hope they are able to tell us soon exactly what is going on and what they intend to do about it.

I personally believe they must also be considering options for economically practical battery refurbishment, replacement and/or upgrade for older cars as the fleet ages. They have done so for the original Roadster. I do not think they can afford to have Tesla's generally considered to have only 8 year useful lifetimes.
 
As many users here are curious about further Tesla actions on this subject, a brief summary of their actions up to now (anagram puzzles seem to be new standard here?;)):

Action X: Makes battery less prone to fires (from excess delithiation or puncture/deformation), helps to prevent Li-plating and fast cathode degradation.
Disadvantages: For the battery none, but user has less range.

Action Y: Helps to prevent Li-plating.
Disadvantages: For the battery none, but user has to wait longer at SuCs.

Action Z: Prevents Li-plating at higher charging rates.
Disadvantages: Cathode degradation is accelerated, the user sees higher consumption/energy costs

So the riddle: Which of the actions, do you guess, Tesla will take back/lower in the future?
Since their update seems to have had high impact on "a very small percentage of owners who own older Model S and Model X vehicles ", I am looking forward to finding out. There has to be some combination of factors which has caused them to limit some of our cars so significantly and I hope they can sort a safe way to remediate that.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: neroden and DJRas
Nothing indicates a line or curve for that, and no Model S has yet reached the 8-year end point, so unless we have experienced greater than 30% loss we really have no legitimate argument against their position.
Hey! The fact that 85kWh batteries burst into flames in Hong Kong and Singapore tell me there is a flaw in the battery. The possible reasons why have been discussed here at nauseam. But that isn't the issue. 1. Tesla is not telling us about it. 2. Tesla put restrictions on our BMS to put a bandaid on the real problem. 3. If my battery will burst into flames, there is no other remedy than a warranty replacement with a safe battery. Software, range restriction, charging rate reduction? Wait... the batteries burst into flames!! We have seen that in Hong Kong and Singapore, and more! That is what brought this whole thing upon us. We are discussing the BS around the real issue. Tesla needs to do a warranty replacement for the effected batteries. Some say that is a "few". Tesla says many owners won't notice. Well, then replace the "few" batteries with new warrantied new batteries!!! Since we are "noticing"!
 
Excellent feedback I finally got the chance to read thoroughly. I suppose you mostly charge at home, correct?
No, I live in an appartment building and cannot charge at home unfortunately. I charge at public AC and ChaDeMo chargers, usually when shopping.

My charging philosophy currently is to charge to about 60%. If I need to go far, that brings easily gets me to the next supercharging in any direction I might want to drive to and the 10 or so minutes I need more by not starting at 100% don't bother me at all.

And guys... you're the native speakers, but I'm pretty sure it's "affected", not "effected". For some reason that bothers me :rolleyes:
 
Tesla has decided that the battery is safe under the limits of the updated software. It is their right and responsibility to determine what battery management is safe and appropriate.
Interesting, I agree that it is their responsibility to make sure it is safe, but what rights do Tesla have? That is the core of this issue, owners right vs Tesla's rights - personally I don't think Tesla can have any rights that overwrites the rights of the owners of the cars.

I personally believe they must also be considering options for economically practical battery refurbishment, replacement and/or upgrade for older cars as the fleet ages. They have done so for the original Roadster. I do not think they can afford to have Tesla's generally considered to have only 8 year useful lifetimes.
I will see it before I believe it. The Roadster v3 battery was/is way to expensive to be considered economically practical and I don't think Tesla will offer any upgrades for older model S/X, they 100% focus on batteries for new cars. It was a dream scenario when they started selllingthe cars, but never going to happen - sorry.
 
I've lost 21% since new typical new was 208, now get 164 miles ! 2014 with 45k miles
I have now looked at three S 60 and they all have about the same max rated range (160, 165, 165). They also show full charging capacity (4.20v). At least one has not upgraded to 16.1.1.
So, the 60s I have seen do not show condition Z but REAL degradation of 23%.