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.
After looking at a LOT of data over the last few days. The ONLY way the car calculates range is by usable kWh.
My car now says it has 60.3 kWh that translates to 218 miles (~276 Wh/mile). On May 13 I had 247 max range = 68.1 kWh. We know there is a 4kWh buffer.
The car does not recalculate the Wh per mile (it should IMHO) by temperature, drive cycles, how often you supercharge, how often you charge to more than 90%, or any other measurable state.

My current 90% SoC is at 3.973 volts and 53.9 kWh. The car DOES recalculate battery percentage on different voltage.
I don't know what voltage is used though for original 100% SoC.
Others say lithium batteries 100% SoC is 4.2 volts period. Tesla may have determined a safety offset to prevent batteries from being actually charged to 100%. Others also say that even a 50% degraded litium battery still charges to 100% at 4.2 volts. That the degraded battery just has less Ah per volt available. Thus you get to 0% faster (ie fewer miles).

So, percent available should not change between a new battery and a degraded battery based on VOLTAGE. What should change is Wh per mile. The car is smart enough to learn this with use and update after every drive.
I NEVER use percent in my gauge, but always use rated range.
That has always been fine. I have pulled into the driveway with 1 mile remaining (thank you 4kWh buffer).

That they are limiting the top end max charge voltage really is the wrong way to protect the battery from damage or fire. They DO control the entire charge process with home charging AND Supercharging. It now takes over an hour to get from 97% to 100% (@2kW for 7 mile range increase). It charges at 10kW up to close to 97%.
This is acceptable to me and I will NEVER charge to 100% (only did that 3 time in the last 12 months). Arbitrarily chopping 13% 8+kWh off the top end is ludicrous.
 
Last edited:
So the last 3 charged it has maintained 23 miles lost. After getting airbags replaced, I had to ask for the notes the person read to me the other day. Service rep copy and pasted it in an e-mail.

Me: Severe battery degradation within last month. Lost mileage every time I’ve charged since I noticed a severe drop in range. So far within last month lost at least 23 miles.

Pre-Diag: There are no HV battery faults. The decrease in range is due to the increase in ambient heat. The Battery management system has recalculated the range to compensate for the energy it has to consume to cool the battery and drive unit(s) in hot weather.

So checking on my TeslaFi log I was already losing range when it wasn't hot yet so that's a bunch of BS. It wasn't until recently it got hot. I even asked the person (not tech) that does that mean I'll start gaining some miles lost when it gets cool again? I already know the answer to that. If this was true, I would have noticed higher than normal degradation the last two summers.

I'm not sure if this is specific to this service center (Rocklin) but they don't even wash cars now because of how overwhelmed they are from new deliveries and those take priority.

That's complete BS. Rated range has nothing to do with anything except the kWH available the BMS reports. Period.

Ironically, rated range usually does INCREASE as temperature goes up because the BMS reports high availble kWH.

Also, the amount of energy needed to cool the battery and run the AC for the cabin at say 100F is less than the energy saved by moving through less dense air which is why I always get the best wh/mile in the hottest weather.
 
Pre-Diag: There are no HV battery faults. The decrease in range is due to the increase in ambient heat. The Battery management system has recalculated the range to compensate for the energy it has to consume to cool the battery and drive unit(s) in hot weather.

OMG, I heard a lot of nonsense from service centers, but this tops it. That's just plain BS.

A warmer battery is more efficient, thus can deliver more energy. If anything, the range should be higher. In very extreme heat the car might need some extra cooling, but the range display is not affected by that. The range estimating shown by the car does not assume or predict AC cooling needs. The car does not show 30 miles less of range because it gets warm. That's just nonsense.
 
Wow this is my exact problem to here in Orange county california. My friends who have model s or x's didnt even notice there's drop with the update. Mine is currently at the service center and they are also telling me this is normal.
Today my 100% charge dropped to 359km.

So I officially lost 40km in 1 month, or 10% of my range. 18% from new. Anyone else with these kind of numbers?
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Ulmo
Very possible. Another reason to wait on installing updates right away to make sure the release is stable. (But I always install right away.)

I have what I assume is 2019.20 X waiting to be installed right now. My car battery software seems to be fine with 2019.16.2. What I don't know is if this has only happened with 2019.16. X? or if it might still come with newer updates? Maybe having 2019.16.x enables Tesla to turn this "battery management" on at any time, on any car, going forward? I am seriously worried about hitting the update button; but will give it a go and hope for the best.
 
I called BS on your statement because any NORMALLY degraded lithium ion cell can still be safely charged to 4.2 volts even if it's degraded to 50% of it's original capacity. If Tesla is limiting the charge because of some unsafe condition they're now detecting via software then it isn't NORMAL degradation and they need to replace the battery if it's still under warranty.

At the very least, they need to not LIE about the SOC and call 3.9 or 4.0 volts 100% when it isn't. They could display the actual SOC and state on the display that the charge is limited due to it being unsafe to charge higher.

By showing 100% when it isn't actually really is a complete LIE.

This is all of our punishment for not upgrading to a new free ludicrous model. :(

I am not sure of the legal ramifications of this apparent "stealing" of a batteries volume, if it is possible for them to do it or not, whether it is for safety issues, or extending its life so as to not have to warranty another X number of batteries, which is the usual reason for corporations to do what they do, maximize profits, or minimize losses as it were. But one thing for sure is when you try to sneak a solution past several savy Tesla model S owners, it doesn't go over very well. They have some communication issues, to say the least. This is how they thank the first owners who contributed to the establishment of this company?

But how about this for a solution: Tesla informs the affected owners they can live with the "new update", have its name diminished by making several hundred, possibly thousands of owners, (many of whom have dozens of referrals), unhappy, or provide an upgrade to a 100 pack at a reduced rate, or at cost? Tesla can avoid possible class-action issues (which is stupid; lawyers make all the money, the affected owners will get squat, and the less money Tesla has left to provide a future for all of us), or even better avoid warrantying numerous 85 kW batteries with similar refurbs.

Who wouldn't upgrade their damaged/reduced capacity 85 kW battery to a 100 kW battery for say $5000?

Better public relations for Tesla, better for the owners.
 
@DJRas

Anyway, FWIW here is Tesla saying they are pushing a software update due to the battery fires:

Tesla pushes battery software update after recent fires

That is a good article. It still does not excuse how they went about it: a notice to the affected owners first would be best. It is like the old days when a professional athlete learning they got traded by reading it in the newspaper.

Perhaps once they determine the cause of these fires ( I assume right after charging and then having the car sit fully charged?) maybe for some they will revise the BMS back to where it was before the update? (fingers crossed). But why some cars have had their max voltage capped and others not: must the battery composition/ formulation, but aren't all BX85's the same? Just thinking out loud here...
 
I have what I assume is 2019.20 X waiting to be installed right now. My car battery software seems to be fine with 2019.16.2. What I don't know is if this has only happened with 2019.16. X? or if it might still come with newer updates? Maybe having 2019.16.x enables Tesla to turn this "battery management" on at any time, on any car, going forward? I am seriously worried about hitting the update button; but will give it a go and hope for the best.

So far mine is fine (other than normal degradation). 2019.20.2.1. Jan 2017 S90D.
 
Everyone seems to think this update has effected the s85 battery, I have a 2014 s60 and my range has suddenly dropped by 10% too !.. bought my s60 6 months ago (in UK), rated was 232 and typical was 184, I now get 210 and 162, so 22mile drop I range. I've not long had Teslafi, so unable to determine when it happened, but can guess it happened with the BMS update in mid May.
 
Everyone seems to think this update has effected the s85 battery, I have a 2014 s60 and my range has suddenly dropped by 10% too !.. bought my s60 6 months ago (in UK), rated was 232 and typical was 184, I now get 210 and 162, so 22mile drop I range. I've not long had Teslafi, so unable to determine when it happened, but can guess it happened with the BMS update in mid May.

Please put yourself on this spreadsheet .
 
After looking at a LOT of data over the last few days. The ONLY way the car calculates range is by usable kWh.
My car now says it has 60.3 kWh that translates to 218 miles (~276 Wh/mile). On May 13 I had 247 max range = 68.1 kWh. We know there is a 4kWh buffer.
The car does not recalculate the Wh per mile (it should IMHO) by temperature, drive cycles, how often you supercharge, how often you charge to more than 90%, or any other measurable state.

My current 90% SoC is at 3.973 volts and 53.9 kWh. The car DOES recalculate battery percentage on different voltage.
I don't know what voltage is used though for original 100% SoC.
Others say lithium batteries 100% SoC is 4.2 volts period. Tesla may have determined a safety offset to prevent batteries from being actually charged to 100%. Others also say that even a 50% degraded litium battery still charges to 100% at 4.2 volts. That the degraded battery just has less Ah per volt available. Thus you get to 0% faster (ie fewer miles).

So, percent available should not change between a new battery and a degraded battery based on VOLTAGE. What should change is Wh per mile. The car is smart enough to learn this with use and update after every drive.
I NEVER use percent in my gauge, but always use rated range.
That has always been fine. I have pulled into the driveway with 1 mile remaining (thank you 4kWh buffer).

That they are limiting the top end max charge voltage really is the wrong way to protect the battery from damage or fire. They DO control the entire charge process with home charging AND Supercharging. It now takes over an hour to get from 97% to 100% (@2kW for 7 mile range increase). It charges at 10kW up to close to 97%.
This is acceptable to me and I will NEVER charge to 100% (only did that 3 time in the last 12 months). Arbitrarily chopping 13% 8+kWh off the top end is ludicrous.
Could you post some screenshots of your CAN bus data from Scan My Tesla, TM-Spy, or both? It would be interesting to see it from a car like yours that has been apparently affected by the recent updates. Post #115 from sorka in this thread is a good example of both types of data.
 
It was advertised as a 15000 amps on the L upgrade but I've always pulled 1525 logged from the canbus.

Ludicrous 0-60 pull at 95%SOC today, 90F battery temp:
01F4244D-5DC8-4698-9A9A-AA0AC17323FC.png


420kW divided by 275V is just around 1525A.

Voltage sag should be less with Max Battery, correct? Is 275V about right under these circumstances?
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: sorka and DJRas