Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[DJRas]

That would be entirely illegal. This is set by the EPA. They can't change it.

I doubt the dispay's "rated range" is controlled by the EPA. This is what our car uses as a gas gauge and those are notoriously unreliable related to EPA estimates of range in gas cars. At least as far as where E is concerned.

I wonder if Tesla modified it along with battery capacity reductions so that the reduction doesn't look as severe as it actually is.

 

[Lukez]

What is reported to the EPA before a vehicle is sold is the mpg highway and city based on a standard test.
Those numbers can change after a vehicle is sold if the test is redone
So you could relate the wh/mile as the mpg

 

[Target]

I am a Chinese tesla user. just in my local region （hangzhou，china），at least 20+ old version of tesla mainly 85 70 have reported sudden lose of battery range. Many of them using SC a lot, So Some specluate that due to frenquent use of SC and full charge(100% of charge) tesla just cut the range to protect the battery .

Here is my specluation:
I think tesla may have some sort of algorithm that counts the number of using the SC and the number of full charge. When the algorithm thinks your buttery is getting worse , It may just cut the range to protect the battery.

Also the battery and the motor have 8 years warrant in China. Tesla China won't replace the battery above 70% of range(through tesla never give the exact number of model S and X. the model 3 is 70%).

Tesla may just cut the range but also let the range stays above 70% and stretch the lifespan of the battery over 8 years, then tesla could free of any legal problems

Just my specluation. The feedback tesla give us just the normal degredation of the battery .

Based on the people posting in this thread I don't think this is a simple supercharging counter based algorithm, the Lithium Plating can be measured based on cell voltages and I believe they are basing these cuts in capacity on real data. The only question is how conservative are they being.

 

[Jkr85]

Did anyone who was not affected by the 19.16.2 software experience the dreaded effect only after the 19.20.1 update?
I was lucky so far, but the sec now pushed the update. I am hesitant to allow it to run.

85D, April 2015, B Battery, 52k miles (Netherlands), version 2019.16.2 73d3f3c

 

[dk10438]

Z06. Possibly a GTR.

Sold my 2012 gtr to get the p100d.

Loved the gtr and shockingly it barely depreciated, at least for that type of car.

I drove it for 5 years and put on 65k miles and it depreciated 21k which isn’t much worse than a Camry...

For that type of car, it’s really practical too. Get ready for an orchestra of “normal sounds”. I’ve never driven a car that makes so many strange noises. It even has a paragraph in the manual stating that odd noises are to be expected. Expect 15-17 mpg and a lot of unwanted attention. GL!

 

[Chaserr]

I doubt the dispay's "rated range" is controlled by the EPA. This is what our car uses as a gas gauge and those are notoriously unreliable related to EPA estimates of range in gas cars. At least as far as where E is concerned.

I wonder if Tesla modified it along with battery capacity reductions so that the reduction doesn't look as severe as it actually is.

You're probably thinking of "ideal" - that was 300 miles on my 85 when new - unrealistic and entirely made up by Tesla. They can change that to 1 million iles or 1 mile, it's not attached to reality.

The other option is "rated" - the rating agency is the EPA, and Tesla can't change EPA ratings without running into legal problems. They would need the EPA to re-certify the car and approve any new EPA ratings.

Tesla got around that on Model 3 by asking for the EPA's rated test results to be voluntarily lowered, so they could later ask for it to be raised again. This is the opposite of the 85 batteries, which were claimed at 300 and then rated at 265 by the EPA. Tesla chose to use the EPA maximum 265. They re evaluated when dual motors were released, etc, but they didn't ask the EPA to re evaluate old cars.

 

[xveys]

I

Did anyone who was not affected by the 19.16.2 software experience the dreaded effect only after the 19.20.1 update?
I was lucky so far, but the sec now pushed the update. I am hesitant to allow it to run.

85D, April 2015, B Battery, 52k miles (Netherlands), version 2019.16.2 73d3f3c

I'm on 19.20.1 and I'm (still) not affected.
My battery has the following code: 108815-01-D.

 

[liuping]

I finally got TM-Spy set up and did a 100% charge test this weekend.

It does not look like my 2015 Model S 90D (2019.20.4.2) is affected much:

 

[Zhelko Dimic]

I wonder what you disagreed with me @Zhelko Dimic here?

Even without considering other types of precedents, there are at least two very clear cases like this kWh/performance limiting in Tesla’s past.

Limiting number of full performance launches on Tesla Performance models via firmware:

Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

Limiting DC charging speed based on DC charging counters via firmware:

If you fast charge, Tesla will permanently throttle charging

Both were done silently and only came to light through customer research such as this thread.

What makes you think this is not normal for Tesla?

Context is wrong. You are showing it as if it's Tesla specific, and unusual - all other auto companies are much worse.

For example, I've had few Porsches, and there is not one that didn't have major issues that company refused to fix (from the exploding engines on 996/997, need to rebuild top end often and early on previous generations, to coolant spilling out on Metzger engines, Turbo/GT3, causing the car behind you to crash if you were on the track, hydraulic pump overheating and causing engine fire (turbo) etc, etc... BMW is much worse story, and Mercedes too...

So your righteousness is misplaced. It's like complaining that life isn't fair - yeah, it isn't...

I feel that Tesla has the right to manage battery based on new info, and if that means you lose some range on 50 or 100Kmiles car, so be it. Especially that it seems to have been the case for ones that used mostly fast charging, which one knew is harder on the battery.
I mean, loss of 10% range isn't equal to your engine exploding rendering your car worthless, is it? Like it would happen with the Porsche...

 

[jaitch]

Li-plating happens mostly at the anode this true, but it reduces the amount of cycle-able Li which is affecting cathode stability at higher SOCs. From the comparison table in my former post you may estimate the hidden reserve of NCM over NCA!

Second: When structural changes of the cathode are going to happen because exessive delithiation, NCM transforms to a spinell, NCA to a rock-salt structure. Latter behaves as an electric isolator (ohmic impedance rises as a second side effect besides capacity loss)!

Informative post. Sounds like you know what you are on about. Obviously a battery expert - I wonder what your experience is?

Cheers

James

 

[yak-55]

That’s funny.
I sold my z06, and bought the p85dl, based on the 691hp claim.

I crossed shopped the GTR and bought the P85D based on the same claim. After all the Tesla BS I wish I’d gone the other way!

 

[Chaserr]

@Zhelko - Your porsche example is a good one to compare what we can expect from Tesla in the future if they stay the course. That one ended in a massive class action loss for Porsche. Unlike Tesla though, they didn't publicly admit to the problem this early so we won't have t wait as many years for a resolution.

 

[jaitch]

Sold my 2012 gtr to get the p100d.

Loved the gtr and shockingly it barely depreciated, at least for that type of car.

I drove it for 5 years and put on 65k miles and it depreciated 21k which isn’t much worse than a Camry...

For that type of car, it’s really practical too. Get ready for an orchestra of “normal sounds”. I’ve never driven a car that makes so many strange noises. It even has a paragraph in the manual stating that odd noises are to be expected. Expect 15-17 mpg and a lot of unwanted attention. GL!

But would you have another now? I think I would find the semi-auto annoying now after driving Tesla. The only non Tesla cars I can bear now are manual gearbox/transmission. Semi auto and auto just drive wrong to me - all that pull away delay and having to brake endlessly. Manual box is just about bearable.

 

[DJRas]

Context is wrong. You are showing it as if it's Tesla specific, and unusual - all other auto companies are much worse.

For example, I've had few Porsches, and there is not one that didn't have major issues that company refused to fix (from the exploding engines on 996/997, need to rebuild top end often and early on previous generations, to coolant spilling out on Metzger engines, Turbo/GT3, causing the car behind you to crash if you were on the track, hydraulic pump overheating and causing engine fire (turbo) etc, etc... BMW is much worse story, and Mercedes too...

So your righteousness is misplaced. It's like complaining that life isn't fair - yeah, it isn't...

I feel that Tesla has the right to manage battery based on new info, and if that means you lose some range on 50 or 100Kmiles car, so be it. Especially that it seems to have been the case for ones that used mostly fast charging, which one knew is harder on the battery.
I mean, loss of 10% range isn't equal to your engine exploding rendering your car worthless, is it? Like it would happen with the Porsche...

It is NOT the case that those that use a lot of SuC are the ones affected (just speculation on your part).
I have been seriously affected with fewer miles, fewer SuC events, etc than another 2014 S85 RWD.
Same battery pack, both have always resided in Southern California

 

[dk10438]

I crossed shopped the GTR and bought the P85D based on the same claim. After all the Tesla BS I wish I’d gone the other way!

depends on what you're looking for I guess... AWD, heavy and neck snapping acceleration are where the similarities end. Oh I forgot, chintzy interior not befitting a 100k car, LOL.

I loved my GTR but honestly, after driving the MS P100D for a couple of months, don't really miss it. The constant attention, back breaking stiffness, deafening exhaust, and bottoming out on the slightest driveway incline I could handle. But in the end, constant trips to the gas station finally got to me. Not to mention, the maintenance on the car is pretty spendy.

 

[sorka]

I post this from time to time. If you want it straight from the horses mouth, this guy is one of the world's foremost experts Lithium Ion cell technology. He consults for Tesla.

 

[richardw0000]

What was your Rated Miles when the car was new?

284

 

[richardw0000]

Respectfully, your issue is not what’s being discussed in this thread. You have the classic 90 pack degradation rather than the artificial charging limit being discussed here. Your screen shot shows your cell voltage at 4.2 at 100%, which is a true 100% state of charge.

Classic pack degradation doesn't happen overnight.

 

[Stere0graph]

Here’s the analogy



An Ice vehicle is purchased with a stated rating of 60mpg and top speed of 155mph – as time passes it becomes apparent to the manufacturer that the gearbox depending on how the vehicle has been driven, becomes prone to a catastrophic failure with the added potential of the engine igniting.

Said manufacturer carries out an investigation as to the cause, and proclaims it’s the 6th Gear ( overdrive) that’s at fault.

In order to mitigate the risk they decide to disable the 6th gear by reprograming the control unit .

Customer is now left with a lower MPG and lower top speed - Clearly the vehicles should be recalled and gearbox replaced – This is no different to owners who have had their battery restricted – If there is a fault Tesla should do the right thing and recall these vehicles.

 

[sorka]

Context is wrong. You are showing it as if it's Tesla specific, and unusual - all other auto companies are much worse.

For example, I've had few Porsches, and there is not one that didn't have major issues that company refused to fix (from the exploding engines on 996/997, need to rebuild top end often and early on previous generations, to coolant spilling out on Metzger engines, Turbo/GT3, causing the car behind you to crash if you were on the track, hydraulic pump overheating and causing engine fire (turbo) etc, etc... BMW is much worse story, and Mercedes too...

So your righteousness is misplaced. It's like complaining that life isn't fair - yeah, it isn't...

I feel that Tesla has the right to manage battery based on new info, and if that means you lose some range on 50 or 100Kmiles car, so be it. Especially that it seems to have been the case for ones that used mostly fast charging, which one knew is harder on the battery.
I mean, loss of 10% range isn't equal to your engine exploding rendering your car worthless, is it? Like it would happen with the Porsche...

They're lying about it though. When some batteries here are limited to charging to only 85%, Tesla is displaying 100% when it isn't. They are taking range that exists currently and eliminating it with a software update and claiming that it only effects a very very tiny number of cars(which of course is false). If true, then they should just be honest about the actual SOC and tell the customer to come in for a battery replacement before their car catches fire. They are cutting corners to avoid warranty repairs by stealing range and telling the customer that it is normal degradation when it isn't.