Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[DJRas]

View attachment 426716


After submitting the claim yesterday, I received the above, this morning.

Encourage everyone to at least take a look, and appreciate feedback and thoughts from anyone that has been through the NCDS process.

Thanks!!!
I started to submit my claim. But, by the time i finished my thousand word details it had timed out and went back to the start.
I will now wite it offline so i can padte it in quickly.

 

[wk057]

Four years ago, after asking why a loaner of the same vintage as my car showed higher range, Tesla service said that they "reset the battery" on some of their vehicle loaners in order to re-calculate the range. I asked them to do that to my vehicle and they refused, later recanting and telling me no such reset function exists. Now you have confirmed that it does, indeed, exist and Tesla was right the first time. They let a cat out of the bag and then tried to take it back!

Tesla service is apparently able to do this somehow. Is there a way I can do this?

As far as I'm aware, there is no procedure that the service center can use to do this. My method is a complete hack where I backup, then corrupt the NVRAM and force the BMS to start over.

 

[electronblue]

Soft paint is a myth, don't get sucked into that hole dug by detailers and aftermarket exploiters.

Thank you for your opinion. Personally I don’t think that is true.

The noise around the softness of the Model 3 paint is too much for me to think there is nothing there. Just my opinion.

See for example: Model 3 Scratches All Over And What Tesla's Tech Said

But also for example: #TeslaPaintIssues images on Twitter and the articles there about owner complaints. I know some is the usual short-noise but there is too much in terms of pictures and videos for it to be nothing in my view. There are mainstream news outlets amongst those reports and too many owner videos on YouTube about the soft paint. I agree we don’t know how widespread it is but it seems to affect at least some number of Model 3s.

Just my two cents.

 

[25firedog]

During evacuation from Hurricane Irma the software was changed to allow greater range. Now the reverse?

 

[tomjonesrocks]

I’m so confused by this issue. I seem to have a car that could be affected by this but have no idea how to check. My car is actually coincidentally at a Service Center - should I ask them to check something?

 

[APD1080]

I agree with the "reset" basically being letting SOC go very close to zero and charging to 100%. I was recently told I had to doe this 3 consecutive times for it to work, not just once. Typically I will charge when I drop to 40-50% because I live 3 miles from a supercharger, I'm retired so time is not a concern and there is a Starbuck's 500ft or so away. I only charge during the day (10 am - 4 pm) so I am not taking up space for someone traveling or going to/from work. Charging 3 times form zero to 100% will take some planning on my part. Has anyone else been give the 3 times "reset" requirement? ON a side note, a few months ago I got an unexpected e-mail about a problem with my 12v battery and 90kW battery pack. Both were replaced under warranty a few weeks after I got the email. All they told me was they detected a problem and needed to replace the batteries.

 

[FMinMI]

During evacuation from Hurricane Irma the software was changed to allow greater range. Now the reverse?

I thought Tesla just temporarily 'unlocked' battery packs that were software limited, like the 75kW packs that were installed in MS 60 or 70 vehicles (or 60kW packs in the earlier MS 40.

I don't believe they changed the software to let the pack go below safety levels that could potentially damage the pack...

 

[wk057]

As you know, the range loss was sudden, some by over 30 miles. Like you have hypothesized, if this range loss is due to the regular lithium ion degradation from normal usage should we then assume the BMS reporting of that regular lithium ion degradation was incorrect pre-update since the range loss has been sudden? If so, why then for just small percentage of the cars (On Edit: it's the same BMS and it should have been reporting it incorrectly for all cars)?

Thanks for your insight.

To help clarify, I mean if this is something that is the result of normal wear and tear, it wasn't taken into account by the BMS until now. I'd argue that if that were the case, it'd still be normal wear and tear, and the BMS is doing what it should to keep things operating safely as a result, regardless of previous handling.

Since I don't know the details of what exactly it is that is being used to affect the calculation just yet, by normal I mean it could be some process that occurs as the result of specific environmental conditions, usage patterns, etc... but not necessarily a defect.

For example, a hypothetical (nothing to do with this, since IR is already detected... just an example): Let's say that under some conditions some modules develop higher internal resistance as a result of wear from chemical processes during fast charging. But, with the old software, this went undetected, and in vehicles with this wear pattern there was an increased chance of a cell group having thermal issues. With the new software, this is detectable and limitations are put in place to keep things operating safely within the parameters specific to that battery. In this case, I'd argue that the resulting loss in range would be normal wear and not a defect.

But, another hypothetical: Let's say that there turns out to be some issue with specific cells/groups/etc that's been present since manufacture, or developed after manufacture that is not the result of normal use. Perhaps a physical process that put too much strain on a cell group or something, and caused less thermal contact for safe cooling. Dunno, could be a bunch of things. Previously, this went undetected, and as a result there were some safety issues. The new software detects this, and places limits to prevent it. I'd say this is a warranty issue. More so, I'd say this should be a recall issue.

Overall, as I said, I'm inclined to believe it's not a mistake and is related to some sort of actual safety issue that they're mitigating. I'm just not sure if it's a defect or wear based issue at hand here. Given my experiences with Tesla over the past six years or so, while I'm definitely willing to give the benefit of the doubt that it isn't a screw up of some kind and is actually a justified change... my willingness to cut them slack on it ends there. Regardless of the reasoning, that reasoning should be provided to affected owners in black and white plain language without any issues. My worry is that this is a larger issue than it appears to be, and maybe it is something recall-worthy... and Tesla is being shady about it trying to sweep the issue under the rug with software limitations that they won't explain. No proof of that, but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.

Just imagine how much it'd cost Tesla to have to recall and replace even a small percentage of 85 packs. There's something like ~90,000 cars out there with 85 packs, and another ~40,000 or so with 85-type cells. If say 5% of those needed to be replaced, that's like ~$125,000,000 in parts, not counting labor or anything. Would be a bad hit for sure.

Anyway... will update when/if I have more info.

 

[Droschke]

To help clarify, I mean if this is something that is the result of normal wear and tear, it wasn't taken into account by the BMS until now. I'd argue that if that were the case, it'd still be normal wear and tear, and the BMS is doing what it should to keep things operating safely as a result, regardless of previous handling.

Since I don't know the details of what exactly it is that is being used to affect the calculation just yet, by normal I mean it could be some process that occurs as the result of specific environmental conditions, usage patterns, etc... but not necessarily a defect.

For example, a hypothetical (nothing to do with this, since IR is already detected... just an example): Let's say that under some conditions some modules develop higher internal resistance as a result of wear from chemical processes during fast charging. But, with the old software, this went undetected, and in vehicles with this wear pattern there was an increased chance of a cell group having thermal issues. With the new software, this is detectable and limitations are put in place to keep things operating safely within the parameters specific to that battery. In this case, I'd argue that the resulting loss in range would be normal wear and not a defect.

But, another hypothetical: Let's say that there turns out to be some issue with specific cells/groups/etc that's been present since manufacture, or developed after manufacture that is not the result of normal use. Perhaps a physical process that put too much strain on a cell group or something, and caused less thermal contact for safe cooling. Dunno, could be a bunch of things. Previously, this went undetected, and as a result there were some safety issues. The new software detects this, and places limits to prevent it. I'd say this is a warranty issue. More so, I'd say this should be a recall issue.

Overall, as I said, I'm inclined to believe it's not a mistake and is related to some sort of actual safety issue that they're mitigating. I'm just not sure if it's a defect or wear based issue at hand here. Given my experiences with Tesla over the past six years or so, while I'm definitely willing to give the benefit of the doubt that it isn't a screw up of some kind and is actually a justified change... my willingness to cut them slack on it ends there. Regardless of the reasoning, that reasoning should be provided to affected owners in black and white plain language without any issues. My worry is that this is a larger issue than it appears to be, and maybe it is something recall-worthy... and Tesla is being shady about it trying to sweep the issue under the rug with software limitations that they won't explain. No proof of that, but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.

Just imagine how much it'd cost Tesla to have to recall and replace even a small percentage of 85 packs. There's something like ~90,000 cars out there with 85 packs, and another ~40,000 or so with 85-type cells. If say 5% of those needed to be replaced, that's like ~$125,000,000 in parts, not counting labor or anything. Would be a bad hit for sure.

Anyway... will update when/if I have more info.

Thanks so much for your objective clarification.

 

[st50maint]

I emailed support questioning my 24 mile drop in range.
Their reply:

Hello,

Thank you for contacting Tesla! Please allow me to apologize for the delay in our response to this email.

There are many factors involved in the actual range of your Tesla, and why you may feel that your actual range or charge capacity does not match up to the high voltage pack capacity. The battery pack is sized to provide range. Our range is carefully calculated and measured according to rigorously reviewed standards, as well as an on-board algorithm that constantly learns your driving habits and adjusts the predicted range accordingly. In contrast, a vehicle’s battery pack energy capacity varies with the rate of discharge and cell temperature.

Please also note that our recent firmware updates included an update to the range estimation algorithm to better reflect range usage.

If there is a concern with the range of the vehicle, we will be happy to work through this to address any issues being experienced

To improve your range, please see these tips:

Personal driving habits have the greatest impact on the range of your vehicle
Drive the speed limit and avoid frequent and rapid acceleration.
Better utilize, and/or adjust the sensitivity for Regenerative Braking (Standard is recommended)
Keep tires at standard air pressure.
Lighten cargo load by removing unnecessary items.
Keep windows closed for better aerodynamic efficiency.
Limit the use of resources such as heating and air conditioning. Using seat heaters to keep warm is more efficient than heating the cabin.
Enable Range Mode
Controls > Driving > Range Mode
Environmental Factors
Exposure to rapid temperature changes, or long exposure to extreme heat, or cold can effect the expected range. (This effect is not permanent, and does not change the health and degradation of the battery over time)
More Range Tips can be found in the "Getting Maximum Range" section of the Owner's Manual

Please visit our Support Page, which covers frequently asked questions about Tesla and your vehicle. If you have any further questions or concerns, you can reach one of our Chat Agents at Tesla.com or Customer Support 24/7 at Contact | Tesla

Best Regards,

Bryce W | Tesla Support
12832 Frontrunner Blvd., Draper, UT 84020
www.tesla.com/support

 

[bluestreak]

Another aspect of recent update - AC pump runs for extended period after charging ceases. At this stage my Sept 2015 P85D VIN 5YJSB7H4XFF089069 is not showing range reduction, but........since the recent software upgrade the AC pump continues to run after the charger is disconnected. This did absolutely not happen before a few weeks ago.

I was first alerted when heard a buzzing in the front end hours after charging ended and car sitting in garage and not activated. Car was checked by Tesla and found no errors, and subsequently agreed with Tesla that it was AC pump running. Yesterday I charged car on a Supercharger to about 96% ending at 6kW charging rate preparing for a long drive, drove home 3 km and left car overnight before departure. AC pump kept running after car shut down, and still running an hour later. When I got up in morning 10 km of range (=2 kWh) gone from battery so AC pump kept running for hours and used up that energy.

I have raised this with Tesla (Australia), so far no response.

 

[sorka]

EPA rating was determined prior to sale with a new full pack.
I BELIEVE Tesla is not obligated to maintain that Wh/mile rating as the vehicle ages, battery degradation occurs, or they learn more about the vehicle.

If, however, they modify this value to avoid warranty claims it would be a different situation- though not EPA related.

The wh / mile constant has nothing to do with the battery.

 

[sorka]

I emailed support questioning my 24 mile drop in range.
Their reply:

Hello,

Thank you for contacting Tesla! Please allow me to apologize for the delay in our response to this email.

There are many factors involved in the actual range of your Tesla, and why you may feel that your actual range or charge capacity does not match up to the high voltage pack capacity. The battery pack is sized to provide range. Our range is carefully calculated and measured according to rigorously reviewed standards, as well as an on-board algorithm that constantly learns your driving habits and adjusts the predicted range accordingly. In contrast, a vehicle’s battery pack energy capacity varies with the rate of discharge and cell temperature.

Please also note that our recent firmware updates included an update to the range estimation algorithm to better reflect range usage.

If there is a concern with the range of the vehicle, we will be happy to work through this to address any issues being experienced

To improve your range, please see these tips:

Personal driving habits have the greatest impact on the range of your vehicle
Drive the speed limit and avoid frequent and rapid acceleration.
Better utilize, and/or adjust the sensitivity for Regenerative Braking (Standard is recommended)
Keep tires at standard air pressure.
Lighten cargo load by removing unnecessary items.
Keep windows closed for better aerodynamic efficiency.
Limit the use of resources such as heating and air conditioning. Using seat heaters to keep warm is more efficient than heating the cabin.
Enable Range Mode
Controls > Driving > Range Mode
Environmental Factors
Exposure to rapid temperature changes, or long exposure to extreme heat, or cold can effect the expected range. (This effect is not permanent, and does not change the health and degradation of the battery over time)
More Range Tips can be found in the "Getting Maximum Range" section of the Owner's Manual

Please visit our Support Page, which covers frequently asked questions about Tesla and your vehicle. If you have any further questions or concerns, you can reach one of our Chat Agents at Tesla.com or Customer Support 24/7 at Contact | Tesla

Best Regards,

Bryce W | Tesla Support
12832 Frontrunner Blvd., Draper, UT 84020
www.tesla.com/support

These continuous assertions from Tesla that there is no actual range decrease and that it is a change in the range calculation is just outright infuriating.

 

[neroden]

But Tesla has said we are only “a small percentage of owners.”

90,000 cars * 5% * $20,000 battery replacements == $90 million. Frankly in the noise. Even if it was 25% of the cars, it would be affordable.

The problem at Tesla is a communications problem, period, end of story. They're creating ill-will by failing to communicate.

 

[lightningltd]

I emailed support questioning my 24 mile drop in range.
Their reply:

Hello,

Thank you for contacting Tesla! Please allow me to apologize for the delay in our response to this email.

There are many factors involved in the actual range of your Tesla, and why you may feel that your actual range or charge capacity does not match up to the high voltage pack capacity. The battery pack is sized to provide range. Our range is carefully calculated and measured according to rigorously reviewed standards, as well as an on-board algorithm that constantly learns your driving habits and adjusts the predicted range accordingly. In contrast, a vehicle’s battery pack energy capacity varies with the rate of discharge and cell temperature.

Please also note that our recent firmware updates included an update to the range estimation algorithm to better reflect range usage.

WOW! This one has to be in the top 3 BS answers given by Tesla employees. It has nothing to do with estimations. It has to do with TESLA reducing the available Kilowatts in our batteries.

Why are Tesla employees so quick to make stuff up when they have no clue what is happening?

 

[neroden]

Got that one beat
Populated the sheet, still losing range.
Down 18.11% from new, 15.23% from where it was pre-update. 134,000 miles, 2013 S85. I am NOT amused!

That's approaching Tesla's criteria for battery replacement -- just 3% more to go! You will probably be able to get a battery replacement.

 

[neroden]

Both our TMS (2013 P85/2015 85D) still charges to 4,2v, but supercharger speed has been seriously capped. 30-40% reduction throughout the entire scale with max speed at extremely low soc just above 70kW. In fact, even chademo speeds are reduced by nearly 15kW in the 60-70% soc range. The 2015 has seen some supercharging as it has been on long road trips around Europe on some occations, but the 2013 has not and has very little supercharging. Still both are equally capped. Both cars have around 100k miles on them.

No trip to from Norway to Spain this year as total supercharging time would increase from 22hrs to 34hrs, and that means we will no longer be able to make the trip one way in three long days. So two extra travel days to a total of 8 days on such a trip because of this supercharger capping then. No can do

Just wish Tesla could understand that most people need to know what kind of car they own tomorrow. Changing things like this is sneaky ****er behaviour. And you can quote me on that.

For clarity, could you specify what Supercharging / ChaDemo charging rates you were getting before and what rates you're getting now? (If you're being reduced from 120 kw to 105 kw, it means something different than if you're being reduced from 50 kW to 35kW)

 

[lightningltd]

Also looks like they are closing threads on the Tesla site on this as well

 

[neroden]

Also looks like they are closing threads on the Tesla site on this as well

I don't even know why Tesla has forums on its site. It just serves to make them look bad when they pull censorship stunts like this.

 

[faughtz]

Another aspect of recent update - AC pump runs for extended period after charging ceases. At this stage my Sept 2015 P85D VIN 5YJSB7H4XFF089069 is not showing range reduction, but........since the recent software upgrade the AC pump continues to run after the charger is disconnected. This did absolutely not happen before a few weeks ago.

I was first alerted when heard a buzzing in the front end hours after charging ended and car sitting in garage and not activated. Car was checked by Tesla and found no errors, and subsequently agreed with Tesla that it was AC pump running. Yesterday I charged car on a Supercharger to about 96% ending at 6kW charging rate preparing for a long drive, drove home 3 km and left car overnight before departure. AC pump kept running after car shut down, and still running an hour later. When I got up in morning 10 km of range (=2 kWh) gone from battery so AC pump kept running for hours and used up that energy.

I have raised this with Tesla (Australia), so far no response.

This seemed to be my trigger mechanism, which then resulted in about 8kWh capacity loss, with a 40kW performance hit. Good luck.