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

Kinda. The wh/mi is a constant based on the battery/motor/chassis combo. Change any of those, and you change the constant. Obviously not the case here, though, just nitpicking. lol.

@wk057 , Do you agree that regardless of the reason, Tesla's latest software is removing access to capacity that actually exists?

Yes, the capacity definitely exists. This isn't a voltage-based limitation like what happens with an SoC imbalance (like when a module has cell-fused failed, or otherwise is degraded in a non-uniform way). In that case, the pack can't physically be charged beyond the limit because it would push some cells over a safe voltage.

In this case, there is no physical limitation and the pack can still be charged to the original pre-update capacity. I've fully confirmed this with the NVRAM reset of my one client's BMS, which is happily charging to right around his original 100% capacity right now.


Additionally, do you think when Tesla did this and say cut the SOC to say 85% of existing capacity that they indicate 100% SOC when it's only 85% or do you think they should display the true SOC and indicate that they will not charge above that?

The BMS uses the lowest of all available capacity variables as the max capacity used for SoC. In this case, the SoC being used is determined by the new unknown variable that's being calculated, since it's the lowest. So, the car will report 100% charge at this capacity.


Again, I do believe they've done this to head off a safety issue. And they need to make good with customers one way or another. They can start by being clear about what the issue is.
 
Conspiracy is too big a word.

Corporate communications policy avoiding things they have been concluded negative for the company and resulting chosen lack in transparency is what I think is possibly happening — basically a corporate culture of silence.

It would be super easy for Tesla to be open about this and so many other negative issues and they rarely are, yet anything even slightly positive gets major and excessive attention from them.

It is a choice, I think.
This is beyond a culture of silence.
They are replying with FALSE information.
They keep saying the rated range is based on YOUR driving style and recent drives. THAT is incorrect and everyone outside of Tesla KNOWS this.
They claim normal degradation when it occurs instantly.

Class action suit for breach of warranty to follow soon.
 
I got back to the car and the charge was at 93% but was only showing 173 and was at 4kw speed and saying I still had 30 minutes to get to 95%!
Since it is mostly uphill to the next supercharger, I needed the 90% range of 230 miles which gives me about a 55 mile buffer (it was cold and windy).

How did the actual distance driven vs reported miles compare ? Did your Wh/m number remain the same, or change ?
 
That's weird. By any chance did the "leave on" happened to get pressed. Doesn't seem like it from your original post. Also, did you just upgrade, and after the upgrade did you reboot? Sometimes a reboot is needed after an upgrade to reset everything. If none of those apply, it's best to call service and have them check the logs.


I had the same but next day had another update which fixed that. But never fixed my range.
 
There was at least one post in this massive thread of a 60 that was heavily impacted.

Yep mine !, usable battery down from 58.6kWh new to 46.7k ! -20%, 45k miles
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20190707-132447.jpg
    Screenshot_20190707-132447.jpg
    214.7 KB · Views: 93
It was very noticeable as well as The degraded regeneration.
In fact it damn near caused an accident today when some asshat decided to push their way onto the freeway and I had a car on my left. I gave it full acceleration and it barely got out of the way.
Still better than my old four-cylinder gas car but it scared the piss out of me and my wife.

This is beyond just safety this is just plain stupid.

Somebody’s trying to save a buck. It’s not gonna cost them that much to replace whatever failed module they need to replace if one is bad.
They need to start rebuilding batteries and just exchange them before somebody gets killed because of this.
Maybe, but I doubt they know yet whether a module replacement is a better solution than battery replacement or ramping up a battery refurbishment program. Is this a narrow issue or the beginning of something they will have to deal with long-term? Is it just a warranty issue until their 8 years of liability are up or do they not dare risk the public conclusion that a Tesla only lasts 8 years and then it's mostly scrap?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Icer and Droschke