Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[mymagiccarpet]

Sorry for long post, but lots of relevant information to share. Thanks to everyone contributing to this topic. I've been monitoring it since it had 20 pages
I still wonder though how many are really affected. No way to know I guess, but would be interesting.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

So... Now they claim it was there but the software was making a mistake and not seeing it? Hmmm... Whether a product is hardware or software, it is still a product... An error of that magnitude, especially with all the bragging Tesla does about their BMS and the MILLIONS of miles of data they have captured, would constitute a material defect in materials or workmanship, and therefore covered under the warrantee unless they are saying they KNEW it was safety and/or durability issue and CHOSE not to disclose it until this moment ...
Hmmmmm… Too bad what he said was not in writing.

Well they can try saying the degradation was actually there, but we just didn’t see it. Now we can. If that is the truth explain how I actually, physically, could drive over 200 miles beforehand, and now I can't. If it really was there beforehand, how come I was able to actually drive the miles?

Or are you treating us as morons.
And are you telling porkies?

 

[Ferrycraigs]

Sorry for long post, but lots of relevant information to share. Thanks to everyone contributing to this topic. I've been monitoring it since it had 20 pages
I still wonder though how many are really affected. No way to know I guess, but would be interesting.

My wet finger in the air, guesstimate is, very very few. Think how many pre face lift cars are out there. And of them, how many have the smaller batteries (85 and below). And of them, only some are affected. So the numbers can’t be great. But even if it was only a dozen......

 

[mymagiccarpet]

My wet finger in the air, guesstimate is, very very few. Think how many pre face lift cars are out there. And of them, how many have the smaller batteries (85 and below). And of them, only some are affected. So the numbers can’t be great. But even if it was only a dozen......

I really tend to agree with that, so I still think they will eventually solve this in customer satisfactory manner. I'd never buy another Tesla if they do not.
What I'm hoping is they are not buying time to get to the point where they can say "well, this is about 3-4% degradation per year, so your battery is where we would expect it" essentially ignoring the fact that they locked capacity. There are many ways to spin it then. So for that reason, discussion needs to always center around battery capacity and sudden change, and not range and degradation. Range is the impact to customer/owner, not root cause. Degradation is not a deliberate event, while what happened here is.

 

[Droschke]

I really tend to agree with that, so I still think they will eventually solve this in customer satisfactory manner. I'd never buy another Tesla if they do not.
What I'm hoping is they are not buying time to get to the point where they can say "well, this is about 3-4% degradation per year, so your battery is where we would expect it" essentially ignoring the fact that they locked capacity. There are many ways to spin it then. So for that reason, discussion needs to always center around battery capacity and sudden change, and not range and degradation. Range is the impact to customer/owner, not root cause. Degradation is not a deliberate event, while what happened here is.

Have you added yourself to this sheet?

 

[fbitz777]

What about sticking to "Physics"? 4.1V per cell and 100% indicated on car display are inconsistent!I
Is Tesla claiming we can't or are not able (or allowed) to see that 4.1V per cell at "full charge"?

Just divide the HV battery Voltage by 96, right?

I am trying to simplify our case here!

 

[Droschke]

Another possible impacted owner posting in the main forum page. I posted and asked the owner to post here. Like others have speculated, there are more owners who are not aware of the issue per this thread.

 

[mjmiron]

We need to come together on this and stay active in social media and like the heck out of posts to get exposure on the front page. All Tesla owners should be concerned about how Tesla treats software and what they THINK they can do when it’s not right. This is about theft with limiting batteries and will either turn out to be no issue once they fix it or a cover up for the fires but it’s bs and if they don’t fix it I will not buy another Tesla either.

 

[Skipdd]

We need to come together on this and stay active in social media and like the heck out of posts to get exposure on the front page. All Tesla owners should be concerned about how Tesla treats software and what they THINK they can do when it’s not right. This is about theft with limiting batteries and will either turn out to be no issue once they fix it or a cover up for the fires but it’s bs and if they don’t fix it I will not buy another Tesla either.

I am not affected, but have followed since the beginning, and YES, this plus several other things will affect my future purchase decision(s) and are already affecting my conversations with people I encounter who are thinking about getting a Tesla - 2 conversations in the past week. I tell them, great car, enjoy it every day. Company right now is having growing pains and making some poor decisions. Then give examples and encourage them to do some research before making a decision. The 2 people I spoke with were what I would term “qualified buyers.” In sales parlance, that means, ready, willing, and able.

 

[EK123]

Work trip today, 300 miles home, make the same trip at the same time 1 week of most months. I waited 10 minutes at a charging station that is normally empty. Plugged in, and was sharing a station. Overall, it took about an hour longer to charge.

Even if you think you are unaffected, if you supercharge, you will be impacted.

I have no issue if this is temporary and was properly communicated.

 

[Blu Zap]

you read some prior posts their was a recommendation to update to be on the safe side it’s up to you. Everything I have read leads me to believe all this limiting is due to dendrites forming at high charge levels and the potential seems to be a fire risk. Their is nothing in writing to confirm that just seems to be the overall assumption. I really would be sad if a lot of folks held off and their was more fires I really hope that does not happen. This would be all the more reason for Tesla to be HONEST and fess up to why they did this to our cars so we didn’t hold off.

Now we are on to the real issue!! Please everyone, don't waste our time talking to Tesla about range loss and charging rates. BOO HOO! says Tesla to our faces. They will have their prepared, canned answers for these issues. The issue is Safety, i.e. spontaneous combustion of our batteries. We do not know for sure that 2019.16.1 really protects us. Since Tesla won't admit the safety issue, they can't say the firmware update solves the issue. That is where we have them. They need to repair/replace our batteries under warranty due to safety. Any other points you bring up, as painful as they may be, will only dilute the rationale for our cause.
Who has the resources/lawyer to pull this case together?

 

[Ferrycraigs]

What about sticking to "Physics"? 4.1V per cell and 100% indicated on car display are inconsistent!I
Is Tesla claiming we can't or are not able (or allowed) to see that 4.1V per cell at "full charge"?

Just divide the HV battery Voltage by 96, right?

I am trying to simplify our case here!

As I understand it, the battery % is related to Vmax. If the cells are all at Vmax it is reported as 100%. But if Tesla change Vmax from 4.2V, where it used to be to, say, 4.01V, the battery reports 100% when it reaches the new Vmax. Alas, the total of all the cells at the new, lower, Vmax now totals 58kWhs instead of the previous 70kWhs.

The experts may put more accurate science on my simple description.

 

[Todd Burch]

Just thought I'd throw my hat in the ring here.

I am one of the original Model S customers. Had a reservation in January 2010 and was one of the first Model S's ever delivered in Virginia in 2012, so I'm not new to this Model S thing. In 2014 I upgraded and bought an Oct 2014 P85 (RevD original battery) and now have about 110,000 miles on it. My 90% charge started at 237-241 when new, then settled to 233 and very gradually fell from 233 to 228 over 4 years and 100,000 miles of driving. Perfectly acceptable.

In the last three months or so (since this update I suppose), my 90% charge has plummeted from 228 to 217, then 216, then 215, and now 214...now dropping about a mile every week or two. Charging/driving habits have not changed at all. I supercharge about a dozen times a year.

I'm not freaking out about it yet, hearing that Tesla is working on it. But if there's no resolution I won't be happy.

 

[Droschke]

Just thought I'd throw my hat in the ring here.

I am one of the original Model S customers. Had a reservation in January 2010 and was one of the first Model S's ever delivered in Virginia in 2012, so I'm not new to this Model S thing. In 2014 I upgraded and bought an Oct 2014 P85 (RevD original battery) and now have about 110,000 miles on it. My 90% charge started at 237-241 when new, then settled to 233 and very gradually fell from 233 to 228 over 4 years and 100,000 miles of driving. Perfectly acceptable.

In the last three months or so (since this update I suppose), my 90% charge has plummeted from 228 to 217, then 216, then 215, and now 214...now dropping about a mile every week or two. Charging/driving habits have not changed at all. I supercharge about a dozen times a year.

I'm not freaking out about it yet, hearing that Tesla is working on it. But if there's no resolution I won't be happy.

You are capped and it's a bad situation for the impacted owners. We need as many affected owner speak up and comment here. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

 

[schonelucht]

Apparently the class action is underway as Rasmussen v Tesla.

 

[fbitz777]

Apparently the class action is underway as Rasmussen v Tesla.

Amazingly well written! We should all join (DAVID RASMUSSEN, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated)

 

[DJRas]

Apparently the class action is underway as Rasmussen v Tesla.

Yes, this is mine!

 

[Chaserr]

Yes, this is mine!

Thank you for your work! Let us know anything we need to do to help.

 

[bhzmark]

Tesla warranty says:



When "gradual" or "over time", "is NOT covered". Fine.

@MP3Mike :

How about sudden? You think if sudden, then it should be covered?

"or due to or resulting from Battery usage" whether gradual, or sudden, or over time, or not over time (whatever that is).

 

[Chaserr]

The "sudden" language might be why they try to hide the software reductions by spreading them out over weeks of simulated "gradual decrease." Has anyone had the full ~20% decrease overnight? Everyone's experiences seem to follow the same general plot of several weeks of steadily dropping pack voltage. This seemed intentional to me from the very beginning - they tried to hide the losses, and maybe wanted to claim the programmed decline is "gradual" by design to make it sound like degradation to a judge.