Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[wk057]

Did Tesla finally wisen up and start paying you not to expose all their shady tactics?

That'd be too easy... and Tesla never goes the easy route.

What did you ever sell that yellow beast for?

Still have it.

Also explain how Tesla can still if not even more so keep you from doing services to your own car? This *sugar* drives me crazy and now they are pushing their updates into your car and have changed their warranties to include “not updating the latest updates will void your warranty .” Tesla is coming to an end and than we can actually make them better ourselves lol. Swap out batteries, motors etc. We need people like you on our side not theirs and you know how that is since you were once in our shoes battling Tesla and their antics.

The short answer is simple: It's not in Tesla's best interest to make the cars easily repaired, serviceable, upgradable (hardware wise), etc.

<rant>
The longer answer: Let's cut through the crap and realize that Tesla is a for-profit entity. Their public facing mission, "to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport," while maybe the goal originally, is definitely not the same as the real mission today: To make as much money as possible. To do that, they have to sell new cars. If someone totals a Tesla vehicle, that's awesome for Tesla. It means that someone is pretty likely to buy another Tesla. If someone takes that salvage car, fixes it, and sells it... that's one less car Tesla will sell. You can try to spin that every which way ("the people buying salvages wouldn't buy new," or, "the people working on salvage cars aren't the same people that would buy a new car," etc etc etc), but understand its complete BS, especially when we're talking about cars in the Model 3 price range. Sure, someone who wants to fix up a Model S for under $40k isn't likely to spend $150k on a new loaded Model S... but they're pretty likely to buy a Model 3.

It pisses me off to no end to find a perfectly working vehicle be salvage titled and blacklisted because of a literal dent in a quarter panel. Tesla cuts off supercharging, connectivity, etc. Doesn't matter what the actual damage is, mileage, warranty remaining, etc... if an insurance company decides it's a total loss, then you're totally screwed. Seriously, from Tesla's perspective a dent in a quarter panel can void your entire warranty, cause you to lose features, etc.

It's always easier to buy a new car from an immediate financial impact perspective. You can't really take out a loan to fix up a salvage Tesla. You're going out of pocket on that. But, you can pick up a new Model 3 for ~$500/mo. The people with the coin to spend on fixing up a wrecked Tesla generally have the means to buy a new Tesla... and, in my experience, many of them do go that route at some point.

The harder Tesla makes it to do anything with these cars without them, the more that shifts the spectrum in their favor towards new purchases. While there is a small community of folks with the knowledge needed to actually make some progress on third party repairs, most of the people claiming to be able to do so don't know anything about how to deal with these vehicles outside of the stuff common to all vehicles (I won't mention any names, but there's several high profile folks who make it look like they know everything about theses vehicles and in reality know jack s***, just scamming people out of time and money all around).

Outside of Tesla, I'd say there's probably less than 15 people with the knowledge needed to actually work on the bulk of the systems on these vehicles without insider help... and of those people, 5 or fewer with the knowledge to actually continue to do so by developing tools needed for the tasks. Figuring out how to work on these cars without Tesla tools requires the skill set of software and hardware developers that are in a small niche capable of such reverse engineering that is what seems to be a dying breed. The kids coming out of college with all sorts of tech degrees know nothing about this sort of work. The vast majority of people who are both inclined to and capable of such work tend to have little to no formal training, myself included.

Overall, Tesla's not going to make things any easier unless eventually they're ordered to by a court with some authority over them. They don't care much about right to repair type laws, since no one tries to hold them accountable. They skirt the law in other places (software copyright, for example) without consequence. They know what they're doing, and they have no intention of doing anything owner/customer friendly outside of the sale and delivery process. Everything else is secondary to the actual mission: making money (ie: selling new cars). Yes, things like service, superchargers, etc all are needed to market for those sales... but they don't need to be perfect.
</rant>

 

[MelvinLee]

That'd be too easy... and Tesla never goes the easy route.



Still have it.



The short answer is simple: It's not in Tesla's best interest to make the cars easily repaired, serviceable, upgradable (hardware wise), etc.

<rant>
The longer answer: Let's cut through the crap and realize that Tesla is a for-profit entity. Their public facing mission, "to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport," while maybe the goal originally, is definitely not the same as the real mission today: To make as much money as possible. To do that, they have to sell new cars. If someone totals a Tesla vehicle, that's awesome for Tesla. It means that someone is pretty likely to buy another Tesla. If someone takes that salvage car, fixes it, and sells it... that's one less car Tesla will sell. You can try to spin that every which way ("the people buying salvages wouldn't buy new," or, "the people working on salvage cars aren't the same people that would buy a new car," etc etc etc), but understand its complete BS, especially when we're talking about cars in the Model 3 price range. Sure, someone who wants to fix up a Model S for under $40k isn't likely to spend $150k on a new loaded Model S... but they're pretty likely to buy a Model 3.

It pisses me off to no end to find a perfectly working vehicle be salvage titled and blacklisted because of a literal dent in a quarter panel. Tesla cuts off supercharging, connectivity, etc. Doesn't matter what the actual damage is, mileage, warranty remaining, etc... if an insurance company decides it's a total loss, then you're totally screwed. Seriously, from Tesla's perspective a dent in a quarter panel can void your entire warranty, cause you to lose features, etc.

It's always easier to buy a new car from an immediate financial impact perspective. You can't really take out a loan to fix up a salvage Tesla. You're going out of pocket on that. But, you can pick up a new Model 3 for ~$500/mo. The people with the coin to spend on fixing up a wrecked Tesla generally have the means to buy a new Tesla... and, in my experience, many of them do go that route at some point.

The harder Tesla makes it to do anything with these cars without them, the more that shifts the spectrum in their favor towards new purchases. While there is a small community of folks with the knowledge needed to actually make some progress on third party repairs, most of the people claiming to be able to do so don't know anything about how to deal with these vehicles outside of the stuff common to all vehicles (I won't mention any names, but there's several high profile folks who make it look like they know everything about theses vehicles and in reality know jack s***, just scamming people out of time and money all around).

Outside of Tesla, I'd say there's probably less than 15 people with the knowledge needed to actually work on the bulk of the systems on these vehicles without insider help... and of those people, 5 or fewer with the knowledge to actually continue to do so by developing tools needed for the tasks. Figuring out how to work on these cars without Tesla tools requires the skill set of software and hardware developers that are in a small niche capable of such reverse engineering that is what seems to be a dying breed. The kids coming out of college with all sorts of tech degrees know nothing about this sort of work. The vast majority of people who are both inclined to and capable of such work tend to have little to no formal training, myself included.

Overall, Tesla's not going to make things any easier unless eventually they're ordered to by a court with some authority over them. They don't care much about right to repair type laws, since no one tries to hold them accountable. They skirt the law in other places (software copyright, for example) without consequence. They know what they're doing, and they have no intention of doing anything owner/customer friendly outside of the sale and delivery process. Everything else is secondary to the actual mission: making money (ie: selling new cars). Yes, things like service, superchargers, etc all are needed to market for those sales... but they don't need to be perfect.
</rant>

Perfectly stated... I respect the hell out of your knowledge of not just understanding the dynamics of the cars but the business behind it. It is complete bullshit that they can basically take away all your privacy rights etc just to own their car and on top of that they can keep you from repairing it yourself. There definitely needs to be changes made however I don’t believe Tesla will last long enough to get there. And the vast majority of major manufacturers will not have these restrictions. I have been a loyal owner for awhile but have lost all trust in them no matter how much I like their cars. Their time is running out and they know it and if Elon let’s his ego get the best of him they’ll be bankrupt and bought for pennies on the dollar just like fisker.
If he’s smart he will sell or merge and use the one huge advantage he has...a supercharging network that cannot be touched at this point by anyone else. He needs to wisen up and leverage the few advantages he has left.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

That'd be too easy... and Tesla never goes the easy route.



Still have it.



The short answer is simple: It's not in Tesla's best interest to make the cars easily repaired, serviceable, upgradable (hardware wise), etc.

<rant>
The longer answer: Let's cut through the crap and realize that Tesla is a for-profit entity. Their public facing mission, "to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport," while maybe the goal originally, is definitely not the same as the real mission today: To make as much money as possible. To do that, they have to sell new cars. If someone totals a Tesla vehicle, that's awesome for Tesla. It means that someone is pretty likely to buy another Tesla. If someone takes that salvage car, fixes it, and sells it... that's one less car Tesla will sell. You can try to spin that every which way ("the people buying salvages wouldn't buy new," or, "the people working on salvage cars aren't the same people that would buy a new car," etc etc etc), but understand its complete BS, especially when we're talking about cars in the Model 3 price range. Sure, someone who wants to fix up a Model S for under $40k isn't likely to spend $150k on a new loaded Model S... but they're pretty likely to buy a Model 3.

It pisses me off to no end to find a perfectly working vehicle be salvage titled and blacklisted because of a literal dent in a quarter panel. Tesla cuts off supercharging, connectivity, etc. Doesn't matter what the actual damage is, mileage, warranty remaining, etc... if an insurance company decides it's a total loss, then you're totally screwed. Seriously, from Tesla's perspective a dent in a quarter panel can void your entire warranty, cause you to lose features, etc.

It's always easier to buy a new car from an immediate financial impact perspective. You can't really take out a loan to fix up a salvage Tesla. You're going out of pocket on that. But, you can pick up a new Model 3 for ~$500/mo. The people with the coin to spend on fixing up a wrecked Tesla generally have the means to buy a new Tesla... and, in my experience, many of them do go that route at some point.

The harder Tesla makes it to do anything with these cars without them, the more that shifts the spectrum in their favor towards new purchases. While there is a small community of folks with the knowledge needed to actually make some progress on third party repairs, most of the people claiming to be able to do so don't know anything about how to deal with these vehicles outside of the stuff common to all vehicles (I won't mention any names, but there's several high profile folks who make it look like they know everything about theses vehicles and in reality know jack s***, just scamming people out of time and money all around).

Outside of Tesla, I'd say there's probably less than 15 people with the knowledge needed to actually work on the bulk of the systems on these vehicles without insider help... and of those people, 5 or fewer with the knowledge to actually continue to do so by developing tools needed for the tasks. Figuring out how to work on these cars without Tesla tools requires the skill set of software and hardware developers that are in a small niche capable of such reverse engineering that is what seems to be a dying breed. The kids coming out of college with all sorts of tech degrees know nothing about this sort of work. The vast majority of people who are both inclined to and capable of such work tend to have little to no formal training, myself included.

Overall, Tesla's not going to make things any easier unless eventually they're ordered to by a court with some authority over them. They don't care much about right to repair type laws, since no one tries to hold them accountable. They skirt the law in other places (software copyright, for example) without consequence. They know what they're doing, and they have no intention of doing anything owner/customer friendly outside of the sale and delivery process. Everything else is secondary to the actual mission: making money (ie: selling new cars). Yes, things like service, superchargers, etc all are needed to market for those sales... but they don't need to be perfect.
</rant>

Am I the only one that thinks it is entirely appropriate that the 5000th post should go to wk057?

 

[MelvinLee]

Am I the only one that thinks it is entirely appropriate that the 5000th post should go to wk057?

Haha that’s great... didn’t even notice. No one deserves it more that’s for sure

 

[⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️]

Their time is running out and they know it and if Elon let’s his ego get the best of him they’ll be bankrupt and bought for pennies on the dollar just like fisker.

You state this as fact. Either you’re able to see into the future or you’re not anymore trustworthy than Tesla is appearing to be. What makes you think they are close to reaching the end?

 

[raphy3]

I have an appointment tomorrow to get my screen replaced. How can I prevent them from updating my software?

 

[kavyboy]

That'd be too easy... and Tesla never goes the easy route.



Still have it.



The short answer is simple: It's not in Tesla's best interest to make the cars easily repaired, serviceable, upgradable (hardware wise), etc.

<rant>
The longer answer: Let's cut through the crap and realize that Tesla is a for-profit entity. Their public facing mission, "to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport," while maybe the goal originally, is definitely not the same as the real mission today: To make as much money as possible. To do that, they have to sell new cars. If someone totals a Tesla vehicle, that's awesome for Tesla. It means that someone is pretty likely to buy another Tesla. If someone takes that salvage car, fixes it, and sells it... that's one less car Tesla will sell. You can try to spin that every which way ("the people buying salvages wouldn't buy new," or, "the people working on salvage cars aren't the same people that would buy a new car," etc etc etc), but understand its complete BS, especially when we're talking about cars in the Model 3 price range. Sure, someone who wants to fix up a Model S for under $40k isn't likely to spend $150k on a new loaded Model S... but they're pretty likely to buy a Model 3.

It pisses me off to no end to find a perfectly working vehicle be salvage titled and blacklisted because of a literal dent in a quarter panel. Tesla cuts off supercharging, connectivity, etc. Doesn't matter what the actual damage is, mileage, warranty remaining, etc... if an insurance company decides it's a total loss, then you're totally screwed. Seriously, from Tesla's perspective a dent in a quarter panel can void your entire warranty, cause you to lose features, etc.

It's always easier to buy a new car from an immediate financial impact perspective. You can't really take out a loan to fix up a salvage Tesla. You're going out of pocket on that. But, you can pick up a new Model 3 for ~$500/mo. The people with the coin to spend on fixing up a wrecked Tesla generally have the means to buy a new Tesla... and, in my experience, many of them do go that route at some point.

The harder Tesla makes it to do anything with these cars without them, the more that shifts the spectrum in their favor towards new purchases. While there is a small community of folks with the knowledge needed to actually make some progress on third party repairs, most of the people claiming to be able to do so don't know anything about how to deal with these vehicles outside of the stuff common to all vehicles (I won't mention any names, but there's several high profile folks who make it look like they know everything about theses vehicles and in reality know jack s***, just scamming people out of time and money all around).

Outside of Tesla, I'd say there's probably less than 15 people with the knowledge needed to actually work on the bulk of the systems on these vehicles without insider help... and of those people, 5 or fewer with the knowledge to actually continue to do so by developing tools needed for the tasks. Figuring out how to work on these cars without Tesla tools requires the skill set of software and hardware developers that are in a small niche capable of such reverse engineering that is what seems to be a dying breed. The kids coming out of college with all sorts of tech degrees know nothing about this sort of work. The vast majority of people who are both inclined to and capable of such work tend to have little to no formal training, myself included.

Overall, Tesla's not going to make things any easier unless eventually they're ordered to by a court with some authority over them. They don't care much about right to repair type laws, since no one tries to hold them accountable. They skirt the law in other places (software copyright, for example) without consequence. They know what they're doing, and they have no intention of doing anything owner/customer friendly outside of the sale and delivery process. Everything else is secondary to the actual mission: making money (ie: selling new cars). Yes, things like service, superchargers, etc all are needed to market for those sales... but they don't need to be perfect.
</rant>

I want to create sockpuppet accounts just to rate this post "Love" again and again.

 

[raphy3]

You state this as fact. Either you’re able to see into the future or you’re not anymore trustworthy than Tesla is appearing to be. What makes you think they are close to reaching the end?

They are definitely behaving like it. They seem very desperate these days.... It would be nice if that was not the case.

 

[swegman]

I have an appointment tomorrow to get my screen replaced. How can I prevent them from updating my software?

If you are ONLY receiving a new screen there is no need to do a firmware update. If they are also replacing the MCU, Tesla will update the firmware.

 

[jensk2]

If we wait long enough we will get these:

Tesla's Jeff Dahn Unveils Million-Mile Battery Cell

I agree the results are fantastic for 1/3C and cycle depth of 100%. But the current NMC 532 design will reduce the 100D battery to approx 83kWh (Current cells 265Wh/kg New NMC 532 = 225 Wh/kg.

To me okay when 100% cycle and 100% SoC is okay, I have a 70D and rarely cycle more than 40% around 45% SoC. But remember the testing was with a 1/3C rate, which is far from a SUC.

 

[swegman]

Hi, I find the numbers interesting.

Being Elctronics Engineer for many decades and from reading Li-Ion papers for years, my brain rules out, that a degradation of 1,56% over six years of use is possible. I think the BMS has failed to correctly identify/estimate/measure the degradation. Only the new Jeff Dahn & Dalhouisie Team NMC cells degrade that little A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologies

Own experience with Li-Ion (NMC though) is:
A: Even with the most perfect treatment of Li-Ion, internal resistance grows over time, so with same remaning capacity, range should be shorter, just because of bigger heat loss.
B: At work we have Lenovo Laptops, that have been powered on everyday, but at only 55% StateofCharge. The BMS thinks they did not degrade at all over the last 3 years, but the battery life from 55% and down is terrible and the battery goes warm, so has high internal resistance
C: I had to dismantle my 8 year old Nokia Windows Phone last week and lift the cell voltage from 2,45V to 3,22V before battery protection allowed it to charge, because it had been powered off for some months and my son wanted it for Alarm Clock. Battery has same capacity as last spring (it only charge to 55% only as well) but the self discharge, when powered off, is approx 5% per 2 days.

All above changes reduces 'range' So I propose that the 253 miles of range was dead wrong (as Tesloop and Tesla Bjørn has experienced with cars dying with miles still on the gauge).

I cannot know whether your capacity should be 223 miles or higher, that depends on whether your batteri has been top-capped.

If you were hit by both 'more correct estimate' and capping, then Tesla's timing is bad. If they first told us that the fantastic low degradation we (*) have experienced was partly due to a bad BMS algorithm and that a new version of SW now report the correct range, so we no longer risk stranding a cold vinter night on a dark highway, then we may have accepted that as necessary. (And Tesla will not need to replace batteries, which they had to for both Tesloop and Bjørn)

A later message to those capped, that the capping is a temporary safety measure, untill Tesla figures out how to handle the assumed safety issue, would as well be less bad for Tesla trustworthieness, than this thread.

(*) Dec 2015 S 70D, BMS Reported range when new: 364 km, now 351 km a dgeradation of around 3,5%. Never the less I tell ABetterRoutePlanner that my battery has degraded 7% and my car uses 205 Wh/km at 110 km/h, which makes me hit the SUC with 17%, when ABRP calculted 18%)

I believe the range indication before the forced update was correct. I base this belief on the fact that at a 100% charge the car indicated a range of 253 miles, and I did a trip that was 250 miles from point A charger to point B charger. I made it with a few miles to spare. If the BMS range indication was incorrect, as you seem to suggest, I would not have made it to the point B charger.

After the forced update, the car only charges to 98% range, which corresponds to a 226 mile range. Either the forced update results in the BMS severely underestimating the real range, or the range has been reduced by capping. It appears to be battery voltage capping.

 

[Droschke]

Hi, I find the numbers interesting.

Being Elctronics Engineer for many decades and from reading Li-Ion papers for years, my brain rules out, that a degradation of 1,56% over six years of use is possible. I think the BMS has failed to correctly identify/estimate/measure the degradation. Only the new Jeff Dahn & Dalhouisie Team NMC cells degrade that little A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologies

Own experience with Li-Ion (NMC though) is:
A: Even with the most perfect treatment of Li-Ion, internal resistance grows over time, so with same remaning capacity, range should be shorter, just because of bigger heat loss.
B: At work we have Lenovo Laptops, that have been powered on everyday, but at only 55% StateofCharge. The BMS thinks they did not degrade at all over the last 3 years, but the battery life from 55% and down is terrible and the battery goes warm, so has high internal resistance
C: I had to dismantle my 8 year old Nokia Windows Phone last week and lift the cell voltage from 2,45V to 3,22V before battery protection allowed it to charge, because it had been powered off for some months and my son wanted it for Alarm Clock. Battery has same capacity as last spring (it only charge to 55% only as well) but the self discharge, when powered off, is approx 5% per 2 days.

All above changes reduces 'range' So I propose that the 253 miles of range was dead wrong (as Tesloop and Tesla Bjørn has experienced with cars dying with miles still on the gauge).

I cannot know whether your capacity should be 223 miles or higher, that depends on whether your batteri has been top-capped.

If you were hit by both 'more correct estimate' and capping, then Tesla's timing is bad. If they first told us that the fantastic low degradation we (*) have experienced was partly due to a bad BMS algorithm and that a new version of SW now report the correct range, so we no longer risk stranding a cold vinter night on a dark highway, then we may have accepted that as necessary. (And Tesla will not need to replace batteries, which they had to for both Tesloop and Bjørn)

A later message to those capped, that the capping is a temporary safety measure, untill Tesla figures out how to handle the assumed safety issue, would as well be less bad for Tesla trustworthieness, than this thread.

(*) Dec 2015 S 70D, BMS Reported range when new: 364 km, now 351 km a dgeradation of around 3,5%. Never the less I tell ABetterRoutePlanner that my battery has degraded 7% and my car uses 205 Wh/km at 110 km/h, which makes me hit the SUC with 17%, when ABRP calculted 18%)

I think the BMS has failed to correctly identify/estimate/measure the degradation.

I also believe this is the case as I have posted here repeatedly about it, that the BMS has been wrong/faulty for all these years, intentional to make the degradation look good or unintentional due to bad algorithms.

If you were hit by both 'more correct estimate' and capping, then Tesla's timing is bad. If they first told us that the fantastic low degradation we (*) have experienced was partly due to a bad BMS algorithm and that a new version of SW now report the correct range, so we no longer risk stranding a cold vinter night on a dark highway, then we may have accepted that as necessary.

Agree. The silence on their part before/after the cap imposition speaks volumes and to the admission of guilt. They either knew about the bad BMS but took no action to avoid negating the "good" degradation rates but had to take action due to the multiple fires, or the fire incidents was the trigger to evaluate the BMS behavior which resulted in its revision and the battery caps.

A later message to those capped, that the capping is a temporary safety measure, untill Tesla figures out how to handle the assumed safety issue, would as well be less bad for Tesla trustworthieness, than this thread.

This one I disagree. I believe the capping, to a large extend, is permanent.

 

[raphy3]

If you are ONLY receiving a new screen there is no need to do a firmware update. If they are also replacing the MCU, Tesla will update the firmware.

Yeah it should be screen only, unless they just only have MCUs laying around and no screens... The SC told me all electrical parts require software updates to work. That sounds like nonsense.

 

[jensk2]

Do you mind sharing or describing your charging curve at SC from low SOC to "full"...I find hard to believe your charge times are not affected. Or is your "MS70" a software locked 85?
Sorry to bug you!

Be warned, I am not Ferrycraigs, but I happen to have a VisibleTesla charging curve for my NOT Capacity/Voltage Capped, but Charging Capped S70D Oct [email protected] on SW 2019.28.3.1

As can be seen my high SoC curve actually looks promising as it flattens at higher SoC!!
I have just changed the cars settings for SW Updates to 'Advanced' and parked it so that it can see my home WiFi, hoping for SW 2019.32.* to be downloaded.

 

[Droschke]

I believe the range indication before the forced update was correct. I base this belief on the fact that at a 100% charge the car indicated a range of 253 miles, and I did a trip that was 250 miles from point A charger to point B charger. I made it with a few miles to spare. If the BMS range indication was incorrect, as you seem to suggest, I would not have made it to the point B charger.

After the forced update, the car only charges to 98% range, which corresponds to a 226 mile range. Either the forced update results in the BMS severely underestimating the real range, or the range has been reduced by capping. It appears to be battery voltage capping.

On June 7, 2018, I supercharged to 265 miles! A three and half years old S85 at that time !!!

Miracle battery with zero degradation or a lying BMS?

On Edit: I was so surprised that I even took a picture of the screen.
Also, my rated miles used from point A to point B always pretty much the same, few miles + or -

 

[qwk]

Perfectly stated... I respect the hell out of your knowledge of not just understanding the dynamics of the cars but the business behind it. It is complete bullshit that they can basically take away all your privacy rights etc just to own their car and on top of that they can keep you from repairing it yourself. There definitely needs to be changes made however I don’t believe Tesla will last long enough to get there. And the vast majority of major manufacturers will not have these restrictions. I have been a loyal owner for awhile but have lost all trust in them no matter how much I like their cars. Their time is running out and they know it and if Elon let’s his ego get the best of him they’ll be bankrupt and bought for pennies on the dollar just like fisker.
If he’s smart he will sell or merge and use the one huge advantage he has...a supercharging network that cannot be touched at this point by anyone else. He needs to wisen up and leverage the few advantages he has left.

I have had the same thought myself for a while, but Elon is a good BS artist, and Tesla moves on to the next shiny thing pretty fast, which helps tremendously. Model Y is almost here, and the pickup is going to be unveiled in November.

Unless the pickup is a metrosexuals dream, like the Honda Ridgeline or Chevy Avalanche, which is possible, they will sell a bunch.

My point is, unless Tesla screws up big time somehow, I don’t see them going away in the next 2-5 years.

 

[qwk]

On June 7, 2018, I supercharged to 265 miles! A three and half years old S85 at that time !!!

Miracle battery with zero degradation or a lying BMS?

The rated range calculation has changed a bunch for each individual car over the years. Rated range doesn’t tell you much. The BMS appears to be pretty accurate though.

 

[Droschke]

The rated range calculation has changed a bunch for each individual car over the years. Rated range doesn’t tell you much. The BMS appears to be pretty accurate though.

Isn't the RM calculated by BMS?

 

[jensk2]

I also believe this is the case as I have posted here repeatedly about it, that the BMS has been wrong/faulty for all these years, intentional to make the degradation look good or unintentional due to bad algorithms.



Agree. The silence on their part before/after the cap imposition speaks volumes and to the admission of guilt. They either knew about the bad BMS but took no action to avoid negating the "good" degradation rates but had to take action due to the multiple fires, or the fire incidents was the trigger to evaluate the BMS behavior which resulted in its revision and the battery caps.



This one I disagree. I believe the capping, to a large extend, is permanent.

Okay, accept your point - i could be suffering from wishfull thinking!

 

[Droschke]

Be warned, I am not Ferrycraigs, but I happen to have a VisibleTesla charging curve for my NOT Capacity/Voltage Capped, but Charging Capped S70D Oct [email protected] on SW 2019.28.3.1

As can be seen my high SoC curve actually looks promising as it flattens at higher SoC!!
I have just changed the cars settings for SW Updates to 'Advanced' and parked it so that it can see my home WiFi, hoping for SW 2019.32.* to be downloaded.

What are you expecting from SW 2019.32.*?