Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[swegman]

If you have an old WiFi access point, hook it up in the garage with no internet connection and connect your car to it. The car will think it has a connection but it won't access anything, so phone network should be off (no app access, no Tesla engineers hacking your car)

Tesla won't be able to remotely connect to your car in the garage this way, and it's doubtful they will initiate a remote install while you're driving. The most they can do is command your car to download over the phone connection when away from home but that will take forever on 3G cars and they will still need to be able to remotely conenct to start the update.

That is not going to prevent a forced update. My car has been off WiFi for 3 years. In fact my car’s official home is in Maryland, yet while I was in Florida Tesla downloaded the update (without my knowledge) via LTE and then installed it without prior notification. One day I was on version 8 software. The next day, when I got in the car, there was a notification on the screen that the software had been updated.

 

[Chaserr]

That's why you were forced update. Off-wifi they can remote to you. On wifi they can remote to you. But on an inaccessible wifi they can't touch you. The car is offline. They (probably) won't initiate a manually started remote install while you are driving - it will fail most likely. They wil try to install when you are at home (and online, unless your car is offline and unable to connect to Tesla).

I actually have an mobile access point set up for this. No updates ever, my car is offline no matter where it is parked, but if I turn off the AP I can remote back to my car again.

What day were you force updated? What version from and to? There is a list of force-updated users. Tesla started a new round of making engineers manually update people when V10 was released - the weekend had at least a half dozen and you're another datapoint. This indicated Tesls is still trying to conceal the dangers of their old software from us but it's just datapoints and suspicion... you're on the list now! Can you add more data?

 

[BigNick]

So maybe the “million-mile” battery tech is just a pack where 20% SoC is labeled 0% and 80% SoC is labeled 100%?

Would take a “135” pack to equal the capacity of an old “85” (actually 81) pack; and to make an equivalent 100 kWh pack you’d need a “167”!

 

[omarsultan]

People have been doing it for years and it works.

If Tesla was genuinely concerned about condition X Y or Z they wouldn't be actively involved in a conspiracy to conceal it from us. We literally would not need to call them "X Y or Z" if they felt the slightest concern.

If they want permission to hack your car, make them ask. Make them tell you why. We want them to stay in business and skirting the law in regards to public disclosure puts all of our warranties at risk.

I am not defending *how* they did this, it sucks but its also par for the course. However, given a choice between 20 miles of range and an increased likelihood that the car will catch on fire in the middle of the night, its not even a conversation.

I expect Tesla to be a responsible company and take care of safety *and* honor their battery warranty.

 

[Chaserr]

It wasn't an accusation! I was pointing out that Tesla absolutely doesn't put the slightest bit of concern towards this issue in regards to safety. If they were concerned or even aware at any level more than comatose of a safety risk they would notify us - not just because they have to by law or because not doing so threatens their future, but because not informing us puts the public at large in mortal danger. Not informing anyone means they are either trying to harm as many people as they possibly can or there is no danger whatsoever.

Their complete and total lack of concern is reassuring to me. It means their motives are financial rather than safety.

 

[DJRas]

I am not defending *how* they did this, it sucks but its also par for the course. However, given a choice between 20 miles of range and an increased likelihood that the car will catch on fire in the middle of the night, its not even a conversation.

I expect Tesla to be a responsible company and take care of safety *and* honor their battery warranty.

But, WHO says it is SAFE now?
Only Tesla!
They also believed the cars were safe from the factory 5 years ago.
Until a third party verifies this IS safe can we actually assume it is safe.

I believe it is SAFER.
But, I installed a smoke detector in my garage that will notify my smartphone on the nightstand.

 

[Chaserr]

I should add that I talk of safety from a perspective of logic and reason - Tesla is only hiding safety troubles from us if they're being unreasonable and illogical. I don't trust Tesla, so I park about 20 feet away from my home (as far as the HPWC allows, and I mounted it between garage doors on the wall so it loses a few feet dropping under the door before being stretched across the drive as far as I can pull it. I have a Nest fire alarm in the car that connects to the garage wifi when I'm at home. It's the only part of my car that is allowed internet access at home, and I only have it there to give me a time stamped independent party record of when my car catches fire. That's how much I trust Tesla's concerns for our lives.

 

[mvotb]

That is not going to prevent a forced update. My car has been off WiFi for 3 years. In fact my car’s official home is in Maryland, yet while I was in Florida Tesla downloaded the update (without my knowledge) via LTE and then installed it without prior notification. One day I was on version 8 software. The next day, when I got in the car, there was a notification on the screen that the software had been updated.

I didn't even get a notification it was just there, and blank release notes.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

I didn't even get a notification it was just there, and blank release notes.

It takes a little while for my release notes to appear, I think they are being loaded remotely every time you pull them up. I guess Tesla likes to be able to change things on the back end...

 

[Chaserr]

They use the browser to download release notes each time, which is why it usually doesn't work.

 

[tga]

They use the browser to download release notes each time, which is why it usually doesn't work.

Rebooting the MCU will unstick the browser (and release notes)

 

[Chaserr]

The strange thing is updates reboot automatically, yet this problem still exists. We're getting off the topic though, this is an older problem for Tesla than their practice of secretly capping our cars' performance.

 

[swegman]

That's why you were forced update. Off-wifi they can remote to you. On wifi they can remote to you. But on an inaccessible wifi they can't touch you. The car is offline. They (probably) won't initiate a manually started remote install while you are driving - it will fail most likely. They wil try to install when you are at home (and online, unless your car is offline and unable to connect to Tesla).

I actually have an mobile access point set up for this. No updates ever, my car is offline no matter where it is parked, but if I turn off the AP I can remote back to my car again.

What day were you force updated? What version from and to? There is a list of force-updated users. Tesla started a new round of making engineers manually update people when V10 was released - the weekend had at least a half dozen and you're another datapoint. This indicated Tesls is still trying to conceal the dangers of their old software from us but it's just datapoints and suspicion... you're on the list now! Can you add more data?

There is a thread ( Tesla forced an update of my P85D to 2019.16.2 ) that is recording those that have been force updated. I’m on the list. More people are being force updated over the past week or so. I was updated from version 8 to 2019.16.2 on June 14 it 15. Then was later updated to 2019.28.2.5. Still on that version.

 

[sorka]

That is not going to prevent a forced update. My car has been off WiFi for 3 years. In fact my car’s official home is in Maryland, yet while I was in Florida Tesla downloaded the update (without my knowledge) via LTE and then installed it without prior notification. One day I was on version 8 software. The next day, when I got in the car, there was a notification on the screen that the software had been updated.

That's because you were on LTE vs connected to wifi that has no internet access. I did this for months with my Verizon hotspot. Whenever I shifted into drive it would disconnect and go back to LTE. When I parked, it would automatically reconnect to the null hotspot. This worked until the one day that I drove to Phoenix from the Bay Area and wanted to keep an eye on supercharging with the app so I turned off the hotspot.

The software downloaded and staged on that day. Fortunately the install failed probably due to keeping the drivers seat harness unplugged. Shortly after that, I was made aware of the other trick of unplugging the rear door handle fuse. So far I've gotten three more updates staged and they've all failed to install so I've given up on using the null wifi hotspot.

Still happily on v8

 

[sorka]

I am not sure about the advisability of suggesting this. At the end of the day, it appears Tesla is concerned enough about condition X or Y or Z to force changes on owners and kick up this sh!tstorm. Assuming this is all rooted in a safety issue, then that would seem, to me at least, to be a higher concern than preserving a UI or range.

Then Tesla should issue a "Safety Recall"

 

[omarsultan]

Then Tesla should issue a "Safety Recall"

Don't disagree, but we don't have enough info to judge the scope and immediacy of the issue to know is such a declaration is meaningful. I mean look at the Tanaka airbag recall, which is taking years to play out. Heck, I spent a year or so driving around with an airbag that could have potentially turned me into a colander, because I needed to go places, there were no airbags available and it seemed a reasonable risk. I guess I could have parked my S for a year, if I was really worried.

If the SW fix reduces the incidence the issue to negligible, it gives Tesla time to figure out and implement a fix and allows us to maintain the utility of our vehicles. But, say Tesla announces the are going to replace all the affected 85 kWh packs, there is still no immediate impact:

• There is the logistics of building packs they no longer make
• There is at the cost of said packs so, given the push for profitability, I am sure they would like to find a less expensive option, especially if its something that may extend to the entire fleet, and a cheaper, simpler fix will likely get rolled out faster
• There is still the time to cycle all those cars though Service

And, again, Tesla could have treated us like adults and explained some of this which would reduced the level of angst for everyone involved.

 

[Moonwick]

If you want to be certain that your car won't download updates you need to open up your MCU and yank the SIM card. Connecting to a 'dead' wifi may be enough to prevent normal-priority updates, but it's silly to think that the MCU is incapable of passing data via LTE at the same time that it believes it's connected to wifi.

 

[hpartsch]

Is this a new "feature"? I don't remember seeing/reading about this before?

 

[omarsultan]

If you want to be certain that your car won't download updates you need to open up your MCU and yank the SIM card. Connecting to a 'dead' wifi may be enough to prevent normal-priority updates, but it's silly to think that the MCU is incapable of passing data via LTE at the same time that it believes it's connected to wifi.

My iPhone is no smarter...

 

[swegman]

Is this a new "feature"? I don't remember seeing/reading about this before?

View attachment 467275

I think that message was referring to the charge being limited to maximum 80% SOC (unless you over-ride Tesla’s setting) due to (what is supposed to be) heavy usage of the charge stalls.