Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[ran349]

A lot of people in this thread have scan my Tesla this can be determined through data from that, pre and post capping.

I believe SoC percentage as shown by the car is:
(Nominal remaining - buffer)/(nominal full pack - buffer) * 100.

While rated miles as shown by the car should be:
(Nominal remaining - buffer) / (nominal full pack of car when new - buffer when new) * rated range of car when new (the last 3 terms are constant for any particular pack/car combinstion so it only really depends on nominal remaining and buffer).

Edit: that is to say if they did what you suggest one of those 3 constants would have to be changed.

I don't think that is quite right. Rated miles always equals: (car SOC% per your definition x nominal full value)/charge constant
So if the charge constant doesn't change, then rated miles change(degradation) is exactly proportional to nominal full value change.
As far as I know, the buffer value has not ever changed for a given model S configuration. But I don't think that is true for the model 3.

 

[ran349]

A simple Question

I have followed this thread for very long, but I am confused. Need just simple brief answer, if possible

I have an S70. bought it new April 2016. I was getting 249 max miles until June 2019. The max. I can get now is 230 miles. The miles have been capped and the supercharge time almost doubled. Forget about normal degradation for a second. The question is: Did I actually loose 19 miles (249 minus 230) after V9, or I actually lost more than that because the Mile measure is also manipulated in such a way that the current mile is less than the mile measure before the V9?

Something doesn't seem right. The S70 was only rated for 230 miles when new. My S70D was rated for 240 miles. So if you are at 230 miles right now, you have essentially zero degradation from the original rated value. By comparison, my 70D originally rated for 240 miles, now has 216 miles max, about 10% degradation.

 

[Guy V]

They do have a battery replacement/refurbishment program and other parts are readily available. The programs is called buying a whole new car

It's a "disposable cell phone" model, where you "upgrade" every few years for a new one (new car). Of course, that was not our understanding when you and I made that expensive purchase!

Well, that's where Tesla has us at the moment, and if it becomes the prevailing opinion it is going to wreck them in the marketplace.

 

[Blu Zap]

I don't think that is quite right. Rated miles always equals: (car SOC% per your definition x nominal full value)/charge constant
So if the charge constant doesn't change, then rated miles change(degradation) is exactly proportional to nominal full value change.
As far as I know, the buffer value has not ever changed for a given model S configuration. But I don't think that is true for the model 3.

Please, keep the conversation to battery capacity in kWh. Range of any kind will be thrown back in our faces by Tesla. With that they can take in all the driving factors that effect range. Not the discussion. It is all about kWh limitation through restricting battery capacity (voltage). With 2019.16.1 my kWh dropped from 73 kWh to 62 kWh. Don't go past that. It dilutes our case.

 

[Kenz]

"your mileage may vary"
The BMS and battery degradation is not an exact science and the range shown may not be 100% accurate.
Batteries naturally degrade differently and are not all 100% uniform.
Battery use and care will impact your range.
Try your best to keep the battery between 20 - 80% in most cases.
Don't charge to 95% or more unless absolutely necessary and do not let the battery SIT at a full charge for hours or days.
Other than that just charge, go and enjoy.
Tesla has learned a lot about batteries over the past 10 years and the technology and chemistry keeps improving with the newest models.
The next generation of batteries will be even better. Early adopters with older vehicles had the best available technology at the time.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

"your mileage may vary"
The BMS and battery degradation is not an exact science and the range shown may not be 100% accurate.
Batteries naturally degrade differently and are not all 100% uniform.
Battery use and care will impact your range.
Try your best to keep the battery between 20 - 80% in most cases.
Don't charge to 95% or more unless absolutely necessary and do not let the battery SIT at a full charge for hours or days.
Other than that just charge, go and enjoy.
Tesla has learned a lot about batteries over the past 10 years and the technology and chemistry keeps improving with the newest models.
The next generation of batteries will be even better. Early adopters with older vehicles had the best available technology at the time.

Surely not more advice on how to avoid battery degradation.

"your mileage may vary"
The BMS and battery degradation is not an exact science...

I would tend to favour that BMS is pretty much an exact science, or at least pretty much exact software that is not alterable by the owner.

None of what you say is wrong. It is all correct. And it’s good advice. Just off topic. (And many of us on here have been owners for several years, so are probably already aware of these things). The thread is about the deliberate capping of the battery capacity by software upgrade. That’s not degradation. That’s not driving style. That’s not about how much or how little your typical charge level is at. It’s about Tesla, without our permission, and without our knowledge, going into our batteries, in some cases many years after sale, and restricting (not reducing), significantly, the amount of Useable battery made available to us.

 

[liamharry]

This is an interesting question. If there are zero A packs affected, it might indicate charge speeds - slowed immensely with chargegate - caused these problems in the first place. Or the cooling they added for faster charging wasn't sufficient and allowed battery damage? Something hardware at least.


Since the best way to get an answer on the internet isn't asking a question, but saying something wrong and being corrected:

Not a single 85-A pack has been impacted by chargegate or batterygate!

I have a 85D with an All pack. Have both batterygate and chargegate. Had 30 miles removed through the update and my usual 100kW charge rate at around 20% is now on average 76kW dropping off to around 46kW at 80%.

 

[liamharry]

I have a 85D with an All pack. Have both batterygate and chargegate. Had 30 miles removed through the update and my usual 100kW charge rate at around 20% is now on average 76kW dropping off to around 46kW at 80%.

Agghh - how do you edit - should say ‘A pack' not ‘All pack’

 

[raphy3]

I don’t know if anyone noticed, but post 1 is now a wiki and can be edited by the community (or at least it let me edit it)

Let’s fill that post up with all the good stuff buried in this thread so folks can keep track and newbies have a good place to start. I took an initial hack at a few links, please add more!!

Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

At the moment some of the original posters are working on a big informational post, along with Djras. If possible it would be nice if folks could hold off for a day or so while it gets finalized.

 

[First EV]

Agghh - how do you edit - should say ‘A pack' not ‘All pack’

Select 'more' at the bottom of your post then 'edit'.

 

[bijan]

I don't think that is quite right. Rated miles always equals: (car SOC% per your definition x nominal full value)/charge constant
So if the charge constant doesn't change, then rated miles change(degradation) is exactly proportional to nominal full value change.
As far as I know, the buffer value has not ever changed for a given model S configuration. But I don't think that is true for the model 3.

Not quite SoC as displayed by the car though, as car can display 100% SoC even when there is degradation.

My SoC definition uses (nominal full pack of current car) in the denominator (this is what the car displays for SoC and can give 100% even if the car degrades since nominal full pack of current car will also degrade). My rated miles definition uses (nominal full pack of brand new car) in denominator and so shouldn't give the EPA rated miles if the car degrades.

Edit: This is how my car now shows 474km at 100% SoC, when the car should show 499km at 100% SoC when new. This is since nominal full pack is now 72.1kwh, when for new car the value would be 76kwh. 72.1/76 * 499 = 474 (I should have subtracted the buffer from both nominal full pack values, but I don't know what brand new buffer should be, and assume that it decreases linearly as battery degrades, unless Tesla plays around with the buffer).

 

[DJRas]

Not quite SoC as displayed by the car though, as car can display 100% SoC even when there is degradation.

My SoC definition uses (nominal full pack of current car) in the denominator (this is what the car displays for SoC and can give 100% even if the car degrades since nominal full pack of current car will also degrade). My rated miles definition uses (nominal full pack of brand new car) in denominator and so shouldn't give the EPA rated miles if the car degrades.

Edit: This is how my car now shows 474km at 100% SoC, when the car should show 499km at 100% SoC when new. This is since nominal full pack is now 72.1kwh, when for new car the value would be 76kwh. 72.1/76 * 499 = 474 (I should have subtracted the buffer from both nominal full pack values, but I don't know what brand new buffer should be, and assume that it decreases linearly as battery degrades, unless Tesla plays around with the buffer).

The brick buffet stays at 4kWh for our 85s from new to now

 

[Jkr85]

Sounds about right. I'm also around SOC + kW = 110 to 115 through the "meat" of the charge curve. At 50% I'm hitting about 60 kW now vs 75 kW previously
(...)
Non-capped '15 85D

Spot on and a copy of mine at just over 50% soc:

 

[Droschke]

"your mileage may vary"
The BMS and battery degradation is not an exact science and the range shown may not be 100% accurate.
Batteries naturally degrade differently and are not all 100% uniform.
Battery use and care will impact your range.
Try your best to keep the battery between 20 - 80% in most cases.
Don't charge to 95% or more unless absolutely necessary and do not let the battery SIT at a full charge for hours or days.
Other than that just charge, go and enjoy.
Tesla has learned a lot about batteries over the past 10 years and the technology and chemistry keeps improving with the newest models.
The next generation of batteries will be even better. Early adopters with older vehicles had the best available technology at the time.

Is this a poem?

Whatever it is, it's not relevant to the topic of this thread and the issue involved

 

[Droschke]

I have a 85D with an All pack. Have both batterygate and chargegate. Had 30 miles removed through the update and my usual 100kW charge rate at around 20% is now on average 76kW dropping off to around 46kW at 80%.

Have you added yourself to this sheet?
Tesla battery capacity loss with FW 2019.16.2

 

[MP3Mike]

I have a 85D with an All pack. Have both batterygate and chargegate. Had 30 miles removed through the update and my usual 100kW charge rate at around 20% is now on average 76kW dropping off to around 46kW at 80%.

That isn't the "A" packs that people refer to as "A" packs. The real "A" packs were never able to charge over 90kW. (And were never available in a dual motor Tesla.)

 

[Chaserr]

As far as I know, the buffer value has not ever changed for a given model S configuration.

There are several examples in this thread. It's why we discuss BMS reported kWh capacity and volts, not rated range. Ratings can and probably are manipulated by Tesla to hide the problem from us. Volts can't be hidden, and volts determine actual kWh capacity.

Please, keep the conversation to battery capacity in kWh. Range of any kind will be thrown back in our faces by Tesla. With that they can take in all the driving factors that effect range. Not the discussion. It is all about kWh limitation through restricting battery capacity (voltage). With 2019.16.1 my kWh dropped from 73 kWh to 62 kWh. Don't go past that. It dilutes our case.

^ Listen to Zap. Range is what people who don't know the topic will talk about. We discuss volt caps because it is non subjective. Volt caps impact capacity, power - nearly every aspect of an electric car's performance.

 

[tga]

Tesla part numbers follow a "Part Number-Subpart Number-Revision Letter" format; ie, my battery is 1014114-00-E. You can only compare revision letters with the same part and subpart numbers. When a new part/subpart number is issued to supercede an old one, the revision letter resets to A. So there is likely an xxxxxxx-yy-A battery that is later than mine.

In the old days, there was one part/subpart number, and people could just compare the letters (hence the 90kw A's and 120kw B and up). But the original A packs were long gone before the AWD 85D appeared.

 

[tomas]

Agghh - how do you edit - should say ‘A pack' not ‘All pack’

If you have an A pack, you NEVER got 100 kW charging. NEVER

oops, Mike got there first...

 

[bijan]

^ Listen to Zap. Range is what people who don't know the topic will talk about. We discuss volt caps because it is non subjective. Volt caps impact capacity, power - nearly every aspect of an electric car's performance.

On this topic. Model 3 long range AWD is going to get "upgraded" from 499km range to 518km range. Just as long range RWD was upgraded from 499km to 525km. If I get this upgrade I'll only be down 1.4% in miles, but still 5% in kWh (unless they play with the buffer).