Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[3ry-reset]

So, you are speculating there are some bad temperature sensors in the impacted packs?

I don't have batterygate, but I have a power limiting problem caused by a damaged battery module I'm trying to make Tesla repair right now. Tesla told me I had a failed coolant pump in my pack, but they only found out about it after they disassembled the battery. Failed cooling pumps don't throw errors, and the failed pump allowed temperatures to get so high Module #9 in my battery was damaged so much it runs 0.3 volts lower than the other modules under acceleration.

Tesla can't detect thermal problems that big, or total cooling pump failures in my P85+ B-Pack. None of it ever showed up in the logs, they didn't find the failed pump until after I'd been complaining for years that power was reduced.

The reason I'm following this thread is because Tesla claims batterygate fires are caused by single modules and researching failures like mine turned up this thread. Cooling pump failures might be causing batterygate - Tesla wasn't even aware it could happen without errors when mine happened.

 

[MP3Mike]

I don't have batterygate, but I have a power limiting problem caused by a damaged battery module I'm trying to make Tesla repair right now. Tesla told me I had a failed coolant pump in my pack, but they only found out about it after they disassembled the battery. Failed cooling pumps don't throw errors, and the failed pump allowed temperatures to get so high Module #9 in my battery was damaged so much it runs 0.3 volts lower than the other modules under acceleration.

Tesla can't detect thermal problems that big, or total cooling pump failures in my P85+ B-Pack. None of it ever showed up in the logs, they didn't find the failed pump until after I'd been complaining for years that power was reduced.

The reason I'm following this thread is because Tesla claims batterygate fires are caused by single modules and researching failures like mine turned up this thread. Cooling pump failures might be causing batterygate - Tesla wasn't even aware it could happen without errors when mine happened.

There is so much that sounds wrong in that. First, there is no coolant pump in the pack, at least as far as I have seen from all of the teardowns. Second every module has a temperature sensor on the inlet side and outlet side, so they could detect the heating. Third, if it were a cooling pump failure all of the modules would have heated up not just module 9. So module 9 was/is probably just a weak module all along.

My advice would be to drive your car hard and push module 9 to actually fail such that they have to repair it under warranty.

 

[sixela]

I don't share your assumption that Tesla is that maliciously incompetent. I don't think they would have taken this so far they had to hire a famous corporate bankruptcy law firm to represent them on this issue if they didn't even have a clue why they needed legal representation.

So you think that if someone sues you, you only need good legal representation if you think you're on the wrong side of the law? Otherwise you don't need a good lawyer, just because "you're right"?

I've had employers who had to hire "famous law firms" to fend off clearly frivolous law suits (which in the end they didn't even have to settle but just won because the other party realised they were throwing good money after bad and abandoned). Being only tangentially involved was enough to cure me from that illusion.

If I were a company (large enough to get sued ;-) ) then even if I wanted to do good for my customers, if I got sued I would still hire a lawyer. I'm sure my insurance company for my insurance against professional liability will agree.

 

[islandbayy]

I don't have batterygate, but I have a power limiting problem caused by a damaged battery module I'm trying to make Tesla repair right now. Tesla told me I had a failed coolant pump in my pack, but they only found out about it after they disassembled the battery. Failed cooling pumps don't throw errors, and the failed pump allowed temperatures to get so high Module #9 in my battery was damaged so much it runs 0.3 volts lower than the other modules under acceleration.

Tesla can't detect thermal problems that big, or total cooling pump failures in my P85+ B-Pack. None of it ever showed up in the logs, they didn't find the failed pump until after I'd been complaining for years that power was reduced.

The reason I'm following this thread is because Tesla claims batterygate fires are caused by single modules and researching failures like mine turned up this thread. Cooling pump failures might be causing batterygate - Tesla wasn't even aware it could happen without errors when mine happened.

Need to disagree that Tesla cant detect pump issues. Back in 2013 on my forst MS60, I got a call around 7pm (Yes, TESLA CALLED ME! But those were the early days, much has changed, less than 10,000 cars on the road back then), that coolant pump "B" threw an error, still worked but threw an error. They would be sending someone in the morning to fix it. Early the next morning doorbell rang, Tesla Ranger was there. Handed him my key, 30 minutes later, he said he was done, replaced all 3 to be on the safe side and bled the system. I miss those Tesla days.

 

[sixela]

You only use the best attorneys when you have too [sic].

You might find that (especially when you're talking about a litigious country like the US with a legal system with US/UK specific philosophies) not everyone shares that sentiment.

My insurer has a different opinion: he thinks that for contracts under US law, no lawyer on the entire planet is good enough; he treats the risk as uninsurable, regardless of the merits of any hypothetical dispute -- for disputes like that no lawyer on the planet is "good enough" even before they are an imaginary Hershey bar in someone's back pocket.

My contracts with US customers are under Belgian or German law ;-).

 

[AdamInFlag]

So what?
What difference does it make if you are right or wrong?

I'm going to answer this as if it were a serious question and not internet snippiness, and I'm going to reframe slightly as "What does it matter what the nature of condition Z is?"
This matters because it has implications for what the eventual remedy might be, the outcome of the litigation, and even potentially Tesla's long-term viability as a company. If condition Z is a cell-level defect that was only in the original battery chemistry, we may expect the issues to remain confined to those cars, but the solution likely involves pack or module replacements. If it's a cell-level condition that's inherent to Li-ion batteries in general, then the problem may crop up in later builds as well. If it's a control systems issue, it's perhaps more possible that Tesla develops a real software fix that both mitigates the potential for any safety or longevity-related concerns. If it's erroneous sensors that do end up needing to be replaced, then it's potentially a pack teardown and remanufacture of each affected pack. Different problems = different effect on Tesla as a company and their willingness to fix the issue.

 

[Droschke]

I don't have batterygate, but I have a power limiting problem caused by a damaged battery module I'm trying to make Tesla repair right now. Tesla told me I had a failed coolant pump in my pack, but they only found out about it after they disassembled the battery. Failed cooling pumps don't throw errors, and the failed pump allowed temperatures to get so high Module #9 in my battery was damaged so much it runs 0.3 volts lower than the other modules under acceleration.

Tesla can't detect thermal problems that big, or total cooling pump failures in my P85+ B-Pack. None of it ever showed up in the logs, they didn't find the failed pump until after I'd been complaining for years that power was reduced.

The reason I'm following this thread is because Tesla claims batterygate fires are caused by single modules and researching failures like mine turned up this thread. Cooling pump failures might be causing batterygate - Tesla wasn't even aware it could happen without errors when mine happened.

I know you have posted 7 times earlier in this thread but never mentioned the issue with model#9 before. Something new after you were posting here already?

 

[Droschke]

I'm going to answer this as if it were a serious question and not internet snippiness, and I'm going to reframe slightly as "What does it matter what the nature of condition Z is?"
This matters because it has implications for what the eventual remedy might be, the outcome of the litigation, and even potentially Tesla's long-term viability as a company. If condition Z is a cell-level defect that was only in the original battery chemistry, we may expect the issues to remain confined to those cars, but the solution likely involves pack or module replacements. If it's a cell-level condition that's inherent to Li-ion batteries in general, then the problem may crop up in later builds as well. If it's a control systems issue, it's perhaps more possible that Tesla develops a real software fix that both mitigates the potential for any safety or longevity-related concerns. If it's erroneous sensors that do end up needing to be replaced, then it's potentially a pack teardown and remanufacture of each affected pack. Different problems = different effect on Tesla as a company and their willingness to fix the issue.

IIRC, we have been advised in this thread the module replacement is not feasible. The pack replacement is.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

Passions run hot in this thread, and I can certainly understand that. But I don't get the absolutism of the angered. This whole thing is a process, and it isn't over yet, so I don't see that any final judgements can be made. I do agree that the communication should have been better (in fact, I don't believe that there has been any official communication).

My bet would be that once Tesla figures out the problems definitively, they will do what they can to make people whole. I would guess they will provide increased value at trade in, or offer some cash equivalent. We shall see ....

I agree passions do run hot. But I find when people try to put one over on me, particularly when they do it in a sneaky, underhand, devious and deliberate way, I do tend to get annoyed.

I used to believe, absolutely, that Tesla would do the right thing. That they were genuinely trying to resolve the issue. Perhaps they didn’t appreciate the unintended consequences of their updates. But absolutely nothing of what they have said, or how they have dealt with me, or others over the past 6 months leads me to that conclusion. Quite the opposite. They have lied to me, to my face, they have dodged and squirmed, they have been disingenuous and have treated me as if I were a moron. When I ask a question, I don’t expect to be ignored. When I suggest a compromise I don’t expect to be ignored. When I submit a formal written grievance, I don’t expect to be ignored. Yet all of that has happened, numerous times. They are, undeniably aware of what’s going on, no longer is ignorance of the issue a defence. That they have hired outside lawyers to represent them in court, and the firm they have chosen to do so, rather than try to find a reasonable way forward, says to me they have zero intention of doing the right thing, unless compelled. They have nailed their colours to the mast, and have set themselves to fight every inch of the way. I think anyone that believes they will do right by us, must be a latecomer to the party. None of the evidence, absolutely none of it, suggests they are even sympathetic.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

And 60 and 70 too?

I would be happy with a 75 capped to 70.

 

[sixela]

That they have hired outside lawyers to represent them in court, and the firm they have chosen to do so, rather than try to find a reasonable way forward, says to me they have zero intention of doing the right thing, unless compelled.

The fact someone filed a class action suit is also related.

I had already pointed out earlier in the thread such an action would possibly have adverse effects, and given the lack of a hard guarantee about the long term battery capacity in the cars, personally I would not have started a class action suit -- Tesla getting all defensive, evasive and paranoid, once the lawyeroids in charge forbid anyone in service from giving a honest answer (often with the threat of termination of the employment contract and/or even legal action against the former employee after termination -- did I mention I've been there? I used to work in support...) was bound to happen.

So I'd only have started a class action suit if I thought I would win. In this case, I still don't think that's likely, but hey, everyone is entitled to his own opinion about it.

In other cases I'm familiar with (and -- see above-- not at liberty to discuss) getting evasive and uncommunicative does not necessarily exclude the intention for doing the right thing (but it's sometimes still counterproductive. Once a company has hired the lawyers, the temptation is always there to ask 'what can we get away with'...).

But of course it's all easy for me to say, since I have a model 3, so I would not mind if people would rather ignore my opinion. They can even get mad at me for uttering it if they want to (though I doubt it'll do them any good in the long term).

 

[Chaserr]

"Loss of Battery energy or power over time or due to or resulting from Battery usage is NOT covered under this Battery and Drive Unit Limited Warranty,"

I believe this restriction is placed because of spontaneous fires and the aforementioned excluding clause does not apply.

So does the regulatory agency of the US government charged with enforcing safety laws.

 

[Chaserr]

Publicizing it seems to be the only way to get Tesla to respond at all.
We have waited 12 weeks and 6 software updates with no effects on the problem.
Individually we are lied to and insulted by Tesla's "Nothing is wrong with your battery" and "tips for better range"

They didn't acknowledge the issue (except with lies and deception) until after you filed the class action, and publicly announced they would begin reversing the downgrades less than 24 hours after you had filed. Public attention has proven to be the only stimulus Tesla will respond to.

 

[Chaserr]

I drive a Signature P85 and am wondering if I was affected by this. I have been very disappointed with my capacity and degredation over the past year.

A 90% charge gets me about 213 miles reported and around 180-200 actual miles of conservative but hilly driving.

Check your volts @ 100%. Range is a symptom of many things but voltage reduction is proof Tesla needs to repair your battery because it can only happen if they illegally downgraded your car or if the battery is experiencing catastrophic failure. Instructions for checking volts using Tesla's on board BMS data is on the page 1 wiki.

 

[Chaserr]

I'll leave you to your echo chamber if you so desire.

YES PLEASE. DON'T MAKE YOURSELF A LIAR.

 

[Chaserr]

That depends on the reason behind it. If it really is for safety reasons or to prolong the useful life of the battery (e.g. to give you more range in the distant future by taking away some of it now, or to lower your charging speed so that your battery retains more capacity over time), that can be argued. If it is an effort to cripple your car to make you buy a new one, then the answer is most certainly "no", as Apple found out.

If it's for safety reasons they will be fined hundreds of millions of dollars for not reporting a safety defect, and still be forced to replace the batteries. It's illegal to downgrade hardware using safety as the excuse. If it wasn't, every manufacturer would claim their expensive V8s engines are a safety hazard and replace them with cheaper to warranty 3 cylinder economy engines. If it' san effort to cripple batteries for warranty dodging reasons, they'll lose dozens of class action suits just like Apple is still losing them.

So you think that if someone sues you, you only need good legal representation if you think you're on the wrong side of the law? Otherwise you don't need a good lawyer, just because "you're right"?

You're the person making this claim. If you don't believe your own words, don't say them and don't pretend someone else said the words you typed.

 

[3ry-reset]

Need to disagree that Tesla cant detect pump issues. Back in 2013 on my forst MS60, I got a call around 7pm (Yes, TESLA CALLED ME! But those were the early days, much has changed, less than 10,000 cars on the road back then), that coolant pump "B" threw an error, still worked but threw an error. They would be sending someone in the morning to fix it. Early the next morning doorbell rang, Tesla Ranger was there. Handed him my key, 30 minutes later, he said he was done, replaced all 3 to be on the safe side and bled the system. I miss those Tesla days.

You're telling me Tesla was aware of my pump failures 2 years ago and falsified dozens of service reports? Why? Why admit to it now and lie to me again telling me they are unable to detect failures without tearing the pack apart and physically inspecting the pump?

 

[MP3Mike]

You're telling me Tesla was aware of my pump failures 2 years ago and falsified dozens of service reports? Why? Why admit to it now and lie to me again telling me they are unable to detect failures without tearing the pack apart and physically inspecting the pump?

They may not be able to detect all modes of pump failures... And again, there is no pump in the pack.

 

[3ry-reset]

There is so much that sounds wrong in that. First, there is no coolant pump in the pack, at least as far as I have seen from all of the teardowns. Second every module has a temperature sensor on the inlet side and outlet side, so they could detect the heating. Third, if it were a cooling pump failure all of the modules would have heated up not just module 9. So module 9 was/is probably just a weak module all along.

My advice would be to drive your car hard and push module 9 to actually fail such that they have to repair it under warranty.

Thank you. I researched this. BMB Module #9 is the front module, and appears to be the "exit" node. It's probably t he one that is exposed to the most battery heat. especially if there is an undetected pump failure causing every module to heat up the others "downstream" more and more starting from the beginning.

You may have helped my personal warranty suit against Tesla. Much appreciated, thus architecture lesson explains exactly why the failure killed that specific module!

@Droschke I only learned the exact failed module recently.

 

[islandbayy]

You're telling me Tesla was aware of my pump failures 2 years ago and falsified dozens of service reports? Why? Why admit to it now and lie to me again telling me they are unable to detect failures without tearing the pack apart and physically inspecting the pump?

Because service has gone considerably downhill. Still some Gems of technicians, but in general, it has gone considerably downhill.