Yes, a number of people won when filing cases against Tesla for the yellow border on the MCU screen. (Before Tesla had the current UV fix developed and rolled out.)
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software
- Thread starter Dutchmeeuw
- Start date
Yes, a number of people won when filing cases against Tesla for the yellow border on the MCU screen. (Before Tesla had the current UV fix developed and rolled out.)
faughtz
Model S P85DL
It's a little program that the author of ScanMyTesla wrote or recommends (I forgot). It loads CSV files and shows a graph of that data. Very simple but deals with large files pretty well.
scan my tesla - Reccommended software
jkennebeck
Member
Here's your smoking gun. Have an independent auditor take readings from the canbus showing less than 4.2v per cell at 100% SoC. Then have same people pull that pack apart and test the cells individually on a workbench (bet you a Cybertruck they carge to 4.2). This proves Tesla's BMS is reducing the capacity. 1000000% certainty they can't call that normal (or even abnormal) degradation.
Now where to find a volunteer to pull their pack apart....
Now where to find a volunteer to pull their pack apart....
That seems like a warranty issue. Do you run it down below 10% anytime?
I don't think the quality of regen is what the issue is about. One pedal driving is a convenience feature, not a useful way to regen. The energy recovered from 5 mph to zero is not much and certainly not important. Likewise the energy spent stopping the car using the induction motors. I would bet it is more a matter of Tesla looking forward to making new cars work better and not really caring much about the cars they've already made their profit on.
My induction motor car will come to a full stop when the cruise control is programmed. So obviously they have the means to do it either by the motors or by using the brakes for the last couple mph. There is clearly no technical reason for not providing one pedal driving on the older cars.
Ever hear of planned obsolescence?
SmartElectric
Active Member
Exactly. There is a constant influx of owners claiming to be capped, but they are charging cold cars. I fully understand your situation, but that is why new people posting to this thread should be downvoted for claims without following the wiki first post to review the actual situation, which is very different, which is easily checked via warming their battery with vigorous acceleration/decel and charging at lower states of charge on non-shared supercharging stalls. Thank you for backing up my post.
Tesla doesn't accept any third party CAN bus apps. Of course that doesn't mean the court won't accept it. There is no doubt the cells will charge to 4.2 and higher if you want. Tesla doesn't deny they can't be charged higher, they say it's preventive measure to make the battery last longer. The argument is that the battery needing this treatment to prevent a catastrophic failure is already defective and need to replaced under warranty. Reducing capacity, range, performance, charge speed isn't OK to avoid a legit warranty claim.
And I bet you can charge any of the cells to 4.3v too. You could go even higher if you wanted, there is nothing stopping it until the cell fails, other than the BMS/charger logic.
Mjsais
Member
SmartElectric, I never claimed that I was capped, I just stated that the charge rate was terrible. Hopefully, when I test it again next week (at significantly lower SoC), I’ll get a better result.
He was saying that you could manually charge the cell to 4.2v means that is proof that they capped the cell. I was just stating that you could charge the cell to 4.3v as well, because there is nothing in the cell that stops you from charging it to a particular voltage. So it is proof of nothing. You can't inspect the cell and determine the voltage that Tesla uses for 100%, that is always controlled by the BMS/charger not the cell itself.
jkennebeck
Member
1. Tesla doesn't have to, hence the independent auditor. Meaning, not you, not me, not Ed Chen or DJRas. An unbiased 3rd party
2. Exactly, so the court WILL accept it as fact.
3. Um, no 4.2v is the max of nearly all 18650 cells. That's a known fact.
4. Tesla sold our vehicles to us and we specifically paid a premium for performance (in the case of P85DL's). They have not only stolen the range of the car, but the premium paid performance.
No it isn't the max, however, it might be the max for safety/long life.
SmartElectric
Active Member
You'll get FAR faster charging in warmer California than colder Ohio for sure, and especially if you supercharge on road trips and not the cold battery, cold car supercharge the Ohio poster did. I downvoted him for being yet another spurious post that ads no value to this thread. Read the first wiki post, it calls out the actual issue. Your 2020 is unaffected by the Tesla firmware update.
faughtz
Model S P85DL
A significant premium, I might add.
And I haven’t access to those capabilities for the last six months...
jkennebeck
Member
Agreed, and THAT is worth some financial compensation.
Whatever suits your (exposed) agenda. This is a Tesla forum for Tesla cars. The thread is for the capped cars. The max of 4.2v is Tesla's max for their 18650 cells, no matter what you bring up to distract.
Similar threads
