Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Ferrycraigs]

That was possibly a recall they successfully avoided with an update like the batterygate recall was supposed to be. For years I had this weird issue where my brakes would lose pressure and the pedal would go all the way to the floor at random (but always at the very start of a drive). I slid through the first intersection by my house a few times but no accidents. Tesla always told me I was imagining things and to use the correct pedal, but I read about it here on TMC so it must have been a real issue. The corrected it eventually, I haven't lost brake pressure in at least a year and thinking back now I bet they hid the fix in an unlabeled update. I wonder if that will turn up in the NHTSA's investigation update notes?

Even from this side of the Atlantic it seems some folk just disagree with everything you say. Have you considered that you may be talking rubbish? And that you really don’t understand the issue. Or perhaps they just don’t like you. It’s nice to be liked.

I am often surprised if people seriously disagree with something why they don’t follow up with an explanation as to why they hold a different view. I do genuinely think it’s entirely possible to hold different views from others, without the need for either view to be wrong. Just look at the % v Miles debate (what to show on the battery icon on the dash). Only 12 days to go until New Years Resolutions come into play. Hope springs eternal.

 

[MP3Mike]

For years I had this weird issue where my brakes would lose pressure and the pedal would go all the way to the floor at random (but always at the very start of a drive). I slid through the first intersection by my house a few times but no accidents. Tesla always told me I was imagining things and to use the correct pedal, but I read about it here on TMC so it must have been a real issue. The corrected it eventually, I haven't lost brake pressure in at least a year and thinking back now I bet they hid the fix in an unlabeled update.

If your brake pedal went to the floor without engaging the brakes then that means there is something physically wrong with them. (Most likely a bad o-ring in the master cylinder.) That can't be fixed by software.

 

[Chaserr]

Mercedes showing us what we have waiting ahead:

Mercedes-Benz Fined $20 Million by NHTSA for Mishandling Recalls

The fines stem from a year-long NHTSA investigation into every Mercedes recall between 2016 and 2018 after the agency, among several federal violations it identified, found the company late in mailing owner letters and omitting critical information in its filings. The automaker must pay $13 million up front, with another $7 million in hanging fines if NHTSA determines that Mercedes is delaying or failing to improve its recall processes. The company will be audited by NHTSA for the next two years.

By law, every automaker must submit quarterly reports to NHTSA that show the progress of ongoing recalls along with all known claims of property damage, death, injury, warranty claims, owner complaints, and internal studies for their past and present models.

This is good news. Those are reasonable fines - not the hundreds of mg illions companies like Chrysler was fined earlier so they're feeling generous at the moment, and are more interested in Auditing companies like Mercedes now to ensure they comply with safety.

Summing up:

1. Expect NHTSA to take a year. They did the same thing they are doing to tesla, evaluating all communications (updates in our case) and it took a year.

2. Not notifying us or the NHTSA means they are going to be punished, but not so much Tesla won't be able to fix us. And more importantly, they will be forced to fix us when they recall the batteries finally.

3. "all known claims of property damage, death, injury, warranty claims, owner complaints, and internal studies for their past and present models" must be reported to the NHTSA. Keep reporting your safety concerns to Tesla. They legally have to report all of them to the NHTSA. This is important - us bothering our service center actually does have a legal impact. Failure to report is why Mercedes was fined here.


4. "Internal studies" - 2019.16 was released with a public statement that TEsla was investigating the root cause of fires and the capping update released that day revised charging and thermal limits as a direct response. This internal investigation had to be submitted to the NHTSA by July as part of their normal safety compliance.

So we have a timeline - a year is a long time but at least we can see the light at the end. And we have a clear legal avenue to continually report safety concerns for the lack of recall notification after capping actions were taken in response to those fires.

 

[AustinP]

I have ALWAYS found using kWhs used to establish capacity is fraught with problems. So many other things interfere with the numbers. And occasionally it results in figures like 28% loss, which can stop you sleeping!

The formula in the WiKi on Page 1 is a pretty easy and accurate way to establish the car’s capacity. Of course it doesn’t prove capping, only suggests when further investigation might be required. And it does include the 4kWh buffer. Your 85 battery would have started at 81.5 kWh total (including buffer).

If you could clarify. When I do the math, on page one, I get 73kWh.
What is the original theoretical 100%: 81.5 or 77.5 ? (I believe the later, but doubting now)

 

[MP3Mike]

2. Not notifying us or the NHTSA means they are going to be punished, but not so much Tesla won't be able to fix us. And more importantly, they will be forced to fix us when they recall the batteries finally.

You are still stating with certainty that they will be forced to recall the battery packs. While it is possible, I don't think it is guaranteed.

 

[joltheadq]

If you could clarify. When I do the math, on page one, I get 73kWh.
What is the original theoretical 100%: 81.5 or 77.5 ? (I believe the later, but doubting now)

I heard there wasn’t a buffer. Also heard my P85D hits zero, it’s dead and getting towed. Maybe one of the modules is defective? I’ll have to hook into the BMS once I get the connector setup.

 

[Chaserr]

There is a buffer. The "85kwh" pack we were sold has 81kwh actual capacity with brick protection (original, bottom) included. 77 usable for driving (uncapped, as rated by the EPA)

 

[Ferrycraigs]

If you could clarify. When I do the math, on page one, I get 73kWh.
What is the original theoretical 100%: 81.5 or 77.5 ? (I believe the later, but doubting now)

81.5 kWh including buffer (if using the Page 1 calculation it will also include the buffer so it should be a good comparison). 77.5 kWh if you exclude the buffer - this is the amount available to you for Range. If you take your average consumption figure from the trip screen (mine averages 328 Wh/mi over 60,000 miles) you will be able to work out your real life Range driving the way you normally drive. Of course it’s unlikely to read like the Range figure from the battery icon. But better perhaps to know the truth.

If your calculation comes out with 73 kWh then it looks like you may have been capped. My capping was about 10 kWhs. Yours looks to be about 8.5 kWh. Pretty much in the ball park I would say. Welcome to the club.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

I heard there wasn’t a buffer. Also heard my P85D hits zero, it’s dead and getting towed. Maybe one of the modules is defective? I’ll have to hook into the BMS once I get the connector setup.

Don’t know who you are listening to. I might be tempted to find a new source of info.

 

[omarsultan]

Well, there is no buffer in that when you hit zero, you should not expect a few extra miles of wiggle room like you can sometimes get away with on a gas car, and, IIRC, you could do in the very early days. The battery does maintain an internal buffer, not accessible to you, to protect the pack from going completely empty and getting bricked.

 

[KidDoc]

From the wiki calculation my battery capacity is 74162 aka 74 KW. Not as bad as I feared but still annoying. Hopefully stabilized now time will tell.

 

[DJRas]

Well, there is no buffer in that when you hit zero, you should not expect a few extra miles of wiggle room like you can sometimes get away with on a gas car, and, IIRC, you could do in the very early days. The battery does maintain an internal buffer, not accessible to you, to protect the pack from going completely empty and getting bricked.

I successfully drove to zero miles and then a few hours later saw the pack was well "below" zero It too about 12 minutes of charging at 9kW to get to 1 mile range shown.

 

[Chaserr]

There is an internal range calculation based on voltage that determines actual shutdown. "Zero" can be programmed to any value - like for example when Bjorn's car was capped his model 3 had the zero value raised. There was discussion of documenting bottom values - you posted the voltage when you did that right? I half expected Tesla to start bottom capping us when we were talking about it before, and now that they have done it to Model 3s I'm waiting until I see it on my car. If they have the 0 mile value displayed above the internally programmed shutdown voltage, or if the calibration is off enough that the two don't match, you can get "reserve power" - or it can be poorly calibrated the other wayand shut down with miles still on the screen. Voltage is the cutoff trigger, and it isn't a stable number under load - especially in a car with a "single module" that has volt problems of some sort, so I'm afraid to even try.

 

[VT_EE]

There is an internal range calculation based on voltage that determines actual shutdown. "Zero" can be programmed to any value - like for example when Bjorn's car was capped his model 3 had the zero value raised. There was discussion of documenting bottom values - you posted the voltage when you did that right? I half expected Tesla to start bottom capping us when we were talking about it before, and now that they have done it to Model 3s I'm waiting until I see it on my car. If they have the 0 mile value displayed above the internally programmed shutdown voltage, or if the calibration is off enough that the two don't match, you can get "reserve power" - or it can be poorly calibrated the other wayand shut down with miles still on the screen. Voltage is the cutoff trigger, and it isn't a stable number under load - especially in a car with a "single module" that has volt problems of some sort, so I'm afraid to even try.

I haven't seen evidence in any Model 3 thread that confirms a voltage cap similar to what is being discussed in this thread. There is Bjorn's testing that seemed to indicate Tesla has moved the "miles remaining" display's "0" value to a higher corresponding voltage (or remaining energy level). I assume this was done to lessen the likelihood of a shutdown prior to getting to zero. As you alluded to, coming up with an accurate "miles remaining" display is difficult to engineer. I view this as a good thing for consumers.

 

[jaitch]

Well, there is no buffer in that when you hit zero, you should not expect a few extra miles of wiggle room like you can sometimes get away with on a gas car, and, IIRC, you could do in the very early days. The battery does maintain an internal buffer, not accessible to you, to protect the pack from going completely empty and getting bricked.

There is zero miles (dash/binnacle/in your face indicated range number) and below that is a 4kWh buffer (currently until Teslia start robbing from it) which is useable for driving. Below that buffer is the "anti-brick"" buffer which is not accessible/useable for driving. There are two buffers in effect. I recently ran to zero and started using my below zero miles buffer. I think the problem is the terminology. I don't think Teslia went out of their way to confuse us but all these different terms do lead to various misunderstandings. Just to confuse things when SOC is zero SOC UI reports actual useable left (SOC Min confuses me and I am not sure what it means - well it probably includes the anti-bricK buffer but I can't be bothered to work it out!). So SOC UI is best your best indication of what your battery will actually let you use. You do not get SOC UI on your dash - this is only available to view with ScanMyTesla/Canbus data readers.

 

[Droschke]

I haven't seen evidence in any Model 3 thread that confirms a voltage cap similar to what is being discussed in this thread. There is Bjorn's testing that seemed to indicate Tesla has moved the "miles remaining" display's "0" value to a higher corresponding voltage (or remaining energy level). I assume this was done to lessen the likelihood of a shutdown prior to getting to zero. As you alluded to, coming up with an accurate "miles remaining" display is difficult to engineer. I view this as a good thing for consumers.

I'm being misquoted? That wasn't my post. How did my name got inserted to the reply quotation?

 

[DJRas]

There is zero miles (dash/binnacle/in your face indicated range number) and below that is a 4kWh buffer (currently until Teslia start robbing from it) which is useable for driving. Below that buffer is the "anti-brick"" buffer which is not accessible/useable for driving. There are two buffers in effect. I recently ran to zero and started using my below zero miles buffer. I think the problem is the terminology. I don't think Teslia went out of their way to confuse us but all these different terms do lead to various misunderstandings. Just to confuse things when SOC is zero SOC UI reports actual useable left (SOC Min confuses me and I am not sure what it means - well it probably includes the anti-bricK buffer but I can't be bothered to work it out!). So SOC UI is best your best indication of what your battery will actually let you use. You do not get SOC UI on your dash - this is only available to view with ScanMyTesla/Canbus data readers.

View attachment 490766

The SOC UI was used for the dash at some point in the past.
I haven't found WHEN that change happened.

 

[Fleer]

I was previously unaffected by the original update that screwed everyone’s range but was affected by reduce charging speed. My 100% was 267 and 90% was 240. After 40.2.3 my 100% is 264 and 90% is 237.

I don’t have anything to check voltage or charge levels so I’m not claiming capped yet, but it seems suspicious.

2016 85D with ~50k miles.

 

[Droschke]

If your brake pedal went to the floor without engaging the brakes then that means there is something physically wrong with them. (Most likely a bad o-ring in the master cylinder.) That can't be fixed by software.

But you don't know that for fact.

Model 3 braking issue discovered by the Consumer Reports, for example, was addressed by Tesla by software update.

Consumer Reports recommends Tesla's Model 3 after braking fix

 

[Chaserr]

I do know for a fact it wasn't a hardware issue. I brought it in to Tesla 5 times. They always told me there was nothing physically wrong with the brakes. I know a lot of people think lowly of Tesla's trustworthiness and I understand why they would assume Tesla lied or tried to harm me in that way but do we think they can't diagnose brake problems that big? They lie so maybe they replaced hardware and didn't tell me, but I doubt it. In retrospect, it could have been a bubble in the brake system - I get brakes done every 2 years and the problem lasted about 2 years, so maybe they caused it with one brake job and fixed it with the next but never actually checked it between the 2 and lied to me every few months when I brought it back for the problem. Or they fixed it in software. Whatever, we're describing Tesla here, none of the answers come out making them look good but it was fixed without a downgrade so I'm not suing.