Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Gr8pursuit]

According to Scan My Tesla app my Nominal full pack 68.6kwh, usable full pack 64.6 kwh, cell voltage min 4.092 max 4.096 @100% charge.
2015 P85D 46k miles, 200miles @90%, 220miles @100%, was 250, then 245 before all this b.s.
Am I capped?? Any other numbers I should be looking at on the app?

 

[Droschke]

According to Scan My Tesla app my Nominal full pack 68.6kwh, usable full pack 64.6 kwh, cell voltage min 4.092 max 4.096 @100% charge.
2015 P85D 46k miles, 200miles @90%, 220miles @100%, was 250, then 245 before all this b.s.
Am I capped?? Any other numbers I should be looking at on the app?

You are capped.

 

[Lukez]

According to Scan My Tesla app my Nominal full pack 68.6kwh, usable full pack 64.6 kwh, cell voltage min 4.092 max 4.096 @100% charge.
2015 P85D 46k miles, 200miles @90%, 220miles @100%, was 250, then 245 before all this b.s.
Am I capped?? Any other numbers I should be looking at on the app?

Totally capped. What does your DC charge and AC charge say?

 

[Gixx1300R]

According to Scan My Tesla app my Nominal full pack 68.6kwh, usable full pack 64.6 kwh, cell voltage min 4.092 max 4.096 @100% charge.
2015 P85D 46k miles, 200miles @90%, 220miles @100%, was 250, then 245 before all this b.s.
Am I capped?? Any other numbers I should be looking at on the app?

Welcome to the club

 

[What Gas]

According to Scan My Tesla app my Nominal full pack 68.6kwh, usable full pack 64.6 kwh, cell voltage min 4.092 max 4.096 @100% charge.
2015 P85D 46k miles, 200miles @90%, 220miles @100%, was 250, then 245 before all this b.s.
Am I capped?? Any other numbers I should be looking at on the app?

That su*ks

 

[faughtz]

That su*ks

Your numbers are very close to mine, 2014 P85DL, 70k miles.

 

[omarsultan]

So, dumb question, if I can longer charge my car to 100%, it it worth pulling the CANBUS data (waiting for adaptor to show up). If I do the math from the wiki post, by pack is capped to ~60 kWh which is roughly what I get when I multiply my rated range times 300Wh/mi.

 

[sorka]

I agree. AP1 only means they only want to install it on older cars (that are already targeted for infection) and they are pushing it over 3G (meaning they have to pay for it). They wouldn't do this if it wasn't an especially nasty malware. People that already ran it show notes that make it sound like they are going after performance now too - that threat alone made me start looking up how to unplug my 3G antenna. Has anyone done that? Can we just remove the data antenna to block malware permanently?

I had my P85D parked at home this week and had to take a different car (swapping logistics with my mom and her car) so my Tesla sat all week at home. On wednesday, the hotspot battery died and my car came back online.

10 minutes ago I got the software available for update message on the app

 

[sorka]

I got the update today. I am throttled, pretty sure I am capped. In fact, in the last week, my "100%" dropped from ~218 to ~205, so that is great news as my effective driving range is now 195.

So the new update is in fact casting a wider net after all???

 

[faughtz]

So, dumb question, if I can longer charge my car to 100%, it it worth pulling the CANBUS data (waiting for adaptor to show up). If I do the math from the wiki post, by pack is capped to ~60 kWh which is roughly what I get when I multiply my rated range times 300Wh/mi.

Yes, you can watch tesla continue to degrade the car you think you own. I am sure the thefts will expand and continue.

 

[mvotb]

So, dumb question, if I can longer charge my car to 100%, it it worth pulling the CANBUS data (waiting for adaptor to show up). If I do the math from the wiki post, by pack is capped to ~60 kWh which is roughly what I get when I multiply my rated range times 300Wh/mi.

I don't see any point in getting it, I can charge my 60 to 198. So you're down to a 60.

 

[DJRas]

As a data point.
I updated to 2019.40.2.3 yesterday.
Nothing noticeable yet.

 

[omarsultan]

So the new update is in fact casting a wider net after all???

I don't know--I was snagged in the original 16.x updates. I got the CANBUS adaptor so I can try talking to our service folks with some data in had.

 

[VT_EE]

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

Wow. That is weird as I was quoting Chaserr. I have no idea how you ended up in there. Regardless, I apologize for the error.

 

[FooFenix]

My P85 2013 was still on 2019.24.4 and received an update over 3G (!) a couple days ago. First I was clicking it away but now I allowed it to install to test a theory.

I've felt a drop in max power (and more frequent dashed lines) while driving at higher SoC, as well as weaker regen, since the summer. I was and still am getting less range (360km vs 375+ in May).
Obviously I've seen my SuC time double when >70% is needed, like everyone else.

But using SMT for weeks (couple months) now, my nominal capacity has been 73.8 kWh and it does charge to 4.19v @ 98%, so I assumed my car hasn't been #batterygate'd YET and I've been wondering what to do about this whole situation. After the summer I did ask Tesla to check the health of the pack which they reported was fine and tried to make me pay 100€ for the "test" while initially they'd said it would be free to look at the logs. I refused to pay, no news since.

The major question on my mind is whether to launch some sort of formal complaint (with Tesla and/or consumer protection bodies) about the issues I experience. Since I cannot PROVE the battery has been capped (it probably hasn't, yet), and I fear arguing #chargegate on its own will be tricky anyway, I've been delaying doing something about it. But it nags at me that this may be a worse tactic than registering my concerns anyway.

So now I just accepted the update in the hope, frankly, that it will demonstrably cap my battery as well. I won't charge it (close to) 100% the coming weeks, but I assume that a cap should be immediately visible as a lower nominal capacity, and higher SoC for the same actual energy in the pack. Is this assumption correct?

More generally, the "better monitoring of HV battery degradation" on the release notes - which I may see later or not - leads me to think Tesla is simply managing the widespread rollout of #batterygate. The amount of owners equipped with OBD tools is limited, and everyone else will not be able to show their own pre-cap data

Having announced this before the cap, they will claim capped cars are now simply (better) managing normal battery degradation. Which I guess even seems credible if one is completely unaware.

Does this make sense? What do others think?

 

[raphy3]

"Performance degradation" makes me think they are trying to create a new excuse for the yellow lines power limiting threads we are seeing lately or trying to tie limited horsepower from software capping to the word "degradation" so they can later use this to obfuscate the downgrades in horsepower. Since capping limits power but degradation doesn't, and Tesla has never proven to be trustworthy on this topic, I assume the worst.







NHTSA required them to outline what every update did over the last couple years. They are having to go back and scrutinize "why didn't we release any release notes between 2016 and 2017 at all?" - this is definitely related to the federal investigation. Lack of any notes may be a reason for their delay in complying with the investigation's deadline, and will come up in court when they are asked why they didn't notify owners - even cryptically - about the substantial downgrades we had to endure.

I hope this trend expands beyond just this problem. Actual update notes is something we've wanted all along and this is an improvement even though the reasoning behind it is suspect.

Yup, this is in keeping with the trends of Si valley lately. Many of them suddenly started to believe that release notes are not needed or are a thing of that past. It seems to have arrived with smart phones. Get a new update downloaded to your phone in the background and it usually tells you "update for the latest features and security." With no detail on what the actual update is. Since Tesla thinks cars are like cell phones, no release notes needed!

 

[raphy3]

So I havent been pushed an update Ota (I stay off wifi) for a few months and yesterday I got the software is ready to install notification. I'm still on 16.2 and I have no Supercharging issues and would like to keep it that way. If I schedule a service appointment and put in writing that I want them to unstage the update as I do not want any more software updates from them would they do it? Or at least I would have something in writing? Or will they just reply that they can't?

They will honor your request not to install the update, but the staging is automatic and while it can be unstaged, it will immediately be staged again as long as it is within a certain radius of the SC. So, it is a little precarious because you have to hope someone doesn't make a "mistake" and accidentally hit the update button for you. If you get a tech out there and tell him you don't want it, and leave a note on the screen, you should be ok. If you're getting a new part that they claim requires an update you may be out of luck. However, make sure you talk with an actual tech person and not the guy who answers the phone and claims that everything needs a software update. If it is a part that does not require software (like a screen or wheels or a bumper or a window or a glovebox or a seat or a... etc.) then be forceful with your request if needed.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

So, dumb question, if I can longer charge my car to 100%, it it worth pulling the CANBUS data (waiting for adaptor to show up). If I do the math from the wiki post, by pack is capped to ~60 kWh which is roughly what I get when I multiply my rated range times 300Wh/mi.

Pulling the CANBUS data just confirms or denies your capacity calculation suspicions. At the moment, proving you are capped seems to hold no sway with Tesla. If you can no longer charge up to 100%, I would say it’s still worth taking a reading at 98%. My reading at 98% was 4.09V. Obviously well short of 4.2V.

(My 100% reading was 4.07V, so about 0.02V higher than 98%). If you weren’t capped I would expect a reading knocking on 4.2V.

 

[doctorwho]

Perhaps I am overly skeptical these days but I interpreted the release notes as "we are getting better at finding cars to cap and throttle" -- my more generous self is thinking perhaps they have made some progress in understanding the cause of conditions X and Z.

Progress, maybe in the sense of preventing it for unaffected cars, but no progress in the sense of being able to reverse the problem through software, returning lost range, replacing affected batteries.

 

[Lukez]

They will honor your request not to install the update, but the staging is automatic and while it can be unstaged, it will immediately be staged again as long as it is within a certain radius of the SC. So, it is a little precarious because you have to hope someone doesn't make a "mistake" and accidentally hit the update button for you. If you get a tech out there and tell him you don't want it, and leave a note on the screen, you should be ok. If you're getting a new part that they claim requires an update you may be out of luck. However, make sure you talk with an actual tech person and not the guy who answers the phone and claims that everything needs a software update. If it is a part that does not require software (like a screen or wheels or a bumper or a window or a glovebox or a seat or a... etc.) then be forceful with your request if needed.

I don't need service done, I just want to not get updates and want the current one unstaged.
Anyway I scheduled an appointment we'll see what they say.