Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Chaserr]

It's almost like you don't read, or comprehend, anything that goes against your view of things.

You're still wrong.

Mp3mike talks about himself in the third party, but at least he's able to tell us what keeps him coming back to this site.

it's how the NHTSA works. They're scattered, poorly staffed, terrible at documentation, so it confused you

I'm impressed by the admission, even when you're describing why my own words were accurate about both the NHTSA and yourself you must turn this into a fight because you take things personally when they go "against your view of things." It's a pattern of yours, I think. One I I will look for in the future and point out if you think it will help you change that pattern. You see a petition to recall "steering intermediate shaft failure" that resulted in "steering intermediate shaft failure" recalls being issued that apparently that "goes against your view of things" and want to make it seem like time goes backward because - in this one instance and only this one - the NHTSA is not scattered, unreliable, understaffed, terrible at documentation, et cetera. Except you've already shot down your own argument because you brought up that ego crushing defeat as an example of how terrible they are at completing paperwork properly by noting they left it open for half a decade. Ouch for you! And why did you do this to yourself? Because facts "that go against your view of things" are still facts but must be disagreed with. You use your words as weapons because they mean something to you, and unfortunately you've said a lot about yourself in a futile waste of effort to make history undo itself. Those recalls can't be reversed by poor record keeping.

 

[MP3Mike]

I'm impressed by the admission. You see a petition to recall "steering intermediate shaft failure" that resulted in "steering intermediate shaft failure" recalls being issued that apparently that "goes against your view of things" and want to make it seem like time goes backward because - in this one instance and only this one - the NHTSA is not scattered, unreliable, understaffed, terrible at documentation, et cetera. Except you've already shot down your own argument because you brought up that ego crushing defeat as an example of how terrible they are at completing paperwork properly by noting they left it open for half a decade. Ouch for you! And why did you do this to yourself? Because facts "that go against your view of things" are still facts but must be disagreed with.

Really you should read the documents, the DP was written and submitted by someone after the recall. The person even mentioned in their DP that they had already taken their car to the dealer for the recall and the problem still happened. So it isn't a matter of NHTSA screwing up, which I never said they did. You are the one that keeps insisting that NHTSA is messing up.

 

[David99]

Perhaps because David is not a known Tesla youtuber.

This is 100% true. Bjorn and other highly visible people have been given better treatment by Tesla.

 

[Chaserr]

We just saw that again, when Tesla stole FSD from a new (used) car owner and told him they were not giving it back... until the story went viral nd suddenly lots of people were asking why anyone would allow OTA to remove property.

Tesla has a difficult time doing the right thing without scrutiny. They like to steal from the shadows.

 

[boywonder]

I would like the court case, if it comes to that, to also address the issue of who owns the car and what rights the owner has vs the manufacturer.

We were all ok with the car getting better with each OTA update; a significant benefit of owning a Tesla. But no one is ok with Tesla removing features or performance especially when paid for by the original owner and this needs to be enshrined in consumer law.

 

[Chaserr]

I don't think that will be considered by the class action, but it does specifically name several computer hacking and crimes illegal access of computer systems Tesla is guilty of committing that will change how they abuse OTA. The NHTSA punishments might also limit how all manufacturers use OTA, since Tesla said they used them to intentionally break safety reporting laws part of the fallout may be all OTA being vetted or sent for government approval.

At the minimum, thorough descriptions of what will be stolen will probably have to be included before installation for informed consent.

 

[kavyboy]

I would like the court case, if it comes to that, to also address the issue of who owns the car and what rights the owner has vs the manufacturer.

We were all ok with the car getting better with each OTA update; a significant benefit of owning a Tesla. But no one is ok with Tesla removing features or performance especially when paid for by the original owner and this needs to be enshrined in consumer law.

I would love a mandate that the product (car) be able to maintain its "sold as" state, within reasonable parameters such as bug fixes, normal wear/tear/use, legal compliance, or security updates. In other words, the product I bought shouldn't materially change after I buy it unless I OK it, or even pay for it maybe. Yeah, I know that means code forking and all that, but Tesla can't claim that they are an advanced technology business with an astounding market capitalization on one hand, then on the other claim they can't maintain manage some code versioning.

 

[boywonder]

People have been talking about a "magic number" (100-110) that is the sum of the battery SOC and charge power during Supercharging. Maybe this graph is useful to see it if you haven't heard of it before.

The yellow line shows the charge power peaking at 122KWH and then tailing off as the charge progresses.
The SOC in green started at 10% and finished at 75% after 44 minutes gaining 65% SOC (25 -> 177 miles) with 45KWh of energy.

The nearly horizontal number in orange at the top of the graph is the magic number - varying between 100 and 110 after the initial 2-3 minutes of charging.

85D running 2019.36.x

 

[kavyboy]

People have been talking about a "magic number" (100-110) that is the sum of the battery SOC and charge power during Supercharging. Maybe this graph is useful to see it if you haven't heard of it before.

View attachment 514397

The yellow line shows the charge power peaking at 122KWH and then tailing off as the charge progresses.
The SOC in green started at 10% and finished at 75% after 44 minutes gaining 65% SOC (25 -> 177 miles) with 45KWh of energy.

The nearly horizontal number in orange at the top of the graph is the magic number - varying between 100 and 110 after the initial 2-3 minutes of charging.

85D running 2019.36.x

That number used to be around 125+/-5 for me. Now it more like 100.

 

[Lukez]

That number used to be around 125+/-5 for me. Now it more like 100.

That looks like the tesla mate self hosted graph, can you share how you added this magic number on the graph? Would love to add it also!

 

[Droschke]

People have been talking about a "magic number" (100-110) that is the sum of the battery SOC and charge power during Supercharging. Maybe this graph is useful to see it if you haven't heard of it before.

View attachment 514397

The yellow line shows the charge power peaking at 122KWH and then tailing off as the charge progresses.
The SOC in green started at 10% and finished at 75% after 44 minutes gaining 65% SOC (25 -> 177 miles) with 45KWh of energy.

The nearly horizontal number in orange at the top of the graph is the magic number - varying between 100 and 110 after the initial 2-3 minutes of charging.

85D running 2019.36.x

I thought for newer (non-chargegated) Model S, it used to be between 120-130.

 

[boywonder]

That looks like the tesla mate self hosted graph, can you share how you added this magic number on the graph? Would love to add it also!

Sure I’ll pm you or otherwise offer it back to the project in the form of a pull request.

I just modified the sql query used to generate the graph

 

[Lukez]

I thought for newer (non-chargegated) Model S, it used to be between 120-130.

Yes it is, I'm still in that range on version 16.2 and not updating the software to keep it there!

 

[bhzmark]

For those that have been affected, Teslafi now presents average batt temps and range for each update version. Something to wave around at the SC as you try to explain what Tesla has done to your car.

It is under the "My updates" tab...

I also just noticed that Teslafi Battery report now also compares your range to a "fleet" of similar cars although in my case that was a fleet of only 4 other cars and the comparison to the fleet varied based on whether I used charges 85% and higher (I was 1.7% worse than the fleet), or limited to charges 95% and higher (I was 2.8% better than the fleet.)

The small sample size must explain why the fleet average has some wild swings in the higher miles at charges of just 85% and more and most recently projected 100% range is quite high. They ought to show the fleet average projection in your future miles too if the fleet has the mileage but you don't.

 

[N3IC]

To provide some data... My March 2015 Model S 85D (50,000 miles) reliably charged to 241 miles @90% without more than a mile difference until this sudden update hit. Now it charges 90% to 218-219, so my 100% range went from 268 to 243. And of course the supercharging rate is considerably lower. I took some data today. Temperature was 53 and I had navigated to the charger (I haven't noticed any actual difference even though Tesla says that it will precondition the battery to be ready to receive charge) after driving @70mph for 40 minutes. Upon plugging in, the car estimated time to charge (to 90%) as 50 minutes. Which is what it used to actually be to get to the 241 miles. I arrived with 40 miles range left. In the first few seconds the KW started at 98 and within two minutes dropped to 87. I then recorded every 5 minutes. There were no other cars at the supercharger. It took 62 minutes to charge to the now 219 90% point. (You know what I am thinking with all the talk about 150KW superchargers and next generation superchargers!) In all honesty, since I have had the car I have charged it weekly at a supercharger (to 90%). Note that I saw zero degradation until the new battery management system kicked in. Also, when I charge with 240vac it predicts the charge time to the former mileage rating and simply cuts off sooner than predicted at the 218 point.

While I'm posting, I really wish we had a separate acronym page. Even as a seasoned two Tesla owner, most of the time I have no idea what the posters are talking about because of all the abbreviations!

 

[Leeboy22001]

My S60 magic number is now (70 - 100) !

 

[faughtz]

I would like the court case, if it comes to that, to also address the issue of who owns the car and what rights the owner has vs the manufacturer.

We were all ok with the car getting better with each OTA update; a significant benefit of owning a Tesla. But no one is ok with Tesla removing features or performance especially when paid for by the original owner and this needs to be enshrined in consumer law.

Well said. I have been in contact with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and although they have worked digital rights issues before, so far, no actions. I see similarities to the John Deere digital rights case.

Electronic Frontier Foundation

 

[NoahX]

Been tracking this thread since it started, my battery was hit by the batterygate pretty bad, with a "full charge" which I never got even close of 217mi. In reality, the battery barely charges past 208mi.

Got the "Max battery charge level reduced" message a couple of weeks ago and finally got my car back with a replaced battery. The part# shows that the replacement is the 85kWh Tesla recently released, However, the range (~290 mi) is nowa lot better than the original one even when it was new.

 

[T.R.T.e.s.l.a.]

Been tracking this thread since it started, my battery was hit by the batterygate pretty bad, with a "full charge" which I never got even close of 217mi. In reality, the battery barely charges past 208mi.

Got the "Max battery charge level reduced" message a couple of weeks ago and finally got my car back with a replaced battery. The part# shows that the replacement is the 85kWh Tesla recently released, However, the range (~290 mi) is nowa lot better than the original one even when it was new.
View attachment 515042

Good on you.
I guess you are one of the lucky ones who got the new 85kw battery!
I wish i get one of those when the time comes.

 

[Droschke]

Been tracking this thread since it started, my battery was hit by the batterygate pretty bad, with a "full charge" which I never got even close of 217mi. In reality, the battery barely charges past 208mi.

Got the "Max battery charge level reduced" message a couple of weeks ago and finally got my car back with a replaced battery. The part# shows that the replacement is the 85kWh Tesla recently released, However, the range (~290 mi) is nowa lot better than the original one even when it was new.
View attachment 515042

Great news. You got the new 85kwh, 350VDC pack, which is reported to be ~89kWh capacity. What's your MS model year and the number of miles you had on your old battery, if I may ask?