Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[oaito]

Anyone got up to date charge rate graphs? (ABRP)

With the different limitations in charge rate per soc, max brick voltage and max amperage the fleet average as delivered in 2019 from ABPR needs additional datapoints... I wish I could set them in ABRP when planning thus using a more fitting profile.

For the teslalogger charts, does anyone know a way to multiple select e.g. all 85 based data?

BR! Oaito.

FYI => On a side note, Björn Nyland described the limit in his Model X 90 as per max amperage, while the video is showing two Model S 85 supercharging videos side by side, comparing 2014 vs 2020 charging rates.

 

[Droschke]

Or our 85-pack cars never get an update past 2020.48.12.1 instead.

In the AP1 thread, at least one 2015 P85D owner (with MCU2 upgrade) has reported receiving 2020.48.26. The update has dangerously "small fonts": https://new.reddit.com/r/teslamotor...size_comparison_before_and_after_most_recent/

On Edit: The post in the AP1 thread is: AP1 ONLY Please -- life after 2018.50.6

 

[Battpower]

For the teslalogger charts, does anyone know a way to multiple select e.g. all 85 based data?

@bassmaster?

 

[Chaserr]

Agreed. That was my point too. So have the voltage caps been removed as well? I haven't seen any mention of that, and am therefore assuming that the reason for that cap still remains.

Also, I am not aware that fires were necessarily linked to vehicles during Supercharging, so one could conclude that charge rate was never a prime suspect directly leading to a failure. However, there is evidence that repeated Supercharging does stress batteries.

So lifting charge rate limits now suggests to me that they feel they have nursed older cars past warranty obligations and can leave it up to owners how they chose to use their cars with impunity.

In all my research, 2 things the gates addressed stand out as most likely to cause fires long term: Charge rate and charge temperature. Both intertwined. Fast charge a cold battery, you get lithium tendrils that can eventually grow long enough to cause permanent short circuits (We have seen this error) and those build up heat uncontrollably. Batterygate (volt capping) is reactionary. It only helps avoid fires that are already going to happen by lowering the potential for those shorts to complete a circuit and heat up. 4.2V can also grow them but only over long periods of time and nobody came forward saying they parked at 100% regularly or supercharged all the way to 100%regularly. Draingate is perpetually searching for otherwise undetectable shorts by measuring and looking for anomalous heat readings in between modules. Again, reactionary. Chargegate and the reductions in Regen, new temp curves, finally adding supercharge preheating to older batteries: These are actively stopping new fire conditions from happening. Regen in winter is just as bad as supercharging in summer even though it's less energy overall. Tesla appears to have screwed up thermal management. if they got it right, lithium growths can be managed. They can grow every charge, but can be "melted" too. The last 20 some months has probably been a cover up to melt as many as possible and replace the ones that can't come back. This hypothesis explains why they would wait... it doesn't explain why they would ignore recall laws, but they probably reduced the hatdware replacement number from 100% to a far lower percentage and put the eventual recall notice in past tense, meaning "This recall gas already been applied to everyone running a firmware from 2019.50 or newer" or whenever "enhanced diagnostics" started replacing batteries in larger numbers.

 

[Battpower]

finally adding supercharge preheating to older batteries

That's one I keep forgetting.

 

[Chaserr]

It seemed like a minor "just buy a new car for that" omission like they pulled for the Chill mode slider but it has big impacts on battery longevity and safety. It is a lot more important than just faster charge times.

 

[trayloader]

I guess the Xmas update only helps 90/100 cars.
We didn´t hear from a single pre FL 60/70/85 improved car yet.

 

[islandbayy]

Sure as heck! I drove on the firmware all last weekend, supercharged 5 times, and was capped at 74kW no matter the pack temp. Today, had to drive to Illinois, supercharged twice. 100 kW rate first time, on the way home, got 119, and sustained charge rate was somewhat decent, curve held out pretty good to 50%, 70kW at 50%-ish and still doing 30kW at 95%!
This is again on a 75kWh battery, same cells as the 90's. NOT a original 60 or 85 cell. Will ask a friend next time I see him at the supercharger what his 85 is doing with 200,000 miles on the clock.

This might entice me to upgrade my MS90D's firmware from 8.1 to latest!

 

[fbitz777]

Sure as heck! I drove on the firmware all last weekend, supercharged 5 times, and was capped at 74kW no matter the pack temp. Today, had to drive to Illinois, supercharged twice. 100 kW rate first time, on the way home, got 119, and sustained charge rate was somewhat decent, curve held out pretty good to 50%, 70kW at 50%-ish and still doing 30kW at 95%!
This is again on a 75kWh battery, same cells as the 90's. NOT a original 60 or 85 cell. Will ask a friend next time I see him at the supercharger what his 85 is doing with 200,000 miles on the clock.

This might entice me to upgrade my MS90D's firmware from 8.1 to latest!

What is the difference from last weekend to today; same firmware?
What about range; any improvement? (I have a 75 pack too)

 

[islandbayy]

What is the difference from last weekend to today; same firmware?
What about range; any improvement? (I have a 75 pack too)

Difference? Temps outside are pretty much the same. It snowed last night, but it also snowed last weekend. I have BMS access so I watch the temps, and the pack was at full temp, the slower charge today at 100kW was a slightly cooler pack, the 119 was at a completely toasty temp. Before charge gate on this vehicle, I got to enjoy 138 kW for a while. Once I hit 10 MWon the dot, my charge rates capped to 74kW.

 

[DJP31]

I have BMS access so I watch the temps, and the pack was at full temp, the slower charge today at 100kW was a slightly cooler pack, the 119 was at a completely toasty temp.

@islandbayy, what is the ideal pack temp for Supercharging?

 

[Lewis88]

At what point does one have 30% degredation? Is it 425 * 0.7 = 300km (265*0.7=185.5 miles) of range?

My battery hasnt done too well, I have driven most without an internet connection due to defective MCU, after it came back online.. well.. you can see the degredation, its 425*0.79=335 (208miles) so I lost 21%, this in a 6 year old car with 108000km (67000 miles). Basically almost all loss was in this year.

They replaced the main HV connector (both ends) a month back because it was (I think) full of water and making sparking noises. Maybe that messed up my cells?

Luckily still 2 full years of the 8 year warranty to go. But will 185.5 miles be a trigger for a battery swap?

 

[Battpower]

@islandbayy, what is the ideal pack temp for Supercharging?

Iirc it's around 50C.

 

[Brass Guy]

But will 185.5 miles be a trigger for a battery swap?

I don't think so. Our warranty didn't have a range loss phrase in it; that phrase is more recent. Technically, without a clear sign of some failure, they don't have to replace it at all.

I'm down to 202 miles. I lost about 40 miles in a week this year while I was still on V8 firmware. I had the "Battery charge limit will be reduced" message, but Tesla said they could not diagnose with V8 on the car, so they "up"dated my firmware, charged me $370, then told me to drive it for a month to get some data on the logs or some such nonsense. They've still done no remote diagnosis, my return appointment just got pushed back to the end of January, which is 3 months from the incident. Now I'm afraid they're going to weasel out of a warranty swap; and now supercharging times have about doubled.

 

[Battpower]

a clear sign of some failure

And I am not aware of any unequivocal 'failure' other than your car not working any more, or something worse.

And with no officially published acceptable limits, it is hard to make an argument / claim for 'failure' and no possibility of external verification / arbitration.

 

[Brass Guy]

And I am not aware of any unequivocal 'failure' other than your car not working any more, or something worse.

And with no officially published acceptable limits, it is hard to make an argument / claim for 'failure' and no possibility of external verification / arbitration.

From what I've read in this forum, Tesla won't accept a customer's data extracted from their own car. Customers are forced to rely on Tesla alone to read and interpret their car's faults as they see fit.

 

[Battpower]

Customers are forced to rely on Tesla alone

Similar approach to Apple?

So when Tesla say your car is fubar'd...... which they will try their best to make sure doesn't happen on their dime......

And the only evidence must be what Tesla chose to accept......

It's really important imo that they should not encrypt vehicle data bus. Then we will be really stuck. OTA downgrades at will, with no way for owners to monitor. Or at the least, they must publish unencrypted data to maintain transparency or encrypt with read-only public access.

 

[Chaserr]

I don't think so. Our warranty didn't have a range loss phrase in it; that phrase is more recent. Technically, without a clear sign of some failure, they don't have to replace it at all.

I'm down to 202 miles. I lost about 40 miles in a week this year while I was still on V8 firmware. I had the "Battery charge limit will be reduced" message, but Tesla said they could not diagnose with V8 on the car, so they "up"dated my firmware, charged me $370, then told me to drive it for a month to get some data on the logs or some such nonsense. They've still done no remote diagnosis, my return appointment just got pushed back to the end of January, which is 3 months from the incident. Now I'm afraid they're going to weasel out of a warranty swap; and now supercharging times have about doubled.

if you are still capable of giving Tesla a bit of optimism, that might put a time line on when they finally hope to go public. The cynic in me says it's almostv2 years now why bother, but that cynic also points out that some heartless empty suit at Tesla might have put financial S&P goals over safety and warranty, and the finances are set. The optimist in me wants to point out they have an S update coming and new batteries in testing.

The realist in me will just point out that they have always done nothing to substantiate it's previous "best warranty in the world" and "safest car in the world" claims, and only the court system has any chance at making them remember those words.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

From what I've read in this forum, Tesla won't accept a customer's data extracted from their own car. Customers are forced to rely on Tesla alone to read and interpret their car's faults as they see fit.

Until Tesla is sued and forced to accept validity of the owner's data in court. Many jurisdictions have a $10,000 limit on small claims. That would appear to be a better way to sue Tesla than a class action. Small claims courts are far more inclined to agree with a wronged consumer than they are with a bully corporation.

If we all filed small claims actions in our local jurisdictions, Tesla legal would be overwhelmed. Why, exactly, are we trying to make this easy on Tesla?

 

[islandbayy]

@islandbayy, what is the ideal pack temp for Supercharging?

For the best supercharging rates I have seen over the years, about 120*F. HOWEVER, the happy place for lithium is about 113*F. Over the past year and a half, I have seen the car let the pack temps get to OVER 130*F before really kicking in the active cooling. That is WAY too hot in my opinion, and cooking those poor cells. In comparison, while not exactly the same, my high output Milwaukee Drill batteries, and my SnowJoe Snowblower batteries all start thermal cutoffs at about 120*F while in use.