Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
How does one confirm if their Tesla is included?

- If it's not already too late, the only option at this time is to immediately reach out to the Settlement Administrator law firm to find out if your VIN is among the 1743 vehicles which were voltage limited. You can find their contact info at their website:


- Don't count on any attorney to contact you.
- Don't count on Tesla to contact you either, especially if you are not part of the class. Tesla has sent letters for battery replacement to only 3 impacted owners we know of in this thread.
- There is also this in the court documents:
"Tesla’s data show that 1,743 Model S vehicles in the United States were subject to a 10% maximum voltage limitation caused by a May 2019 software update. See July 27, 2021 Declaration of Sean P. Gates (“Gates Decl.”) ¶ 2. A subsequent update in July 2019 restored about 3% of the battery voltage in these vehicles, and a third update released in March 2020 is designed to fully restore the batteries’ voltage over time as the vehicles are driven. Id. ¶ 3. The restoration has proceeded as planned and, to date, Tesla’s data shows that of the 1,722 vehicles for which there is data, 1,552 have had their maximum battery voltage fully restored, 79 have been restored to between 95.5% and 99%, and 34 have been restored to between 93% and 95.5%. Id. ¶ 4. The maximum voltage on the latter vehicles should continue to be restored over time as the vehicles are driven."

slower Supercharging sessions

- Slow charging has never been part of this class action lawsuit.
 
I have neither been contacted by Tesla nor any attorney regarding my lower battery capacity, slower Supercharging sessions, and presumed reduction in performance with respect to our 2013 S 85. In early 2019, we had a consistent displayed range of 256 miles. After a software update in June 2019 our maximum range was instantly reduced to 246 miles while experiencing slower Supercharging sessions. Over the last 3 years/20K miles of driving and numerous software updates, we've seen the maximum range fluctuate from 232-244 miles. Unfortunately since March 2022 our maximum range has been steady at 236 miles. How does one confirm if their Tesla is included? I don't know if there is something physically wrong with the car or battery pack. What I can speculate is that software updates have diminished the utility and convenience of the vehicle. I'm sure I'm not the one experiencing this.
The May 2019 update reduced range from about 250 miles to about 220 miles. You experienced about 1/3 of that and likely was not one of the affected cars.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20220306-052939_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20220306-052939_Chrome.jpg
    102.3 KB · Views: 605
The May 2019 update reduced range from about 250 miles to about 220 miles. You experienced about 1/3 of that and likely was not one of the affected cars.
Thank you for that summary, DJRas. My range remained about the same (254ish) until late summer/early autumn when I checked. My range had dropped to ~235. By late November, it was down to ~230--which might have been the algorithm that estimates "mileage."

Fast forward to this year, and my range is in the low 250s, essentially consistent with the reading before the software change.

It would have been better for all concerned if Tesla and your representatives defined just who the eligible classes were for this settlement. Ambiguous and vague statements just don't cut it. Sorry to be so blunt, but your lawyers have some responsibility for definition. In my opinion, this is sloppy and careless legal representation, notwithstanding the good things that they did in getting to the heart of the matter. It would have taken a few hours of actual work plus some office expense to list the eligible and ineligible members by VIN or other means with the appropriate reasoning behind this decision.

But then, I am an accountant, and full disclosure is part of my wheelhouse!
 
The settlement was approved by the court. There will be an appeal period for objectors to make their case. Then, Tesla will fund the settlement and it will be distributed.

IF anyone has not received the settlement notice and believe they should have, then contact the settlement administrator and/or my attorney (Nimish Desai [email protected]).

This has been a long journey and I appreciate everyone's concerns and participation in this process. The effort was effective at getting everyone either restored or replaced.
I wish the settlement had been more, but firmly believe this is the best possible outcome. Had we rejected this offer it would be years more before the end with likely a lesser judgment (since Tesla has restored us).
Thank you for that summary, DJRas. My range remained about the same (254ish) until late summer/early autumn when I checked. My range had dropped to ~235. By late November, it was down to ~230--which might have been the algorithm that estimates "mileage."

Fast forward to this year, and my range is in the low 250s, essentially consistent with the reading before the software change.

It would have been better for all concerned if Tesla and your representatives defined just who the eligible classes were for this settlement. Ambiguous and vague statements just don't cut it. Sorry to be so blunt, but your lawyers have some responsibility for definition. In my opinion, this is sloppy and careless legal representation, notwithstanding the good things that they did in getting to the heart of the matter. It would have taken a few hours of actual work plus some office expense to list the eligible and ineligible members by VIN or other means with the appropriate reasoning behind this decision.

But then, I am an accountant, and full disclosure is part of my wheelhouse!
The list of VINs was protected Tesla information not even available to my legal team. They could ask about specific VINs.
This is part of the process that utilized mediation rather than a trial with full discovery that would have added years to the case.
 
Got the car back today and confirmed the pack was replaced with 1014116-00-C. Rated range at 100% is now 270miles. The rear upper suspension links on both sides were also replaced, along with a coolant refill and bleed. The work only took a couple of days.

Thanks for the feedback.

That was very quick with a new replacement. Nevertheless, I'm sure you are happy about it. They had that battery in stock at the service center?

Any chance you can post your redacted invoice here?
 
Last edited:
@TSLA_maybe ,

Per my previous post, I said this:
That was very quick with a new replacement. Nevertheless, I'm sure you are happy about it. They had that battery in stock at the service center?

I just realized you had mentioned you initially had an appointment for early May which was pushed back a few times. So, your replacement wasn't as quick as I was thinking yesterday. Sorry about that.

Please don't forget to post a screenshot of your redacted invoice, if you don't mind, as it would very much help the other interested owners in the same situation with the part numbers, etc., especially the newly discovered requirement for the replacement of the rear upper suspension arms for the type of battery you have received.

Appreciate it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJRas
Yes...they had rescheduled a few times awaiting parts. It was quick turnaround after dropping off car at the service center.
View attachment 818387
View attachment 818388

Thanks so much. It appears that the rear suspension arms are needed for only certain model S/X builds and not for all. This might be due to the constant design and manufacturing modification of the parts and the car's configuration. For instance one car might require 28 particular clips and another car only 14. I've noticed that when comparing different invoices posted in different threads for battery replacements (and this might as well be true for any other part replacements). I’m also guessing the car which does not require new suspension arms when its battery is replaced was possibly built with a different suspension arm specs which can handle any extra weights of the new battery.

Speaking of different configurations being a factor, do you have a coil or air suspension?

Thanks again for posting the invoice and congrats on the new battery … hopefully this one would last much longer for you.
 
Last edited:
Thanks so much. It appears that the rear suspension arms are needed for only certain model S/X builds and not for all. This might be due to the constant design and manufacturing modification of the parts and the car's configuration. For instance one car might require 28 particular clips and another car only 14. I've noticed that when comparing different invoices posted in different threads for battery replacements (and this might as well be true for any other part replacements). I’m also guessing the car which does not require new suspension arms when its battery is replaced was possibly built with a different suspension arm specs which can handle any extra weights of the new battery.

Speaking of different configurations being a factor, do you have a coil or air suspension?

Thanks again for posting the invoice and congrats on the new battery … hopefully this one would last much longer for you.

To prove my point mentioned above, I did some comparisons based on what has been reported at TMC.

I took two battery replacement invoices for two different Model S cars which had their battery replaced with the same 1014116 00-C pack.

Below are the differences in parts requirements as it applies to installing the 1014116 00-C pack (as an example):

1655663690254.png
 
Thanks so much. It appears that the rear suspension arms are needed for only certain model S/X builds and not for all. This might be due to the constant design and manufacturing modification of the parts and the car's configuration. For instance one car might require 28 particular clips and another car only 14. I've noticed that when comparing different invoices posted in different threads for battery replacements (and this might as well be true for any other part replacements). I’m also guessing the car which does not require new suspension arms when its battery is replaced was possibly built with a different suspension arm specs which can handle any extra weights of the new battery.

Speaking of different configurations being a factor, do you have a coil or air suspension?

Thanks again for posting the invoice and congrats on the new battery … hopefully this one would last much longer for you.
I'm on coils. Scheduled another service call for later this week. Got the 'Coolant is Low' message. Checked the coolant level and way less than 'Min'. Topped it off for now but want them to give it another once over since they did some cooling system work.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: DJRas and Droschke
Got the car back today and confirmed the pack was replaced with 1014116-00-C. Rated range at 100% is now 270miles. The rear upper suspension links on both sides were also replaced, along with a coolant refill and bleed. The work only took a couple of days.
How is your charge speed now? So did they firmware limit the battery to 270, or is that what the pack comes out to?
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Droschke
You can check with a boroscope or by removing the Frunk trim and tub.

However, adding coolant is prohibited by the owners manual.

Would not put it past Tesla to invalidate a warranty claim should there be a leak somewhere.
Yes...pull the upper cover in the frunk and can see the expansion tank and markings. Mine was way below the 'Min'. Can only assume whatever work was done, when they put things back to together didn't notice/get the error since not enough miles were put on the car during their test drive. I've only put on about 40 miles since I got the car back and about 10 of the those mile were coming back home from the service center.
 
How is your charge speed now? So did they firmware limit the battery to 270, or is that what the pack comes out to?

As we understand, the 1014116 is a 100 kWh pack with 14 instead of 16 modules, started with revision A and B, and currently at C, and delivered to the owners with different full ranges:

1014116-00-A 85kWh 350VDC
Reported Full Range 289
Pack was installed under warranty

1014116-00-B 90kWh 350VDC
Reported Full Range 248 miles
Pack was installed under warranty
(This one was installed capped at the top!). Notice the useful SMT data, including the nominal full pack of 87.3kWh:

1014116-00-C 90kWh 350VDC
Reported Full Range 271 miles
Pack was purchased

1014116-00-C 90kWh 350VDC
Reported Full Range 270 miles
Pack was installed under warranty

On Edit:
If we take the 87.3kWh nominal full pack reported for 1014116-00-B and assume the real world consumption of 3 miles/kWh, that's 262 real world miles of range.
 
Last edited:
I head my 2013 tesla a p85 for the past 4yrs I was able to charge my car 285-305 miles full charge. Week ago I took my car for 8GB ram recall and when I got my car back I my full change range dropped to 243 miles. I contact tesla and they told me my battery is out of warranty. So I explain to them this can not be a battery! This happen over night in tesla service center. To replace my 8gb card they keep my car for two days.