Telemetry: favor proactive service, or privacy?

[stevezzzz]

I've had my Sig S since the end of September, 2012, and driven it some 21,000 miles. On Friday I had occasion to use an HPWC for the very first time, but the charge rate maxed out at 40A. A quick look at the charging screen confirmed that the car believed 80A was available and selected, so I called Ownership.

It took the rep who answered the phone less than 30 seconds to determine that my slave charger was not communicating. A few minutes later I got a call from my local service center and scheduled a service visit to have it replaced. Since I purchased Valet service they'll come and get the car and it'll be little or no hassle to me...except that I was 1000 miles from home on a road trip and could really have used that 80A charge to get me back on the road a few hours sooner.

My question is this: since the slave charger's problem was readily available to the front-line Ownership phone rep (and so far as I know, the slave charger could have been defunct since I bought the car), could/should Tesla have remotely diagnosed the problem and proactively contacted me for service? Or do privacy concerns trump this potential benefit to owners?

 

[jerry33]

As far as I know, there is software at Tesla that looks through the logs for problems to address proactively. Charging is just not one of the things that it looks for. I'd say it's more about signal to noise ratio rather than privacy. I'd agree that the slave charger not communication probably ought to be on the proactive list.

 

[stevezzzz]

Fair enough, jerry33. Next question: shouldn't the service center have caught this at my annual service last October?

 

[jerry33]

Fair enough, jerry33. Next question: shouldn't the service center have caught this at my annual service last October?

Perhaps it wasn't broken then or there is no communication between the master and slave unless an attempt is made to charge at over 40 amps so no failures would be recorded. I had the master charger fail on vacation and I had to phone rather than them being proactive. However, they did fly out a Ranger to fix and I actually never lost any driving time (other than the couple of hours while the Ranger was there).

 

[Cottonwood]

Fair enough, jerry33. Next question: shouldn't the service center have caught this at my annual service last October?

Hopefully, they did a test drive and a courtesy charge during the annual service. That charge should have been done on their 80A HPWC at the shop. You may want to ask them about this.

A software suggestion to Tesla: For cars with Dual Chargers that regularly charge at 40A or less, occasionally (every Nth charge) split the load across master and slave to test the slave.

I have have HPWC's at both my 1st and 2nd homes that can source 80A. I have tested and have normal operation at 80A, but I normally set the charging to 46A (80/sqrt(3)) to reduce the stress on my house and neighborhood electrics. I guess setting my normal (no hurry) charge rate to greater than 40A is good, to regularly test my slave charger. It is interesting to watch the current ramp up to 23A, pause as the slave charger comes on-line, then continue to 46A, so I believe that the MS is splitting the load between the two chargers.

Enjoy the rest of your drive! I guess the 70A J's in Pagosa and Salida won't be as interesting. Over 2 feet of fresh powder at Wolf Creek in the last two days and still snowing, BTW.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

I've had my Sig S since the end of September, 2012, and driven it some 21,000 miles. On Friday I had occasion to use an HPWC for the very first time, but the charge rate maxed out at 40A. A quick look at the charging screen confirmed that the car believed 80A was available and selected, so I called Ownership.

It took the rep who answered the phone less than 30 seconds to determine that my slave charger was not communicating. A few minutes later I got a call from my local service center and scheduled a service visit to have it replaced. Since I purchased Valet service they'll come and get the car and it'll be little or no hassle to me...except that I was 1000 miles from home on a road trip and could really have used that 80A charge to get me back on the road a few hours sooner.

My question is this: since the slave charger's problem was readily available to the front-line Ownership phone rep (and so far as I know, the slave charger could have been defunct since I bought the car), could/should Tesla have remotely diagnosed the problem and proactively contacted me for service? Or do privacy concerns trump this potential benefit to owners?

Hi Steve, I was wondering if you were the same person who charged at my house on Friday. I'm glad you were able to get to your destination, and thanks for leaving your card. Your photography is beautiful!

To answer your question, I favor proactive service.

 

[Cottonwood]

I did not say before. I do prefer proactive service suggestions, and my vehicle being monitored for problems that have occurred and for symptoms of problems that may occur.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

I have a Miele (German) washing machine that alerts the mother ship when there is a fault code. I receive a proactive call from Miele service when this happens. So far my laundry's privacy has not been compromised.

 

[stevezzzz]

Hi Steve, I was wondering if you were the same person who charged at my house on Friday. I'm glad you were able to get to your destination, and thanks for leaving your card. Your photography is beautiful!

To answer your question, I favor proactive service.

Hey, I thought you knew it was me. :biggrin:

Thanks for the kind words about my photography, and major kudos for helping out a fellow Model S owner.

- - - Updated - - -

I have a Miele (German) washing machine that alerts the mother ship when there is a fault code. I receive a proactive call from Miele service when this happens. So far my laundry's privacy has not been compromised.

Now, that's funny...

 

[brianman]

A software suggestion to Tesla: For cars with Dual Chargers that regularly charge at 40A or less, occasionally (every Nth charge) split the load across master and slave to test the slave.

I believe you get pretty close to what you want if you periodically set your max charge rate at home to 42A instead of 40A.

 

[Cottonwood]

I believe you get pretty close to what you want if you periodically set your max charge rate at home to 42A instead of 40A.

That is true only if you have more than a 14-50 with a UMC. That is SteveZzzz's situation. and I don't think that you can set the current to higher than the offered pilot current, 40A for a UMC with a 14-50 adapter.

 

[stevezzzz]

That is true only if you have more than a 14-50 with a UMC. That is SteveZzzz's situation. and I don't think that you can set the current to higher than the offered pilot current, 40A for a UMC with a 14-50 adapter.

Right: that is the way charging limits work with a UMC. In this case the car displayed a current setting of 80A as soon as I plugged in to the HPWC, but the actual charge rate settled at 40A/80A.

 

[efusco]

To the original question--privacy vs proactive...
I think, ideally, one would be able to login to our Teslamotors.com account and, for each Tesla you own, be able to select a)No automatic remote telemetry, b)allow remote telemetry for all systems, or c)The ability to select what systems you'll allow full-time remote telemetry.

Most people would probably choose "b", but the privacy freaks can have "a" and those who don't want their GPS coordinates or top speed tracked could opt out of those while allowing everything else with "c".

 

[tezco]

Right: that is the way charging limits work with a UMC. In this case the car displayed a current setting of 80A as soon as I plugged in to the HPWC, but the actual charge rate settled at 40A/80A.

Steve: Thanks for the heads-up about this situation. I'm going to head down to the new Supercharger in Denver to make sure my slave is working, before heading over to Glenwood this spring.

With regards to the original question: Definitely favor proactive service. I've had my 12V replaced twice proactively. Sure beats this scenario: Ran out of Juice....

My Leaf asks whether I want to share info with Nissan at every start up, probably taking this to the other extreme. Efuso's recommendation makes sense.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

Steve: Thanks for the heads-up about this situation. I'm going to head down to the new Supercharger in Denver to make sure my slave is working, before heading over to Glenwood this spring.

this won't work. SC doesn't use onboard chargers

you'll need to try a HPWC for an S to use the second charger. Maybe try a service center ?

 

[Cottonwood]

this won't work. SC doesn't use onboard chargers

you'll need to try a HPWC for an S to use the second charger. Maybe try a service center ?

Exactly! The Denver Service Center has HPWC's, and I think that they have them at the Show Room. In fact, at the Show Room in Lone Tree, you should be able to try both 80A charging on an HPWC and Supercharging. Call ahead to make sure.

 

[Kipernicus]

Since we don't get all the detailed data that Tesla does, then I want them to monitor it and proactively fix stuff. I choose efusco's "b".
If we had access to all the data ourselves, I might change to "c", but probably not. This thread deserves a poll.

Fair enough, jerry33. Next question: shouldn't the service center have caught this at my annual service last October?

Yes! (assuming it was faulty then). IMO $600 non-service ought to check everything

 

[swaltner]

My Leaf asks whether I want to share info with Nissan at every start up, probably taking this to the other extreme. Efuso's recommendation makes sense.

That behavior was for the 2011/2012 model years on the Leaf. Nissan listened to customer complaints and changed the behavior on the 2013 Leaf, where clicking OK on the nag screen is good for a whole month.

 

[tezco]

I'm going to head down to the new Supercharger in Denver to make sure my slave is working, before heading over to Glenwood this spring... My Leaf asks whether I want to share info with Nissan at every start up, probably taking this to the other extreme. Efuso's recommendation makes sense.

this won't work. SC doesn't use onboard chargers. You'll need to try a HPWC for an S to use the second charger. Maybe try a service center ?

Yikes, what was I thinking? So many facts, too little memory. I wonder if my next door neighbor has his HPWC installed yet....

That behavior was for the 2011/2012 model years on the Leaf. Nissan listened to customer complaints and changed the behavior on the 2013 Leaf, where clicking OK on the nag screen is good for a whole month.

Yes, it is very annoying. Unfortunately, unlike Tesla, the Leaf software seems frozen in time (except for Nissan's hidden tweaks to hide battery degredation following the Phoenix fiasco).