Tesla deemed as the worst warranty deal in Norway

[Ande]

The Norwegian Consumer Council did a big comparative test, and deemed Tesla to have the worst battery capacity warranty/ and the worst total score..

There are articles in Norwegian media about "no battery capacity warranty"
Here is the test, (in Norwegian only )
https://fil.forbrukerradet.no/wp-co...l-garantiguiden-1.0-2017-utdypende-tabell.pdf

and here is a translation of that .pdf:

Google Translate

Now and then, some journalist sum it up as "Tesla does not provide ANY capacity warranty, if a new car runs 10km on a charge, that's ok"

Observe how easy it would be for Tesla to WIN the test, Tesla could win this test anytime, especially after leading strongly in the "unlimited mileage" part.

I would love to see Tesla fix that .... prettyplease ?

 

[Tam]

...Tesla to have the worst battery capacity warranty...

It's theoretical.

In reality, how many Tesla capacity has degraded down to 70% (best non-Tesla warranty) after 5 years since 2012?

 

[kort677]

how do you say FUD in norwegian?

 

[Ande]

- I am not even going to discuss if this is a real "problem" with that or not - what I say, is it's sad to loose on such technicality.

While we don't doubt Tesla battery packs would hold up even better, putting that down on paper as a warranty, would win such test hands down, and THAT would be cool - it would win by a lot too.

I imagine similar "tests" exists in other, more significant countries too.

 

[Tam]

...it's sad to loose on such technicality....

Technically, best warranty is Volkswagen 70% to up to 160,000 km.

Now, for reality shock: Read what happened to Tesloop Taxi service at 200,000 miles or 320,000 km when its owner said its capacity has lost 6% but the battery gauge was inaccurate and off 10 miles (the car would power down when the battery gauge says you still have 10 more miles): Tesla got them another battery for free!

That's a replacement for 94% capacity!

If I want to choose between a technical win of 160,000 km on paper and the actual coverage at 320,000 km, I would pick the reality one any time!

 

[Ande]

I am not arguing... not at all.
All I say that writing down 200000km /80% , would win those tests ...and as you point out .. it would not cost Tesla more.
Also, Tesla could, like today, still be flexible on even better terms.

Our cars have some of the most advanced battery management and cooling/heating there is, noone here doubts they can outperform/outlast those simple competitors, I am just talking about the matter of getting it down on the paper for the purpose of such tests.

So - nobody needs to convince me in this thread about the durability of the battery packs, or Tesla's willingness to fix it if there should be any issues.

 

[Tam]

...it would not cost Tesla more...

I think Tesla sticks to its principle on no warranty on battery degradation because it's more beneficial to owners.

Capacity loss can be caused by a number of reasons including:

1) natural battery degradation
2) a defective cell out of thousands of cells...

I think in the Tesloop case above, Tesla must have diagnosed that one of the cell module was bad and did the whole pack replacement but not because of battery degradation.

So, Tesla does cover capacity loss even only 6% with a remaining capacity of 94% as long as it is not because of degradation but because of a defective cell that can no longer hold a charge.

 

[David99]

I think in the Tesloop case above, Tesla must have diagnosed that one of the cell module was bad and did the whole pack replacement but not because of battery degradation.

So, Tesla does cover capacity loss even only 6% with a remaining capacity of 94% as long as it is not because of degradation but because of a defective cell that can no longer hold a charge.

The Tesloop example should not be used as a data point. Tesloop is a business that has all it's marketing based about 'Traveling in a Tesla'. Any negative things related to the cars would directly reflects on Tesla as a company. Tesloop also puts miles on their cars like no other. With that background of course Tesla is very interested in keeping these cars running and being proactive to make sure they do not break down with any problems. That would get major press coverage. When Tesla replaced the battery pack, it was with that background in mind. The Tesla warranty also excludes commercial use. Tesloop is clearly commercial use. Tesloop is an invalid example how great Tesla's warranty is.

PS: IMHO one reason they replaced the battery is because the Supercharge speed goes down with use. My 85 is now 25% slower at the Supercharger than when it was new. During their trips between LA and Las Vegas they had to stop once to charge (in Barstow). Longer charge times are not in favor to Tesloop's customers.

 

[verygreen]

how do you say FUD in norwegian?

Unfortunately it's not completely unfounded.

Tesla 75kWh (since introduction till a few months ago) and 90kWh packs of the same vintage are losing capacity relatively fast. It was a new chemistry change compared to the 85kWh packs and so there's no plateau often reported in the 85 packs. They try to hide it in firmware not to stand out as much, but the reality is, there are 90 packs today that have less capacity left than 85 packs and every day there are more of them (compounded by real low starting capacity too).
They did fix whatever was the problem so 100 packs don't degrade as much (still a bit more than 85 packs) and recently 75 packs were updated too so they do about as well as modern 100 packs.

Also it is true that Tesla does not cover battery degradation under warranty, and reportedly they started to not be as generous with battery replacements if there's no clear demonstration of a module failure.

 

[StefanSarzio]

Do you have more detailed information on how this loss of capacity was detected, like how much loss at what milage using which method?

 

[bambam4171]

Tesla 75kWh (since introduction till a few months ago) and 90kWh packs of the same vintage are losing capacity relatively fast. It was a new chemistry change compared to the 85kWh packs and so there's no plateau often reported in the 85 packs. They try to hide it in firmware not to stand out as much, but the reality is, there are 90 packs today that have less capacity left than 85 packs and every day there are more of them (compounded by real low starting capacity too).

I would love to see the underlying data here. Is this supported by the Max Range Tesla google sheet?
MaxRange Tesla Battery Survey

 

[AnxietyRanger]

FWIW, I concur with @verygreen that the 90 kWh's larger than usual battery degradation has been widely reported on TMC (and that 85 kWh and 100 kWh are faring better). 90 kWh has also been most susceptible to Tesla's after the fact firmware changes to the worse: DC peak rate throttling and had the largest issues with performance limiters (though those since mostly overturned due to a succesful lawsuit). The latter issues add to the idea that something went a bit wrong with the 90 kWh.

Of 75 kWh I had not heard before this.

 

[BigD0g]

We'll seeing how much 75, 85, 90 packs didn't even start at full capacity, we were already starting below the bar. My example my back shows only 72kW according to the BMS system. I think @wk057 made a post about this a long long time ago saying the rated battery capacity was actually not the battery capacity.

 

[verygreen]

Do you have more detailed information on how this loss of capacity was detected, like how much loss at what milage using which method?

There were two independent sources with different methods, but both are not public.
One was simulated and another one was real data.
Also people I know with rooted 90kWh packs see the degradation (but that sample size is small).

I would love to see the underlying data here. Is this supported by the Max Range Tesla google sheet?
MaxRange Tesla Battery Survey

You cannot trust user-visible car reports, Tesla is trying to hide the degradation by software means (by playing with the remaining range numbers). If you root (or get onto car network) and can query BMS - you can get the real picture.

 

[lunitiks]

how do you say FUD in norwegian?

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

how do you say FUD in norwegian?

FUD, according to Google Translate.

Rhetorical question is apparently "retorisk spørsmål".

 

[lunitiks]

But what happens.... if you google translate it back to English again...

 

[David99]

Also people I know with rooted 90kWh packs see the degradation (but that sample size is small).

You cannot trust user-visible car reports, Tesla is trying to hide the degradation by software means (by playing with the remaining range numbers). If you root (or get onto car network) and can query BMS - you can get the real picture.

What does rooted mean? I have never heard that about Tesla batteries or cars. Do you mean access to thew CAN bus?

 

[lunitiks]

More like this...

 

[verygreen]

What does rooted mean? I have never heard that about Tesla batteries or cars. Do you mean access to thew CAN bus?

rooted means you've got root level access on the car computer that drives the big screen. That lets you to see a bunch of stuff. Even jsut connecting to in-car ethernet network lets you see a whole bunch of stuff. Also easier than the CAN bus.