There are more junked Tesla cars than ten years ago that’s what I’m saying , more supply!!
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla Service says my Tesla Model S 2013 60 kw Main battery needs to be replaced
- Thread starter AprilDelivery??
- Start date
@Recell is very comfortable with the value we provide to our customers.
as @wk057, @Recell and others have said here (repeatedly?), it’s not always possible to be all things to all people. And though we always aim do our best, there are going to be instances where a pack replacement through Tesla or another provider may be the best option, and we *always* encourage owners to seek the best value for themselves.
as @wk057, @Recell and others have said here (repeatedly?), it’s not always possible to be all things to all people. And though we always aim do our best, there are going to be instances where a pack replacement through Tesla or another provider may be the best option, and we *always* encourage owners to seek the best value for themselves.
Last edited:
Sure but there are WAY more failing battery packs now then there were 10 years ago. Probably significantly more than there are junked Teslas.
Eventually the supply will run out, more are not be adding to the supply, which is why wk057 is working on creating an aftermarket replacement pack.
I would. No question. But yeah, they won't actually sell them.
dark cloud
Active Member
Hmmm, Is there a maximum number of cars to one owner for that quote? If you could ship them a trailer load of cars (with non-salvaged titles) containing failed 60kW batteries... (hint hint, nudge nudge....)
What I find odd is that the OP is in New York: How could it be cheaper for a pack from Tesla for someone on the east assuming the packs are shipped from California?
Another argument made on YouTube that has no basis in reality. The chassis themselves (which is what matters most for crash tests) are identical. All the different packs do is slightly change the base weight of the car, which you can do by loading some groceries or humans in the car. It's not like they crash test with varying amounts of watermelons in the trunk.
I’m not arguing that the cars wouldn’t be safe, or that you or I wouldn’t make the switch. I’m just saying that service centers won’t put a 100 in a 90 without changing the seats, because the crash tested seat combo was different. (and both are 16 module) So now the service center is replacing 60s with 90s without changing the suspension? (14 module to 16 module)
I am genuinely curious since I hear the service centers are putting 75s in 60s. (Both 14) Are the service centers including suspension changes in these quotes or are they more relaxed with individual cars than they were with a publicized upgrade?
Last edited:
The seats are identical also. The only changes between vehicles based on battery pack size are with coil suspension vehicles to tune fully-loaded ground clearance to be whatever is required. The weight differences are pretty negligible even in the worst possible case like an original 60 to a 100. In the bulk of cases a change wouldn't even be noticeable. The crash related systems are identical on all variants, and the software has zero changes depending on battery size. Vehicle with air suspension are all completely identical, as the car just adapts to the weight of the pack regardless.
TLDR: There are zero safety implications in putting different packs in a vehicle, regardless of how it was "born." No additional changes to the vehicle are needed even from a practical standpoint in 99% of cases. (I'd probably suggest swapping the coils if going from a 60 to a 100, but that's not a super common request anyway.)
The max weight delta between an original 60 and 75 is something like 75 lbs... basically a rounding error. In the case of some of the 60 pack variants, the new 75s weigh less than the original 60s due to design improvements... and significantly less than some variants (as much as ~50 lbs or so!) So I don't think it makes a difference either way, and Tesla is just doing this now because there's no production of the old 60s and they're nearly impossible to refurbish.
Based on everything I've learned over the years, I firmly believe Tesla's original thinking on not doing upgrades had absolutely squat to do with vehicle side differences, safety, etc with the pack sizes (since these are effectively non-existent, despite being a potential excuse) and more about driving new car sales. Why would a customer buy a new 100 vehicle for $100k when they can spend $way_less on an upgrade of a vehicle that just missed the mark or whatever the case may be? Even if most people interested in upgrades don't buy new instead, every upgrade is a new car they're definitely not selling. A simply policy decision that costs them nothing and probably contributed to some non-negligible percentage boost to sales.
Edit: Oh, the note about the seat thing finally clicked. Originally there was no combination of software that would work on a 100-equipped vehicle where the seats and a few other things (like, only dual motor) didn't line up. This had nothing to do with safety of general compatibility and was just "we're running out of space on the MCU to cram all of these different configurations into the firmware image." At one point on MCU1 they were pushing it to within bytes of max size. They eventually culled down the firmware bloat and pretty much every combination is available, except for a RWD 100, by default.
davewill
Active Member
Not to mention that they've never had a surplus of battery packs available for such upgrades. I'm sure they wanted them all in new cars.
Most service centers have at least a few battery packs on hand, so I don't think it was ever really much of an issue of supply and more of no real benefit to the company to do upgrades. Why make a couple $k on a upgrade when you can make ~$25k+ on a car sale?
Tesla service said I am third in the que for battery pack and there are three cars ahead of me. There are only three technicians qualified to do the battery pack. As soon they get the battery and parts they will notify me so friday and next week we will see if they get it. I'm not they only one in NY with a failed battery pack , corroded fuse box. Must be 6-10 cars that need battery packs in NY, I'm not the only one.
Last edited:
BigNick
Infamous Fat Sweaty Guy
I don't think this is any different than what would happen if you took a 12-year-old ICEr to a dealer that had a rod punched through the engine block. Sure, they could just order a remanufactured short-block and install it, but they'd much rather sell you a whole new car.
No , Tesla is making more money because they get the battery from a junked, accident Tesla car which is probably free. Or refurb battery ,recycled etc.
Electric700
Active Member
I don't think they would do the first one, but the second one with a refurbished main battery or from recycled materials, yes (fully tested and certified as safe to use in Teslas).
Tesla does buy wrecked/salvage vehicles, for things like the battery pack and drive units. They don't get them for free. (Insurance companies don't give things away.)
Last edited:
I mean... this is one of the core driving forces behind Tesla Insurance. I've never seen a vehicle from Tesla Insurance on IAAI or CoPart... They're making money as an insurance underwriter selling normal insurance, and the rest (as in, when they keep a salvage car) is gravy.
How much longer do you think I have to wait for a battery replacement? I towed the car into Tesla Service on July 20. Tesla said I'm third in the que for battery replacement. There must 5-10 cars that need battery replacement in this Tesla Service Center. I spoke to Service , they said no way of knowing because it is shipped by ground. They said next week maybe. But they have been saying that for 5 weeks!
Similar threads
