Either case the result is not correct.
Giving back the 220Miles at 100% it's a pure mathematical calculation, so why doesn't Tesla send an update to fix it?
Either Tesla made a mistake with the range meter or a mistake with the battery
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
text from service center (downgrade from sr+ to sr)
- Thread starter smashcz
- Start date
Giving back the 220Miles at 100% it's a pure mathematical calculation, so why doesn't Tesla send an update to fix it?
Either Tesla made a mistake with the range meter or a mistake with the battery
The car does take different wheels into account when displaying rated range. It's easy to see the rated range change instantly when I go from 21 inch wheels to 19 inch wheels and reset the TPMS. This is not the same as saying the car looks at the wh/mile you are achieving and adjusts rated range from that information.
Look out everyone we have a Tesla engineer in the house.
It's just like a gas gauge. It takes battery voltage and estimates the number of miles able to be driven based on known max capacity and watts per mile. That's why you can drive 500 miles on the battery if you're all downhill, and only get 50 miles out of it if you're towing up hill.
Similar to a gas gauge, when it's full it shows the needle full. If you calibrated the gauge to show full when the physical tank was only half full, that wouldn't mean you could only drive half the range. It wouldn't magically make your gas disappear or become unusable. It just doesn't know where the true full is.
This is the same thing.
Not exactly.
In your example what Tesla did was not make available part of the gas tank, and recalibrate the gage to show full anyhow. Why doesn’t the gage show full ? Because they shrinked the tank too much?
The system make a calculation according to some parameters.
The point was that the range should have been reduced from 240 to 220, this is what was agreed
This is done reducing the available Kw from the battery.
Now the system using the same parameters used before and looking at how much battery is not anymore available should give 220.
Assuming the battery was not degraded, why does it shows less than 220?
Concern is that more than the needed range has been cut.
Just accepting the explanation as it’s just an indication is not really what we’re looking for. It’s a mathematical calculation, change the parameters to show 220, why not possible?
That is a big assumption. (And is probably incorrect.)
Maybe the range was being incorrectly reported as 240, and not showing the degradation, before the downgrade...
@smashcz So have you actually charged to 100% and driven until the car stopped to see how far you can drive? No? Then how do you know for sure that you can't go the same distance as you could from before the car was downgraded and charged to 90%? (Speaking of which did you drive from the old 90% to 0 to get a initial range?)
And of course your driving conditions between the two tests would need to be identical to actually compare them.
Do you have 1 long continuous drive to prove that you are actually missing 8% of your capacity? I'm sorry, and I am not trying to say you aren't missing 8%, I'm just saying the only way to PROVE it is to drive. And if you are missing 8% of capacity, and it is because of degradation then no software will fix it.
I know it is a pain and you shouldn't have to do it but I see this issue like a lot of issues with any other car...that you kind of have to prove an issue to the service people yourself to get them to do something. I've had to do it many times with various cars, having to prove that the service people were wrong.
ElectricEel
Member
Agreed, we all need to do at least three, from 100% -1%, record our wh/ml and report back.
I'm really tired if everyone's keyboard estimates and guessing. No one in here works for Tesla engineering, software, or Panasonic battery.
Time to get these ankles cracking and get some FACTS. so we can present this to Tesla and get answers.
Some FACTS:
Before downgrading the display showed the equivalent of 240 miles, spot on
After downgrade (same day) the display showed the equivalent of 214 miles, 6 less than expected 220 and is keeping the same value
Batteries do not downgrade 2.5% in 12 hrs.
wh/mi is shown on the same screen that is miscalculating the range, should I trust it?
Additional facts:
Tesla suggested to perform the 20% to 100% cycle couple of time and leaving the car stopped about 6 hrs when reaching 20% and when reaching 100%.
I would be pissed off if I buy a car that is telling me that the expected range is 300miles, but the computer that makes the estimate according to EPA shows 294. So why not saying 1000Miles?
For those that are saying you need to drive to see if you reach 220 Miles, please note that it depends by a lot of factors including but not limited to outside temperature, wind, tire pressure, altitude, speed, weight.
I understand that you can see how much is in theory the battery capacity making the calculation Miles x wh/Mi but it's still a calculation made according to information provided by a calculation that could be faulty.
Question:
How many SR owner sees 220 Miles as estimated range?
i will create a poll, and see if it's just few isolated cases or some more
ElectricEel
Member
A lot of things you said are things people have tried and found to be wrong, cycling the batteries did nothing.
I am asking fellow SR owners to do tests and give proof of real world claims ok n their mileage with wh/mi, plain and simple. If it's getting even close to 200 so be it.
I tested mine today and I am looking at getting 180 total miles at 238 wh/mh.
I'm at my last 20% so we shall see later. It will be test one for me.
My apologies for being brutally honest, but “a lot” means more than 1
Interesting the test you’re performing, not sure it will mean anything to Tesla, since the constant tantrum is that the screen shows an estimate, and the real world test is affected by too many factors, but would be interested to see the results.
ElectricEel
Member
Lol, thank you for your arm chair guesses, you work for Tesla? Are an battery engineer for Tesla? Or work in software for tesla? No, ok please shut up or provide real world information and testing.
Thank you for the constructive feedback.
I provided real world i formation above in the thread, but probably were not aligned with your expectations or desiderata.
My apologies for being factual.
BTW: may you please provide the “lot” of facts that I stated that were found wrong?
when you talk about range, I am taking it to mean the Rated Miles, which is your complaint right? The above statement implies to me that you think being on "the same screen" means their calculations are linked. While that concept may be appropriate(energy screen), the Wh/mile is NOT on the same "screen" as the Rated Miles. The Wh/mile is in the cards section which is not linked as further discussed below.
First off, to be clear, Rated Miles has NOTHING to do with any of your listed factors.
The point of people saying you need to drive to see if you get "220" miles, is that you need to see if you get the equivalent energy out of your pack. What I mean by that is for the SR your pack should provide ~50kWh, SR+ ~54kWh... So if you drive, you should be able to get ~50kWh(220 EPA miles) out of the pack. You verify this by charging to 100% and IMMEDIATELY driving(without ever going into PARK again) as close down to 0% as you can, and then look at your trip meter to get your kWh usage.
Yes, I agree that if there is a faulty calculation everything can get messed up, but you have to prove there is a faulty calculation. But, if you do a long 100-0 continuous drive, and you get ~50kWh on an SR, then the Rated Miles value is faulty. If you do the drive, and the miles x Wh/mi shows more then ~50kWh then either you have more capacity available, or the miles or Wh/mi is faulty. If you drive and miles x Wh/mi is less than ~50kWh, then either miles, Wh/mi is faulty, OR you have battery degradation/loss. Hard to prove the Wh/mi is faulty unless you can prove actual battery capacity first which probably only Tesla would be able to do.
This doesn't explain it correctly. He switched tire sizes. You program that into car and it can change the assumed Wh/mi.
Thank you for taking the time to provide me with additional information and explanation and for allowing me to understand I couldn't express myself correctly.
I know that rated miles doesn't take into consideration an of the factor I listed, what I was saying is that if I can drive 220 miles, or 240 miles, 100miles it's not related with the rating miles. The actual miles driven depends on too many elements, the ones listed above.
My point is that even if I drive till the car stops exactly 220Miles and obtain a Wh/mi of exactly 227.27, I cannot prove that the rated range is faulty, it could be something else that is not correct.
My point is that in my case the rated range was perfect when I was on the SR+ configuration, as soon as I was downgraded it moved to 216Miles instead of 220. So 2 possibilities: either tesla cut too much on the battery or the calculation ofthe range is not correct.
I'm giving Tesla the benefit of doubt to say they didn't cut too much, but then there's something wrong on the rated milles so they have to fix pne of the 2.
Bottom line according to what you explained only Tesla can say how the battery is, do you think the SC can check?
There is a third possibility: The original reporting of 240 while your car was an SR+ was wrong. (Very few, if any, cars don't suffer degradation fairly quickly.)
So, theoretically and I think effectively, all power usage will be accounted for in the trip meter on one long continuous drive. That being said, if you get exactly 50kWh from 100-0% then yes that would be proof that the Rated Miles number is wrong. Now why it is wrong in that scenario is a function of the BMS calculation.
Let me start the following about Li-Ion batteries by saying I am absolutely no expert on the following and I welcome anyone to factually correct any statements if they are completely wrong. Li-Ion batteries do not have a linear voltage curve. They are designed to maintain for the most part a "stable" voltage for most of the capacity. The problem comes because theoretically, if you don't exercise the battery where the voltage curve is pronounced enough, the BMS can lose track of where 100% and 0% is. Just like a cellphone can get down to 10% and then just die because it lost track of how much capacity was left.(I had this happen on my wife's cell phone and had to reset the battery data in the phone so it would re-calibrate).
Tesla knows the secret sauce of how the BMS figures out where the battery level is and I don't think anyone is going to get that out of them. The SC people, in my opinion, don't have any more clue into this than we do. They look for major defects that their testing may pop up and if nothing pops up its a "within normal limits" statement, or they just say something that is inaccurate.
Similar threads
