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.
I think the issue is communication from the manufacturer. They are lying/hiding/not forthcoming/whateveryouwanttocallit with information about this update. For example, if they released this software update to prevent battery fires, what happens to owners that have been refusing to go on V9 software and do updates? Are they now at risk of having a car fire in their garage while they sleep?
If it's not about the fires, then why do this cap at all? Prevent future degration? Well they just degraded them now instead of the future, what's the point in that?
I can't see how you can say this is about expectation. The manufacturer physically capped battery capacity of vehicles they do not own without an explanation. How can you possibly view this as being ok?

Thank you @Lukez. May be he would listen to you :)
 
I am deeply informed on this topic. Read every post.
I understand this range loss is not gradual like owners expect.
That’s my point.

Stop expecting things. Live with what you have. Enjoy driving. Tesla has the safety and functionality of its fleet to manage and so far has shown a will to focus on safety above all other concerns.

I’d be totally fine with whatever Tesla needs to program on my car with respect to safety and long term function.
Gradual loss is not just what we expect but what is written into the WARRANTY.
 
  • Love
Reactions: sorka and Droschke
Agreed with the entire post, except the "hoax" part disagreement. I used it as a noun (you don't see what Tesla has done here all over it?) and not as a verb:

Definition:

Noun: hoax

Something intended to deceive; deliberate trickery intended to gain an advantage
= dupery, fraud, fraudulence, humbug, put-on, spoof

Verb: hoax
Subject to a playful hoax or joke
= play a joke on, pull someone's leg


Ha, fair point, although I stand by my words. Tempting though it certainly is to suspect them of subterfuge, I’m not quite there yet, in relation to the original error. I am persuaded by wk057's view that it was completely unintentional and something of which they were unaware. I do believe they were trying to do a good thing.

I am not at all so sure I am prepared to be so charitable regarding their behaviour subsequently. I do see that as sneaky, underhand, disingenuous and deliberate. The original sin was forgivable, a genuine mistake that they got wrong [who hasn’t done that! :( :(]. But their silence, refusal to reply, dishonesty and deliberate misinterpreting is appalling behaviour. And actually it is that conduct that has turned me away from being a fan of the company into the complete opposite.
 
I am deeply informed on this topic. Read every post.
I understand this range loss is not gradual like owners expect.
That’s my point.

Stop expecting things. Live with what you have. Enjoy driving. Tesla has the safety and functionality of its fleet to manage and so far has shown a will to focus on safety above all other concerns.

I’d be totally fine with whatever Tesla needs to program on my car with respect to safety and long term function.
Well I return to the point that I paid many thousands more to buy a car with a larger battery because of the benefits a larger battery brought. Without asking, and without my permission they have reduced my car to a lower spec model. So at a stroke they have denied me access to a capability which I paid extra to have. You suggest, quite reasonably, that we live with what we have. Of course it is still possible to drive from A to B, even if it means more stops, but that rather misses the point which is we no longer have what we have, or had. It is now less. Significantly less. 16% less in my case.

If the changes were imposed due to safety concerns, that of course would be a different thing. But at the moment there is zero evidence that safety is the trigger. Lots of speculation that it might be, but that's just it. It’s just speculation.
 
Ha, fair point, although I stand by my words. Tempting though it certainly is to suspect them of subterfuge, I’m not quite there yet, in relation to the original error. I am persuaded by wk057's view that it was completely unintentional and something of which they were unaware. I do believe they were trying to do a good thing.

I am not at all so sure I am prepared to be so charitable regarding their behaviour subsequently. I do see that as sneaky, underhand, disingenuous and deliberate. The original sin was forgivable, a genuine mistake that they got wrong [who hasn’t done that! :( :(]. But their silence, refusal to reply, dishonesty and deliberate misinterpreting is appalling behaviour. And actually it is that conduct that has turned me away from being a fan of the company into the complete opposite.
I would tend to agree with you that this update had unintended consequences. But, they have had 12 weeks already. As wk057 said, they have known about this since shortly after the release.
Fixing this should be top priority!

Yet, we have had 5 releases with such important thangs as CHESS!

I will not patiently wait a year (or 3) for them to reverse this. It adds an hour to my commute eveery day. So, 60 hours so far extra time sitting at the supercharger.
 
I am deeply informed on this topic. Read every post.
Well everyone is entitled to an opinion, and to air it, but not everyone has to agree with it.

And I guess that is your opinion, and you have aired it.

No doubt many of the overblown hysterical owners with self generated expectations may not agree with it. But you never know.
 
Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: Droschke
Well everyone is entitled to an opinion, and to air it, but not everyone has to agree with it.

And I guess that is your opinion, and you have aired it.

No doubt many of the overblown hysterical owners with self generated expectations may not agree with it. But you never know.

It's very difficult to disprove the poster you are replying to "Read every post." It's very obvious he has not understood what the negative impact is to the affected owners.
 
Even your reduced capacity is more than the "lower spec model" that has also been impacted. :rolleyes:
Sadly it isn’t. I bought a S70. After only a couple of months it showed 68.5kWh capacity, for 3 years. After the download it showed 58.5kWh capacity, and has remained at that level ever since (3 months). So now I don’t even have a S60. But yes, it’s probably better than an impacted S60 which would probably now be a S51. Maybe a Leaf is better than an impacted S60.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Droschke
Despite Tesla's shady practices, I simply don't see a better alternative. I'm not about to switch to an EV with no autopilot, even less range, and no long distance charging network over this. And I don't consider ICE an alternative- I'm done there.
I hardly ever supercharge, the times I need it I could very easily be accommodated with a CHAdeMO or Combo. Autopilot is not even a remote factor in my decision as the feature doesn't even work properly and is another one of those Tesla things that can get changed (or aspects taken away) without notice (it's still a Beta product, after all).

Bring on the competition!

If our Tesla has reduced that amount of range I’d be Ok with it. It’s still more range than needed considering the massive supercharger roll out here in Ontario Canada.
By association, then, you would be OK with Tesla reducing your range to that of your SmartED if it deemed necessary to do so for safety, right? Or disable your navigation system. Or curtail your acceleration to that of a Prius?

All of these examples live on the same slope. When does it get slippery for you?

Tesla has outstanding experience with managing battery packs.
Managing ≠ stealing

I drive a Smart ED with only 100km range in perfect conditions. I have somehow been able to drive 50000 km in 6 years. How did I get by with such low range. It’s a mystery. Guess I charged up every night.
You also paid 1/3-1/2 for your SmartED that most paid for their Teslas. I guess value and contractual obligations mean nothing to you because, you know, you charge every night.

Driving a low range EV and then getting back into a Tesla is an illuminating experience.
You wouldn’t feel so cheated and bitter if you realized range loss is a thing, and your expectations of gradual loss over the life of the car are not met, but that isn’t a problem, it’s just the nature of the propulsion method and technology of this age. Enjoy driving a car with 5x the range of my Smart. I do when I get in our S85.

Dude, you're talking to a room full of highly educated, well to-do people who likely know far more about batteries, EVs, and the underlying technology than do you. Your past ownership of low range EVs has led you to have very low expectations and standards. Don't foist that on us.

Regardless of your opinion, which is immaterial, Tesla cannot legally reach into someone's car and remove an item of value. That is theft. Period. Full stop. Whether this falls into that category is yet to be determined.

Stop with the drama.
Get out of a thread that doesn't apply to you. Bye Felicia!

It is certainly not a felony, and the EPA rating applies to the car when it is new, not when it is years old.
Do you know of a single vehicle manufacturer who, through an intentional act, lowers your EPA rating after you buy a car?

I then was so tired of the drain I turned OFF data sharing with Tesla (Under Security Menu) and have not seen Vampire Drain for the last 15 hours.
Doesn't this also shut off a bunch of features, like traffic awareness?

I am thinking that Tesla is running all kinds of tests or collecting data related to that sudden loss of range?
After being updated to 16.1 or 16.2 (don't remember) at the service center, I did notice the fans in the front of my car and the entire HVAC system was running full bore to cool the battery on normal city driving, when it did not previously.

Yesterday when I drove my car down to 40 miles, my cooling system was running full blast as well when it didn't before.

I also notice that when I hit the Trip tab on the Energy screen, the grey (estimated) range line is significantly lower than actual. This means the vehicle thinks I'll arrive with significantly less range than actual. Prior to these updates, the estimated and actual were much closer together.

They REFUSED to print the results or let me take a picture of the results screen on their pc.

You should have whipped out your phone and taken a snap. Better to ask forgiveness than permission :)

I also wonder how this factors into the "unlimited" battery warranty, since a battery with significantly lower range than the rest of the fleet is no longer performing as expected and should be replaced?
Read the warranty. It excludes all degradation due to usage. Would this degradation be considered due to usage? That may be for a judge to decide but my hope for Tesla is that it does not go that far. All they have to do is just contact the affected owners and let them know what's going on. If there are so few of them, as Tesla says, then a few phone calls or emails shouldn't be a big deal.

It may be worth remembering that the battery capping issue (as opposed to slow charging issue) only affects, some, pre facelift cars with smaller batteries. So the numbers are always going to be a small % of the fleet. It would be interesting to know what % of pre facelift 85s and below, are affected.
How does one know if one is affected? Would we have to suffer sudden range loss? What if those of us who did not suffer the sudden range loss now suffer slow, gradual range loss as our batteries build up to the affected condition?