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.
The actual failure mode might that the cars catch on fire and this is 100% defensible step they took to pre-empt that and I think anyone that has an affected car and parks it in their home at night would applaud the move.
What you are suggesting is along the lines of what happened in 2013 with the titanium shield. Tesla temporarily disabled low suspension mode via software update while it rolled out the shield solution. There was some initial outcry which quickly dissolved because Tesla was extremely forthcoming and Elon Musk communicated with owners.

Unfortunately, here we have a situation where Tesla removed 10% of owners' battery capacity without any communication whatsoever and without any reassurance that Tesla was working to resolve the issue. This is much, much worse than temporarily disabling low mode, compounded with the lack of communication and Musk's/Tesla's complete, utter silence on the issue.

There is only one logical reason for Musk to stay silent and not communicate with owners about #batterygate. It would be a game-ender for the company. That is the only logical reason I can see that would compel Musk's silence. Remember, we are talking about a man who generally cannot be told what to do and whose communication is difficult to restrain.

Musk has recently shown a disdain for government regulators such as the SEC, and openly disregards the rules set down by NHTSA regarding how manufacturers are to represent its safety ratings. Even if NHTSA were to open an investigation, which it has not yet done, I fully expect Musk and Tesla to challenge its findings and do everything it can to avoid compliance if it's an existential issue.

In the past I have given Tesla every benefit of the doubt. I've owned since 2013 and excused almost every misstep Tesla has made over the years. But I've also seen the company (and its CEO) evolve over this time. I've seen the dismantling of communication between owners and service, which was not unintentional. There is a method to Tesla's stifling owners in this way. If you make something difficult enough, you'll have a significant number of people give up and not even try. It all seems very methodical.

There was a time when we could escalate our service and vehicle issues to regional service managers. That has long since disappeared. Tesla service will no longer disclose contact information for anyone above the local level. This is very intentional and I don't think anyone need wonder why. It's now fairly obvious.

If it is not a safety risk, the information the NHTSA exposes will help the class action move forward. Tesla will have to explain why they stole from all of us and will have to defend the reasoning given to the NHTSA. If it's not safety, it's probably an attempted warranty skirted action in violation of Magnusen Moss.
I wouldn't put so much faith in the NHTSA. If it decides not to investigate Tesla, which is still very much a possibility, there will be no published findings. There would have been no formal investigation. I'm not sure what information would be available to the public were that to happen, or if inside communications could be revealed through a FOIA request.

Has anyone filed with their State Attorney General on the basis of criminal theft? Tesla reached across state lines to essentially vandalize thousands of owners' vehicles. Doesn't this aspect make Tesla potentially liable for committing a federal crime?
 
Last edited:
What you are suggesting is along the lines of what happened in 2013 with the titanium shield. Tesla temporarily disabled low suspension mode via software update while it rolled out the shield solution. There was some initial outcry which quickly dissolved because Tesla was extremely forthcoming and Elon Musk communicated with owners.

Unfortunately, here we have a situation where Tesla removed 10% of owners' battery capacity without any communication whatsoever and without any reassurance that Tesla was working to resolve the issue. This is much, much worse than temporarily disabling low mode, compounded with the lack of communication and Musk's/Tesla's complete, utter silence on the issue.

Yes.
  1. Stealth SW upgrade removes functionality
  2. There was massive outcry and lawsuits threatened
  3. Tesla explained (eventually) themselves and their plan
  4. Most people were willing to give Tesla slack to work things out
  5. Tesla restored the functionality and fixed the underlying issue
I agree this is worse because the impact is more material and we are stuck at step 2 and Tesla seems disinterested in moving to step 3 (and, now that there are lawyers involved, maybe we'll never get to step 3). My point was that Tesla did not have to look too far back in their own history to find a workable template, especially many of us that went through suspension-gate are now here for battery-gate. Somewhere along the way, Elon got some crappy guidance on how to handle this.
 
What you are suggesting is along the lines of what happened in 2013 with the titanium shield. Tesla temporarily disabled low suspension mode via software update while it rolled out the shield solution. There was some initial outcry which quickly dissolved because Tesla was extremely forthcoming and Elon Musk communicated with owners.

Unfortunately, here we have a situation where Tesla removed 10% of owners' battery capacity without any communication whatsoever and without any reassurance that Tesla was working to resolve the issue. This is much, much worse than temporarily disabling low mode, compounded with the lack of communication and Musk's/Tesla's complete, utter silence on the issue.

There is only one logical reason for Musk to stay silent and not communicate with owners about #batterygate. It would be a game-ender for the company. That is the only logical reason I can see that would compel Musk's silence. Remember, we are talking about a man who generally cannot be told what to do and whose communication is difficult to restrain.

Musk has recently shown a disdain for government regulators such as the SEC, and openly disregards the rules set down by NHTSA regarding how manufacturers are to represent its safety ratings. Even if NHTSA were to open an investigation, which it has not yet done, I fully expect Musk and Tesla to challenge its findings and do everything it can to avoid compliance if it's an existential issue.

In the past I have given Tesla every benefit of the doubt. I've owned since 2013 and excused almost every misstep Tesla has made over the years. But I've also seen the company (and its CEO) evolve over this time. I've seen the dismantling of communication between owners and service, which was not unintentional. There is a method to Tesla's stifling owners in this way. If you make something difficult enough, you'll have a significant number of people give up and not even try. It all seems very methodical.

There was a time when we could escalate our service and vehicle issues to regional service managers. That has long since disappeared. Tesla service will no longer disclose contact information for anyone above the local level. This is very intentional and I don't think anyone need wonder why. It's now fairly obvious.


I wouldn't put so much faith in the NHTSA. If it decides not to investigate Tesla, which is still very much a possibility, there will be no published findings. There would have been no formal investigation. I'm not sure what information would be available to the public were that to happen, or if inside communications could be revealed through a FOIA request.

Has anyone filed with their State Attorney General on the basis of criminal theft? Tesla reached across state lines to essentially vandalize thousands of owners' vehicles. Doesn't this aspect make Tesla potentially liable for committing a federal crime?

I am thinking of having my attorney bring this up with the MA AG. That office loves cases like this.

I am waiting for all diplomatic channels to fail first. But we are very close to that point.
 
Another data point...

I am on 16.2 software and have been since it first released in May or early June. I thought I was unaffected by batterygate so far. After stumbling on this thread in June I have been following it daily, and recording data from scanmytesla as much as possible. I subscribed to Teslafi recently to gather even more data more often.

The issue has always been as the title has said, a "sudden" range loss. Well, I think there is also a gradual range loss for those cars that were not initially flagged by the software as "need to act now".

Here is my data...
I have been noticing my range decreasing over the last 2 months, not by much but by 1 or 2 km every week or so. I assumed it was due to temperature dropping outside.

My last full range charge was on August 2nd on AC, not DC charging. I had 390km range, 4.2 volts max, 71.4kwh (which is the same amount of range that I had for a few months, it was 389km in the winter, went up to 391km as peak in the summer).
After months of noticing my range gradually decreasing, I had to range charge yesterday for a long trip. At 100%, again on the same AC charging method, I am now at 385km range, 4.17volts max, 70.6kwh.

So I went from charging to 4.2 volts max and 390km of range to 4.17volts max and 385km range.
Again, not a sudden drop or a large drop yet, but perhaps those of us unaffected are getting gradual capping?

Screenshots with data attached below...
Teslafi data since September 18th:
teslafi.JPG


Full charge on Feb 15, 2019:
feb15fullcharge.jpg


Scanmytesla August 2nd:
Screenshot_20190802-091726.png
Screenshot_20190802-091736.png


Scanmytesla Oct 11th:
Screenshot_20191011-112200.png
Screenshot_20191011-112206.png
 
I have often asked them why was I capped. They have always said, for the longevity of the battery. When I point out that is what they hope to achieve, not why they did it in the first place, the conversation dries up. Always.

Maybe my reading comprehension is not so good, but I don't understand what you mean by "When I point out that is what they hope to achieve, not why they did it in the first place".

To save me searching back through the hundreds of pages, what exactly are you capped to and which battery do you have? I seem to recall this being a problem with the 90 kWh battery only and the rate was capped at some 80 kW?

I know if I paid this much money for a car and they abruptly capped my charge rate I would be up in arms. Tesla might get away with it on the Supercharger network, but capping your charge rate on Chademo chargers is not Tesla business.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: Chaserr
They aren't trying to hide, they have no clue. They only know what they have been told to say by the engineers/HQ.

Somewhere along the way, Elon got some crappy guidance on how to handle this.

Somewhere along the way things started to change. All the good people are gone, Guillen, McNeill, Straubel, etc. Nowadays, it’s a one-man show, although it mostly comes across as a no-man show. Very sad.
 
The issue has always been as the title has said, a "sudden" range loss. Well, I think there is also a gradual range loss for those cars that were not initially flagged by the software as "need to act now".

I have posted this 100 pages ago but I'm a model 3 owner and my battery capacity went from 100% at 20something k miles to a 8 or 9% loss from June to August/September around the time of that software update. A lot of other model 3 owners are seeing the same especially AWD owners as we didn't get the bump to 325 miles. My battery has since recovered to 6% degradation.

Anyways I'm guessing they did something to the BMS as it is odd that I got 100% all winter and started seeing degradation in the summer. Tesla says my battery is fine and blames it on the warm weather but I'm in Canada and the weather really wasn't that warm.
 
Last edited:
Unless...the batteries are sentient and can think for themselves--capping is the clandestine beginning of SkyNet as they fight back against their oppressors.

[Apologies, thought we could do to lighten things up a bit before the weekend]

just refund me my 2k i gave you to uncork the battery!!

omarsultan charged you 2k to uncork your battery?
 
Another data point...

I am on 16.2 software and have been since it first released in May or early June. I thought I was unaffected by batterygate so far. After stumbling on this thread in June I have been following it daily, and recording data from scanmytesla as much as possible. I subscribed to Teslafi recently to gather even more data more often.

The issue has always been as the title has said, a "sudden" range loss. Well, I think there is also a gradual range loss for those cars that were not initially flagged by the software as "need to act now".

Here is my data...
I have been noticing my range decreasing over the last 2 months, not by much but by 1 or 2 km every week or so. I assumed it was due to temperature dropping outside.

My last full range charge was on August 2nd on AC, not DC charging. I had 390km range, 4.2 volts max, 71.4kwh (which is the same amount of range that I had for a few months, it was 389km in the winter, went up to 391km as peak in the summer).
After months of noticing my range gradually decreasing, I had to range charge yesterday for a long trip. At 100%, again on the same AC charging method, I am now at 385km range, 4.17volts max, 70.6kwh.

So I went from charging to 4.2 volts max and 390km of range to 4.17volts max and 385km range.
Again, not a sudden drop or a large drop yet, but perhaps those of us unaffected are getting gradual capping?

Screenshots with data attached below...
Teslafi data since September 18th:View attachment 465282

Full charge on Feb 15, 2019:
View attachment 465288

Scanmytesla August 2nd:
View attachment 465286 View attachment 465285

Scanmytesla Oct 11th:
View attachment 465284 View attachment 465283
Same boat as you. I've lost 2.34 miles in three months (7/1 -10/1). 3500 miles driven in that time. 2.34 miles lost for 3500 miles driven is extreme. I'm very suspicious. I started logging with tesla fi to get documentation on it. The true range loss is much worse, as I dropped 5RM off the range over night one day and that's what spurned me to start documenting it. ~7 miles lost since January of this year.
 
You expect the service center staff to have any idea why the engineers at HQ did something?



They aren't trying to hide, they have no clue. They only know what they have been told to say by the engineers/HQ.
Yes, I expect the service people and the customer support people to be able to answer service related questions.
They are the ONLY people we can talk to. They are the face of the company. They have had 5 months now to come up with a credible story.
 
How did you generate this report?
Teslafi. It records every charge session and calculates charge at Target in miles/km divided by target percentage to get 100% equivalent and graphs that. Since I almost always charge to 90% I think that graph is at a minimum a good indicator of how my 90% charge has decreased over time.
 
Maybe my reading comprehension is not so good, but I don't understand what you mean by "When I point out that is what they hope to achieve, not why they did it in the first place".

To save me searching back through the hundreds of pages, what exactly are you capped to and which battery do you have? I seem to recall this being a problem with the 90 kWh battery only and the rate was capped at some 80 kW?

I know if I paid this much money for a car and they abruptly capped my charge rate I would be up in arms. Tesla might get away with it on the Supercharger network, but capping your charge rate on Chademo chargers is not Tesla business.
To save you reading through the 6000 plus posts, there are two 'problems' running concurrently.
1. Capping of the battery (batterygate). This is where they have capped the batteries on SOME pre facelift cars with 60, 70 or 85 kWh batteries. But NOT 90 kWh. (This is the problem this thread deals with)
2. Strangling charge rate (chargegate). This applies to a much larger group of cars. (This thread does not deal with this problem, although there are many posts about it, as it is obviously closely linked). I have not heard that Chademos have had their rate capped.

My 70 kWh battery has been capped, from 70 kWh to 58kWh.

When I noticed the capping I asked Tesla why they had done it. They said for the longevity of the battery. That is NOT why they felt they had to cap the battery, that is what they hope capping will achieve. They have steadfastly refused to answer what made them cap my battery in the first place.
 
Last edited: