Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[lightningltd]

So you don't know if you are still capped, or you have a bad brick that is reaching 100% before the rest of the pack.

@wk057 would that even be possible? Could one brick cause that much reported range loss without triggering an error?

Tesla said all is normal and nothing is wrong. I kept asking. I am capped.

 

[maximizese]

That sucks, Droschke. I think I am around 245 miles now. It was 254 when the proverbial hit the fan.

My experience has been similar. 256 rated range around April 2019 with 70K miles on the clock; 236 rated range around September 2019. It's now about 242 but won't charge above 98%. The proposed settlement fund divided by $625 implies there are 2,400 affect Model S owners out there. I can't be help feel like there are plenty more than 2,400 affect owner/leasees.

 

[MP3Mike]

The proposed settlement fund divided by $625 implies there are 2,400 affect Model S owners out there. I can't be help feel like there are plenty more than 2,400 affect owner/leasees.

Not so fast... The lawyers are taking ~25%, $410k, of the settlement funds off the top: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.345967/gov.uscourts.cand.345967.56.0.pdf

 

[wk057]

An SoC imbalance would trigger an alert if that's the cause.

If its the update trying to fix a messed up brick reading, it can take a lot of driving before it gives up.

 

[DJRas]

The voltage limitation does not correlate to the limitation of capacity.

Cell string at zero is 3V. Cell string at 100% is about 4.2V.

A 10% reduction in string voltage would be about 3.8V. that would equate to a capacity reduction of approx 30%.

I do believe some card have had capacity restored with new updates and many charges over time. In my case the improvement is very small, so I can't say for sure.

I also believe some cars do not have their capacity restored. In this case, SMT should show the string voltage to be well under 4.2V, and I think Tesla owes those cars a new pack.

The MaxV was reduced to 4.07V in May 2019 then raised to 4.10V in Sept 2019.

 

[DJRas]

Pool the settlements. hire an AMAZING Lawyer, then sue for the supercharger capping.

My legal team investigated the slowed Supercharging rate.
1) it couldn't be included in this suit because it didn't happen until AFTER we filed suit.
2) there is no documented rate of charge. Even the advertising said "up to" (or some legal loophole like that).
3) there is no reasonable measurement for the loss incurred by slower charging. The court requires this. To some the extra time is enough that they won't drive the car. For others, they just have desert while eating dinner.
4) this case took over 2 years and the effects were well documented (with SMT data). It would be very difficult to find any legal team that would take this on.

 

[aerodyne]

The MaxV was reduced to 4.07V in May 2019 then raised to 4.10V in Sept 2019.

My voltage was never reduced, and my RR is within 2% of new. Capacity of 77Kwh.

Not all cars were capped.

 

[aerodyne]

My legal team investigated the slowed Supercharging rate.
1) it couldn't be included in this suit because it didn't happen until AFTER we filed suit.
2) there is no documented rate of charge. Even the advertising said "up to" (or some legal loophole like that).
3) there is no reasonable measurement for the loss incurred by slower charging. The court requires this. To some the extra time is enough that they won't drive the car. For others, they just have desert while eating dinner.
4) this case took over 2 years and the effects were well documented (with SMT data). It would be very difficult to find any legal team that would take this on.

Thanks for all your work on this. The slow charging is the one thing I wish could be fixed.

 

[lgli]

2) there is no documented rate of charge. Even the advertising said "up to" (or some legal loophole like that).

The advertising said 150 miles in about half an hour. https://web.archive.org/web/20130403021612/http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger
But why does it matter? What gives Tesla the right to downgrade cars they no longer own? To damage private property.

 

[Gixx1300R]

It is still my belief there is something wrong with the battery chemistry of the 18650 cells from 2012 to about 2017 and Tesla knows about it.

 

[DJRas]

My voltage was never reduced, and my RR is within 2% of new. Capacity of 77Kwh.

Not all cars were capped.

That is and always was very clear. Only about 2% of them were.

 

[DJRas]

It is still my belief there is something wrong with the battery chemistry of the 18650 cells from 2012 to about 2017 and Tesla knows about it.

I don't disagree. But, it is NOT dangerous now with the new software.

 

[DJRas]

I received my settlement notice in the mail yesterday.
Believe me, I wish it was more. But it is the best we could do. Tesla (well at least Elon) admitted they did us wrong and they restored our capacity.

 

[JRP3]

Tesla (well at least Elon) admitted they did us wrong and they restored our capacity.

Apparently not everyone's capacity though.

 

[Droschke]

... and they restored our capacity

Except some

 

[Gixx1300R]

I don't disagree. But, it is NOT dangerous now with the new software.

actually the danger is still there, if it wasn't Tesla would have reverted all of the effected packs back to what they were. That has not happened. Either the packs are still nerfed by capacity or supercharging speeds.

 

[DJRas]

As I said, the new software removes the dangerous part.

 

[DJRas]

Except some

Understood.
Tesla has not said what can be done in such cases.
I think the best advise is to schedule with a Service Center.
They SHOULD be able to resolve things now that the whole story is known (at least internally).

 

[DJRas]

We need to have access to see if our VIN is included, and if NOT, then let the court know they went back on the settlement (or lied to the court).

I will ask again about what to do. I think the settlement administrator can and will report to the court on these cases in June.

 

[maximizese]

Not so fast... The lawyers are taking ~25%, $410k, of the settlement funds off the top: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.345967/gov.uscourts.cand.345967.56.0.pdf

You're right. $373K in plaintiff attorney fees, $36K for reimbursed legal costs, $1K service award to Rasmussen, then the remainder ~$625 per 1,743 Model S owners. Still seems like the figure is understated. I'm not sure if I'm in the group. I can definitively say I suddenly lost about 12% range briefly, then restored to where I'm only down 5.5% from before the major limitation. I'm very curious to know how many and what proportion of 2012-2016 Model S owners did not see a reduction in range.