Superchargers super-slow

[KOL2000]

In the same boat here and have been quietly watching this thread.

Our recent trip to Arizona was considerably slower in the X than when we did the same trip a couple of years ago in the S.

There is some serious SC throttling going on and I wish Elon would tweet more about this than his fondness for making tunnels or riding roller coasters.

This combined with the completely overwhelmed service centers leaves me baffled on how Model 3 rollout will be anything less than a disaster.

 

[TexasEV]

There is some serious SC throttling going on and I wish Elon would tweet more about this than his fondness for making tunnels or riding roller coasters.

Can we find another term to describe this than throttling? Throttling implies intent, and none of us think the reduced supercharger power is intentional (other than a few conspiracy theorists).

 

[ikjadoon]

Can we find another term to describe this than throttling? Throttling implies intent, and none of us think the reduced supercharger power is intentional (other than a few conspiracy theorists).

True, but not always. For example, thermal throttling is often unplanned.

It may be intentional by Tesla: possibly because of so-far-unknown safety concerns.

Surely Tesla can measure the charging rates, right? Either there is no actual loss of speed, only a limited but not concerning loss of speed, or they actually don't know how fast their chargers are working.

 

[Ulmo]

Fremont SC, #3A, not sharing same number (no one at #3B), had 20kW when I arrived with 56%. Peaked at 50kW. Now at 97% at 36kW. Basically a fast Chademo experience.

Other variables: this is within driving distance of home; when I arrived, half of stalls had cars. Now just me + 1.

 

[calisnow]

Can we find another term to describe this than throttling? Throttling implies intent, and none of us think the reduced supercharger power is intentional (other than a few conspiracy theorists).

Dude's landing rockets upright on barges and building self driving cars - but you think a system wide, persistent reduction in charging power is just some accident nobody back at HQ has gotten around to looking at and/or can't solve? Dude provides us with an unlimited fuel card for life AND unlimited mileage battery warranty - creating an obvious freerider problem - and you think it's some accident that the chargers are operating vewwwy vewwwwy slowly? LOL hey I got some good stuff to sell you over here - step right up and pull out your wallet.

 

[calisnow]

@TexasEV - do the math brah. Pick some random numbers and find what tesla might be spending on electricity alone (not counting wear and tear on the charging hardware and any increased battery wear on the user end from faster charging):

200,000 teslas
1 supercharging session per month average (wild ass guess - maybe the majority use less, and then a few use far more)
$0.13 / kwhr tesla pays for electricity (except actually it's more than that because the fleet is heavily concentrated in California, where Tesla is charging new customers $0.20 / kwhr)
50 kwhr average electricity sucked up in one session

= $3.9 million dollars per month just in electricity provided to a fleet of cars that are providing, drum roll please...

ZERO revenue for Tesla. How much? ZERO! Say it again - ZERO. Repeat after me - ZERO revenue for Tesla.

Add additional variable costs per kwhr "free" juice provided: wear and tear on system hardware, maintenance costs, technician salaries, battery wear for batteries that are under an unlimited mileage warranty.

Let's say additional variable costs are 100%

We are now at $8 million dollars per month down the tubes providing free juice to a bunch of people providing zero revenue.

If you can reduce demand 25% simply by throttling charging to the point where it annoys people enough to pop off the charger sooner than they otherwise would have you are saving:

$2 million dollars per month = $24 million dollars per year.

For a company not turning a profit who is to say that they are not watching every last million every single quarter?

Wake up and follow the money.

 

[calisnow]

You own a limo service that requires a different charging expectation compared to those like me who are only doing casual long distance trips.... Expectations may be different due to this.

Can you say "mindless defense of Tesla in the face of obviously intentional reduction in the delivery of an "unlimited" and "free to the customer for life" resource?

...it is becoming more apparent to me that Tesla is doing something on their side, whether it be to discourage supercharging in general, or to protect the battery or charging gear- who knows. Don't count on getting a statement explaining this change in behavior from Tesla anytime soon. Communication is definitely not their forte.

Exactly. And it is especially not their forte to communicate about something that is going on which saves them money no matter how you slice it. (even if you are a Pollyanna who thinks it's a "conspiracy" to believe that Tesla would try to restrict the quantity of a "free for life" resource which costs Tesla money every second it's delivered).

Why doesn't Tesla list this maintenance information publicly in the UI, so owners can plan their trips a bit more carefully? Instead of requiring an email chain and, apparently, it's been going on for a while.

Why would they do that? They'd acknowledge their network has problems.

...I've ended up in all sorts of oddball situations because of slow SuperCharger charging. I've come to depend less and less on SuperChargers and more and more on EVGO Fast DC chargers. 50kW is still fast from that point of view. When it goes to full speed (97kW), I feel lucky! Your expectations are based upon a reality that no longer exists. ... I read, I listen to podcasts. I don't think that works in a family setting. While you bought out of most of those problems with the higher range and larger battery allowing faster charging, Tesla no longer offers that fast charge capability... Now, things have been sliding. That suggests that Tesla is facing some sort of demand charges or feeder cable issues. I don't know if that's true. I'd love to know what's actually going on. Is "0 users" the new perfect SuperCharger to show up at now?

Depending less on Tesla is exactly how Tesla wants it lol. This is reminding me of Verizon throttling grandfathered unlimited data plan users. Nothing is new under the sun.

 

[luckyj]

Oy vey. Where do these people come from...

 

[calisnow]

@TexasEV - don't retort that throttling supercharging would harm Tesla's image and sales more than it will save money - nonsense. If Tesla is saving $24M / year by throttling supercharging (and I would guess personally they are saving more than that) - they would have to see a corresponding reduction in gross sales of over 5 times that amount to cancel out the financial benefit of throttling.

$125M per year reduction in Tesla sales or more, in other words. Or 1,250 fewer Teslas sold every 12 months simply because the network has slowed down and word of mouth got around.

Bullcrap. Teslas sales growth is on fire and the story which has the imagination of the public and which drives sales is now autopilot and self driving - NOT "super fast nationwide charging network."

You think any rational corporation would hesitate to save money on an unlimited resource that drains cash - while the sales driver is something entirely different that is sold for fat margins as a very expensive $5-$8K option? Wake up man, wake up.

 

[calisnow]

@TexasEV - finally, chew on this. A few years ago Tesla didn't have autopilot, Model X, Model 3 and "full self driving" wasn't more than an unspoken sparkle in Elon's imagination.

What Tesla DID have to capture the press and public's imagination during 2012-2014 was that Tesla had produced the first *long range* EV and had *ALSO* produced a very fast and "free" nationwide charging network.

You had journalists writing articles about Teslas and commenting on how fast the superchargers were (and customers telling each other). At the time, range anxiety was a much bigger deal than it is now, and Tesla did not have the self driving story or other models to drive sales growth. So it would have been *rational* for Tesla at that time to provide the BEST (fastest) free supercharger experience possible.

It is no longer rational for Tesla to do so. Surprise surprise - they aren't.

 

[calisnow]

Oy vey. Where did Calisnow learn to do math? Too late to edit my post several posts up - but I overstated the electricity use in my hypothetical example of a fleet of 200,000 cars, supercharging once per month each and consuming 50 kwhrs per session at a cost to Tesla of $0.13 / kwhr.

I wrote "$3.9 million dollars per month" when this would actually be $1.3 million per month in direct electricity costs. If you double that to account for variable costs on top of the juice it's $2.6 million per month. Throttling the chargers to reduce demand by 25% would result in a savings of only $650,000 per month or $7,800,000 per year. Not nearly as dramatic as my example but still, I think, significant to Tesla corporate. I could tweak the assumptions around to make my case look stronger but that wouldn't be fair. I think my point still stands and I think Tesla is most likely doing this on purpose to save money. It will be *very interesting* to see what happens with the charging rates of the post-april 2017 delivery cars.

 

[TexasEV]

It seems our president isn't the only one who posts conspiracy theories in the middle of the night.

 

[boonedocks]

Conspiracy theorist say that for those of us living in areas where Tesla will be charging by the hour for SC, they have throttled it down just enough to make aN electron tank full cost $1.99 less than filling an ICE car. JUST KIDDING!!!!!!!!

 

[luckyj]

In Soviet Russia, math does YOU.

 

[Galve2000]

That suggests that Tesla is facing some sort of demand charges or feeder cable issues... Is "0 users" the new perfect SuperCharger to show up at now?

This would be my guess. on both counts. I think it has gotten to expensive for Tesla to have 115 kW of power readily available at a lot of these locations and have throttled back. sounds like the golden era of the SuperChargers has finally met the cold hard reality...

very unfortunate.

 

[hill]

"Tesla Superchargers provide up to 170 miles of range in as little as 30 minutes."

If they reduce the charge rate so that this is no longer possible under any circumstance, then they'll be going back on their word. If I pull into a supercharger at 10% and the battery temperature isn't too cold, I expect to get 170 miles in 30 minutes. I usually get that in about 25 minutes when I have a 10% SOC....except for recently.

Main Place Mall, Santa Ana - a dozen spots .... throttled if they're all full, i get that. You pull in @ 4am when there's obviously no one else around but crickets & the parking lot sweeping machine, & only get 120mph? .... and even then, it very slowly works up to that rate? Gotta laugh. Good luck finding a quick place to hook up when 400K Model 3's compound longer charge times.
" ... as much as... " that kind of nebulous charging language may just as easily be interpreted as,
"once in great while - in order to keep valid our statement, we'll crank up the power for 30 minutes MAYBE once a week. The fact that it happens at the time when it's least likely .... HA, we still met the bare minimum"
.

 

[ikjadoon]

This hit /r/teslamotors yesterday, too: A plea for more detailed supercharger information • r/teslamotors

Exact same symptoms.

>I plugged into completely vacant Temecula yesterday at 15% battery, and the initial 110 kW the charger started at slumped down to 30kW. I moved to another stall, same behavior. I called the tesla number to ask what was going on, and the service rep could immediately provide me my answer, he said "Let's see, yeah that stall is currently showing fluctuating power, actually all except 4B are. I'm showing 4B as the only one with full power." I plugged into 4B, and sure enough immediately got 112 kW (highest I see anywhere). He mentioned they have service scheduled for Temecula, but I saw the same problem at this spot a few months ago.

>So why do I have to call for this information? We can see how many stalls are available now, which is nice, but we really need Tesla to give us information about which stalls have full power available. As I was leaving, I saw a brand new tesla approaching with paper tags, and felt bad because that new owner probably wouldn't know what was going on and just sit there at 30 kW.

Why would they do that? They'd acknowledge their network has problems.

Right. This is too common now.

 

[ModelX]

I am charging at 106 kW in 28 degrees in Idaho. I don't think the superchargers are being routinely throttled.

 

[ikjadoon]

I am charging at 106 kW in 28 degrees in Idaho. I don't think the superchargers are being routinely throttled.

From the two Tesla calls we've seen so far, it looks like a growing number of Superchargers are behind on maintenance or have been neglected. Thus, we're behind in car service and we're behind in Supercharger maintenance now, as well.

Shucks, I've always wondered what corners Tesla would have to cut after they hit 370k+ reservations. Did not expect Supercharger charging speed.

 

[jeffro01]

While Tesla needs to publicly own up to why the problems with poor SC performance are occurring, this notion that it's being done intentionally is just well... Stupid...

There is absolutely ZERO reason why Tesla would intentionally throttle SC performance as all that does is cause more congestion, more waiting, and more frustration... Come on people...

What's possibly the culprit, IMHO, is insufficient thermal management that has developed as the connectors wear and ambient temperatures fluctuate combined with the constant use of the system in some locations. As it's been explained in other threads, and possibly in this one as I haven't read the entire 7 pages, the electronics aren't getting sufficient time to cool down between uses which is only exacerbating the issue...

I don't know remotely enough about the design/thermal management characteristics of the current system to question said design but I can reasonably deduce that an improvement in the design is necessary to allow for consistently high performance regardless of use and ambient temperatures...

Jeff