FWIW I have verified that MCU2 CAN BE retrofitted into MCU1 cars and HAS BEEN DONE by both Tesla, and a few others who don't want to admit that they did it.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla infotainment system upgradeable from MCU1 to MCU2
- Thread starter MurrayJimW
- Start date
I can't be to precise but spoke with the individuals directly and saw it in a car.
HankLloydRight
No Roads
I’d have to bet the issue is the cost. They need to make money on it (or at least not loose a pile). If they price too high, people complain. If they price too low people complain they cannot get in to have it done.
mcu replacement is around $3500. IC is around $1500. Just from reading here, no idea how accurate. That’s already $5k. Some labor savings for mcu & icu at same time. Some additional cost for antenna and wiring changes.
Will people pay $5k? I wouldn’t, except if my mcu1 failed.
Isn't that an inevitability, though? Elon's "Should be better at this point" tweet notwithstanding, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that this issue is being addressed except by Tesla making people pay for full replacements of the MCU1 with another MCU1...
That thread has some real gems in it
- "What are the symptoms?" "services and programs not working correct (LTE, wifi, web)" -- must be someone with an MCU2, an MCU1 owner would know the web browser never works
- "well understood problem for embedded systems" -- sure, until you take into account the obvious fact that Tesla's software devs don't have a background in embedded systems and don't understand them.
Trebek1762
Let's play jeopardy
HankLloydRight
No Roads
I've been wrong about many things in my life, but I would imagine that the API between MCU1 and IC is still documented at tesla and thus they could re implement it or possibly even reuse the MCU1 code. The MCU 2.5 would wake up, assess if it needs to drive a 2ndary display or talk to a remote IC, then run whichever code-path is appropriate for a particular deployment. Again, I have no distinct knowledge of this but I imagine the switch to the MCU2 was a twofer -- large part a cost savings move to eliminate the IC computer while also getting a more powerful and easier to develop for MCU.
A MCU1 retrofit project would have a couple key deliverables:
- it works
- it has a long supply chain lifetime
- it is compatible with the 3/y development tools
- it is cheap and easy to install
- it is cheap to make
- it replaces the MCU2 or MCU1
Presumably whoever manages the lifecycle of shipped products (assuming there is such a position at Tesla) is aware that there is going to be a giant stream of dead MCUs coming in the next 0-6 years, some of which are going to happen while the car is on extended warranty and thus tesla's direct problem. Even if owner-responsible repair work, the press of "6 year old teslas are all going to brick themselves and there's no replacement parts to unbrick them" is bad enough that they'd want to get ahead of this.
Last edited:
f205v
Member
I do totally agree with @cduzz
The only possible long term solution is MCU3 (the one they will hopefully deliver with Model Y) engineered to be backward compatible (both hard and soft) with both MCU2 and MCU1
This has already been proposed a few times by different people, but it basically gives a long term stabilised path for Tesla to maintain only 1 version of the software, and will give a good number of costumer a way to upgrade their MCU1/2 (at a cost, obviously!) and keep their cars updated.
The only possible long term solution is MCU3 (the one they will hopefully deliver with Model Y) engineered to be backward compatible (both hard and soft) with both MCU2 and MCU1
This has already been proposed a few times by different people, but it basically gives a long term stabilised path for Tesla to maintain only 1 version of the software, and will give a good number of costumer a way to upgrade their MCU1/2 (at a cost, obviously!) and keep their cars updated.
Is the MCU2 the same exact part between the 3 and S/X ?
I could see a strong reason to make distinct parts because of the volume differences between 3/Y and S/X.
I'm actually surprised that the MCU2 was not designed to be compatible with a "replace MCU1" scenario from the start.
f205v
Member
IDK, maybe is it possible to check it from the spare parts catalogue.
As you say, they should have done it already with MCU2, but they missed the opportunity (maybe they were rushed to go into production as soon as possible).
But now the need for a backward compatible MCU is clear and loud, bringing benefits both to Tesla and to users. Not having it would be a very depressing and un-smart thing.
f205v
Member
I checked the online catalogue, and they appear to be different.
See attached image.
Correct, they are very different parts, and the 3 and Y will use the same mashed together display that's in the 3 currently.
thegruf
Active Member
surely an even bigger issue is SC overload?
Elon already aware that FSD computer upgrade going to further stress SCs when they cant even cope now.
Heck they cant even deliver my inventory order - one more week of zilch response and I'll cancel. Had enough tbh.
maybe they publish a pricing schedule that it starts at $8000 and drops $250/mo until it hits $5k. No refunds, etc.
I just replaced my MCU1 for $2100 with a remanufactured part from Tesla. They wouldn't give me the old part back unless I paid a $500 core charge. The screen was failing and I figured the extra $700 was worth it to change the whole unit.
dark cloud
Active Member
More details please. Was this a re-laminated MCU, or does it have a fresh eMMC as well? Reman from Tesla, or a third party?
Similar threads
