and what will be the cost of it?I just spoke to Tesla and I have to pay for the repair in full first to unlock the full 75KW battery which the range would be around 249 miles .
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
and what will be the cost of it?I just spoke to Tesla and I have to pay for the repair in full first to unlock the full 75KW battery which the range would be around 249 miles .
212-215 . Tesla said I agreed for the repair and it’s not under warranty and the enclosure is not a defect.
Ha-haTesla Fremont probably shipped my car a battery pack maybe with a mix of refurbished , new batteries. Below is photo of Tesla Giga factory Houston.
If Tesla knew about this fuse box defect and Tesla is giving me a 2nd generation battery pack which relocates the fuse cover to eliminate the water corrosion ,same type of failure , Tesla should repair it free . This is not my fault . Tesla made this defect and should have told me earlier and replaced it free. Right wk057, Recell ??? What do you say?
Good news Tesla Service finally got me the 75 kw battery installed after 5.5 weeks! Tesla says it’s a refurbished 75KW battery with a 4yr/50k warranty , see photo. The reason why the 75kw battery is 11k as opposed to the 60kw battery is 13k because Tesla makes 75kw batteries all the time and the 60kw they would specifically have to build one for me. So I’m going to try to limit my supercharging and charge slow at home with a 120 line or 40 amp so not to charge fast and ruin the battery. I try not to do long trips like going to Florida 12 times like I did with old battery. Keep it charged at 80% most of the time . I think my friend had a 60kw and sometimes he kept it below 50% charge and Tesla replaced his battery in Feb 2022 , it was under warranty so it was free and he said he was only getting 150 miles at the time.The fuse cover is rarely the issue we find. Seems silly to focus on this. I'll bet you $100 to charity that this is NOT what has caused a failure on your battery.
Yes, Tesla did flip this to the bottom of the pack at some point in 2015, but this was for ease of replacement (don't have to remove the battery pack) and nothing whatsoever to do with moisture ingress near the fuse. Any time I've seen a fuse cover rusted/damaged/etc, it's been due to some other issue (moisture from inside, damage from unqualified repairs, etc). The actual issue is almost always the side vents along the rails that fail and allow moisture ingress into one or more module chambers, almost always near the center of the battery pack. (There's a few reasons why this in the location, but perhaps a story for another time.)
The fuse covers are actually usually very well sealed. Even more so than the rest of the battery pack cover. The failure points tend to be the side vents, followed by the through-bolt aluminum fasteners that have an o-ring at the top of the pack. I've yet to find a car where a cell group or other related component has failed without a moisture related cause.
We always update the side vents, or we'll transplant an entire pack of modules from a v1.0 or v1.5 enclosure into a v2.0 enclosure if needed, although generally the side vents are more easily replaceable than a full transplant.
Sounds good, although there's really not much point in limiting the charge speed on regular 240v charging, at least in terms of the battery. Even 240v 72a (17.2kW) charging is just not significant for a 75kWh battery. Now if you wanted to limit the speed to keep the wall outlet or charging plug cooler, that would make sense. However, don't do 120v charging for that purpose. I'd say almost any 240v outlet is safer to use than the general 120v wall outlet.So I’m going to try to limit my supercharging and charge slow at home with a 120 line or 40 amp so not to charge fast and ruin the battery. I try not to do long trips like going to Florida 12 times like I did with old battery. Keep it charged at 80% most of the time .
The car is much faster and heavier , doesn't handle as well due to the weight gain.
Actually the 60 pack in his particular car had all cells populated, but these were different cell types than the 85s produced at the time (lower capacity).A 75kwh battery has 840 more cells than a 60. Each cell weighs about 45 grams, so overall pack weight is increased by about 38 kg = ~84 pounds.
Not nothing, but not particularly significant either.
Interesting. I'd always been under the impression that they made original 60s by de-populating cells in the modules (had seen many references to 384 cells per module instead of 444).Actually the 60 pack in his particular car had all cells populated, but these were different cell types than the 85s produced at the time (lower capacity).
The original pack also used metal module fins and other things.
The 75 kWh pack is actually lighter.
I take it these different cells are the reason there's no demand for or value in old 60 packs?Actually the 60 pack in his particular car had all cells populated, but these were different cell types than the 85s produced at the time (lower capacity).
The original pack also used metal module fins and other things.
The 75 kWh pack is actually lighter.
That's my understanding, too. 14 modules of 384 cells instead of 16 modules of 444 cells for the 85 kWh pack.Interesting. I'd always been under the impression that they made original 60s by de-populating cells in the modules (had seen many references to 384 cells per module instead of 444).
Interesting. I'd always been under the impression that they made original 60s by de-populating cells in the modules (had seen many references to 384 cells per module instead of 444).
I take it these different cells are the reason there's no demand for or value in old 60 packs?
That's my understanding, too. 14 modules of 384 cells instead of 16 modules of 444 cells for the 85 kWh pack.
Looking at the photos, here, you can see the holes:
I guess wk057 is saying there was a revision at some point.
There were 4 different revisions of the 60 pack, two of them had missing cells, two of them had lower capacity cells. The missing cell packs were more prevalent, and the full ones with weaker cells completely suck. Like, really really suck. They also charge one of those variants to 4.3V per cell @ 100% vs 4.2V per cell, which makes a 90% charge closer to a normal 100% charge voltage, greatly accelerating degradation (~1500 cars).
Release order was missing, full low capacity, missing, full low capacity 4.3V.So were the later revisions the ones missing cells (and hence suck less)? (Not good for me, since I have one from the first batch of 60s.)
Whats the most efficient charging ? 40amp or supercharging? those are my options120V charging is the least efficient possible. Basically a last resort setup.
40 amps will put less strain on the battery and be better for longevity.Whats the most efficient charging ? 40amp or supercharging? those are my options
I'm not sure about the relative efficiency between those two, but 40a is what I would choose for daily charging. Daily Supercharging is both inconvenient and not recommended for battery health in general.Whats the most efficient charging ? 40amp or supercharging? those are my options
@markb1 - the part numbers/revisions for the 'missing cell' 60 packs are 1020422-00-A and 1020422-00-B (but need to look in our files to confirm the B revision, 'please hold while we check our records...')
that may (or may not) help you sleep better at night.
@wk057 may have the info on the second 'missing cell' revision as well