In a statement, Tesla explains that it is a software limitation to optimize for the best possible owner experience that’s within the limits of physics. Here’s the statement in full:
“The peak charging rate possible in a li-ion cell will slightly decline after a very large number of high-rate charging sessions. This is due to physical and chemical changes inside of the cells. Our fast-charge control technology is designed to keep the battery safe and to preserve the maximum amount of cell capacity (range capability) in all conditions. To maintain safety and retain maximum range, we need to slow down the charge rate when the cells are too cold, when the state of charge is nearly full, and also when the conditions of the cell change gradually with age and usage. This change due to age and usage may increase total Supercharge time by about 5 minutes and less than 1% of our customers experience this. Tesla is not slowing down charge rates to discourage frequent Supercharging – quite the opposite. We encourage our customers to use the Supercharger network at their discretion and we committed to doubling the number of worldwide chargers just this year. We also want to ensure that our customers have the best experience at those Superchargers and preserve as much vehicle range as possible – even after frequent usage.” Sent from AT&T Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Sunday, May 21, 2023, 4:49 AM, Josh Landess via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote: Phil, thanks for these points. On the slow supercharging thing, I feel like I've put myself in Tesla's hands, and if I go against them in any way, then I would be at risk of losing the free supercharging, so I am just living with it. With that said, I took some notes (pictures of my dashboard) of my supercharging session 'tonight. started a supercharging session at 44%: 62 kW 76%: 32kW 89%: 18 kW If I combine this with the small size of my battery (~70 kWh when new) then it is arduous to try and road trip. I hate to say it but given the late entry of other manufacturers into this competition with their first efforts (Audi e-tron, etc.) it's hard for a used-car-buyer mentality like mine to justify getting out of the Tesla that quickly. I'm still thinking maybe to buy a ~90 kWh upgrade, until such vehicles as the Equinox come along, and maybe have been in the ecosystem for a year or two (or maybe splurge and take advantage of the tax credit). That may sound frivolous, but another complicating factor for me is that I know I will lose a lot of money going through conventional auto dealers At least with Tesla I know up-front what the financial damage will be. Josh On 5/18/2023 8:23 AM, (-Phil-) wrote: > I have over 3000 salvage and unsupported Teslas connected to my > server, Most of them are older Model S. I very rarely see an owner > need to replace a battery pack. The worst of the repairs needed on > older Model S is the drive unit. There was a known engineering flaw > on units made before about 2015. Followed by occasional contactor > failure. By 2015 the Model S was very reliable, Tesla had fixed > almost all of the problems from 2012-2014. > > Degradation of the battery pack is a pretty slow stable thing, not a > phenomenon where you wake up one day and you need a new battery. > Tesla recently revealed the average battery capacity (and range) > degradation figures. According to what I saw, the average battery > capacity lost after 200k miles is 12%. This jives almost perfectly > with the data I have seen on the ~3000 cars connected to my server. > Article: > https://insideevs.com/news/664106/tesla-battery-capacity-degradation-average-2022/ > > Now the slow supercharging is most definitely a thing. As I said in > my previous email, I routinely downgrade owners to software before the > 2019.16.x "hobble". Almost all of my clients elect to keep older > software when I inform them that moving to newer will only take away > capacity and charging speed and result in a more laggy touchscreen > interface. > > On cars 2015 and newer, they are very reliable. Most maintenance > consists of Windshield Washer fluid, Occasionally a set of tires, and > a new 12v battery every 4-6 years. I also recommend drive unit fluid > changes every 50k miles. Most owners might have to put on a set of > brake pads somewhere North of 100k. > > There is a flaw in the early Model S ball joints and fore links where > they were incorrectly hardened which can cause them to fail suddenly. > I've had it happen on 3 of my cars, and heard from countless others > about this. It's my biggest complaint about the Model S, and I think > there should have been a recall over it. (There was in China for the > same cars). > > Other than that just some minor and relatively inexpensive niggles for > older cars. The door handles, the trunk latch and cinching motor, > power window regulators, Falcon wing doors and door latches on the > Model X. (Don't buy a Model X, It's the most problematic Tesla!) > > The Model 3 and Y are really amazing. They do not seem to have any > common failures. > > > On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 7:42 AM Josh Landess via EV > <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote: > > HI - > I recently started using thunderbird for email and can't seem to > understand how to insert my comments inline with others' in a way > that > is readily understood, but to address a few points from the below: > > - Pros/cons of Tesla and separately its CEO are rich topics to > me. Glad > to see that you are able to look at both. > - the primary point of this thread for me is in my view worth getting > back to for a moment. It is to look at this question (as from the > subject heading) of Tesla wanting to buy out free supercharging. > I want > to emphasize that they don't just want to buy it out, but they > provide > another incentive to get out of the car, which is that the older > vehicles equipped with the full-blown free transferable > life-of-vehicle > supercharging arguably are hobbled enough (and with some strong > question > around Tesla will allow us to pay to improve them) that it is not > worth > it to many of us to stay in the vehicle. I see very few news or > analysis articles which look at the phenomenon of extraordinarily > slow > supercharging of old Teslas that have free supercharging, and so one > thing I don't know is whether this is rare, and more detail as to > what > the rates of charging are of many other vehicle owners. > - related to this issue of Tesla's approach to free supercharging: > * I took a look at Tesla's most recent annual. They do explicitly > talk > about the free supercharging, but I am not knowledgeable enough about > this area of finance to understand how they are looking at it on > their > books: > >https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000095017023001409/tsla-20221231.htm > I've been wondering about this because in theory, arguably, we're > talking about an obligation that they've taken on in perpetuity, or > until all the vehicles are removed from circulation. > * The question is also begged to discuss post-warranty upkeep and > maintenance. If it costs $20k every 5 or 10 years to replace > batteries > and other what-not, then this helps us understand the long-term > value of > the vehicle. On the other hand, for how long would Tesla sell > replacement batteries? Maybe they will not want to make the 18650s > forever. If they offer eventually modifications to allow for use of > 2170 or 4860 batteries, then would they demand that drivers give > up the > free supercharging in return? > * The new Model S and X appear to be in the range of just below to > above > $100k. So, some drivers might want to pay for battery and other > replacement parts for many decades, seeing the vehicle they're > maintaining as nearly as good as a $100k vehicle, and the free > supercharging in some ways making it better. > > > > > > > > On 5/17/2023 2:05 PM, EV List Lackey via EV wrote: > > On 17 May 2023 at 6:52, Josh Landess via EV wrote: > > > >>> "...I don't know that you have noticed, but there is quite a > bit of > >>> Tesla negativism" here on EVDL. I fail to understand it. ..." > >>> > > On 5/17/2023 2:05 PM, EV List Lackey via EV wrote: > > > > I wouldn't say that there's "quite a bit of Tesla negativism" > here. Maybe it > > seems that way to the folks who are devoted Tesla fans and > loyalists. > > > > There are a few of us who have reservations about Tesla's cars, > Tesla, > > and/or its CEO. There are also a few who seem to have > unswerving loyalty to > > the cars, the company, and the CEO. I think that the two sides > probably > > just about balance out. > > > >> As for myself, I have mixed views. They do not balance out to > exactly > >> "equal", but I try to give credit ... I guess I have a summary > view on > >> certain things. > > I haven't taken a survey and I don't plan to, but my impression > is that most > > people here also fall somewhere in the middle. > > > >> In the particular case of the issue under discussion > (incentives for > >> giving up vehicles equipped with the free supercharging), I do > think > >> there is possibly (but not definitely) an element of sleaze to > Tesla's > >> throttling some packs to charge at such slow rates that the > owner is > >> incentivized to get rid of the vehicle. > > I expect that the diehard Tesla lovers will find a way to > justify just about > > anything that others might call sleaze. > > > > Meanwhile, the Tesla skeptics willl say that it confirms what > they always > > suspected. > > > > Let's face it - questionable or sleazy business practice is par > for the > > libertarian-capitalist course. Nothing is more important than > "shareholder > > value," ya know. > > > > In that way Tesla is pretty much like everybody else. > > > > Maybe it's just me, but that seems kind of disappointing from a > company that > > used to talk up how they were going to save the world from ... > whatever. > > > > Oh, also, "Don't be evil." > > > > So it goes. > > > > Thanks to Tesla for advancing the state of the art in EVs, and > for showing > > other automakers, drivers, and *governments* what's possible. > > > > But NO thanks to Tesla for breaking laws - for example VOC > limits - and > > labor standards. I read that they were also hit with more than 800 > > environmental lawsuits in Germany. It's amazing what Tesla get > away with, > > usually with, at most, just a little slap on the wrist. > > > > NO thanks to Tesla for the way they've often treated their > factory workers, > > expecially women and minorities. Lawsuits there too. > > > > And NO thanks to Tesla for control-freaking their cars. As Phil > and Sharkey > > suggest, If they can take away features without asking you, you > don't really > > own your Tesla. > > > > Tesla is far from the only game in town for EVs. USians have > many more > > choices now than 10 years ago, and the selection is even wider > in Europe. > > So I think it's a good thing having a Tesla-preference balance > here on the > > list, and talking about it. That way you're well informed when > you decide > > where you're going to spend your hard earned EV bucks. > > > > David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey > > > > To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it. Use my > > offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt > > > > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > = = = > > > > Fertility is hereditary. If your parents didn't have any > > children, neither will you. > > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = > = = = > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org > > No other addresses in TO and CC fields > > HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org > No other addresses in TO and CC fields > HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230520/a5f59938/attachment.htm> _______________________________________________ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230521/28591890/attachment.htm> _______________________________________________ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
