Mar 13, 2015
Saghost We know that Tesla has been putting in battery packs to cut demand charges at most Superchargers. Maybe the reduced rates are something to do with the overall load at the site and/or the SoC of the leveling pack?
I'd be very surprised if Tesla is putting in any sort of throttling on a user by user basis or even as a long term continuous thing for a site - as others have pointed out, it would be a horrible PR issue and is contrary to the entire philosophy of Supercharging.
Walter�
Mar 13, 2015
roblab You folks are also aware that the battery charge rate varies by temp of the battery. If you drive in and sit for a while to let the battery cool, you may start charging at 120, which quickly drops to below 90. If you come in off the freeway after cruising along at 80, your charge rate may be quite low. Tesla is mainly concerned with making the battery last, not with every minute you might spend trying to hurry a charger along.
They also want you to charge at home when you're not doing anything, which is also easier on the battery, and there's no waiting involved.
I hesitate to add, that it has been found that slowing down a few miles per hour can let you skip a supercharging stop, which can save you a lot more time than you lost slowing down. I know, I know. Just sayin'.�
Mar 13, 2015
Benjamin Brooks Yes, this this is widely understood. The new behavior is a hard 60kW limit independent of SoC or temperature, but it's not clear yet the reasons.
Thread should be merged with My car won't charge faster than 60kW
�
Mar 13, 2015
Zarwin The one time I supercharged in exceedingly hot weather coming off the interstate with a low SOC, the supercharger (which was a 120 kW with no other cars there) limited me to exactly 60kw. Next time I visited the same supercharger it was a cooler day and I charged initially over 100kw.�
Mar 13, 2015
gaswalla No way this is true. Folks who have been with Tesla for a while know that the folks that make statements like this at service centers really are not in the know. I would totally disregard these flippant comments.�
Mar 13, 2015
AmpedRealtor This "policy" would make no sense. A Model S charging at 60 kW will take up a stall twice as long, meaning even longer waiting and lines at the supercharger.�
Mar 13, 2015
robby I'm not convinced. That seems too short-sighted to be a real Tesla policy. Take our use case, for example: most of our driving is biweekly trips up to NH via Hooksett. If they make supercharging impractical for us at that station, the entire car will be worthless. Surely there are others who have similar habits for work, visiting family, etc. I think we should wait and see what Tesla has to say about this before assuming the worst.�
Mar 13, 2015
Krugerrand Let's jump the gun, eh?�
Mar 13, 2015
Evbwcaer I'll start by saying I think throttling is not goin to happen, but 60kw may ease traffic on Superchargers.
As somebody who lives in Minnesota, I can't help but look at the NYC/Boston, SW Ca., and Chicago areas and think these Superchargers are not being used by road trippers, but by locals to a very large extent, locals that could be charging at home in many cases. If locals were throttled to 60kw it probably would ease pressure on Superchargers because the locals would not use them. Everything I have said is based off an educated guess, tell me if I am wrong.�
Mar 13, 2015
PunchIT
I live no where close to the 2 superchargers, where I have experienced throttling! I do use these 2 superchargers regularly on my weekend trips as they are on my route.�
Mar 13, 2015
FlasherZ Yeah, let's not jump to conclusions here until we have more data or some kind of official statement.�
Mar 13, 2015
Nigel16494 Actually I thought it happened because Fremont went up to 12 stalls now so maybe limit the power. It is true that 60Kw is the limit for the last couple of weeks for me. It doesn't appear to take a whole lot longer but I guess it should. This is nothing to do with load, I was the only Tesla there at Fremont and 11 open stalls still I was at 60Kw.
I guess Tesla should tell us why since we already worked out it's happening. Maybe they need to give us the technical explanation. I am local to Fremont but having me occupy a stall for longer wouldn't make sense with them also increasing the number of stalls. Also at Fremont they have built 20 HPWC stalls just 100 yds around the corner from the superchargers. They seem to be functional and showed green as I walked around.
EDIT: having read the other thread on the same subject it's seems to me it's the last software update maybe, the Europeans think it's some power provider but I think it could just be a bug (feature). I updated a couple of weeks ago as it happens so that would fit. I am not near the car to get the software level but maybe others can confirm that.�
Mar 13, 2015
hiroshiy In Japan some owners experienced similar limits. My question is why Tesla is doing this.
How is the demand charges structured in the U.S.? In Japan if you go over the last highest demand amperage for like one minute, you'll get a higher monthly basic charge for one YEAR.�
Mar 13, 2015
markb1 It may be they are temporally limiting to mitigate some problem, while they engineer a permanent solution. Perhaps they've discovered a safety issue or a battery damage issue, in which case they should do whatever they can to prevent the issue.�
Mar 13, 2015
fadkar I will hold in my infuriation until I see an official word from Tesla. If they do change the rates, I'd be pretty pissed off.�
Mar 13, 2015
nleggatt There's no way this is true. And if so they just destroyed their market. I make a frequent commute where I use two supercharges to get their. If they throttle the sc and it adds an hour to my trip (or more because of both) I would be furious.�
Mar 13, 2015
Obsoletion Here is a pic to show what i am getting. I had not been driving fast or hard and it was only 78 out
- - - Updated - - -
And, seriously Tesla, IF this is true, why would they not have an announcement BEFORE implementing it? Why allow your customer and your service centers waste their time trying to figure out what is going on?�
Mar 13, 2015
Benjamin Brooks No way it's true? Just in disbelief?
There are at least a half dozen owners reporting here on TMC recently hitting a 60kW hard limit at specific SuperChargers.
So I believe it's true. We just don't understand why quite yet.�
Mar 13, 2015
TaoJones Yet another completely avoidable detail to add to the list of things to resolve, or not, before the end of the 90-day "happiness guarantee".
No way should this have come from an SvC before some sort of mothership announcement.�
Mar 13, 2015
Archer Just charged tonight again in Oxnard and got 100KW. Again, what SC are you experiencing this at?�
Mar 14, 2015
Archer I think it would be a big mistake if TM does this. There are owners, like me, who drive a lot for work. 2-3 days a week, I travel 200+ miles around SoCal and by the time I get to Oxnard, which is 23 miles from home, I sometimes have 15 miles or less remaining. And on the rare occasion, I sometimes have to turn around and drive back to LA. Throttled charging would seriously be disruptive and does not make any sense since congestion is not an issue at any SC except for SJC. If this is real to discourage local charging in favor of long distance travelers, why continue to build out SCs in the SoCal? According to TMs map, there are going to be 7 SCs in the greater LA area by 2016.
Also, why would TM presume to know any local's lifestyle? I go out with my wife at least once a week and if I could not get max charge at Oxnard that would seriously screw up our plans: restaurant reservations, childcare provider, movie showtime, etc.�
Mar 14, 2015
FlasherZ Denarius charged at > 60 kW and is 20 miles from his SC. My car won't charge faster than 60kW - Page 15
AmpedRealtor charged at > 60 kW and is 2 miles from his SC. My car won't charge faster than 60kW - Page 12
Both ref this thread.
Not enough data points yet to conclude. Please help stop the crazy speculation! Data points welcome, along with data analysis to help reach a conclusion, but be prepared to address the entire data set in this topic. Avoid open speculation without data to back it up.
- - - Updated - - -
Good idea. I wouldn't point them at this thread, but I would offer a note saying that you have read that there seems to be a wide range of owners who are experiencing limited charging rates at superchargers, getting 60 kW charging power maximum, and that there doesn't seem to be any sort of pattern to it yet. Explain that one owner was told by a service center that Tesla was working on some sort of policy with regard to limited Supercharging rates, but it has not been corroborated, and that you would like a firm answer as to whether this is a bug or something Tesla is introducing before you feel comfortable accepting your car. Then see what they say in response. I wouldn't pose it as a demand for something in writing, but rather just as a simple query.�
Mar 14, 2015
bxr140 Why? Who cares if someone speculates on an interesting phenomenon? Its just the internet...�
Mar 14, 2015
FlasherZ Because it reduces the signal to noise ratio and stirs a bunch of people up for no good reason. No need to deal in that kind of BS (especially when the data disproves the speculation but is overpowered by the emotion).�
Mar 14, 2015
ION eDRV +1....�
Mar 14, 2015
vvanders Charged ~1 hour ago at Centralia SC 114kw with 25% SOC and < 60mi to home. If they're throttling its not on the 85D.
Given the inconsistencies I'm leaning towards software bug but hopefully we'll get official word soon.�
Mar 14, 2015
mkjayakumar I still don't see what is wrong in having a nominal cost for local users? Discourages free loaders, and should have minimal impact on apartment dwellers. At $.10 per kWh someone exclusively charging at a local SC would end up paying around $25 per 1000 miles, compared to $125 on gasoline.�
Mar 14, 2015
ION eDRV -1....�
Mar 15, 2015
tonl My fw is 6.1(2.2.173) and a s85.�
Mar 15, 2015
J1mbo Tesla installed a number of superchargers, a few miles apart, all over London *specifically* for local users to charge. Home charging just isn't an option for many people here.
Why go to that expense of setting up a convenient infrastructure for locals and then deliberately crippling it? I just don't buy it.�
Mar 15, 2015
docrice Just got back from the Fremont Supercharger (I live 10 miles away). I was the only one there again and this time used stall 4A - full speed charging. Ambient temp was 66 F and at around 55% SoC I was getting about 75 kW. Perhaps it's stall-dependent, or Tesla's experimenting with the stall throughput settings � or they've been reading this thread. Or something else. S85 running .179 firmware.�
Mar 15, 2015
Matias It would be changing the contract retroactively. People who have purchased 85 or 60 with supercharger, have signed a contract with Tesla with free supercharging for life.�
Mar 15, 2015
Thud Using a service that you already paid for in advance is not the same thing as freeloading.�
Mar 15, 2015
SW2Fiddler "Right" or "Wrong," adding a cost would require a change in written policy regarding Models S at Tesla Superchargers.
True or coincidental and speculative, Limiting wattage at any Tesla Supercharger would NOT contradict the wording on the TM Supercharger web page as noted upthread.
Adding a cost, locality-based or otherwise, for future models would also not contradict the web page wording:
How much does it cost to use the Supercharger?
Supercharging is free for the life of Model S, once the Supercharger option is enabled.
Why is it free?
We want to encourage Model S owners to take road trips.
Will it always be free?
Yes, Superchargers will be free to use for Supercharging-enabled vehicles for the life of Model S.
Just Read The Instructions!
�
Mar 15, 2015
Depeche Mode oh geez...
-100�
Mar 15, 2015
hiroshiy My data points in Japan.
Grand Hyatt SC 50kW only
I'm from 4.3km from this Supercharger.�
Mar 15, 2015
Nigel16494 I am waiting for the Tesla announcement. No question this 60Kw limit is happening. The only reason I came looking on the thread was that it was happening to me. Now I found a lot of others I kind of feel better and won't book it into a service center just yet. Making local people charge longer at Fremont just adds to the misery of everyone else so it wouldn't seem a wise move. The other thing I noticed since the last update was that now I don't have full regen when the battery is coldish, the yellow line appears that normally says the battery is too full to accept maximum regen. Since my garage only gets down to about 50F I am not sure what is going on there either. The yellow line goes away as I drive a bit. So with the 60Kw limit and yellow line appearance someone is playing around with the battery software.
I do hope they come clean soon or we'll all have to flood the service centers with our cars and that's not good either.�
Mar 15, 2015
bxr140 No, it doesnt.
Discouraging well intentioned dialogue has always been a bad idea.
- - - Updated - - -
That happens (and has always happened) with a lot of people. Could be your software, could be coincidence.
Somewhat related, In my ~1500 foot morning descent I can pretty much always get regen limiting to pop up (near the bottom of the hill) regardless of soak temps or ambient temps or SOC. It goes away seconds or minutes later.�
Mar 15, 2015
Krugerrand I'm not convinced that much of this dialogue is 'well-intentioned'. In which case it's just talking to hear one's self talk (or it you'd like, more accurately, to see one's self in print).�
Mar 15, 2015
bxr140 Sure it is. Being wrong and being honest are not mutually exclusive. Let people speak up. Who know's what kind of brilliance they'll stumble upon.
And...no need to fear nefarious/malicious intentions. They will be handled on the internet as they always have been...�
Mar 15, 2015
tga Maybe the mods can add a wiki to the front of the thread, and we can collect observations/data there. At least that would provide localized high S/N, even if the rest of the thread degrades...�
Mar 15, 2015
dsm363 Whatever changes are made should be for all cars built or reserved after a certain date. Only way to keep their promise.�
Mar 15, 2015
bxr140 Even if throttling locals turns out to actually be true and permanent, what promise are they breaking?�
Mar 15, 2015
FlasherZ Can you show me the part in your MVPA or other contract that says that Supercharging has a minimum power delivery? Take a look at the 90 kW "A" pack thread for more conjecture on that particular subject. 60 kW is still supercharging. Slower? Yes. But "changing the contract retroactively"? No. "Free"? Yes, still free. "Supercharging"? Yes, you're still getting a rate faster than anything else out there. "For life"? I don't see any limits yet.
And, of course - and I'll say it every time I post on this thread until the data points to something differently - the data collected still doesn't prove nor disprove any particular theory about why certain cars are being limited at certain superchargers, including a theory about local supercharging. We have frequent SC'ers not being limited, and non-frequent SC'ers limited; we have people 2 miles from their SC who are unlimited, and people 60 miles from theirs who are limited. Conjecture is fitting an emotional narrative rather than a rational approach to the data - a lot of heat rather than light.�
Mar 15, 2015
Cerie Just adding a data point, I was charging last night at the East Greenwich, RI supercharger with 108 miles left and it would only go up to 60 kW. I was the only car there out of 8 stalls and tried two different pairings with the same results. Model S85, November 2014 build and my home is located about 40 miles away from this charger. I am not a frequent user as I think I've only used superchargers maybe 5 times max since taking delivery and regardless of whether or not it's legal for them to do this, it is a dick move to advertise a full charge in 45 mins (half charge in 20) and then throttle it later on. There are too many over zealous fanboys that will excuse anything Tesla does even if you wouldn't accept this kind of behavior from other companies. We were all told before buying the car how long it would take to supercharge and if they had added "but we reserve the right to throttle in the future", it would definitely have affected my decision to purchase. This is an issue of goodwill and nothing else.�
Mar 15, 2015
Matias I responded to mkjayakumar's proposition of collecting a fee for superching.�
Mar 15, 2015
Cosmacelf Were you heading back home, or heading out somewhere?�
Mar 15, 2015
Matias Many promises on this page
Supercharger | Tesla Motors
"You simply plug in, walk away and in approximately 30 minutes you have enough range to get to your destination or the next station"
If you arrive with empy pack and max charge rate is 60kW, I think this is not true.
That page also doesn't say, that Tesla may limit your charge rate based on some decision.�
Mar 15, 2015
Cerie Heading back home after going to Providence.�
Mar 15, 2015
bxr140 That doesn't hold water. There are plenty of real world (meaning: not corner case) situations where a 'standard' charge rate for 30 min won't get you to the next station. Also, note the CYA of "approximately 30" in the text you quoted from that page...
What other promises do you think they are making and breaking?
Don't get me wrong, I think its a shifty move to throttle locals without telling them (if that's actually what's happening), but I also trust that Tesla is smarter than me. I'm confident that whatever they may implement will improve fleet satisfaction, even if its at the expense of a few disgruntled locals that have to spend another 5-10 minutes charging. And so my position here is clear, I'm affected--I local supercharge probably once every 10-12 days or so.�
Mar 15, 2015
Cosmacelf Yeah, I wonder if that has something to do with it. You didn't need the charge. I too was heading home 2 weeks ago, 110 miles to go, 150 miles in the battery and was limited to 60 kW as well. The car knew where I was going since I had home set in the nav.�
Mar 15, 2015
JRP3 I wonder if this may be a temporary side effect or in some way related to the upcoming announcement? http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/44362-Elon-About-to-end-range-anxiety�
Mar 15, 2015
Cosmacelf Crap, that thread, which started this morning, is now 13 pages long already.
But yeah, I strongly suspect that Tesla has been beta testing, or A-B testing, or whatever a new system whereby, if you have a destination in your nav, it'll more accurately estimate energy usage and direct you to chargers along your route IF YOU NEED THEM. If you don't need them, it won't suggest Superchargers, and indeed, will limit charging speed if you do stop at a Supercharger. This will be spun in a way to ensure that people that really need the charge will have access to the full charge.�
Mar 15, 2015
dirkhh I was also struck by that coincidence.
But as much as I try, I can't see how this helps. Even if they slow down locals charging (and we have no proof that that's what they are doing), how would that help? Especially since they seem to do this even when the person is the only one charging at an otherwise empty supercharger.
Based on our experience with Tesla so far, I think we are missing a piece of the puzzle. They have a history of making changes that negatively impact owners without communicating why. See the temporary end to lowering smart air cars at speed. See the removal of the ability to roll down the windows from the keyfob. See the 90kW limitation for A batteries.
I haven't read every single of the 212 posts in this thread... I'm wondering if there is something else that is common among these cars... has anyone who had the charge limit received the contactor replacement? Do these cars have a similar range of battery serial numbers? Is it possible that Tesla found an issue with some part and wants to limit people until they can be replaced?
Just throwing out ideas. Mainly because I don't want to believe that they would slow you down when you are too close to home...�
Mar 15, 2015
AmpedRealtor Well, given Elon's announcement coming on Thursday, perhaps there is a tie-in with the 60 kW policy of discouraging local use. So in that respect, the service center would have been correct and this announcement could be a good thing overall for the supercharging experience. By the time Thursday rolls around, we will be speculating that Tesla will be beaming power to each car via satellite... lol�
Mar 15, 2015
JRP3 Tesla may simply be experimenting with different charge throttling and unintentionally limited some cars to 60kW temporarily. I can't see any rational reason to do it permanently, and since I don't think Tesla is irrational, I'm rejecting that possibility.�
Mar 15, 2015
AmpedRealtor Not doubting you at all, I've heard crazy things come out of my local service center that weren't really the case. I suspect the reality is somewhere in the middle. Yes, there is probably going to be some policy put in place regarding the 60 kW charging, but it will be done with an eye towards helping long distance travelers reduce their wait time. The mention by your service center that a policy statement was forthcoming would point to Elon's press conference this coming Thursday. The two have to be related, but the policy won't be what we expect. Tesla wants to reduce, not increase, our travel time.�
Mar 15, 2015
dirkhh I like the way you think! Yes, that is a good explanation that combines both of the threads.
It's not perfect (as faster supercharging doesn't "end range anxiety"), but maybe the faster supercharging is simply part of a multi aspect solution.�
Mar 15, 2015
AmpedRealtor That sounds like a typical decision from someone who doesn't put much value on traditional marketing and advertising. Musk admitted that in China they have a name recognition problem. The easiest way to change that is with an advertising blitz. However, that doesn't seem to be anywhere in Tesla's plan for China, and I think that's a mistake.
- - - Updated - - -
I charged at 93 kW with a 42% SOC yesterday, less than 5 miles from my home at the Buckeye supercharger. I rarely use Superchargers, so perhaps they are throttling those who live within a certain radius and who also use the Superchargers within that radius beyond a certain threshold?
- - - Updated - - -
I think that Tesla has a right to manage its network, doesn't it? If it sees usage that it defines as "abuse", it can throttle those users. That's not unlike your cell phone provider throttling your bandwidth on an "unlimited" data plan if you exceed a certain amount of GB.�
Mar 15, 2015
Larry Chanin I have asked four of our club members who live near Superchargers to provide their findings to me on this subject.
Here is the first response from a club member that lives 4 miles from the Port Saint Lucie Superchargers.
He is on v6.1(2.2.115) of the firmware.
He drove a little over 40 miles before charging in 80 degree weather on Charger 2A in Port Saint Lucie.
The charge rate quickly went to 111 kW then leveled off around 105-109kW for the first 5-10 minutes.
This is the first time he has used the Supercharger in about a month.
Larry�
Mar 15, 2015
Cosmacelf My current working theory is that the car will throttle to 60 kW if you have a destination set in your nav and you have enough charge to reach that destination. That would explain the apparent random throttling.�
Mar 15, 2015
ecarfan That is the most interesting theory I've heard so far.
At the moment I am working 74 miles from home. I left home with about 240 miles of range. I don't need to charge to get home, I have 150 miles of range shown as remaining. . But I am going to stop at the Petaluma charter on the way home and see what charging speed I get.�
Mar 15, 2015
bollar That was not the case for me yesterday in Ardmore, OK. I had enough charge to make it home and I did have "home" plugged in as the destination. Max charge was 97 kW.�
Mar 15, 2015
Archer And how can TM possibly determine what constitutes "abuse" without seriously screwing people who need access to the local SC because of their lifestyle? Just because someone is only less than 60 miles away from their home doesn't mean that they have the luxury of going home to charge up adequately. For example, owners who aren't intending to go and stay home for the day and can then charge up at night at a lower utility rate.
- - - Updated - - -
That would mean that TM assumes all you need is enough to get to your destination. What if there's no charging at the destination? What about afterwards? There is no logic to limiting max charge based on an algorithm that would have to accurately predict your needs and behavior after SC.�
Mar 15, 2015
redi Not sure about that. I visited the Ardmore OK Supercharger (new 135kw) yesterday on a round robin trip and had about 30% left and not enough electrons to make it home. I happened to have visibletesla on at home and noted the following.
At about 13:20 I noticed the slow rate and moved to another unloaded charger (you can see this in the graph) and I did not fare any better.
Maybe it is just me but I cannot figure out why I charged slowly while others visiting that location (bollar, Danal) in the same general timeframe charged normally. And I have not visited a supercharger since last November. I'm not attempting to fuel the conspiracy theories, but the data is the data.
�
Mar 15, 2015
tonl
Hi Cosmacelf.
I have the same problem and didn't set any destination on my nav/gps when I used my nearest SC..�
Mar 15, 2015
omarsultan Hit the Fremont SC on Thursday - saw my usual charging rates - no throttling.
O�
Mar 15, 2015
tonl Hi again PunchIT
I have new data and theory here. I charged on the nearest SC as I mentioned on my previously post. I tested out a theory. On the navi I deleted my home adresse. I got 114kw when I charged at the nearest SC where I got the 60kw limitation for past 3 weeks. I'm not sure this is just a coincidence or not. I'll set my home adresse back on navi and test it again. My FW is 6.1(2.2.173). I got 60kw limitation after I got the latest FW.
�
Mar 15, 2015
Klaus I wouldn't mind having my theory (post #113) confirmed.
How else could Tesla check for "charging close to home"? Frequent charging at the same Supercharger doesn't necessarily mean it's convenience charging close to home (not that this might not be necessary in some locations ...)
I have a feeling we're going to find out on Thursday.�
Mar 15, 2015
ecarfan To add to my earlier post (below): right now I am at the Petaluma SC charging at 71kW. Started charging with battery at 51% and navigation destination set to "Home" which means 56 miles away. So I am not being limited to 60kW despite having plenty of charge to complete my trip home.
�
Mar 15, 2015
PunchIT Well, I experienced throttling at superchargers 100 miles and 200 miles from the home location in the Nav system!! Your theory, not correct!
Edison, NJ and Delaware, are the only two superchargers I have used in long a while(~7 months), so I think frequency of charging at the same location can be a factor.�
Mar 15, 2015
KalOrtPor I agree with Archer, I don't see how an announcement including 60kwh throttling could be spun in anything but a negative light. I would rather it be a technical cause as the explanation. What constitutes "local" and "heavy use" anyway? How Tesla would make that determination might seem arbitrary and unfair to some....People who take regular long-distance road trips could still fall under that, as could someone who drives to multiple destinations in the same day over greater distances. What if you're coming home from a meeting over 100 miles away to pick someone up and need to head out somewhere soon afterwards? What if your job has you meeting with clients all over the place and you rely on the superchargers to get from place to place in time? Is that abuse? Elon said use it as much as you like. So many lifestyle differences to base assumptions on.
I know throttling is not technically violating "free supercharging for life" and it wouldn't be the first time the company changed things on people, but Tesla didn't get where it is today by treating customers in a way where they felt they had to read the fine print carefully or they'd be swindled. I just wasn't led to believe from the sense I got early on that Tesla would do something like try to play detective with who should be using the superchargers and who shouldn't. It feels like they went out of their way in the beginning to make people feel comfortable on the idea of superchargers with no strings attached, as I'm sure many people took them with a grain of salt, especially the "free for life" part. Would one expect Tesla not to honor the infinite mile warranty if a car has 500,000 miles on it? The idea of throttling just feels disingenuous and counter to Tesla's past customer-friendly, benefit-of-the-doubt image. At best throttling is an inconvenience, at worst there is no workaround and people can no longer use the car as they were able to before. That goes against the ideal of Tesla not needing an ICE backup.
I also believe using throttling as a means of discouraging is backhanded and shortsighted. I can imagine how a S60 user who paid the $2,500 outright might feel knowing they're now being "discouraged" from using them, which some people had in the back of their minds all along. What will happen is the majority, some if not most out of necessity, will not change their charging habits and just take longer, wasting their own time in lesser used areas, and tying up the stalls for everyone else in busier ones. Lose-lose.�
Mar 15, 2015
Johan If Tesla were to actually limit/throttle supercharging deemed "excessive" close to home I would be very, very concerned and I'd very seriously have to consider getting out of my entire TSLA investment.
If the SC network gets overwhelmed at certain places during certain hours there are only two solutions worthy of Tesla: build more stalls + charging sites and make the SCs charge faster (not slower!).�
Mar 15, 2015
Larry Chanin A number of us have posted photos of the dash board showing that some people who live near Superchargers are NOT being throttled. If we take Obsoletion's report at face value the Tesla service advisor is saying Tesla is responsible for limiting the charge rate, but he is NOT sure why.
I'm inclined to follow Walter's general line of reasoning. IF Tesla is responsible for this a simple explanation is that they are trying to save money on demand charges. Therefore, in this scenario when they apply charging rate limitations it would have no relationship to where you live or how often you charge, but rather it would depend on the real-time activity at the particular Supercharger. When a Supercharger is busy it would be more likely to be throttled than when it is not busy. People who live near Superchargers are more likely to charge frequently at Superchargers. People who charge frequently are more likely to occasionally run into a situation where demand charge throttling is being applied.
That's my current theory. :wink:
Larry�
Mar 15, 2015
KalOrtPor Well, there was grumbling in the beginning as it became known charging speeds slowed due to paired stalls, tapering, colder weather and such. But those were known quantities that were technical limitations. An effort to discourage certain users seems self-serving, contrary to however such an announcement might spin it. If a supercharger with 10-12 stalls frequently gets used to 100% capacity and the charging prioritizes longer distance travelers somehow, I can understand that. But not to be the lone car at a SC finding your speed artificially reduced, amid rosy talk of future efforts to bring even faster charging speeds.
Larry, your explanation then seems to make much sense, as there's no other benefit I can think of. Tesla has traditionally emphasized customer experience and goodwill (unlike companies like Comcast) over blind pursuit of profit and pennypinching, so an initiative like this would be somewhat of a departure from that.�
Mar 15, 2015
dirkhh But here's the counter intuitive problem... if you throttle users at a crowded supercharger, unless you are able to drive them away, you risk INCREASING the wait time... The one thing that would ever so tiny slightly make sense if you have a paired situation, a "local" (whatever that means) user is there first, a second "non local" car connects to the second charger and the charge for "local" drops to give more power to the "non-local" driver. But that is NOT what we are seeing.
I am much more inclined to say that we are seeing an unintended side effect of something else that they are testing...�
Mar 15, 2015
Larry Chanin Well, there are a few explanations that occur to me:
1) Tesla is responsible for charging rate limitations beyond normal tapering and ambient temperature reasons
A) They are trying to save money on demand charges
B) They are trying to adjust some owner's charging behavior
2)Tesla is not responsible for any of this and some of us are hallucinating. :wink:
I vote for 1A. It may be a departure from the past, but it is a publically traded company and it can't continue indefinitely to burn through cash without adjusting its strategy.
Item 1B would in my opinion, be an incredibly stupid public relations move and not worthy of Tesla.
Item 2 in my opinion is highly unlikely
Larry�
Mar 15, 2015
FlasherZ And today at Springfield, IL, new supercharger (few months):
�
Mar 15, 2015
dsm363 Technically nothing if this is true which I doubt it is but it's the least likely to cause drama among current owners. They really only promised free for life of car.�
Mar 15, 2015
Obsoletion The demand savings doesn't make sense as the demand charge is determined by the maximum 15 min load over the entire month. So only throttling some wouldn't change that�
Mar 15, 2015
Larry Chanin Demand charges vary with utility. Mine measures demand over a 30 minute period.
In either case though throttling would limit demand charges. In one case the car could be pulling about 120 kW, in the other it is limited to just 60 kW. The demand is additive, if there are multiple cars charging at the same time overlapping the measuring interval.
Utilities measure the average demand over the demand interval. If a Model S arrives at a Supercharger with a very low state of charge there may be virtually no tappering of the charge rate during the demand measurement interval. Normally that could be at close to 120 kW and it could register very close to the full 120kW demand particularly in the case of a short measurement interval like 15 minutes. On the other hand if that same car were throttled to 60 kW you can see that Tesla would save about 60kW of demand charges if that happend to be the peak for the month.
Larry�
Mar 15, 2015
hiroshiy Demand charges are different from utility to utility, country to country. For example in Japan we have 30 minutes interval system but that effects for ONE YEAR. So if a SC station becomes full just once, you get highest demand charges and the rate won't change for a year. Throttling isn't effective at all in this case.�
Mar 15, 2015
Larry Chanin If throttling were in effect during that particular peak demand period for the year then it would have had a positive effect by lowering the peak demand.
To be clear, I'm not advocating that Tesla should implement such a program. I am merely pointing out that it can save them money at the expense of customer convenience.
Larry�
Mar 15, 2015
mkjayakumar for those that have said -1 and -infinity on my suggestion that locals should be charged for SC access, because it violates the contract, you have only two options (speculating):
- Insist that Tesla honor the contract of free charging for life, but be prepared to stay longer at the local SCs with slower charging, ironically sipping more coffee and spending more than what you would have paid on a reasonable per kWh rate.
- or, accept a new contract that states that you will charged for local SC access with no charging rate cap.
Tesla might provide these two options for new customers (or even to existing customers), either to take the "free" contract with the charging rate cap, or a contract that will cost you some money on the local SCs (perhaps not more than what it would have cost you at your house if you had a garage) but with no restrictions.
Face it, we all knew the free for life is sure to hit a wall sometime soon.�
Mar 15, 2015
apacheguy I'm not sure I agree. The SpC funds are directly proportional to sales of new cars. Thus, as long as everyone is contributing to the network, it should not "hit a wall sometime soon" as Tesla will be able to continually expand their resources.�
Mar 15, 2015
Klaus I'm ok having the theory rejected. But until you try it with your home location deleted you haven't disproven it either :wink:�
Mar 15, 2015
ecarfan After reading though this entire thread I am not convinced that any deliberate "throttling" by Tesla is taking place. Maybe, maybe not. There could be other explanations. We need more data.�
Mar 15, 2015
docrice My my, this thread got lengthy quite quickly. I'll add yet another data point:
Just got back from the Fremont SC again and at 45% SoC I was at 75 kW on stall 2B, so things seem back to normal. Roughly half the stalls occupied, ambient temp around 64 F. Maybe Tesla's been testing the waters randomly on various stalls or based on specific trigger conditions.
Something sketchy on the Tesla's official forum - this topic of potential throttling came up (http://my.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/superchargers-limited-heavy-users-60-kw) but it looks like the thread's been deleted. I haven't checked if it was moved, but it feels suspect.�
Mar 15, 2015
dirkhh Random data point. 90 miles from home at Centralia, a SC that I as a person have been to many times (maybe 20 times in the last year and a half), but this was the first visit for my new car... 120kW.�
Mar 16, 2015
LandShark I charged at Fremont yesterday (Sunday) at 15% SoC and got 89 KW. I have an A battery. The previous three Sundays at the same time in the morning I was limited to 58 KW. Hopefully Tesla has concluded this diabolical experiment!�
Mar 16, 2015
AmpedRealtor The solution, then, would be to set no destination in your nav or an alternate destination that is really far away. Problem solved.
- - - Updated - - -
My home address is in my car's navigation under Favorites. I'm 2 miles from the Buckeye Supercharger. I received 93 kW at 42% SOC.
- - - Updated - - -
And if that's the case, Tesla needs to immediately change their Supercharger web page because it is blatantly false advertising. I was promised free supercharging for life, and that I can charge to 170 miles in 30 minutes. I don't care about Tesla's demand charges - those are Tesla's problem and should have been considered before making commitments to owners and claims on their web site.
No, this can't be it.
- - - Updated - - -
Why would you penalize Model S owners who live in apartments and condominiums and who may not be allowed to set up a charger at their home by the management? They have as much right to use as any other owner. Treating apartment and condo dwellers as you describe is terrible policy. What do you think customers in China will think when word of this gets out, do you think that will make it easier or more difficult for Tesla in that market? Sorry, but this idea is a non-starter.
- - - Updated - - -
Unless Tesla needs to put money towards something else. Tesla has already stated in their latest 10K that Supercharger expansion may not meet expectations due to other financial obligations. So don't think that just because owners are paying for supercharger access that money is not going to be diverted towards other needs as Tesla deems necessary.�
Mar 16, 2015
SarahsDad Ok, now they're really playing with us.
Went back to the Charlotte SC today (about 30 miles away) where I was limited to <60kW last week (see post #82 My car won't charge faster than 60kW - Page 9).
Same stall, no one else charging.
This time got 80kW at an even higher SOC - clearly no throttling. Didn't have any destination in the Nav (and didn't the first time either).
Not seeing a trend here.�
Mar 16, 2015
tga I'm sure someone will blow a gasket over this, but...
Maybe, just maybe, US buyers who can't charge at home or work shouldn't buy a Tesla (or any other electric car, for that matter)? I can't imaging buying an electric car without control over my own charging situation.
China (and London) are different altogether. Superchargers are being built there for the express purpose of supporting local residents. That's not happening here (yet).
Once the intercity supercharger network is (mostly) done, we can worry about the intracity network to support apartment and condo dwellers. Clearly Tesla is focusing on intercity first.�
Mar 16, 2015
sorka Maybe Tesla was trying something to gauge response or maybe there was a bug. It's interesting that the sibling thread in the My Tesla forum was deleted.�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion 
Just got it back. See item 2�
Mar 16, 2015
bollar That seems like more of an "I don't know what's up" than anything else.�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion They verified and stated its operating normally. Ie. It's suppose to do that at local superchargers.
Whether or not you believe it, it's coming to your model S soon.�
Mar 16, 2015
redi So in my case my a "local supercharger" is 100 miles down the road. Very interesting interpretation.�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion I don't really mind IF it's for the health of the battery. If it's for cost savings, then tesla is saying our time have a pretty low value. Either way, advance notice would have been appropriate�
Mar 16, 2015
markb1 My interpretation is that they are saying the car is acting normally. The service center is not responsible for diagnosing the superchargers. They are only responsible for diagnosing the car's side of supercharging system. It does not rule out the supercharger being broken.
Now that interpretation is really a stretch.�
Mar 16, 2015
Larry Chanin However, as you an I have demonstrated in our postings above, even when the destination is in the nav system and only 2 and 4 miles away from the Supercharger throttling did not occur. So proximity to the Supercharger is obviously not the cause in every case.
Larry�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion What is it you guys need the paperwork to say before you will believe that tesla is telling me this is intentional? I will call them and have them reword it if it's the only way any of the naysayers will believe. This is real. It's happening to me and others and tesla is telling me and anyone who calls their service centers that this is intentional.�
Mar 16, 2015
Zarwin Just charged in Burlington, NC, which is exactly 25 road miles from my house. Charge rate of 116kw initially, nothing unusual.
v6.1(2.2.115) No home setting, no NAV at all.
Edit: I am not a frequent "local" charger as this is only the third time I have plugged into this supercharger. I have, however, used superchargers about 30 times since getting the car(April '14) when travelling.
�
Mar 16, 2015
mikeash I generally agree, but it's really up to the buyer. It seems like it would be incredibly inconvenient not to have home charging, but if someone thinks they can make it work, who are we to tell them no? If someone bought a Model S planning to use a nearby supercharger for regular charging needs, based on Tesla's advertised charging rates and availability, can we really say that they're somehow doing something wrong?
I don't think Tesla should go out of their way to enable such scenarios at the moment, and I agree that such buyers should really reconsider their options, but I very much don't like the idea of pulling the rug out from under them after the fact.�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion I would also add the local sales and service centers were advised of this today according to my local center. Don't believe it... Call your service center and request service because you can't supercharger beyond 60kW. Let's see what they say today�
Mar 16, 2015
Larry Chanin I invite you to visit posting #237 and add your own logical reason(s) to explain the various observations.
None of the the reasons that I have suggested leave me with a good taste in my mouth. :biggrin:
Larry�
Mar 16, 2015
dhanson865 No one is going to believe it the way you do until there is a Press Release, modifications to the teslamotors website*, or Elon says it.
Nothing personal it's just too drastic of a change to take from one source that doesn't have a CEO or VP title next to his name.
*preferably all up and down Supercharger | Tesla Motors and Supercharging | Tesla Motors the latter which says
and so on, nothing supporting what you say is coming.
Though I and others will leave it open that the Press conference coming later this week (Thursday morning/afternoon depending on your time zone) might reveal what the service center is hinting to you.�
Mar 16, 2015
markb1 I think there's really nothing the service center could say to convince me that it is intentional. Service centers have demonstrated repeatedly that they are not in the know when it comes to corporate policies. (Not that I am ruling out that it is intentional, I'm just saying we need a better source than the service center.)
And even if we take the service center at their word, that invoice certainly does not say that it is intentional, just that the car is working as designed. They may have said otherwise verbally, but I'm just talking about what I see on the invoice.
My opinion is that it probably is intentional, but not related to how close you live to a supercharger, and that it is temporary.�
Mar 16, 2015
ecarfan What one person at a Service Center says is not a reliable indicator of a major corporate policy change.
Let's see what is announced on Thirsday.�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion i agree. That's why I suggest calls to local centers and see if we can extract a unified statement�
Mar 16, 2015
sorka So the repair invoice doesn't really say anything. All it says is that the charge rate was reduced by the Super Charger which would happen if there was a technical problem there i.e burned out chargers in the stack, local supply issue with the utility.
The invoice does not say the customers charge rate was reduced due to a POLICY decision. If that's what they meant, then they should have clearly stated such.
The invoice should have stated the reason why the charge was reduced rather than the fact that it simply was reduced which was already known by the customer.�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion It says Concerned VERIFIED...charging rate is being reduced by CUSTOMERS local superchargers. Vehicle operating normally�
Mar 16, 2015
markb1 Right. They verified that your car was indeed not charging above 60 kW at the local supercharger. The supercharger is responsible for the reduced rate, not the car. That's all that says. I don't see any statement about corporate policy.�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion Superchargers (plural). And they drove it to two different ones to verify
And others at the same location have no issue. So the vehicle is working right and the supercharger is working right... 60kW as intended�
Mar 16, 2015
dirkhh So if this is a policy change, then why would they drive to the superchargers to verify? That makes no sense - you are contradicting your own statement.�
Mar 16, 2015
sorka Why don't you go ahead and call them and ask them *WHY* the charge was reduced. You state it's intentional but you didn't really provide a quote that indicates that's actually the case, so many of us are thinking what you were told, whatever it was, is open to interpretation. Call them back and ask them point blank is this intentional due to POLICY and not due to local / temporary technical issue. If POLICY, ask them to clarify what the policy is.�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion You didnt see my original post. The thread I started was merged into this one. When i took it in for service they didn't know about this. They couldn't find an issue with the vehicle so they took it to the Indio supercharger and it charged at 120kW. Then took it to cabazon and it charged at 59kW then they took it to Rancho Cucamonga and it charged at 59kW. Verifying there was an issue they contacted tesla engineers and we told on froday that this is intended reduction at owners local
superchargers. They called me with this and i asked them why and why I wasn't notified before the change was made. He stated that the announcement was coming in the next week
- - - Updated - - -
i asked why and was told the engineers wouldn't state why and an announcement was coming�
Mar 16, 2015
sorka BTW, I'm going to play devils advocate. If this wasn't due to a policy decision, then something was wrong technically and the service center did a lousy unacceptable job diagnosing this issue. They should have simply stated that the car does not have a technical issue that would have prevented a full charge rate and the cause is unknown and then stated it would be investigated by the Super Charger deployment teams, or some such.
The diagnosis as written is unacceptable and Obsoletion should demand in writing clarification of why charged was reduced:
1) A new policy.
2) A technical issue.
3) Unknown at this time.�
Mar 16, 2015
Obsoletion
Agreed. Asking for this now�
Mar 16, 2015
strider My theory is that this is all about money in the form of utility demand charges. Is it possible they have some kind of data tie-in with the local utility and if they are going to be hit w/ a demand charge and throttle charging to keep the SC out of the demand charge range? Much of the desire to have battery packs at SC sites was to help smooth out demand and eliminate demand charges. Tesla could be getting killed on electricity costs and this is a way to get costs under control.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét