Mar 24, 2015
sorka You took the one remaining free stall? Wouldn't the first guy you're paired with get higher priority and you'd get whatever is left over?�
Mar 24, 2015
Nigel16494 There was one free stall after I took one. Then a few more later. I think the others weren't actually charging more likely shopping. It's not scientific but very curious that it's exactly 60kw mark. Could be coincidence. This weekend I'll start up visible Tesla and hopefully get a better idea. I am heading to Southern California in a few weeks so I want to know if there is a limit, when it is applied so I can plan the journey.�
Mar 24, 2015
gg_got_a_tesla No issues getting the full 120 kW when we rolled into stall 6A (one of the new ones at the end) with no one in 6B at the Fremont factory SC; we had only 20 miles left. Went all the way to 92% in exactly 60 minutes.�
Mar 24, 2015
HankLloydRight Yeah, I'm pretty sure. He wouldn't let me take any pictures. It was a year ago, and I'm basing this on how the bottles were labeled and what we discussed.. Not just what it looked like.�
Mar 25, 2015
smac OK look at it another way, Tesla weren't expecting to spend so much on this advertising/marketing. We know Elon doesn't like spending money in this area
I suspect they were looking to break even / make a small profit for the S based on less kWh used on average across the fleet against what had been set aside to pay for those kWh. This would have lead to a substantial ongoing recurring revenue stream for the 3. (I've seen plenty of analysts use this as a partial justification of TSLA share price). Given the way Tesla has chosen to account for supercharging in it's SEC filings, i.e a deferred revenue rather than a provisioned liability, there's at least accounting evidence someone inside Tesla holds this view too.�
Mar 25, 2015
jerry33 I have serious doubts expense is the problem. If Telsa stopped research and development, they'd be showing a profit, but that's not Tesla. As far as I've ever read, Supercharging was never intended to be a profit centre. At best, when the network is completely rolled out the amount of solar power was supposed to cover, or perhaps even more than cover the cost of the electricity. Right now the network is nowhere near complete. The "we have to make money every quarter, regardless of what's best for the company in the long run, to appease Wall Street" is why many corporations go under. Tesla has good cash flow, so they aren't hurting.�
Mar 25, 2015
Johan This is a good thread with lots of good insight. While I haven't done as much roadtripping as some here, I have had a few longer drives (600-700 kms) hitting 3 SuCs along the way spaced by >250 km and widoh's, and other's, experience is also partly mine. Let's be honest, the one and maybe only last obstacle for electric vehicles, is time use on longer trips due to charging. In almost all other aspects EVs (especially Tesla) are already superior to ICEs.
With regards to the taper problem many have said in this thread that charging times could be improved if only Tesla came up with "better algorithms" and that "it's a software thing". Well, while that may be true in one sense the software/algorithm side of it I believe would be literally as simple as changing a few lines of code containing the voltages and temperatures at which tapering occurs. The real issue of course is can the battery handle it? Now this is not a black/white question but rather a question of how the battery degrades over time. I know that there are also strictly physical and electrochemical limits to when tapering must occur, but I'm convinced that Tesla is throttling the charging rate before those physical limits occur. I think of this issue much like range charge. Remember in the earlier software, where there was "Normal" and "Range". Later this was changed to the % slider. Tesla do warn that constantly charging to 100% will degrade the battery faster.
What if there was a user selectable option for Supercharging taper? For example "Normal" v.s. "Aggressive" where the user would have to acknowledge that by charging in "Aggressive" mode the longevity of the battery will suffer and degradation will happen sooner. Of course the user would have to have some sort of idea of how much "increased damage" you're doing to the battery by Supercharging "aggressively" (mind you they haven't given any firm data on this and range charging, other than Elton saying that the effect is small). I assume Tesla have data on this but they're holding their cards close to their chest.
The flip side of this would be of course to remind consumers that the batteries do degrade and eventually will loose significant capacity even if you pamper it. It makes sense to not put the searchlight on this right now, but rather in 4-6 years when the reports of meaningful degradation start emerging. By this time the Gigafactory will be up and running, there might have been one or two step changes in chemistry, prices will definitely have gone down. So it makes sense waiting to address this issue until later.�
Mar 25, 2015
Matias ^User selectable tapering curve would be otherwise ok, but it would have two PR problems 1) It would tell, that batteries degrade and 2) it would tell, that aggressive supercharging is bad for battery. But I'm OK with it. You could use it, if you were in serious hurry.�
Mar 25, 2015
gregincal Except I just don't see how this saves Tesla any money. The demand charge thing never made any sense to me, because the highest demand is when all the stalls are full, and even if you limit everybody to 60kW you are still using the same 120kW per paired stations. In terms of total power it's exactly the same power delivered, only more slowly. In terms of discouraging locals from using the Chargers, my experience is that for free power people will use them no matter what the speed. At a lot of places the locals are plugged in for a long time anyway while they go shopping at the mall. So how does this actually save money?�
Mar 25, 2015
Cerie Ok update after my stop in East Greenwich, RI. Got there with 30% soc, only car there and the charge peaked at 80 kW. Changed to an A stall at 51% and initially saw it go over 90 kW for about 5 seconds, pushed back to 80 and then started to taper down to 70 kW all before my battery was at 60%. Gave up and decided to just go home. I'm now being told this is because it's cold and I should see better results in spring and summertime. Sorry but I think that is total bs and at with it being this cold in New England half the year, I'm expected to supercharge twice as long? I just don't know what other steps I can take to get someone to at least run some kind of battery diagnostic on my car or anything other than telling me this is working as intended. Bc If that's the truth, then this car might not be right for me anymore.�
Mar 25, 2015
ItsNotAboutTheMoney It could perhaps save money only because Leccy Spongers are a wildcard in terms of when they charge. If Tesla is trying to optimize costs, including through the use of storage they might be modeling behavior to match long-distance travel patterns.
But I think that overall it would really be about discouraging parking and waiting. And we don't even know it's happening.�
Mar 25, 2015
Depeche Mode Doesn't make sense... the usual tapering at 51% SoC is 75 kW not 90 kW... and 62 kW at 60%...�
Mar 25, 2015
Cerie I agree it doesn't fit with the other kinds of data so far and not even the 60 kW capping I've experienced before but now I'm being told it's all working as intended. I just don't know where to go from here to have something done about this.�
Mar 25, 2015
Ugliest1 When I read your story it seemed to me you had none of the 59/60 capping, and the kW numbers you quoted were either "normal", or actually higher than normal. How long did you actually stay at the supercharger (from 30% start), and what % did you stop charging (and leave) at?�
Mar 25, 2015
FlasherZ Here is an example of the taper curve on a "D" pack - SOC vs. charge rate at a 120 kW supercharger. Observed on my car, only one present.
15% - 122.9 kW
20% - 122.9 kW
25% - 118.9 kW
30% - 114.9 kW
35% - 104.7 kW
40% - 97.4 kW
45% - 86.8 kW
50% - 78.9 kW
55% - 71.2 kW
60% - 61.7 kW
The 90 kW threshold is crossed at 43% SOC.
Your later observations line up with that (50% SOC @ 80 kW, 60% SOC at < 70 kW) except for the 30%. Do you have any instrumented data or just visual observation?
(Source: Supercharging Taper Curve for D+ Pack - Page 2)�
Mar 25, 2015
smac I have no idea why you think Tesla have good cash flow, they are going through cash at an alarming rate. IIRC they burnt nearly $450m in Q4 alone.
To keep refilling the cash kitty they are issuing convertible-bonds. The interest rates on these bonds are posited on their stock price. So Tesla's access to reasonably priced cash loans it needs to continue to with such bold plans, is based on their appeasement of Wall street. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
Anyway getting I'm going way off the issue of restricted charge rates, and into technical analysis which belongs in a different thread so I'll leave it there.
- - - Updated - - -
I posted a detailed analysis of the set aside, and long term depreciation by dissecting the SEC filings, which led me to the conclusion.
I agree, they are making upfront profit on the 60's (manifested in the margin per car), but making ongoing losses on average for existing cars in the fleet on a forward basis due to what I believe is an insufficient forward carry of a mere $500 to cover 20 years of usage. (Latest stats are showing on average across the fleet each Model S is using something like 500kWh)
Anyway... This belongs in the investor section.�
Mar 25, 2015
Cerie 
And yes, before anyone says, I'm well aware the picture shows I just plugged in, but the kW never went any higher than 80.
Beyond photographs of my center screen, I don't have more in depth instrumental data. I'm on an E pack if that makes any difference. And as regards the 59/60 capping, I did experience that as well about two weeks ago at the same supercharger although at the time there was one other car there (8 stalls) and we were not paired. I don't have documentation of that first time since I didn't expect for that to happen. My problem with this whole experience is that despite having been in contact with both the supercharger side and the service side, I'm being repeatedly told that everything is functioning as normal with my car. I live 45 mins from the closest supercharger and I can't keep making trips out there with varying SOCs to take photographs in an attempt to get them to run a battery diagnostic or do SOMETHING.
�
Mar 25, 2015
smac @Cerie silly question but is this Supercharger the one that's 45 miles from home?
Did you have home in your sat nav as a destination?�
Mar 25, 2015
FlasherZ Perhaps there was a malfunctioning charger at the Supercharger you were at. At 37% SOC you should have been about 100 kW. However, the rest of your data seemed within the normal taper curve. Watch it closely as you Supercharge again...�
Mar 25, 2015
Cerie Yes it is but I did not have home set in my Nav.
@FlasherZ This is an 8 stall charger and I wanted to give it a chance to ramp up so I was only able to test out two stalls. I also had a brain fart and couldn't remember which stall I had the 60 kW issue with two weeks ago so I can't say for sure it wasn't that one either.�
Mar 25, 2015
bluetinc Cerie,
I've had to travel longer than 45 minutes to fully warm my battery up to the point that it is able to take a full 120kW charge after it was cold soaked. Did you do this after that car was cold soaked overnight?
Peter
�
Mar 25, 2015
wk057 Keep in mind the charger banks in the superchargers can only be switched out between stalls in groups, not individually. If memory serves from badgering a supercharger tech in Hamilton, NJ, they're in groups of three units, so, 30kW granularity. Would fit with 60kW (two groups) if for whatever reason the cabinet decided not to switch in the next group (60-90kW) because of one or more reasons. Speculation: One reason that comes to mind would maybe be that you're at say, 75kW or less on the taper curve that it would just round down to two active charger groups. No sense wasting that capacity and wear on components to save ~1 minute of charge time. The one VisibleTesla curve of 60kW limit seems to suggest otherwise, but fits with only two groups being switched into the stall in use for whatever reason.�
Mar 25, 2015
trils0n I think something like this is most likely, given my experience and what I've heard from Supercharger Techs. The switching is not happening properly at certain Superchargers for whatever reason. Either bad installation/repair or a bug or a combination of the two.�
Mar 25, 2015
Cerie Nope this happened after my morning work commute, then from my house to providence airport, there to dinner, and then to the supercharger. So I would say probably about an hour and a half of driving before I hit up the supercharger and when I was at home, the car is inside the garage so by no means a frozen overnight battery.
- - - Updated - - -
I don't expect to find a resolution to this issue inside this thread. I'm more curious about what I can do at this point to get someone at tesla to at least take a look at my battery or car. If the car truly is working as intended, a full charge at a supercharger would take well over an hour and a half. I would just like some honest communication or action on tesla's part. If they intend to do nothing, then just say that so I can make a decision to keep the car with the way it currently functions. Would emailing Jerome do anything?�
Mar 25, 2015
FlasherZ Probably not.
I would suggest that you try supercharging again - and if you can demonstrate a pattern of the car not reaching its proper initial charging current at the beginning, then you can escalate through your service manager to the regional service leader. I would suggest trying at the next opportunity and recording the data at several points, comparing them against the taper curve you see above.�
Mar 25, 2015
redi Good luck. I have contacted them 3 times and have never had a response.�
Mar 25, 2015
PunchIT
Hey Guys, I thought I'll update you on my supercharging experience this past weekend.
2 weeks prior, I had experienced 60kW limit at Edison and Delaware superchargers even with low soc.
I pulled into the Hamilton Marketplace supercharger at 40 miles rated and took one of the unoccupied pairs. I was able to charge at 118 kW!
I met another owner there and he informed that couple weeks ago he met a technician at the Delaware supercharger, apparently fixing some supercharger issue.
Later that day I pulled into Edison supercharger at 125 miles rated and was able to charge at 85kW!
Later, later that same day I pulled into Delaware supercharger at 108 miles rated and was able to charge at 99kW!
So most likely, if you are not able to charge at normal pace, it's an issue with the supercharger and the supercharger team should be informed.
Very unlikely Tesla is throttling the superchargers!
Go Tesla!!�
Mar 25, 2015
apacheguy @cerie - Please clarify your issue. I'm confused as you stated your MS charged well over 60 kW and even held 70 kW up until 60%. This seems perfectly normal, and possibly better than expected, to me. Sorry if I am missing something.
---updated---
Ok, now I see it. Are you suggesting your car is 80 kW limited?�
Mar 25, 2015
trils0n This is almost certainly the issue. The tech I spoke with mentioned incorrect installation of the splitters as being the likely culprit. (And mentioned that throttling supercharging would be stupid, and against the whole point of superchargers). His laptop was connected the the supercharger when I was limited and it gave no indication of any problem, so it is possible that, remotely, Tesla's diagnostics do not know this is an issue and everything looks good, but the installation can still be wrong. Report the issue with the supercharger if you have an issue.�
Mar 25, 2015
Cerie I've experienced both being limited to 60 kW and then 80 at the same supercharger. I don't really know if they are throttling or not. Either way that's a decision that I can't do anything about. I would like to just rule out that there is something wrong with my car.
Incidentally ill be going to Maryland over Easter so will be stopping at Greenwich, ct and Newark, de so will be sure to document more if I don't experience the normal charge rate. If after that, they still refuse to look at my car, I will have to find some way to escalate.�
Mar 25, 2015
sorka Obsoletion swore that his service advisor claimed that throttling for heavy users was intentional and that there would be an announcement about it shortly. I asked him to go back and get further clarification but I hav not seen any reply back from that. I'm just about ready to call up his service center and ask his service advisor point blank what that was all about.�
Mar 25, 2015
ecarfan I never believed that SA was correct.�
Mar 25, 2015
sorka To be blunt, what I believe happened is that he misinterpreted the diagnosis (bad as it was) on the repair invoice and inserted something he believed was true. This is just my own opinion and is not stated as fact.�
Mar 25, 2015
David99 Unlikely. The three times I experienced it at three different locations I tried several stalls. Same 60 kW limit on all of them. It is really unlikely that all of them had the exact same issue at the same time in different places.�
Mar 25, 2015
apacheguy Yeah, this is another instance where Tesla could be communicating better. Jerome or a regional service rep ought to be contacting folks and giving them an explanation as to exactly what is occurring. Or if they haven't figured it out yet, at the very least assure everyone that SpC is not intentionally throttling. Tesla's silence on this issue certainly does not help.�
Mar 25, 2015
FlasherZ Where are they supposed to respond? They're aware of consternation here but with the exception of a couple of posts from George here, Tesla has a long track record of leaving TMC and the TM forums be. Those who have reported it to their service center are - with the exception of one - are being told that it is not the case that they're limiting and are passing the information on to the supercharger team. Sometimes, that's the best way to communicate -- telling those who are affected and have properly lodged a ticket with service, specific dates and times that Tesla can check.
I called a friend at a service center (not my local one) and was told no such policy or communication has been made to service centers.
This whole thread has been nothing but complete speculation based on what one service center advisor told one member here, that has not been corroborated by anyone, and in fact has been disclaimed by several others. So why should Tesla respond to pure speculation, especially since no data points line up? The only thing we have to go on is that some people have demonstrated that some service center + car combinations have resulted in 60 kW being their charging limits. No pattern has emerged.
I don't think it's necessary for Tesla to respond to rampant speculation, especially when no data exists to support said speculation.�
Mar 25, 2015
deonb That's exactly the problem. This kind of isolation between engineers and customers is something that belongs back in the 20th century.
Even Microsoft these days have engineers directly responding to blogs - and they have 1000's of times the number of customers that Tesla does.
I can totally understand Tesla being silent about Model X/3/Gigafactory etc. But not on existing products.�
Mar 25, 2015
FlasherZ Microsoft's engineers aren't going to respond to speculation about its policy, especially speculation about a policy that would likely require executive coverage. They might respond to individual cases, and they'd probably do the same thing that we've been recommending -- call the supercharger # and file a ticket with service.
Otherwise, it will be put into a position where it has to respond to every bit of speculation out there.
TuneIn favorites disappeared? Speculation suddenly pops up that Tesla is dumping all Internet radio options (despite none of the evidence lining up behind it), then Tesla has to respond to that.
Tesla knows that this speculation will shake out because the data doesn't line up. Individual cases can be worked through service channels, and the crazy speculation goes away. And it doesn't set a precedent whereby every hypothesis must be responded to.�
Mar 25, 2015
deonb Oh yes they would. Well, they won't change a policy in the first place without telling anybody about it...
What Tesla is doing is akin to Microsoft cancelling a product, but instead of posting any information about that, they just silently remove it from the web site. And then if you call support about it, you just get a generic "we looked at the web site, and it's currently up and running" answer.
That's assuming this is even a policy change. If this was just an error, engineers would respond with: "We realize this is a problem and we're looking into it".
Tesla is in pretty uncharted territory of standoffishness towards customers here. And they certainly DO have a history of changing major things without any communication (remember suspension-gate), which is why speculation like this is fueled in the first place.
They should. There's actually not a lot of this type of speculation out here that has to do with trying to interpret some weird observed behavior that's going on right now. Maybe one case a month. Most of the rampant speculation on here has to do with future products & announcements.�
Mar 25, 2015
FlasherZ Well, then we'll just disagree.
I would rather funnel customers through my proper service channels where I could investigate properly than be held to respond to every crazy rumor that popped up on a message board, especially when the data just doesn't line up with that crazy rumor (and when non-customers and/or other troublemakers can stir the pot).�
Mar 25, 2015
apacheguy Well, this isn't just a rumor. It was written on official company letterhead through an official transaction. Granted it's only one customer, but I disagree that Tesla should keep their distance. I do believe there ought to be a public response of some sort.�
Mar 25, 2015
Larry Chanin Not exactly.
He stated that the service advisor said it was intentional, but he explicitly stated that the advisor was not sure on what the throttling is based on.
Here's what Obsoletion posted earlier.
Larry�
Mar 25, 2015
wk057 Fiance got 120kW at our new local supercharger (Charlotte) this evening (~15% SoC). I got 100kW there the other day at ~39% SoC (P85D taper awesomeness).
I'm actually pretty tempted to call shenanigans on @Obsoletion. The whopper about a service adviser talking about an announcement from Tesla about something that would make no sense to actually implement. Since when does Tesla service actually have info on upcoming stuff? Come on now, this is Tesla. You know, the whole lack of internal communication thing? The invoice posted just says that the tech verified that the charge is limiting at 60kW and that the vehicle is operating normally. The wording suggests that the tech is blaming the supercharger. Doesn't say anything about a local throttling policy being the cause.
I highly doubt this conversation (or anything similar) happened at Tesla: "So, what are we going to do about locals using superchargers and hogging them when people on trips need them?" "Ohh! Pick me!" "Yes?" "Lets limit their charge rate so they hog them for longer!" "Perfect!"�
Mar 26, 2015
David99 No one says they need to respond to speculation. I want them to respond to the reports/calls I (and others) have made about the issue. Every time I called and explained it, they said they would look into it and call me back, but haven't. It happened to me 5 times in three different locations. Add the others and there are plenty of "data points".�
Mar 26, 2015
LetsGoFast This is the fundamental problem with the intentional throttling theory. It doesn't appear to make any sense from Tesla's perspective.�
Mar 26, 2015
FlasherZ All of the speculation has been something about a Tesla plot to keep locals from using the Superchargers. And none of the data points line up toward that at all (at least not now).
I agree you deserve communication on your specific issues that you've reported. But to expect Jerome (or anyone else from Tesla) to explain that here in this thread, with all the unfounded speculation, is not the right course of action. Have you escalated to your service manager? Have you asked him to escalate to the regional service executive? Have you called them twice a week looking for an update? I can tell you that if it affected me, I wouldn't be seeking my answers by shouting into this forum; aside from complete silence, it's probably one of the least effective communication methods I know to reach Tesla (although I do know that Tesla does monitor them and occasionally reaches out).
It may be realistic and worthwhile for Tesla to come here and say something *if* we had any sort of data pattern that was testable and consistent (e.g., if we noticed that all superchargers in California limited to 60 kW when the car's address registered with Tesla was less than 30 miles from the supercharger) and the furor was significant... but we don't. There is no official statement from Tesla, there is no discernible pattern, there are only anecdotal problems with some SC+car pairings that haven't even been repeatable consistently.
Now that's not to say this thread hasn't been valuable for them - it could be that they were testing some sort of local restrictions, saw the 5-page-a-day thread here, and reconsidered - backing it out. We don't know, and unless it becomes some sort of a policy, it's likely we won't ever know - and if I were in their position, I would consider the same approach.�
Mar 26, 2015
qwk FWIW, the SC's are the last place I would be looking for accurate, up to date information. They are the LAST to get the latest information.
- - - Updated - - -
This is spot on. There is a lot of history of Tesla changing things mid-stroke(in a sneaky fashion), and pretending like it never happened. That's why there is always a new thread like this here all the time about a different concern.
Yes, throttling users makes very little sense, BUT some of the decisions Tesla makes don't make much sense either, so ruling it out is not that easy.�
Mar 26, 2015
FlasherZ Yes, most of the time. In this case it was said that the service center told him that an announcement was coming in the next week on the local throttling of Superchargers.
Proving negatives is a tough business. It's far more effective to find a positive to disprove than try to address every unfounded speculation made on this forum. There are some forum members who have an axe to grind with Tesla, or who have something that has irritated them, and it's easy to peddle unfounded speculation. I'd be standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the people speculating here, if the data supported the speculation.�
Mar 26, 2015
sorka Yes, but he also said this after that:
and
Sorry, remove the heavy user based comment. The point was that he said it was intentional as in a policy decision, not due to a technical issue.�
Mar 26, 2015
qwk A lot of this stuff isn't speculation, nor "an axe to grind". This is definately not the thread to hash this out, but there is no need to stick your head in the sand and pretend that Tesla can do no wrong.�
Mar 26, 2015
mackgoo Every where I go if I'm not on a paired charger I get 110Kw/hr tapers off to about 40. Even 7 miles from home.�
Mar 26, 2015
LetsGoFast Except that several people with the same problem have contacted their service center and did not receive corroboration. In fact others not only heard flat denials, but saw their specific problem resolved. If we had multiple people reporting confirmation from multiple service centers that this was a policy, it would be a very different matter.�
Mar 26, 2015
sorka Right. That was my whole point. I don't believe any of it was true and I don't believe Obsoletions service advisor told him that throttling is intentional.�
Mar 26, 2015
ecarfan Show me a scan of the "official company letterhead" with this "throttling" policy statement and then I will believe it. Until then this is just a case of speculation and misunderstanding.�
Mar 26, 2015
FlasherZ Definitely not doing this, as I said once the data lines up I'll be supporting this issue with the speculators who think Tesla's out to get them. But there are many users on this forum who have been found to try to stir things up. There are people here who blame Tesla for a problem with their own environment or special use case for which the car really isn't intended.
Show me the data that supports the tens of pages of speculation that Tesla is trying to eliminate local supercharging; then explain the data that exists contraindicating (the fact that many other cars on the same firmware releases at the very same superchargers at the very same time are charging just fine). Then I'm with you.
That's not burying my head... it's actually having an open mind and studying the data instead of creating a conclusion and working toward that conclusion.�
Mar 26, 2015
deonb Here
�
Mar 26, 2015
scottf200 
�
Mar 26, 2015
FlasherZ That just says "vehicle charge rate is being reduced by customer's local superchargers".
It means, simply, that the car was not responsible for telling the Supercharger to limit the charge at 60 kW, and instead that the Supercharger limited the supercharging to that value. It doesn't say why. It does not say something about a new policy, or that the rate was limited because the owner was within 50 miles, or anything else supporting speculation here... it's precisely why it says the "vehicle [is] operating normally at this time" - simply meaning it's not the vehicle's fault for the charge at 60 kW and instead was the choice of the Supercharger.
Only if you're looking for a conclusion that Tesla's trying to limit local supercharging can you get that interpretation from what is written.�
Mar 26, 2015
Racerx22b Just supercharged at the Fort Drum SC on the Florida Turnpike during my trip to/from Disney from Palm Beach at the following levels (see pics). Pic 1 is the start rate, Pic 2 is the stopping rate, and pic 3 is the start rate on return trip. I didn't capture an ending screenshot. Not sure if this has bearing on this topic.
�
Mar 26, 2015
Ugliest1 It seems to me that maintenance report does NOT show that the service centre stated throttling was a policy, or that it was a deliberate management action. It only confirmed that the charge rate reduction had been done at the supercharger end, not the vehicle. Just the facts, ma'am, no mention of why.
My head isn't in the sand, and I also am not carrying a pitchfork and torch. In addition I'm hoping that I won't run into this problem at Burlington in a couple of weeks. Although, I'm guessing if I do the impact would only be a delay of 30 minutes - it would piss me off, but not cause a major problem.�
Mar 26, 2015
mdemetri Yes, but it also says that the problem was at multiple supercharger stations. IMHO, this makes it unlikely that there was the same malfunction at multiple superchargers all at the same time. Rather, throttling by Tesla makes much more sense.�
Mar 26, 2015
sorka Did you even read this thread. This has been hashed out multiple times. Once again, that only states the charging was reduced by the supercharger and is not an issue with the vehicle. It says nothing about POLICY or it being intentional. Period.�
Mar 26, 2015
trils0n Malfunction could be due to a new tech installing something incorrectly at multiple locations, or a bug in a revised part, or a new part revision that is installed/setup different from the old one. Any number of malfunctions could manifest at multiple locations before it becomes a known problem.
My experience was the Supercharger tech onsite said that he just replaced the splitter and must have done so incorrectly and that was why I was getting a reduced (<60kW) rate. When I switched to a different stall, no limiting, full 110+kW. Why would I be throttled at one stall and not another (at the same location, within 5 mins) if the policy was to throttle? More likely an Supercharger error, especially because it seemed his laptop connected to the Supercharger gave no indication of the problem. It was only when I asked that he became aware of the problem, and that he figured the issue was his recent installation not splitting the power to the pedestals correctly.�
Mar 26, 2015
MITE46 Inconsistent charging speeds at SC?
There's been a couple of times where I arrive at a station with very low SoC, good weather, completely empty, and then the charging speed limited to 60kw. I change stalls and then it's perfectly fine at 120kw. This has been happening for months...at various stations...various times during the day...and yes the cord is seated all the way.
I was thinking about it some more and I was wondering if Tesla uses stationary storage at their SCs to help offset high demand charges from the utility? Could it be possible that the slow stalls where because the station storage was depleted? And then the fast stalls had full stationary storage?
I pulled into Gilroy the other day...there's a meter on the side of the SC that shows the station pulling 8kw when no one is even there. I plug in my car and it shoots up to 130kw...which would suggest it is pulling all of that from the grid, which throws out my demand charge theory...what do you guys think?
�
Mar 26, 2015
AnOutsider You might be experiencing this: My car won't charge faster than 60kW�
Mar 26, 2015
MITE46 I have seen that thread before(when it was only 11 pages, now its 51)...but the fact that I can always find a stall that will do the full 120kw leads me to believe that they aren't throttling on per VIN basis...and throttling by stall doesn't make sense unless it has a history of failure at higher rates?�
Mar 26, 2015
FlasherZ None of the data supports the theory that they're throttling for a policy-based reason, yet. File a ticket with service and call the supercharger line to let them know which stall is limiting.�
Mar 26, 2015
MITE46 I experienced the same thing at Gilroy, the 1/2 were slow, moved over to 3 and it was 120kw....I'm going to say supercharger malfunction also..�
Mar 26, 2015
smac I'll fly this one up the flagpole...
Do the Superchargers, like the cars, have the ability to receive OTA updates?
Maybe there was some new SpC firmware being rolled out in prep for 6.2, and this caused the issue?�
Mar 26, 2015
AmpedRealtor Agreed. Tesla should not be answering questions online. Talk about liability.�
Mar 26, 2015
deonb Shoot the messenger, why don't you? 'ecarfan' was asking for the document that was being discussed so I simply posted the link.
I agree it says nothing about policy.�
Mar 26, 2015
apacheguy It's a two way street. At the same time, I should not have to find out about limitations on my car or policy changes here on the forums. Tesla needs to be communicating these things directly to customers. Believe me, they've screwed up before on this.
If there was absolutely no policy change that occurred and it ends up being some random issue then I say fine. If there was in fact a change then Tesla is merely showing that they've chosen to continue with their sealed lip approach when in fact they ought to be opening a dialogue with loyal customers.�
Mar 26, 2015
brucet999 Might it have something to do with half the chargers apparently having been installed upside down?
�
Mar 27, 2015
mmh Well, now I'm going to fan the fire and claim Tesla is limiting based on proximity to home...
Yesterday I charged at the new SLC, UT charger, limited to 55kW. Today, I changed my address listed on the mytesla account page to somewhere in New Jersey and went back to the supercharger. Charged initially at 100kW and as it tapered held 80kW. Used same stall both times.
Yesterday, mytesla address set to Utah:
Today, mytesla address set to New Jersey:
�
Mar 27, 2015
wk057 Not sure how new the SLC one is, but the one in Hamilton NJ was limited to ~60kW from testing up until the grand opening announcement.�
Mar 27, 2015
Lloyd Change you home address back and see if you are once again throttled. If so, that would be complete verification!�
Mar 28, 2015
FlasherZ Not complete, but it's a good start.
We need to:
a) document more information such as time of day and day of week that it was done, mmh's patterns of charging (are you an occasional SC'er or a habitual local SC'er), car version, etc.
b) try and tighten the timeline up to narrow the variables (1 day gap leaves reasonable chance something else happened in the meantime...)
c) reproduce with other cars and SC's (probably one of the best first steps)
d) start looking for patterns that would explain why many owners in this thread have not experienced any reduction in rate given similar conditions.�
Mar 28, 2015
sorka Looks like your starting SOC was a bit lower when you did the second charge. Did you call Tesla? Everyone should call Tesla each and every time this happens while its happening.�
Mar 28, 2015
Andyw2100 I believe mmh saw what he or she saw with respect to the throttling, though I don't know what it means. What I don't understand is why, if Tesla really did want to throttle local cars, (and I am not yet ready to accept that premise) they would do so in a way that is so incredibly easy to circumvent. The car holds so much other information that could be used to determine where "home" is, that we wouldn't have any ability to change. Why use something we can change in 30 seconds?�
Mar 28, 2015
Nigel16494 Today I left my home location set, went to the Fremont Supercharger and I got the normal 118Kw start at 9% SOC. Not the 60kw I have been getting for a few weeks. I left visible Tesla up but it seems to have dropped out at the start of charge. Same time same place and I think the same stall (I was the only one there at the start (11 free stalls) and usually am the only one).�
Mar 28, 2015
sorka I was there Friday afternoon and all stalls were full and there was a wait.�
Mar 28, 2015
SW2Fiddler Sounds good! However:
New topic "Tesla is intentionally throttling VisibleTesla data?" in 3...2...1...
�
Mar 28, 2015
breser Maybe they're trying to combat the taxi situation in Amsterdam (that links back here but the thread is in Dutch and the comments on reddit explain what's going on):
https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/30lyt1/amsterdam_supercharger_is_already_100_in_use/�
Mar 28, 2015
mackgoo Just out of curiosity. When you had the low charge rate, did there happen to be some using the other charger of the pair. When you had the good charge rate was there anyone using the other charger of the pair?
My experience is this is bull. Soon you'll be able to check it on snoops and find it is just another urban legend. I
I routinely use a super charger 7 miles from my home. I always get 117kW unless I'm using one of a pair and there is someone on the other one of the pair.
The fact that this thread continues, for my pea brain is just mind blowing.�
Mar 28, 2015
David99 I'm happy for you that you never had any issues. You find it mind blowing that other have the problem and post in this thread? I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. Any theory why this throttling is happening is just that, a theory. But that it is happening is a fact and has nothing to do with the wild speculations. I don't care about all the speculations, but the fact that several people experiencing the lower rate when the stall is not shared is odd and can be quite annoying when planning road trips.�
Mar 28, 2015
mackgoo All I'm saying is it's bunk that TESLA is throttling, I must admit I just haven't had enough time to waste to read every thread. What I have read though seems to have a common theme, throttling. Just isn't happening, except of course when the black helicopters are circling, then for sure.
And to read people report anything else, continually is, mind blowing. I have an idea. Maybe it's the tin foil hat. Try taking your tin foil hat off before hooking up.�
Mar 28, 2015
cgiGuy You're insulting a lot of people, and basing it all on your single data point.�
Mar 28, 2015
dennis Um, there are many data points in this 57 page thread of other owners using a local supercharger and not getting reduced to 60 kw.�
Mar 28, 2015
bxr140 That Tesla is using "home" on the nav systems was just someone's speculation. They know where you live already from when you purchased your car and presumably from your records at your service center.
Also, the data in this and other threads suggests that if Tesla is purposely throttling, the pattern is more layered than simply 'everyone's local charger'. Proximity to home could easily be a false positive.�
Mar 28, 2015
wk057 Supercharged again locally. 121kW.�
Mar 28, 2015
sorka There is no proof or real evidence that Tesla is throttling. If they are, then the pattern, if there is one, has not been seen by anyone yet.�
Mar 29, 2015
Depeche Mode GREAAATTTTT!
but it's not the kind of info we need...
please stop posting that you have been able to charge at a rate of 60kw+ as it makes the post longer and it doesn't help anyone here that has the throttling problem...
Though, if you have constructive ideas you'll be more than welcome!
Thanks in advance...�
Mar 29, 2015
FlasherZ I disagree. There's still speculation going on that local supercharging is throttled. Data points that disprove a theory are just as valuable. Selection bias is a bad thing.�
Mar 29, 2015
JRP3 Indeed. If some people using local SC's are not seeing reduced power then it would seem obvious that location can not be the determining factor, or at least not the only factor, and something else must be happening.�
Mar 29, 2015
bxr140 Agree.
The data clearly shows that some people are experiencing lower charging rates at local superchargers, but the cause is still unclear. More data sheds more light on the pattern.�
Mar 29, 2015
AmpedRealtor This would only be a valid comparison if you unplug, change your address, and then plug back in to see if there is a change. The fact that you did this on two separate days at two different SOCs means that other variables are in play which you cannot eliminate.
- - - Updated - - -
I'm not insulted at all. Speak for yourself.
- - - Updated - - -
Actually that type of information is quite useful because it disproves the hypothesis that Tesla is throttling owners local to a Supercharger. If Tesla were throttling locals, then all locals would see the same behavior. Obviously they don't. I don't. I charged at 93 kW at the local Supercharger 2 miles away from my house. The speculation here seems to be running amok when the actual answer is likely nothing more than a simple hardware, load or maintenance issue.�
Mar 29, 2015
bxr140 That's not true.
In fact, almost from the beginning the data has shown that if intentional charge rate reductions are occurring, theyre clearly not happening to everyone. By assuming those who claim local throttling mean everyone must be getting stiffed, you're falling into the same assumptions trap that they are accused of doing, just from the other side.
Stick with the data. The data says some people are getting slower charging close to home. That's all we know.�
Mar 29, 2015
cgiGuy So much for your theory that he's taking all those other data points into account. He's saying, "My car doesn't do it, so you're all crazy."
Congrats, cool breeze. But the fact that he's basically saying everyone who "thinks" there may be a chance that there is throttling should look for black helicopters and take off their tin foil hat is pretty insulting. Shall we look back at a few of your theories in the past and see if you need to take your tin foil hat off?�
Mar 29, 2015
dennis Do we have any data points of cars being limited to 60kw of supercharging when they are MORE than 100 miles from home?�
Mar 29, 2015
bxr140 I don't think so (other than pairing events), but its possible someone's chimed in with a data point that i missed.�
Mar 29, 2015
SW2Fiddler Aren't the OP's first page of posts describing exactly that?
Quartzsite and Buckeye. Home = L.A.�
Mar 29, 2015
dennis You are right! So then how did the speculation that this issue is being caused by throttling locals gain such momentum in this thread?�
Mar 29, 2015
dirkhh Because that's what people do here? Speculate on limited data, ignoring all data that don't fit their current theory?
Oh wait, I guess your question wasn't serious, was it? :-/�
Mar 29, 2015
David99 Yes we do!
I have no theory and I don't speculate. The only pattern I see among all people that have the issue is the 60/59 kW number which rules out variations due to state of charge or temperature or charger sharing. All these factors would produce random numbers, but never a consistent and constant 60 kW.
Here is the problem, we all have lives and jobs and none of us has time to drive around only to test out Superchargers under different conditions.�
Mar 29, 2015
wk057 It's just not the data you want to see. You need data from all people charging locally, not just the few that are "throttled". As others have mentioned, censoring data that doesn't go with your theory is silly. Data showing that other people's local superchargers are NOT throttling are certainly valid data points, and it why I've posted a few of those here, from two vehicles.
I've read this entire thread and I personally see nothing that definitively correlates throttling based on location. There are many data points (dozen or more) against this theory and very few (2?) that actually *may* support it (A picture of a car charging at 60kW is simply not proof of local throttling). I think it is definitely time to put such speculation on hold until either we have more data points that support the theory (we already have plenty that do not) or something public from Tesla on the matter (unlikely since it doesn't seem to be a policy thing).
I'll point out again that throttling at a supercharger makes no sense whatsoever when the power is available (as in, not another car on the paired stall). If they're trying to discourage locals from hogging superchargers, then this would be the dumbest possible way to go about it since it would force the locals to stay there LONGER. A longer supercharge time is in no one's best interest. Throttling locals definitely does not fit the Occam's razor type reasoning for what some are seeing, which could be any number of factors specific to them or the supercharger they were using at the time. It is much more likely that it is something to do with the supercharger cabinets or their vehicles at the time of the throttling rather than some non-public Tesla policy for throttling supercharge rates for seemingly random locals at seemingly random times and locations. Just doesn't make any logical sense.�
Mar 29, 2015
David99 I agree with everyone that says the theory of throttling local users is unlikely because really it makes no sense in any way. If Tesla didn't want that, they would not have built so many Superchargers right in Los Angeles and other well populated areas. It has always been Tesla's goal to make charging as fast as possible (within reason). Slowing it down makes no sense whatsoever.
The only reason I'm still interested in this issue is because I use Superchargers a lot and really hate to almost double my charging times. Nothing is worse than knowing it could go faster but for some mysterious reason it's slower. There doesn't seem to be a pattern other than the 60 kW limit.�
Mar 29, 2015
bxr140 There are very few people claiming their charge rates are being intentionally reduced by Tesla. There are close to 600 posts in this thread.
Ironically, its been those commenting on the speculation that are stoking the flames on this one. It is the Kardashian of threads.�
Mar 29, 2015
FlasherZ The point is that we don't have any patterns yet.
For all we know, the Superchargers could limit charging to 60 kW max when the Supercharger controller code crashes, and therefore can't do dynamic switching of more charging modules. As to why a fix hasn't been pushed to the affected Superchargers, it could be the case that when the controller code does crash, it is doing so in such a way that inhibits its restart, or update. Or, it could be the case they haven't found the bug that causes the crash quite yet, and instead they're restarting them when a report gets made, or it takes a watchdog a while, or something. That wouldn't be most resilient of systems and I think Tesla knows better, but it's as good of a guess as any and fits our data better than any other speculative theory in this thread (although I admit it's just a simple theory that would fit the randomness we've seen).
- - - Updated - - -
I disagree. Each time I think the "locals are getting throttled" issue has been settled, new people pop up to re-fan the coals.�
Mar 29, 2015
bollar Except very early in this thread, we had three cars at one Supercharger and only one of the three was affected by the limit. We moved between charger pairs, so at least in this one case, the charge limit was tied to the car, not the SC.�
Mar 29, 2015
FlasherZ Well, hey, there goes that theory on which I wasted 5 whole minutes!�
Mar 29, 2015
Andyw2100 As one or more people have pointed out in this thread, we know Tesla does like to test things. We may never know exactly what they're testing, but I think it's reasonable to believe that some of the people who are seeing the throttling may be part of some test, even if it was just a very temporary or even one-time test in some cases. We can keep trying to fit the throttling to a pattern, but we're pretty unlikely to find one. But it's also probably not productive to tell the people who have been throttled that they're liars and should be wearing tinfoil hats. Just because we can't figure out exactly what's going on doesn't mean nothing is or was.�
Mar 29, 2015
bxr140 Well there's one divergence...for those who have seen reduced rates, at no point has the issue ever been close to 'settled'. There has only been opposing speculation as to why Tesla couldn't/wouldn't reduce charge rates.
Escher would be so confused if he tried to follow a TMC thread. :tongue:�
Mar 29, 2015
Depeche Mode You would do an excellent job as a lobbyist for Tesla... maybe you are already.�
Mar 31, 2015
Depeche Mode Update as of today... after couple of SuperCharger throttling at Montr�al SC, I got my first full speed rate (118 kw)
That's good news...
Any good news for those who experienced throttling in the past?�
Mar 31, 2015
dhanson865 Were you still on 6.1.x or did you update to 6.2.x before that charging session?�
Mar 31, 2015
Depeche Mode Still on 6.1�
Mar 31, 2015
FlasherZ No, I just like to deal in data and facts instead of emotion and speculation.
And I think most people here know that Tesla employees are highly discouraged from participating in conversations here. I'm not one of them. I'm just a customer.�
Mar 31, 2015
brucet999 Somehow I never expected to see an Escher reference in a TMC thread, although a few of the posts might have made me feel a little like the subject of an Edvard Munch painting.�
Apr 1, 2015
Depeche Mode Update: I got the 6.2 version and just decided to go try again the Montr�al SuperCharger and I haven't been throttled for the 2nd time in row...
I'll maybe try another SuperCharge in couple of days, I'll keep you posted...�
Apr 1, 2015
mmh To follow up on my previous post, I don't think local super charging is being rate-limited. I've visited the SLC charger several times over the past few days to test since my last post. Each time I've been the only one charging. Sometimes I get 60kW, sometimes I get 100kW. There doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason as to why. Tried with various starting SOC, different times of day. If there is a pattern to it, I'm not seeing it.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét