Tesla's Major Design Flaw May Cost You $40,000

[Surf Green]

Come on quit spewing the same garbage about "thats how the technology is" - That is a load of BS. Yes it is true of the technology - BUT the user should be prevented from allowing this to occur when it costs 40,000 to fix. We're not talking about a $300 error with an ipod. $40,000 is a huge mistake.

Common leakage in a Li+ cell is a maximum of 1 mV per day. That's with no load.
that's why storage voltage is cited at 3.6V per cell (30-40% state of charge). That allows you to leave the cells for over a year without having to maintain them.
A properly designed BMS in shutdown, will draw very little current, and will deplete the battery at a slower rate than natural leakage.

So, it is certainly possible for a battery to die on it's own if you fully deplete it, and then park it for a long period of time. There's nothing that Tesla can do about it if you're that intent upon damaging the pack.

[mack73]

How about preventing the average car driver from driving with an overheated engine thus "bricking" an ICE? It's on the end user to use the damn things properly be it a ICE car or an EV. Why can't we simply require that rather than worrying about what some dumbass that can't use the tech is going to POSSSIBLY do to it out of ignorance?

You can damage any car, EV or not, using it improperly. Period. Follow the manufacturer's recommendations or pay the cost for not doing so.

Oh come on - these comparisons are rediculous. Ok lets think this through logically.

[Chris_V]

Oh come on - these comparisons are rediculous. Ok lets think this through logically.

yes, why don't you. Since you haven't listened to anythign logical yet from anyone.

[mack73]

How about preventing the average car driver from driving with an overheated engine thus "bricking" an ICE? It's on the end user to use the damn things properly be it a ICE car or an EV. Why can't we simply require that rather than worrying about what some dumbass that can't use the tech is going to POSSSIBLY do to it out of ignorance?

You can damage any car, EV or not, using it improperly. Period. Follow the manufacturer's recommendations or pay the cost for not doing so.

Oh come on - these comparisons are rediculous. Ok lets think this through logically.

1. User of ICE has an overheating warning light
2. If said user ignores the warning light - physical evidence is displayed of the overheating (steam)
3. If said user listens to the warning light and stops the car and turns it off - no damage is done.
4. If user continues to ignore the warning light and the physical sign of overheating, runs the car completely out of water and siezes the engine, the cost is not 40,000 unless were talking about a Lamborghini. More like 7-10,000.


Now for Tesla

1. There is no warning light that you are about to brick the battery FROM A LACK OF CHARGING
2. The user can drive the car till the cut off. Leave the car for a relatively small amount of time, and the battery is bricked.
2. It costs 40,000 to fix.

[AHFlynn]

Now for Tesla

1. There is no warning light that you are about to brick the battery FROM A LACK OF CHARGING
2. The user can drive the car till the cut off. Leave the car for a relatively small amount of time, and the battery is bricked.
2. It costs 40,000 to fix.

im sorry but thats totally wrong. youre warned extensively that the car is low on batteries, to the point that the car will actually stop moving in an attempt to get the message across, and tesla will call you and tell you to plug it in if you have your gsm activated and its nearing the danger zone.

[mack73]

Common leakage in a Li+ cell is a maximum of 1 mV per day. That's with no load.
that's why storage voltage is cited at 3.6V per cell (30-40% state of charge). That allows you to leave the cells for over a year without having to maintain them.
A properly designed BMS in shutdown, will draw very little current, and will deplete the battery at a slower rate than natural leakage.

So, it is certainly possible for a battery to die on it's own if you fully deplete it, and then park it for a long period of time. There's nothing that Tesla can do about it if you're that intent upon damaging the pack.

It is obvious that in Tesla's implimentation this is not true. How can a "off" car brick the battery in significantly less than a year if there is no load.

That is the problem - they are keeping a load on it, even in the off state. Again as I have said before. There needs to be a safeguard that will remove ALL load once a minimum state is reached

[emmettlodge]

As the thread OP, I had posted this with the intent of not only being an informative member of TCL, but also to have a good laugh.

I have not been disappointed

[mack73]

im sorry but thats totally wrong. youre warned extensively that the car is low on batteries, to the point that the car will actually stop moving in an attempt to get the message across, and tesla will call you and tell you to plug it in if you have your gsm activated and its nearing the danger zone.

No there is a difference between the minimum level for the vehicle to operate and the level where the battery is permanently damaged. The warning is for when the battery is reaching the lower limit of operation, not the level where the battery will receive permanent damage

[Chris_V]

You can damage any car, EV or not, using it improperly. Period. Follow the manufacturer's recommendations or pay the cost for not doing so.

for good measure. This is the point and how driving your ICE car overheating is the same as driving your EV to 0 charge then not rechrging it, and letting it dwindle to true zero charge. In both cases, it's mistreating your vehicle and in both cases it will cause expensive damage to the motive power of the vehicle. And in neither case is it the fault of the manufacturer, as in both cases they warn you of it happening before it gets to be a problem!

[AHFlynn]

No there is a difference between the minimum level for the vehicle to operate and the level where the battery is permanently damaged. The warning is for when the battery is reaching the lower limit of operation, not the level where the battery will receive permanent damage

yeah i know, im just saying that besides all the lights and warnings telling you youre running out of juice, the car actually shutting down should be a pretty good indication that you dont want to just let it sit for a week.

they should have a better way of dealing with it though. i know gm has a smartphone app for the volt that would work well in this circumstance.

[Chris_V]

No there is a difference between the minimum level for the vehicle to operate and the level where the battery is permanently damaged. The warning is for when the battery is reaching the lower limit of operation, not the level where the battery will receive permanent damage

the warning comes BEFORE it gets to the point of permanent damage (which is still in contention as to how "permanent' it really is) and it's up to you the owner not to let it get worse. Much like the warning for overheating is whan the car gets hot, not when the car is permanently damaged and needs a new engine. It's up to you not to let it get to the point of permanent damage. NOT the manufacturer.

[cockerpunk]

for good measure. This is the point and how driving your ICE car overheating is the same as driving your EV to 0 charge then not rechrging it, and letting it dwindle to true zero charge. In both cases, it's mistreating your vehicle and in both cases it will cause expensive damage to the motive power of the vehicle. And in neither case is it the fault of the manufacturer, as in both cases they warn you of it happening before it gets to be a problem!

you are forgetting that the electric car is the boogie man, and anything that can be used to destroy it, no matter how silly, should be used.

why can't car folks understand that the electric car, and progress itself, poses no danger to the automotive enthusiast?

[Chris_V]

you are forgetting that the electric car is the boogie man, and anything that can be used to destroy it, no matter how silly, should be used.

True, I did forget that.

[dunhamjr]

Now for Tesla

1. There is no warning light that you are about to brick the battery FROM A LACK OF CHARGING
2. The user can drive the car till the cut off. Leave the car for a relatively small amount of time, and the battery is bricked.
2. It costs 40,000 to fix.

So you now want a warning light/system (which will draw even MORE electricity)... to warn you that the charge is low?

First off.
The car does have a system in place already. It tells you what mileage/electricity you have left.
It tells you the car needs to be charged.

Second.
People are ignoring this and parking their car unplugged in for long periods of time.

They were told how to care for the car by the dealer and the manual.
They were warned that the battery was low and it needs to be charged.
They decided they knew better and ignored the instructions and warnings.

Why no do we need to add ANOTHER level of warning again?

The cars are not Corolla's. Idiot "average joe" is not the buyer here. These people have money to spend on a 'toy'. They are early adopters to a new tech. They are more savvy and thus they should have a higher expectation placed on them for following 'the rules' where it pertains to caring for their $100k cars.

Unless Tesla goes the route of sending techs out to every car to ensure that thee plugged in each day, people are going to be idiots and are going to brick the batteries... and then like idiots, they are going to put the blame on anyone they can other than themselves.

[freedomgli]

yeah, if you drive it to empty and park it.

im hoping youre not dumb enough to do that after reading all of this.

It's not a matter of being too dumb to charge a depleted battery immediately. It's a matter of Tesla's poor decision to keep discharging the battery in vehicle that is sitting idle to the point that it becomes a $40k paperweight in a very short order. We're not talking about AAA batteries that are 5 years old or an iPod that takes a little bit longer to recharge after it's been sitting in a desk drawer for 6 months. We're talking about how much risk Tesla is choosing to burden their customers with.

[dunhamjr]

It is obvious that in Tesla's implimentation this is not true. How can a "off" car brick the battery in significantly less than a year if there is no load.

That is the problem - they are keeping a load on it, even in the off state. Again as I have said before. There needs to be a safeguard that will remove ALL load once a minimum state is reached

regular car batteries will brick in significantly less than a years time.
why should Tesla's batteries be any different? they are still batteries after all.

even without load. batteries lose their juice. its kind of the nature of the beast.

batteries die.
rubber rots.
metal rusts.
gas goes bad.

its all the same.

take care of the tech you have and everything will work out. ignore it and it will prematurely fail.
simple as that.

[AHFlynn]

It's not a matter of being too dumb to charge a depleted battery immediately. It's a matter of Tesla's poor decision to keep discharging the battery in vehicle that is sitting idle to the point that it becomes a $40k paperweight in a very short order. We're not talking about AAA batteries that are 5 years old or an iPod that takes a little bit longer to recharge after it's been sitting in a desk drawer for 6 months. We're talking about how much risk Tesla is choosing to burden their customers with.

it sounds like an inherent technology flaw, not an executive decision that tries to profit off of people ruining their batteries. tesla should have been more explicit with the repercussions, but i think the owners manual outlines whats going on pretty well.

[Chris_V]

It's not a matter of being too dumb to charge a depleted battery immediately. It's a matter of Tesla's poor decision to keep discharging the battery in vehicle that is sitting idle to the point that it becomes a $40k paperweight in a very short order.

Unless I've read the entire thread wrong, the fact is if you've got a reasonable charge in the battery it can sit for long periods of time. WHy you would let it sit for months at a stretch without plugging in, or even a year is beyond me. THEY CAN"T PLUG IT IN FOR YOU, but they TELL you to plug it in when it gets low, if you fail to do that, it's NOT THEIR GODDAMN FAULT!

There are a few dozen ways you can horribly damage your ICE car if you mistreat it, and we don't blame the manufacturer. Yet here, if you mistreat your EV then OMG! The manufacturer carries the burden of blame! WTF?

[mack73]

So you now want a warning light/system (which will draw even MORE electricity)... to warn you that the charge is low?

First off.
The car does have a system in place already. It tells you what mileage/electricity you have left.
It tells you the car needs to be charged.

Second.
People are ignoring this and parking their car unplugged in for long periods of time.

They were told how to care for the car by the dealer and the manual.
They were warned that the battery was low and it needs to be charged.
They decided they knew better and ignored the instructions and warnings.

Why no do we need to add ANOTHER level of warning again?

The cars are not Corolla's. Idiot "average joe" is not the buyer here. These people have money to spend on a 'toy'. They are early adopters to a new tech. They are more savvy and thus they should have a higher expectation placed on them for following 'the rules' where it pertains to caring for their $100k cars.

Unless Tesla goes the route of sending techs out to every car to ensure that thee plugged in each day, people are going to be idiots and are going to brick the batteries... and then like idiots, they are going to put the blame on anyone they can other than themselves.

Slow down my man - Never did I say there needs to be a warning device. What they do need like freedomgli says is for a safety mechanism to remove ALL load before permanent damage occurs.

What I was saying is that since they do not have a safety device to remove all load, AND there is no warning before permanent damage is done to the battery from letting it sit to long = A huge user issue.

[Chris_V]

but i think the owners manual outlines whats going on pretty well.

From what's been posted on here out of the manual, yes, it does. It's pretty clear, too.

[mack73]

regular car batteries will brick in significantly less than a years time.
why should Tesla's batteries be any different? they are still batteries after all.

even without load. batteries lose their juice. its kind of the nature of the beast.

Again when did I say it should last a year? I was commenting on the simple fact that was posted that at the storage level, the battery draw down should allow the battery to be without a load for a year before permanent damage occurs.

[Chris_V]

Sl, AND there is no warning before permanent damage is done to the battery from letting it sit to long = A huge user issue.

But there IS! There is a warning saying it's getting low, much like the warning your ICE is getting too hot. And in the manual it says clearly that once it gets too low, AND of you don't do anything about it, it can cause damage.

Now if they didn't cover this enough in their owner orientation, much like Brandon does when he talks owners through their purchases, then there COULD be an issue that the part of the manual that covers that is not adequately pointed out, but you should STILL RTFM. And, as they say, when it gets low, charge it (much like they say in your own owners manual, that when it gets too hot, shut off the engine).

If you continue to use it after the warning light goes off, and you fail to do what's recommended (like charge the car back up) then it's not on the manufacturer to do it for you. On this or any other car. And it's on you to suck up the consequenses.



I mean, what woud you say if they DID have a switch in there to disconnect the batteries totally, and they STILL go dead from disuse over time? That's just the nature of the beast and if you don't charge them when they are nearly dead, it's STILL on you.

[dunhamjr]

Slow down my man - Never did I say there needs to be a warning device. What they do need like freedomgli says is for a safety mechanism to remove ALL load before permanent damage occurs.

What I was saying is that since they do not have a safety device to remove all load, AND there is no warning before permanent damage is done to the battery from letting it sit to long = A huge user issue.

warning light.
monitoring system... same difference.

its another system to put in the car, they will draw energy.

and then you also want some sort of mechanical disconnect system that the monitoring system will trigger to break the battery connection. again another system/more parts to add into the car.

AND THEN... even once you do that. you still cannot prevent the battery from draining naturally. so Telsa could do all of that and idiots would still brick their cars.

so now what is the point of adding in all that complexity in the monitoring systems and adding in the mechanical disconnect switches, when the battery will still brick?

its an electric car. plug it in. SUCH an easy solution.

i mean really. your argument is basically the same logic as saying that you should be able to run an ICE past empty and it will still keep going till you decide to fuel up. and if it runs out of gas, then in the manufacturers fault.

don't run your ICE out of fuel. don't run your EV out of fuel. the solution is so painfully easy.
plug in your EV.

[dunhamjr]

Again when did I say it should last a year? I was commenting on the simple fact that was posted that at the storage level, the battery draw down should allow the battery to be without a load for a year before permanent damage occurs.

umm here....^^^
this statement seems to imply you think it should last a year.

and previously the statement below as well.

how can a "off" car brick the battery in significantly less than a year if there is no load.

so what are you basing "the battery draw down should allow the battery to be without a load for a year before permanent damage occurs" on?

sounds to me like you are just wishing and hoping. you can WANT something more then anything in the world, but that doesn't make it any more likely to come true. or even be physically possible.

[Techun]

The difference is that you can kill an ICE through action, but the Tesla can die from not taking an action. There is a very large difference here.

There are multiple use cases where the car could sit for 2 weeks and die. That is just not acceptable.


Tesla should have completely, physically cut off drain from the batteries at a high enough point that they can be saved after a year or so.

[2.0T_Convert]

Come on quit spewing the same garbage about "thats how the technology is". The user should be prevented from allowing this to occur when it costs 40,000 to fix. We're not talking about a $300 error with an ipod. $40,000 is a huge mistake.

Then please do tell how exactly should this be prevented. Should a nanny state beacon be installed and automatically call for help when the car is left sitting?

The nature of these types of batteries and well I'd bet any battery is they slowly loss a charge over time. That's why even the batteries we buy at CVS have a shelf life. lith-Ion has certain advantages over other battery types such as lower weight. If you don't or can't understand how to care for one of these cars then don't buy one. Simple.

[Techun]

Then please do tell how exactly should this be prevented. Should a nanny state beacon be installed and automatically call for help when the car is left sitting?

The nature of these types of batteries and well I'd bet any battery is they slowly loss a charge over time. That's why even the batteries we buy at CVS have a shelf life. lith-Ion has certain advantages over other battery types such as lower weight. If you don't or can't understand how to care for one of these cars then don't buy one. Simple.

Simply cut off all drain, and at such a point that the self-discharge won't kill the batteries within a year or so. Simple.

[AHFlynn]

Then please do tell how exactly should this be prevented. Should a nanny state beacon be installed and automatically call for help when the car is left sitting?

i dont think this is a bad idea as long as it is defeatable, like the thing tesla already has going.

id trust tesla more than say facebook or twitter.

[dunhamjr]

The difference is that you can kill an ICE through action, but the Tesla can die from not taking an action. There is a very large difference here.

Not changing the oil is inaction.
Not replacing the timing belts is inaction.
Not shutting off an overheating engine is inaction.

So how again can you NOT kill an ICE through inaction?

[mack73]

umm here....^^^
this statement seems to imply you think it should last a year.

and previously the statement below as well.



so what are you basing "the battery draw down should allow the battery to be without a load for a year before permanent damage occurs" on?

sounds to me like you are just wishing and hoping. you can WANT something more then anything in the world, but that doesn't make it any more likely to come true. or even be physically possible.

What are you talking about - you are misreading.

Here let me explain it:

Surf Green posted this.

Common leakage in a Li+ cell is a maximum of 1 mV per day. That's with no load.
that's why storage voltage is cited at 3.6V per cell (30-40% state of charge). That allows you to leave the cells for over a year without having to maintain them.
A properly designed BMS in shutdown, will draw very little current, and will deplete the battery at a slower rate than natural leakage.

So, it is certainly possible for a battery to die on it's own if you fully deplete it, and then park it for a long period of time. There's nothing that Tesla can do about it if you're that intent upon damaging the pack.

My comments were point out that this cannot be true in Tesla's implementation. Of course the battery will never last forever.

[chris@revotechnik]

Simply cut off all drain, and at such a point that the self-discharge won't kill the batteries within a year or so. Simple.

Which would give the car a 0 mile range since a completely charged battery could drain with no draw in that time.

[Techun]

Not changing the oil is inaction.
Not replacing the timing belts is inaction.
Not shutting off an overheating engine is inaction.

So how again can you NOT kill an ICE through inaction?

Continuing to drive past the oil change interval is an action.
Driving past the timing belt change interval is an action.
Continuing to drive the vehicle while it's screaming at you and steam is billowing from the hood is an action.

The Tesla can die in 2 weeks if you get hospitalized, go on vacation, get arrested, etc etc.

[chris@revotechnik]

Continuing to drive past the oil change interval is an action.
Driving past the timing belt change interval is an action.
Continuing to drive the vehicle while it's screaming at you and steam is billowing from the hood is an action.

The Tesla can die in 2 weeks if you get hospitalized, go on vacation, get arrested, etc etc.

Walking away from your car without putting the charge cord in is an action

[dunhamjr]

Tesla should have completely, physically cut off drain from the batteries at a high enough point that they can be saved after a year or so.

Again... is that even physically possible?

First problem I can think of... how high is the battery level requirement to allow for the natural physics of the batteries storage decay so that the battery would still not brick in a year? 40%? 50%? 73%?

Are you really asking a manufacturer to limit the range on their battery systems to potentially HALF so that they can accommodate idiots who ignore maintaining their cars by allowing the battery to store for a full year?

Do manufacturers of ICE's do that?
Is there some oil monitoring system I have never seen that will only let the car go 12 months and then will then not allow the car to start again without an oil change?

Is there some fuel quality monitoring system I have never seen that will only let the car sit 12 months and then will then not allow the car to start again without dropping the fuel tank to drain out the bad fuel?

[mack73]

Then please do tell how exactly should this be prevented. Should a nanny state beacon be installed and automatically call for help when the car is left sitting?

Um... I did - go read page 5. Here let me link you: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthrea...1#post76059448