Forums

Is SR+ 90% SOC = SR+ 100% SOC Software limited?

Is SR+ 90% SOC = SR+ 100% SOC Software limited?

As far as battery degradation goes with charging over 90%, I was wondering with software limited charging, is the software recruiting the exact same 90% cells to charge them to 100% and causing rapid degradation or if the software will be using 100% of the battery pack being charged at 90% of the time and avoiding rapid battery degradation over multiple charges?

mrburke | April 16, 2019

@Evolution - I think what you are trying to ask is. Which part of the charge is being software limited. The bottom or the top ? If I were Tesla, I would limit the bottom x%. So a battery at 0 miles still had 20 miles of charge in it.
Two reasons.
1) You don't want the SR battery to charge better/faster than the SR+.
2) When an SR driver runs out of juice, you can offer to unlock the extra 20 miles for $$.

Bighorn | April 16, 2019

I was told by someone knowledgable at Tesla that charging to 100% on a software limited battery is just a damaging as doing it on any other battery. Tons of debate on this point, especially by those that feel that they gamed the system because they're charging to the same range on a smaller, cheaper battery.

ebmcs03 | April 16, 2019

Well hopefully Tesla designed it like mrburke said so those who buy the SR and charge to 100 all the time will damage the battery thinking they got a deal.

mrburke | April 16, 2019

It is more than just the damage of charging to 100%, those last 10% take along time.

EVolution | April 16, 2019

interesting info
thanks

Carl Thompson | April 16, 2019

@ebmcs03:
"Well hopefully Tesla designed it like mrburke said so those who buy the SR and charge to 100 all the time will damage the battery thinking they got a deal."

You would wish that on people?

gordon_r_benson | April 16, 2019

I think his intent is that people who try and game the system at Tesla's expense kind of deserve what they get. A better way to go on the SR is to just not buy it if you really do need the extra 20 miles in range while staying at at 90% or less charge.

Carl Thompson | April 16, 2019

@gordon_r_benson:
"I think his intent is that people who try and game the system at Tesla's expense kind of deserve what they get."

I definitely wouldn't characterize it as gaming the system at Tesla's expense!

Tesla is the company that was too cheap / inept / whatever to build the actual cars they took SR buyers' money for. So if Tesla instead sells a better car with a better battery to those buyers how is it wrong for them to utilize it to its fullest?

Remember, when Tesla sells a car they no longer own it. When sold the car and its battery belong 100% to the person that bought it. The buyer should be able to use their purchase as they see fit and it's wrong for Tesla to hinder the full use of something it willingly sells.

.

Suppose I sell computers and I sell you a cheap value model that is supposed to have a 128 GB SSD drive. But I don't get a lot of orders for the value model and I don't want to design and buy parts for it so instead I just ship you a better model with a 256GB SSD drive. Because I'm a dick, I partition it so that only 128GB is used by the OS because I don't want you to have more than you paid for.

But I've sold it to you; it's now _your_ computer. You _own_ it.

Should I as the seller be able to install software / firmware on the computer that will reformat and potentially damage your SSD drive if I detect that you've configured it to use the extra SSD space? After all you're practically a thief and you "deserve what you get."

tenchir | April 17, 2019

Your SSD example isn't apples to apples. It should be more like a firmware lock to that 256GB so that only 128GB is only accessible, the rest of the drive could be used as "scratch" by the firmware for longevity purpose.

Your equivalent example would be that the person who owns the SR would hack/mod the car's firmware/software to unlock the extra features and/or battery capacity. They could do that, but they will also void your warranty on the battery and the car. The same as what happens if the SSD manufacturer finds out that you flashed your 128GB SSD with a 256GB SSD firmware and messed up, they not going to honor your warranty.

Carl Thompson | April 17, 2019

@tenchir:
"Your SSD example isn't apples to apples. It should be more like a firmware lock to that 256GB so that only 128GB is only accessible, the rest of the drive could be used as "scratch" by the firmware for longevity purpose."

OK, let's use your refinement of the analogy.

"The same as what happens if the SSD manufacturer finds out that you flashed your 128GB SSD with a 256GB SSD firmware and messed up ..."

No. It's _not_ a 128GB SSD where you flash some rogue firmware to make it 256GB. For an apples-to-apples analogy the SSD was designed and manufactured to be a _256GB_ SSD not a 128GB SSD. The manufacturer just partitioned it so you can't use all the space that the SSD was designed to allow you to use. That's a very, very big difference.

scornell3095 | April 17, 2019

Picked up SR today and the delivery specialist said we can charge it to 100% with no concern. On another note, the SR did not come with basic Autopilot. That is not an issue for us but there has certainly been a lot of confusion surrounding this on the forum.

EVolution | April 17, 2019

Same thing for my delivery

JarvisM3 | April 18, 2019

I’m happy for you! I picked up my Plus a few weeks ago. I’m sad I am getting a ride to pickup my pickup truck to move some pinball games around. I already miss my car and it’s been 12 minutes. Ha

Carl Thompson | April 18, 2019

@scornell3095:
"... the delivery specialist said we can charge it to 100% with no concern."

Interesting. We've had others in this thread say doing that would damage the battery. I wonder who's right?

Carl Thompson | April 18, 2019

@ scornell3095

BTW, congrats on getting your car! You got a great deal at $35k.