Vampire loss fix in 5.8 not working for me :(

Vampire loss fix in 5.8 not working for me :(

Still losing 8-10 miles a day. My car normally charges to 183 (M60) when I get home from work in the evening. By morning it is always down to the mid 170s. Parking at work for 10 hours it loses another 5-8. Energy Saving mode is set and I do notice a slow startup on the dash and 17 screen. Anyone else having vampire loss issue with 5.8?

deeptesla | December 9, 2013

Another data point. I have S60 with 5.8. I am still seeing a loss of .5 miles per hour. My car sits in a 50F garage. I have a service appointment next week lets see what Tesla says. I have tried the rebooting process as well but I don't see any improvement

AmpedRealtor | December 9, 2013

@ deeptesla - sounds like you may have a 12v battery issue.

Mathew98 | December 9, 2013

@AmpedRealtor - Not necessarily true. My S60 experienced similar battery drain. My SC pulled the log and determined there were no faults in any of the systems including the 12V battery.

The explanation was that the cold weather prompts the car to keep the battery warm by taking some juice to do so. Another SC explained that the cold weather affects the range calculation.

I do find it strange that most S60 owners see the drain issue persists in V5.8 whereas the S85 owners are quite satisfied with the same version.

lygren | December 10, 2013

It is indeed a problem is Tesla now officially believes us S60 owners will accept the fact that our cars drain more than 85kW under same circumstances...... That´s not gonna run it for me at least, and I am already fed up having to spend this much time concerning this issue!! Again, a Norwegian guy parked his 85kW on the airport for 36 hours in -10 degrees celsius with 1,5KM total drain!!! That´s about what my S60 drains per hour.

By other words, the explanation Tesla is trying to pull on the cold weather and/or keeping the battery warm is nothing short of bullshit as far as I can tell........... NOT good Tesla, pulling stunts like these may indeed be far more costly than any article published in NYT if facts this time actualy remain in Teslas disfavour.

Again, I am hoping Tesla comes up with a solution on this matter, but thus far my communication with Tesla on this matter has been far from satisfactory.

AmpedRealtor | December 10, 2013

@ lygren,

You are basing your anger, and corresponding use of expletives, on one story communicated 2nd hand about some guy in Norway. I have a P85 and live in Arizona. My garage is in the 50s and 60s, so temperature is not an issue. Under 5.8 my car loses approximately 4 miles of ideal range in 24 hours. Calm yourself! :)

lygren | December 10, 2013

Still, 4 miles during 24 hours is far less than my 1 mile per HOUR. I am generally a very calm person, but this issue is now taking far too long to address.

Again, Tesla suggested that THEY compare my S60 with another Model S, but is currently (I am working on it though...) not accepting to compare the drain with a 85kW car.

As for this being potentially VERY bad for Tesla - you bet´cha, someone should pinch mr. Musk on the shoulder and make sure the issue with the 60kWs is taken care of ASAP.

Captain_Zap | December 10, 2013

@Lygren - That conflicts with everything else that I have learned. Did you get this official opinion from Tesla HQ? If so, would you please ask for permission to share what information you gleaned from them with us here at the forums so that we can understand what is happening? I wouldn't mind following up too so that I can understand why I am getting a different impression.

lygren | December 10, 2013

I am communicating directly with the Nordic Service Manager on this matter, and although I have insisted that comparing my S60 with another S60 that most likely would have the same issue he is not accepting to compare it to a 85kW-model even under the exact same circumstances.

I was also VERY surprised that they would not be interested in comparing and figuring this out themselves, and although this might be the opinion of the Nordic Service Manager and not "HQ" this is the highest ranking Tesla-official I have been able to get a hold of.

Also, I might add that the same Tesla-official has confirmed to me that my car actually only draws 3,2KM per day according to data pulled from my vehicle on two service-occations. If that is true, I simply do not understand why in the world a comparison with a similar 85kW would be any issue.

lygren | December 10, 2013

Sorry, again;

I am communicating directly with the Nordic Service Manager on this matter, and although I have insisted that comparing my S60 with another S60 that most likely would have the same issue is of little interest, he is not accepting to compare it to a 85kW-model even under the exact same circumstances.

AmpedRealtor | December 10, 2013

@ lygren,

Quick question - how do you know per hour what your Model S is draining unless you are checking each hour? Every time you check your car by waking it up - either by opening the door or using the app - you increase the vampire load because the car takes a while to go back to sleep. The more you check, the less time your car spends sleeping and the higher the vampire loss will get.

Is your car plugged in the whole time? That makes a big difference. If your car is not plugged in, at those temperature extremes you will have battery depletion due to thermal management. If your car is plugged in, the car will top itself off automatically. Also, in colder conditions, the display may show fewer charged miles than usual due to the battery being cold. This could, in turn, exaggerate the appearance of vampire loss. As the battery warms, you may see miles coming back.

The next thing to check is to make sure you don't have anything going on that would prevent your car from going to sleep. I'm sure that Tesla's logs would show as much, but I've heard of one situation where the car's browser was set to a constantly updating web page. This, in turn, prevented the car from sleeping. I read this in another thread or over at TMC Forums. It's a long shot, but worth a look.

Some have reported success by rebooting the center console in a specific manner after updating to 5.8. Set your sleep mode to off, reboot, then set to on and reboot again. One owner at TMC Forums reports that this solved his vampire load issue.

lygren | December 10, 2013

Thanks for diggin´ in, AmpedRealtor;

1. I certainly have a life besides checking in on my Tesla...?? :) By other words, loss per hour is calcuated by reviewing miles left when parking at night and miles left in the morning. :) If I´d wake the car every hour I would agree, that could take somewhat of a toll...

2. No, the car is certainly not plugged in when reviewing loss of miles. How would I be able to review loss if I charge the car at the same time?

3. The car does go to "deep sleep" as it takes forever to wake up each morning (like me I suppose)... :) The FOB is placed far away.

4. I´ve tried that reboot-sequence, unfortunately no luck...

AmpedRealtor | December 10, 2013

@ lygren,

Regarding #2, I was simply saying that your vampire loss may be less if plugged in because the car may use shore power to maintain the battery temperature versus battery power. When comparing your vampire losses to that of other Model S vehicles, make sure you are comparing cars under the same or similar conditions - including whether or not the vehicles were plugged in during the time in question.

You are claiming 1.5 km loss per hour, or 36 km vampire loss in 24 hours (22 miles). That type of loss would be extreme even for firmware 4.5 which did not have a sleep mode. Tesla's claim of very little vampire loss of 3.2 km (2 miles) per day based on the logs seems far more realistic. I wonder why there is such a discrepancy? Hopefully you can get it sorted out through Service.

Mathew98 | December 10, 2013

@AmpedRealtor - The reported loss by @lygren is not unusual for S60. His S60 is obviously in a much cold climate than your toasty AZ temperature.

I see similar results as @lygren even in the 30's and 40's. My car would lose 10 miles during an 8 hours period at work (35 degrees garage). Then the car would lose another 6 - 8 miles over 12 hours period in at my home garage (50 degrees). This is regardless if it is plugged in or not.

I've rebooted the MCU and dash multiple times with on/off/on sequence with no changes in V5.8.

@lygren has legitimate gripe at the 20+ miles of daily drain for S60. I will give TM more leeway will reserve judgement until warmer weather in spring.

Perhaps the engineers that Cap_Zap spoke to have already escalated up to HQ. We will know soon enough in future updates.

AmpedRealtor | December 10, 2013

@ Mathew98,

Thanks for the information. There seems to be a rising tide of S60 owners who are not happy with vampire loss under 5.8. Where there is smoke there is usually fire, so it sounds like a software issue possibly with S60 models. Coincidentally, 5.8 dropped as temperatures started falling. Have any S60 owners compared their vampire loss before/after installing 5.8?

Longhorn92 | December 10, 2013

I have not seen a big difference between vampire loss before/after installing v5.8; however, my v5.8 installation almost perfectly corresponded with colder weather arriving in the Chicago area, so it's hard to tell if there are offsetting changes (possibly vampire loss improvement offset by colder weather drain increase).

NKYTA | December 10, 2013

"Where there is smoke there is usually fire"

@AR - unfortunate choice of words for the Model S forum?

terryd | December 10, 2013

I have a S60 and loose about 8 per night and about 5 in the day since 5.8 added' temps in San Jose have been in the 30's early morning and in the high 50's during day.

elguapo | December 10, 2013

@AmpedRealotr My S60 loses the same amount of rated miles with 5.8 as it did with 4.5. I knownTM will figure it out, but I don't buy the cold weather / battery warming explanation. When I get in my car after a cold (30 degreeF) night, I get the dashed yellow line and alert that battery is warming.

Brian H | December 10, 2013

Many S60 complaints.
Few or no S85 complaints.

The conclusion seems inescapeable.

AmpedRealtor | December 10, 2013

@ NKYTA - Doh! lol

Mathew98 | December 11, 2013

This is a re-post from another thread for S40:

mbergman | DECEMBER 10, 2013
Just heard from my local service manager -

"We have other customers with a similar concern. We have been communicating with our engineering team. In the next few weeks we will be launching a firmware update to help restore some of the range loss. I cannot say exactly what headquarters is going to do. The factory has not disclosed this to us at this time. Also, future firmware updates will refine the algorithms over time to also help. As for what to expect from the battery over time we cannot commit to any hard numbers. An engineer explained how our battery ages over time.

'…it is expected that with this battery technology, the battery ages faster at the beginning of line, and then the capacity decrease should slow down. Therefore the customer should not extrapolate his range loss in a linear fashion, especially if a portion of it is due to FW changes.’"

lygren | December 11, 2013

I was prompted with a new firmware this evening, perhaps this will address the vampire loss on the 60kWs? I will let you guys know tomorrow, I have set the firmware-update to run in 15 minutes...

Longhorn92 | December 11, 2013

@Mathew98: I believe the S40 post is dealing with the reduction in battery range vs. this post dealing with the vampire loss issue. Correct?

Mathew98 | December 11, 2013

I think they are entwined. Both are software related and both the S40 and S60 are affected more so than the S85 in both issues.

V5.8 introduced the re-calibrated range estimate and the sleep mode also "lose" range similar to 4.5 for S40/S60.

Capt_Zap also acknowledged the engineers are looking into the sleep issue for S60.

Let's see if the upcoming update(s) would address both issues.

Longhorn92 | December 11, 2013

That would be great if it fixes both.

whitex | December 11, 2013

Just adding a data point I recently collected from my S60:
@16degF, open lot - 2.20 miles of rated range lost per hour of parking
@36degF, semi enclosed - 1.23 miles of rated range lost per hour of parking
@46degF, closed garage - 0.67 miles of rated range lost per hour of parking

The car wasn't losing that much with 5.6, but then again 5.8 coincided with temps lowering outside. I've asked for 5.6 back but of course Tesla refused.

Haeze | December 11, 2013

Keep in mind, the greater loss on a S40/S60 in cold weather is to be expected.

As @DTsea said earlier in the thread, the "current charge level" you see on the dash when you get in the car is based on the voltage it is getting from the pack. When you have a 60kWh pack, there are 20% fewer battery cells in the pack than in the 85kWh pack. When batteries get cold, the voltage they provide is lowered because the chemical reaction in them is slowed down. This means the voltage will be affected a LOT more in a 60kWh pack than an 85kWh pack since you have less cells to provide fractional voltages raising that charge state. It also means that the pack has to be kept slightly warmer in order to maintain a high enough voltage capable of running the car, should you step in and drive away. This means the pack heater must be run more often than it does in an 85kWh pack.

I am not saying that some of you don't have a legitimate issue with vampire drain, but if you are losing less than 1-mile per hour, it is most likely just pack heating that is using that charge. If you are close to 1mph or more of vampire loss, or if you see significant loss when in warm temps, you likely have a faulty 12v battery. The reason I say this, is that if you got one of the faulty 12v batteries, the main pack will constantly be trying to charge that 12v battery, and not get anywhere, so the charger keeps running, draining the main pack. You should contact your local SvC and have them monitor your 12v charging status (they can do it remotely without having you bring the car in) for a night or two. If they see an irregular charging pattern, they will swap out the 12v battery under warranty.

Mathew98 | December 11, 2013

@whitex - Your observations pretty much mirrored my results. We can surmise the range "loss" is affected by cold weather conditions.

How and why does it affect S40/60 more than S85 is up to TM to resolve.

@Haeze may be correct in his explanation. However, we would like TM to clarifies it for the owner regarding the fuzzy logic involved so we wouldn't be so frustrated with the "lost" range.

I have to reiterate that the new algorithm in the range calculation is much much more accurate. My morning commute of 24 miles range usage is within 1 mile of actual usage (provided I stay in the 330 Wh/m range). My previous range vs actual usage was about 10 miles difference under V4.5.

lygren | December 11, 2013

Haeze, if it is indeed correct that the 60kWh-version has a greater loss due to a less rigid "setup" for a cold climate than is the case for a 85kWh-battery I would certainly not accept that.

The only two options that Tesla stated to me when I purchased their car was that range and power would differ on their 60 and 85kWh battery package. If the vampire-loss would be 1 mile per hour on a 60kWh as opposed to 1 mile per day for a 85kWh that is a substantial piece of information that Tesla - at least not according to Norwegian law - can dodge when suddenly ?? becoming apparent at a later point of time.

I understand this is a new technology - and that Tesla is a new company, but these are facts of such potential magnitude that they cannot be simply "brought to my attention" afterwards as they suddenly appear to be an issue.

I this is the case, which I do believe seems quite likely, I will demand an upgrade to the 85kWh battery for the SAME difference in price when I originally purchased my vehicle.

Let´s hope the firmware fixed this issue, if not I am most probably filing a complaint to the official Norwegian consumer-officials quite shortly. In Norway, the laws for protecting the consumers is quite different from those in the US (I have lived in the US for some time, and I also have a house in Florida... :)). If, however, the fact remains that the 60kWh-version of this car draws far more power in idle than the 85kWh due to technical reasons there are far more risks for Tesla than Norwegian consumer protection to be taken into consideration. This would be TRULY bad PR and I would believe that the option of granting any 60kWh-customer the ability to pay for an upgrade to the 85kWh would be far smarter than just trying to keep this an issue "for the forums".

Sorry for getting a bit ahead of myself here, but drawing up the consequences of not dealing with this issue in a timely manner (it´s been 3 months since I reported this issue) seems like a good idea in my head provided that perhaps Tesla-officials even reads their own forums!

lygren | December 11, 2013

OK, new firmware installed. 275KM rated left at 23.44PM @ 31F (which should remain quite consistent throughout the night). Hoping that number will stick quite well until the morning, but I have to say - I have my doubts! :)

Tiebreaker | December 11, 2013

@Haeze's explanation doesn't sound correct.

To achieve a certain voltage U, you need to string in a series an exact number of cell, adding their voltage. To increase power, you connect multiple "banks" in parallel, adding their current output I, which in turn increases power P=I*U.

I.e. (numbers rounded for the sake of easier calc) if each cell gives 2 volts, to achieve 400V you need to connect 200 cells in series in a "bank": 200 x 2V = 400V.

The 60kWh battery packs have the same voltage as the 85kWh packs, but less total power. Given the same cells are used, the "banks" of cells in series must contain the same number of cells, but there are fewer "banks" in parallel. If a change in temperature affect the voltage, it would equally affect both packs.

But only Tesla knows for sure.

whitex | December 11, 2013

2 miles rated range loss per hour seems a little excessive. If your car is parked 22hrs per day and loses 2miles per hour, it uses an equivalent of 44 miles per day. Since I drive less than 44 miles per day on average, that kind of loss more than doubles my car's electricity usage (and therefore the utility bill for the car). I agree with that it should have been disclosed prior to the purchase, both the difference between 60 and 80 as well as the fact that it exists in the first place (Tesla website calculates savings as compared to ICE cars based on energy used while driving, ignoring the energy used while parked. For ICE cars the energy to recharge the battery that covers parking energy use is included in the mpg).

Are you saying that the battery cells irreversibly lose stored energy and if so, what happens to the power (is it converted to heat or some other form of energy radiation)? Or, is it that only the cell voltage drops while cold (therefore the voltage should rise when heated back up)? If the latter, that should be able to be accounted for in the range algorithm (some battery characterization may be required by Tesla).

Captain_Zap | December 11, 2013

Did you do a reboot after the install and and make sure that all the sleep/range mode settings are in proper order?

whitex | December 11, 2013

One more thing that makes me wonder. Why is Sleep Mode making any noticeable difference in the daily battery drain at all (or does it)? The on-board computer is about as powerful as a recent iPad, which can sustain itself for days on a ~42Wh (not KWh) battery while connected to the internet (screen off) and yet be able to wake up to receive face-time or skype calls fairly quickly. Yes an MS in sleep mode can take a minute to wake up from a cell phone app. What is the MS computer doing if the sleep mode is disabled that would even be noticeable with 40-85KWh battery?

lygren | December 12, 2013

Today at 9.45AM the car reads 266KM rated left. By other words, 9KM loss in 10 hours, or about 0,6 miles per hour @ 30Fs. This is consistent with my previous readings, perhaps a small improvement, but still far from a solved issue when compared with 85kWh cars.

As for regaining any miles due to miscalculations, my travel-distance to work is 27KM and I had 232KM rated left when I arrived. By other words, 34KM rated on a 27KM drive @ about 55 miles/hour with no rapid accelerations which seems quite normal? By other words, little or no "regain" due to battery getting warm.

lygren | December 12, 2013

Captian_Zap: the power-saving was on after installing new firmware, but I did not do the reboot-sequence again. I will try that for tomorrows readings... :)

HGP16 | December 12, 2013

Did the double reboot last night on my S60. Lost 8 miles in 12 hours overnight at 25 degrees, about what I reported in this thread on Nov. 25. Since Wi-Fi defaults to "on," is that a possible source of the drain? Is the connection preventing the car from going into deep sleep mode? I will try again tonight after turning WiFi off and report tomorrow if there is any change. Also, with the car cold, I drove 7 actual miles to work, which consumed 16 rated miles as the battery heated itself.

elguapo | December 12, 2013

@HGP16 WiFi shouldn't have any effect as 85 owners using WiFi aren't reporting the same issue. Plus, think about how long an iPad can last standing by in WiFi mode like @whitex said.

I have the same experience in cold weather with respect to losing almost 2x the rated range versus what I drive. For example, I drive 10 miles and lose 18-20 miles of rated range when it is 35 degres F.

I can't imagine how frustrating this must be for people in really cold climates, like Norway. Hope TM says/does something soon for the 60s.

ssarker | December 14, 2013

Charged my 60 (5.8 ..24)to 90% (172 miles) last night. Lost 6 miles overnight (10 hours) while plugged in, 50F in the garage.

David70 | December 15, 2013

I wonder how much of this is temperature related. I'd been getting 4 hour loss overnight at charges of 220+ miles, but it's warmed up from low 30F overnight lows to low 50F overnight lows. Last night I had 188 miles (rated) and now (11 hours later) it's still 188 miles. Not plugged in last night.

hikerockies | December 15, 2013

Rated range seems to be influenced by more than just the battery charge level. It seems to take into account energy consumption history over some unknown number of miles, battery temperature and who knows what else besides the battery level. So I am not sure if rated range is a reliable way to determine how much vamipre loss we are experiencing. I started monitoring rated range, ideal range and battery level using REST API about a week back on my S60. This was after I had already tried the energy saving toggle and reboot trick which seems to have made a big difference to vampire drain. What I am observing is percentage loss on battery level is very low even though from time to time I seem to lose more on rated range. For example, yesterday I noticed that I seem to have lost 7 miles of rated range in 24 hours after charging to 90% but the battery level only dropped to 89%. 1% drop in charge is very good. Almost all of us monitor battery level on our cell phones and laptops using percentage battery level, not estimates usage time remaining. I see estimated usage time fluctuate a lot on my laptop depnding upon use, so I barely pay any attention to it.

Just my opinion. I am happy with the vampire loss I am seeing on my S60 when looking at battery percentage and consider vampire loss to not be a problem. I am on 5.8 (1.49.25).

Haeze | December 15, 2013

@lygren, you seem to have not read what I posted. I did not state in any way that the 60kWh battery is a "less rigid setup".

The way batteries work is through a chemical reaction. Most chemical reactions are slowed in lower temperatures and are thus, less violent, and less energetic. When a battery gets cold, it can not output as high a voltage as a warm battery. This is not Tesla's fault, it is simply how batteries work.

If you really are getting this worked up over a loss of less than 1 mile per hour at night, then I think you may have purchased the wrong car, and in fact should probably not purchase any car, since even an ICE will use significantly more fuel when starting (especially when starting cold), than it does while running. You probably waste as much fuel cold-starting an ICE as a "vampire drain" of 1 mile per hour overnight in a BEV.

If you are getting worked up over a loss of more than that, then I suspect you didn't even read the last half of my post which stated higher rates of loss are more likely an actual problem with your 12v battery system, and that you should call Tesla Motors to have it addressed.

The fact that you say your first course of action will be to register a complaint with the Norwegian consumer-officials before even talking to Tesla to have the matter resolved reeks of someone with an axe to grind, rather than someone who really is trying to be a part of the electric vehicle movement.

Tesla has mentioned in the past that they have a smart switching system that dynamically assigns how it pulls power from each hexagonally-shaped bundle of cells as needed depending on charge state, temperature, and power demand being placed on the vehicle. You are not dealing with a bank of batteries like in a home-built BEV, where the interconnects between banks of batteries are hard connections. The Tesla pack will pull power from the cell bundles that have the best state of charge, and temperature values to meet the power demand the car needs at any moment. With the 60kWh pack, it has less bundles to choose from, so statistically, it has less "good" bundles to choose from at any given moment than an 85kWh pack would. This means until the car warms up, the reported range will be much lower (percentage-wise) since there are fewer bundles of cells that meet the criteria for powering the vehicle (high enough temp/charge to be used without damage).

I may not have been clear in my explanation. I am not saying the charge is lost. The electrons don't disappear from the cells from low temperatures, they simply can't be drawn from the cells through their normal chemical reaction as quickly. As the car warms up, those electrons become available, but due to increased usage of heating systems, and from lack of regenerative braking, you are using the additional energy, so you will not see the range counter "count backwards"... it simply doesn't 'seem' to go down as fast as it would if the range were reported correctly while cold.

Haeze | December 15, 2013

The "Rated Range" is based strictly on the charge level of the battery, and the EPA rated range estimate per kWh. There is no self-correcting or dynamic algorithm for it.

The dynamic ones based off your driving habits are the "Estimated Range" and "Average Range" on your energy usage histogram screen.

The "Rated Range" on your dash is just a static equation based on the EPA estimate per kWh, multiplied by the kWhs remaining in the battery.

Brian H | December 15, 2013

I think that used to be true, but recent fiddles have started using history in rated rates, too.

SCCRENDO | December 15, 2013

I have the 85S and previously thought there were no vampire losses. When I am unplugged at the office for 8 hrs I lose nothing. On Friday night it 90% charged to 222 (it's usual) by 6pm. 8 am on Sat I entered the car didn't unplug and it was 218. By 4pm it was down to 214.

hikerockies | December 15, 2013

@Haeze: I used to think that as we'll but Tesla confirmed rated range is not derived from battery charge level alone and their explanation matches what I have been seeing. This may have changed with firmware 5.x.

Bob W | December 16, 2013

Suggestion: replace your 12V battery with a new one. My 12-month old original Exide battery was recently replaced by a new C&D battery, and the vampire drain seems to have dropped from 8-12 miles / day to about 4 or 5. However the temperature rarely gets to 30° F around here, usually 40-50° F., minimum.

tghoxie | December 16, 2013

Seems to work for me. I seem to be loosing only 1-2 miles now overnight

Not bad if that experience continues.

lygren | December 17, 2013

Haeze; you got me there, I don´t care one tiny bit about the "electric movement" (but GOOD for the planet that YOU do! :)), I´m simply a good ol´ capitalist that excepts to be receiving what I´ve paid for. Leave that as is may; it is indeed in my interest that your explanation is correct as it would in such case mean the "loss" we are seeing is simply a matter of calculations that works on the 85kWh and does not on the 60kWh-pack.

The problem is that neither your explanation or my worries is possible to verify when Tesla refused to deliver me the data that they claim actually proves my car only draws 3,2KM (2 miles) per day in 20-30s over a 20-day period.

Tesla also refuses to compare my 60kWh car to a 85kWh in terms of loss, which is also making it hard to verify the above.

Tesla is a new company and I have chosen to invest in this company purchasing their vehicle - that´s on me... However, as being a new company with a lot of growing-issues I would certainly do my best not to be the discarded "prototype-customer", as would I reccommend all other 60kWh-owners to make sure they do not end up as.

A new software update is currently installing on my car (only a couple of days after my previous update), hopefully it addresses this issue and we may all live happily ever after... :)

hyperarmor | December 17, 2013

Prior to the 5.8 v24 update, I had no problems with vampire loss (my S60 was using 5.6). However, afterward, I noticed the same as some of you, about 8-10 miles of loss per day in 50F-60F weather. My first call to a service center was met with ignorance of the problem, but I called again last week and the service center confirmed that the return of vampire loss had been noted in a number of S60s (the S85s and P85s seemed not to be affected by this issue). Yesterday, I received the update to 5.8 v30, and after one night I'm cautiously optimistic the update may have solved the problem. I only lost about 2 miles over an 11 hour dormant period (though the temperature was a bit warmer last night). I intend to keep track of the losses and see if the problem has truly been fixed.