The HW3 Firmware Thread (2019.7.105)

The HW3 Firmware Thread (2019.7.105)

So if you recently picked up a new Model 3, you may notice it seems to be running an outdated and uncommon firmware 2019.7.105. This iteration is missing sentry mode, enhanced summon, and NoA free lane change. According to a Tesla rep, the features are "there", but not "turned on" due to being on a new hardware. Apparently the firmware from HW2.5 is not totally compatible with the HW3 chip.

That being said, HW3 owners use this thread to communicate about firmware updates, and please share if you have any additional info.

hokiegir1 | 29 avril 2019

No one but some early access people have enhanced summon.

3onTheTree | 29 avril 2019

@hokiegir1 yes but the rep told me that enhanced summon would be included in the next HW3 firmware update

RickM3 | 29 avril 2019

I would assume the new Chip requires different code to make these features functional than HW2.5.

Kary993 | 29 avril 2019

The fact that the current HW3 chip owners are not keeping up with the HW2.5 owners is a really bad sign for the HW2.5 owners in then future. Tesla will not be able to focus resources on maintaining two software bases.......kind of a built thing for Tesla to force owners to buy FSD to get HW3 and most importantly the new features that will continue to be developed in HW3 software base. | 29 avril 2019

@Kary993 - It all comes down to verification. LIkely it is trivial to release the software on different platforms - they are already doing that with MCU1 vs MCU2 (one's Nvidia CPU, the other Intel Atom). Few could tell them apart on-screen, other than MCU2 is a bit snappier. Likely done with an automated software build process - rather common in the software/hardware industry.

Same could be done wtih HW2.x vs HW3.0 - just a different build, but you really have to test the hell out of it to be sure with AP/FSD. There will be a time when HW2.x just can't do more, but I think we have a while yet.

EVRider | 29 avril 2019

@Kary993: I think it's actually the HW3 owners that should worry. When Tesla introduced EAP/HW2, it took a long time for EAP to achieve parity with AP1/HW1, and many EAP owners were unhappy about this. Tesla never stopped supporting AP1, and they still support it today (bug fixes only).

Given what happened before with HW1/HW2, I'm surprised Tesla is putting HW3 in production before it works as well as HW2.5. That makes me happy I have FSD on HW2.5, since I probably won't get the HW3 upgrade until it's really ready.

Sandman89 | 29 avril 2019

Picking up my new model 3 on Wednesday will check to see if it has the new chip. Anyway to check beforehand? I personally do want it in from the get go as I don't know how long it will take for Tesla to retrofit the hardware in the older models so. I did purchase the FSD option so hoping the new chip is installed.

Firaz.ashraf | 29 avril 2019

If the steering wheel is capped, you have FSD on HW3 ;)

3onTheTree | 29 avril 2019

@Firaz capped?

Firaz.ashraf | 29 avril 2019

joking...Elon Autonomy day presentation..

Kary993 | 29 avril 2019 - I have been in software development and all sorts of technology for 35 took apple many years to support many iphones backward and those are relatively simple beasts by comparison to validating autonomy for the federal and state governments......that's where the issue is. We can agree to disagree but HW2 and 2.5 will terminate functions sooner than anyone thinks because EM wants FSD approved by the government and won't be bothered by lessor functionality and support of older stuff. Everyone just buy FSD so we can advance faster!

dmanincali | 29 avril 2019

I'm actually convinced that they're going to have to upgrade everyone to HW3 free of charge. They've been claiming for years that their cars have ALL the hardware needed for FSD (and certainly didn't make an exception for needed a computer upgrade). They're either going to do it out of the kindness of their heart or are going to do it because a class action forces them to do it. Not saying I'm a proponent of a class action but this does seem like a slam dunk case given everything they said in the past.

jimglas | 29 avril 2019

Class Action?
Elon has stated that anyone who buys FSD will get the new hardware
TF are you FUD-ING about

Kary993 | 29 avril 2019

And what if HW3 doesn't get all the way to FSD as advertised today and what I bought and it takes HW4 to accomplish, will Tesla charge for HW4? Seems they need to FSD to work on HW3 period or there will be issues....

dmanincali | 29 avril 2019

I'm not FUD-ing - I own 2 Teslas (and no other cars) and am a huge fan. But it's not hard to find all the stuff they published about the cars having all the hardware needed for full FSD - and they never said you had to buy the FSD package to get it. So the right thing to do will be to upgrade everyone to the HW3 computer if that is in fact what it takes to meet their earlier commitments. I want Tesla to succeed as much as anyone (it would really suck to own two cars from a defunct auto maker) but they're not going to do that by not meeting their commitments.

Personally since I currently have no intention of buying FSD for my current cars I really don't care UNLESS the other feature sets of the car start becoming outdated.

I think you can be a fan of the company without mindlessly agreeing to everything they say.

dmanincali | 29 avril 2019

Also this one was over much less:

I ended up getting some money from this case even though I really didn't care about the complaint in the class action.

Kary993 | 29 avril 2019

@ dmanincali - constructive questions are fine in my opinion, but I don't see where you have a leg to stand on that everyone should get HW3 particularly those that have not paid for it. When FSD came into existence it was clear if purchased you get HW3. If no purchase you have what you have. Never been any confusion about that.

dmanincali | 29 avril 2019

This is my last comment on the matter and after that we can agree to disagree.
Tesla has been saying their cars have all of the computing and sensing hardware needed for full self driving since at least Oct 2016. This is well before HW3. It's only been in the last 6-8 months or so that they've admitted HW3 would be necessary. So to anyone who bought before then, they had every reason to belief that FSD would be a software only update.

I get that their upgrading the computers for folks who purchased FSD but that wasn't a requirement for getting an FSD capable vehicle before.

Kary993 | 29 avril 2019

Good luck with that view point......

howard | 29 avril 2019

I am lost with this argument. FSD is a paid for option. If you paid for FSD then you will get HW3 if not then you don't as it is not a basic "free" feature of the car.

M3phan | 29 avril 2019

@dmanincali, seems pretty clear that a car can have all the hardware needed for FSD, ie., cameras, sensors and radar, and not qualify for HW3 because it was not paid for as an upgrade option.
Having the hardware doesn’t mean you get FSD unless you paid for it.

crmedved | 29 avril 2019

@dmanincali If you buy FSD, Tesla will make it right and give you the hardware you need for it "at no cost". I'm not sure what more you want from them. They never said the software for FSD would be free.

If you don't buy FSD, then you don't need HW3 as HW 2.5 will handle all the features you paid for... so they're not going to upgrade your car at their own cost for literally no reason.

3onTheTree | 29 avril 2019

HW3 owners are reporting upgrade to 2019.12.1.1

typedoss | 29 avril 2019

Mine is updating now. Model 3 Standard + FSD and I was told it was borne on 4/15/19.

3onTheTree | 29 avril 2019

Awesome. Mine was built 4/19 so maybe soon...

Sandman89 | 29 avril 2019

So my dad bought a model x in 2016 (hardware 1). At that time on the order page it said you had the option of buying FSD later on (just had to pay more later than at time of purchase) similar to model 3. Now that hardware 3 is needed for FSD, what happens to owners like my dad? He didn't pay for fsd at that time because it was a ways away, but had peace of mind that he could buy it later if he wished. This is now not the case. So was he misled by Tesla? He should be able to buy fsd now but Tesla has stopped supporting those cars for fsd. On the account page, there is no option to buy autopilot upgrades to fsd for the model x. That seems deceptive to me...

jjgunn | 30 avril 2019

Your dad never purchased FSD. Nothing deceptive since he didn't purchase anything.

People that tried to extract "value" by waiting to purchase FSD find out now it's no longer supported. You didn't buy anything. If he had...then he has a right to FSD.

Most car companies would tell you to "buy a new car" if you want those features especially since you never purchased them.

Why do some people try to extract something from nothing?

Wormtown Kris | 30 avril 2019

You could never buy a base model Chevy Camaro, and then save up more money and "upgrade" to an IROC Z28.
Tesla, however, is offering the option to upgrade at any time, Within The Limits of the hardware you were willing to pay for at the time. If you just bought a Model 3 SR, you can "unlock" the battery to a SR+, but you can't get the range of a LR car. Tesla promoted the Model 3 with "up to 310 Miles (later 325 Miles) Range." You can't start a class action because you bought a SR that cannot travel 310 miles...…..

derotam | 30 avril 2019

@dmanincali, people are missing your point...I understand you point about the technicality that Elon said in the past that all the cars with HW2.5 had all the hardware required for FSD, but there are a couple flaws in your theory about a legal issue... The FSD goalposts have shifted over time, the definition has shifted over time, what "FSD" was before is not what "FSD" is now...And who is to say that from a legal confrontation standpoint Tesla couldn't just put in "FSD" features sufficient to get around your legal point. We don't even have to go that far though since what are your damages even if HW2.5 isn't "FSD" capable? You didn't buy the FSD option, so what are you going to sue for?

Now where someone could possibly go, is after FSD actually comes out in software, if they are still on HW2.5, they could "demand" that Tesla makes the FSD features available on their car WITHOUT forcing a hardware upgrade... But because Tesla is going to upgrade the hardware for free anyway, I still don't see how that legal standpoint could work.

PittCaleb | 30 avril 2019

I am stuck on 2019.7, however I'm not convinced I have HW3. Earlier in the thread, someone said "steering wheel cap" - what does that even mean? I show APF0 in option codes.

Here is a photo of my steering wheel

hokiegir1 | 30 avril 2019

They mean that there is no steering wheel in the car. It was a joke.

3onTheTree | 30 avril 2019

@PittCaleb if you are on 2019.7.105 you almost certainly are equipped with HW3. What is your build date (driver side door jamb)?

bpaul | 30 avril 2019

Yeah, most on here aren't actually engaging with @derotam's argument, and those just dismissing it out of hand lose the rhetorical battle. Since he's understandably done, I'll take it up for a post.

Derotam paid for all the hardware needed for FSD when he paid for a car that Tesla told him had all the hardware needed for FSD. That bit is simple. I don't see how anyone argues their way around that point.

Given that Tesla misrepresented their product to Derotam, the question to me becomes one of harms. What does Tesla have to do to make Derotam whole for Tesla's misrepresentation at the time of sale? Derotam says he wants what he paid for. Tesla says the absence of the hardware makes no difference since he didn't pay for the option to begin with. I think the answer is somewhere in the middle. Given the expectation that HW3 is going make AP and summon better, it seems to me that the "right" answer is somewhere closer to Dertam's expectation than his detractors.

What seems like a *much* bigger deal is that Tesla sold FSD under one set of expected features, and they unilaterally switched to a new, lessor set of expected features.

bpaul | 30 avril 2019

Wait, @dmanincali's point, not @derotam.

PittCaleb | 30 avril 2019

@AlsetSrotom I don't see a build date, but it does say 4/19, I presumed that was the year, not day of month. Delivered Apr 24th in NJ, and it would take what, a week to get here from Cali? Any way to better determine my mfg date?

derotam | 30 avril 2019

I just argue that until FSD ACTUALLY comes out, that there has been no *REAL* misrepresentation. Now as soon as FSD comes out and nothing is put on HW2.5 THEN the thus far perceived misrepresentation turns into a real one. But from a damages standpoint for any kind of legal action I don't really think that misrepresentation means long as Tesla is providing HW3 free of charge.

Yep that's enough for me on the subject...just wanted to address the implication that if HW2.5 cant do ANY FSD, and you didn't purchase the FSD option, that you would have any kind of legal basis for suing and receiving who knows what.

RedPillSucks | 30 avril 2019

@bpaul I'm missing why it's not sufficient that if someone purchased a Tesla prior to HW3 and didn't purchase FSD,
when they finally decide to purchase FSD, Tesla upgrades their CPU to provide the FSD features they're paying for. | 30 avril 2019

I was sort of thinking in a twisted way, derotam is correct. Thinking about it more, the problem is vehicle owners sign a Motor Vehicle Purchase Agreement with Terms and Conditions, along with a Vehicle configuration. Nowhere does it describe the hardware required for FSD or that any upgrades would be available or for how long such upgrade would be available.

The way I read it, Tesla is under no obligation to make a future feature available to existing owners. They could say for instance, FSD is no longer available to existing owners (luckily they haven't). I see nothing that says they have to provide options forever. There is no language in my contracts that state my (EAP equipped) car has any hardware related to FSD.

Still @derotam might have a case fby basing his sale on some forward looking marketing statements at the time of purchase, but I think it is quite weak. Maybe some legal eagle can weigh in. The easy fix for Tesla is to simply say EAP to FSD upgrades are no longer available on older cars (for those that didn't buy FSD) and the legal problem is likely fixed. Let's hope they are not forced to go that route.

3onTheTree | 30 avril 2019

Still sitting on 2019.7.105...

bpaul | 30 avril 2019

@RedPill Because Tesla misrepresented the product to everyone, argues @dmanincali, they should have to provide the remedy to everybody.

FWIW, I personally don't think that's exactly right, but it's at least partially right. Aside from the time cost to arrange and accept the remedy, consider the scenario where @dmanincali stays with HW2.5, which receives no further software updates. Meanwhile, HW3 drivers continue to receive updates that improve safety and reliability. @dmanincali has been harmed by Tesla's misrepresentation: his car is less safe than those vehicles who received the remedy. His resale value is impacted.

I'm not looking to necessarily argue that the harm is significant (I don't know and IAMAL) but it certainly seems to be greater than zero.

Sandman89 | 30 avril 2019

It's simple if the company says you can buy something later but then backs out, that's deceptive. They even have a different price (increased) option for buying it later. For the fanboys saying "if the option wasn't purchased, you don't have a right to anything" are quite thick. They always had the right to purchase later based on what Tesla told them. That right being taken away now is wrong.

Sandman89 | 30 avril 2019

Also the vehicles that this issue affects are closer to 100k and up vehicles, not a cheap 35-50k model 3. Those people paid a huge premium to get the ball rolling for Tesla. If they were promised something....I would expect Tesla to keep it. With that being said, I'm gonna probably get my father to trade out the X for a model Y anyway next year.

hokiegir1 | 30 avril 2019

Question -- did Tesla send any notification to people that "after xxx date, you will no longer be able to upgrade"? Because I think that makes a difference. They *initially* said "You can purchase the upgrade after delivery." They didn't (to my knowledge) say that this would *always* be the case. Many may assume that means indefinitely, but that might not have been the intent, so you'd have to look at specific language to confirm.

I'm just wondering if there was any communication that went out that said something to the effect of "we're reaching hardware capacity for the version you have. We've upgraded as much as we can. If you choose to do it now, you'll get xx hardware. If not, you will lose the option to upgrade later" (or something vaguely similar). They may not have. Again -- it goes back to the initial language in the contracts. And just because someone *thinks* it means indefinite does not mean that's what it says.

82bert | 30 avril 2019

I guess you’d have to show me where FSD capabilities was promised with original AP hardware. I’ve definitely heard that since the latest camera/radar suite and 2.5, which I believe was around 2016 with infamous video that they posted. Not sure about prior to that. Would love to see a link/info to show that.

82bert | 30 avril 2019

I should say since 2/2.5. But original AP with HW1 I have no idea.

Fact remains if you opt for FSD, Tesla will retrofit newest computer at no additional cost. So whether you bought FSD last year, 2 years ago or tomorrow, you will have HW necessary.

jefjes | 30 avril 2019

The question could be, does FSD really mean autonomous driving in all situations? The various levels of FSD that range from L1-L5 that involve different amounts of driver intervention are all some sort of driver assist with the possible exception being L5 that does everything without the need to have a driver present. The fact that Tesla moved many of the EAP features into FSD option and restricted some of the AP options, could be seen as HW2.5 equipped cars already being able to perform at some level of FSD. In which case, there is no case...;-)

derotam | 30 avril 2019

@bpaul...I am not going to go back and read this all again but I think dmanincali was more arguing, or at least not accepting that any upgrade would not be sufficient. I see them as arguing that HW2.5 MUST be FSD capable, or they could then sue Tesla for misrepresentation. I don't agree with that. As long as Tesla provides HW3 free of charge to all those who pay for FSD then I think the issue is then moot.

Again, for the record, I am only arguing against what I see as dmanincali's flawed implied legal standpoint.

I just don't like it when people seem to imply that there is a sue-able offense when there isn't anything to even think about suing over yet.

82bert | 30 avril 2019

I read into the original complaint same as derotam.

Carl Thompson | 30 avril 2019

I understand and agree with what @dmanincali and @bpaul are saying. I was / am in the same boat; when I bought my Model 3 Tesla said in no uncertain terms that my car had everything needed for _real_ FSD and that I would be able to upgrade to it for $10,000 ($6,000 EAP + $4,000 FSD). A large part of my buying decision was based on this promise by Tesla.

But I also agree with @RedPillSucks. It is reasonable and sufficient for Tesla to simply upgrade any similarly situated owners to HW3 (or whatever HW is required) if and when those previously promised FSD are actually available. Also Tesla has to at least allow the owner to buy FSD and honor the price promised when the owner bought the car. (Tesla has actually allowed owners such as myself who took advantage of the deal to purchase FSD recently for much less than the originally promised price.)

Tesla never promised us any particular timetable (though Musk's previous statements implied it should be here already) so it doesn't have to be right now though that would be nice. I do think it's in Tesla's best interest to deliver the FSD they said they would deliver as soon as possible so that customers don't feel scammed.

The only thing that seems vague to me is what happens if a customer bought EAP and EAP's features benefit from the new FSD hardware? Should EAP owners be entitled to the upgraded hardware even if they don't buy FSD? My opinion is no, they shouldn't. They'd need to purchase FSD (and the prerequisite AP if necessary) to get the hardware.

Carl Thompson | 30 avril 2019
"... vehicle owners sign a Motor Vehicle Purchase Agreement with Terms and Conditions, along with a Vehicle configuration. Nowhere does it describe the hardware required for FSD or that any upgrades would be available or for how long such upgrade would be available. The way I read it, Tesla is under no obligation to make a future feature available to existing owners. They could say for instance, FSD is no longer available to existing owners (luckily they haven't). I see nothing that says they have to provide options forever. There is no language in my contracts that state my (EAP equipped) car has any hardware related to FSD. Still @derotam might have a case fby basing his sale on some forward looking marketing statements at the time of purchase, but I think it is quite weak."

Your purchase agreement also doesn't say your car will work at night, will be able to drive you to work, will be capable of driving your kids to school or any of a million other things that are expected when one purchases a car.

But there is the legal concept of suitability to purpose. If you buy a new car it is expected that that car will be able to do all of the things normally associated with owning a car. It does not need to be spelled out in the contract that the car will work at night; that's just expected from it being a car. You would absolutely win case brought against an automaker if your car didn't work at night even if working at night wasn't explicitly stated in the purchase agreement.

Tesla did not just sell post HW2 cars as cars, they explicitly sold them as cars _capable of FSD_. So those cars must meet the suitability to purpose requirements of FSD cars, whatever that ends up being determined to be by some court, regardless of whether it's explicitly stated in the contract.

I am not a lawyer nor do I pretend to be one on this forum!