Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#411

Post by wheelie_boy » Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 8:31 PM UTC

martindbp wrote: post #403

wheelie_boy wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla is such an odd company. They apparently have a great product, hardware and software. But the rest of the company is just an absolute shitshow Like, a friend recently received delivery of a Tesla. They went to the dealer 4 times before they got the car. Each time it was "Your car is available, come pick it up" and then when they got there the car wasn't actually there. By the last time they demanded that the per…

Quoted post unavailable.

Looks like I used the wrong word when I said dealer.

It's apparently called Express Delivery where you "Take delivery at a Tesla location"

https://www.tesla.com/support/taking-delivery#express-delive...

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#412

Post by kelnos » Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 8:32 PM UTC

I kinda don't care about the aftermath of this. I think this entire thing is bad:

1. Tesla offers a warranty.

2. Tesla is unable to properly make good on the warranty because they don't continue to stock the correct parts.

3. Tesla uses a better part, but then tells the software to pretend the part is much less capable than it really is.

No, no, no. Stop right there. This should be illegal. We should not get to any successive steps where Tesla can gouge you $4,500 for someone to spend two seconds clicking in some admin UI somewhere. That is just bullshit. If you replace a part with something that is more capable (because you no longer have the less capable version), then the customer should get the benefit of the new capabilities. Full stop.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#413

Post by jtbayly » Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 8:32 PM UTC

jabbany wrote: post #354

jtbayly wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the post? It said it was a 90.

Actually it didn't. The post said the battery had a 90 badge and the car reported capacity as if it were 90. Neither of these are direct claims by Tesla that an "upgrade" happened. Some 2060s also have dies marked for 2080s that are then fused (re: badging doesn't imply performance). Similarly, you could potentially overclock a GPU and end up having measured performance that matched a higher model (re: car reported c…

I’m sorry, in what world is having an actual 90 physically installed by Tesla, and enabled physically by Tesla, able to be used and reported as such in the Tesla UI less relevant than some row in the Tesla sales db? Tesla did put in the 90 and enable it!

The fact that there isn’t a receipt proving that anybody paid for it is irrelevant. It could have been a gift, a reward, a thank you, a bribe, a reasonable business decision given the parts on hand, or an accident. Regardless, that’s on Tesla.

Am I required to ask the manufacturer if they will take back the Chrome wheels when I buy a used car just to make sure they didn’t put them on accidentally?

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#414

Post by hgomersall » Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 8:33 PM UTC

jabbany wrote: post #275

zozbot234 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the problem is that there are 2 different types of "can't": can't as in technologically impossible, and can't as in legally disallowed. Exactly. Bait and switch is legally disallowed, even when technically possible.

Actually, it isn't bait and switch at all. Unless Tesla advertised the upgraded capacity explicitly after the service, you are not entitled to anything. This is why things like consumer CPUs and GPUs do not advertise a guaranteed level of performance (they only state things like clock speeds, core counts, memory etc.) -- they are not liable if performance gets better or worse down the line. There is no distinction be…

The problem is it's not just a software tweak, you're also lugging around 30kWh of batteries. They are useful when they add range; less so when they're just dead mass.

The response to this would be, fine reduce my range, but also swap out the battery for the proper size.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#415

Post by patothon » Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 8:33 PM UTC

martindbp wrote: post #403

wheelie_boy wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla is such an odd company. They apparently have a great product, hardware and software. But the rest of the company is just an absolute shitshow Like, a friend recently received delivery of a Tesla. They went to the dealer 4 times before they got the car. Each time it was "Your car is available, come pick it up" and then when they got there the car wasn't actually there. By the last time they demanded that the per…

Quoted post unavailable.

not everywhere. you have to pick it up in san francico for example

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#416

Post by Xorlev » Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 8:34 PM UTC

martindbp wrote: post #403

wheelie_boy wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla is such an odd company. They apparently have a great product, hardware and software. But the rest of the company is just an absolute shitshow Like, a friend recently received delivery of a Tesla. They went to the dealer 4 times before they got the car. Each time it was "Your car is available, come pick it up" and then when they got there the car wasn't actually there. By the last time they demanded that the per…

Quoted post unavailable.

You often have to pick them up at a service center.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#417

Post by kube-system » Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 8:34 PM UTC

LgWoodenBadger wrote: post #327

gnicholas wrote: post #16

How can a potential buyer verify that a used Tesla they are considering purchasing is not subject to some sort of pullback like this? I feel like there's an information asymmetry between the used car buyer (who has likely never owned a Tesla before, and certainly doesn't know the history of the vehicle he's considering purchasing), the seller (who may specifically be aware that the car appears to have functionality t…

In the US that would be the Monroney Sticker that every new car comes with. Instead of throwing it out, sounds like most new car buyers should keep it as a fundamental record of ownership now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroney_sticker

I don't understand people who throw away monroney stickers. They fit perfectly in the back of every owners manual pouch.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#418

Post by AinderS » Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 8:34 PM UTC

kube-system wrote: post #397

AinderS wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are talking about something subtly but crucially different. Replacing your headlights is not illegal, only the type of headlight you use is legally restricted. Modification itself is not legally restricted, only the end result.

Yeah, a better example is modifications to homes. Those are restricted in many places in the US. I can't replace a circuit in my homes wiring, even if I follow every code.

But even in that case, the restriction comes from law, not an arbitrary decision made by a private company.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#419

Post by MichaelCollins » Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 8:35 PM UTC

kube-system wrote: post #378

thayne wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just the fact that they can do this makes me not want to own a tesla.

I find it less concerning that they can do it, and more concerning that they do do it. If a company treats their customers like crap, they have more avenues to do so than OTAs.

Not only will Tesla do something like this, but it seems half their customers will defend Tesla for doing it. So there isn't even consumer pressure for reform. Tesla is going to keep doing shit like this because their fanboys will continue to defend it.

Re: Tesla remotely converts battery pack, cutting 1/3 of range

#420

Post by hgomersall » Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 8:35 PM UTC

judge2020 wrote: post #283

skyyler wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why use analogies at all? Tesla replaced a 60 with a 90, the owner now has a 90. They list it as a 90 when selling it. The new owner gets hit with the update to turn it back into a 60. New owner is pissed at old owner, when they should be pissed at tesla.

Tesla replaces a 60 with a 90, HQ says 'set this to be 60', service center doesn't do it. Years later another center looks at the config and fixes the mistake, probably because there's a big warning and the technicians before them ignored it out of goodwill. The OP is right in that Tesla should codify in the goodwill of free upgrades when logistics doesn't allow it, but they didn't, so the car being rebadged by the o…

Except that 30kWh of batteries cost several thousand $ wholesale, whereas heated seats cost pennies.