Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla responds to "bricking" issue

teslamotors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 249 posts

Re: Tesla responds to "bricking" issue

#121

Post by nknight »

seanos wrote: post #109
scott_s wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason that we don't need to read a manual for normal cars is that we have grown up knowing that they need basic maintenance, and what that maintenance is. Imagine the flip side, that electric cars were normal, and internal combustion engines were unusual. Then we could have stories about owners ruining their engines because they never changed their oil.

"Imagine the flip side, that electric cars were normal, and internal combustion engines were unusual. Then we could have stories about owners ruining their engines because they never changed their oil." No you wouldn't because an oil change is part of the annual service for the car. Everyone knows that if you neglect to follow the manufacturer's maintenance schedule for a car you might get problems. On the other hand…

And plugging in the damned car is part of the daily routine of owning an EV. You're only making his point for him.

Re: Tesla responds to "bricking" issue

#122

Post by jellicle »

wtvanhest wrote: post #31

What happens if you leave a gasoline car for 6 months without driving it? That is the comparison I would like to see.

If you disconnect one of your car battery terminals, it will be perfectly fine for six months. Reconnect the terminal and drive away. It's not necessary to do anything else.

The main danger is things like squirrels moving into your engine block, if it's outside.

Re: Tesla responds to "bricking" issue

#123

Post by vannevar »

cyrus_ wrote: post #40
URSpider94 wrote: post #2

This is PR mastery. Nowhere in the release does Tesla refute that owners have "bricked" their batteries. Nowhere in the release do they say that the battery can not be bricked by leaving it for a long period without a recharge. All they say is that it would take a period of weeks for a Tesla roadster to reach 0% charge, and that the Model S has battery disconnect technology that can extend this to several months. The…

This is almost PR mastery. PR mastery would be saying that the blogger is correct before listing the facts about how insanely long you have to leave the car unplugged for the battery to become inoperable, and detailing what steps Tesla is taking to make this less of an issue (i.e. making it more prominent in their manuals, working on "deeper" sleep, etc.) As it stands, this makes me think that Tesla likes to play wit…

Real PR mastery would be to issue a modification to the warranty to include this condition within X years of owning the vehicle and be done with it. If it really is rare, it will cost them a lot less to cover it than the PR costs of fighting bad press every time it pops up.

Re: Tesla responds to "bricking" issue

#124

Post by jellicle »

Tesla, what's the cost of bundling a solar trickle charger in with your vehicle? Either build it into the roof (next generation, obviously) or just buy one that sits on the dashboard and throw it in with purchase.

"Please to be using this when leaving vehicle at airport. Thank you much, Tesla."

Maybe there's some reason this won't work, but... you need to work with your customers' expectations. Some of them are going to leave the vehicle unplugged for a while, and they're going to be pissed if the vehicle battery is destroyed.

Re: Tesla responds to "bricking" issue

#125

Post by Kynlyn »

marvin wrote: post #118
Kynlyn wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it is entirely different. Running an early fuel-injected vehicle out of gas didn't result in a repair bill that is approximately half the purchase cost of the car. Secondly, you could leave your fuel injected car idle for months on and end without having to worry about the car slowly slurping the fuel down and then leaving you an empty. So it is much easier to run a EV out of battery power and far more expensive…

I really don't see the problem. Tesla clearly states in the manual that completely depleting the battery and then leaving it without charging it will cause damage to the car. This would be completely analogous to running a brand-new early car without oil, destroying the engine. It's a serious neglect of your maintenance duties. I mean, yes. You can "destroy" your car by not charging it. You can also destroy it by acc…

I don't know that there is a problem except when people compare it to running a car out of gas. One is a minor annoyance; the other a hugely costly repair. The fact that EVs also consume battery while idle makes the comparison even less useful.

You can destroy a Tesla by running it into a brick wall too. Yet there is no warning in the manual for that. Probably because it's not a risk unique to Teslas. Leaving your car at the airport for two weeks and coming back to find it suddenly worth $40K less than when you left it is more-so unique.

Tesla seems to be somewhat downplaying the high costs involved in forgetting to plug it in or leaving it too long.

Re: Tesla responds to "bricking" issue

#126

Post by cynicalkane »

blhack wrote: post #119
cynicalkane wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a few dozen people pointed out, these batteries can become bricked even with a physical disconnect. They're not bricking because of being drained, they're bricking because they're drained and then left for months. Do this to any other Li-Ion device and the same thing will happen. More generally, you jumped to conclusions based on personal anecdotal evidence, ignored the entire preceding discussion, then pretended…

>More generally, you jumped to conclusions based on personal anecdotal evidence, ignored the entire preceding discussion I didn't ignore anything, nor did I "jump" to any conclusions. The preceding discussions have been talking about the vehicle doing things like "phoning home" and issuing audible warnings. This stuff doesn't come for free. You need the battery to power this.

You know those things take virtually no power, right? These are 50KwH+ batteries and you're worried about I don't know how many fractions of a millijoule.

Re: Tesla responds to "bricking" issue

#127

Post by Kynlyn »

onemoreact wrote: post #81
Kynlyn wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it is entirely different. Running an early fuel-injected vehicle out of gas didn't result in a repair bill that is approximately half the purchase cost of the car. Secondly, you could leave your fuel injected car idle for months on and end without having to worry about the car slowly slurping the fuel down and then leaving you an empty. So it is much easier to run a EV out of battery power and far more expensive…

If you leave an IC car for a long period of time with 1/2 a tank of gas you can destroy the engine. Gas like everything else breaks down and if you left leave your car sitting for a long time you may need to completely drain the gas tank. PS: Gas can noticeably degrade in as little as one month depending on ambient conditions. But, condensation is the largest risk for mid term storage. After 1 year you will probably…

All very true; but I don't think very many IC engines have died just because the owner took a longer than expected trip and came back to the airport to find their vehicle's engine is destroyed. Furthermore, the costs of any such IC repair wouldn't be nearly as high as what it is in the Tesla.

The point is simply that Tesla should give more warning and attention to the very high cost of repair when you forget to plug the vehicle in or leave it unattended for long periods of time.

Re: Tesla responds to "bricking" issue

#128

Post by tikhonj »

JS_startup wrote: post #94
jd wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the original post. $40.000 is roughly 1/3rd of the original cost of purchase. So it's completely reasonable. If you can't afford that you have no business buying a first-generation $100.000 toy. As far as I know Tesla strongly recommends owners buy a charging station for their home and plug in their Roadsters every night.

Then you also know that the Model S that's being aimed at average consumers is rolling out soon with the same shortcoming, negating your expensive toy argument.

The article mentions that it would take 30 days of being at 0 charge before the battery break.

From the article: "Of course you can drive a Model S to 0 percent charge, but even in that circumstance, if you plug it in within 30 days, the battery will recover normally."

So just discharging the battery to 0% gives you a month to charge it back; if you're at ~50% and leave it in the airport, it will be fine for over a year. (12 months to discharge to 0% and more time after that while it's still recoverable.)

Re: Tesla responds to "bricking" issue

#129

Post by blhack »

cynicalkane wrote: post #126
blhack wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>More generally, you jumped to conclusions based on personal anecdotal evidence, ignored the entire preceding discussion I didn't ignore anything, nor did I "jump" to any conclusions. The preceding discussions have been talking about the vehicle doing things like "phoning home" and issuing audible warnings. This stuff doesn't come for free. You need the battery to power this.

You know those things take virtually no power, right? These are 50KwH+ batteries and you're worried about I don't know how many fractions of a millijoule.

Do you have any hard data on this, or are you just "jumping to conclusions"?

I'd love to see a comparison on how long the battery can sit if it is physically disconnected from anything drawing current, and how long it can last when plugged into Tesla's phone home system.

Re: Tesla responds to "bricking" issue

#130

Post by tocomment »

teamonkey wrote: post #79
tocomment wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that a fail-safe or the opposite of a fail-safe? I can't decide...

Consider a battery failure while parked on a hill

Does it not have a "park" setting? How does "park" work in a car with an automatic transmission anyway?
Post reply on HN