Tesla Model S Battery Drain Issue Fixed 239
cartechboy writes "Does the Tesla Model S suck down power even when the car is switched off? Recently, a tweet to Elon Musk with an article saying so sparked the Tesla CEO's attention. He tweeted that it wasn't right and that he'd look into the situation. Then a few hours later, he tweeted that the issue had to do with a bad 12-volt battery. Turns out Tesla had already called the owner of the affected car and sent a service tech to his house to replace that battery — and also install a newer build of the car's software. Now it appears the 'Vampire Draw' has been slain. The car went from using 4.5 kWh per day while turned off to a mere 1.1 kWh. So, it seems to be solved, but Tesla may either need to fix some software, or start sending a few new 12-volt batteries out to the folks still experiencing the issue."
And, Folks, stay tuned.. (Score:2)
..for Elon's next Slashvertisment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
No, that 1100w per day. That would be an increasing rate of power draw.
1100Wh per day. So a draw of 1100/24 W = 45.83W.
Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. (Score:4, Insightful)
For 45W? That's a lot of watts for a 15mA receiver.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. (Score:5, Funny)
But expecting to turn all the electronics OFF in a present day automobile is not the smartest of ideas.
For sure the clock would be wrong - and just flash 12:00 all damn day :-)
Re: (Score:3)
A friend of mine let the battery run down on his WRX. He had to truck it to the Subaru dealer to have it rebooted.
Re: (Score:2)
Then you're not the market for a Tesla. Not only because batteries degrade over time (whether you're using them or not, I think), but also because if you only use a car occasionally then it's stupid for you to buy an expensive car.
Re: (Score:2)
I do, however, happen to know people, like myself, who may well be interested in such an 'expensive' vehicle (my current car is a BMW7) , bur also have some real-life issues, like weekend homes, where they like to switch the power off,
While you're there? If not, take the car with you. If so, then install a small off-grid maintenance solar system. You've already got kooky habits.
streets in cities where they like to park for more than a few days without a handy power socket, etc.
You'd park a 7-series on the street for days? Not me.
I remain unconvinced, 1100w (per day - which I call when no one else does ;) is too much,
I agree. The computer should sleep when not in use. That's excessive.
Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. (Score:5, Informative)
" to a mere 1.1 kWh per day, while doing nothing.."
- sorry, I am actually a Tesla fan (or would be, given the chance..) - but 1100w (per day) for doing sweet fuck all, presented as progress?
it's stuff like this that makes me say, thanks, call me when you have the finished article.
1.1kWh is equivalent to having a ~40W light bulb on. If you have a couple of circuits powered on, given it is a fully electric car with all kinds of gizmos built into it, this discharge rate is actually quite nominal.
Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, it's shockingly high. I'm a Tesla fan, but this seriously makes me wonder what's eating up all that energy while the car is supposed to be "off".
The Tesla is not the only car out there with "all kinds of gizmos built into it": every high-end luxury car, from the likes of Mercedes, BMW, Cadillac, etc., is loaded with electronic accessories. However, all those cars run on gasoline engines, with a standard 12V battery to keep things alive when the car is "off". No regular car would be able to start its engine in the morning if it were powering a 40W light bulb all night.
So what exactly is the Tesla doing with all that power? Even if it's keeping a WiFi connection alive, that shouldn't take much power: my little smartphone can do that for days with a puny little 5.6Wh battery. Are they running the main computers at full power? It really shouldn't be that hard to put them into sleep states when the car is off. It sounds like maybe they badly architected the computers in this car, so that they could never go into power-saving sleep states and still keep the WiFi/3G connection alive, something every modern smartphone can do with ease.
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like maybe they badly architected the computers in this car, so that they could never go into power-saving sleep states and still keep the WiFi/3G connection alive, something every modern smartphone can do with ease.
That seems to be the case. Features like keyless entry are apparently run by that computer and so it never goes into a deep sleep state. Even then, 40W is pretty extreme. A typical high end mobile phone with wifi and 3G connections and background sync is more like 1 or 2W maximum (averaged over a day, of course).
Hopefully Tesla will explain it. They are usually happy to provide technical information.
Re: (Score:2)
That seems to be the case. Features like keyless entry are apparently run by that computer and so it never goes into a deep sleep state. Even then, 40W is pretty extreme. A typical high end mobile phone with wifi and 3G connections and background sync is more like 1 or 2W maximum (averaged over a day, of course).
Yes, but a mobile phone can't drive dual large displays with Nvidia GPUs; that system is surely comparable to a typical x86-64 desktop system, and one of those would easily use 40W at idle with the
Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, but a mobile phone can't drive dual large displays with Nvidia GPUs
My phone drives a full HD (1920x1080) screen with desktop class graphics, more than enough for what Tesla does. They should be able to power down their GPU and screen when not in use.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, this would be somewhat complex, and require some fancy software architecture since ARMs aren't binary-compatible with x86-64s.
Make all the CPUs ARM and use Big.Little [wikipedia.org] that allows you to seamlessly switch to a low power CPU on the same chip when not much is happening.
Re: (Score:2)
Features like keyless entry are apparently run by that computer and so it never goes into a deep sleep state.
That is an utterly unsatisfying explanation in a world with hardware interrupts.
A typical high end mobile phone with wifi and 3G connections and background sync is more like 1 or 2W maximum (averaged over a day, of course).
And they will wakeup from deep sleep if you press a button.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
since it uses a chipset designed for tablets and phones.
It does? I thought it'd be comparable to a x86-64 desktop, and I thought I read it used dual Nvidia GPUs even. I could be wrong though.
Re: (Score:2)
Well if they're using an ARM chip(s) and mobile GPUs (which should be shut down when the display is off anyway), then something's really wrong, especially if you can run a dual-core i5 laptop at 7W (display off) like another poster here said.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
40watts is how much power the charger is using, not how much the car really needs to idle.
You're taking a hit in the AC->DC conversion, you're also taking a crap shoot at what the batteries need for amperage/voltage. A float charge, for 12volt batteries, is 13 to 13.8 volts at whatever for amperage. ~2amps hitting the batteries sounds reasonable to me.
It's not different than having a battery charger on your start battery plugged in.
I lived off grid for a year on a battery based system. You get OCD about
Re: (Score:2)
AC-DC conversion does incur a loss, but if the batteries are topped off, the float charge should be pretty minimal, and the extra losses through AC-DC conversion only add, at most, 10% to that if you have a decent converter. Someone else mentioned around 9W to keep the batteries topped off due to their inherent self-discharge rate; there's no way your AC-DC converter is going to have a 20% efficiency (if it does, it's a POS).
Re: (Score:2)
I've owned printers which used that much electricity when they were "sleeping".
Re: (Score:2)
Self discharge on the main battery should be on the order of 9W.
I started thinking about that after I wrote the previous comment, so this answers my question assuming your number is correct. A big-ass battery pack like the Tesla's surely has a significant self-discharge rate, but 9W isn't too bad, and sounds about right considering how fast my cellphone batteries self-discharge (I have spares I keep for days when I'll be using my phone a lot and won't have access to a charger).
Re: (Score:3)
No other car is equipped like a tesla.
Sure they are. Lots of high-end cars have dashboard computers.
In addition, tesla must stay alive with WiFi/3g to report battery status.
My mobile phone, and every tablet made, can stay alive with WiFi/3G without using anywhere near 45W. A typical Core i5 laptop can do this with less than 10W, according to someone else here. 45W is what you need to keep a server or very powerful desktop running with multiple hard drives.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
"1100w (per day)" ... whatever that means, it is wrong.
1.1 kWh = 45 watts for a day
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine in an electric car quite a lot of energy is wasted in presenting the user with how much energy they are saving.
so it goes with many v1.0 products (Score:3)
The learning curve gets climbed.
In Other News (Score:5, Funny)
The 12V battery of a family member's Honda Civic didn't just draw more current than intended. It failed completely! The car could not start! The whole battery had to be replaced at cost to the owner and the Honda CEO was nowhere to be seen.
drain (Score:4, Insightful)
The whole battery had to be replaced at cost to the owner and the Honda CEO was nowhere to be seen.
This would be because people will buy a Honda regardless of whether the dealer or company or CEO is a prick or not, where Tesla is trying to get itself a foothold in the market and Elon feels personally responsible if there's a defective product because it reflects badly upon the company. A hundred million Hondas Thousands of Teslas.
Re: (Score:2)
Elon feels personally responsible if there's a defective product because it reflects badly upon the company
Are we sure his name is Elon, and not, for example, Uncle Enzo? ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
There, FTFY.
Elon Musk is a master at manipulating the media and the fanbois.
Please explain the Elon Musk hate (Score:5, Insightful)
In every piece concerning Tesla on slashdot, there are a few people making negative comments about Elon Musk. However, not once have I seen the complaints backed up with facts, examples, or otherwise, just negativity without any indication as to why.
Could someone please explaint to me why there is this hate on Elon Musk, and what it is about?
Re: (Score:2)
He dreams big. That makes some small-dreaming people hate him.
Yes, a lot of his talk is just ridiculous. That hyperloop thing? Preposterous. But then again, I'm sure people said the same about modern electric cars. That's why my stance on him is "ignore the pie-in-the-sky talk, focus on the actual actions", and by that measure he's doing very well. If he blows his entire fortune trying to build a vacuum-sealed tube for superconducting maglev trains to cross the country at R5, I'll laugh at him, but if he bu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same as the Steve Jobs hate. A CEO identified with a product some people can't afford. The hatred is envy.
Re: (Score:3)
1. I agree, give me an extra $70k and I'm not buying a model S with it, but if you gave me $200k I might... Right now it's not a good fit for my needs. Maybe that truck he's planning on around 2017 or so....
2. About those batteries they're buying off the shelf... That might change... [autonews.com]
3. There's more reasons to buy a Model S than 'faux shit about the environment'. They range from stupid(IMO) gimmies like access to the carpool lanes even with only 1 passenger in California to being able to avoid gas sta
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
where the blunt facts of the matter are this - the problem has existed for quite a while and was ignored by Tesla and Musk
As a point of fact, that "blunt fact" statement is incorrect. Tesla did not simply ignore the issue. They acknowledged that the problem existed (9 months ago) and promised a solution in the future. It might have taken them a while to identify what they thought was the cause and get a solution out, but that's hardly ignoring the problem.
Anyway, if you're going to start accusing people of ignoring facts or being willfully ignorant, it's probably a good idea to avoid using hyperbole in your own set of "blun
Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate (Score:5, Informative)
Take SpaceX for example - where the fanbois refuse to acknowledge the problems the Falcon 9 has experienced and who also treat the Falcon Heavy as if it were a proven craft rather than vaporware.
So you hate Elon Musk because you imagine that people (who are not Elon Musk) are not adequately upset by all the "problems" that Falcon 9 has experienced? Are you sure fanbois (nice ad hominem by the way) refuse to acknowledge the "problems," it seems to me you are blowing them out of proportion. What Falcon 9 problems are out of line for developing a completely new rocket, including engines? I'm not saying there haven't been problems and I know it took longer than they thought, but I don't see anything out of the ordinary in the course of developing a new rocket. Also, kindly list any comparable rockets that had fewer problems during their development and shakedown phases. Most currently flying rockets have had catastrophic failures during their development and service. The "worst" incident so far for the Falcon 9 was an engine failure, and it still reached orbit and deployed it's cargo - albeit in a lower than optimal orbit. Here is a sampling of some respectable rockets, from respectable companies having real problems:
No rocket technology has ever been perfect right off the drawing board and most rockets flying today are using engines originally designed in the 60s and 70s. Those engines failed a lot during their early flights.
The only currently inservice rocket (that I am aware of) that has not had an outright failure is the Atlas V. That thing is amazing, but it costs 4x as much to launch as a Falcon 9 even though ULA gets launch subsidies. Orbital Services' Antares also looks like a solid platform. Its first flight was originally planned to be in December 2010 (when it was called the Taurus II). Its first launch was actually late April 2013. Two and a quarter years behind schedule (which is about the same delay as the Falcon 9.) Yet it's a much less capable rocket than the Falcon 9, using "off the shelf" engines and therefore should have been easier to design and build. But it turns out that building rockets is hard, even for companies that have been doing it for decades.
I want to be clear, I'm not bagging on any of the existing manufacturers nor their rockets. I just don't understand your animosity towards SpaceX, Elon Musk, and those of us excited that space flight is becoming less expensive.
And I feel the same way about Tesla. I don't expect a car to be perfect. It seems like a damn cool car and most the people that own one seem more than pleased with it. As for this problem existing for quite a while, it sounds like Tesla addressed it once they where made aware of it.
Facts aren't hate - except to the fanbois.
If this has to be explained to you... well, then you're either among the fanbois or terminally clueless as to the world around you.
You didn't list any actual facts and calling people fanbois and terminally clueless is pretty rude.
That's shocking! (Score:3, Insightful)
That is clearly a worse problem than every single Tesla Model S ever made sucking down 4.5KWh per day, every day, for months on end while Tesla sit on their fingers and do nothing to fix a problem that can apparently be fixed within hours of a single Tweet to the CEO.
And the fact that the "fixed" Tesla still sucks up enough power to drain the battery in any other car overnight, every night
Re: (Score:2)
Re:That's shocking! (Score:5, Interesting)
And the fact that the "fixed" Tesla still sucks up enough power to drain the battery in any other car overnight, every night...
I'm kind of wondering if "sucks up" is really the right verb to be using here. I mean, the article's author notes that the battery pack has a nominal 85 kWh capacity. Losing 1.1 kWh in 24 hours (note, not just "overnight") from a fully-charged battery pack is a shade less than 1.3% of the total capacity per day; if it maintained that rate of discharge, it would drain the battery pack in about 2.5 months.
The question I have, then, is how much of that consumption is replenishment of unavoidable self-discharge from the batteries, versus actual electricity used to power the various onboard electronics packages. That is, even if you physically cut every connection between the car and the battery pack in the evening, how much would the charge need to be topped up come morning?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Tesla batteries shouldn't be self-discharging faster than say 10% per month. That's like 0.3% per day. Plus, I think this guy had a 60kWh car, so your 1.3% is too low.
$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? (Score:2)
Can't they put a big red cutoff switch for the battery, for owners who won't be charging to just physically disconnect the battery when they're parked?
If I had one, I wouldn't need the computer/GPS/3G_app/dataminer to keep running when I'm grocery shopping or working, as long as it reboots in less than, say, a minute.
Do that are you're down to the raw battery leakage only.
rechargable battery decay (Score:3)
Batteries discharge when doing nothing. What if the 1.1kWh is the normal for just sitting there like if it wasn't even in the car, plus some trickle for things like the clock and other persistant items? This might say more about the batteries' charge decay rate than the rest of the system causing a drain (though I do figure, fairly, there's a little more than just the clock and expected no-load decay at issue here).
Re: (Score:2)
What you call decay is what I call "raw battery leakage". You're more correct.
Unless you're afraid your car will be stolen, there is no reason for anything to be powered when you're not using or charging it.
Throw in three more cells if that's what it takes to power the door locks, and let me physically unplug everything else.
Re: (Score:2)
The radio receiver for the keyless entry door locks ought to be able to idle on microwatts, and wake up and use milliwatts when it needs to spin up the computer that determines whether a received signal is actually the right key to open the locks.
Re: (Score:2)
Self discharge on a 60kWh battery shouldn't be more than say 10 Watts, I believe.
Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? (Score:4, Informative)
You do realize the thing does not have a key. Hell you can not even open the doors without the fob they are literally retracted into the car.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The first car I owned was a 1986 Nissan Pulsar. Those days retractable headlights were much in vogue. Toyota Celica, Mazda Miata and some of these Nissans had them. There was a switch to disable the retraction and leave it permanently up. I used that to leave it up all the time based on a simple logic. "This car is old, and this damned retraction thingie is going to fail someday. When it does, I want it fail with the lights up not lights down".
I'm certain this is absolutely pointless to say now, but most of those setups were designed so that spring pressure had to be overcome to close the lenses; that way, if the mechanism did fail, it *should* fail-safe to the open position.
I wonder if Tesla has a switch to leave its door handles out.
If I owned a Tesla with a dead 12v battery right now, I'd be afraid to know the answer.
Re: (Score:2)
>*should* fail-safe to the open position.
Not in my first MX5. It failed down.
My second MX5 and my first 350Z both solved this problem by not having retractable lights.
Re: (Score:2)
>*should* fail-safe to the open position.
Not in my first MX5. It failed down.
Hence my use of the qualifiers "most" and "should."
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Well predicated.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm certain this is absolutely pointless to say now, but most of those setups were designed so that spring pressure had to be overcome to close the lenses; that way, if the mechanism did fail, it *should* fail-safe to the open position.
My 1987 Honda Prelude had retractable headlights - technically rotating. They used a screw mechanism to raise/open lower/close - no springs. The car also had a button to manually raise the lights w/o turning them on - I used that for cleaning and to raise them in case of snow/ice conditions, so they weren't frozen closed.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm certain this is absolutely pointless to say now, but most of those setups were designed so that spring pressure had to be overcome to close the lenses; that way, if the mechanism did fail, it *should* fail-safe to the open position.
Ha-ha. Americans and their electronic complexity.
My Italian car with flip-up headlights just had a knob you turned to raise them if the motor failed.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm certain this is absolutely pointless to say now, but most of those setups were designed so that spring pressure had to be overcome to close the lenses; that way, if the mechanism did fail, it *should* fail-safe to the open position.
Well, no. Not in the Nissan. Like most imports, the Nissan uses a worm gear motor to actuate the headlights, or at least, it did from the eighties to the nineties. It was true in my 1984 300ZX, and it was true in my 1989 240SX, so I'm quite sure it was also true in the 1986 Pulsar. The motor pack has an arm on it like a windshield wiper, and a short pushrod attaches with small ball joints. The best part of the whole thing is that on the top of the motor there's a small knob in the same brick-red color as th
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That battery costs 30k right now, that's a whole lot of reinvestment. Even at 15k in 10 years that is still a big chunk of cash on a decade old chassis.
Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? (Score:5, Interesting)
One of my favorite features of my Nissan Leaf is that I can turn the air conditioning or heater on from a phone app. I can also check the state of the batteries and the time remaining until it fully charges. So even in standby, electric cars are doing a decent amount of stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
My question is "how much of that stuff is actually necessary and worth draining the battery for?"
I know about AC in Texas or heaters in International Falls. Even if that's half the year, what about cutting off the waste the rest of the year?
After the first month, you know exactly how long it takes to charge and how low batteries are after 51 miles. And if you don't yet, how often does it matter, when you're away from the car?
Re: (Score:2)
Not necessarily. It depends not only on your driving pattern but also the ambient temperature (which obviously varies according to season unless maybe you live in the tropics).
Re: (Score:2)
The only situation where it matters at all is if the car is sitting unplugged for weeks on end. That doesn't happen very often.
Re: (Score:2)
My raspberry pi or my cellphone both have easily enough CPU to run a basic web interface and opeate a couple of switches, yet neither draws anything like 40 watts.
Re: (Score:2)
Can't they put a big red cutoff switch for the battery, for owners who won't be charging to just physically disconnect the battery when they're parked?
If I had one, I wouldn't need the computer/GPS/3G_app/dataminer to keep running when I'm grocery shopping or working, as long as it reboots in less than, say, a minute.
Do that are you're down to the raw battery leakage only.
You're willing to sit in your car for 60 seconds while you wait for the computer that runs it to boot? You're much more patient than I am.
Re: (Score:2)
You're willing to sit in your car for 60 seconds while you wait for the computer that runs it to boot? You're much more patient than I am.
My Civic takes about five seconds to 'boot' after I turn the key (i.e the point where the digital displays reach their normal driving status). That's about as long as my Windows PC takes to boot to the login screen after it exits the BIOS, so it's clearly not hard to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Your app-enabled, GPS-equipped, 17-inch-touchscreen-dashboard car needs you to know what time it is, dear troll.
My Question (Score:2)
How much electricity does a fossil-fuel vehicle use in a day while sitting, turned off?
If it's anywhere near 1.1 kWh, then yea, no big deal for the Tesla to have a similar draw.
Re: (Score:2)
A car battery contains about 1 kWh of power. So this kind of draw would drain a car battery in on day. You could probably leave a car parked for a month-or-so without worrying about the battery, so figure the Tesla is using power about 30x faster than a normal car. That further implies a normal car is running at about 1.5 Watts (which sounds about right for a computer running in low-power mode and occasionally checking for things like a nearby key fob for keyless entry).
Of course, you'd expect to lose ch
Parasitic current draws (Score:3)
How much electricity does a fossil-fuel vehicle use in a day while sitting, turned off?
I recently had to troubleshoot something like this (turned out the culprit was a flaky switch in the trunk that would leave the trunk light on constantly). For a typical older-model car like mine, the expected current load is generally less than 30mA. A newer model car may be several times that, due to the increased parasitic draw from various built-in devices.
The incandescent bulb in my car's trunk drew several hundred milli-amps, which was enough to drain the battery within a day or two.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Some cars draw quite a bit more than the old cars. For example, my Prius would drain the battery within a week due to the keyless entry system. When I had my Prius sitting for any length of time I hooked it up to a Battery Minder. My Tesla has a lot more going on than my Prius did. For example, it still periodically uses its 3G connection while sleeping in addition to the remote keyless entry. While I can disable the remote access, I find it useful for things like warming my car up before leaving work and t
Aux battery (Score:4, Informative)
There's a 12-volt lead-acid battery in the thing to power the auxiliary systems. It's the same size as a regular automotive battery, but apparently is a sealed type, intended to last the life of the vehicle. Since it doesn't need to provide cranking power, a high-current battery isn't necessary.
Tesla owners have been reporting 12 volt battery failures for months. Usually the charging system reports "12 volt battery failure", but apparently a partial failure is possible, where the aux battery is an energy drain but still functional.
Re: (Score:2)
This is due to a problem with the battery manufacturer. The "well known" battery manufacturer subcontracted the batteries out to a Chinese company that subcontracted them out to a Vietnamese company. The resulting batteries Tesla got were crap and have a very high failure rate. I ended up with one of those batteries and Tesla had to replace it a few months ago when my car was less than 6 months old. The batteries Tesla had contracted were supposed to be much higher quality than what they ended up with. Sur
If this is the future of automotive service (Score:2)
and it will be billed at dealer rates.
Re: (Score:2)
Technician comes to your home and fixes you car right then? That's a big improvement over leaving the car and having to walk/taxi home, having the car not even be looked at for anywhere from a few hours to a couple days depending on how busy the shop is, then walk/taxi back to pick it up.
That's a lot of 12V loss (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
"According to Tesla, the car needs a constant flow of power to keep its computers and systems switched on 24/7, ready to boot up instantly when the driver gets into the car.
That's just stupid. It won't hurt anyone to wait 20 seconds for the computers to boot up. If it takes longer than 20 seconds to boot the cars computers, WTF? PCs only take minutes to boot because of legacy BIOS and OS writers who don't care about boot times. Embedded computers suffer none of these problems.
Re: (Score:2)
That's just stupid. It won't hurt anyone to wait 20 seconds for the computers to boot up.
That's just stupid. Not only might it hurt someone, but there's a third way: sleep mode. Modern computers can sleep on truly wispy amounts of power. What kind of chip did they use, a Nacho?
Re: (Score:2)
That's what fancy splash screens are for.
Elon Musk owes an apology to John Broder (Score:2)
The problem with the 12 volt battery is exactly what caused all the problems with the review car that John Broder wrote about. Hmm, I guess Broder might not have been the big liar that Musk and his gang of fanboys painted him out to be.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with the 12 volt battery is exactly what caused all the problems with the review car that John Broder wrote about. Hmm, I guess Broder might not have been the big liar that Musk and his gang of fanboys painted him out to be.
Nope. This problem is with the car sitting still. That was a complaint about the car running out of battery precisely when it told the driver that it would, after he failed to charge it when it told him to. Broder is still a liar.
Little discrepancy in the summary (Score:2)
Then a few hours later, he tweeted that the issue had to do with a bad 12-volt battery. Turns out Tesla had already called the owner of the affected car and sent a service tech to his house to replace that battery — and also install a newer build of the car's software.
So, it seems to be solved, but Tesla may either need to fix some software, or start sending a few new 12-volt batteries out to the folks still experiencing the issue.
Well, just to be accurate here. As far as we know, the problem was tracked to be a bad battery. Thus it does not make sense to suggest that they "may need to some software". During servicing, the faulty car's software was possibly just upgraded "while we are at it", without the upgrade necessarily having to do anything with the battery.
In every Tesla thread I mean to ask... (Score:3, Interesting)
What is the US energy mix? Is a Tesla better for the environment than a small petrol driven car? What about the embodied energy of a Tesla vs. a conventional car?
I know here in Australia where we burn brown bloody coal an electric car produces more emissions than a V6.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Here's a good article that looks at emissions based on the type of fuel.
http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/electric-cars-green [shrinkthatfootprint.com]
If you look at the map "Emissions equivalent MPG", you'll see that Australia CO2 emissions are about equivalent to a 26MPG petrol car whereas the in the US (nationwide average fuel mix) it's about equivalent to a 40MPG car.
India (all coal) is about a 20 MPG car whereas Brazil is equivalent to a 134 MPG car.
Volvo 240-DL Battery Dies Due to Dashboard Clock (Score:2)
Sad but true.
I contacted Volvo but they didn't send a repair person out.
I can't believe it. I trusted Sweden and this is how I am repaid....
Damn you Sweden!!!!
I just replaced it with a, standard domestic brand, Ford Pinto.
Sounded like a great deal. We'll see how it goes.
Frick'n Sweden.....
Re: (Score:2)
Welcome to the world of cars which are not astoundingly expensive. The 2000+ Astro will drain the battery if you leave the keys in the ignition. Apparently, so will the 1992+ Ford F250, and it doesn't even have a BCM! Nobody was sending techs 'round for those problems, either.
My car had the 12v battery replaced (Score:2)
I haven't noticed the vampire battery drain but then again I always keep my car plugged in at night. I also had to get my 12v battery replaced some months back. The 12v battery manufacturer outsourced the batteries to a Chinese company that outsourced them to a Vietnamese company causing a bunch of cars to get crappy 12v batteries that tended to fail fairly rapidly. I found out about it when I went to install a software upgrade and the car complained that the 12v battery was going bad. It sounds like the ca
Re:4.5 kWh per day (Score:4, Informative)
That's 4.5 kilowatt-hours per day. I.e. in a day, it draws 4.5 kWh of energy.
A watt is a unit of power. A watt-hour is a unit of energy. 1 Wh = 1 W x 1 h. Similarly, 1 kWh = 1 kW x 1h. A 200-watt motor left on for an hour will draw 200 Wh of energy. A 200-watt motor left on all thetime will draw 200 W x 24 h = 4.8 kWh of energy per day.
Re: (Score:2)
Or 4.5kWh/24h=190W. Almost enough to power 2 100W lightbulbs.
hire Andrea Rossi (Score:3)