Slashdot Mirror


Tesla Model S Battery Drain Issue Fixed

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."

239 comments

  1. And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    ..for Elon's next Slashvertisment.

    1. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      " 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.

    2. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    3. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by von_rick · · Score: 4, 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.

      --

      Face your daemons!

    4. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..fair enough reply, still a lot for nout tho..

      I dunno, I really would like to live in aworld whereby I can switch things 'off'.

      Then on again, and they still work. Do you use a car everyday? I don't. I would ask for some 'real-life' experience from Telsa drivers, how this all works it out.

      However, tis the internet ;) I know exactly what I'd get on here if I did. Sadly.

    5. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      "1100w (per day)" ... whatever that means, it is wrong.

      1.1 kWh = 45 watts for a day

    6. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Grishnakh · · 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.

    7. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats (sorreee..) completely disingenous, 1100w (per day) is the actual current draw of an unused Tesla. My original point was maybe better stated as, "What is the actual current discharge rate of the batteries, is this also 1100w per day?" - just in case I wanted to do something strange like park on a street for more than 24hrs, or similar..

    8. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by von_rick · · Score: 5, Informative

      Wan't to completely turn the battery off? You sure can, but that clicker to open/lock the door won't work, nor would the security alarm. These are the first two things that come to mind. There might be many other essential things that you might have to do without.

      --

      Face your daemons!

    9. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For 45W? That's a lot of watts for a 15mA receiver.

       

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    10. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, rather weird.
      Self discharge on the main battery should be on the order of 9W.
      And yeah, I also suspect the mystery draw is the main computers.

    11. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by von_rick · · Score: 1

      The AC comment mentioned tunring everything completely off. There must be some documentation that gives the breakdown of where all the 45W end up. But expecting to turn all the electronics OFF in a present day automobile is not the smartest of ideas.

      --

      Face your daemons!

    13. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I agree. Any regular car would be pulling about 1/100th of that amount.
      I imagine in an electric car quite a lot of energy is wasted in presenting the user with how much energy they are saving.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    14. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Do you use a car everyday? I don't.

      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.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    15. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by jandrese · · Score: 2

      I imagine leakage from the batteries might be a good chunk of that. Even a small 0.5%/day leakage adds up when you've got a huge battery pack. 40W to run a dash computer (with the screen off!) is definitely excessive, especially since it uses a chipset designed for tablets and phones.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    16. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..ah, fuck - OP AC (again..) - while I was actually trying to stay out of this now, this is so completely fucking stupid a reply, I can't resist.

      OK, again, Do You Know Anybody Who Uses A Car EVERYDAY? (sorry, my blink tag is broken..)

      I don't either, because they don't exist.

      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, completely, streets in cities where they like to park for more than a few days without a handy power socket, etc.

      I remain unconvinced, 1100w (per day - which I call when no one else does ;) is too much, it remains however admittedly an improvement over an apparently previous 4.5 kWh draw per day, which they were apparently shipping on production models. That, my friends, is a fucking *insane* power draw for an unused vehicle, seriously.

    17. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      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).

    18. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      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 displays off. x86-64 CPUs are not low-power like ARMs.

      It sounds like the problem is they didn't design this system for power management very well; they should have had some sort of multi-CPU system running both a low-power ARM and a high-power x86-64, so it could keep the ARM running while "off" to manage functions like WiFi/3G, background sync, and keyless entry, and only powering up the big CPU when the car (and its main displays) is "on". Of course, this would be somewhat complex, and require some fancy software architecture since ARMs aren't binary-compatible with x86-64s.

    19. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      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.

    20. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by fahrbot-bot · · 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 :-)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    21. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, 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.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    22. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Linux laptop with a dual-core i5 processor, 4GB RAM, and SSD can idle with display and wifi active at around 11W or with display off at under 7W. This is idle with ability to ssh in and do stuff, not suspended in any way. A figure like 40W at idle sounds more like my desktop core i7 with multiple hard-drives and 24GB of RAM.

      There is something wrong with their on-board computer if it cannot match the power profile of a regular x86-64 laptop computer with gigabytes of RAM, wifi networking, large SSD, and general desktop software. At the very least they could have sourced the same kind of motherboards and deployed them with an appropriate cooling solution for the car environment. No need for a hybrid with ARM processors unless they want to get down to mobile-phone levels of power draw.

    23. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Lazere · · Score: 1

      It does, but it uses the Tegra line which is Nvidia's mobile solution. So, it'd be an ARM chip in there, not x86.

    24. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by fredprado · · Score: 1

      To be fair there were so many articles here about the problem being the end of the world that even if it is an advertisement this article still has a place here.

    25. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by CaptainLard · · Score: 1

      Obviously it's the DVR thats causing the power draw since we all know they draw 40W when turned off. Gotta keep those hard drives spinning through the night! Seriously Motorola/Comcast/Verizon, if you find it in your heart to shut them down 8 hours a day _for reals_ America would save like 10GWh a day! (40W x 8H x ~30M homes)

    26. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by JLennox · · Score: 1

      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 it.

    27. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by mspohr · · Score: 1

      I've owned printers which used that much electricity when they were "sleeping".

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    28. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Believe it or not, some people actually leave our mom's basement and go to work every weekday. Others even socialize on the weekends, too! Shocking, I know!

    29. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why don't they just say "46 Watts" instead of "1.1kWh per day"? I could understand if you were talking about mains power being used (for billing purposes), but they're talking about battery drain. And for a car that's supposed to be efficient, 46W power drain when it's "off" is unacceptable.

    30. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      45.83W Lightbulb.

    31. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by MichaelSmith · · Score: 2

      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.

    32. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

      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 that allows you to seamlessly switch to a low power CPU on the same chip when not much is happening.

    33. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      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.

    34. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      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).

    35. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by suutar · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. That's an interesting factoid. I should put my cablebox on the Kill-a-watt. (Though I'm not sure what I'd do about it, aside from gripe; the cable box is one of the few things not on the timed powerstrip, because it might need to record something in the middle of the night.)

    36. Re: And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but people that buy tesla want a top end car for low end dollars. OTH, those buying BMW are paying top end dollar for a sub-par car. IOW, u are really into names.

    37. Re: And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, no. No other car is equipped like a tesla. In addition, tesla must stay alive with WiFi/3g to report battery status. I suspect in future that will be moved to new small computer, but for now, it remains on the main.

    38. Re: And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      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.

    39. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    40. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    41. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      If you want the electric locks, clock, alarm, etc to work, there's going to be some power draw. 1.1kWh still sounds high. From other comments, the car keeps some of its computers running or something (to process things like the keyless entry). Still sounds like overkill....you'd think they could run some of that stuff on a couple-watt low-performance SoC or something.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    42. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Lead Acid batteries hate trickle current.

      Devices that use it (clock, alarm, remote opener etc) should have a secondary battery that is OK with trickle current and recharges using an occasional a burst from the main battery. This would cost a few extra cents, so instead they just do it stupid way on most cars.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    43. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      RF receiver for remote, machine to machine GSM module to talk back to Tesla to push telematics and to pull software updates, but most importantly the battery management system. This babies the expensive lithium pack, and actively cools it if necessary to prevent damage.

    44. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Because I can't edit my post, here is a paper battery management systems: http://www.stanford.edu/~adurieux/cgi-bin/Website/downloads/Antoine_DURIEUX_MSE303_Paper.pdf

    45. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Your phone doesn't have to manage a $30K lithium battery pack. Those packs require constant health management, balancing, and cooling.

    46. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Battery management is not that big of a deal. You could do that with something like a MSP430 that wakes up every 10 seconds or so.

    47. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Chozabu · · Score: 1

      Well, Thats easily enough to be covered by some solar cells in the body of the car.

    48. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      OK, again, Do You Know Anybody Who Uses A Car EVERYDAY?

      I know more people who use a car everyday than don't. What are you in college or something? I didn't when I was 19-21, but before, and after, yes, I used a car every day. The only people I can think of who don't drive EVERDAY live in Boston and NYC.

      (my current car is a BMW7)

      Now I think you are trolling. My old boss had an X5 as a second car. He drove every day, but the X5 was weekends only. He was told by the BMW dealership that his warranty was void because he didn't drive it enough. The battery was drained faster than it was charged, unless you drive more than about 8000 miles in a year. So his car would drain, until it died, from all the electronics you couldn't turn off. If you really had a recent BMW and drove it as infrequently as you imply, you'd have run into a similar problem. He plugs in his X5 to charge every night, and it's not even an electric or hybrid. That's how a modern BMW works these days.

    49. Re: And, Folks, stay tuned.. by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      Well, they are talking about battery drain which you will need to top off (and pay for in $/kWh). Also, the battery packs are given (when I have looked) with capacity in kWh, so x loss/ total capacity is easier to visualize.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    50. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      And a nice strong light in the ceiling of the garage to power the solar cells.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    51. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Lead Acid batteries hate trickle current.

      Citation? I know they've been increasing the size of batteries and chargers in modern cars to keep up with the increase in vampire draw from all the electronic do-dads, I also know that lead acid batteries don't like being fully discharged, but I've never heard the trickle current thing.

      As for the secondary batteries, with cars lasting over a decade I'd really rather not have to replace more batteries.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    52. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      The battery was drained faster than it was charged, unless you drive more than about 8000 miles in a year.

      This makes me wonder - how does that 1.1kwh per day compare to other modern cars in it's class?

      As for your boss, I'd think that it'd depend on how many miles he drives when he does start it up. 8k miles translates to an average of 22 miles a day(7 days a week). Given that my work is right at 10 miles away, I'd probably need to top that battery off occasionally if I'm not making a fair number of extra trips. That's either a lot of vampire drain or an underrated charging system.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    53. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      No regular car would be able to start its engine in the morning if it were powering a 40W light bulb all night.

      Truck, not a car, but I've left my lights on a couple times and still been able to start it... Mostly during the day when I started driving it was dark, but light when I got to work/home. Noticed when I went to leave. Still started. Of course, first opportunity after that I slap the charger on...

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    54. Re: And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      They also rate the car's mileage in terms of kwh - about 3 miles per kwh. So 1.1 kwh = 3.3miles lost per day.

      I have to agree with the others; it shouldn't need this much power. I rate it up to the fact that they're doing something relatively brand new, are a new car company, and getting vampire drain lower was lost on the priority list. Never buy the first year of a new/significantly revised car model....

      Going what I'm seeing for vampire drain for other appliances - 1w should be mostly doable, or 24wh per day. Or almost 50 times less than what's being reported.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    55. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      No they don't. They require periodic health management. Interestingly enough it's something simple enough to do with a microcontroller, or a tiny single chip solution, both of which draw just a few mA. Even if it were doing continuous monitoring, what is continuous to you? 1 billion times per second? Once per second? A microcontroller waking up once per second can draw in the order of a few microamps. The key is sleeping between readings.

      By the way I have a full blown computer here which running flat out uses less than 9W of power. It's industry hardened and has all the bells and whistles.

      Maybe Tesla should buy a few of those instead.

    56. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      45Wh is about the total volume of my laptop's battery. A slightly more powerful variation of my laptop with the same battery can easily suck it up in less than an hour under load.

      Unlike my laptop, car likely has many systems, several of them mechanical, than must be kept in awake state during car's shutdown. I would imagine 45W/h is not a huge amount for a fully electric car with a lot of different systems.

    57. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      That's either a lot of vampire drain or an underrated charging system.

      Or both. The vampire drain is expected. The dealer refused to "fix" the car, so the drain was declared normal. The charging system would also be under-rated for the level of vampirism of the system. Fixing either one would fix the problem. But the dealer said it was "expected operation" and he needed to buy a charger or drive it more. He bought a charger. No problems since.

    58. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      8k miles/year required driving still seems a touch much to me. Regular trips into Fairbanks would do it for me, but I'd have looked into a beefier alternator. Maybe install something temporarily so I could get a good idea of the vampire drain on the car. Oh, and measure how fast it's charging the battery. It might be one of those 'tick up the voltage 10%'. I remember reading about BMW having had trouble with insufficient charging.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    59. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I've seen similar problems with people that used under-sized alternators with engine swaps. You can play with pulley sizes to improve performance (smaller fly-wheel on the alternator will spin it faster, making more electricity). He spent a lot of time with the dealer before he got an official answer that the performance was "expected".

    60. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      40W is still at least twice as high as it should be:

      ThinkPad W530, quad-core hyperthreaded CPU and driving two external monitors while on battery so forcing the NVidia Quadro w/ 2GB of video RAM to be operational: I draw 15-18W in that state.

      ThinkPad T530 (it's less workstation-like sibling) with only an Intel HD Graphics 4000 can power those same two external monitors drawing only 10-12W browsing the web.

      Both of them have SSD's, admitedly, and GOBS more RAM than they need (32GB for the W530, 16GB for the T530) but the SSD's at least would be a given in a Tesla.

      And both of the above while using wireless and bluetooth, even adding an additional 1-2W to power the cellular component doesn't remotely add up to 40W.

      So, no, 40W isn't reasonable even using off-the-shelf x86_64 components that are relatively old at this point.

    61. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OP, re: 7er - Trolling? Hell, no..

      In fairness, never claimed it was brand-new either ;) also, live in central Munich, where parking a 7er on the street for longer periods is hardly an unknown phenomenon. And the luxury of a garage can cost you more than a new 7er.

      X5 models also had a few problems with batteries, IIRC. Problem may quite simply be an under-spec'd alternator or similar, but your Boss certainly wasn't alone with his (albeit, minor) X5 woes. If you park a 7er for *long* periods, (e.g., my holiday home car intended-example), you'd be well advised to leave the door unlocked or on a trickle charger. The older models, you could let the battery run flat without much problem, would have to 'retrain' the electronic keys or some similar nonsense, newer models, you get dire warnings not to do so, doubtless better avoided when possible.

      My point about people driving the same car EVERYDAY (holidays? etc.) - maybe happens more than I think, but EVERYDAY is certainly unusual, if you think about it. Must also be fair to say, high percentage of Tesla owners, would be a second (or more) vehicle. End of the day, no one really seems capable of simply explaining how long you can leave a Tesla without charge (1 Week?), and the eventual consequences of doing so, when either once or regularly.

    62. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The literature mentions 1% per day, so 80 days and you'll be into reserve charge. So 2 months is likely the practical maximum. When I stored a car in an uncontrolled environment in Alaskan winters (storing the summer car), I'd start it once a month. Sometimes it wouldn't start so well (temperature was hard on batteries). Other times, it started easily. I'd let it idle for at least an hour before turning it off for another month. I'd also roll it forward a quarter turn of the tires (at least the first winters, before I bought a "storage set" of wheels for it with crap tires I didn't mind the flat spots in).

      If you are parking a Telsa on the street for a week at a time, where are you charging it before you park it there? Best is to charge it up the day before you want to use it again, or more often if you exceed the drain time. Also, others have noted that the main battery pack will self-disconnect if you remove/disconnect the 12V battery. So if you are storing it longer term, disconnect the 12V battery, and you'll be better off. I have no idea how long it will/should last if you do that.

      Given the difficulty of charging if you only have on street parking, I expect most Tesla owners would reserved parking with access to a charger in that location. In that case, charge it up before storage, and, once a month, charge it up to full. OR just leave it trickle indefinitely.

    63. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by toruonu · · Score: 1

      So if it's completely off how do you make contact with it to turn the AC on before driving and slide the charging level up a bit so that it charges a bit warming the battery in winter. You know to connect the car has to maintain a regular standby connection to 3G or WiFi able to be pinged. I personally switched off the sleep mode because I don't drive that much and waiting for the car to wake up for 2 minutes was annoying. If I go on road trips I'll probably turn sleep mode on again. But so far I saw about 8km drain overnight with sleep mode off, but the car is instantly active on iPhone app as well as when sitting in.

      So spending 40W to watch for the keyfob approach, poll the 3G service and do some other minor internals isn't that much. And losing about 12c worth of electricity per day or so won't break my wallet either.

    64. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by KreAture · · Score: 1

      It is also against the rules.
      Since you can view the car as a plugged in device, as it's connected to the grid all night, it should follow the rules of phantom draw.
      Basically if it's OFF it should be below 0.5w (was 1w in 2010).
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standby_power
      You could argue that it's systems like location sensing, gps, wireless networking and such that are never turned off, and are required for fast startup once out of the OFF-state, but a 3G modem that is not transmitting data can survive nicely on 10 mW if need be. Also, since the car can be assumed not to move when off, GPS can be kickstarted with old coordinates and the current time.
      It is more likely this draw is from quite hungry computers that shouldn't even be there in the first place.

    65. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The problem is, you don't need 40W to run a computer. Look at all the other posts here, where people are posting what their regular laptop computers consume. Typical numbers for dual-core and even quad-core x86-64 laptops are well under 20W, and even under 10W, and that's just idling, not in a sleep state. If I can buy a Thinkpad laptop and let it run idle at less than 10W, with WiFi connected and responding to SSH, then why the heck does the Tesla need 40W when it's supposed to be using an ARM-based computer, which should theoretically need even less power than a typical i5-based laptop? Anyone have the idle power consumption of an iPad? It's probably a lot less than 10W.

    66. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by petteyg359 · · Score: 1

      1.1kWh per day != 1100 W per day. You can't just cut off that pesky "hours" part of the unit.

    67. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1,1 KW while doing nothign? thats huge drain. I could have acceptable Sauna moment with that ammount of energy. If its ok for device doing nothing consume that huge energy, no wonder US is energy hog of the world... Thats 1.1 kW you cant use to drive the car... Massive waste of energy in my opinion

    68. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Small ones are affected more than big ones. A classic case is motorcycles with an added aftermarket alarm/disabler. The trickle draw dramatically shortens the life of the battery. Car's were not affected so much, but with increasing draw, the batteries have to be increased in size not only for capacity as for robustness in the face of trickle current.

      I can't be arsed to go googling for real data, but when I was designing cell tower backup systems (a former life before I got dragged into cryptography), the load/reliability data came with the batteries.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    69. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're off by an order of magnitude or more. Power draw with on these devices is 10s of milliwatts when fully idle with all radios off. Active radios add a lot of overhead but they too have deep idle states. For instance, if an iPhone 5 averages 200mW it will last about a day. Given that the device easily lasts a day including screen on use, its power draw with radios on and screen off must be (considerably) less than 200mW.

      The Tesla's average idle power draw is like a desktop.

    70. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Gallomimia · · Score: 1

      Your unitary algebra is totally fucked.
      1100kWh translates to 3 960 000 000 joules

      --
      Sadly, a Libertarian cannot force his views on another, and freedom cannot spread as does the cancer known as religion.
    71. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Gallomimia · · Score: 1

      Sorry, it's 1100 watt-hours, 1.1kWh, which is only 3.96MJ, not gigajoules.

      --
      Sadly, a Libertarian cannot force his views on another, and freedom cannot spread as does the cancer known as religion.
    72. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Gallomimia · · Score: 1

      Where I'm from, this translates to roughly 12 cents worth of power. (Cheap hydroelectric, and rates are going up soon) It's still about 30-40 minutes of charge from a 120V outlet, which you could get arrested for if you steal it from a school apparently.

      --
      Sadly, a Libertarian cannot force his views on another, and freedom cannot spread as does the cancer known as religion.
    73. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      I remain convinced that lead-acid is fine with trickle-discharge. The trick is that car(and motorcycle) batteries are typically optimized for burst power - utilizing lots of thin plates vs thick ones combine with that they really like being fully charged and that a steady trickle current can add up to lots of energy drain before you realize it.

      Use 600 watts for 5 seconds to start your vehicle? That's not even the energy used by a 1 watt drain for an hour. As such a trickle current discharge will drain a battery relatively quickly, and unless you get deep-cycle batteries the wear starts racking up on them - but that's more from them being discharged.

      And yes, I did mention that they've been increasing the size of batteries due to the extra demand, didn't I?

      I wouldn't be surprised if the price of LiIon keeps dropping that we won't end up seeing LiIon starting batteries.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    74. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Wan't to completely turn the battery off? You sure can, but that clicker to open/lock the door won't work, nor would the security alarm.

      One of my colleagues has experienced multiple problems with two successive Mazdas (I think ; I'm not a car-interested person - I do around 50 miles more/week on the pedal bike than I do in the wife's car) which experienced this sort of power draw. Repeatedly he'd come home from a month working (away at sea), and greet his elderly father at the door of their house (who doesn't have the keys, because he's not well enough to know that he's not well enough to drive), then open the garage (relatively high car crime area), go to start his car ... and then go to call the dealer to get a technician around to re-set everything.

      Neither a very good advert for Mazdas (if it was then ; I got something different, so I'll phone him to check if I consider getting a different model), nor their dealers, nor their salemen's ability to understand their customers saying "this is my life ; I need a vehicle that fits my life." To be honest, I can understand my colleague being pissed off after discovering this problem once ; I don't understand why he got a second one.

      (My suggestion was to get a solar-powered trickle charger and hook that up permanently ; defeated by the garage, but I don't know why he didn't use a mains-powered trickle charger.)

      TL;DR version : cars other than Teslas have battery vampire problems.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    75. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by stepho-wrs · · Score: 1

      Surely the clock wouldn't flash anything at all if it was off...

    76. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by Askmum · · Score: 1

      Granted, I do not have a Tesla, nor is my car electric. It is an old fashioned car with an ICE. It does however have "electronic gizmo's". Keyless entry, navigation, a digital clock (remember when we thought digital watches were cool?).
      It also has one 60Ah 12V battery. That's a theoretical 720 Wh. Maybe half of that in practice, so 360 Wh.
      With that capability, and the battery drain of a Tesla, it would be dead in 8 hours. Yet, it still works after 14 days (yes, it has been that long one time). That makes a maximum of 25Wh per day or 1W continuous consumption.

      I would be very, very interested to know what is causing the (in comparison) humongous load in the Tesla.

      Remember Apollo 13 where they had to figure out how to save a few amps to get back?

    77. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      45.83W for a day is 45.8333.. Joules * seconds in a day. = 45.8333.. * 24 * 60 * 60 = 3,960,000 Joules.

      You're off by a factor of 1000

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    78. Re:And, Folks, stay tuned.. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Yup. Lead acids can be optimized for different types of load.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  2. so it goes with many v1.0 products by themushroom · · Score: 2

    The learning curve gets climbed.

  3. In Other News by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 4, 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.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    1. Re:In Other News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still though...replacing the 12V battery on a 18 month old vehicle doesn't make sense especially given the application (non-starting) of that 12V battery.

    2. Re:In Other News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had to replace a lead-acid battery less than one year old which was used extremely infrequently for starting because it wouldn't hold a charge anymore. (I noticed one cell was swolen, also.) I assumed, and my battery store did not disagree with my assessment, that this was due to a manufacturing defect.

    3. Re:In Other News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would be interesting to understand if this is an isolated case for Tesla. If it is, clearly the battery had a defect. Which is not a knock on Tesla, and probably not even a knock on their supplier assuming it's an outlying case.

    4. Re:In Other News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why I use Costco lead acid batteries; return them every 2.9 years or sooner and you affectively have a lifetime warranty :)

  4. $80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by bob_super · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by silas_moeckel · · Score: 3, 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.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    2. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what? Have a faggoty mechanical switch to turn the car back on? Have to reset the clock? Fuck that.

    3. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by bob_super · · Score: 1

      Yes. Your app-enabled, GPS-equipped, 17-inch-touchscreen-dashboard car needs you to know what time it is, dear troll.

    4. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 4, 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.

    5. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by bob_super · · Score: 1

      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?

    6. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
      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". My logic was impeccable and all the PIGS (poor indian grad students) left their headlights up if they had retractable head lights.

      I wonder if Tesla has a switch to leave its door handles out.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    7. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by hawguy · · Score: 1

      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.

    8. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by Albanach · · Score: 1

      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.

    9. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    10. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      After the first month, you know exactly how long it takes to charge and how low batteries are after 51 miles.

      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).

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    11. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by silas_moeckel · · Score: 0

      It is an 80k car I doubt many owners will ever change a tire forget worrying about the door handles, lets remember EV's are disposable there battery s degrade and they are worth nothing, your not going to see many go much past 10 years.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    12. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      >*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.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    13. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      >*should* fail-safe to the open position.

      Not in my first MX5. It failed down.

      Hence my use of the qualifiers "most" and "should."

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    14. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    15. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      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.

    16. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      Yes. Well predicated.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    17. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      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.

    18. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

      Electric cars have super long durability. Battery is designed to be swapped. Electric motors run for decades, sometime continuously, without servicing. Make it of a non rusting material, keep swapping out the batteries, these cars can last for millions of miles. The electric traction motors of locomotives go for decades without even being opened and rewound.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    19. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    20. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 1

      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.

    21. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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 the fuel injector harness connectors. If your pop-up headlights fail, then you just disconnect the electrical connector if necessary and turn the knob to raise or lower the headlight. Since it's a worm gear drive it takes quite a few revolutions, but that's not a serious problem.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    22. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by bob_super · · Score: 1

      I'll leave the water open and let it flow straight into the drain 24/7 even when I don't need it.
      Why bother to turn it off? I can afford it.

    23. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by chihowa · · Score: 1

      Except that every car mentioned in this thread so far is Japanese.

      My Honda had these, without a fail-open spring (which I've never actually seen on any car), and it also had a knob to crank them open.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    24. Re: $80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Yes but you can start the engine and drive off before the gauges and warning lights have finished the self test.

    25. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      30K? More like 3K for Prius and Insight. That is the current price using current technology. They would be cheaper in 10 years, not costlier. Recently there was a news item that some survey showed that there are people who are less likely to buy a product if it claims to be green or earth friendly. You one of them? http://www.tirebusiness.com/article/20121120/NEWS/121129994/replacing-hybrids-battery-not-as-costly-as-you-think

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    26. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and that's why auto parts stores don't sell starters or other electrical motors for vehicles and there are no industrial electric motor repair firms. Doh! Sorry, I thought I was in Bizarroworld where those things don't exist. Sorry, you can find them in every major city in this world because electric motors like anything else that moves, can break. BTW, traction motors aren't as worry free as you think either.

    27. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      30k from Tesla's forums, HUGE difference between an all electric and a hybrid. Nope I like green things fission power plans and hydro for base load :)

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    28. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mostly true. You don't need the fob. A soft touch to the outside will extend the door handles.

    29. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      "most" is an interesting choice. I've never found any that did. My Nissan and Mazdas failed down. More than one model, more than 20 years separation. Eventually, flip headlights were (essentially) made illegal, so we don't have to worry about it anymore.

      Can you name a single one that failed open, if the opening mechanism failed while closed?

    30. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      For the amount of power it's using you can run an entry level computer with a decent GPU doing some bitcoin mining.

      I don't think a few fancy features is the problem here.

    31. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by Smauler · · Score: 1

      OT, I know, but the reason new cars don't have retractable lights is pedestrian safety.

    32. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      Sorry buddy. I realized you were talking about a full battery vehicle just as I hit the submit button. Should have posted a follow up retracting my statement. Sorry.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    33. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      1969 Merc Colony Park. My Dad started routinely seeing the lights open in the morning till he had it fixed. (They were spring loaded to be open; a vacuum cylinder pulled them closed.)

    34. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      Huh? How does this affect pedestrian safety? If anything, I'd rather be hit by the smooth metal on the closed lights than the glass headlamps when they were open. Bear in mind, these were located in the grill and rotated in place, rather than popping up from the hood line.

    35. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If by "most" you mean most non-Japanese. The typical Japanese design was a worm gear with a manual adjustment/override knob next to the light module under the hood.

    36. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I will concede that I didn't think of the headlight covers, but would indicate that all of them I found that would fail open (a required safety feature from 1970), were ones that didn't move the lights. And my wording of "flip headlights" (to me, at least) doesn't include all possible headlight concealments, but only those that move the headlights themselves.

      Eventually the flipping headlights were made illegal through rules for pedestrian safety. I have no idea if the covers are still legal, but nobody would use them because when the requirements for the horrible sealed lamps were lifted, everyone abandoned them as quickly as practical, so there was less need to hide them.

    37. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by JamieIanMacgregor · · Score: 1

      Mazda RX7's were my favourite to laugh at, as they aged the pop up headlights would get out of sync and you'd have to turn them on-off-on-off-etc over and over to get them both up at the same time.

    38. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that I understand your reference to covers - I'm referring to a design wherein the entire, twin bulb headlamp rotated. That is, the headlamps pointed down when closed. But my point here and in another comment was that the Merc was distinctly more pedestrian friendly when closed. Again, this car had its headlamps forming part of the grill, not popping up like on a Mazda RX-7.

    39. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Ah, then the site I read was wrong. It indicated the lamps were fixed, and a cover was spring-loaded to pop up, held back by vacuum. The Corvette/RX-7/Nissan/Toyota systems I've seen since 1980 on (1969 was before I was born, and the only cars of that era I ever dealt with had fixed headlights) were all light-rotating systems with the "fail" being locked in the previous position, whatever it was, with most having a manual bypass. I'm not sure why they could all get away with flip lights that could fail closed when the references to the 1969 era concealed lights indicated the law required "fail open" from 1970 on.

    40. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by rpstrong · · Score: 1

      I just did a bit of Googling, and I think you're correct - I'm seeing references to covers, not rotating units. But it's been almost 40 years since I drove the car, and that was a lot of brain cells ago . . .

    41. Re:$80k car, $10 cutoff switch? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      It's not like it matters. There were "hidden" lights that would fail open. And there were "hidden" lights that would fail closed. And they were different types. There are no more new cars with "hidden" lights that I'm aware of available in the USA, having had all the popular styles made illegal by pedestrian safety standards. 2004 was the last year (according to wikipedia) for them. So now all lights fail open. And those from yesteryear can be whatever we remember them to be. I'm familiar with the cars from the '80s. All of which were locked in place by mechanical action that would fail locked in the last position. You are more familiar with the "open by default, closed by Rube Goldberg" systems.

  5. 1.1 kWh is still too much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    That's 45 watts continuously, it should be more like 10. Multiply the wasted energy times tens or hundreds of thousands of cars and all of sudden you're talking about the output of an energy plant wasted every day.

  6. drain by themushroom · · Score: 3, 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.

    1. Re:drain by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      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? ;-)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:drain by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Tesla is trying to get itself a foothold in the market and Elon feels personally responsible if there's a defective product that has reached the attention of the media because it reflects badly upon the company.

      There, FTFY.
       
      Elon Musk is a master at manipulating the media and the fanbois.

  7. Not fixed yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1.1 kWh is a hell of a lot energy. Something is still seriously wrong if it's not lost in balancing the battery pack.

    1. Re:Not fixed yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it isn't. It's about the heat put off by a 45 watt bulb.

    2. Re:Not fixed yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's still at least an order of magnitude too much power. I know, I design EV electronics.

    3. Re:Not fixed yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh wise Anonymous armchair expert, how do you get 4.5W when the self-discharge on the traction pack is already about 10W?

    4. Re:Not fixed yet by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Oh wise Anonymous pundit, you get it by looking at the 12v battery which is doing the leeching -- the traction pack runs off the main battery, unless I'm mistaken.

      When the vehicle is off, the 12v battery should be powering something about equivalent to a smartphone, so 4.5v sounds about correct. Amperage should be minimal until some mechanical process is kicked off, like unlocking the doors, turning on A/C, powering up the antenna(s) etc.

      What this really feels like to me is that some secondary process controlled by the computer that's backed by the 12v battery isn't going into standby correctly -- likely culprit would be the wireless communication radio transmitter (not sure what type this car uses, so leaving vague).

      One thing for owners experiencing this leakage to do would be to try parking their S in the garage overnight one night, and then outside the next night, and see if the consumption is visibly different. If it isn't, there's a design flaw to be tracked down. Has this system been EnergyStar rated?

    5. Re:Not fixed yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, math in easy small steps for the retards:
      "It's 45W"
      "It's still at least an order of magnitude too much power."
      Order of magnitude = factor of 10, so Mr. EV electronic designer claims it should be 4.5W.
      Main battery is 85kWh LiIon.
      LiIon has self-discharge rate on the order of 10%/month at 25C.
      10% of 85kWh is 8.5kWh
      divide by 30 to get self discharge per day, 283Wh
      divide by 24 to get W, 11.8W
      So the traction battery "draws" 12W just sitting there.

      Now tell me, how do you get below 4.5W for traction battery + electronics?

    6. Re:Not fixed yet by gnupun · · Score: 1

      Let's convert how much energy is wasted in tesla's sleep mode compared to a fossil fuel car:
      According to yahoo answers, 1 gallon of gasoline = 34.7 kWh.

      Energy consumed by a model s in a month = 30 x 1.1 = 33 kWh
      Converting 33 kWh to equivalent gallons of gasoline = 33 / 34.7 = 0.95 gallons

      The tesla wastes the equivalent of 1 gallon gasoline/month while parked!

    7. Re:Not fixed yet by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Has this system been EnergyStar rated?

      Probably not, the technology is too new and 'out there' for the Energy Star section of the EPA. The closest section, battery chargers, well, Tesla probably handily beats. We're talking about something where efficiency increases as the power draw increases after all. An efficincy standard for chargers for cell phones, AA cells and such is going to be easily met by a charger intended for a 60-85kwh behemoth. At that size you're using efficient processes just to handle the power demands without setting things on fire.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    8. Re:Not fixed yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Self-discharge is not drained by the system, it's an inescapable inherent property to battery chemistry used. It can be compared to evaporated fuel in ICE cars (before charcoal cans were introduced). Apart from balancing the pack anything above 1W or even 100mW is just sloppy design.

  8. Customer care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some pretty fantastic customer care tbh

  9. Not a massive difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's still 46W permanently, isn't it? More than most devices. Is that really what's needed to keep the batteries charged?

  10. rechargable battery decay by themushroom · · Score: 2

    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).

    1. Re:rechargable battery decay by bob_super · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:rechargable battery decay by Entropius · · Score: 1

      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.

    3. Re:rechargable battery decay by Chuckstar · · Score: 1

      Self discharge on a 60kWh battery shouldn't be more than say 10 Watts, I believe.

  11. just hang in there, help is on the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure Tussle owners can manage the expense for awhile, eh?

  12. 4.5 kWh per day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huh? 4.5 kilo watts per hour per day?

    1. Re:4.5 kWh per day by Trepidity · · Score: 3, 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.

    2. Re:4.5 kWh per day by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Or 4.5kWh/24h=190W. Almost enough to power 2 100W lightbulbs.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:4.5 kWh per day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Finally something that makes sense. kWh/day is just nuts---3 time units in a row! (Why not go for 5?) They say kWh is used to make it easier to understand but I couldn't relate it to anything until it became W. Now I see similar to a running desktop machine and... seems a bit high.

    4. Re:4.5 kWh per day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From 190 watts to 45 watts.

  13. My Question by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    1. Re:My Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How much gas can I put in my tank by plugging it in on my wall socket overnight at home when I'm low on gas?

      If it's anywhere close to being a full tank, then yea, no big deal for the regular car to have a similar running cost.

    2. Re: My Question by chaboud · · Score: 1

      It is nowhere near that in a normal car...

      I have a 40Ah battery in my car (at 12V, that's 480 Wh). If it were drawing like a Model S, it would be dead in under half a day... I often go *weeks* without driving.

        45W is huge. Your phone in active standby (screen off) is probably around 45mW... A Macbook Air under load is 45W. That is an *astronomical* amount of energy in standby. Even the cellular connection can only account for, maybe, 1W. Is this for the auto door pulls? Battery heaters?

      Isn't the model number the kWh of the battery pack? The 85 is an 85kWh car, right?

      So, you know, when you go on vacation, make sure to leave your car plugged in...

    3. Re:My Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A typical 12 V automotive battery might have a capacity of 100 Ah. That corresponds to 1200 Wh, or 1.2 kWh. The Tesla would drain that battery in about a day, whereas in a typical car, the battery would probably last at least a few months. So, based on that, the Tesla is using 50 to 100 times more power while sitting.

    4. Re:My Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering how the 12V battery on a combustion car is ~100Ah, it's no where near 1.1kWh.

    5. Re:My Question by Chuckstar · · Score: 1

      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 charge in a 60kWh lithium ion battery at a rate of about 5-10 Watts. Adding the 1.5 Watts that a car's computer can expect to use, and the Tesla should be using about 6.5-11.5 Watts when parked. I can't tell you where the other 33.5-38.5 Watts is going.

    6. Re: My Question by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      I have a 40Ah battery in my car (at 12V, that's 480 Wh). If it were drawing like a Model S, it would be dead in under half a day... I often go *weeks* without driving.

          45W is huge. Your phone in active standby (screen off) is probably around 45mW... A Macbook Air under load is 45W. That is an *astronomical* amount of energy in standby. Even the cellular connection can only account for, maybe, 1W. Is this for the auto door pulls? Battery heaters?

      Isn't the model number the kWh of the battery pack? The 85 is an 85kWh car, right?

      So, you know, when you go on vacation, make sure to leave your car plugged in...

      Well, the high voltage battery constantly charges the 12V battery, and the 12V battery enables the contactors for the high voltage battery (as a safety feature). If you remove the 12V battery, the high voltage battery disconnects automatically (if you're needing to rescue someone inside, the rescuer manual says to cut the 12V battery cables to disconnect the high-voltage battery).

      I suppose part of it could be to power the big relays that connect the battery to the rest of the high voltage lines. (remember, those things have to pass a huge amount of current, so the 12V coil may have to be fairly beefy).

      It's also just a relay - unlatched. Remove the battery and the HV disconnects. Reconnect it and the HV reconnects.

  14. Aux battery by Animats · · Score: 3, 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.

    1. Re:Aux battery by AaronW · · Score: 1

      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. Surprisingly, as far as I can tell, they did not use an AGM battery.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  15. hire Andrea Rossi by Thud457 · · Score: 2

    For a $100,000 car sold by some Ian Flemming villain, I expect the damn thing to be giving back more than 1.1 KW just sitting in my driveway. And v2.0 better be able to hover.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  16. If this is the future of automotive service by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    and it will be billed at dealer rates.

    1. Re:If this is the future of automotive service by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:If this is the future of automotive service by AaronW · · Score: 1

      As a Tesla owner I have zero complaints about their service or their warranty coverage. They go out of their way to try and inconvenience the owners as little as possible. With their maintenance contract they normally charge $100 per remote visit but for warranty stuff they wave it.

      I was also surprised at how little they charge for parts. I had to replace a couple of parts due to non-warranty reasons (i.e. my screwup) and the replacement part price is a fraction of what Toyota would charge for the Prius. I managed to break one of the roof clips on my car requiring the entire roof panel next to the panoramic roof needing to be replaced. It was $100 for the panel and $175 labor to replace it. If this had been any other luxury car it would have easily cost several times this. Elon stated that their goal is to not make a profit on service and maintenance. This is the exact opposite of my experience I had dealing with Toyota and my Prius.

      I also looked into replacing the driver's side seat belt receptacle due to having spilled something sticky down it (a friend had a can explode in the car). Anyway, I was quoted $109 to replace it, including labor. If my car had been a Mercedes according to a mechanic friend of mine who is quite familiar with the brand it likely would have cost $900.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  17. That's a lot of 12V loss by johndoe42 · · Score: 1

    Before the battery replacement, the car lost 3.5kWh/day. After the replacement, it lost 1.1kWh/day. That's a difference of 2.4kWh/day, which is 100W. That's something like 8 Amps internally leaking in the 12V battery. That seems shockingly high. Or maybe there's something else going on. If the battery was marginal, then perhaps the car's DC-DC converter was continually "charging" it but actually overcharging it. Then it would be electrolyzing 8A worth of water and battery acid. I expect that would make a giant mess. Alternatively, it just keeps running the DC-DC converter at very low output. The DC-DC converter could be incredibly inefficient when producing just a little bit of current (Tesla is reputed to use a huge (~200A) DC-DC converter, so the thing could be running at about 1% of rated output at, say, 10% efficiency).

    1. Re:That's a lot of 12V loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1.1kWh/day still is vampire power. That's about 50W. My car takes about 0.6W when it's off and that is already troubling (50mA). Part of it may be the mechanical clock but that's not really a satisfactory explanation. Usually, you'd expect something like 20mA unless there is a car alarm installed.

      That battery might have been flaky, but the principal problem would appear to persist. Now Lithium batteries of high capacity will have considerable leakage, so they might account for some of that, but if it's indeed the auxiliary power circuit that is sucking that current, that's a sign of quite bad engineering.

  18. Standard Consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A standard automobile uses minimal electricity. The need to maintain power to the clock, a trickle to maintain memory for the radio presets, and keep the keyless entry system listening for the activation code. These things take a tiny amount of electricity. Approximate usage when ignition is off is ~500mA . This equates to 0.144kWh per day!

      Tesla's "fixed' consumption of 1.1kWh per day is an outrageous 8 times higher in comparison. But, they are also keeping their computer up and running all the time in order to maintain cloud connection for monitoring, updates, remote access...

    1. Re:Standard Consumption by AaronW · · Score: 1

      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 things like that. Additionally, it has to do a lot more monitoring for the main battery than a typical car, potentially having to cool it if it gets too hot or warm it if it gets too cold.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  19. Tesla owner's findings... by SternisheFan · · Score: 5, Informative
    Found this article from November 25, 2013. Three excerpts below...

    "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. (It's a popular myth among Model S owners that much of the vampire power goes to keep the battery warm during cold nights. This is simply not true.) According to Tesla, there is no thermal management of the Model S battery when the car is turned off and not charging--no matter how cold it gets."

    "Ironically, the Model S had very little vampire drain when it was first introduced. My owner's manual is based on the original software in the car. "When you're not driving Model S, the Battery discharges very slowly to power the onboard electronics," it purrs reassuringly. "On average the battery discharges at a rate of 1 percent per day. Unfortunately, the "sleep mode" software in those early cars triggered all sorts of glitches in the car's other systems. Eventually, the problems became so persistent that Tesla simply disabled the sleep mode. With sleep taken away, the vampires came out to play. And instead of draining 1 percent every 24 hours, the Model S battery suddenly began losing 5 or 6 percent of its charge every day. (In the case of 60-kWh cars like mine, it's closer to 7 or 8 percent.)"

    "So far I've run three overnight tests with the kWh meter. For each test, I charged the car up in the evening to its usual selected level (In my case, about 80 percent). Then I removed the charge plug. I allowed the car to sit unplugged overnight and on into the next day, until I needed to drive it. (Typically a span of 12 to 24 hours.) Before driving it, I plugged it back in to top off the vampire-depleted battery back to its original level. Then I checked the kWh-meter. Test results: The three tests showed vampire losses of 2.3 kWh in 17 hours, 1.9 kWh in 23 hours, and 4.2 kWh in 18 hours. Total vampire power lost was 8.4 kWh in 58 hours. That's an average of 3.5 kWh per day--roughly 25 percent lower than the losses I measured previously. I can't explain the wide variation in the vampire draw over the three tests. Clearly, more than three tests will be required to come up with an accurate figure. But it's clear to me that the new vampire-slayer software is pretty weak stuff. It's better than nothing, I suppose. A 25-percent improvement means that the 20,000 Model S cars now on the road will only waste about 70 megawatt-hours of power a day, down from 90 MWh. And it means that Musk's anti-vampire prediction has turned out to be one-quarter true in twice the time. Update 6.0, anyone?"

    http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1088648_life-with-tesla-model-s-even-after-update-vampire-draw-remains

    1. Re:Tesla owner's findings... by eudaemon · · Score: 1

      I'm a fan of Elon and Tesla, but it sounds like they need to invest heavily in fixing sleep mode.

    2. Re:Tesla owner's findings... by SternisheFan · · Score: 3, Informative
      Doh! I should have fully RTFA completely through :( Turns out it was the car's defective 12volt battery

      And so it looks like my vampire was indeed my car's defective 12-Volt battery

      But does the 12-Volt hypothesis explain why so many Model S owners reported similar problems on the various owner forums? Do they all have bad 12-Volt batteries?

      And what about the odd fact that most of the reported problems seem to be in 60-kWh cars? The Tesla spokesman told me that the 60- and 85-kWh batteries are identical, vampire-wise.

      http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1088929_life-with-tesla-model-s-electric-draw-vampire-slain-at-last/page-2

    3. Re:Tesla owner's findings... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      "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.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    4. Re:Tesla owner's findings... by xeio87 · · Score: 1

      You say this, but if you ever went to check out a car and had to wait 20 seconds after turning the key how likely would you be to view that as a positive thing...

      We're talking about a car here, people just expect them to work. This is why they even added "creep" as a feature because some people complained that the car didn't behave exactly like they expected a car to work. Perception is more important than practicality.

    5. Re:Tesla owner's findings... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      That's what fancy splash screens are for.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    6. Re:Tesla owner's findings... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Tesla owner's findings... by AaronW · · Score: 1

      There are multiple computers. The spedometer is an nVidia Tegra 2 and the main touchscreen is an nVidia Tegra 3. Talking with other engineers with experience with the Tegra 3 it sounds like there have been a lot of power management software issues with the Tegra 3 processor. There are a number of other subsystems that likely can't be shut down entirely for things like the keyless entry, 3G connection (for remote access for things like the climate control, unlocking, etc.), battery temperature management, etc. A modern car has dozens of separate computer systems, not all of which can just shut off.

      In this case it looks like the main culprit is the 12v battery. Tesla's 12v battery supplier substituted the batteries they were supposed to use to batteries from a Chinese company who then subcontracted it to a Vietnamese company. I got one of the bad batteries and Tesla replaced it since it is a warrantied item. In my case, Tesla called me to tell me that my battery was failing and took care of it.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  20. That's shocking! by gweilo8888 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My god, one person's battery failed completely? That's truly shocking! I've never heard of a battery failing before.

    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, for the rest of recorded time -- well, that's just the price of having a shiny car with no doorhandles or keys, right? Pretty trumps energy efficient and intelligently designed every time!

    1. Re:That's shocking! by gweilo8888 · · Score: 1

      That whooshing sound was me missing the joke. Although I can perhaps be forgiven, bearing in mind the levels of rabid Tesla fanboyism around these parts.

    2. Re:That's shocking! by Idarubicin · · Score: 4, 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?

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    3. Re:That's shocking! by suutar · · Score: 1

      and (as someone mentioned) you also have to consider whether that 1.1kWh is all reaching the battery or if some of it is losses in the charging system. That is one big-ass wall wart, after all.

    4. Re:That's shocking! by Chuckstar · · Score: 2

      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.

    5. Re:That's shocking! by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      What do regular cars suck up in a night, and what is their capacity? Older cars, with a door open all night are often dead. But I've seen newer ones survive it (15W or so incandescent bulbs in the passenger compartment).

  21. Overnight? What about a week? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Say you take this to the airport and go away for a week or two? Will there be any juice left to run the car? I think most people need a car that doesn't need so much pampering every night.

  22. Elon Musk owes an apology to John Broder by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    1. Re:Elon Musk owes an apology to John Broder by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Elon Musk owes an apology to John Broder by AaronW · · Score: 1

      Nope. Broder knew the distance he had to travel and decided not to wait long enough for the car to get enough charge. The car clearly told him it did not have enough range before he started. It's like knowing your car gets 30 miles per gallon, filling an empty car with 2 gallons of gas and complaining when the car dies after 80 miles when you know that the destination is 100 miles away. Broder was just an idiot.

      Most people I know make sure they have more than enough fuel to get to their destination, especially when the weather is going to be cold.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  23. Wow, this guy is a complete nut job. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is how other Tesla owners responded to what we now know was a legitimate complaint. I ask you, who are the real nut jobs?

  24. Re:Overnight? What about a week? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Say you take this to the airport and go away for a week or two? Will there be any juice left to run the car?

    Nope.

  25. Little discrepancy in the summary by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Little discrepancy in the summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good catch. You're correct. :)

      Unless, of course, the software somehow breaks the battery, but we haven't heard about something like that so far.

    2. Re:Little discrepancy in the summary by AaronW · · Score: 1

      Whenever Tesla services a car they typically always install the latest patch level of the software even if it's only a minor update.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    3. Re:Little discrepancy in the summary by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Exactly, that was my point. :)

  26. In every Tesla thread I mean to ask... by Anonymous Coward · · 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.

    1. Re:In every Tesla thread I mean to ask... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is the US energy mix?

      That would be far too aggregate a figure to be useful. The US is a big place with a lot of distinct climate/geography mixes. For example, the Midwest uses mostly coal and/or natural gas, but in the Pacific Northwest wind power makes up a significant chunk.

    2. Re:In every Tesla thread I mean to ask... by mspohr · · Score: 2

      Here's a good article that looks at emissions based on the type of fuel.
      http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/electric-cars-green
      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.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    3. Re:In every Tesla thread I mean to ask... by luther349 · · Score: 1

      hard to say i does not burn gas but all those battery's when dead are defiantly not good for the environment.not to mention when one catches fire all the junk those battery's are venting.

    4. Re:In every Tesla thread I mean to ask... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't matter if Tesla is better for the environment or not *today*. By demonstrating the feasibility and success of the concept of the electric car, it helps justify the case to build an energy infrastructure that will be better for the environment *someday*.

    5. Re:In every Tesla thread I mean to ask... by AaronW · · Score: 1

      Lithium batteries are not considered hazardous waste. The batteries are Lithium Aluminum Cobalt oxide, so there's really nothing very toxic in them. While the smoke is probably not a good thing to breathe, the batteries themselves are not particularly toxic. Lithium batteries can be safely disposed of in municipal waste. Anyway, there are already plans on recycling the batteries and its not like they suddenly die. They slowly lose capacity over time and Tesla plans to use the older batteries for grid storage. The chances of them burning is still fairly low and it's not like they spontaneously combust, only after a significant impact that penetrates the 1/4" thick metal plate under the car.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    6. Re:In every Tesla thread I mean to ask... by swillden · · Score: 1

      I know here in Australia where we burn brown bloody coal an electric car produces more emissions than a V6.

      Are you sure? Coal is dirty, yes, but big coal generation plants can and do make it much cleaner than you might expect. The nature of a big facility makes it possible to ensure a very complete burn, and many coal plants also scrub the output. In addition, large power plants are much more efficient at extracting the energy than a small ICE, which also helps them with the emissions/work ratio. Whether or not what you say is true depends less on the type of coal and more on the type and configuration of the power plant.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    7. Re:In every Tesla thread I mean to ask... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't use petrol in the US. We use gasoline or diesel fuel.

  27. Volvo 240-DL Battery Dies Due to Dashboard Clock by stoicio · · Score: 1

    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.....

  28. Please explain the Elon Musk hate by quadrox · · Score: 4, 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?

    1. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps there is significant revulsion to the way Elon Musk relies on heavy advertising/propaganda to construct a corporate image. The same is true of all big corporations --- but that's no excuse, since there's no fundamental reason why a tech nerd should be blindly accepting of how corporate capitalism works. People might respect the technological / engineering side of Musk's ventures, but feel icky about how this is tied to marketing/PR goons saturating the tech media with gushing propaganda stories aimed at rich investors (instead of plain-spoken, informative, "engineers' talk"). Of course, the appearance of genuine anti-corporate-PR revulsion to Musk's enterprises is magnified by slimy corporate PR shills from competing industries adding their own FUD.

    2. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by quadrox · · Score: 1

      Perhaps there is significant revulsion to the way Elon Musk relies on heavy advertising/propaganda to construct a corporate image. The same is true of all big corporations --- but that's no excuse, since there's no fundamental reason why a tech nerd should be blindly accepting of how corporate capitalism works. People might respect the technological / engineering side of Musk's ventures, but feel icky about how this is tied to marketing/PR goons saturating the tech media with gushing propaganda stories aimed at rich investors (instead of plain-spoken, informative, "engineers' talk"). Of course, the appearance of genuine anti-corporate-PR revulsion to Musk's enterprises is magnified by slimy corporate PR shills from competing industries adding their own FUD.

      Of course Musk will interpret everything as positively as possible, but as long as he does not actually lie or try to deceive with heavy handed rheorics or in other ways, then I have no problem with it. In the end, the reader (esp. on /.) should be intelligent enough to discern just how far what he says should be believed. I am not familiar with the SpaceX stuff, but when it comes to the Tesla cases I have not seen him say anything I would classify as dishonest yet. For example, you may argue about how exactly Tesla fire occurrences should be compared with ICE vehicle fires and you might end up with somewhat different numbers/results, but he does have a point when he says that fires occur in ICE vehicles as well.

    3. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by gman003 · · Score: 1

      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 builds it and it actually works I'll applaud him.

    4. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      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 "blunt facts".

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    5. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by quadrox · · Score: 1

      Yes, this is exactly how I feel. It just seems so strange to hate so strongly on someone who has clearly accomplished so much, even if it's not all perfect.

    6. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by BasilBrush · · 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.

    7. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by DerekLyons · · Score: 0

      They acknowledged that the problem existed (9 months ago) and promised a solution in the future.

      And yeah, it's coincidence that future date shows up just a few days after the story starts to spread in the media. And oddly enough... the CEO seemed unaware that problem existed and needed fixing (from his own tweet "Doesn't sound right. If it is, we certainly need to fix it. Investigating...").

      So, here's the facts jackass; The problem was known, but went unacknowledged, and when it was finally acknowledged, it went unfixed for a considerable time (after the patch that supposed to fix it) until the CEO learned the media was on the scent.

      So piss the hell off back your drug addled dreamworld fanboi. You have no fucking clue what you're talking about and no real interest in any facts.

    8. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Astroturfers/shills can't win their arguments with science or facts, so they have to rely on attacking people's character.

      You'd think the companies paying them to post this stuff would at least do some amount of 'fake research' to give them semi-valid talking points, but they are sloppy and lazy.

    9. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by bledri · · Score: 4, 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:

      1. First launch of the Ariane 5
      2. Ariane 5 Mission Failure
      3. Proton-M launch failure
      4. Soyez launch failure
      5. Progress fails to reach orbit
      6. Taurus XL fails to reach orbit
      7. Delta II launch failure
      8. Zenit-3SL/ NSS-8 Sea Launch rocket vehicle failure

      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.

      --
      Some privacy policy Slashdot.
    10. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      It's the same as the Steve Jobs hate. A CEO identified with a product some people can't afford. The hatred is envy.

      If I had $70k in disposable income, I certainly wouldn't spend it on a car. There are better ways to spend the money if you're truly interested in reducing your carbon footprint. Musk makes it sound like if you buy his car and plug it into our filthy, over-half-fossil-fuels electrical grid, Captain Planet will personally come to your house and give you a blowjob. The reality is, the Model S is a toy for smug rich people who want to show off how much money they have and project an aura of giving a faux shit about the environment, at the same time. My hat's off to Musk for separating these people from their money, but I don't for a moment believe he's ever going to produce a car that the so-called 47% can actually afford. The single component that makes electric cars so damn expensive is the lithium ion cells and since Tesla just buys them "off the shelf" from existing battery manufacturers, they're not really doing any of their own research into making this critical, resource-intensive-to-construct component any less expensive for the masses.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    11. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by fnj · · Score: 1

      Fans of excellence and achievement are not "fanbois", no matter how much self satisfaction is perversely gained by some pretending so. "Fanbois" are unquestioning sycophants. The mirror image of fanbois are nattering nabobs of negativity. And again, that is different from raising meaningful and specific issues.

      Oh, and you fail completely at backing up complaints with facts as demanded by GP, if that was you intention.

    12. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People, in general, love to tell others they can't do something if they can't do it themselves, and if the other person is successful in their efforts, they tear them down to feel good about themselves. A bit from the ugly side of human nature.

    13. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Jealousy. That is all.

    14. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      making negative comments about Elon Musk.

      I've seen this as well. Boiling it down, my perception is that Elon Musk is honestly concerned about how people receive his product. If you have a genuine problem he'll attempt to make it better. After all, somebody tweeted him*, he then went through the effort(or made somebody else do it) to track down the reviewer's car, complete a more extensive diagnosis on it(failed battery) and send a team out to fix it. We don't honestly know whether or not this was due to the public perception, though the article writer notes that he's not the only one reporting on the forums that they're replacing the batteries. He does mention that the 60kwh version is having more problems reported, which is indeed a head-scratcher, but it could be a perception thing - 60kwh owners could be more concerned with efficiency than those that buy the 85kwh vehicles, after all.

      Now he DOES get incredibly pissed if you misrepresent his product - see the lawsuits against Top Gear for implying the vehicle ran out of power and had to be pushed into the warehouse, as well as firing back against the NYT author who drove faster than he said, ran the heater/AC when he said he didn't, deliberately missed charging points, disconnected early and did loops around a parking lot until it died.

      So a guy makes an honest assessment and Elon gets his car fixed. Somebody lies and he sues. Sounds like he has pride in his product.

      *He has to be aware of the problem before he can fix it, of course.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    15. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by Firethorn · · Score: 2

      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...
      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 stations(if you have a particular dislike) to being able to drive your car right into your warehouse(not a good idea with gas cars), and it's actually competitive with the other cars in it's price range for luxury.
      4. Nearly all car manufacturers got their start building premium vehicles. Especially new tech ones.
      5. Back to the battery packs - Tesla produced it's first car using a Lotus Elise body. Really, the core Tesla development at that point was the drivetrain - engine and systems. With the Model S they used their own designed from scratch body. With each model Tesla is taking more of the production 'in house'. Musk may be obscenely wealthy, but he doesn't quite have Scrooge McDuck's money vaults to establish all the production systems from day 1.
      6. His buying of massive quantities of cells, as is, allows the companies that DO produce them to invest more in said cell production technology, automating more, increasing efficiency of scale, etc...

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    16. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's from South Africa. If you can't understand that, it's because you've never been to South Africa, know nothing about its people or its culture. Uneducated and inexperienced, you are.

    17. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      >but I don't for a moment believe he's ever going to produce a car that the so-called 47% can actually afford.

      At this point it would be financhial suicide for Tesla to try, you have Chevy and Nissan in that market. To dilute the brand and compete with companies with flexible mass production lines (volt fails to sell, in a month the line will produce the car that is selling). And dealer networks...

    18. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      He does seam to be crossing the line, but as you say it is in a way that is possibly true. He keeps calling it the worlds safest car, and as proof uses a impressive crash test results but that is a small part of safety. Then immediatly compares burning a car to the ground fire in a new car to stats that include fires that mostly went out on there own in 15 year old cars (ie 5x fewer but smaller fires than the least safe cars on the road is still the safest car on the plannet? Also he keeps using $.05 / kwhr as a realistic cost for residential customer cost, and then using california costs for fuel as a comparison.

    19. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What Musk is doing is building the market for electric cars. I don't know if he is doing anything to further research in making the batteries better and more affordable, but he is still developing the technology for electric cars and the next Tesla (the Model X) will be a bit cheaper than the Model S, even if it still isn't in a price range that most people can afford. He is also stimulating competition in the electric car market, this drives other car manufacturers to fund their own development research in making electric cars. Tesla may never make an electric car that everyone can afford, but that doesn't mean the company isn't acting as a catalyst which gets other manufacturers to do that.

    20. Re:Please explain the Elon Musk hate by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Ahh, one of those goalpost-moving hypocrites, I see. I can see by your insults that you don't think your position on this argument is tenable, but what the hell I'll respond anyway just to point that out.

      Here's what you first said:

      the blunt facts of the matter are this - the problem has existed for quite a while and was ignored by Tesla and Musk. Until it started getting media attention.

      "Ignored by Tesla and Musk", you claim. And now your story is changing to this:

      The problem was known, but went unacknowledged, and when it was finally acknowledged, it went unfixed for a considerable time (after the patch that supposed to fix it) until the CEO learned the media was on the scent.

      So first, the problem was known, but unacknowledged for some period of time before being acknowledged (as with happens with all problems, everywhere), and then it went unfixed, until it got fixed. So, not only is that completely different than "ignored by Tesla and Musk", but I'm pretty sure that's the exact life cycle of all problems that eventually get fixed. The problem is identified, then acknowledged, then fixed. It took them a while to fix it, sure. Go ahead, rake them over the fire for looking for a software fix that sounds like it turned out to be a hardware issue. You're still an asshole and a hypocrite though.

      As for Musk being unaware of the problem until recently, I really hate pointing out the obvious but you ARE so concerned with facts, and all:

      Last March, Tesla CEO Elon Musk addressed the vampire/sleep-mode issue in a meeting with Norwegian Model S buyers in Oslo. Musk promised that a new sleep mode would reduce vampire losses to a mere 0.2 percent--an insignificant 170 watt-hours--per day.

      So, he was aware of it in March. All of your "facts" are bullshit, you move the goalposts when someone calls you out on it, and you resort to insults when you don't have anything substantive to say. Have a wonderful day.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  29. Parasitic current draws by Guppy · · Score: 2

    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.

  30. My car had the 12v battery replaced by AaronW · · Score: 1

    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 cars were wasting a lot of energy trying to keep these crappy batteries charged up. Like the author, I was contacted by Tesla about getting the battery replaced. In my case though I had taken my car in for service a couple of days earlier to fix some minor rattles and they replaced the battery then.

    The 12v battery is not easy to replace as far as I can tell. It's in the back under the frunk next to the firewall but underneath a lot of heavy reinforcing. It looks like the only way to replace it is to remove the plastic frunk lining. One advantage of its location is that it is very well protected in the case of an accident.

    --
    This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  31. Re:Volvo 240-DL Battery Dies Due to Dashboard Cloc by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  32. Is it not the antithesis of ironic? by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    That you are not really into names?

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  33. Here's some arithmetic by bigwheel · · Score: 1

    Regarding self-discharge:
    Li-Ion has a self-discharge rate of about 1% per month. A Tesla S has an 85kwh battery pack. So, 85 * .01 / 30 = only 0.027 kwhr/day

    Regarding the energy used by door locks and clocks:
    An average car battery is about 40 amp-hours @ about 13v. (about 0.5 kwh total capacity) Yet, you can leave a car sitting for a couple months and it still has enough energy to start the car. But the Tesla would completely drain the same battery in a half-day.

    So, for a car sitting in the garage doing nothing, 1.1 kwh/day wasted energy is much better than 4.5. But it is still embarrassing for a car that claims to be green.

    1. Re:Here's some arithmetic by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      A 1% self-discharge rate on an 85kW-h battery works out to a constant rate of 1.16W according to my calculations. That's pretty insignificant really. So where's the other 43.8W going? Something's really off here. We've covered the self-discharge rate (should only be 1-2W), and we've covered the computers in previous posts (should be no more than 10W), so something's really off here.

  34. ahh the sounds of astroturfing fill the air by db10 · · Score: 0

    ..these are dollars well spent by the oil and auto industries... Elon Musk could be a huge ahole, but he would not come close to the galactic ahole quotient of the the oil and auto industries.

  35. That's a lot of juice by markass530 · · Score: 1

    My Electric bike has a (pretty high for a 2 wheel electric vehicle) 2.5 KHW/hr battery. It's pretty much a several thousand dollar battery. To think the tesla is chewing through that every 2 days while *off* is disconcerting.

  36. Re:Not fixed yet (but Tesla is still efficient) by bledri · · Score: 1

    Let's convert how much energy is wasted in tesla's sleep mode compared to a fossil fuel car: According to yahoo answers, 1 gallon of gasoline = 34.7 kWh.

    Energy consumed by a model s in a month = 30 x 1.1 = 33 kWh Converting 33 kWh to equivalent gallons of gasoline = 33 / 34.7 = 0.95 gallons

    The tesla wastes the equivalent of 1 gallon gasoline/month while parked!

    I hope Tesla keeps working on reducing the amount of energy wasted. But lets use those same numbers for cars that actually get driven and see how the Tesla compares:

    Given the average US driver drives 13476 miles per year, which is 1123 miles per month. And the average new car gets 24.9 miles per gallon. Therefore the kWh equivalent for the average ICE car is: 1123/24.9*34.7 = 1564 kWh / month

    Whereas the Tesla consumes 38 kWh/100 miles. So for the Tesla we have: 38/100 * 1123 = 427 kWh driving per month, plus 33 kWh wasted per month gives a grand total of 460 kWh / month.

    In other words, for people that actually drive their cars, the Tesla uses less than 1/3 of the energy of an ICE. Which seems relevant to the conversation.

    Now, to be fair. I bet that people drive their Teslas more aggressively and get less than the EPA 38 kWh/100 miles. And there is the drain of accessories, etc. But that is a lot of headroom, I doubt any of the similar sized ICEs ever come close to the Tesla in energy efficiency.

    --
    Some privacy policy Slashdot.
  37. You would think the car would warn of a bad batter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder why all these Tesla owners with bad lead acid batteries aren't getting warning messages, saying that the lead battery is bad and is causing vampire losses?