Comment

Comment on Elon Musk reveals Tesla software-locked cheapest Model Y, offers 40-60 more miles of range

deranger@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

It’s not like BMW locking heated seats, a trivial feature, to nickel and dime the owner out of $300.

Yes it is; it’s exactly that.

Reducing the battery capacity severely alters the value of the car possibly dropping it into the range of more budget conscious buyers.

Or they could not reduce it for the same production cost…

There are benefits too. Less wear on the battery by not using its whole range, faster charging to “100%,”

There are no benefits. You could simply unplug at 80%.

This is such a cope ass response.

source

Sort:hotnew top

SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Let’s just say it’s 50% battery capacity and range for simplicity.

As each cell dies, it can use another cell to replace that one, it would effectively double the life span of the battery.

source
- ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  That’s… not how battery packs work
  
  source
  - SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    That’s actually how the majority of batter packs operate, they have a margin of cells to replace when they start undercurrenting.
    
    source
    ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    No. The packs aren’t like flash storage where they have spare blocks to use when one block wears out. Essentially switching in something that wasn’t used at all before.
    
    The cells are all connected physically, being charged and drained. They do not connect and disconnect cells when wear occurs. They have software limitations on how far to charge and discharge (at what voltage and c rating). Yes, a larger pack will last longer if the charge/discharge cycles aren’t as “deep”. But no, they don’t have spare cells just to cover wear.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - Steve@startrek.website ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    It kinda sorta is, but not exactly.
    
    source
ch00f@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

Or they could not reduce it for the same production cost. No money is saved by tasking an employee to develop the battery nerf.

Yes, but perhaps some money is saved by not having to manage multiple production lines for multiple battery capacities and also having to predict how many of each capacity is going to sell so you’re not stuck with cars nobody wants?

There are no benefits. You could simply unplug at 80%.

Right, after you just paid more for battery that you’ve decided not to use. The benefit is that it’s cheaper for the customer.

source
- deranger@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  It’s only cheaper because they inflated the price from a limitation they created. There is absolutely no reason to limit the battery capacity in software in this manner other than to create an artificial divide to upsell people on the “”higher”” capacity.
  
  source
  - ch00f@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    It’s only cheaper because they inflated the price from a limitation they created.
    
    TIL Tesla has a 100% monopoly over the electric vehicle market space.
    
    Tesla is offering a wider variety of products at more diverse prices to try to better fit the needs of a larger portion of customers. They must have determined that it was cheaper overall to do it this way rather than physically rip the batteries out of the vehicles or they wouldn’t do it.
    
    to create an artificial divide to upsell people on the “”higher”” capacity.
    
    I mean, isn’t not offering a cheaper version at all already upselling? When the F-150 Lightning came out, people had a really hard time finding the standard range version because dealers didn’t want to sell a lower trim version of the car with lower commission.
    
    source
    deranger@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    They must have determined that it was cheaper overall to do it this way rather than physically rip the batteries out of the vehicles or they wouldn’t do it.
    
    Or, you know, just keep the capacity the same and lower the price without imposing a battery nerf. It costs the same to make. The only reason the nerf exists is to extract money from consumers.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

There are no benefits. You could simply unplug at 80%.

You misunderstand, having a larger battery that is not used to full capacity makes it last longer. If you unplug at 80%, you need to have paid the extra price for the bigger battery.

source
- deranger@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  There is no “larger battery”. It’s an identical battery with different software limitations on the charge level.
  
  source
  - Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    No consumer benefits from artificial limitations being imposed
    
    No we agree on that, but when the market is so they can charge more, you still benefit getting the car cheaper with 80 Watt than an extra production line with a 70 watt battery. I agree it feels like cheating, and I’m not defending the practice, but if the choice is between making a model with an actual smaller battery that cost the same to make, the customer is actually better off getting the bigger battery without being able to use it 100%
    
    There is no such advantage in the BMW example. Which was kind of the point.
    
    source