Tesla is found guilty of throttling charging speed

But they've also been agreeing to buy people's cars back if it's an issue, since selling someone a car with a particular range capacity and then reducing it afterward is obviously problematic.

The Bolt's battery reduction is supposed to be temporary while the final recall fix was worked out. I don't have one so I haven't been following the current news on whether that's been sorted.

In Tesla's case here it sounds worse, because this might be a permanent change where they just said "lol your car is permanently worse now, have fun."

Because charging and managing modern EV batteries for optimal range and lifetime is complicated? That's my understanding anyway. If this was easy to do without all the software, why would the manufacturers spend money on it?

They don't sell electric vehicles. Their boffins are working on "EV/AV".

If you're curious, I'd recommend reading Moore's "Crossing the Chasm". I'm entirely for electric cars, but I'm part of what Moore would call the "mainstream market". I don't want a car to be amazing and cutting edge. I want it to work unobtrusively and very reliably. That means that I'm going to be hard to persuade and will want to wait for evidence.

That makes me a terrible initial Tesla customer. For a new tech product, you want early adopters, as they will happily spend money on things that don't work very well. You want the kind of people who will, sight unseen, spend $500 on a flamethrower that isn't a flamethrower. [1]

So given Musk's brand and given the size and wealth of the user base you'd need to launch a new car company, it's pretty much inevitable that Tesla (and now its competitors) were going to mine the technophiles who are happy to pay a premium for sealed-box gee-whizzery.

The good news is that the electric car market will be getting more boring over time. There a lot more people in the more conservative market segments, so although we aren't as profitable per unit as the early adopters, plenty of companies will eventually be addressing our needs.

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/10/17445838/boring-company-f...

Power windows are such a commodity now I wouldn't be surprised if it's cheaper to make a car with power windows rather than cranks.

If I have to describe it, it would be closer to a 4 wheeled electric-scooter.

Or the cash?

Are there companies that will convert your favorite car to electric, or is that just too much of a liability minefield in the USA?

After seeing the prices for electric motors I'm probably just going to get it running instead.

What is the reason? Don't automotive manufacturers offer cheap ICE cars? Why would a cheap EV bankrupt them but not cheap ICE cars?

The Renault Zoe is a "normal" car and fit the bill for a more "simple" electric car. They now have the Twingo Electric also which is the size of a usual twingo (roughly like a Citroën C1/Peugeot 107) and cheaper than the Zoe.

The speculation about 100,000 more owners getting involved is editorialization from this blog, although I suppose some of them will be incentivized to do follow-on suits now that the award value is so high.

Tesla has actually INCREASED both range and charge speed via software updates, as well.

And there’s no reason to suspect Tesla or Chevy knew for a fact they’d need to do this. People throw “fraud” around way too easily. Usually, when people do that, it makes me think they’re likely perma-skeptics.

He also drives from SF to LA about once a month and said it takes 3 stops (so +3 hours?) but the way he put it is "now I arrive much more refreshed because I took breaks on the long drive"

The idea of a gas station likely will just fade away. We have fuel stations because the infrastructure to deliver gasoline to everybody’s home is unrealistically complicated.

But the delivery infrastructure for electricity is largely already there. You just need to install the equivalent of a “pump”.

(Coincidentally there are some guys at my house installing one of those “pumps” today!)

I don't think it'll take too much EV penetration for houses and apartment buildings that are set up for charging to command a premium.

At the time I wondered if there was 'reserve' range and turns out there is at least one mile left. But it's clear this isn't the healthiest range to run the battery in.

It's possible they bumped the minimum charge a bit just to urge people to not dip so deeply into the well as often.

But that doesn't exonerate Tesla in any way. Tens of thousands of customers got cars gimped with no official explanation from Tesla. It's been close to two years - that's a significant part of the vehicle's lifetime. Tesla still hasn't admitted any issues and still hasn't compensated the owners - absolute radio silence from them. It's abhorrent

Anyone or their business who depended on the old charging speed for mission-critical functions is screwed.

Edit: do note this applies to older cars, it's a bit slower than EVs but 10year old cars will not have the same mileage and power as a new one even with the same specifications.

Throttling and limiting capacity in exchange for increase durability are inherent to the lithium battery charging process. It seems perfectly reasonable that as field data comes in the OEM would refine the tune.

This is like the EV equivalent of a service bulletin that flashes a new ECU image that actuates some emissions doodad slightly differently to improve longevity or whatever but costs you a fraction of an MPG of a couple horsepower at part throttle.

Yes the messaging to consumers was clearly insufficient but I don't see anything fundamentally wrong here and I'm generally no fan of Tesla.

Apple slowed down your phone because the battery probably couldn't provide enough power to keep it running at its original speed.

But all they need to do is say: do you want us to slow down your device/restrict its battery someway, or run it over spec and it'll be worse in the long term? And let the user pick.

But then they'd be 1000 articles about how batteries are terrible and so are the companies who use them, because terrible journalism

Actions should have consequences.