That certainly won't help resale value (*permanently gimped Supercharging).
If this was a new change, he probably would chuckle since he's far away from the mothership and probably doesn't even know it happened yet.Thanks. I'm waiting on my 3rd contact to verify, but he chuckled when he understood the question. He said he would have seen it pop on on a ton of cars, well before this week.thread re-opened (at least until more is learned about this potential issue/practise)
But please keep it civil people
25 kW is 25 kW. Because it's only realized for 5-10 minutes a charge session, it's okay to be taken away? I guess you would be fine if Tesla pushed out a firmware update reducing HP by 50 to increase power train life too, huh?That is why I stated current in this statement: "The OP claims he is current getting 90kW charging."And op also said he used to get 115. 90<115 last time I checked.
If true, then again how much extra time would this take him to actually charge?
GM hasn't (in the...7 vehicles I've possessed over the years) applied an update without my knowledge that degraded the performance of my vehicle like Tesla has done once already (ludicrous launch limiter), and likely again with the fast charging hard cap limit.You are not acknowledging my question about what GM does in informing the customers about the details. Why give them a pass?
I'm OK with GM managing my battery for longevity in the 3 Volts my family has. Same as I'm OK with Tesla managing my battery for longevity.
Again, did GM document to you how they are managing your Bolt's kW power flow over a single charge? Do they start at 44kW and keep that rate until you stop the charge? Or does the BMS manage that rate? Is it documented? Will it change over the life of your battery? Is it documented?
Again, did GM Bolt document to you how they are managing your Bolt's kW power flow over X number of DC charges or Y months? Do you think it will remain the same from day 1 to year 10? Is it documented?
If you bothered to read either of the threads on either forum, the main issue is Tesla sneaking in ninja firmware updates that degrade performance without informing owners of such changes. Just like the Ludicrous mode counter debacle. Duh.A better thing would be don't post in Tesla forums.Don't buy a Tesla. problem solved.
Then again if you are worried about charge rate and even with the "supposed" reduction isn't it still faster than the Bolt? Meaning that if the Tesla is to slow to charge wouldn't that mean the Bolt is so slow it shouldn't even be considered?
And that is what many Tesla owners want to know; unfortunately, JonMc did not address all the questions people want answered.He said nothing that confirmed a charge session counter, either. He did indicate that the BMS changed the charge parameters based on age and usage, but provided no indication of how Tesla determines that age/usage that I saw.
I'm not sure how that leads to "after so many DCFC sessions."
Too bad your Spark EV did not have DCFC. Would have been a good data point for how GM BEVs handle peak DCFC charging in degraded states.You bet wrong. My Spark EV lost over 25% of its battery capacity over three years and I didn't even have fast charging.
Also, you have ZERO proof that Tesla "sneaked in" a software update to throttle back charging rates. But let's say for kicks they did do that. Good for them, they apparently understand battery life/conditioning better than GM does if they adjusted battery charging capacities in order to increase battery life and longevity.
Anyway, we'll wait for your proof. As of yet, there's been none and any owner issues and/complaints have been individual issues/examples that have ZERO bearing on the fleet. And, as mentioned earlier, these seem to be issues that have reached back as far as mid-2016.