New Battery monitoring software update?

[whitex]

Do we know for sure that J1.2 doesn’t have the same problem?
Do we know for sure if it already has the monitoring and alerting software?
if it did, wouldnt retrofitting it to J1.1 be a straightforward quick thing?
J1.2 production and sales numbers are smaller.

J1.2 is not subject to the same recall, so it stands to reason whatever cause the recall has been remedied in the new batteries. Will it have problems in the future? You never know. There isn't a car on the market today guaranteed to never have recalls. Look at his, ICE cars just recalled due to risk of fire: https://www.ksat.com/news/local/202...ehicles-recalled-due-to-possible-fire-hazard/
There were other cars recalled in the last year for possible fire hazard - both EV and ICE.

Sponsored

 

[D00notD00d]

@whitex
We’re both speculating.
My reasoning tells me that j1.2 doesn’t have battery monitoring and alerting software. If it did, retrofitting to j1.1 should be straightforward, even if there’s a different control unit.
The absence of recalls and fire incidents one year into j1.2 production isn’t long enough - it was 4 years into Taycan production, at higher volumes, before Taycan battery recalls.
Is there any conclusive evidence that LG have fixed the problem?
Analysis of fire incidents LG vs. Others would be interesting.
I dont believe in leaps of faith.

 

[W1NGE]

Do we know for sure that J1.2 doesn’t have the same problem?
Do we know for sure if it already has the monitoring and alerting software?
if it did, wouldnt retrofitting it to J1.1 be a straightforward quick thing?
J1.2 production and sales numbers are smaller.

Different battery chemistry / type in J1.2.

 

[W1NGE]

I don't want to create a panic here but if this is a brewing issue ought we offload our cars now (today)??

 

[Travis]

Does anyone have a record of the number of Tacan fires caused by batteries overheating absent car accidents? Seems to me this is not a likely issue and everyone is dramatic talking about selling their cars today. Not PMCC related, not due to a wiring/receptacle issue, or an animal that chewed wires, strictly due to battery faults. Was it a single Taycan?

 

[Tooney]

Does anyone have a record of the number of Tacan fires caused by batteries overheating absent car accidents? Seems to me this is not a likely issue and everyone is dramatic talking about selling their cars today. Not PMCC related, not due to a wiring/receptacle issue, or an animal that chewed wires, strictly due to battery faults. Was it a single Taycan?

Here is what Porsche says:

and

 

[W1NGE]

Does anyone have a record of the number of Tacan fires caused by batteries overheating absent car accidents? Seems to me this is not a likely issue and everyone is dramatic talking about selling their cars today. Not PMCC related, not due to a wiring/receptacle issue, or an animal that chewed wires, strictly due to battery faults. Was it a single Taycan?

Not many onshore - however there was that ship (Felicity Ace) that caught fire (2022) off the Azores laden with EVs (and ICE) - 4000 vehicles - Porsche, Bentley, VW, Lambo, etc. There was a lawsuit that led to Porsche - no idea of provenance or outcome.

 

[Travis]

Thanks for the info. This is my point. Certainly no one wants a bad product that will stop working, less range than expected, etc. but the desire to sell the car for a largely unfounded very minuscule risk of fire seems very dramatic to me. Every single car model likely has caught fire at some point with no fault of the owner due to some manufacturing defect, systemic or not. Lots of fear mongering that is not proportional to the much greater risks involved with just driving on the daily by distracted drivers, drunks, potholes, etc.

 

[chun]

Thanks for the info. This is my point. Certainly no one wants a bad product that will stop working, less range than expected, etc. but the desire to sell the car for a largely unfounded very minuscule risk of fire seems very dramatic to me. Every single car model likely has caught fire at some point with no fault of the owner due to some manufacturing defect, systemic or not. Lots of fear mongering that is not proportional to the much greater risks involved with just driving on the daily by distracted drivers, drunks, potholes, etc.

What may happen is that Porsche follow the Jaguar route (as it is the same battery), and announced that cars are too risky to keep without changed batteries and changed batteries is out of reach/scope for Porsche Servicing - which will tank value of taycans. Then, they will be forced to announce a buy back program.
At that point, they will decide that they will pay the price of the cheapest much further deprecated taycan, for any taycan they buy back, irrespective of configuration or model/model year - as they will claim that is current market valuation of the cars. So a 250.000k car, would be bought back by Porsche for 20-30k, close to 80-90% deprecation. Then they will either scrap them for parts en mass, battery modules for recycling, motors for reuse for j1.2, etc. So big win for Porsche - as it happened with Jaguar, the blue print for this happening is already out there.

That is what people are afraid of; part of it.

And if that doesn't happen, because porsche pride, owners of 2020 cars, like me, are also affraid that the 8 years warranty is close to run out soon. What will happen with the defective modules in my batteries, that will inevitably fail at some point? Porsche has done 0 communication on this. Will porsche continue to give recalls to batteries beyond the 8 years - do their contract with LG even allow for that - will LG even support the batteries beyond those 0 years?
Or will they claim that because the wheel has a 2cm scratch, the battery broke together with the steering column, and therefore the car is not eligible for recalls/warranty - as they seem to do recently when a car gets a defect that would be covered by warranty and the car is scratched?

This is a complex issue.

Not to mention that some owners are already eligible for a buy back/battery replacement, because 2022-2023+ cars fall in the category of: below 60.000km and below 3years of age; with a 20% restriction on the charging, making the usable % of battery below 80%. Of course, porsche will fight it in court likely, as they will claim there are active recalls on the battery and therefore warranty claims for batteries don't apply. Because if they wouldn't, we would have already seen brand new batteries being installed in some taycans, but we don't, because they are fighting it in courts - proof is also the class action lawsuit in america related to this.

Porsche is taking a very anti consumer approch from all sides on this issue, communication, warranty, recalls and everything related to taycans is handled in a very anti cosumer way by porsche right now. Why would people assume porsche will suddenly change their tone/become pro consumer in regards to the taycan at a later date, when they have shown 0 intention to do right by the consumers so far?

 

[Travis]

Wow. That’s a lot of speculation not based in reality. Obviously no one is that worried about fires as we all are still driving are cars, they were not pulled from market, and cars are not burning to the ground. Why so scared?

 

[chun]

Wow. That’s a lot of speculation not based in reality. Obviously no one is that worried about fires as we all are still driving are cars, they were not pulled from market, and cars are not burning to the ground. Why so scared?

Sorry, am i supposed to discuss the communication from Porsche? Oh, wait, there's none. So yes, we speculate.

We speculate based on the info available to us.

I'm not sure what has you so confused about people being worried and bothered about their 1/4 million car going though massive rapid deprecation, safety issues, lack of transparency from porsche and lack of pro-consumer solutions being provided. What exactly has you so confused about people being worried about these things?

Unless your job is sucking off porsche, or you don't actually drive a taycan, i would fail to see how you wouldn't be worried or bothered.

This is not speculation based on nothing, it is speculation based on available info. If Porsche doesn't want people to speculate and tank their reputation, maybe they should look into clear & transparent communication with their customers

 

[Vim Schrotnock]

As a number of people have pointed out, this has the potential to be a very serious issue. Risk of fire in EV's and PEV's is a relatively common problem, but as pointed out earlier, the solution in terms of a diagnostic may not be feasible. If this is the case, then Porsche and all of us have a massive problem. To answer the above post, a company simply cannot continue to sell a product if there is a known defect that could cause injury or death. The company has to remedy the problem. Period.

Here is a summary of the Jeep PEV recall, and there are actually a number of recalls that sound very similar to what we are going through right now in terms of the issue with specific modules failing due to 'separator damage'. Hopefully Porsche can figure things out, but given their ridiculous designs of charger and cabling - things that a college engineering student could have figured out - I'm not optimistic. Attached is a report on the Jeep recall.

Automaker, Stellantis, announced a major safety recall of approximately 154,000 hybrid Jeep vehicles for a potential battery fire risk. The recall covers the 2020-2024 Jeep Wrangler and 2022-2024 Cherokee plug-in hybrid models. However, it only applies to models manufactured between July 2020 and November 2023.

Keep reading to learn everything you need to know about the recall.

Keeping Yourself Safe
Anyone with an affected vehicle should take two immediate steps to protect themself:

1. Stop charging the vehicle’s battery until repairs are complete. This will help prevent the risk of fire.
2. Park your vehicle outside and away from buildings or other vehicles. This will help prevent the spread of a potential fire.

Affected Jeep Vehicles
The 2024 Jeep recall includes:

• 118,230 Jeep Wrangler plug-in hybrids (2020-2024 models)
• 35,802 Jeep Grand Cherokee plug-in hybrids (2022-2024 models)

Understanding the Defect
The issue stems from a defect in the high-voltage battery pack. These packs have been known to contain cells that suffer from separator damage. This problem can lead to battery fires regardless of whether the vehicle is parked or being driven. The company has received reports of multiple battery fires and two potential injuries related to this issue.

Timeline of Events
Stellantis discovered the problem in May 2023 when two owners reported fires in their 2021 Jeep Wrangler plug-in hybrids. The company immediately bought back these vehicles for investigation. Between May and September 2023, five more battery fires were reported in 2021 and 2022 Wrangler models.

In October 2023, after examining the buyback vehicles, Stellantis issued its first recall. This November 2023 recall covered 32,000 hybrid Jeeps and included a software update for the battery pack control module. The recall also included replacement batteries for vehicles showing specific diagnostic fault codes.

However, the problem persisted. From April 2024 through July 2024, Stellantis received new reports of battery fires. These fires happened in both Wrangler and Grand Cherokee plug-in hybrids that had already received the software update. As a result, Stellantis launched a joint investigation into the matter with battery supplier Samsung SDI in June 2024.

By August, Samsung SDI identified the likely causes: battery cell separator damage in conjunction with other complex interactions within the cell. As of September 13, 2024, Stellantis had documented 13 customer assistance records, one warranty claim, and 13 field reports related to this issue, including two potential injuries. This led to the current expanded recall announced on September 20, 2024.

What Owners Should Do
Owners should watch for recall notification letters, which will be mailed starting October 17. Those with concerns can NHTSA.gov/recalls to check if their vehicle is affected. Using your vehicle identification number (VIN) on the website will confirm your recall status.

If your vehicle was affected by the recall, reach out to an experienced lemon law lawyer as soon as possible. A lawyer can guide you through the recall process to ensure you receive the compensation you’re entitled to.

In most cases, you’ll be able to take your car to the dealer at no cost to you. The dealer will update your battery pack control module software and inspect the high-voltage battery. If necessary, they will also replace the battery completely to ensure your safety.

 

[D00notD00d]

VW took a long time to cave on the Emissions case. Likewise Chevy. Businesses will put shareholder interests first until that isn’t tenable.

For me, the crunch/last straw is the charging location constraint that has been placed on my car. In my view it makes it unfit for its intended purpose. I can’t use it. I’m awaiting answers from Porsche GB and the DVSA.

Organising a UK collective action might be a possibility, using one of the established firms which fronted the case against VW.

 

[Chalper]

What may happen is that Porsche follow the Jaguar route (as it is the same battery), and announced that cars are too risky to keep without changed batteries and changed batteries is out of reach/scope for Porsche Servicing - which will tank value of taycans. Then, they will be forced to announce a buy back program.

A few times you've said they're the same battery, but do we actually know that to be true? The closest I can find is that they're the same setup (pouch cell, etc.) but have been unable to find anything confirming they are actually the same model of battery.

 

[chun]

A few times you've said they're the same battery, but do we actually know that to be true? The closest I can find is that they're the same setup (pouch cell, etc.) but have been unable to find anything confirming they are actually the same model of battery.

Yes, we know that to be 100% true. By law proceedings.
It is the exact same modules, same cells, same chemistry, all manufactured in Poland. Different enclosure.
None of the recalls are about the enclosure, for porsche or for any of the other brands affected.

The recalls have to do with a manufacturing issue, resulting in folded anode tabs in the cells. Sadly, if 1 cell in a module is affected, the whole module needs to be replaced. There are 33 modules, each with hundreds of cells. The likelihood of a cell among hundreds of cells to be defective is high, hence any of the 33 modules can be affected.

The Jaguar I-Pace uses a 90 kW·h lithium-ion battery from LG Chem. This battery has been involved in several incidents of vehicle fires, similar to those experienced by other vehicles using LG Chem batteries, such as the Porsche Taycan, Chevrolet Bolt, Bolt EUV, and Hyundai Kona Electric. In these incidents, the cause was identified as a folded anode tab in the battery cells. As a result of these issues, LG Energy Solution agreed to pay GM $1.9 billion and Hyundai around $623 million for recalls and settlements.

The terms of the agreement with Porsche haven't been made public as far as I could find

The software from Porsche, same as Jaguar, plans to identify the module in which a cell is defective and disable the module/s, resulting in range reduction; until it is replaced at Porsche. Same as the software deployed by Jaguar. But Jaguar found out that they would realistically be replacing 90%+ of the modules, hence they just bought back the cars.
New modules, used in Taycan j1.2 supposedly don't have this manufacturing issue.

Sponsored