New Battery monitoring software update?

[hifi239]

The solution has been announced to be out by the end of Q1/2025. This obviously did not happen. We are still under 80% charge limit and every 60-day periodic checkup.

It isn't really a solution, so much as it is an on-board monitoring SW vs at-dealer checkups. So I wonder why your 2022 is not under ARB7 (Porsche can see the car over the air and knows it is okay)? Do you have it in privacy mode? Is something different in EU vs mine in the US?

Sponsored

 

[Donar]

just wish Porsche would get its communication with customers on a better footin

I did not hear anything from Porsche. Only reason I know about this issue is because I’m visiting this forum. Same as a friend of mine in NL. I am not aware of any letters sent out on this issue in NL.

@Jasper4S did you?

 

[GTSS]

It isn't really a solution, so much as it is an on-board monitoring SW vs at-dealer checkups. So I wonder why your 2022 is not under ARB7 (Porsche can see the car over the air and knows it is okay)? Do you have it in privacy mode? Is something different in EU vs mine in the US?

Agreed, this is not a proper solution of the core problem.

I did not renew MyPorsche app subscription which expired just days after I was notified about ARB6. It just isn’t worth 325EUR per year for me. If there were no problems with the car, I would renew it.

They offered to change it to ARB7, but I would need to renew mu subscription. Which I refuse.

 

[chun]

Agreed, this is not a proper solution of the core problem.

I did not renew MyPorsche app subscription which expired just days after I was notified about ARB6. It just isn’t worth 325EUR per year for me. If there were no problems with the car, I would renew it.

They offered to change it to ARB7, but I would need to renew mu subscription. Which I refuse.

damn, so they can’t get logs from a car OTA if you don’t pay for the subscription?

Now that is proper ridiculous.

How will the new software transmit data back to porsche OTA for people without the subscription?

I guess porsche will have to have another recall for that ? or maybe they intend to keep the 60 days check-ups at dealer for the whole life of the car. Good stuff

I can see the headlines: “Porsches asks you to subscribe to find out when your car will catch on fire before it does” or “Porsches subscription required to not burn alive”

Here, free AD idea for porsche: “Would you like to be blamed for burning your neighbours house? Buy the porsche subscription to avoid an uncomfortable situation”

 

[hifi239]

How will the new software transmit data back to porsche OTA for people without the subscription?

It won't. The new software detects a module issue, and then locks the car to no more than 80% charge. No communications to Porsche needed. If that happens you will likely get a dash notification to make an appointment with service to have it checked, and have the module replaced.

One dim light at the end of the tunnel in all of this is that this is a safety defect, in which case, if they don't implement the iPace buyback solution, they will replace bad modules past the battery warranty period. But also, I'm seeing that several hundreds of cars are affected so far out of 150,000 Taycan J1.1s. That's 0.1%. It's a big deal because fire is a big deal.

 

[chun]

It won't. The new software detects a module issue, and then locks the car to no more than 80% charge. No communications to Porsche needed. If that happens you will likely get a dash notification to make an appointment with service to have it checked, and have the module replaced.

One dim light at the end of the tunnel in all of this is that this is a safety defect, in which case, if they don't implement the iPace buyback solution, they will replace bad modules past the battery warranty period. But also, I'm seeing that several hundreds of cars are affected so far out of 150,000 Taycan J1.1s. That's 0.1%. It's a big deal because fire is a big deal.

What do you mean several hundred?

The recalls affects all taycans produced before 2024, and porsche in the recall entry to the EU entity say that even if the car doesn’t have an actual problem now, they won’t rule it out having the problem in the future. I have posted the recall for EU entry a bit higher up.

Edit: https://ec.europa.eu/safety-gate-alerts/screen/webReport/alertDetail/10092672?lang=en

and even then, actual cars that got modules replaced with older recalls, are more than hundreds, see ara4 and ara5 recalls, that were for actually replacing modules. That alone is thousands of cars.
In USA there were 600+ cars under ara4; and USA amounts to 1/7 of taycans sold world wide if we extrapolate the numbers from arb6 (which covers all taycans and around 27.000 in USA compare to 150.000+ worldwide before 2024). So you can extrapolate 6 or 7 times 600 for ara4 alone. Add to that ara5. And the initial battery recall apb5 I think it was?

https://ec.europa.eu/safety-gate-alerts/screen/webReport/alertDetail/10012844?lang=en

while it’s not an absurdly high number, I would bet it’s closer to 7-10% than to 0.1% of cars that actually got modules replaced under those 3 past recalls alone. And some cars got multiple modules replaced - mine got 3 modules replaced

 

[Travis]

Wow. Suggesting that you’re going to be burned alive or responsible for burning your neighbors home down. On one hand bitching that the software is not out, than stating that the software will deactivate cells and reduce range before it’s been installed is a guess, claiming a lifetime of 60 day checks, and on and on baseless claims, claiming to know “by law” the battery is identical to the ipace and suffers from the exact same defect that we need our cars bought back, they are not even the same voltage. I am sure many BEV cars use highly similar batteries and designs, just like cell phones are all so alike, and car engines use many of the same technologies, this does not provide concrete evidence the suffer the same defects at the same frequency and share the same magnitude of risk. Such a diva. I agree Porsche is not doing a good job communicating and controlling the narrative, but this is so out of hand. Reality is zero confirmed battery fires, zero confirmed injuries over nearly 5 yrs and approximately 150,000 vehicles. Live in reality, not in what ifs, you would be a lot happier. You haven’t sold your car so the depreciation your bitching about has not been realized, market could change, your car has not caught fire, your not limiting charge level or location. How have you actually been impacted to date? You haven’t. You have an entitled attitude and want to bitch about corporations and thinking you are owed some explanation and to have your hand held and be told everything is going to be ok. That they owe you behind the scenes details of where everything stands. And absent that your going to assume and makeup details as you have admitted. Drive your car, be patient, if you actually have an issue, than you could expect Porsche to support you. To bitch nonstop how terrible Porsche service is crazy, how terrible they are to their customers, the story is not written yet. Maybe the batteries will prove to be fine, maybe they will need all to be replaced, maybe the cars will be bought back, maybe Porsche will fuck everyone over and suffer reputational damage and go out of business like Fiskar, I think we will all be just fine, but I am gonna wait and see what happens before I cry about it.

 

[chun]

Wow. Suggesting that you’re going to be burned alive or responsible for burning your neighbors home down. On one hand bitching that the software is not out, than stating that the software will deactivate cells and reduce range before it’s been installed is a guess, claiming a lifetime of 60 day checks, and on and on baseless claims, claiming to know “by law” the battery is identical to the ipace and suffers from the exact same defect that we need our cars bought back, they are not even the same voltage. I am sure many BEV cars use highly similar batteries and designs, just like cell phones are all so alike, and car engines use many of the same technologies, this does not provide concrete evidence the suffer the same defects at the same frequency and share the same magnitude of risk. Such a diva. I agree Porsche is not doing a good job communicating and controlling the narrative, but this is so out of hand. Reality is zero confirmed battery fires, zero confirmed injuries over nearly 5 yrs and approximately 150,000 vehicles. Live in reality, not in what ifs, you would be a lot happier. You haven’t sold your car so the depreciation your bitching about has not been realized, market could change, your car has not caught fire, your not limiting charge level or location. How have you actually been impacted to date? You haven’t. You have an entitled attitude and want to bitch about corporations and thinking you are owed some explanation and to have your hand held and be told everything is going to be ok. That they owe you behind the scenes details of where everything stands. And absent that your going to assume and makeup details as you have admitted. Drive your car, be patient, if you actually have an issue, than you could expect Porsche to support you. To bitch nonstop how terrible Porsche service is crazy, how terrible they are to their customers, the story is not written yet. Maybe the batteries will prove to be fine, maybe they will need all to be replaced, maybe the cars will be bought back, maybe Porsche will fuck everyone over and suffer reputational damage and go out of business like Fiskar, I think we will all be just fine, but I am gonna wait and see what happens before I cry about it.

The recalls are filled by porsche as: fire risk, unfit for road use, not meeting European market regulations.

I am not suggesting anything, porsche is clearly stating it in their recalls.

I am clearly making a joke of how badly porsche is handling this. Stop insinuating stupid things

what the software will do is not a guess, you can go and read the filling of the recall.

but go on, put more words in my mouth knock yourself out

the only person bitching in this thread is you, bitching about people discussing the latest info on the topic of this recall and the software that is supposed to fix it

Imagine the audacity to tell people to stop discussing on a platform about discussions. Incredible. You can wait and see all you like, just like other people can discuss all they like, you don’t have to read it

 

[Travis]

I am not making any assumptions or insinuating anything regarding Porsche. As I stated I am being patient, observing reality, how I or others are actually impacted. I did not put words in your mouth or suggest anyone to not discuss the issue. In fact I said a normal and healthy level of concern and attention is warranted. I do not think your position is proportional, helpful, based in reality, and is largely intended to stir up a fearful and angry reaction. I would repeat my question as to whether or not you have actually realized any damage from this issue, and what exact services have Porsche provided in such a poor manor to date that have impacted you at all? If you are not capable or willing to see the irrational nature of your posts, than I guess there is no conversation in reality to be had about the situation.

 

[Travis]

Chun,

You suggested Porsche may be maliciously intending to reduce J1.1 vehicle values so they can buy them back are highly reduced values so they can then reuse the motors in J1.2 vehicles. Then have the nerve to suggest I am making maligned insinuations and acting in bad faith. I have suggested in trusting a process, having some patience, and uprising when it’s warranted, focus on realities, enjoy life. Never suggested forum members not to discuss issues. I guess I don’t know why you keep your car if you believe Porsche is such a deviant corporation with such mal intent. Move on.

 

[chun]

I am not making any assumptions or insinuating anything regarding Porsche. As I stated I am being patient, observing reality, how I or others are actually impacted. I did not put words in your mouth or suggest anyone to not discuss the issue. In fact I said a normal and healthy level of concern and attention is warranted. I do not think your position is proportional, helpful, based in reality, and is largely intended to stir up a fearful and angry reaction. I would repeat my question as to whether or not you have actually realized any damage from this issue, and what exact services have Porsche provided in such a poor manor to date that have impacted you at all? If you are not capable or willing to see the irrational nature of your posts, than I guess there is no conversation in reality to be had about the situation.

What exactly is irrational in my posts?

Can you quote?

Me implying that Porsche may approach this the same way as Jaguar? Why is this irrational? Porsche hasn't communicated otherwise, and so far, step by step, have taken same decisions as Jaguar.

Me making jokes about how bad Porsche is approaching this whole shit show and how anti consumer their approach is? Why is this irrational? It's facts. Porsche are asking people to limit their charging to 80%, reducing their already limited driving range even further, and to not park inside or charge in or near buildings. This is very anti consumer and badly handled, and also, again, a step Jaguar took.

Me pointing out that the solution, aka the software, got delayed, as per official later from Porsche? Is this irrational?

Me pointing out what gold technician from Porsche Switzerland has stated for a fact that the software is not available, called Porsche Germany which confirmed that no update for PIWIS is available to enable the software. Is this irrational?

That's all that was discussed.

 

[chun]

Chun,

You suggested Porsche may be maliciously intending to reduce J1.1 vehicle values so they can buy them back are highly reduced values so they can then reuse the motors in J1.2 vehicles. Then have the nerve to suggest I am making maligned insinuations and acting in bad faith. I have suggested in trusting a process, having some patience, and uprising when it’s warranted, focus on realities, enjoy life. Never suggested forum members not to discuss issues. I guess I don’t know why you keep your car if you believe Porsche is such a deviant corporation with such mal intent. Move on.

Well, if Porsche don't want people to assume things, they should pursue the art of clear and transparent communication. Business that apply it, usually are having a good time.

Until then, Porsche are following exactly step by step in the footsteps of Jaguar, and those foot steps ended up in cars being bought back (at vastly deprecated price) and scrapped for parts. And I simply pointed that out, i did not maliciously suggest anything, i simply pointed out what Jaguar did and how Porsche is directly on those foot steps right now.

 

[GTSS]

Whatever Porsche intended to achieve with this recall, the result for me is the opposite — it has created uncertainty and doubt, not just about the Taycan, but about Porsche as a whole. I used to be a passionate EV enthusiast, fully prepared to tolerate minor glitches, software bugs, even replacements like the high-voltage charger or heater. But this isn't some rumor started by an anonymous Reddit user — this is official Porsche communication. It openly references fire risk, charging limitations, warnings not to park near buildings, etc. And even if the inspection shows everything is fine now, there's no guarantee it will be in 60 days. And they call that prevention?

 

[Tooney]

Reality is zero confirmed battery fires

Porsche is aware of battery fires, and reported same in its recall reports to NHTSA. Read post 261 above.

Porsche initiated multiple HV battery recalls because of its stated concerns about risk of fire. The risk of fire recalls were not initiated by anyone in this forum.

Porsche has advised some Taycan owners in the UK and other countries not to charge their Taycans inside buildings or to park near buildings. That advice came from Porsche.

I don't know about other owners, but I can see reason for Taycan owners to be concerned, based on written statements from Porsche.

 

[Bennachie]

IF that is the case, I would not want shares in LG Chem. why has Porsche not sued the backside off LG and replaced all battery packs? A lot of IPace were bought back by Jaguar towards the end of production.
I suspect the battery chemistry is irrelevant the issue will be with something physical within the pouch cell or its design/manufacture. Is Macan a pouch? Or is it cylinder/polygon? Pouch takes up much less space and is easier to package obviously but I guess cooling is more complex

Sponsored