UK ONLY PROGRESS THREAD - Recall: High-Voltage Batteries May Short Circuit (ARA4, ARA5).

[D00notD00d]

UK ONLY PROGRESS THREAD - 2024 Recall: High-Voltage Batteries May Short Circuit (ARA4, ARA5).

I wanted to create a separate UK only thread for Taycan owners to share information, experiences and progress updates on this subject. I’ll start with what I know, happy for anything here to be corrected or supplemented.

Problem: Fire RIsk - The supplied high-voltage battery may experience a short circuit within the battery module

Scope ‘certain’ 2021-2023 Taycan; Taycan 4 Cross Turismo. 2020-2023 Taycan 4S, Taycan Turbo S. 2021-2022 Taycan 4S Cross Turismo. 2022 Taycan Turbo S Cross Turismo. 2022-2023 Taycan GTS. 2023 Taycan GTS Sport Turismo. 2020-2021 Taycan Turbo.

Workaround/Mitigation: Limit all charging to 80%.

ARA4 is the global Porsche recall ID applicable where remote analysis of vehicle logs via Porsche Connect has confirmed existence of the problem and that replacement of some or all battery modules is required.

ARA5 is the global Porsche recall ID applicable where Over The Air updates/analysis is not possible and dealer inspection is needed to establish if the problem exists and replacement of some or all battery modules is required.

I have received a ARA4 ‘pre-notification’ letter dated 24/5/24 from Porsche GB. This will be followed by a formal recall notice. Presumably the main purpose of the pre-notification letter is to notify the mitigation workaround above and thereby limit damage/liability.

The letter states: ‘analysis has found that your Taycan shows comparable signs of deviations in the cell module parameters and that a defect in the affected battery modules cannot be ruled out over the vehicle’s service life.
If the aforementioned defect appears on the abnormal battery modules, there is a risk of vehicle fire. This can also increase the risk the of injury or property damage.’

Next step - await receipt of a formal recall notice with more information on contacting your dealer to arrange for the repairs to be completed.

i assume ARA5 recalls will ask owners to contact their Porsche dealer to conduct an investigation.

IMPACTS

1. In my case the 80% charging limit effectively limits me to 120-130 mile round trips from home before incurring the 10x higher cost of public charging, and decreased charging intervals inconvenience. This means the car isn’t really usable for summer trips. (The car has already been off road for 2 of the 12 months I’ve owned it).
2. I’m guessing that Porsche (and other) dealers will be unable to retail unrepaired cars affected by the recall - because of the range limitation and fire risk. That will also prevent or affect resale of privately owned cars.
3. There is likely to be product reputational damage, further affecting residual value.
4. The repair time is c. 30 hours, so the car is likely to be off road for one week. Initial investigation will add to the off road time.

As this is a large scale global problem, with replacement parts supply, loan car and dealer specialist HV technician resource constraints, impacts 1 & 2 above are very likely to occur over a prolonged period of many months.

I’m going to ask Porsche GB about estimated resolution timescales and reparations.

Charging Limit Workaround

The ‘pre-notification’ letter includes a separate page giving an overview on how to limit AC charging to 80%. This has incorrect information- it says that a Profile can be used to limit charging, confusing the purpose of the Profile minimum charge parameter. The Profile Minimum Charge parameter is executed immediately the car is plugged in. My understanding is that to limit AC charging (to 80% or the previous general Porsche recommendation of 85%) a separate Timer maximum charge parameter must be set - now at 80%.

The letter correctly says that for DC (left port) fast charging the only control method is manual - I.e. eyeball monitor and stop charging. Which isn’t reliable.

But the letter also does not say that manual monitoring of AC charging where Direct Charging is switched on will also be necessary to apply the 80% maximum.

Please share updates/corrections.

Sponsored

 

[Persuader]

Just dropped my 2020 4S into the dealer last Wednesday for this recall.
They've lent me a GTS Sport Turismo whilst it's being sorted.
I'm happy with that.

 

[RGBArgee]

UK ONLY PROGRESS THREAD - Recall: High-Voltage Batteries May Short Circuit (ARA4, ARA5).

I wanted to create a separate UK only thread for Taycan owners to share information, experiences and progress updates on this subject. I’ll start with what I know, happy for anything here to be corrected or supplemented.

Problem: Fire RIsk - The supplied high-voltage battery may experience a short circuit within the battery module

Scope ‘certain’ 2021-2023 Taycan; Taycan 4 Cross Turismo. 2020-2023 Taycan 4S, Taycan Turbo S. 2021-2022 Taycan 4S Cross Turismo. 2022 Taycan Turbo S Cross Turismo. 2022-2023 Taycan GTS. 2023 Taycan GTS Sport Turismo. 2020-2021 Taycan Turbo.

Workaround: Limit all charging to 80%.

ARA4 is the global Porsche recall ID applicable where remote analysis of vehicle logs via Porsche Connect confirms existence of the problem and replacement of some or all battery modules is required.

ARA5 is the global Porsche recall ID applicable where Over The Air updates/analysis is not possible and dealer inspection is needed to establish if the problem exists and replacement of some or all battery modules is required.

I have received a ARA4 ‘pre-notification’ letter dated 24/5/24 from Porsche GB. This will be followed by a formal recall notice. Presumably the main purpose of the pre-notification letter is to notify the mitigation workaround above and thereby limit damage/liability.

The letter states: ‘analysis has found that your Taycan shows comparable signs of deviations in the cell module parameters and that a defect in the affected battery modules cannot be ruled out over the vehicle’s service life.
If the aforementioned defect appears on the abnormal battery modules, there is a risk of vehicle fire. This can also increase the risk the of injury or property damage.’

Next step - await receipt of a formal recall notice with more information on contacting your dealer to arrange for the repairs to be completed.

IMPACTS

1. In my case the 80% charging limit effectively limits me to 120-130 mile round trips from home before incurring the 10x higher cost of public charging, and decreased charging intervals inconvenience. This means the car isn’t really usable for summer trips. (The car has already been off road for 2 of the 12 months I’ve owned it).
2. I’m guessing that Porsche (and other) dealers will be unable to retail unrepaired cars affected by the recall - because of the range limitation and fire risk. That will prevent or affect resale of privately owned cars.
3. There is likely to be product reputational damage, further affecting value.
4. The repair time is c. 30 hours, so the car is likely to be off road for one week.

As this is a large scale global problem, with replacement parts supply and dealer specialist HV technician resource constraints, impacts 1 & 2 above are very likely to occur over a prolonged period of many months.

I’m going to ask Porsche GB about estimated resolution timescales and reparations.

Charging Limit Workaround

The ‘pre-notification’ letter includes a separate page giving an overview on how to limit AC charging to 80%. This has incorrect information- it says that a Profile can be used to limit charging, confusing the purpose of the Profile minimum charge parameter. The Profile Minimum Charge parameter is executed immediately the car is plugged in. My understanding is that to limit AC charging (to 80% or the general Porsche recommendation of 85%) a separate Timer maximum charge parameter must be set - at 80%.

The letter correctly says that for DC (left port) fast charging the only control method is manual - I.e. eyeball monitor and stop charging. Which isn’t reliable.

But the letter also does not say that manual monitoring of AC charging where Direct Charging is switched on will also be necessary to apply the 80% maximum.

Please share updates/corrections.

My 2023 4S cross was produced in Feb 2023 - do you know what Chassis numbers are affected? My 23 was a replacement for a 22 which suffered all the usual problems! Thanks.

 

[r553]

I know this is a UK only thread but I brought my 2020 4S in for the ARA4 recall. My dealer says they don't have the work instructions to implement this yet.....

 

[Nickj]

Is this a new recall then I take it? Mines a dec 2020 4s. Is there a way of checking if affected?

Makes me laugh that Porsche made the profiles/ charging so complicated even they don’t understand it!

 

[D00notD00d]

I know this is a UK only thread but I brought my 2020 4S in for the ARA4 recall. My dealer says they don't have the work instructions to implement this yet.....

I couldn’t find an equivalent for the ARA4 recall but this is the ARA5 instruction. It seems to overlap with ARA4.
https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2024/RCRIT-24V217-5724.pdf

 

[D00notD00d]

The purpose of the following is to show recall info, but neither shows my recall. That may be because it is at a ‘pre notification‘ stage.

https://www.check-mot.service.gov.uk/


https://recall.porsche.com/prod/pag... character VIN,using numbers and letters only

 

[D00notD00d]

Just dropped my 2020 4S into the dealer last Wednesday for this recall.
They've lent me a GTS Sport Turismo whilst it's being sorted.
I'm happy with that.

How were you notified? By letter from Porsche GB or by your dealer?

 

[D00notD00d]

Is this a new recall then I take it? Mines a dec 2020 4s. Is there a way of checking if affected?

Makes me laugh that Porsche made the profiles/ charging so complicated even they don’t understand it!

There doesn’t seem to be a precise and reliable way of checking if specific cars are definitely in scope. If you have a current Porsche Connect subscription and have enabled OTA sw updates my understanding is that the car‘s logs can be analysed remotely to identify whether the problem exists. i don’t know the order which is being applied for the remote ARA4 and on-site ARA5 investigations.
My 4s is Oct 2020. Unless multiple battery suppliers are involved, my guess is that yours may also be affected.

 

[rim23]

But the letter also does not say that manual monitoring of AC charging where Direct Charging is switched on will also be necessary to apply the 80% maximum.

Please share updates/corrections.

You’re wrong. When a profile used WITHOUT timer set, it’s indeed MAXIMUM charge. I have only profile set and it works as expected.

 

[Persuader]

How were you notified? By letter from Porsche GB or by your dealer?

My car was booked in for its 4 year service. They phoned me to say they would need it for longer, potentially 3 weeks, because of the recall. A letter from Porsche GB coincidentally landed the next day.

 

[D00notD00d]

You’re wrong. When a profile used WITHOUT timer set, it’s indeed MAXIMUM charge. I have only profile set and it works as expected.

True - but context is everything. The letter does not advise that any higher timer charge target will surpass the initial charge target set in a Profile. The Profile target is a minimum value, to be reached immediately after plug in. A Timer target is a maximum value, to be reached between the start and expiry of the timer.
Since the purpose and context of the advice is fire damage/injury prevention, the information provided should be complete.
I use a Profile with a minimum charge of 35% to ensure that I have enough charge for any unexpected late evening trips. I use a timer to charge to 85% (now 80%) at a cheap overnight rate ready for next day.

 

[Porsche-Guru]

Just dropped my 2020 4S into the dealer last Wednesday for this recall.
They've lent me a GTS Sport Turismo whilst it's being sorted.
I'm happy with that.

Any update on your car? How long did the fix take or is it still with the dealership?

 

[Persuader]

Any update on your car? How long did the fix take or is it still with the dealership?

Still at dealership. They did say up to 3 weeks.

 

[D00notD00d]

I’m awaiting a reply from Porsche GB with estimated timescales and reparations.
I saw a post on a US thread saying that there is an approach there of some centralisation of the specialised HV battery module replacement task, with local dealers removing whole battery assemblies, shipping them for repair, then refitting.
The global scale of the recall isn’t known. There is a bunch of cars where because the owner refused OTA updates Porsche cannot remotely confirm the fire risk exists. A lengthy dealer analysis is needed for that.
I’d have thought that the priority for Porsche (and Audi, who are also affected) will be to limit physical damage by communicating the 80% charge limit. To limit the Porsche financial and reputational risk they should be contacting all owners - via PCM/App/email/post.
They won’t have the resources, procedures and systems to handle all aspects of this.

Sponsored