Comment by lesuorac
10 days ago
first page result for "reminds me of the teslas that got downgraded because the new owners only paid for the cheaper subscription".
https://electrek.co/2022/07/26/tesla-ransom-customer-over-80...
10 days ago
first page result for "reminds me of the teslas that got downgraded because the new owners only paid for the cheaper subscription".
https://electrek.co/2022/07/26/tesla-ransom-customer-over-80...
> Tesla used to sell Model S vehicles with software-locked battery packs. This was a way to offer different range options without having to make production more complicated with different battery pack sizes.
> Later, Tesla started to offer owners of those software-locked vehicles the option to unlock the capacity for an additional cost. Tesla phased out the practice over the years, but the company still used software-locked battery packs when doing warranty replacements of battery packs of certain capacities that it doesn’t produce anymore.
Upgrading the head unit for a 2013 Model S triggered an error and reverted this old generation battery to software lock.
This clearly was a software bug and Tesla reverted it for all customers using these older batteries.
This has literally nothing to do with subscriptions (the word subscribe isn’t even in the article once). I don’t even think you read the article.
> Car is sold twice since, and now has a new owner (my customer). It says 90, badged 90, has 90-type range.
> He has the car for a few months, goes in and does a paid MCU2 upgrade at Tesla after the 3G shutdown.
> ...
> Tesla told him that he had to pay $4,500 to unlock the capability:
It's all in the article.
You can get all stuck-up about the word "subscription" but guy goes into Tesla for a non-battery related service and loses 2/3 thirds of the range the car claimed it had unless he forks over 5k.