Teslag said:

---

Of course and no one really disputes that. But Nortex was trying to say that it's easily and readily available now. And posted a 2021 video as his proof. Yet Tesla didn't release the battery health check until 2023.

---

LOL, there you go interpreting/lying about what I have said again. And I don't track when your meter of 'well the newest 2 model years of tesla fix everything' happen. I don't care. Buying a used BEV is a huge gamble, and nothing on your app can convince reasonable skeptics otherwise. We aren't going to just consult you to make sure each time we consider a car purchase, get a vaccine, or get in a land war in Asia.

But by all means, keep "EVangelizing."

I really don't think you realize how many people laugh at all your posts here.

Thinking that F16 laughing about posts with respect to EVs should be embarrassing is a wild perspective. The posters on this forum run the gamut from woefully uninformed to outright deranged.

For your scenario to be the norm experience of buying a used EV you'd have to believe that the norm caretaking of the vehicle is bordering on intentional damage to the vehicle. There are way more safeguards/warnings with respect to appropriate caretaking of an EV than there are for a gas vehicle. So while there may be some instances of that level of outlier abuse it is almost certainly less common than poor maintenance of a gas vehicle and far more easy to identify despite your protests.

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Of course and no one really disputes that. But Nortex was trying to say that it's easily and readily available now. And posted a 2021 video as his proof. Yet Tesla didn't release the battery health check until 2023.

---

LOL, there you go interpreting/lying about what I have said again. And I don't track when your meter of 'well the newest 2 model years of tesla fix everything' happen. I don't care. Buying a used BEV is a huge gamble, and nothing on your app can convince reasonable skeptics otherwise. We aren't going to just consult you to make sure each time we consider a car purchase, get a vaccine, or get in a land war in Asia.

But by all means, keep "EVangelizing."

I really don't think you realize how many people laugh at all your posts here.

---

Remember folks, this poster is totally above snarky replies and only here for serious discussion.


The cold hard truth is that a Tesla can easily tell you what the health of the battery is. And Nortex had no idea it could and once again shoved his foot in his mouth because he didn't bother check that fact before hand.

hph6203 said:

---

Thinking that F16 laughing about posts with respect to EVs should be embarrassing is a wild perspective. The posters on this forum run the gamut from woefully uninformed to outright deranged.

For your scenario to be the norm experience of buying a used EV you'd have to believe that the norm caretaking of the vehicle is bordering on intentional damage to the vehicle. There are way more safeguards/warnings with respect to appropriate caretaking of an EV than there are for a gas vehicle. So while there may be some instances of that level of outlier abuse it is almost certainly less common than poor maintenance of a gas vehicle and far more easy to identify despite your protests.

---

It doesn't have to be the norm in order for it to be very different vs. a used ICE vehicle in the risks/analyses.

nortex97 said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Thinking that F16 laughing about posts with respect to EVs should be embarrassing is a wild perspective. The posters on this forum run the gamut from woefully uninformed to outright deranged.

For your scenario to be the norm experience of buying a used EV you'd have to believe that the norm caretaking of the vehicle is bordering on intentional damage to the vehicle. There are way more safeguards/warnings with respect to appropriate caretaking of an EV than there are for a gas vehicle. So while there may be some instances of that level of outlier abuse it is almost certainly less common than poor maintenance of a gas vehicle and far more easy to identify despite your protests.

---

It doesn't have to be the norm in order for it to be very different vs. a used ICE vehicle in the risks/analyses.

---

You are absolutely right on there. The games used to hide problems with the power train on ICE vehicles are well known and easy to do by the average American with any mechanical skill. Hacking a computer is way beyond most of us.

https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/fire-risk-sparks-a-recall-of-nearly-91000-genesis-vehicles-022924.html

'More news of fire prone ICE death traps Parkinng an ice vehicle in your garage is quite literally playing with fire.

Quote:

---

Water may enter the starter solenoid and cause an electrical short, which can result in an engine compartment fire while the vehicle is parked parked or being driven.

An engine compartment fire can increase the risk of injury.

Owners are advised to park outside and away from structures until the recall repair is complete.

---

Teslag said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Of course and no one really disputes that. But Nortex was trying to say that it's easily and readily available now. And posted a 2021 video as his proof. Yet Tesla didn't release the battery health check until 2023.

---

LOL, there you go interpreting/lying about what I have said again. And I don't track when your meter of 'well the newest 2 model years of tesla fix everything' happen. I don't care. Buying a used BEV is a huge gamble, and nothing on your app can convince reasonable skeptics otherwise. We aren't going to just consult you to make sure each time we consider a car purchase, get a vaccine, or get in a land war in Asia.

But by all means, keep "EVangelizing."

I really don't think you realize how many people laugh at all your posts here.

---

Remember folks, this poster is totally above snarky replies and only here for serious discussion.


The cold hard truth is that a Tesla can easily tell you what the health of the battery is. And Nortex had no idea it could and once again shoved his foot in his mouth because he didn't bother check that fact before hand.

---

The cold hard truth is I could care less what you claim as the beginning of safe EV apps and software incapable of being hacked and wonderfulness in Tesla MY 2022. But I must thank you again for the entertainment and laughs.

pic.twitter.com/1uewyCkEXY

— parakeet05 (@parakeet05_) March 3, 2024

Up next in the BEV fantasy of crap that will never really work well/reliably/happen; induction charging.

Teslag said:

---

Of course and no one really disputes that. But Nortex was trying to say that it's easily and readily available now. And posted a 2021 video as his proof. Yet Tesla didn't release the battery health check until 2023.

---

So it took them two years to fix that exploit?

Quote:

---

Then didn't show us how. Or tell us where. So until this fantasy comes true. It can't be done. And when it happens Tesla will just patch the exploit with a software update like they always do

---

Two years later?

Methinks Nortex has a point. One should always be careful with used cars. Heck I wouldn't buy a NEW Tesla let alone a used one with less battery life left.

Different is not worse.

You're arguing that it's of notable concern, in order for that to be true it would have to be common place and difficult to identify. It's not. You buy a car from a reputable dealer that provides a return period, you take 6 hours to drive the car and determine any faults, return to your home and charge to 100% and then drive it the next day to determine any notable degradation in battery and then either proceed to return the vehicle or accept that your concerns have been assuaged.

That is a wholly more easily identifiable problem with a vehicle than an ICE vehicle. The use patterns you're talking about are genuinely bordering on intentional damage so that they could screw over the next owner. With an ICE vehicle I have to rely on the owner following maintenance schedules, with an EV I have to rely on the owner adhering to warning messages that are posted every time they charge their car. I'll take the latter.


It is not a difficult problem to navigate.

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Of course and no one really disputes that. But Nortex was trying to say that it's easily and readily available now. And posted a 2021 video as his proof. Yet Tesla didn't release the battery health check until 2023.

---

So it took them two years to fix that exploit?

Quote:

---

Then didn't show us how. Or tell us where. So until this fantasy comes true. It can't be done. And when it happens Tesla will just patch the exploit with a software update like they always do

---

Two years later?

Methinks Nortex has a point. One should always be careful with used cars. Heck I wouldn't buy a NEW Tesla let alone a used one with less battery life left.

---

They didn't fix anything. They just gave owners the ability to do themselves what service centers could only do.


And why would you be afraid? If the battery is really terrible a less than 8 years old or less than 150k miles you get a new one under warranty.

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Of course and no one really disputes that. But Nortex was trying to say that it's easily and readily available now. And posted a 2021 video as his proof. Yet Tesla didn't release the battery health check until 2023.

---

LOL, there you go interpreting/lying about what I have said again. And I don't track when your meter of 'well the newest 2 model years of tesla fix everything' happen. I don't care. Buying a used BEV is a huge gamble, and nothing on your app can convince reasonable skeptics otherwise. We aren't going to just consult you to make sure each time we consider a car purchase, get a vaccine, or get in a land war in Asia.

But by all means, keep "EVangelizing."

I really don't think you realize how many people laugh at all your posts here.

---

Remember folks, this poster is totally above snarky replies and only here for serious discussion.


The cold hard truth is that a Tesla can easily tell you what the health of the battery is. And Nortex had no idea it could and once again shoved his foot in his mouth because he didn't bother check that fact before hand.

---

The cold hard truth is I could care less what you claim as the beginning of safe EV apps and software incapable of being hacked and wonderfulness in Tesla MY 2022. But I must thank you again for the entertainment and laughs.

pic.twitter.com/1uewyCkEXY

— parakeet05 (@parakeet05_) March 3, 2024

Up next in the BEV fantasy of crap that will never really work well/reliably/happen; induction charging.

---

But you said this hack was available now. You said we were well aware.




Where is it?

PTeslag said:

---

JamesE4 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

The issue is there are whole hoops a buyer should rightfully go through to see if the battery data is accurate, including driving it for a while and using a third party app. There's no telling really if an owner properly charged it 'regularly' or just reconditioned/reset the battery stats when selling it, or charged it to 100 percent regularly etc. And heck, even if it's fine when bought used initially, when getting it serviced Tesla might just decide to hack off 80 miles of range down the road as a ransom. There was also a reddit discussion thread about how to hide a battery error in the software when going to car max etc. but I can't remember where it was. About a year ago.

---

One of your articles is from 2021, which was before Tesla released the service mode update to check battery health. Like I say, always check a Nortex link.

You can not alter the Tesla battery health results to display anything else and one can easily check the health of the battery prior to purchase through the service mode if they are so inclined

---

Where on the menu do you see battery health/degradation? I haven't found it.

---

Go into the software menu in the control panel. Hold your finger down over the Model "XYZ3" text under your cars image. Then type "service" to enter service mode when the dialogue menu appears. Then in service mode select battery health test. The car will completely deplete itself and then recharge. You'll get a full readout of the battery health and all HV components

---

Thanks - I am only at 10k miles and don't seem to have any degradation so I think I will wait to do that test

Kansas Kid said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Thinking that F16 laughing about posts with respect to EVs should be embarrassing is a wild perspective. The posters on this forum run the gamut from woefully uninformed to outright deranged.

For your scenario to be the norm experience of buying a used EV you'd have to believe that the norm caretaking of the vehicle is bordering on intentional damage to the vehicle. There are way more safeguards/warnings with respect to appropriate caretaking of an EV than there are for a gas vehicle. So while there may be some instances of that level of outlier abuse it is almost certainly less common than poor maintenance of a gas vehicle and far more easy to identify despite your protests.

---

It doesn't have to be the norm in order for it to be very different vs. a used ICE vehicle in the risks/analyses.

---

You are absolutely right on there. The games used to hide problems with the power train on ICE vehicles are well known and easy to do by the average American with any mechanical skill. Hacking a computer is way beyond most of us.

---

Right now, it's not worth it for hackers to really try much. But, if they become ubiquitous, I guarantee they will.

You can get tuners for all sorts of vehicles that allow you to essentially hack the PCM so that you can modify parameters on the vehicle (I've got one form my Rubicon). I wouldn't be surprised for that kind of "white hat" type hacking to come to a Tesla near your one of these days. And after that the mods will follow that will allow stuff like mentioned here with vehicle health, etc. I don't think is doing that on ICE right now, because I don't think many mods like that would have a big market...

BTW, I'm not putting Teslas down, just pointing out some info...

hph6203 said:

---

Thinking that F16 laughing about posts with respect to EVs should be embarrassing is a wild perspective. The posters on this forum run the gamut from woefully uninformed to outright deranged.

For your scenario to be the norm experience of buying a used EV you'd have to believe that the norm caretaking of the vehicle is bordering on intentional damage to the vehicle. There are way more safeguards/warnings with respect to appropriate caretaking of an EV than there are for a gas vehicle. So while there may be some instances of that level of outlier abuse it is almost certainly less common than poor maintenance of a gas vehicle and far more easy to identify despite your protests.

---

Right now you still have "early adopters" (for lack of a better word) buying most of the vehicles - people that do a lot more research and take good care of their vehicles. Especially since the vehicles are pretty pricey for the most part.

When EVs start being cheap (which you continuously tout they will be) and the average guy starts buying them, the upkeep will probably drop...The average person tends to not be as studious about taking care of things...

So, I expect there will be more problems due to the fact that the new breed of EV owners aren't like this current one...NOTE: I said because of the owners, not the EVs...

hph6203 said:

---

Different is not worse.

You're arguing that it's of notable concern, in order for that to be true it would have to be common place and difficult to identify. It's not. You buy a car from a reputable dealer that provides a return period, you take 6 hours to drive the car and determine any faults, return to your home and charge to 100% and then drive it the next day to determine any notable degradation in battery and then either proceed to return the vehicle or accept that your concerns have been assuaged.

That is a wholly more easily identifiable problem with a vehicle than an ICE vehicle. The use patterns you're talking about are genuinely bordering on intentional damage so that they could screw over the next owner. With an ICE vehicle I have to rely on the owner following maintenance schedules, with an EV I have to rely on the owner adhering to warning messages that are posted every time they charge their car. I'll take the latter.


It is not a difficult problem to navigate.

---

So...a completely different model than most used car dealers?

hph6203 said:

---

Different is not worse.

You're arguing that it's of notable concern, in order for that to be true it would have to be common place and difficult to identify. It's not. You buy a car from a reputable dealer that provides a return period, you take 6 hours to drive the car and determine any faults, return to your home and charge to 100% and then drive it the next day to determine any notable degradation in battery and then either proceed to return the vehicle or accept that your concerns have been assuaged.

That is a wholly more easily identifiable problem with a vehicle than an ICE vehicle. The use patterns you're talking about are genuinely bordering on intentional damage so that they could screw over the next owner. With an ICE vehicle I have to rely on the owner following maintenance schedules, with an EV I have to rely on the owner adhering to warning messages that are posted every time they charge their car. I'll take the latter.


It is not a difficult problem to navigate.

---

My Jeep lets me know when I need things like oil changes...I assume most new vehicles do that too. Or, if there are issues you get the happy check engine light (which I think could be improved to give the driver the ODBII code without needing to go to Autozone).

So we got that going for us...

Ag with kids said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Different is not worse.

You're arguing that it's of notable concern, in order for that to be true it would have to be common place and difficult to identify. It's not. You buy a car from a reputable dealer that provides a return period, you take 6 hours to drive the car and determine any faults, return to your home and charge to 100% and then drive it the next day to determine any notable degradation in battery and then either proceed to return the vehicle or accept that your concerns have been assuaged.

That is a wholly more easily identifiable problem with a vehicle than an ICE vehicle. The use patterns you're talking about are genuinely bordering on intentional damage so that they could screw over the next owner. With an ICE vehicle I have to rely on the owner following maintenance schedules, with an EV I have to rely on the owner adhering to warning messages that are posted every time they charge their car. I'll take the latter.


It is not a difficult problem to navigate.

---

My Jeep lets me know when I need things like oil changes...I assume most new vehicles do that too. Or, if there are issues you get the happy check engine light (which I think could be improved to give the driver the ODBII code without needing to go to Autozone).

So we got that going for us...

---

They are easy to reset without changing the oil. I do that with my Toyota that is programmed for 5k changes but with full synthetic, I go 10-15k. You can also reset many error codes.

Ag with kids said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Thinking that F16 laughing about posts with respect to EVs should be embarrassing is a wild perspective. The posters on this forum run the gamut from woefully uninformed to outright deranged.

For your scenario to be the norm experience of buying a used EV you'd have to believe that the norm caretaking of the vehicle is bordering on intentional damage to the vehicle. There are way more safeguards/warnings with respect to appropriate caretaking of an EV than there are for a gas vehicle. So while there may be some instances of that level of outlier abuse it is almost certainly less common than poor maintenance of a gas vehicle and far more easy to identify despite your protests.

---

It doesn't have to be the norm in order for it to be very different vs. a used ICE vehicle in the risks/analyses.

---

You are absolutely right on there. The games used to hide problems with the power train on ICE vehicles are well known and easy to do by the average American with any mechanical skill. Hacking a computer is way beyond most of us.

---

Right now, it's not worth it for hackers to really try much. But, if they become ubiquitous, I guarantee they will.

You can get tuners for all sorts of vehicles that allow you to essentially hack the PCM so that you can modify parameters on the vehicle (I've got one form my Rubicon). I wouldn't be surprised for that kind of "white hat" type hacking to come to a Tesla near your one of these days. And after that the mods will follow that will allow stuff like mentioned here with vehicle health, etc. I don't think is doing that on ICE right now, because I don't think many mods like that would have a big market...

BTW, I'm not putting Teslas down, just pointing out some info...

---

There has already been white knight hacking of Teslas that is well documented. Most sponsored by Tesla as they have sponsored some big prizes to get some top hackers to participate and some done by independents. It is a concern with all new cars with computers which is most of them. One advantage Tesla and the EV focused companies is they have OTA update capabilities to quickly patch hacks as they are found.

I am not a PCM expert but as you point out, there are a lot of tools available to modify them that are readily available. I also don't think most have the ability to have software updated when a hack is found.

Quote:

---

(which I think could be improved to give the driver the ODBII code without needing to go to Autozone).

---

$18 bucks on Amazon


Won't do 100%, but will take care of most common codes

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Quote:

---

(which I think could be improved to give the driver the ODBII code without needing to go to Autozone).

---

$18 bucks on Amazon


Won't do 100%, but will take care of most common codes

---

Oh I know. My tuner pulls the code, too. I was just saying it would be nice if the check engine came on that it gave you the code at the same time...

And it isn't like it should be hard to do. That is one thing with the Tesla, if you get an error code, it usually gives you a good idea of the problem.

There is very little upkeep knowledge necessary. It's just follow the warnings the vehicle presents to you. If the vehicle says to charge to 80% daily, charge to 80% daily. If the vehicle says charge to 100% daily, charge to 100%. If the vehicle says DC fast charging past 80% can accelerate battery degradation, don't DC fast charge past 80%. Simple.

Even absent following what the vehicle says with respect to fast charging it is actually a net waste of time for the owner and that would be fairly clear after the first time they do it. The time to charge 10-80% is roughly the same as charging 80-100%.

The argument is basically that a person is going to ignore warnings that they're potentially accelerating battery degradation and that they're going to do that so they can waste their own time. Then they're going to turn around and hack their car to modify the battery health data. Dumb enough to damage it beyond the norm, smart enough to find hacking tools. Seems like a small population.

I can see manipulation of range estimates happening, but that's an easy thing to suss out.

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Quote:

---

(which I think could be improved to give the driver the ODBII code without needing to go to Autozone).

---

$18 bucks on Amazon


Won't do 100%, but will take care of most common codes

---

EV's don't have OBDII ports or standardized codes.

nortex97 said:

---

EV's don't have OBDII ports

---

You could find one that works for a Porsche/VW of course, but it's not standardized yet, about the codes etc. OBDII was originally a tailpipe emission code tool, so EV's were exempt and...some EV mfg's don't want to let folks see the codes etc.

They haven't been required to even provide a port yet, again part of the non-standardization of programming/transparency that makes buying a used one riskier. Or, one could trust the seller or that the California regulators will solve this...I mean, we all trust California bureaucrats to help us.

Quote:

---

The landscape of electric vehicles (EVs) is set to undergo a significant transformation in 2026 with the introduction of an industry-standard diagnostic system. Currently, EVs lack a uniform onboard diagnostic (OBD) system, leading to challenges for both consumers and service technicians. The absence of a standardized diagnostic system has been particularly evident in many cases, which may face recurring issues, including instances of "bricking," or no longer being able to operate correctly.

Without a consistent diagnostic system, service technicians struggle to identify and address problems effectively. This lack of standardization has contributed to a decline in dealership service satisfaction, as indicated by the 2023 J.D. Power U.S. Customer Service Index Study.

However, change is on the horizon. California, a pioneer in environmental regulations, is at the forefront of implementing a standardized EV diagnostic system. The state's Advanced Clean Cars II program mandates the inclusion of a standard diagnostic system in all 2026 model vehicles. This regulation is poised to become the benchmark for EV diagnostics, as seven of the 17 states following California's emissions rules have already adopted the Advanced Clean Cars II regulations.

The standardized diagnostic system, as outlined in California's legislation and SAE International document J1979-3, will cover various components critical to an EV's functionality. This includes the propulsion system, battery pack, power electronics, charging system, and thermal systems. The goal is to create a comprehensive diagnostic framework that ensures the efficient monitoring of EVs' health.

---

I already knew about the standardization coming in 2026. Most of the legacy manufacturers have OBD2 ports in their EVs, and there are CANbus adaptors for the Teslas to get an OBD2 port.

It may happen and work well, or not. Used vehicles though are usually purchased when 3 to 10 years old. The utility of the thread imho is to share information not understood by folks who track this stuff so closely.

Quote:

---

The utility of the thread imho is to share information not understood by folks who track this stuff so closely.

---

Which is odd given how many "authorities" on EV's we have on this board who have never owned nor operated one.

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

The utility of the thread imho is to share information not understood by folks who track this stuff so closely.

---

Which is odd given how many "authorities" on EV's we have on this board who have never owned nor operated one.

---

No. Reading comprehension fail. It was started by/for that purpose.

Plenty here own and operate EV's.

Most probably don't operate the BEV variety.

Because the BEV is a minor segment of the EV marketplace.

The golf cart marketplace is majority BEV.

bobbranco said:

---

Plenty here own and operate EV's.

Most probably don't operate the BEV variety.

Because the BEV is a minor segment of the EV marketplace.

The golf cart marketplace is majority BEV.

---

I think it's quite clear this thread is discussing EV as road vehicles, not golf carts (of which over 40% are ice powered).

Quote:

---

40% are ice

---

I know this. Thank you.

bobbranco said:

---

Quote:

---

40% are ice

---

I know this. Thank you.

---

LOL. We all know it. And it proves nothing.

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

The utility of the thread imho is to share information not understood by folks who track this stuff so closely.

---

Which is odd given how many "authorities" on EV's we have on this board who have never owned nor operated one.

---

No. Reading comprehension fail. It was started by/for that purpose.

---

Fun to see nortex owning this thread.

techno-ag said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

The utility of the thread imho is to share information not understood by folks who track this stuff so closely.

---

Which is odd given how many "authorities" on EV's we have on this board who have never owned nor operated one.

---

No. Reading comprehension fail. It was started by/for that purpose.

---

Fun to see nortex owning this thread.

---

Except the part where he assured us Tesla's battery health result can be manipulated (and that it was easily available online) and then refused to show us how or where.