D00notD00d
Well-Known Member
- First Name
- D00notD00d
- Joined
- May 17, 2023
- Threads
- 4
- Messages
- 980
- Reaction score
- 609
- Location
- Newcastle
- Vehicles
- L461 Range Rover Sport. Gone: Taycan 4s, Cayenne, 911 C4S.
- Thread starter
- #61
Has there been some summary analysis of the numbers from that thread/the tool, or is the 2% a@D00notD00d tldr; there is software from a workshop in thailand. The owner did a lot of work on damaged batteries. He created a piece of sw (free to use) to diagnose your own battery pack. I did not see a single bad battery posted in the whole thread. Few had some weird readings but were packs where modules were replaced hence the weird reading. Confirming the 2% you, @Dee and I are thinking about.
Would bad batteries have been identified first via balancing failures, then via Porsche recall efforts from 2024 (their remote or workshop analysis); then later, the Porsche on-board error monitoring, before Cris’s sw is executed against the car? I don’t know how the functionality of each of those sw items differs and what overlap occurs. Does anyone outside Porsche?
Only Porsche has data. Only Porsche knows the facts. Everything else is anecdotal
Porsche are saying 2% of cars are affected. We don’t know the accuracy of that figure. We don’t know if it is a current estimate figure, or the number to be revealed across the entire J1.1 HVB service life. We know from Porsche that the defect can surface across the entire service life. This story has many more years to run. Like Dieselgate, the truth may never be willingly admitted.
I’m reminded of the Sherlock Holmes quote:
“Never theorise before you have data. Invariably, you end up twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts.”
Only Porsche has the facts.
Sponsored
Last edited: