Yeah, you are in the worst case scenario. They won't replace the bad cell because the entire pack is suspect. I find it odd to see such a wide array of buyback offers from downright insulting to essentially a new car for free.

Yeah, you are in the worst case scenario. They won't replace the bad cell because the entire pack is suspect. I find it odd to see such a wide array of buyback offers from downright insulting to essentially a new car for free.

Called the service manager for third time today, didn’t leave a message this time. It’s been 3 months sitting in their lot. They did give me a loaner but I’d really like my car back. I understand the service managers reluctance to tear the battery down and replace one cell while other cells are still suspect.

 

I had the "traction battery fault detected" come on in my 2019 again this week so took it to the dealer to resolve this AM. The H514 recall showed up with an actual software fix available in their system today and he said they would perform the update while they inspect the 12V and traction battery and fix the problem. The service dept has been incorrect on i-pace info prior, so I will believe the fix is live once the EV tech actually looks at it... so take it with a grain of salt. I purchased this car used and it has had modules replaced in the past, I imagine they will do the same again here

In our past family experience with LG and the Chevrolet Bolt recalls, the software update and warnings to not charge over 80%, park outdoors, etc., are the beginning, and I hope they will eventually force them to replace all the modules with known issues. My in-laws' 2020 Bolt had the recall for modules to be replaced and no problems now after another 20,000 miles since the fix.

 

The H514 recall showed up with an actual software fix available in their system today and he said they would perform the update while they inspect the 12V and traction battery and fix the problem.

From what has been posted, there is a software fix but it's just the "fix" that limits charging not an actual full fix.

 

NHTSA has posted their copy of the Interim Owner Notification Letter(Part 577).

https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2024/RIONL-24V633-0565.pdf

 

I was under the impression 2019 sales in the US were no more than 1500, and that H484 applied to more than 300 US vehicles.

That said, my point is the majority of those vehicles identified as probably having corrupted cells within the modules based on LG's description of a manufacturing defect were identified under H484. To use the 3 fires amongst 2700 cars (1 in 900) as cause to replace every other battery is neither logical, sensible or logistically reasonable.

I will repeat: We have no idea if the majority (or even a meaningful proportion) of the modules that have been flagged under H441 would have caused a thermal incident (fire). As such the current paranoia over battery fires is just that - until proven otherwise.

 

We don't have all the information that LG and JLR have. It may not just be the actual incidents. The failures lead to a root cause analysis. They would be reviewing the work instructions and records in assembling the packs and looking for a failure (NC, or non-conformity in regulatory jargon) in the parts themselves, or a failure in the assembly instructions and the quality control tests for the packs. If the root cause was determined to be an assembly procedure where a critical step was not properly described (so some randomness in the actual way it got done by the tech since it was not specified) or QC step that failed to capture the problem, then they don't have a way of knowing by looking at the records, which pack might be unsafe. They then haver to lean on statistics and after-sale surveillance in hopes of weeding them out.

This leads to a CAPA (corrective action/preventative action). Corrective action is what do you do about the packs out in the wild. Preventive action is what change can they do in the manufacturing process to prevent this from happening again for future packs.

The Corrective action was at first, to issue a software update to try to identify, after the fact, the suspect modules and replace them. This led to H441 and a period of monitoring and replacing modules deemed faulty. The corrective action includes steps to verify the effectiveness of the action by looking for more adverse events. If they continue to occur, then the corrective acton is deemed insufficient and additional actions are required, hence H484 and even later, H514. Not sure what they only looked at US for H514 other than the higher chance of litigation, otherwise I expect H514 to expand since there is unlikely to be a specific flaw in manufacturing packs specifically destined for the US.

 

I have been looking to buy a used EV. The 2019 IPace I am interested is showing "OK to drive with caution Traction battery fault detected". This vehicle is listed under E514 recall. I am OK with 80% range but concerned about any possible safety issues. I can park and charge outside. Should I proceed to buy or should I stay away.

 

"OK to drive with caution Traction battery fault detected". This vehicle is listed under E514 recall. I am OK with 80% range

From what I know, the temporary software for the 80% range limit is not out yet. So the car you are looking at has at least one bad cell and was tripped via the H441 high temperature setpoint and is limited to a 72% max charge.

 

Stay away

 

Thanks a lot!! I ended up getting a 2020 IPace. I am based in California and I can return the car in 48 hrs if I am not satisfied . I Charged to 100% (it shows 225 miles) with no issues. I have already driven 150 miles with no problems. I still have 24 hrs to test it out. Planning to try fast charger next. Anything else I should try?

 

This is speculative but reading the Porsche recall information may provide insight into why H514 only applies to 2019 US market vehicles.

Is it possible that US 2019s do not have the ability for Jaguar to have "continuous over-the-air access to continually monitor and access high-voltage data and detect future battery module anomalies in a timely and reliable manner using data analytics"? Perhaps the interpretations of US privacy regulations at the time prevented it and the capability was not built-in. I know some of you think Tesla would have done it, but this is not Tesla (a company that has flaunted regulations many times). Or perhaps they built the cars with modules so restricted in memory/storage that they can't support the process and it would be too costly to replace all the necessary modules (BECM, BCM and TCU).

They are handling it differently. Analysis of the battery pack is done first, replace faulty cell modules then install the software. It also states that the software can find other modules to replace after the initial analysis and replacement. We have seen that happen to several cars. The software for Porsche is also not available at this time.

 

In NA the MY2019-2020-2021 share the same architecture. They are only able to update over the air 4 modules out of 44. For MY2022 and up they are all updatable OTA. The H441 proves that they find enough free space on the BECM to implement a detect strategy and expose new value for voltage deviation, etc… I don’t see why they could not send a couple of bytes of data once a day using the TCU.

 

.... I don’t see why they could not send a couple of bytes of data once a day using the TCU.

Perhaps the answer is not "a couple of bytes of data" but rather continual monitoring OTA in the same manner that your ODB monitoring can be employed. Or at least continually during charging.

Privacy be damned. I'd rather let JLR know I'm charging and be monitored vs burning down the house.

 

When I visited my dealer in June they told me that module #8 was defective (I already knew it based on my OBD2 reading) and a couple of other are also borderline but not defective yet (I also knew it but he was able to give me borderline module # because he did not kept a copy of the report). That is unfortunate because I could have validated my theory on the threshold on voltage variation per module.

 

"Remedy" instructions for H514. Nothing more than a specific H514 software update to BECM via TOPIx Cloud.

 

From what I can see, the "Hybrid/EV Moving Average Voltage Deviation Exceedance Threshold" data in the BECM is "probably" used (among others) to determine if a cell is faulty of not (stored in the "Hybrid/EV Battery Voltage deviation Diagnosis 1"), and because I monitor those data since a couple of months, I can tell that they are not moving fast, so a sample rate of once a day would be more that enough, according to me, to start with. Having that information for every single iPace produced would be a very valuable data for investigation, at very low cost.

 

Interesting, so the software is basically monitoring a single cell string voltage and compare its moving average value versus all other cells in the pack. If any cell voltage deviates more and more from the population, it can indicate that cell has elvated self-discharge and could be caused by soft-shortcircuit due to folded tabs.

 

I think the basic permises is the previous software may not be effective enough for whatever technical reason, and they issue another recall to update the software.

The question is what does this new software do. Will it do active mitigation (limit charge to 80% regardless of whether anything abnormal has been detected) and buy time for them to plan for module/pack replacement/more robust future software. Or it would continue the passive monitoring without action as previous version does, and only intervene (limit charge to 72%/80%) when issues are detected. It would be the same situation we have---once the new software identify a problematic cell/module, that module should be replaced.

 

There is no question. Please read the recall letter you received and other recalls documents posted.

 

Quick question: has anyone, whose charge is limited to 80%, gone on to get a traction battery error (bad module detected)? Meaning has any bad cell ever been detected with the car’s state of charge below 80%? Just curious.

 

So I had the older software update that would limit the charge to 80% IF it detected a bad cell. I had been going about just fine with the ability to charge to 100% for a few months after that update. Then the traction battery error showed up and the car limited the charge to 80%. So it's been with the dealer for just under 3 weeks now while I drive a gas loaner. They let me know that the newer recall came through and they are going to update the software to always limit charging to 80%. Kind of stinks because the range has always been low with this car anyway, and now I have no reason to believe they will find a fix for a 5 year old car. I'm thinking we'll be limited to 80% max charging for the remainder of the vehicle life, which really hurts resale value.

 

From what I have heard, the temporary limit to 80% is not out yet. They experimented on my car by tripping it back to 72% and I called a foul, that I reported to the Feds. My dealer told me they would be meeting with Jaguar as to how they would change the 72% up to 80% in the next week or 2 once the software was available.

 

Dealers have only just received instructions for updating the BECM with the update. See my previous post. It is too soon for anyone to have it and get any results besides frustration for having limited charging.

 

I thought the original recall of select 2019s that offer a new pack actually limit charging (as opposed to asking).

 

Original recall H441 and its revisions (and related recalls due to improper installs) detected cell module faults and limited charging to 72% if any were found. A limit of 7 defective cell modules would initiate a full battery replacement.

H514 updates the BECM to limit charging to 80% without anything else considered. It will take a future update to all H514 cars to charge beyond 80%. It doesn't matter if any defective cell modules exist in the battery or not.

H484 was for select 2019s getting replacement batteries, car buyback, or replacement car deals, even if no faults were found to date.

 

My curiosity was if anyone whose charging were limited to 80% (H514) has gone on to get a module failure alert anyway (I presume that the original H441 monitoring was still active).

 

Has there ever been any documentation indicating the date LG modified their batteries to prevent a thermal overload? Do newer models have the H441 software installed to detect defective modules/cells as a precaution for the new modified battery packs?

 

My 2023 has had 3 bad modules replaced so far this year.

 

Yes, H441 (probably early version) started getting installed back circa May 2023. The date was mentioned in the recall paperwork that came out back then.

As for physically fixing that all pouches were not produced with the defective anodes, we can't be certain. The same factory produced defective batteries for the Taycan until 4 March 2024. Clearly they were still being manufactured so who knows if they made their way into JLR products.

 

There is now a class action lawsuit for Porsche Taycans.

https://www.taycanforum.com/forum/threads/porsche-class-action-claims-taycan-evs-have-battery-defect-december-5-2024.22843/

 

My 2019 is back in the shop because it won't charge at level 2 (level 3 is fine, might be something with the port), and it's getting the H514 downgrade while it's in there. This after being in the shop or three months over the summer (front wiring harness etc). Yesterday, JLR offered to buy the car from me at high Blue Book, which isn't going to cut it. But before I counter, should I throw in the towel on the iPace or try to get a newer example? I love everything about it when it works. Does anybody know whether the 2023s and 2024s were revised in a way that protects against the problems we're seeing in the 2019s (and apparently some 2020s also), or is it just a matter of age?

Thanks

P

 

Mine 2019 HSC was neutered yesterday. I charged it last night...to 80% and the range was a whopping 206 miles. I'm soooo happy at the moment.

 

Mine 2019 HSC was neutered yesterday. I charged it last night...to 80% and the range was a whopping 206 miles. I'm soooo happy at the moment.

My only charges to 80% which is only 176 miles after they “neutered” it under the guise of replacing a battery module that they said was “lucky for me still under warranty.” Now I have a 176 max miles car. What should I do?

 

What about the charging speed? Is that affected by the H514 recall software update ?

 

I haven’t noticed any charging speed changes. But that 20 percent sure hurts on a trip.

 

I haven’t noticed any charging speed changes. But that 20 percent sure hurts on a trip.

Does the 20% hurt? I wouldn't be charging past 80% anyway, so it is "only" the starting range that it affected

 

I read today that LG is building 2 battery plants in the US soon. One of them will make big cylindrical cells. & one of them will make batteries for Mach Es. They did not mention if this Ford supporting plant will be making the contained pouch cells or cylindrical cells.

 

Cylindrical cell batteries are going to Rivian for the R2.

 

Second recall letter received stating software available and appointments can be made.

 

Let us know what they give you for a peak, if you get it. If I was not tripped to 72% now, I would not get it!

 

Jaguar version of second letter filed with NHTSA.

https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2024/RIONL-24V633-7017.pdf

 

I am currently talking to lawyers. They have jerked me around for so long about a buyback of our 2019 first edition which has been a nightmare just to reject again. They told me there are no escalation points at this point. I am talking to lawyers anyone interested in joining the lawsuit let me know.

 

I got a letter from Jaguar today which indicates the H514 resolution is a software update.

 

are they saying the resolution is the current software update where it cant fully charge or there is another update