[marts4]

Mine refused to go beyond 72% after the warning. Interestingly, the remote app notifies that the charge is complete - albeit to the limited capacity. My desired SoC was still set to above 72% (would have been 80% or 100% - I can’t remember which it was at the time).

I haven’t seen mine for approaching 3 weeks now, still in the Disco!

 

[Bookster]

Yes. Although first time i got thr error car had charged to 100 percent, then refused to charge again until under 72.

IO just notifies you that you did not reach your desired level of charge.

 

[Bookster]

Mine did that, I got the error at a public charger then went home plugged in and got 100%, since then I cannot get past 72%, car drives normally though so its not a big problem. its booked in for the 26th for repair. Will keep you posted.

 

[Geoffham]

I have done 56,000 miles with zero problems, love the car but this weekend I got the traction battery warning, car will charge to 72% and drives normally but what does "OK to drive with caution" mean? can i use it on the motorway? 70 MPH ? Jaguar dealer doesn't seem to know.

2019 IPACE SE in red with oyster

hi ,you may want to check your 12v aux battery. If this is failing then it prompts the warning. Quite a lot of info on the forum.
Hope this helps

 

[Tall Phil]

There was a good diagram showing the number of batteries in a cell and number of cells in the traction battery but I can’t seem to find it.
Anyway, most people seem to quote 72% ish as the battery charge restriction when the fault is detected. Is this just a standard reduction figure or is it associated with one or more duff cells.
Has anyone been told their traction battery has more than one duff cell and was your recharge limit lower or higher than approx 72%?

 

[marts4]

There was a good diagram showing the number of batteries in a cell and number of cells in the traction battery but I can’t seem to find it.
Anyway, most people seem to quote 72% ish as the battery charge restriction when the fault is detected. Is this just a standard reduction figure or is it associated with one or more duff cells.
Has anyone been told their traction battery has more than one duff cell and was your recharge limit lower or higher than approx 72%?

Mine has multiple cells deteriorated (I think they classify 80% as the deterioration health mark). I also read somewhere on another thread (apologies I can’t remember who said it), that up to 7 cells would be replaced, any more and it’s the whole battery. Mine‘s awaiting the whole battery. I have in the back of my mind that there’s about 14 cells, though someone may jump in to correct me. Anyway, I can confirm with mine needing a new battery (so I’m guessing more than 7 deteriorated cells), it was still 72% restricted charge. FYI; dealers send downloaded data to Birmingham (for those in the UK at least) to be analysed. It’s the Birmingham office who then make the decision and instruct the dealers next steps.

 

[Tall Phil]

Marts4. Great info, thanks.
With that many defective cells did your range suffer?

 

[marts4]

Marts4. Great info, thanks.
With that many defective cells did your range suffer?

It most certainly did, that’s an interesting topic…
Prior to the fault (and H441), I had been speaking with the dealer about two key issues;
1) GOM range indicated 209 miles at 100%. We agreed a realistic range should be 240-250.
2) DC chargers (such as IONITY), rarely exceeded 50kW. Actually, I only ever achieved a figure above 50kW just once. We agreed other conditions when the expected kW wasn’t reached, had met the necessary conditions (SoC, temperature, etc.).

When the car went in for H441, a battery health check was also completed to investigate the other symptoms. The results an overall average of 91% health, with the worst cell at 86%. All above the 80% tolerance. So I guess this suggests those health checks aren’t actually a good indicator. As just a few weeks later, I had the fault, and a whole new battery required.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Just to clarify the thing regarding cells. Cells are not replaceable in the IPace battery pack. The cells are sealed inside modules that cannot be opened to replace individual cells. Each module contains 12 cells, arranged as four cells in parallel with three paralleled cell groups connected in series. Only the modules can be replaced, so a module change replaces 12 cells.

I posted some info on the battery here: After 10days H441 - hybrid battery fault and max 72% charge

 

[kermit68]

It most certainly did, that’s an interesting topic…
Prior to the fault (and H441), I had been speaking with the dealer about two key issues;
1) GOM range indicated 209 miles at 100%. We agreed a realistic range should be 240-250.
2) DC chargers (such as IONITY), rarely exceeded 50kW. Actually, I only ever achieved a figure above 50kW just once. We agreed other conditions when the expected kW wasn’t reached, had met the necessary conditions (SoC, temperature, etc.).

When the car went in for H441, a battery health check was also completed to investigate the other symptoms. The results an overall average of 91% health, with the worst cell at 86%. All above the 80% tolerance. So I guess this suggests those health checks aren’t actually a good indicator. As just a few weeks later, I had the fault, and a whole new battery required.

A 91% average SoH with minimun at 86% are quite low figures unless you have very high mileage with repeated high speed charging. Also the fact you could not charge at a power higher than 50kW is very strange. I wonder what is the delta mV among best and worst cell.

I would say that even without H441 your dealer should suspect something was not ok with the HV battery.

 

[Ayepace]

Just to clarify the thing regarding cells. Cells are not replaceable in the IPace battery pack. The cells are sealed inside modules that cannot be opened to replace individual cells. Each module contains 12 cells, arranged as four cells in parallel with three paralleled cell groups connected in series. Only the modules can be replaced, so a module change replaces 12 cells.

I posted some info on the battery here: After 10days H441 - hybrid battery fault and max 72% charge

It's just semantics. People know what is meant although they don't use the exact terminology. In fact, Jaguar refers to them as "cell modules" not just "modules".

 

[marts4]

I was sure the dealer said cells, so “cell modules” makes sense where I picked it up from
My mileage is 67k+ for reference. Even so, you’re right that I knew something was up, the dealer also somewhat agreed. They are just limited in what they can do/ tools at their disposal!

 

[Slartibartfast]

It's just semantics. People know what is meant although they don't use the exact terminology. In fact, Jaguar refers to them as "cell modules" not just "modules".

Sort of, but the diagnostic report is for cells (technically it's for every 4 parallel cell group) so one below par cell group within a cell module means replacement of that module, so 12 cells/3 cell groups will be replaced.

Having seen the work involved in stripping the battery to replace a cell module, and then sealing the pack back up, leak testing it etc, I'm a bit surprised that Jaguar are opting to do this at dealers. Dropping the whole pack is fairly straightforward, as is installing a replacement. I can't help thinking that Jaguar might be better off providing a replacement refurbished pack option, rather than expect dealers to strip the things down and replace modules.

 

[Ayepace]

Consider shipping and storage of complete packs at a worldwide level. In addition the complete replacement traction battery includes BEM and BECM modules. The handling of 36 cell modules (and related parts) to repair 36 separate packs may be less than 36 complete packs for those repairs, as an example. There is a cost-effective breakpoint where the cell module replacement method costs less than whole pack replacement. I suspect the accounting bean counters had a say in determining the limit of 7 failed cell modules.

However, there are complete packs getting replaced with fewer failed cell modules. It may depend on location and availability of parts there, or other factors that JLR takes into account before authorizing one method or the other.

If mine shows up as bad, a complete battery or individual module has to be shipped from the factory in Poland to a port, then by boat to the east coast of the US, then by truck (lorry) about 100 miles to JLR warehouse, then about another 1000 miles by truck to dealer (who doesn't have a large storage area for parts for all JLR products they service). It will take a long time. They won't be shipping lithium-ion batteries (complete packs or cell modules) by air freight. Factor in all the related costs to the decision process.

 

[Volkswarren]

Dealer has had the car for two weeks, they say the gateway was updated last time, not sure which one that was as they said these were the four modules updated. 4 modules BECM, BCCM, BCM & PCM.
They cant see any fault codes and I had to reset the 12v system again, it's no faulted since. They have raised this with JLR UK for tech assistance.

 

[Tall Phil]

It most certainly did, that’s an interesting topic…
Prior to the fault (and H441), I had been speaking with the dealer about two key issues;
1) GOM range indicated 209 miles at 100%. We agreed a realistic range should be 240-250.
2) DC chargers (such as IONITY), rarely exceeded 50kW. Actually, I only ever achieved a figure above 50kW just once. We agreed other conditions when the expected kW wasn’t reached, had met the necessary conditions (SoC, temperature, etc.).

When the car went in for H441, a battery health check was also completed to investigate the other symptoms. The results an overall average of 91% health, with the worst cell at 86%. All above the 80% tolerance. So I guess this suggests those health checks aren’t actually a good indicator. As just a few weeks later, I had the fault, and a whole new battery required.

That's very useful to know. I always thought I was down on range compared to other posters on here as my GOM rarely went above 210-220 miles and I found it difficult getting over 200 miles in real life and that was with employing a considerate driving style.

I suppose the immediate question is whether the defective cell modules can still provide effectively 75% of their electric power when the traction battery, as a whole, is charge limited to 75% (ish)? Or are those defective cell modules producing less power but that difference is being taken up by the "healthy" cell modules?
Another question is why is it safe to charge the defective cell modules, even if it is only to 75%? Isn't the traditional thinking that "bad" batteries shouldn't be mixed with "good" batteries?

 

[Slartibartfast]

The issue here is really about cells that are out of tolerance, rather than cells that are bad, I believe. I think the new firmware loaded into the BMS as a part of the recall is detecting apparent anomalies between cells (really cell groups) that weren't being flagged up before. Whether these anomalies are really "bad cells", or whether they just cells at the edge of the acceptable tolerance range, isn't clear. My gut feeling is that JLR are erring on the side of caution. Their reasons for this aren't known, but I'm guessing that a large part of the cell defect cost is being passed on to LG (who have admitted to having manufacturing defects). There's probably also some element of concern that JLR might be held liable for any loss, injury or death arising from a cell defect, given that the issue is in the public domain, so they cannot claim ignorance.

 

[Tall Phil]

The issue here is really about cells that are out of tolerance, rather than cells that are bad, I believe. I think the new firmware loaded into the BMS as a part of the recall is detecting apparent anomalies between cells (really cell groups) that weren't being flagged up before. Whether these anomalies are really "bad cells", or whether they just cells at the edge of the acceptable tolerance range, isn't clear. My gut feeling is that JLR are erring on the side of caution. Their reasons for this aren't known, but I'm guessing that a large part of the cell defect cost is being passed on to LG (who have admitted to having manufacturing defects). There's probably also some element of concern that JLR might be held liable for any loss, injury or death arising from a cell defect, given that the issue is in the public domain, so they cannot claim ignorance.

Ah, I see now. Not necessarily bad cells but out-of-tolerance. That makes sense.

 

[marts4]

That's very useful to know. I always thought I was down on range compared to other posters on here as my GOM rarely went above 210-220 miles and I found it difficult getting over 200 miles in real life and that was with employing a considerate driving style.

I suppose the immediate question is whether the defective cell modules can still provide effectively 75% of their electric power when the traction battery, as a whole, is charge limited to 75% (ish)? Or are those defective cell modules producing less power but that difference is being taken up by the "healthy" cell modules?
Another question is why is it safe to charge the defective cell modules, even if it is only to 75%? Isn't the traditional thinking that "bad" batteries shouldn't be mixed with "good" batteries?

I can say that mine was using about 1.4 GOM miles, per actual mile travelled. So in reality, it was considerably less than the 209 miles indicated.

 

[Jim Scot]

My I Pace was brand new in May this year (2023). It has the battery traction fault and apparently cell 26 is to be replaced. At that stage it wouldn’t charge beyond 72%. It has been recovered by JLR and has been off the road for nearly 4 weeks, my dealer has 4 from 5 parts required and no eta on the 5th. I have a courted car so still mobile.