Shimano BT-E8035 Integrated Battery Issue: very fast degrading and loss of range

[chtabajara]

Firmware 1.0.0
14 cycles 90% health

Oficial shimano app.

 

[Gary]

it seems that the drop in the number happens every 10 cycles.

My battery has 161 charge cycles and 84% health
Using your logic it would now read 75% (10% drop after the first 10 cycles and a further 1% for each subsequent ten cycles?).

In the past users of the firsts speshhh Turbo Levo reported a similar problem, which was corrected through a firmware update, perhaps this is the case.

in which case wouldn't you think a firmware "fix" would only alter how the batteries health reading was interpreted by the software and displayed to the user? Or are you saying Specialized magically "fixed" how quickly the battery physically deteriorates over it's lifespan with a download?
?

 

[Zimmerframe]

@chtabajara I think Spesh just got fed up with all the dentists panicking because they could see their battery degrading and started jumping up and down demanding replacements .. So the fix wasn't actually a firmware fix, it was just a change in Mission Control where it always just showed the battery health at 100%. They've now rectified that so it shows the correct amount. You could still check in Blevo or other apps to see what your battery health really was, but at least it stopped the masses panicking over something that was just normal battery degradation.

 

[chtabajara]

My battery has 161 charge cycles and 84% health
Using your logic it would now read 75% (10% drop after the first 10 cycles and a further 1% for each subsequent ten cycles?).


in which case wouldn't you think a firmware "fix" would only alter how the batteries health reading was interpreted by the software and displayed to the user? Or are you saying Specialized magically "fixed" how quickly the battery physically deteriorates over it's lifespan with a download?
?

In my opinion, the problem is only in the number being displayed and not really a physical problem in the batteries, because despite the 10% drop in the number I did not notice a loss of autonomy.

Being a problem only in the number or real problem, shimano should assume and solve this.

 

[chtabajara]

@chtabajara I think Spesh just got fed up with all the dentists panicking because they could see their battery degrading and started jumping up and down demanding replacements .. So the fix wasn't actually a firmware fix, it was just a change in Mission Control where it always just showed the battery health at 100%. They've now rectified that so it shows the correct amount. You could still check in Blevo or other apps to see what your battery health really was, but at least it stopped the masses panicking over something that was just normal battery degradation.

I have to agree.

 

[chtabajara]

@Gary please,

Tell us how your battery's autonomy is with 160 cycles. With that amount of cycles, yes, you should notice a loss of autonomy, but then I think it would be normal. Now, what is strange are other people here on the forum with a battery of 30 cycles and noticing a real loss in autonomy.

 

[Gary]

Being a problem only in the number or real problem, shimano should assume and solve this

[This thread]

Assumption...

Vs Reality...

 

[Zimmerframe]

It's always possible that some people just get unlucky and get a battery with a bad batch of cells - even one cell can have a huge impact if it goes. As Chris from Berkshire cycles was saying the other day, they'd suddenly had problems with levo batteries - so a bad batch of cells.

@nosenada's situation is really unusual though. Unfortunately, with that pattern, if you were Shimano - you'd be thinking that with the thousands of people with no issues, for someone to have that it must be something they're doing. Like charging when the battery's still hot for instance (that's just an example).

I think the problem with this thead is that the OP is trying to prove an intrinsic problem exists. Where as in reality, for the majority of people - there isn't a problem. Which ultimately proves that there isn't an intrinsic problem, only isolated incidents. For those people this will be incredibly frustrating, but it's also possible they might need to take a step back and check first that it's not actually something they're doing which is causing the problem. Something they do, which they've not even considered could cause the issue - or they are just unlucky. Realistically, it will be a mix of the two.

My Spesh battery dropped quite quickly to 90%, but has stayed there forever. My Shimano was the same. The Shimano batteries are actually configured to be the safest in theory, being really inefficient in terms of what energy they make available to the user in order to extend longevity.

 

[Gary]

Tell us how your battery's autonomy is with 160 cycles.

 

[chtabajara]

It's always possible that some people just get unlucky and get a battery with a bad batch of cells - even one cell can have a huge impact if it goes. As Chris from Berkshire cycles was saying the other day, they'd suddenly had problems with levo batteries - so a bad batch of cells.

@nosenada's situation is really unusual though. Unfortunately, with that pattern, if you were Shimano - you'd be thinking that with the thousands of people with no issues, for someone to have that it must be something they're doing. Like charging when the battery's still hot for instance (that's just an example).

I think the problem with this thead is that the OP is trying to prove an intrinsic problem exists. Where as in reality, for the majority of people - there isn't a problem. Which ultimately proves that there isn't an intrinsic problem, only isolated incidents. For those people this will be incredibly frustrating, but it's also possible they might need to take a step back and check first that it's not actually something they're doing which is causing the problem. Something they do, which they've not even considered could cause the issue - or they are just unlucky. Realistically, it will be a mix of the two.

My Spesh battery dropped quite quickly to 90%, but has stayed there forever. My Shimano was the same. The Shimano batteries are actually configured to be the safest in theory, being really inefficient in terms of what energy they make available to the user in order to extend longevity.

It certainly makes sense, but what leaves me in doubt is that people you know, all with the same battery, are showing the same pattern described.

All of them, are from different places in Brazil, are they all making the same mistake or was it a batch of defective batteries?

Another friend with an 8010 battery ran for 3 thousand km and had a loss (in the application) of only 4% in 1 year of use, which for me is real and acceptable.

 

[Gary]

Milan didn't even bother to ask which motor firmware any of our batteries have been using.

 

[chtabajara]

Gary, you behave like a fourth grader. If you have nothing to add besides your sarcasm and think this post is stupid, just go and have sex with someone and don't spend your time here.

 

[Gary]

I also don't know why anyone is even valuing mileage in this thread.
1000 Scottish winter miles is a hell of a lot more battery consumption than 1000 dry Brazillian miles.
and then you also have elevation and rider weight to take into account.

 

[Zimmerframe]

Milan didn't even bother to ask which motor firmware any of our batteries have been using.

Or which motors ..

 

[Gary]

I've no idea what a 4th grader even is.

I think you need to lighten up a little

 

[chtabajara]

Or which motors ..

Of those 3 people I mentioned.

2 running on e8000
1 running on the e7000

 

[R120]

I still think how the Data is displayed is a big problem, or rather there is a software issue across the whole Shimano system whereby what the system tells whatever app or device you are using to display the battery health, doesn't stack up with the real world range.

There ar defintiely a few dodgy batteries out there, but the way the data is presented is pretty useless in the first place.

 

[Milan]

Gary said that my pointless stats are just worthless. As @chtabajara said Gary is a fourth grader. Here it means that your assumptions and the way you lead your life is appalling. When you go and buy some food, you end up buying the cheapest one and not very good quality. The next day, you follow the same pattern. I assume it means that you feed s… and as a result you talk s…In Brasil, the picture may be even worse or something different. Gary, you either start helping in this thread or you get lost. If you really are fed some s…., buy some proper food and forget about us. Really, unless you are the owner of this whole forum, I will raise an issue with the forum soon because you have been filling it with lots of ambiguous responses that lead nowhere. And true, I have asked people fill it with lots of stats that to you are found pointless, worthless. You have shown everyone around that you like to be glorified, something like a ‘godlike’ figure. But you are not, you have just been wasting our time and have shown you are an arrogant male who has got 423 points and 7,900 score and think this is so cool and makes you visible. I meet these guys like you everyday when delivering food to people. They never question, they are the smart asses that have figured out the world for everyone. If you know something specific about this bug of BT-E8035, LET US ALL KNOW, but spare us of your patronizing responses. You can lead us out from the darkness and provide SOME REASONABLE INFO, that, of course, we lame ones do not have because, like myself, we know nothing about the battery architecture and I dare raise the issue not having kept myself for the last century in the books to learn about the THE TRUE STORY of the Shimano BT-E8035 battery. So far, your contributions, which you have asked of me to make, are completely worthless and you have not helped the thread much. Hey YOU out there in the darkness can you see me? Do you want to help us or bug us? Let me please know. If you do not want to help, I will ask the ebike forum to ban you from here (they will most likely do not ban you from here as you have so far been presenting an opinion in a PC way) but it would be so great not have you here. Gary, take a rest, why don’t you just pick some easier topics where you can really help people with their issues and send them Simpson pics?

 

[Milan]

Or which motors ..

Hm, never thought this would be a motor related as I have seen elsewhere that this degradation is present with both, 7000 and 8000. Not sure how this is coming with EP8. As a result, I think it has nothing to do with the motor.

 

[Milan]

I still think how the Data is displayed is a big problem, or rather there is a software issue across the whole Shimano system whereby what the system tells whatever app or device you are using to display the battery health, doesn't stack up with the real world range.

There ar defintiely a few dodgy batteries out there, but the way the data is presented is pretty useless in the first place.

Dodgy batteries, fine, let's just rule them out. Bad batches of batteries that have some cells corrupt, let's rule them out too. It is hard to convice you guys that my 76 km range actually means your 94 km minus 18 km which in the end means that you most likely ride around 45 to 50 km and me 30 to 35. The figure of 76 is not artificial, it tells you the health or capacity. The more you waste it/drain it, the sooner you get close to something like 25 km.

 

[Milan]

Hello Emtbforums,

I have been trying to compile stats on the faulty BT-E8035 but I get this Gary who never helps and responds with ambiguous posts as he thinks he is the one to know better than the others. Could you please start moderating this thread or ban him from the thread? He has pointed out that the info I have solicited is pointless and I should study in depth to understand better the architecture of the battery. I like the style and the wording of his, it makes me laugh from time to time but it leads nowhere, his remarks are pointless. Could you please offer him some more appealing topics?

 

[Gary]

The numerical range value figure shown on your bike's shimano display means very little.
it's an estimated figure that re-calibrates as you ride based on how quickly the battery depletes/how much assistance is being output and which modes you are using.
it doesn't know how your bike is set up, the weight of it or the resistance from your tyres.
It doesn't know who you are. ie. how heavy you are or how you ride.
and it doesn't know either the elevation profile of your ride or the terrain or conditions.
It is simply a rough guide. and no Emtb battery can get you anywhere near the distance range you are suggesting on an actual mtb ride with hills.

Now please stop crying. The most pointless thing here is not me replying but your unfounded claims. Especially if all they are based on is you feeling hard done by for not getting a 76km riding range from a 500wh Shimano battery.
In an actual hilly area most riders would be lucky to get a 30km range.

Fair enough if you want to collate the data. But to reeling off paragraph after paragraph of unfounded bias speel claiming a fault you have absolutely no proof of before that data is collated is really not the way to go about it.

 

[urastus]

Hello Emtbforums,

I have been trying to compile stats on the faulty BT-E8035 but I get this Gary who never helps and responds with ambiguous posts as he thinks he is the one to know better than the others. Could you please start moderating this thread or ban him from the thread? He has pointed out that the info I have solicited is pointless and I should study in depth to understand better the architecture of the battery. I like the style and the wording of his, it makes me laugh from time to time but it leads nowhere, his remarks are pointless. Could you please offer him some more appealing topics?

Perhaps you could stay on topic yourself if you do want answers? If you don't like a person's input you can hit "ignore" rather than try to squash or control the forum. If you're not getting the answers you want, well, consensus is a rare thing.

In your original post: "I am just sadly trying to inform all owners of BT-E8035 that we all have the same problem and the way out is to gather evidence/stats and provide this information to Shimano to resolve this". It looks as though (me included) that not everyone agrees with you - I don't believe that I have this problem. My battery range is similar (almost identical) to a friend who rides a fairly equivalent giant in similar modes on the same rides. I don't doubt that you might have a problem.

 

[Milan]

The numerical range value figure shown on your bike's shimano display means very little.
it's an estimated figure that re-calibrates as you ride based on how quickly the battery depletes/how much assistance is being output and which modes you are using.
it doesn't know how your bike is set up, the weight of it or the resistance from your tyres.
It doesn't know who you are. ie. how heavy you are or how you ride.
and it doesn't know either the elevation profile of your ride or the terrain or conditions.
It is simply a rough guide. and no Emtb battery can get you anywhere near the distance range you are suggesting on an actual mtb ride with hills.

Now please stop crying. The most pointless thing here is not me replying but your unfounded claims. Especially if all they are based on is you feeling hard done by for not getting a 76km riding range from a 500wh Shimano battery.
In an actual hilly area most riders would be lucky to get a 30km range.

Fair enough if you want to collate the data. But to reeling off paragraph after paragraph of unfounded bias speel claiming a fault you have absolutely no proof of before that data is collated is really not the way to go about it.

OK, will stop crying and wait what stats might come this way. Thanks for your input.

 

[Milan]

Perhaps you could stay on topic yourself if you do want answers? If you don't like a person's input you can hit "ignore" rather than try to squash or control the forum. If you're not getting the answers you want, well, consensus is a rare thing.

In your original post: "I am just sadly trying to inform all owners of BT-E8035 that we all have the same problem and the way out is to gather evidence/stats and provide this information to Shimano to resolve this". It looks as though (me included) that not everyone agrees with you - I don't believe that I have this problem. My battery range is similar (almost identical) to a friend who rides a fairly equivalent giant in similar modes on the same rides. I don't doubt that you might have a problem.

From now on, I will try ignoring, it makes lots of sense. Thanks.

 

[Zimmerframe]

@Milan

I don't think you're making this easy on yourself.

You have a theory that the 8035 is no good, your words and conclusions were more severe, but I'll simplify.

You're now trying to gather evidence to prove this. Except, instead, all you're actually doing is discounting anything or anyone which doesn't fit with your theory in order to bend the facts to make them fit.

For instance, you're hoping to obtain similar stats from other people with the same problem. In almost 1000 views, which is only generally going to be anyone interested in the 8035, only two people have come up with remotely similar issues. Yes, others have commented, either out of amazement at what your proposing or to try to help you consider other options or at least set about looking at the whole picture to try to work out what's really going on. Doesn't this give you some basic data to prove that the vast majority of people with the 8035 DON'T have this issue ?

Hm, never thought this would be a motor related as I have seen elsewhere that this degradation is present with both, 7000 and 8000. Not sure how this is coming with EP8. As a result, I think it has nothing to do with the motor.

With regard to you discounting the motor. The motor houses the computer which collects and interprets all the data you're talking about. So you need to know which motors in case the fault is data related in how the motor computer is processing the data. You need to know which motor and firmware as it might just be specific to certain firmwares. It might be certain motors or certain firmwares which cause the 8035 to draw more power than it's designed and cause battery degradation ? The 8035 doesn't a direct on the bike charge port - could there be a hardware/software issue with the external charge ports ? (keeping in mind that even the mode selector switches have firmware on the Steps system).

Dodgy batteries, fine, let's just rule them out. Bad batches of batteries that have some cells corrupt, let's rule them out too. It is hard to convice you guys that my 76 km range actually means your 94 km minus 18 km which in the end means that you most likely ride around 45 to 50 km and me 30 to 35. The figure of 76 is not artificial, it tells you the health or capacity. The more you waste it/drain it, the sooner you get close to something like 25 km.

How can you perform an investigation into proving something when you then just discount half the data which might prove there is a problem/ might prove there isn't a problem but also gives you another baseline to work alongside. For instance you might conclude something like "we've found 5% suffer from faulty cell induced issues, but an additional 7% have some other unidentified fault .. ???"

Ultimately, you're massively oversimplifying the way your going about trying to prove something. Riders, how they ride and what terrain they ride will also make a vast difference on range, which will also have a bearing on the loadings the battery is under. I can flatten my Kenevo in less than 10km on the right trails in Turbo and I'm less than 70 kg's.

I still have no idea what you mean when you keep saying waste it ... ? You don't waste it, you use it ? On some motors, the wrong cadence will result in the motor running considerably hotter, so yes, then you're wasting it as you're converting your battery power to heat.

 

[urastus]

From now on, I will try ignoring, it makes lots of sense. Thanks.

Did you know, if you click on a person's name, there is an option for "ignore".

 

[Gary]

B.. B.. But Milan said he liked me

I've probably said more than I needed to on this now anyway.

 

[Milan]

B.. B.. But Milan said he liked me

I've probably said more than I needed to on this now anyway.

I still do like you, the time to ignore you has not come yet and I hope it never will

 

[Milan]

@Milan

I don't think you're making this easy on yourself.

You have a theory that the 8035 is no good, your words and conclusions were more severe, but I'll simplify.

You're now trying to gather evidence to prove this. Except, instead, all you're actually doing is discounting anything or anyone which doesn't fit with your theory in order to bend the facts to make them fit.

For instance, you're hoping to obtain similar stats from other people with the same problem. In almost 1000 views, which is only generally going to be anyone interested in the 8035, only two people have come up with remotely similar issues. Yes, others have commented, either out of amazement at what your proposing or to try to help you consider other options or at least set about looking at the whole picture to try to work out what's really going on. Doesn't this give you some basic data to prove that the vast majority of people with the 8035 DON'T have this issue ?



With regard to you discounting the motor. The motor houses the computer which collects and interprets all the data you're talking about. So you need to know which motors in case the fault is data related in how the motor computer is processing the data. You need to know which motor and firmware as it might just be specific to certain firmwares. It might be certain motors or certain firmwares which cause the 8035 to draw more power than it's designed and cause battery degradation ? The 8035 doesn't a direct on the bike charge port - could there be a hardware/software issue with the external charge ports ? (keeping in mind that even the mode selector switches have firmware on the Steps system).



How can you perform an investigation into proving something when you then just discount half the data which might prove there is a problem/ might prove there isn't a problem but also gives you another baseline to work alongside. For instance you might conclude something like "we've found 5% suffer from faulty cell induced issues, but an additional 7% have some other unidentified fault .. ???"

Ultimately, you're massively oversimplifying the way your going about trying to prove something. Riders, how they ride and what terrain they ride will also make a vast difference on range, which will also have a bearing on the loadings the battery is under. I can flatten my Kenevo in less than 10km on the right trails in Turbo and I'm less than 70 kg's.

I still have no idea what you mean when you keep saying waste it ... ? You don't waste it, you use it ? On some motors, the wrong cadence will result in the motor running considerably hotter, so yes, then you're wasting it as you're converting your battery power to heat.

Thanks for your contributions, I think I am already seeing a different picture. Not very clear but perhaps it will be the baseline for more grounded assumptions regarding this issue on my part. I meant draining or flattening, sorry.