Tesla Supercharger Issue MG5 LR

[Verdigris]

No Tesla upgrade for me, then. Just have to hope that the "Tesla effect" will drag down prices from other providers.

 

[tlps]

I’ve got an appointment today at dealer for my early September 21 LR. Dealer mentioned the conflicting information from MG & that they can only tell if software upgradable by getting car in and checking. So, should know by lunchtime.

Good luck. Once the update is applied, it may say ‘EVCC update required’ or similar. It would also say ‘complete’ against the update.

The information is now live on "TRIP" (MG's internal workshop manual tool)

The basics are that all Long Range MG5 should have the correct hardware. All that is required is a software update, which is chargeable by the dealership as MG have said this is classed as an enhancement rather than a warranty fault.

The only vehicles that will need hardware updates are the MK1 ZSEV and the Standard Range MG5.

This requires a replacement EVCC, part number - 11505199 - RRP: £220.71 + VAT.
Indicative labour time for replacement of this part is 1 hour + coding

View attachment 27242


(MCE = Mid-Cycle Enhancement = Facelift model)

Still not 100% correct. Mine is 11313393 and was the one updated my MG dealership who then told MGUK technical it could be done.

 

[biffo]

My 09/21 MG5 LR

Good luck. Once the update is applied, it may say ‘EVCC update required’ or similar. It would also say ‘complete’ against the update.

update applied to my LR from early September 2021. Working fine now ?

 

[Coulomb]

EDIT: also found:
EVCC-02 10971602
EVCC-02 11170476
EVCC-01 10947807

Evidence that suggests the latter was fitted to both the 5 and ZS at times. It was also apparently from a 2022 Exclusive, which would discount that the EVCC-01 was fitted to the SR alone.

I can confirm that my MG ZS EV Mark 1, Australian model, has the EVCC-01 10947807 fitted (date code 201209).

Do you know anything about this one's compatibility? Being a -01 when all the others are -02 sounds ominous.

 

[Rookery]

My 09/21 MG5 LR

update applied to my LR from early September 2021. Working fine now ?

Excellent there is hope for mine also.?

 

[Alslad]

Still not 100% correct. Mine is 11313393 and was the one updated my MG dealership who then told MGUK technical it could be done.

I hope they do update the bulletin - mine is that number too. I would be shocked if it hadn't been compatible given mine is an October 22 car. Waiting until service in October to ask for update and hopefully MG will have finished all the faffing about. Like others, this experience of MG handling the issue so badly/inconsistently has put me off considering the brand when I am ready for another car

 

[Green Salop Man]

The information is now live on "TRIP" (MG's internal workshop manual tool)

The basics are that all Long Range MG5 should have the correct hardware. All that is required is a software update, which is chargeable by the dealership as MG have said this is classed as an enhancement rather than a warranty fault.

The only vehicles that will need hardware updates are the MK1 ZSEV and the Standard Range MG5.

This requires a replacement EVCC, part number - 11505199 - RRP: £220.71 + VAT.
Indicative labour time for replacement of this part is 1 hour + coding

View attachment 27242


(MCE = Mid-Cycle Enhancement = Facelift model)

With regard to the Mk1 preFL two of the three quoted EVCC part numbers appear to be incorrect. Rather than 11182838 and 11313398 shouldn’t it be 11182835 and 11313393?
It really does beggars belief that even now, after multiple revisions MG UK still cannot get it right!

 

[Les burrows]

Hi these numbers that are being quoted as being wrong can you please explain where they are coming from and where owners might be able to check what is fitted in their cars.
Miles has posted what MG I presume have stated or have sent him so why are you saying they are wrong do please enlighten us.
Les

 

[Coulomb]

where owners might be able to check what is fitted in their cars.

It's straightforward, but awkward (at least in my case). You take a photo or video of the front of the EVCC. It seems to often be located near the negative lead of the auxiliary (12 V) battery.

This post has photos for an MG ZS EV:

MG ZS missing V2L function

I got the impression that V2L on the MK 2 (refresh) ZSEV model had been officially deprecated - as all trace of it seemed to be removed from the recent specs, as noted by a previous poster. it’s a shame, as it was a feature that would come in very handy for me and one of the features that swayed...

www.mgevs.com

I found it near impossible to take a photo with my phone, so I took a video with the LED on, waving it in front of the EVCC a bit. I was able to pause the video and read the part number.

Rather than 11182838 and 11313398 shouldn’t it be 11182835 and 11313393?

It could well be that there are many more variants than a small sample of MGs reveals.

But one would hope that the list of part numbers from MG that don't have to be replaced would be exhaustive. Otherwise, people are going to miss out on important functionality, and/or pay a lot of money needlessly. I see that 11182835, the most popular one owners have reported, is one that has successfully Tesla supercharged with only a firmware update, so that is concerning.

Having had a quick look at what the EVCC is likely to have to do, I see that while it looks simple on paper (just a few chips do most of the work), the devil is likely in the detail. For example, when rapid charging, there are high currents flowing, possibly lots of electrical noise from imperfectly smoothed switching regulated power, variations on the way that rapid chargers provide that power and how quickly they react to requests to change that current, and so on. I saw "damping" inductors and resistors, whose exact values would be tricky to predict without a lot of testing. So that could explain the long string of different part numbers for a seemingly "simple" module.

It's also possible that some of the ones that appear to work successfully with just a firmware update might not work in all circumstances. So it could be that MG knows best, having carefully researched the issue.

I mean, that could happen. It's a possible outcome, to slightly mangle one of Elon Musk's famous phrases.

 

[shpub]

Hi these numbers that are being quoted as being wrong can you please explain where they are coming from and where owners might be able to check what is fitted in their cars.
Miles has posted what MG I presume have stated or have sent him so why are you saying they are wrong do please enlighten use.
Les

I collated a list of numbers from here and other sources to get an understanding of what is going on. Those 3 numbers have not appeared on any of the units I and others have documented. On an MG5, the evcc is next to the battery but the label is facing the battery and it is hard to see what is written. I used an endoscope with a mirror to find mine.

Two of them look like typos to be honest.

It could well be that there are many more variants than a small sample of MGs reveals.

Yes I suspect so as well.

But one would hope that the list of part numbers from MG that don't have to be replaced would be exhaustive. Otherwise, people are going to miss out on important functionality, and/or pay a lot of money needlessly. I see that 11182835, the most popular one owners have reported, is one that has successfully Tesla supercharged with only a firmware update, so that is concerning.

Yes that is worrying as well

Having had a quick look at what the EVCC is likely to have to do, I see that while it looks simple on paper (just a few chips do most of the work), the devil is likely in the detail. For example, when rapid charging, there are high currents flowing, possibly lots of electrical noise from imperfectly smoothed switching regulated power, variations on the way that rapid chargers provide that power and how quickly they react to requests to change that current, and so on. I saw "damping" inductors and resistors, whose exact values would be tricky to predict without a lot of testing. So that could explain the long string of different part numbers for a seemingly "simple" module.

The unit has powerline comms which imposes an RF signal onto the CP and PE signals. This requires a lot of filtering hence the inductors etc. The EVCC is located far from the high voltage cables and although the unit is attached to the charging plug, the power lines don't go to it.

It's also possible that some of the ones that appear to work successfully with just a firmware update might not work in all circumstances. So it could be that MG knows best, having carefully researched the issue.

I mean, that could happen. It's a possible outcome, to slightly mangle one of Elon Musk's famous phrases.

Yes it is a possibility but FL cars have had the same EVCC part as on the PFL. They have been upgraded with this software update only. On that basis those FL cars should have had the EVCC replaced.

The 10861617 number appears to be that from an EVCC-01 built before the end of 2019. It was used on the first ZS so why is it being implied that it can be upgradeable. This is very very strange!

The best thing we can do is to collate as many EVCC details as possible: build date and number from the EVCC, car model and build date and has it been upgraded? The more data we can provide as to why this is wrong the better.

 

[tlps]

Even if people can’t see the label on the EVCC, it is relatively easy to take off. There are two 8mm bolts holing it on and is a simple job. If you wanted to remove the 12V battery, taking the EVCC off is part of that process so shouldn’t be an issue.

 

[Green Salop Man]

One would think in this day and age that MG should have a database showing which EVCCs have had their software successfully updated to re-enable Tesla Supercharging. Judging by this latest technical service bulletin they haven't or are not bothering to check it if they have.

As ever with MG they seem to be very secretive and seem unwilling to give owners honest and open information regarding their vehicles. The vibration issue on the MG4 X power is another example. The Tesla Supercharging debacle has been ongoing for eighteen months and lack of communication has only made matters worse for owners.

 

[tlps]

One would think in this day and age that MG should have a database showing which EVCCs have had there software successfully updated to re-enable Tesla Supercharging. Judging by this latest technical service bulletin they haven't or are not bothering to check it if they have.

As ever with MG they seem to be very secretive and seem unwilling to give owners honest and open information regarding their vehicles. The vibration issue on the MG4 X power is another example. The Tesla Supercharging debacle has been ongoing for eighteen months and lack of communication has only made matters worse for owners.

They’ve only just accepted that it can be updated, but they know which is in my vehicle as I told them, then updated them that car had been successfully updated - something they said wasn’t possible.

 

[Rookery]

Even if people can’t see the label on the EVCC, it is relatively easy to take off. There are two 8mm bolts holing it on and is a simple job. If you wanted to remove the 12v battery, taking the EVCC off is part of that process so shouldn’t be an issue.

Yes that's very easy to do much easier than moving the 12V battery. It only took 5 to10 mins to do.

Please see below the label on my EVCC. Hopefully it is updateable.

 

[shpub]

Please see below the label on my EVCC. Hopefully it is updateable.
View attachment 27262

Added to my list. That is the earliest (so far) to have been successfully upgraded!

Current running total in the MG5 lottery:

11170476 11182835 11313393 have been upgraded successfully. Still no sign of the MG list numbers.

The build dates for these range from 210606 to 220621 which does appear to cover most of the MG5 PFL LR.

I think I have found out why MG are quoting "different" build numbers...
Two of the build numbers seem to be a typo but this piece of info from ASRtichy explains things. When is a part number not a part number? When you have a build number, ECU part number, and an ECU hardware reference as well.

We know that 11182835 marked units work but they also have an internal reference number which is 11182838. Yes I have ignored the 01 as a suspect that is a filler for the 8 byte CAN message that reports back this data. So in this case it was successfully upgraded. This implies that the build number is not the same number as MG refer to! This data is only available to MG dealers BTW as Carscanner or Ezs cannot read it.

However there is a number that eZs does read and that is the ECU supplier software revision and that appears to be common to all successful upgrades. If that is the same as your car, good news. If not, there may be issues.

 

[Coulomb]

When is a part number not a part number? When you have a build number, ECU part number, and an ECU hardware reference as well.

Brilliant! I have no idea why they need so many similar-sounding numbers.

At least that removes the concern about typos on the bulletin, although it may still be incomplete.

This data is only available to MG dealers BTW as Carscanner or Ezs cannot read it.

I'm sure that we could read it, IF we knew the appropriate PID to use. It might even be possible to guess it, based on the one that gives the firmware version number(s).

Do we know for sure what the extra number(s) is(are) when eZS is used in landscape mode?

I wish I could find my OBD-II dongle. Sigh.

 

[shpub]

Just found my OBDWan CANobi star wars kit so will be having a look later. One is definitely the ECU supplier firmware revision and the other is a YAPN - (yet another part number) .

Yes I think you are right as we have some cribs to use to find the data. I'll have a think on how we could approach this.

 

[Rookery]

I have emailed MG head office to try and find out the take on this, but I'm not expecting much back.

 

[shpub]

I have emailed MG head office to try and find out the take on this, but I'm not expecting much back.

Probably a good position to take. As you can probably gather, the members on here have been piecing what is reality from limited data and while some of the omens are good, we don't know if there are other factors involved. Thanks for the EVCC info - that is another piece of the jigsaw.

 

[biffo]

This is mine - software updated and confirmed working on 11th June 2024.