I’m experiencing similar issues with inaccurate display of received and transmitted power and runtime predictions. How can you help?
EL100V22526000873526
ARM v2186.15
DSP v2200.14
BMS v1083.07
1 Like
@BLUETTI_CARE tested the 1083.10, and I have some good news: almost everything is finally fixed!
Some details:
-
AC discharge with no load - SOC at 73% after 24 hours (55% before). The percentage drop is not rapid, like it was (3-4% per hour), and is very linear.
-
Discharge with small loads - see pic below. I did the same - electric blanket set to 40 watts for 8hrs 7mins. Output, SOC, time remaining — it’s a day and night difference!
-
Output reading: now, here’s the problem - it’s not quite there yet. I feel like loads under 50W are displayed as active power, but beyond that is still apparent power, because 60W becomes 75W on the display (it was 97W before, tho), and a 130W fridge is ~200W.
Nevertheless, the SOC reading is not the ravings of a madman now, and pretty accurate, time remaining too, and the unit is more or less usable now.
I’m planning to send it to my relative in the next 10 days, so the burden of further feedback now must fall to someone else.
Also, people from my country are buying these en masse and have started noticing all of that too. You better release this BMS version in bulk, or you’ll face massive returns/negative feedback pretty soon (at least in my country, looks like no one cares in the US lmao).
Now, the billion dollar question: was it really that hard to do all of this before the release? Do I look like someone who loves to do your job for free?
2 Likes
Hi @lavash_bluetti, thank you for contacting us.
I have now applied to our IT department to upgrade your system. They will push the latest version of the firmware to your unit within 24 hours.
Please upgrade the firmware tomorrow. Do not connect any devices during the upgrade process.
1 Like
Hi @VSM, Thank you for sharing the test data—this information is extremely valuable. We have also passed along this good news to the technical department.
Regarding your suggestion, we believe only a small number of users have encountered this issue, so we currently have no plans for a mass release. However, we will conduct further analysis and confirm our future plans.
We did conduct extensive testing before the product launch. That said, this particular issue did not arise during our tests, and we believe its occurrence is accidental. I appreciate your kind understanding.
1 Like
You’re misjudging the scale of the problem. The fact that only 4-5 users have complained isn’t indicative of its scale. Only a few people register on the forum and search for it. Simply compare the number of stations sold per year with the number of forum registrations and messages from unique users per year. This ratio will help you assess the scale of the problem. And if you multiply the number of users who noticed and responded by this ratio, you’ll understand the scale of the problem. A good service should respond to every request promptly and evaluate it not by the number of similar requests but by the nature of the request. Rather than waiting for a deluge of requests from others, it should promptly investigate, develop a solution, and implement it. Only then can you maintain and strengthen your reputation.
1 Like
Hi @BLUETTI_CARE! The firmware arrived, I installed it. Thank you. There’s still something wrong with the wattage display; there are significant differences between the readings on the station screen and the wattmeter. But sometimes they match. Moreover, I connected different loads. It’s difficult to understand the relationship. For example, I have a router and 5 identical LED bulbs.
Results.
- One router works. Station -9 watts, Wattmeter -8.93 watts. - Excellent.
- Add 2 LED bulbs (approximately 5 watts each = +10 watts). Station -19 watts, Wattmeter -18.39 watts. - Excellent.
- Add 3 more LED bulbs (also 5 watts each = +15 watts). Station -70 watts (???), Wattmeter -32.91 watts. How the station shows 70 watts is beyond me. I’m attaching a photo.
Maybe the developers will take the trouble to run these basic tests themselves.
I don’t see the point in delving into the projected battery life; we need to figure out the power consumption first.
Hi @lavash_bluetti, Thank you for your testing—this data is extremely valuable. We have already fed all this information back to the R&D department.
We will contact you as soon as we receive a response.
1 Like
Hi @lavash_bluetti, we have now received a response. For the Elite 100 V2, the screen will display the apparent power when the apparent power of the load exceeds 50W.
When the apparent power of the load is less than 50W, the screen will show the active power.
Your power meter should be displaying the active power, which causes the numerical difference under different power conditions.
When your power meter shows 32.91W (i.e., the active power is 32.91W), the apparent power at this time has already exceeded 50W—hence the Elite 100 V2 displays the apparent power.
Thank you for your reply. I tried to understand this proposal, but I don’t understand how it works. I’ll try to explain it with an abstract example. Imagine your car’s speedometer displays speeds up to 50 km/h in the European format (km/h), and above that in the American format (mph). Something like that works. I hope that in the future, power will be displayed uniformly on the charging station screen. I would limit it to only the active power component.
@BLUETTI_CARE It seems that you are not giving up and keep doubling down, huh.
I’ll keep it simple: an average user does not need to know the apparent power of their appliances.
We are not electrical engineers or utility providers, and we do not deal with complex electrical systems.
We just plug in our computers and fridges into your portable powerbank.
Geniuses who thought it was a good idea to display apparent power in such simple and non-professional product should be fired or chewed out at least. Especially considering that none of the other Bluetti (and other brands) products do this, and no one needs this.
Make the power display logic match other units, f.e, AC180, and never do that again.
1 Like
Hi @BLUETTI_CARE
Same issue posiibly
EL100V22526000353216
ARM v2186.15
DSP v2200.14
BMS v1083.07
I just checked with the wattmeter:
AC load = 50W (wattmeter in grid AC outlet)
AC output = 50W (wattmeter in Bluetti Elit 100 V2 AC outlet)
Bluetti Elit 100 V2 display output = 82W
Can it be fixed?
What real time on battery I’ll have with 50W AC load for example?
Thank you
Hi @BLUETTI_CARE
Just repeated the test with the same load on my AC180P:
AC load = 50W (wattmeter in grid AC outlet)
AC output = 50W (wattmeter in Bluetti AC180P AC outlet)
Bluetti AC180P display AC output = 50W
Can we have something like this on Elite 100 V2?
Thank you!
Hi @tempal, The output display logic of the Elite 100 V2 differs from that of the AC180P.
Display Logic Details
- Elite 100 V2: When the apparent power exceeds 50W, the LCD screen shows apparent power. When it is less than 50W, the screen displays active power.
-
AC180P: When the apparent power exceeds 200W, the LCD screen shows apparent power. When it is less than 200W, the screen displays active power.
This is why the displayed output power differs between the Elite 100 V2 and the AC180P. Please rest assured that the different display methods do not affect usage. In fact, your load only consumes 50W of active power, and the additional 32W is reactive power—this does not mean the Elite 100 V2 uses more power than the AC180P.
Currently, we do not have a dedicated firmware to modify this display logic. However, we have a new firmware that can improve abnormal power loss if you encounter this issue. Please confirm if you need to upgrade your Elite 100 V2.
Then MAKE. ONE.
Do you even read previous replies? We are going in circles here.
Hi @BLUETTI_CARE. Why is the remaining time displayed incorrectly even with a low DC output load? It’s impossible for the remaining time to be 99 hours 54 minutes with a 23W load.
EL100V22527011595346
ARM v2186.15
DSP v2200.14
BMS v1083.07
Hi @vlad_n, We’ve applied for the rollout of the new firmware.
Please upgrade your device after receiving BMS v1083.09, then recalibrate it before conducting the test.
We hope this helps.
You’re providing false information. I don’t understand why, but what you’ve written is untrue. Perhaps you’re doing this because you don’t understand how it works and believe the false information given to you by technicians. Alternatively, you know how it works and are trying to deceive users. In any case, it’s regrettable and disappointing.
The fact is that without counting the amount of energy entering and leaving the battery, you can’t tell how much energy is in a LIfepo4 battery. That’s because the calculation algorithm works, which means it can be changed and calculated differently.
You can continue to resist and deny reasoned claims regarding the data displayed on the Bluetti Elite 100 V2 screen.
And what will you do when the consumer contacts the Consumer Protection Centers (Verbraucherzentralen) in Germany?
Believe me, they’ll quickly find the precision instruments and most likely impose a sales ban on the model and very hefty fines. And then other EU members repeat the same thing. Do you want to check this or will you still fix the problem?
1 Like
Just want to ensure that this deleted response from Bluetti remains here.
@BLUETTI_CARE Display logic CAN be fixed through software updates, because you already did that.
As I said here, 40w load was 64w before the update, now it’s 40w as it should. It displayed apparent power no matter the load, but now it displays active power if VA is under 50W. All you need to do is expand this threshold from 50 to 200 or so, like in any other Bluetti model.
So everything you said in the deleted reply is total BS. And yes, I agree with @lavash_bluetti , you deserve to get fined. If this is a hill you want to die on, so be it.
Hi @BLUETTI_CARE !
Let’s get back to the problem and I’ll try to explain why displaying total power is an error.
I don’t want to write a lot of theory here; read this explanation of active and reactive power.
https://www.google.com/search?q=What+is+active+and+reactive+power%3F&oq=What+is+active+and+reactive+power%3F&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIJCAEQABgTGIAEMgkIAhAAGBMYgAQyCggDEAAYExgWGB4yCggEEAAYExgWGB4yCggFEAAYExgWGB4yCggGEAAYExgWGB4yCggHEAAYExgWGB4yCggIEAAYExgWGB4yCggJEAAYExgWGB7SAQg5MDNqMGoxNagCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
If you’ve read a bit of the theory, I’ll tell you why this is an error.
-
The charging station display itself says “WATT,” which means it should only display ACTIVE power, which is measured in WATTS. - Is that clear?
-
Look at two photos with the same load on two stations: an AC180 and an Elite 100V2. The load is LED lighting (LED bulbs only). The difference is obvious. - Make it like the AC180!!!
-
Now, why is it practically more convenient to see active power? We use active power in our everyday lives. We know that a lamp uses 10 watts, a refrigerator uses about 100 watts, and so on. And so, when you have no power for 15 hours a day and you use a charging station, you always look at the station display and estimate the load, mentally adding up all the devices turned on, wondering if you’ve turned on anything unnecessary. And the figure of 115 watts in the example photo raises questions – where does it come from if only the LED lighting is on? Why do I need to know the reactive power???
Let me give you a simple, abstract example. When you’re driving, do you look at the speedometer? You see 50 km/h there, but the speed limit signs on the road are also in km/h.
So imagine that the car manufacturer decided to display your speedometer not as your ground speed, but as your sun speed, while the signs on the side of the road remain ground speed.
So, do you understand the problem?
