[BUG] [Max 5x] Weekly usage limit reset day drifts forward each week (window exceeds 7 days)

Open 💬 3 comments Opened Jun 17, 2026 by Jeff667698989

Summary

On Claude Max (5x), the weekly usage limit reset day keeps shifting forward (roughly one day per week) instead of holding a fixed weekday or a clean 7-day / 168-hour cadence. The displayed "Resets ..." time moves further into the future as I keep using Claude, so each cycle runs longer than 7 days and the reset never stabilizes.

Environment

  • Plan: Max (5x)
  • Surfaces: claude.ai + Claude Code (+ Desktop) — shared weekly limit per the Help Center
  • Counter affected: "Weekly limits — All models"

Observed behavior

  • The reset anchor creeps forward across consecutive weeks (same Wed → Thu → Fri pattern as the closed reports below).
  • Current snapshot (screenshot attached): Max (5x), "All models" 93% used, "Resets Fri 4:00 PM".
  • Net effect: the window exceeds 168 hours; the reset date is never stable.

Expected behavior

A "weekly" limit should not exceed 7 days. The reset point should be predictable — either a fixed weekday or a clean 168-hour window anchored to one fixed point — and should not recompute forward on every new session. If forward drift is intentional, the public Help Center should document the exact mechanism: the current article (support.claude.com/en/articles/11647753) does not describe how the weekly reset is anchored.

Impact

An unpredictable, ever-receding reset makes it impossible to plan heavy work sessions around a known reset point. As a daily heavy Claude Code user this directly disrupts scheduling.

Requested fix

Either (a) correct the calculation so the weekly window stays <= 7 days and stops drifting forward, or (b) document the real mechanism in the Help Center so behavior and docs match. Also: show the fixed anchor / exact next-reset timestamp in /usage.

Related (all currently closed as not planned / stale)

  • #54974 (Max, Wed→Thu→Fri)
  • #55150 (Max 5x, Thu→Sat, 8d12h cycle)
  • #49616, #52921

Filing fresh because the above are closed/stale and the behavior persists.

View original on GitHub ↗

This issue has 3 comments on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗