Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fred's contacts from Tesla confirm


From the article: "
upload_2017-11-21_16-5-31.png
"
 
  • Like
Reactions: hiroshiy and Yuri_G
This is said with malicious intent, he wants them to fail probably because
He has something to gain . If you are looking for a motive,
Follow the money.

The dude is 85. He's not finessing some sort of secret plan. He's focused on getting up four times every night to pee.

"Going out of business" is an odd thing for Lutz to say. The worst case is that Tesla would go bankrupt and then continue. The balance sheet would be a lot prettier without the non-recourse debt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NicoV
The dude is 85. He's not finessing some sort of secret plan. He's focused on getting up four times every night to pee.

"Going out of business" is an odd thing for Lutz to say. The worst case is that Tesla would go bankrupt and then continue. The balance sheet would be a lot prettier without the non-recourse debt.

Tesla is going out of the car business:
into the solar business.
into the boring business.
into the trucking business.
into the energy storage business.
into the cell phone charger business.

Tesla is going out of business all over the place!
 
A 500 mile pack at 2000 charge cycles provides 1 million miles. The existing NCA chemistry could probably do that, if they are using NMC chemistry used in Powerpacks it's good for 5000 cycles.

One way to accomplish 2 goals would be to have a larger pack than what is chargeable. This would extend the life by never having the battery charge over 90% and never drop below 10% except in emergency situations and speed charging with the battery always charging between 10-90 instead of say 3 and 100%. It would also allow for some degradation as the pack could smartly always allow 500 miles Max charge by opening up those excess miles over time. Could even be smart enough to allow more charge in winter. I believe there are already doing this with the 3 based on EPA numbers which exceed Tesla's but only when you run the car completely out.

As far as I know 1000 is easily doable, so improving to 2000 doesn't seem like a stretch. Aren't there reports of model S going over 300,000 with little degradation? Even with daily Supercharging with Tesloop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gavine
Will Tesla run out of buyers later 2018? My view is we are at the tipping point of EV adoption. If we compare the total cost of ownership, compare the performance, now EV is more compelling than ICEs. As Elon mentioned, Model 3 is the most compelling vehicle on the market.

Going forward, the addressable market is huge, it's the entire ICE market. The thought that Tesla will soon run out of customers is really strange.

The analyst may think most people are not aware of EVs and are not willing to consider EVs. Tesla has a unique sales model to address it: Tesla has no advertisement and dealership, but every Tesla car owner is an effective sales person. This sales force will soon increase from 200,000 to one million, then 2 million... Imagine during weekend parties, one or two people just bought Model 3s, the car will be hotly discussed. The awareness will quickly catch up.

Also, do not underestimate Tesla's Autopilot and self-driving progress. I think the progress on that front will be a real game changer next year.
 
No. Two 400 V packs of X amp hours in parallel or series is the same amount of energy and charge time is not affected.

Energy per pack is the same, but If you take two 100 kWh packs and charge them in series or parallel both charge at the standard rate each, so nett you effectively get two times as much energy in the ‘system’ as one pack.

example case : supercharger site with two cars charging at stall 1 and the other at stall 2.each 120 kW. Works as long as the packs can get rid of the heat instead of transferring heat to each other.
 
Energy per pack is the same, but If you take two 100 kWh packs and charge them in series or parallel both charge at the standard rate each, so nett you effectively get two times as much energy in the ‘system’ as one pack.

example case : supercharger site with two cars charging at stall 1 and the other at stall 2.each 120 kW. Works as long as the packs can get rid of the heat instead of transferring heat to each other.

I think you misunderstood what they were saying. Two packs vs one pack does make a difference. For two packs, series or parallel connection does not make a difference.

Edit: modified pronoun
 
I don't think Tesla Semi has either an energy density or C rate design challenge. I think the design challenge is limiting degradation to enable enough battery cycles needed to do a million miles.

No. Jeffrey Dahl's battery research group has recently doubled (or more) the number of charge/discharge cycles for the type of cell used by Tesla Energy. Since partnering with Tesla earlier this year, its understood they'll be doing the same for Tesla NCA batteries.
Much greater Energy density is the Holy Grail. If tomorrow they found a way to double density, they could get today's range, etc. using 1/2 the cells. That would lower pack costs dramatically, while also reducing the size and weight of the battery pack. It would also advance use of the batteries in aviation and other weight sensitive applications.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Turing
Status
Not open for further replies.