2022 Model Y 4680 Structural Pack is "Amazing", Says Munro & Associates

Munro & Associates has just released an analysis of the structural pack for Tesla's 4680 battery cells, having just received a 2022 Model Y SR from Giga Texas.

In their analysis, Cory Steuben (President of Munro & Associates) and Julian Aytes (lead engineer) found that the car's front seats are directly mounted onto the structural pack itself, making the structural pack essentially the vehicle's floor itself.

"It's absolutely mind-blowing to be standing under a vehicle on a hoist and have absolutely nothing for the floor structure. To truly understand how amazing it is to see a vehicle with no floor and the seats mounted to the top of the structure on the pack, you have to go back more than years, but decades."

(Source: Munro & Associates)

The structural pack, including the seats and other components mounted to it, weighs 1,198 pounds, which is "incredible because in a couple of the other EVs we have, the batteries will weigh twice that. Just the batteries. No seat, no carpet, no trim."

According to Elon Musk, the structural pack is "the right overall architecture from a physics standpoint, but still far from optimized," which seems to be a modest take on the speed of Tesla's design improvements.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1544511999392071680

Despite minor manufacturing issues found by the team, the Giga Press casting machines, noted as the world's largest high-pressure die casting machines, have done an amazing job at astronomically decreasing both parts and complexity for the structure of the chassis itself.

"At Munro & Associates, we've seen the development of the automotive industry for the past 30 to 40 years. I've come from a background of benchmarking vehicles where you'd have hundreds of stamped parts where this front giga casting is, and hundreds of parts in the back. The level of refinement and integration is incredible. Tesla is not waiting to integrate the casting for multiple mounting features."

Overall, these improvements have come from decades of constant work and continuous improvement on Tesla's end, and it is clear to see why Tesla is so ahead of many other manufacturers in terms of vehicle and battery structure.

Steuben mentions that the next goal for their analysis is to remove the battery cover and be able to know how Tesla is securing the 4680 cells themselves and take a look inside the battery pack itself.

The full breakdown and analysis is linked below.

 

[sleepydoc]

Tesla did not promise at the Battery Dat Presentation that the Austin Y's would have a 54% improvement in range over the Fremont Y's. The presentation was specifically about the new battery cell (4680), structural battery pack, and ultimate cost saving per KWH, once all the benefits/improvements are made over the next few years. There was no mention of the Austin Model Y and its range.

Over the next few years or so, once they fully implement all of the 4680 improvements (Cell design - 16%, Anode Material-20%, Cathode Material-4%, Vehicle integration-14%), the range increase will be 54% total. Nothing about what the range of any of the vehicles utilizing the new cells will be. The range of the cars will just depend on how many 4680 cells are used in the battery pack.

Specifically, they said 56% reduction in cost per kWh, 5x energy storage, 6x power and 16% increase in range.

The numbers don't add up quite like people are tying to make them out to. Regardless, a battery cell alone doesn't make 'range.' It's the combination of the total energy stored in the battery pack and the efficiency of the car. If Tesla makes a new battery that stores twice as much energy but puts half as many cells in the car the car will have the same range, just fewer cells.

I would fully expect Tesla to do just that. They advertise and sell the cars with a specific range. Can you imagine what would happen if some people got cars from Austin with a 400 mile range and others got cars from Freemont with a 300 mile range?

 

[advocate8]

I don't remember them mentioning any increase in range. There was a mention of increase in energy per cell. But from pack energy density perspective there is not much change, because the 4680 cells are bigger in volume and hence less number of cells can be packed in a battery pack, so overall energy is the same at a pack level irrespective of 2170 or 4680. So no increase in range.

no but there were BS weasel words suggesting it, which put this forum in a tizzy for months ... until this pretty mundane dual motor Austin car was finally released.
The main benefit for consumers is being able to incorporate them in structural packs... which in turn means better-fitting body panels, perhaps a slight increase in torsional stiffness (which isn’t really lacking in my Fremont build.) And in theory a price that isn’t as high as it might be otherwise, due to the increased efficiency etc in manufacturing.
Performance increases, at least serious ones, seem unlikely... be it in charging, range, handling, or acceleration.
The structural pack is, though, a serious advance in EV construction... genius stuff right up there with the megacastings for simplifying and speeding up and reducing costs and decreasing QC issues.

 

[PCTAZRichard]

I saw some thinking about the SR Y charging at higher rates for longer, anyone have experience supercharging one yet that can comment?

 

[Watts_Up]

I saw some thinking about the SR Y charging at higher rates for longer, anyone have experience supercharging one yet that can comment?

There is no SR Y.

Do you have a link for your above charging comment?

 

[SageBrush]

I saw some thinking about the SR Y charging at higher rates for longer, anyone have experience supercharging one yet that can comment?

The videos I have seen do not show an advantage over 2170 cells. Perhaps they are limited while Tesla collects data. I hope so.
Here is a snapshot from 'spoken reviews.' that started at 9% SoC. It is really a story of two tales: Up to 39% SoC -- impressive. 50 -> 80% -- mediocre at best. Overall from low to 80% -- 2170 type results.

 

[PCTAZRichard]

SR- standard range, that’s what I understood Tesla was calling this model. I pointed out dual motor because there was briefly a SR single motor Y.

As for links, here’s a recent one - Tesla Model Y with new 4680 cells shows impressive potential for faster charging

‘potential’ is an important word there.

 

[P3dStealth]

how much does the new design affect total body weight? if integrating the battery into the structure decreases the amount of material needed it will save both money and weight.

According to this owner who weighed his SR model Y there was not a huge weight savings when comparing to a long range Y. Doesn't matter because I don't think Tesla ever promised a weight savings anyway. They did create a better way of making the car and packaging the energy. It's definitely good for them and an advancement. I just don't think there is going to be that big of a difference for us owners driving the car.

He came out with some good videos. Lots of info. He deserves some views for his info.

 

[sleepydoc]

According to this owner who weighed his SR model Y there was not a huge weight savings when comparing to a long range Y. Doesn't matter because I don't think Tesla ever promised a weight savings anyway. They did create a better way of making the car and packaging the energy. It's definitely good for them and an advancement. I just don't think there is going to be that big of a difference for us owners driving the car.

He came out with some good videos. Lots of info. He deserves some views for his info.

330 pounds is still significant - that’s a 7% Weight loss, or a couple of adults (or one big adult).

 

[Stuart Watson]

Remember when people were delaying orders for this pack because “moar range!”

While it is an impressive engineering feat, it benefits the manufacturer far more than the end-user.

You are spot on.
100%

But hopefully, all of us in this forum, are TSLA shareholders as well as car owners ?

 

[SageBrush]

330 pounds is still significant

Yes, but it includes the weight difference from less kWh (whatever that might be.)

 

[Bob2C]

Remember when people were delaying orders for this pack because “moar range!”

While it is an impressive engineering feat, it benefits the manufacturer far more than the end-user.

Exactly.....But what really do these new batteries have over the current ones that have a proven record other than more efficiency and cheaper for the manufacturer?

 

[hellobye]

Exactly.....But what really do these new batteries have over the current ones that have a proven record other than more efficiency and cheaper for the manufacturer?

It really is just the potential for a larger range pack in. But as noted before, it doesn't make sense to extend the range beyond 300 miles for cars like the M3, MY, MS, MX unless they offer an "extended range" version say an increased officer point. Especially if the 4680 had reduce charging time.

But the energy density of the battery will be more important for viability of vehicles that 1. Don't have the space for existing batteries (smaller vehicle), or 2. Don't have the efficiency to be practical with existing batteries (larger vehicle).

Hypothetically, by making the cost of the vehicle (materials and labor) lower, either they can spend more money developing other things (proposed Model 2, Semi, or CyberTruck), increase profit, or they can reduce the market price.

 

[P3dStealth]

330 pounds is still significant - that’s a 7% Weight loss, or a couple of adults (or one big adult).

He made a mistake in the video. He is out of the car when he pushes the button and then he also subtracts his own weight at the end (275lbs). They weigh you when you hit the button. You have to add the 275lbs.

It's still a 55lb savings but that could be because the pack is smaller capacity in the SR.

This is all speculation until we see more comparisons. We have limited info here.

 

[Beltsbear]

He made a mistake in the video. He is out of the car when he pushes the button and then he also subtracts his own weight at the end (275lbs). They weigh you when you hit the button. You have to add the 275lbs.

It's still a 55lb savings but that could be because the pack is smaller capacity in the SR.

This is all speculation until we see more comparisons. We have limited info here.

Yup. Plus even if he was on the platform, why add the complication. Just weigh the car with you not on the platform!

 

[sleepydoc]

Exactly.....But what really do these new batteries have over the current ones that have a proven record other than more efficiency and cheaper for the manufacturer?

you say 'more efficiency' like it's nothing. That's one of the major goals of battery design since inefficiencies in the battery packs cause all sorts of other problems - decreased available power, decreased regenerative braking, heat generation that degrades the battery and requires energy spent to cool the battery pack...

 

[advocate8]

330 pounds is still significant - that’s a 7% Weight loss, or a couple of adults (or one big adult).

It’s not significant when compared with the LR’s greater range. Add the batteries to get that range and THEN weight it.

 

[advocate8]

you say 'more efficiency' like it's nothing. That's one of the major goals of battery design since inefficiencies in the battery packs cause all sorts of other problems - decreased available power, decreased regenerative braking, heat generation that degrades the battery and requires energy spent to cool the battery pack...

Youre probably misreading this. There’s no proof 4680s are more efficient in their performance. I think he means the structural pack makes manufacturing the cars more efficient. So far the batteries, from a performance sense, are a disappointment.

 

[sleepydoc]

Youre probably misreading this. There’s no proof 4680s are more efficient in their performance. I think he means the structural pack makes manufacturing the cars more efficient. So far the batteries, from a performance sense, are a disappointment.

Yes, I interpreted efficiency to be in the battery function, not efficiency of manufacturing. Both important but in differing respects.

My comments on battery efficiency were based on Tesla's previous statements. I think we all need to wait and see what the actual characteristics of the batteries are. Even if they're more efficient to manufacture but function the same as the old cells that's still a win, just not as much of a win.

 

[advocate8]

Yes, I interpreted efficiency to be in the battery function, not efficiency of manufacturing. Both important but in differing respects.

My comments on battery efficiency were based on Tesla's previous statements. I think we all need to wait and see what the actual characteristics of the batteries are. Even if they're more efficient to manufacture but function the same as the old cells that's still a win, just not as much of a win.

All true. It’s just that the sheer gall of the hype level exuded onstage at battery day continues to tick me off.
And echo through pretty much everything posted here, on YouTube, Twitter and Reddit about 4680s.
It was a first rate propaganda operation.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

...and it's completely filled with pink foam? Next Monroe vids to be epic!