4680 cell design, chassis integration & factory discussion for investors

[kpanda17]

By dry cell, do you mean the dry battery electrode (DBE) process? The cell still uses electrolyte.
Anode was DBE in early leaked cells, I think cathode is DBE now also (or will be after that building is completed). Not that DBE has a huge impact on energy.

Silicon will result in an improvement in energy density.
View attachment 1035136

is this chart illustrating the generations of 4680? gen 1 to gen 4

 

[mongo]

is this chart illustrating the generations of 4680? gen 1 to gen 4

No, just the different things they were working on and potential impact.
https://www.tesla.com/2020shareholdermeeting

 

[kpanda17]

No, just the different things they were working on and potential impact.
https://www.tesla.com/2020shareholdermeeting

between Jordan and Cleanerwatt, im estimating the generations
exciting times for Tesla battery tech

 

[Daniel in SD]

That's a lot of extra room. That plus all the extra room on top of the pack makes me think the original plan was to double stack. I can't think of another plausible way they could have gotten 500mi of range.
I bet there will be a 500mi range version in the future once demand declines.

I suppose it's also possible they wanted a lot of crumple room on the bottom for off-road durability.

Called it!
46160’s soon?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1777709953723293919

Tesla really should stop talking about future products. Why would someone buy one today instead of waiting for them to fill the battery pack?

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Called it!
46160’s soon?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1777709953723293919

Tesla really should stop talking about future products. Why would someone buy one today instead of waiting for them to fill the battery pack?

If you want a lighter truck with nearly a decimeter of underbody “rock rail” crush allowance.

I saw someone say it was a “vent channel”. It seems extremely large for that given they have not been needed before (there is extra space in the cover too, I think).

 

[mongo]

If you want a lighter truck with nearly a decimeter of underbody “rock rail” crush allowance.

I saw someone say it was a “vent channel”. It seems extremely large for that given they have not been needed before (there is extra space in the cover too, I think).

The Y 4680 pack has a vent channel also. The difference is the cells are placed into the pack bottom in a plastic tray whereas the Cybertruck's are suspended from the top of the pack.

 

[Buckminster]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1778807547677270496

 

[mongo]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1778807547677270496

... at least that's what it's doing today....

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

33mm of crush zone. “Brilliant.”

The only thing crushed is 46120 dreams.

 

[Daniel in SD]

33mm of crush zone. “Brilliant.”

The only thing crushed is 46120 dreams.

There’s room above the battery too! They just need to figure out how to make the cells structural.
I refuse to believe Tesla engineers overestimated range by 50%. They must have been planning to have more battery.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

There’s room above the battery too! They just need to figure out how to make the cells structural.
I refuse to believe Tesla engineers overestimated range by 50%. They must have been planning to have more battery.

He counted that allegedly. I am not paying any attention.

Ah I see what you mean - the cross members, ABOVE the battery. Yeah. Just need structural cells.

I also refuse to believe this is crush protection. It is just stupid. What is Tesla going to do? Replace that plate for you for $1k when you damage it? No.

 

[Buckminster]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1780204626895094230

 

[Buckminster]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1788986724464672983

 

[Buckminster]

Easily over a million a week

Cybertruck production seems to be at or close to 200/day

1344 cells per pack means close to two million cells a week, and if we take the “4680 production is well ahead of Cybertruck production and we have weeks of inventory “, that number can be much higher

 

[Buckminster]

TLDR: 4680 is very much alive and kicking, despite some people that suddenly went missing in the past few days saying otherwise. Lower cost than what Tesla was paying a year ago (I'm assuming equivalent cells, so high Nickel ones, NCA and NMC from Panasonic and LG). Order cancelations from other manufacturers drove price way down due to oversupply, path to cost parity with current price by the end of the year, much more details in the post

https://twitter.com/x/status/1801418835343339886

Worth showing in full:

 

[Buckminster]

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I wonder how they will keep the uncompetitive 4680 alive? Will be interesting to see if they can actually make a decent battery. Not something they have ever done before!

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I wonder how they will keep the uncompetitive 4680 alive? Will be interesting to see if they can actually make a decent battery. Not something they have ever done before!

Interesting, a disagree. I am not aware of the 4680 being better than the 2170L, which is not as good as the 2170C.

We'll see what happens but time is running out. It seems like if they can increase density a lot and improve charging speed a lot (by 2x) there could be hope.

So far it has been extremely disappointing to see. At this point, years after battery day, we should have batteries that charge faster and are more energy dense and more able to deliver power than the 2170C. We don't. No one knows why. We do know that heads have rolled at Tesla due to the lack of execution.

Hopefully we'll see a huge change with v3 which actually makes the structural pack compelling. I'm hoping for a 20%-30% density improvement to catch up and leapfrog other options, with >2x charging speed (C rate).

 

[MP3Mike]

I wonder how they will keep the uncompetitive 4680 alive?

How so? They were cheaper than the alternatives until the other OEMs cancelled all of their orders and made a glut of batteries available on the market. And they said that they think the 4680s will be cheaper than even that surplus by the end of this year.

So far it has been extremely disappointing to see. At this point, years after battery day, we should have batteries that charge faster and are more energy dense and more able to deliver power than the 2170C.

All of the battery day goals were long-term goals. I think through 2026, so we still have plenty of time for them to refine the 4680s.

From what I have seen the Gen2 4680 already has energy density slightly greater than the current 2170 cells. (And I think to be fair we really should compare capacity after ~1-year. It seems like most Panasonic 2170s lose ~5% in the first year, while the Gen1 4680s lose almost nothing in the first year. We will have to see how the Gen2 4680s perform in this respect.)

We don't. No one knows why.

Of course there are people that know. I think the issue is that Tesla is new to battery manufacturing, and they started with a "simple" formulation as they learn. (Concentrating on new physical manufacturing advancements.) Like they didn't put silicon in it to start with. (Though apparently they did for Gen2.) Is it the "Tesla silicon" they talked about at battery day? I don't think we know yet, but those details may come out now that cells have been harvested and sent off for analysis.

If Panasonic had stepped up and increased 2170 production in the US the 4680 likely wouldn't have been necessary in the first place. But Panasonic seems to be slow walking all of their expansions and new plants in the US. As far as we know there still aren't any other Tesla compliant cells that are qualified for the tax credits other than the Panasonic 18650s/2170s and the Tesla 4680s.

Other new battery manufacturers, like Northvolt, seem to be doing a much worse job of getting production up and running than Tesla is.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

They were cheaper than the alternatives until the other OEMs cancelled all of their orders and made a glut of batteries available on the market. And they said that they think the 4680s will be cheaper than even that surplus by the end of this year.

Maybe. Talk is cheap, we'll see how it turns out. It's cheap for a reason. Look at the charging curves!!!! That is not what you want in a road trip vehicle. Put that into a Model 3 Highland and it'll turn it into a complete disaster of a road-trip car. The step down from 2170C to 2170L was bad enough. They're going the wrong way! Put high quality cells in, and go to 800V (completely unrelated to the cells) to keep the currents down. I'm not sure we're ever going to get v4 Superchargers at this rate. It's bizarre people think it is fast enough. I have a super duper fast charging 2018 Model 3, and it's quite workable for a road trip car (in spite of its apparent high consumption Performance tuning when compared side by side with AWD) but it could most definitely be faster, since I do wait on the car on occasion. Need to be able to do longer distances, with faster charging at stops.

It's really infuriating and frustrating that things have been backsliding since 2020, the golden age.

From what I have seen the Gen2 4680 already has energy density slightly greater than the current 2170 cells.

Can you link to the analysis? It just seems that in real-world form factors, it's not there. That's what I am referring to. If I take the Model Y AWD and scale up the battery (~69kWh IIRC) by the Gen1 to Gen2 density improvement, it still ends up being lower capacity than the 80-81kWh 2170L Model Y LR AWD (and it's not close). How can that be explained? You can't look at cell density, of course.

As far as we know there still aren't any other Tesla compliant cells that are qualified for the tax credits other than the Panasonic 18650s/2170s and the Tesla 4680s.

All the more reason for them to be the best & safest cells in the world. Make Batteries Great Again.

When 4680s are shipping in every 85kWh Model Y LR AWD, we'll know we've arrived.