4680 Model Ys?

[ZenRockGarden]

So, I also have a MYP on order (EDD March) - current M3P owner.

Will the MY 4680's with structural battery packs and large cast body frames actually be an upgrade? or will they be a way for Tesla to increase profit margins and volume?

I've read all about the 4680's and it appears this is a chance for Tesla to increase the speed of production, lower cost and 'potentially' increase range, performance and charging capabilities. But why not keep stats the same and make more $$?

This is a good question.

Elon's motivation is to increase manufacturing efficiency - 2 huge parts instead of hundreds. Fewer cells. Fewer layers of containment/structure to hold the pack.

So the thing we're certain of is the new mega-castings/4680-cells/structural-pack will be simpler to build and cost Tesla less to make.

What we don't know are the things we'd care about:

1: Will it be stronger or lighter? (both seem likely)
2: Will it have longer range? (it could, but more likely Elon will reduce the number of the cells to get an overall range similar to existing)
3: Will it charge faster or degrade slower? (maybe - Elon tends to advance in these dimensions)
4: Will the cars be higher quality overall from TX? (In the long run, probably yes based on China results, but early cars might have quirks)

I suspect the average end-user will not find the 4860 vehicle to be meaningfully different than existing despite huge progress in how it's been built and powered.

$0.02

 

[TomServo]

My hope for 4680 cars is for Tesla to offer a few more RANGE options. Like say a LR+ and maybe a LR Max. I’m waiting to trade up to a 4680 Y but want more range. I’d gladly pay for a 400 mile Y.

 

[Zebelkhan]

My hope for 4680 cars is for Tesla to offer a few more RANGE options. Like say a LR+ and maybe a LR Max. I’m waiting to trade up to a 4680 Y but want more range. I’d gladly pay for a 400 mile Y.

Y don’t you get model S then?

 

[ZenRockGarden]

My hope for 4680 cars is for Tesla to offer a few more RANGE options. Like say a LR+ and maybe a LR Max. I’m waiting to trade up to a 4680 Y but want more range. I’d gladly pay for a 400 mile Y.

I hear you, and I think there is marketing value in offering at least one version of a car with competitor-beating real world range. That said, I think the actual use case of most customers is centered on ~300 miles. That's more than enough for local use, and sufficient to bridge along the supercharger network for long travel. Almost no one needs to drive without stopping for more than 5 hours at a time.

Tesla's supercharger network is actually it's secret range advantage. Cross country travel is _awful_ and unlikely to improve on non-tesla cars, even if they have the same or even slightly better than Tesla range in the vehicle.

 

[Sludog]

I hear you, and I think there is marketing value in offering at least one version of a car with competitor-beating real world range. That said, I think the actual use case of most customers is centered on ~300 miles. That's more than enough for local use, and sufficient to bridge along the supercharger network for long travel. Almost no one needs to drive without stopping for more than 5 hours at a time.

Tesla's supercharger network is actually it's secret range advantage. Cross country travel is _awful_ and unlikely to improve on non-tesla cars, even if they have the same or even slightly better than Tesla range in the vehicle.

Yeah that's until Elon opens up the supercharger network to all EV vehicles. Then the range advantage becomes a nightmare with slow charging and long lines. We can only hope that Tesla puts the money from other EV vehicles using superchargers ( at a more costly charge rate I'm sure) and add more supercharger locations immediately.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

Yeah that's until Elon opens up the supercharger network to all EV vehicles. Then the range advantage becomes a nightmare with slow charging and long lines. We can only hope that Tesla puts the money from other EV vehicles using superchargers ( at a more costly charge rate I'm sure) and add more supercharger locations immediately.

Elon's playing smart politics - there's billions in government money for helping the helpless other charging networks. He knows what he's doing - he'll connect up a few of the masses in certain underserved markets, collect his government cash and still have the best located, best maintained chargers for his real customers because he can re-invest the billions in even more supercharger stations. There is simply no comparison on the ground right now. In my town, I have 18 shiny new perfectly working supercharger stalls waiting for me 1 mile away. That's more than all slots of ALL kinds for competing non-tesla cars to use, assuming they're in service and honor whichever charging credentials you bring hopefully to their abused plug-in.

 

[Terminator857]

Wed, Jan 26 is Tesla's investor update. I suspect we will get an update after that.

Tesla Announces Date for Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2021 Financial Results and Webcast | Tesla Investor Relations

AUSTIN, Texas, January 12, 2022 – Tesla will post its financial results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2021 after market close on Wednesday, January 26, 2022. At that time, Tesla will issue a brief advisory containing a link to the Q4 and full year 2021 update, which...

ir.tesla.com

 

[hatch]

My hope for 4680 cars is for Tesla to offer a few more RANGE options. Like say a LR+ and maybe a LR Max. I’m waiting to trade up to a 4680 Y but want more range. I’d gladly pay for a 400 mile Y.

A smart idea would be to build 4680 cars with the increased range capabilities that the new battery packs can provide. From the factory, these cars would have the same or slightly increased range compared to cars with the 2170 packs. But then at some future date, owners of the new cars will get the option for increased range through a paid software update that unlocks more capacity.

 

[advocate8]

A smart idea would be to build 4680 cars with the increased range capabilities that the new battery packs can provide. From the factory, these cars would have the same or slightly increased range compared to cars with the 2170 packs. But then at some future date, owners of the new cars will get the option for increased range through a paid software update that unlocks more capacity.

Unlikely Tesla would extra construction costs, relatively space 4680s and extra weight into every car. easier to boost range slightly, reduce weight and reduce their costs by increasing energy storage slightly from current and leave it at that. Perhaps a trim level later with significantly greater range for more $ vs a kind of standard range with 4680s. But... most likely there will just be P and LR, both with slightly more range than now.

 

[hatch]

Unlikely Tesla would extra construction costs, relatively space 4680s and extra weight into every car. easier to boost range slightly, reduce weight and reduce their costs by increasing energy storage slightly from current and leave it at that. Perhaps a trim level later with significantly greater range for more $ vs a kind of standard range with 4680s. But... most likely there will just be P and LR, both with slightly more range than now.

I guess my point is that a standard 4680 pack for all vehicles (specific to the model) would reduce costs and simplify production. Decide on a size that is a certain amount better than the previous packs, in terms of range and weight, but lock the vehicles at first to the current ranges. No need to change production later, or build different pack sizes. All vehicles are the same.

It may just be cheaper and more efficient to operate this way. The trick is deciding what is the pack size sweet spot.

 

[hatch]

I guess my point is that a standard 4680 pack for all vehicles (specific to the model) would reduce costs and simplify production. Decide on a size that is a certain amount better than the previous packs, in terms of range and weight, but lock the vehicles at first to the current ranges. No need to change production later, or build different pack sizes. All vehicles are the same.

It may just be cheaper and more efficient to operate this way. The trick is deciding what is the pack size sweet spot.

Am i crazy or is the rear motor in the performance cars the same as in the long range, but just needs a re-flash? Kind of like the software acceleration boost for the long range cars. They try to build all cars the same, as much as possible. I think they would want to do this with the battery packs as well. Imagine how much easier it would be to build all cars physically identical, with trim levels being determined by software.

 

[Curious Nomad]

A lot of speculation but good assumptions in this video regarding overall weight reduction, increased acceleration, increased range from reduced weight, and decreased production costs.....

 

[NYMY]

Am i crazy or is the rear motor in the performance cars the same as in the long range, but just needs a re-flash? Kind of like the software acceleration boost for the long range cars. They try to build all cars the same, as much as possible. I think they would want to do this with the battery packs as well. Imagine how much easier it would be to build all cars physically identical, with trim levels being determined by software.

This was done before so is not crazy. I also agree that while Tesla can go for volumes now, there is a value in appearing to always be ahead of the competition. With 300mi range vehicles becoming standard, having a 400mi MY would give a point to show that.

Tesla explains how easy it is to upgrade its software-limited battery packs

Since the introduction of the 75 kWh battery pack in Tesla’s vehicles, the automaker has made the concept of upgradeable...

electrek.co

 

[SalisburySam]

…I think the actual use case of most customers is centered on ~300 miles. That's more than enough for local use, and sufficient to bridge along the supercharger network for long travel. Almost no one needs to drive without stopping for more than 5 hours at a time.

Don’t disagree, but that’s not how it works. No way am I going to get 300 miles on my advertised-as-a-310-mile-range Model 3. Under the best of conditions I can’t use all of the capacity and then magically have a Supercharger available when I reach 0%. Any weather condition such as rain or wind will reduce range and possibly significantly. Speed reduces range. Cold weather reduces range. Altitude changes common in the Rockies and Appalachians reduce range. Use of heat reduces range. Towing. Packing items on the roof. And so on. So a 5-hour trip without stopping is not in the cards.

But your point is well taken, and for my use you’re correct: 300-mile range was the sweet spot at which I would be willing to and did buy another EV (first EV was 2012 Nissan LEAF with a pathetic 65-mile actual range for me when new, now down to about 35 miles). Whether this is true “of most customers” I don’t know. Given that much of the US, all of Canada, and lots of other countries experience winter, that 300-mile range almost becomes table stakes and more is desirable, and in some use cases much more.

 

[DLAv8r]

My MYP has a EDD of mar7-31. I’m not one to delay getting the car, but being so close to possibly getting the 4680s would make me want to wait. I wish there was more clarity on what is upcoming. I’m sure Tesla doesn’t want to do this to slow sales while folks wait for the battery switch. I’d just hate to miss out on the 4680s if I could have delayed even a month.

 

[DrGriz]

Don’t disagree, but that’s not how it works. No way am I going to get 300 miles on my advertised-as-a-310-mile-range Model 3. Under the best of conditions I can’t use all of the capacity and then magically have a Supercharger available when I reach 0%. Any weather condition such as rain or wind will reduce range and possibly significantly. Speed reduces range. Cold weather reduces range. Altitude changes common in the Rockies and Appalachians reduce range. Use of heat reduces range. Towing. Packing items on the roof. And so on. So a 5-hour trip without stopping is not in the cards.

But your point is well taken, and for my use you’re correct: 300-mile range was the sweet spot at which I would be willing to and did buy another EV (first EV was 2012 Nissan LEAF with a pathetic 65-mile actual range for me when new, now down to about 35 miles). Whether this is true “of most customers” I don’t know. Given that much of the US, all of Canada, and lots of other countries experience winter, that 300-mile range almost becomes table stakes and more is desirable, and in some use cases much more.

For me, 300 was certainly a deciding point (gets me to the service center and back) and 400 (realistic where I live, =300) would induce me to upgrade.

 

[Redline_]

My MYP has a EDD of mar7-31. I’m not one to delay getting the car, but being so close to possibly getting the 4680s would make me want to wait. I wish there was more clarity on what is upcoming. I’m sure Tesla doesn’t want to do this to slow sales while folks wait for the battery switch. I’d just hate to miss out on the 4680s if I could have delayed even a month.

Same. My estimated delivery for the MYP is Feb 5 - Mar 5. It seems likely that it won't be the 4680. I want it asap, but missing the cut-off by such a small margin bothers me...

 

[Terminator857]

Unlikely Tesla would extra construction costs, relatively space 4680s and extra weight into every car. easier to boost range slightly, reduce weight and reduce their costs by increasing energy storage slightly from current and leave it at that. Perhaps a trim level later with significantly greater range for more $ vs a kind of standard range with 4680s. But... most likely there will just be P and LR, both with slightly more range than now.

Are you aware that Tesla has done this in the past? They used the software limited battery pack to lower the entry price.

 

[advocate8]

Are you aware that Tesla has done this in the past? They used the software limited battery pack to lower the entry price.

Yup and apparently determined it was not a sustainable approach. And it was a bit different. They had a very good reason for trying to hit that lower price if only briefly. Symbolism. Pricing isn’t going to be high on the list of considerations for this. And the 4680s are supply constrained

 

[advocate8]

I guess my point is that a standard 4680 pack for all vehicles (specific to the model) would reduce costs and simplify production. Decide on a size that is a certain amount better than the previous packs, in terms of range and weight, but lock the vehicles at first to the current ranges. No need to change production later, or build different pack sizes. All vehicles are the same.

It may just be cheaper and more efficient to operate this way. The trick is deciding what is the pack size sweet spot.

It MIGHT be cheaper. But the batteries are the most expensive part of the car and so there would have to be quite a bit of efficiency gain to make up for that.