4680 on Model Y?

[tangible1]

Most of the benefits of castings and 4680 batteries will be to the company, not so much to the customer.

Actually, NO.
IMHO the benefits to the Buyer of a MY v2.0 with 4680 + both F+R megacasts:
1. 10% reduced weight - weight buys range, buys handling, buys performance (it's 440lbs, that's a lot)
2. better fit / finish - the castings are more consistently dimensioned vs welded steel pieces, meaning body panel gaps will be more consistent
3. 4680 batteries charge up faster - for those people (only) who do road trips, that's a big benefit.

I believe the primary value of the 4680 battery (to the Buyer) is as an enabler of the structural improvements and weight savings.
Most people seldom do long road trips, but it's nice to be able to when you need to.

But yes, Tesla will be able to build the MY v2.0 faster, in fewer steps, with better QC, and therefore cheaper for them.
Whether MY v2.0 is worth the up-rated price tag compared to v1.0 is eye of the beholder.

 

[tangible1]

The castings shave 100 pounds off the vehicle weight the battery pack another 300-400 pounds.

That is definitely going to improve your performance and handling a bit. There is also potential for faster charging.

The big problem is how you ensure you actually get one of the new ones at this point in the game when even after production starts 4 out of 5 Model Ys will be from Fremont.

OPINION
Austin is going to be very low run rate for the first 3-6 months. They might even do only MYP models to start.
Longer term, Austin is supposed to serve more central / eastern regions, but Tesla adapts - things change.
Fremont will start running the new builds pretty quickly as well. There might be a brief shutdown while some conversions to the line are made.
Evidence for this: look at the thousands of FRONT castings stacked up on the lot at Fremont. The rear castings go inside. The fronts are stacked.
Both factories will be building the same base configurations.

It makes no sense for the factories to do different builds. Inefficient, and logistics of both suppliers and customer deliveries would be terrible.
Tesla is about squeezing as much blood from the stone as possible. And they've got two new factories to pay for.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Actually, NO.
IMHO the benefits to the Buyer of a MY v2.0 with 4680 + both F+R megacasts:
1. 10% reduced weight - weight buys range, buys handling, buys performance (it's 440lbs, that's a lot)
2. better fit / finish - the castings are more consistently dimensioned vs welded steel pieces, meaning body panel gaps will be more consistent
3. 4680 batteries charge up faster - for those people (only) who do road trips, that's a big benefit.

I believe the primary value of the 4680 battery (to the Buyer) is as an enabler of the structural improvements and weight savings.
Most people seldom do long road trips, but it's nice to be able to when you need to.

But yes, Tesla will be able to build the MY v2.0 faster, in fewer steps, with better QC, and therefore cheaper for them.
Whether MY v2.0 is worth the up-rated price tag compared to v1.0 is eye of the beholder.

Where do you get that 4680s charge faster? At Battery Day Tesla suggested only that tabless would be able to charge almost as fast as 2170s, not faster.

 

[carz]

2. better fit / finish - the castings are more consistently dimensioned vs welded steel pieces, meaning body panel gaps will be more consistent

The steel pieces are welded by robots to perfect specifications. It is the panels that are installed by humans (I would say drunken koalas, looking at the fit and finish) where the problems arise, and to be honest, I am not sure that will be resolved with the castings.

 

[tangible1]

Where do you get that 4680s charge faster? At Battery Day Tesla suggested only that tabless would be able to charge almost as fast as 2170s, not faster.

The 4680 charging cycle has been interpreted by different people and articles in different ways.
Take this from CleanTechnica's article on Battery Day:
Larger tabbed cells have historically struggled to shed heat at very fast charging speeds. Tesla’s new cell disrupts the trend, charging nearly as fast as a smaller cell, while bringing all the benefits of a larger cell to the table. Tesla was able to take the best of both worlds, completely disrupting the small but growing world of automotive battery cell production.

This can be read as charging at about the same rate per KWh, or as charging a given volume at the same rate but with higher KWh per volume.
The web has run with it.
Again, my post is IMHO, and no one will know much more until the 4680 is inn the wild and working. So far not, but perhaps imminent.

 

[tangible1]

The steel pieces are welded by robots to perfect specifications. It is the panels that are installed by humans (I would say drunken koalas, looking at the fit and finish) where the problems arise, and to be honest, I am not sure that will be resolved with the castings.

The tolerance stack of 70 welded pieces for the rear, and more for the front, is anything but 'perfect'.
They are additive for each step. Unless all the pieces were welded at the same time in a single jig, that is so.
Tesla claims they will significantly reduce the number of robots in the production line, ie steps to make the chassis are significantly reduced.
Tolerances improved.

 

[Ogre]

OPINION
Austin is going to be very low run rate for the first 3-6 months. They might even do only MYP models to start.
Longer term, Austin is supposed to serve more central / eastern regions, but Tesla adapts - things change.
Fremont will start running the new builds pretty quickly as well. There might be a brief shutdown while some conversions to the line are made.
Evidence for this: look at the thousands of FRONT castings stacked up on the lot at Fremont. The rear castings go inside. The fronts are stacked.
Both factories will be building the same base configurations.

It makes no sense for the factories to do different builds. Inefficient, and logistics of both suppliers and customer deliveries would be terrible.
Tesla is about squeezing as much blood from the stone as possible. And they've got two new factories to pay for.

That would be nice… but I don’t think Tesla is going to be able to source enough cells to supply the entire Model Y production any time soon. So they might realize 100 pound of weight savings but still be running the heavier 2170 cells.

Hadn’t heard about front castings at Fremont, that’s a good sign.

 

[tangible1]

That would be nice… but I don’t think Tesla is going to be able to source enough cells to supply the entire Model Y production any time soon. So they might realize 100 pound of weight savings but still be running the heavier 2170 cells.

Hadn’t heard about front castings at Fremont, that’s a good sign.

Tesla wants very badly to lower costs and speed up production.
The F+R megacasts together realize a good deal of that. Fewer steps, fewer robots, faster production, better quality.
They can get that with or without the 4680 batteries. But the 4680's are the lion's share of cost savings, assuming yield success.

Can't argue the 4680 status. Nobody outside Tesla really knows much in reality.
They're warehousing 4680 QC passes but no word on yield % since Sept/Oct.
Austin is expecting battery pack shipments from Nevada to start production there very soon (this week Austin got dashboard assemblies, with screens, delivered)
Most scuttlebutt says 4680 packs, but again, no one really knows.
My opinion, it's 4680 packs if Austin starts with limited MYP production. But a better bet is 2170.

See the flyover videos of Fremont on YT; massive stacks of front castings, and growing, so they're gonna be used soon.
Tesla has stated several times of a 'backup plan' using 2170 batteries with F+R magacasts.
However, I would think they'd have begun that already....since they haven't it implies 4680 is near. Implies.....

As to weigh savings, the castings alone save about half what the 4680 + castings do; roughly 200lbs +/-, according to EM statements.

 

[carz]

The tolerance stack of 70 welded pieces for the rear, and more for the front, is anything but 'perfect'.
They are additive for each step. Unless all the pieces were welded at the same time in a single jig, that is so.
Tesla claims they will significantly reduce the number of robots in the production line, ie steps to make the chassis are significantly reduced.
Tolerances improved.

That's not the case, and you can see how it is always the frunk, trunk, or doors that are misaligned, not the chassis. The service center can adjust it, something that wouldn't be possible if it was the welded pieces.

All the other manufacturers have a similar process, but they have more attention to detail to avoid these issues. Robots don't fail, humans do.

 

[tangible1]

That's not the case, and you can see how it is always the frunk, trunk, or doors that are misaligned, not the chassis. The service center can adjust it, something that wouldn't be possible if it was the welded pieces.

All the other manufacturers have a similar process, but they have more attention to detail to avoid these issues. Robots don't fail, humans do.

The 'perfect' robots hang body panels based on a programmed XYZ location.
If the chassis doesn't match that exactly, there's some adjustment, but not much that the robots can make. hence, body gaps....
Frunk, trunk, etc, clearly issues resulting from chassis dimensional tolerance slop.

 

[DanDi58]

The 'perfect' robots hang body panels based on a programmed XYZ location.
If the chassis doesn't match that exactly, there's some adjustment, but not much that the robots can make. hence, body gaps....
Frunk, trunk, etc, clearly issues resulting from chassis dimensional tolerance slop.

That doesn't make sense to me. The chassis robots weld the same parts, the same way, every time. That's how they're designed. In the case you note, you'd consistently have panels gaps. However, there are plenty of examples of cars being nearly perfect (like mine). And we know that the panel gap issue is inconsistent. So I feel like it's the finishing process of mounting the fenders, doors, rear hatch and frunk, and installing the lights that is at the very least inconsistent and certainly not consistently inspected. (Disclosure: I'm no expert on production line methods)

 

[pt19713]

Seems unlikely.

In the earnings call they suggested they likely won’t be delivering any cars from Texas until 2022. Even once they start up the cars with the new body/ structural battery, it’s only going to be around 1000 per week versus… 5000+ per week coming out of Fremont.

It seem like Tesla is going to just quietly slip some cars with the 4680s into their production with similar specs to their existing numbers So it’s possible you won’t know until you actually get your car delivered. There might be some hint when you get your VIN.

This is unlikely. Tesla (and other manufacturers) have to qualify their vehicle setup with the EPA, so any change has to be re-certified. Tesla has submitted the 2022 vehicles (done in October 2021). If you know where to look, you would find the 4680 cells being certified months before it's put into a production vehicle.

 

[Stook02ss]

This is unlikely. Tesla (and other manufacturers) have to qualify their vehicle setup with the EPA, so any change has to be re-certified. Tesla has submitted the 2022 vehicles (done in October 2021). If you know where to look, you would find the 4680 cells being certified months before it's put into a production vehicle.

It seems like they'd want to get on w/ the 4680s as soon as possible - if I'm not mistaken, they'll actually save money using this battery pack. Might they already be working with the EPA, or is that overt public knowledge that we can keep tabs on?

Also, wouldn't it make sense for them to begin production of 4680s with the MYP? I'd love to know how man MYP production rate is atm - I feel like it would be the natural choice for them to begin the transition to 4680s with... and could give them cause to even bump the price up again (not that I'm looking forward to that part).

 

[tangible1]

think of the chassis as the foundation of a house.
on that foundation, the framing is built, then the doors are hung
If the foundation isn't level, a couple possible outcomes:
-the walls will have a little tilt (if the framing is built square to the floor, ie level in one dimension)
-the interior doors will be slightly askew (a slight variance in gap to the floor from one side to the other).

The chassis is the foundation on which the body panels are hung (welded, fastened, glued)
If the chassis lacks consistency, then what you 'see' in result is body panel gaps.

The robots can only accommodate a certain variance. What remains are gaps.
The gaps include the door variances, which are hung by humans (mechanically assisted) off hinge points, locations of which are part of the chassis build.
The gaps that are more indicative of the chassis consistency are the window framing and roof glass positioning.
Those bumps or voids are the tell. Quarter window framing that bumps out at the door panel, roof glass silicon edge fills.....

As a side note, Porsche back in the day used lumber to bend the chassis so as to make the doors hang properly.
It was an art as much as science.
Tesla is learning the art of manufacturing, one software 'engineer' at a time. Doing well, but learning still.

 

[Ogre]

This is unlikely. Tesla (and other manufacturers) have to qualify their vehicle setup with the EPA, so any change has to be re-certified. Tesla has submitted the 2022 vehicles (done in October 2021). If you know where to look, you would find the 4680 cells being certified months before it's put into a production vehicle.

Look what they did with LFP batteries on the SR models.

I suspect the 4680 cell introduction will look almost exactly the same.

 

[orion2001]

My opinion is that we will probably end up seeing the mega castings being incorporated into the MY within a few months considering that they are already stacking them up at Fremont. I highly doubt that 4680 cells are coming anytime soon to high volume cars like the MY. The reasons I believe this are:

- Scrapping of the Plaid+ model which was supposed to use 4680 cells for the large range numbers. If they weren't confident enough of using them on such a low-volume car, they have bigger things to sort out before they can hope to incorporate them in high-volume cars like the MY

- Continuing delays with the Cybertruck which relies fundamentally on 4680 cells.

- How quiet Tesla has been about 4680 cells off late. One could argue that they want to keep things quiet to avoid the Osbourne effect, but things have still been uncharacteristically quiet for a long time now if they had made good progress.

Personally, I don't envision 4680 cells on MY for a while still (maybe not even in 2022). To be honest, I'm not sure I'd want the mega casts or 4680 cells for my current order. The current MY has gone through a lot of teething pains and is a fairly reliable car without any recurring issues due to design/component flaws. Not sure I want to be an early adopter for new manufacturing tech from Tesla. Historically, that has been a bit of a losing proposition for the early adopters.

 

[Stook02ss]

My opinion is that we will probably end up seeing the mega castings being incorporated into the MY within a few months considering that they are already stacking them up at Fremont. I highly doubt that 4680 cells are coming anytime soon to high volume cars like the MY. The reasons I believe this are:

- Scrapping of the Plaid+ model which was supposed to use 4680 cells for the large range numbers. If they weren't confident enough of using them on such a low-volume car, they have bigger things to sort out before they can hope to incorporate them in high-volume cars like the MY

- Continuing delays with the Cybertruck which relies fundamentally on 4680 cells.

- How quiet Tesla has been about 4680 cells off late. One could argue that they want to keep things quiet to avoid the Osbourne effect, but things have still been uncharacteristically quiet for a long time now if they had made good progress.

Personally, I don't envision 4680 cells on MY for a while still (maybe not even in 2022). To be honest, I'm not sure I'd want the mega casts or 4680 cells for my current order. The current MY has gone through a lot of teething pains and is a fairly reliable car without any recurring issues due to design/component flaws. Not sure I want to be an early adopter for new manufacturing tech from Tesla. Historically, that has been a bit of a losing proposition for the early adopters.

For those that want the MYP, the 4680 could be a big deal. If nothing else the car should be lighter... but it may also lead to greater range, currently the biggest tradeoff between the LR and P.

Either way, there's the other changes that are likely to drop at some point in 2022 as well (many of which we know about as they've already made their way into the Chinese cars and appear to be slated for inclusion in the Berlin ones), albeit they aren't as big, Tesla may be putting of their implementation until they start production in Austin.

 

[DanDi58]

Look what they did with LFP batteries on the SR models.

I suspect the 4680 cell introduction will look almost exactly the same.

Except for the fact that they didn't have to redesign the chassis to use the LFP batteries. They were plug-and-play in the current architecture.

 

[pt19713]

Look what they did with LFP batteries on the SR models.

I suspect the 4680 cell introduction will look almost exactly the same.

This is captured in the EPA request for CoC, as I stated previously. It's pretty obvious if we see a significant change in the battery pack weight, volume, etc as shown below.

Little known fact. 2022 Model 3 Long Range have a higher nominal usable pack size than the 3 Performance. Last year it was the other way around. All of this is found with the assorted documents submitted to the EPA.

 

[Fairchild]

Elon Musk just announced that Model Ys built in Giga Austin will have 4680 batteries. They are almost certified and will be in cars delivered to customers by the end of the quarter. Yay for my MYP Mar delivery date!!