500 + Mile Range Debate

[ZenRockGarden]

Range costs cubic-dollars, and cubic pounds, both of which burden you as you spend 95% of your time doing short in town trips.

How often do you really want to drive for 4+ hours without a short break?

My suggestion is for Tesla to perfect LFP or other chemistry that is friendly to full 100% to 0% usage and then combine it with the packaging efficiency of the 4680 format to deliver a real-world 300 to 400 mile range pack and call it good.

Another idea: Save $20k by purchasing the modest-range everyday car, and just Turo a long-range 300 KWh beast for the twice yearly cross country trip.

 

[kilpatds]

The majority of my miles are highway miles. Why do you assume I must not exist?

Edit: there's a weird thing with long tail distributions where the mode and mean can be WIDELY divergent. I used to work for a storage company where we stored small files very badly, but it wasn't Actually relevant to our customers because it always turned out that a few big files took all their space. The average file is small, the average disk block is taken by a large file. Fixing our small file storage efficiency only got you 1-2% total space, even though it dropped the space required for all the small files by 4x.

So ... While my average day driving might be local[0], the long trips are so long that the average mile is highway.

[0] actually not true either.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

There's dozens of people on this thread - I was replying to a general "you", not any one person in particular. Of course individual driving habits may vary. A few folks may frequently need 4+ hours of uninterrupted highway time, but I will again assert that MOST of "you" are not in that camp and it does not make sense to double the price of the model Y to optimize for it

 

[kilpatds]

But it makes sense to offer the big battery to those of us that exist. Because we do exist.

Should the average MY have a 150kWh battery? Likely not. But last I checked, the median M3 is a SR, not a LR. So people can make the right choice. Let us.

 

[wornout]

There's dozens of people on this thread - I was replying to a general "you", not any one person in particular. Of course individual driving habits may vary. A few folks may frequently need 4+ hours of uninterrupted highway time, but I will again assert that MOST of "you" are not in that camp and it does not make sense to double the price of the model Y to optimize for it

Personally, I run out of range/battery before I need to go pee.

 

[wornout]

But it makes sense to offer the big battery to those of us that exist. Because we do exist.

Should the average MY have a 150kWh battery? Likely not. But last I checked, the median M3 is a SR, not a LR. So people can make the right choice. Let us.

+1. MS is their premium car. IMHO, would make sense to offer premium range and performance.

 

[MontyFloyd]

For the record, over 4 hours glued to a seat, no matter how comfortable, is about all I can handle.
300 miles is about the sweet spot for range, and that if someone does want to go X-country.
Stay in city, 150 miles will be fine (for spread out cities like Houston).

 

[kilpatds]

I truly don't understand conflating maximum stint with maximum range. My better half needs stops ever hours or so, but boy it's nicer when those can be quick stops at whatever rest area I'm near or park or... And my choices aren't tied to charger locations. I'd also rather not have chargers at every park I might want to stretch my legs at.

There's a difference between "I need to stop for a bio break (2min)" and "I need to stop for a 15 minute charge". And having to do the first doesn't negate the cost of the 2nd.

My personal endurance from when I was driving ICE cars was more like 10 hours. Sure, put stops and fuel stops in there, but those are only ~3 minutes. And even then, I generally preferred to go closer to 4-5 hours between. (Atlanta to DC with one stop, for example. C5 Corvette was a great road tripping car and could go ~400 miles at "75" on a single tank of gas. ~5 hours between stops).

But if I had a 500 mile EV, I'd not be trying to recreate that. I WOULD be doing 250 mile stints on the usual "bounce along the bottom of the pack" approach that allows for the fastest charging. And a 250 mile range doesn't allow for 15 minute stops to go another 250 miles.

Conflating bio break times with charge times only works if your stop is expected to be 45min-1hour .... And, uh ... Wat?

 

[kilpatds]

(Since I waited too long to read to be able to edit...

"And a 250-mile max range EV doesn't charge enough during a 15 minute stop to go another 250 miles at highway speeds")

 

[Boza]

Please consider that one will never reach or use the full EPA range because it will be damaging to the battery pack. Additionally, cold/hot weather and mountain driving significantly reduce the range. So, the real world range is 1/2 to 2/3 of the EPA range. Hence, 400mi car will practically have about 250mi - 300mi usable range.

 

[Giampigua]

Range costs cubic-dollars, and cubic pounds, both of which burden you as you spend 95% of your time doing short in town trips.

How often do you really want to drive for 4+ hours without a short break?

My suggestion is for Tesla to perfect LFP or other chemistry that is friendly to full 100% to 0% usage and then combine it with the packaging efficiency of the 4680 format to deliver a real-world 300 to 400 mile range pack and call it good.

Another idea: Save $20k by purchasing the modest-range everyday car, and just Turo a long-range 300 KWh beast for the twice yearly cross country trip.

My suggestion is to remove all luxury items from all cars, because they are substantially needless and expensive.Tthis way a Model S could cost a good 30% less...

Joke apart, anyone has its needs and its desires.

If we limit the discussions on "needs", we should make an appeal to Tesla to immediately stop Plaid versions.

Otherwise, someone should explain to me why should a desire of higher range be sacrified and a desire of faster accelleration preserved.

What will happen is what we can see for any product in a free market: producers will offer to the market all possible range of products to catch the consumers, and competition will help that process.

Do not confuse the actual period, where Tesla is/was the sole EV producer with the next period, where an incredible range of products will appear to the market. At that time, someone will offer more range consistent cars to those (like me) that desires it, regardless if they "need" it.

 

[kilpatds]

Otherwise, someone should explain to me why should a desire of higher range be sacrified and a desire of faster accelleration preserved.

To grossly oversimplify, in EVs torque comes from the motor, power comes from the battery. If the battery is big enough to provide good range, it will inherently also provide insane power.

Now, the plaid has special motors to keep putting out good torque at high RPM, and that's pretty darn irrelevant to range. But in general: long range EVs are fast EVs because the core ingredient to both is the same - a big battery.

(Also, personally, I want my 500 mile EV to be model-3 sized or smaller. I dislike the "only model S can have good range" approach because the model S is too physically large and doesn't fit anywhere except the highway. Wish the roadster was more real so I could know what the exterior dimensions of it would be)

 

[Boza]

My suggestion is to remove all luxury items from all cars, because they are substantially needless and expensive.Tthis way a Model S could cost a good 30% less...

Tesla is not a luxury car.

 

[Terminator857]

Tesla is not a luxury car.

Although you don't consider it a luxury car, the industry does, because of its price range.

 

[chinney]

For 'family' and 'personal' EVs (cars, SUVs), I see a future where you would have a 'standard' range of about 400 miles, with a short range version of about 300 miles and a long range version of about 500 miles (all in nominal original EPA miles). There might also be ultra low range 'urban' versions with even lower range and maybe ultra-long range versions with even more.

Personally, our 2020 Model 3 with nominal original range of about 320 miles meets all of our driving needs fairly well, even on the highway, with only minor inconvenience due to charging. But it could be a bit better, especially for winter driving. Actually, it meets about 90% of our driving needs without any issue at all, and it is only rarely, on long trips, where the minor inconvenience arises.

To achieve the future that I envision above in vehicles that will not be too ponderous or completely uneconomical, battery technology will have to improve to allow cheaper and lighter batteries. But that day is coming - and coming soon.

 

[Boza]

Although you don't consider it a luxury car, the industry does, because of its price range.

Yes, it is a general misconception because the industry does not have the concept of “technologically advanced” car - where Tesla belongs. If one had a luxury car they will immediately spot the difference.

 

[Terminator857]

Yes, it is a general misconception because the industry does not have the concept of “technologically advanced” car - where Tesla belongs. If one had a luxury car they will immediately spot the difference.

Technologically advanced = Luxury
From wiktionary:

1. Something desirable but expensive.
2. Something that is pleasant but not necessary in life.

 

[Boza]

Technologically advanced = Luxury
From wiktionary:

1. Something desirable but expensive.
2. Something that is pleasant but not necessary in life.

The Lunar Landing module was super technologically advanced but I would hardly call it luxury

 

[SageBrush]

But it makes sense to offer the big battery to those of us that exist. Because we do exist.

In a world where the R&D cost to offer you the car you want is zero -- no doubt.

 

[kilpatds]

Fair point, but the R&D costs for "and make the battery bigger" aren't huge, especially as battery sizes and weights drop (and so you don't have to redo all the crash protection.) And also, evidence is that we'll pay.