Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

500 + Mile Range Debate

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
The Munro video about their progress tearing down the structural pack was kinda hilarious. Reminds me of the time I tried to figure out how to repair a blown head gasket for the first time.

"DAY 4: Blood has been spilled. We remain undeterred"

To me, the signs point to the pack in the MIT Y's being right around the same or more capacity and much faster-charging than the 2170 packs, (no power limiting/regen limit at low/hihg SoC being the big one that suggest they're leaving a big, big buffer compared to other teslas right now) once they gather some more real-world data. As usual, they are beta testing with willing and enthusiastic customers
 
Last edited:
  • Funny
Reactions: Prairie
The Munro video about their progress tearing down the structural pack was kinda hilarious. Reminds me of the time I tried to figure out how to repair a blown head gasket for the first time.

"DAY 4: Blood has been spilled. We remain undeterred"

To me, the signs point to the pack in the MIT Y's being right around the same or more capacity and much faster-charging than the 2170 packs, (no power limiting/regen limit at low/hihg SoC being the big one that suggest they're leaving a big, big buffer compared to other teslas right now) once they gather some more real-world data. As usual, they are beta testing with willing and enthusiastic customers
From the economics POV, they do not have an incentive to provide larger batteries. The margin on the car is much bigger than the margin on the batteries. Additionally, there is a strong demand for cars and shortage of Li. The demand for cars is so high that whatever they produce people will buy. Once there is an equilibrium they will start looking at longer range, other products. Until there is such high demand I doubt we will see Cybertruck, Roadster, M2 or anything else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Prairie
You are absolutely correct … but in a different way. Yes, the batteries are major constrains for making cars. Hence, the one way to make more cars is by reducing the battery size. The added value of a car is much bigger than the added value for just the battery, so this makes a ton of economic sense.
However, there are quite a few, much cheaper, alternatives at the low battery capacity range of the spectrum. If someone needs a daily driver for the city Leaf (for example) would make much more sense (and more are coming).
On the other hand, range for cars is similar to energy industry - you build for the highest consumption/range, no matter what the base load/daily range is (within limits and with appropriate price structure, of course). So, when families buy cars they look at the longest range they usually need (excluding once-per-year road trip, of course) rather than the daily commute. That is the reason why a lot of people buy hybrid and not EV. Few families could afford a daily commuter and longer trip car - and that is actually bad for the environment.
While one could rent another vehicle for once-per-year road trip, doing that on a regular basis becomes a hassle.
There is also another concern, amplified by the decision to make the batteries a structural part of the vehicle. While that will reduce the production cost, it will make the car disposable based on a non-replaceable part that has limited life. The shorter the range of the car (which necessitates more frequent charges) the shorter the life of the car is.
Novice here. . I thought EV batteries were recycled, or able to be. Am I mistaken?
 
EV's have been out for 10+ years now, and there most certainly are failed batteries. Where they are going, I frankly don't know, and I haven't seen information on it. I hope they are, otherwise the amount of electronics waste going into the land will not be insignificant.
 
Elon calls used battery packs "high grade ore". Former Tesla CTO JB Straubel now runs Redwood Materials - which is doing battery recycling.
My understanding is, the elements inside the batteries do not "wear out." When broken down and separated out you have pure cobalt, lithium, manganese, nickel for the making of new batteries. Cheaper than mining the materials.

Rich
 
Correct. Cobalt and nickel in particular are pretty valuable. Hopefully very few battery packs should wind up "in landfills".

The whole recycling area is fascinating and evolving. No one seems to re-use cells - instead the guts are processed into what is termed "black mass" which can be regarded kinda like concentrated ore from which you could extract useful minerals for new cells.

Contents of cells varies a lot - ironically Tesla is on the leading edge of minimizing their use of the more expensive elements when possible - cell phone used batteries are apparently far richer (and more plentiful in the recycle chain right now). But the used car batteries will be coming. Lots of startups trying to figure out how to affordably process them, since the market ahead is huge. That said, it's gotta be cheaper to do the recycle operation than it is to mine new... and prices vary, some ores are pretty cheap.
 
1670025259743.png


 
  • Like
Reactions: MitchMitch
It will be an expensive Truck. GM says that in 2024 a version of the Truck will be able to tow 20,000 pounds. That indicates that the Truck would be 5th wheel or Gooseneck compatible. But you most likely won't get the range of a Deisel. People won't be happy when they have to down jack large long 5th wheel or Gooseneck Trailers to charge.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DanCar
  • Like
  • Funny
Reactions: mspohr and DanCar
More range would mean less use of superchargers. Bad for business. Less range also means more affordable vehicles since the battery is the most expensive component. In a way less range is a win win.

Superchargers are run at break-even. It's not a profit center for Tesla

Doubling battery size would mean making half as many cars - THAT would affect the bottom line
 
  • Like
Reactions: outdoors
More range would allow for shorter SC sessions to add the same number of kwh. This could make for shorter stops on a long trip because you keep the SoC levels lower on the car. You only need enough energy to get to the next planned stop. An M3LR already has greater range than I. I prefer stopping every couple hours. But, reducing the charge time from, say 20 min to 15 min would make for faster stops.

For remote superchargers, which primarily support travelers, this could reduce the number of stalls required as each car would occupy a stall less time. That represent lower initial cost as well as reduced maintenance.

Still, the 500 mile battery would carry a hefty price just to save a few minutes on each charge.
 
More durable batteries that handle such charging sessions, more chargers. Don't see a 500 mile battery without technology that would make it easier to sell more cars.

Profits matter. A business needs those to make it an ongoing concern. There is no panacea at 500 range. It won't steal business from anyone other than Tesla, as currently no need for such. Hint. There never will be. Never is a strong word, but again absent a change in tech. 500 is a dream outside of the cybertruck of and when it happens.

Goosenecking a trailer while towing a with a cybertruck across the country. That will take some time. I won't be participating.