They may have stopped that, idk.
Certainly the 4680s are nowhere the energy density Elon and Drew claimed over three years ago.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
They may have stopped that, idk.
Certainly the 4680s are nowhere the energy density Elon and Drew claimed over three years ago.
This is the basis of the RAM 1500 Ramcharger with a roughly 100kwh pack combined with the venerable pentastar V6 serving as a range extender for up to 690 (I'd just round it out 700) miles of range. Hybrid truck - though in this case - the ICE engine is not connected to the powertrain at all - it is solely available to recharge the battery pack to extend range when traveling long distances or towing/hauling over longer distances. For those who tow/haul regularly - this truck seems like a good solution. A large enough battery pack that daily driving, you'll never use the ICE range extender, yet it's there when you need it and provides much more capability and distance when compared to the CT with only a battery range extender.
They were briefly in the AWD standard range model. So far testing shows that they're a bit of a dud. Same weight as the long range model despite significantly less energy, and worst charging curve of all the Teslas currently for sale, including LFP models.
Do you know of a link where I can read about that? Nothing coming up via Goggle with any validity.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Here. 25 pounds lighter. Model Y AWD vs. Model Y Long Range AWD
~67.8kWh (have to calculate it - it is missing from the doc).
80.71kWh/91.115kWh * 76.533kWh = 67.8kWh
Compare to AWD Long Range - 80.7kWh
So, 16% less energy, about same weight.
92s9p (known from teardown)
Know nothing about charging.
Cybertruck uses Cybercell. V2 4680. It has about 10% more energy density.
Need another generation and a few more years to get better than 2170 and meet the original target. (Actually never mind: they targeted 5x the energy of 2170 (it’s 5.5x the volume)…so they are actually likely hitting that now; 2170 is 18.3Wh/cell, so 5x would be 91Wh/cell - that would be 120-123kWh with current expected cell counts for Cybertruck.)
City range is 381 miles vs. 451 (unadjusted, obviously). (Nearly exactly as expected, 15.5% less)
Cybertruck doesn’t have enough cells is the biggest issue - I hope there is room for more!!! Battery Day projections: Meeting the energy. Not sure where the 16% higher range was supposed to come from. I guess better packing efficiency, lower overhead, lower vehicle weight (structural pack)? They don’t seem to be there with Model Y. Power 6x isn’t really that important.
Last edited:
Here's some info on twitter https://nitter.net/brandenflasch/status/1692526077350940743?t=qT5Mqn6Y80K93tBN1ZDU0Q
If you're interested in tracking battery tech, follow The Limiting Factor on YT: https://www.youtube.com/@thelimitingfactor/videos
This is about the best battery tech coverage I've found. While not entirely dedicated to the 4680 battery, the Q3 update contains quite a bit of information on where the 4680 currently stands and what the forward path looks like:
Physics is not garbage. Your inappropriate understanding of the application of physics is garbage. That is you are using theoretical
principles and trying to infer them in an applied setting.
So your thoughts on the Tesla semi? ~27k lbs, ~40k lb GVWR, ~900 kWh battery, and is a traditional body on frame.
As for the Silverado. This is from the 114 page fleet sales pre delivery packet they sent me, 450 miles with the work truck trim.
Attachments
Last edited:
As and engineer, I use theoretical principles and use them to determine how they can apply to applied settings. They always work, however, there are often (usually?) things one missed when real factors come into play. Sometimes (often) those things render the theory to be irrelevant.
Sometimes, however, such as with mass and energy, one can see how limitations arise. With the old Pb-A (Lead Acid) batteries used by the Gen-1 EV1 and the T-zero (early modern EVs and direct ancestors to Tesla) you just could not add much more batteries to get more range. Diminishing returns set in. The structure/Specific Energy equations because the mass increase went out of control as you added battery. The introduction of NiMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) and Li-ion for the EV1 and T-zero respectively, were the breakthroughs because that same battery mass provided more energy.
I don't have clear thoughts, however, I do know that the Semi does not need to provide much passenger space, nor does it need to carry much mass itself. It only needs to be able to carry the trailer tongue (most likely directly over 8 wheels) and drag the mass behind it. A box trailer also tucks smoothly behind a Semi. We also don't actually know how much range it has with say, a flatbed with loads.
Like the CT and the Silverado EV though, all we have are marketing estimates and projections. I haven't seen any of the actual analyses nor has anyone done any testing on any of these final products yet.
The next couple of years are likely to be as exciting for EV trucks as the last decade was for cars.
Thanks for the Silverado brochures. I'll believe them when I see them.
After looking at how the physics showed they were feasible, I risked a lot of money helping to pave the way for the EV car. I got what I consider to be nearly the perfect car. It meets my car needs and it keeps getting better as more chargers are deployed. However, I'm not doing so again for trucks. I don't need a truck like I do a car and our old one still meets our needs. I'm just watching and trying to provide balance to the trolls who, like with the EV car, are trying to derail it in its infancy by spreading FUD and lies which can't yet be refuted with any authority. If that Silverado EV actually gets 450 miles unloaded, I'll be impressed and interested. Given that they seem to have made it also very aerodynamic (based on the photos), possibly more than the CT, it will be interesting to see what kind of range it gets with cargo protruding out of the back or towing a less-than-aerodynamic trailer. I also don't like the fairings at the leading edge of the bed (like the CT, Ridgeline, Avalanche, and Escalade EXT) since I often find myself loading, unloading, tying down, and adjusting from the sides of pickups. If we do wind up with an EV truck, it may require a compromise on our preferences. Therefore, I'll probably wait until we really know more of the real options.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Believe it. It gets 695.5 miles on the UDDS test, and 607.07 highway.
0.7*(0.55*695.5+0.45*607.07)= 459 miles.
It’s got a 209kWh battery or so, so I would certainly hope it gets that range!
Cybertruck would get similar range with that size pack after removing scalar inflation (set to 0.7). (With expansion, 540-mile range. Lol)
Whether it makes sense to build any of these trucks is another question. It’s the Ultiumate challenge.
Race is on to make batteries cheap and safe.
Last edited:
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
123kWh CT AT tires UDDS 430 miles - confirmed implicitly from order page.
=> 290mi EPA (0.7 scale)
City:
CT AT: 123kWh/(0.7*430mi) = 409Wh/mi
R1TDL AT: 131kWh/(0.7*459mi) = 408Wh/mi
As a regular person with a Tesla Model 3, I use bladder principles.
Every vehicle outlasts my bladder.
No formula's necessary.
Tesla begins inviting customers to order $120K 'Foundation Series' Cybertrucks [Update]
Tesla kicked off deliveries of the Cybertruck last week at Giga Texas, inviting a select few to participate in the Delivery Event and take possession of their Foundation Series Cybertrucks. Now the company is inviting […]
driveteslacanada.ca
Range extender not available until late 2024 (assuming that's not Elon Time).
Range also drops to 318 miles on AWD and 301 miles on tri motor with currently available tires.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Renormalized to 290 miles (0.7 factor) for CT Dual 318mi 0.767 factor.
Compare to 304 miles (0.7 factor R1TDL AT20+500lb 307 miles 0.707) for Rivian.
Similar overall efficiency as expected.
So basically that UDDL test is like saying that the Model 3 has a 500 mile range if you drive 30 mph (~50 kph).
EPA is good for comparison between cars but useless for loaded trucks or towing which is what the long-range trucks are needed for.
I'll wait until Tom Moloughney from INSIDEEVs or someone similar does side-by-side 75 mph tests: empty, with some sort of standard load in the bed, and towing some sort of nominal trailer on the various trucks before I'll really take anything seriously.
LoL!
I don't ever expect to drive 450 or 500 miles in a single shot, however, if towing or carrying a load in the bed, we can expect the range to drop to nearly half. The effective range is even less if one assumes one only charges to about 80% and discharges to about 10% to minimize charging time and stress.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Just responding to your comment.
Yeah it’ll get 600-700 miles or so if you drive slowly as you said, which is corrected to 450 miles.
On the freeway it’ll be more like 350 miles, maybe a bit higher. 600Wh/mi.
This has already been tested by TFL months ago using a Silverado 4WT towing a 6500 lb box trailer:
Screenshot of the end result of the test - 232 miles towing a 6500 lb box trailer at 1.13 miles/kwh using 204.9kwh from a 213kwh battery pack. That's actually pretty impressive IMHO - and this was a real world test.
Attachments
Thanks for sharing this - good info:Tesla begins inviting customers to order $120K 'Foundation Series' Cybertrucks [Update]
Tesla kicked off deliveries of the Cybertruck last week at Giga Texas, inviting a select few to participate in the Delivery Event and take possession of their Foundation Series Cybertrucks. Now the company is inviting […]
Range extender not available until late 2024 (assuming that's not Elon Time).
Range also drops to 318 miles on AWD and 301 miles on tri motor with currently available tires.