-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
85 to 100 : only 15 kWh Increase in 4 years?
- Thread starter Electroman
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model S
int32_t
Tesla Spotter
That's kind of like saying the MacBook Air is disappointing because, in seven years, its base clock speed hasn't increased. Actually there's a lot more to it than that ... and if that clock speed (or energy storage, which correlates to range) is sufficient for most use cases, why change it? Especially since increasing the clock speed (adding energy capacity) would increase cost (same for analogy) and reduce battery life (increase weight, lessening the impact of the greater capacity). At some point the analogy will break, but the current Air, like the current Model S, is the same in many ways to the original and also much improved at the same time. At some point there will be an amazing shiny new successor to the Model S, I'm sure, just as the MacBook is to the Air.
Nissan and BMW, I will venture to say, are nowhere near the same league as Tesla in this field. If you don't push the tech to begin with, it's a lot easier to significantly improve on it later!
Even more disappointing, if you look at it from your perspective, is that the 100kwh pack is still using 18650's....
But I recall, wasn't the trade-off a 7% increase in density or a 7% reduction in cost per kw? I would argue they have absolutely succeeded in both a reduction in cost per kw and total pack cost.
3s-a-charm
Active Member
No, they are using the same cells as in the 90 kWh but by arranging them differently they have manage to fit more cells. The new 2170 cells wound come to Model S and X until end of next year.
So at 4%(nice and conservative) will it still be considered poor progress when the 2026 P150DL which gets 470 miles on a charge(assuming no further drivetrain efficiency improvements or aerodynamic improvements) poor progress?
How about the 2036 P220DL which gets an even 700 miles EPA rated miles? Or the 2046 P485DL which gets 1525 EPA rated miles on a single charge?
How about the 2036 P220DL which gets an even 700 miles EPA rated miles? Or the 2046 P485DL which gets 1525 EPA rated miles on a single charge?
3s-a-charm
Active Member
Correction: it will be a P150DMP (Maximum Plaid!)
By 2046 I suspect Elon will have been able to make a car so fast it has a time travel mode...
The cells themselves have not improved much. A small 5-6% increase in energy density is all they have achieved so far. The 100 battery is a different design where they managed to fit more cells in. To be honest I also would have expected a bigger improvement in 4 years. I believe that they have made much bigger improvements, but not applying these to the old 18650 cell but focus to make it work in the new cell format they will produce at the Giga factory. TBH the range of the Model S and X is plenty and no one comes even close. Despite having 4 years, there is still no real competition. So from that point of view Tesla is just fine. They are still way in the lead and put all their efforts into the new cell production and the Model 3 which will be the real challenge.
Tam
Well-Known Member
When talking about better energy density, I would imagine it's about more energy packed in a same cell volume/size.
I thought Elon explained that this is not about cell chemistry improvement but it's about how to pack more of the same cells so closely together in a same form factor of the battery pack despite of the limitation of the cooling system.
That comparison is meaningless as if you would compare Prius traction battery that was 1.3 kWh and then it's increased to 4.4 kWh which is more than 238% increase but who cares?
What counts is since Tesla can produce a 100 kWh car, can others do one with more than 100 kWh? Not from 24 to 30!
Elon did say that battery technology would progress in energy density at a rate of 5 to 7% per year. In the last four years the cells tesla is using have only had one significant change with silicon added to the anode when they went from the 85 to the 90. So the actual increase in battery energy density is well short of the projected rate of change. Having said that, the changes are more likely to be step changes than gradual improvements. So when it comes, the next iteration of battery density technology should turn a 100kwh battery pack into perhaps 150kwh or more, maybe with gel technology, lithium air or graphene etc etc.
Well, yes & no. It is plenty for early adopters and EV advocates. Coming from a Leaf, this is like a dream. I am willing to wait another 15 minutes for a full charge in a SC, and if it is really warranted to get to the destination I will drive a bit slower than speed limit, without AC or heating and I won't even complain about it.
But once you go beyond the early adopters, the $200 mile range on an S85 on a subzero cold windy day is simply not enough for the mainstream. Increasing the SC density only mitigates the problem of not getting stranded, but the your trip is just as slower end to end, compared to an ICE. You get ICE equivalent faster trips end to end, only by increasing the range and not by increasing the SC density.
The only way you get to a range of 300 miles on an X on a 20F windy day, is by increasing the cell level energy density. No amount of engineering at the battery level is going to cut it.
Hopefully the new cell format will be a step in that direction.
Last edited by a moderator:
