Too bad about the range not recalibrating (if that's what it is), I was hoping different. I assume you started the trip at 100% charge. Love Mustard's, love the French Laundry, Brix and the Rutherford Grill, oh and the vino. [emoji485]
Too bad about the range not recalibrating (if that's what it is), I was hoping different. I assume you started the trip at 100% charge. Love Mustard's, love the French Laundry, Brix and the Rutherford Grill, oh and the vino. [emoji485]
I am not sure if i should post it here as it not yet confirmed, but apparently big car German OEM Reengineering division took P90D apart to check out the chemistry and was surprised to find the cells being 100% same as with S85 cars, which would imply range increase either due to less built in degeneration reserve or more efficient powertrains or both.
The news is now making the rounds in German Engineering community
The news is now making the rounds in German Engineering community
You posted in the Short-Term thread you expect that to be something big if true. I don´t really get the point of the story - I don´t think anyone claimed that the P90D had a different chemistry, right? And with a German company most likely involved with the big German automakers in charge of this, you don´t expect any ulterior motives behind this, do you?
Definetly but if Tesla indeed charged people 3k$ for what is basicly a software fix that reduces the "degeneration reserve", you can expect some pissed owners (and shareholders).
Again i was forwarded a semi-internal email from a friend, when you want to damage a competitor they would have leaked it to press or something.
Again i was forwarded a semi-internal email from a friend, when you want to damage a competitor they would have leaked it to press or something.
Maybe I am misunderstanding something here but as far as I am concerned, this is not something new : from charging voltages it's pretty clear that the Tesla increased the number of cells and not the chemistry of individual cells to go from 85 to 90 kWh? Either way, I am not clear how this would imply range increase comes from less degeneration reserve of more efficient powertrains. If there are more cells in the pack, the stored energy is going to be proportionally higher?
Well maybe i dont get it but if Tesla said same number of cells with more energy, and now Tests (apparently) show same batteries, if we have same number of same batteries, where does the extra range come from then`?
Elon Musk mentioned on the press call announcing the 90D that they had added some silicon to the anode. I don't know how to reconcile that with this though!
Right and to me that's changing the chemistry. I'd discount Ingenieurs post as untrue for now.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Of course they could have done exactly nothing to the battery and just called the 85 a 90 and let it go to a higher voltage at 100% SOC.
If they added Si to the anode then that's a chemistry change.
If they did nothing but charged people $3k more that would be fraudulent. Not likely IMO.
If they added Si to the anode then that's a chemistry change.
If they did nothing but charged people $3k more that would be fraudulent. Not likely IMO.
I dont know about Silicone in the anode, what i was told is that the energy density was same as before, the number of cells is same, so only explaination would be software fix, maybe there is now silocone is that anode, but it didnt increase the energy contained in the cell, so only explaination either more efficient powertrain or less reserve from my point of view
Gerardf
Active Member
Well, how is your source so sure it is the same cells ? and the same energy density..
Did they check the cell part number (assuming the Tesla cells HAVE a printed part number) and measure the exact energy density ?
From 85 kWh to 90 kWh is less than 6%.
Implying Tesla would lie about using an improved cell chemistry would need much more proof before such rumour is spread around.
Did they check the cell part number (assuming the Tesla cells HAVE a printed part number) and measure the exact energy density ?
From 85 kWh to 90 kWh is less than 6%.
Implying Tesla would lie about using an improved cell chemistry would need much more proof before such rumour is spread around.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
If you're an engineer then surely you can understand that kWh rating for a battery is arbitrary as in you put a floor and top voltage and between those is your 0-100 SOC.
If adding Si to the anode allows you to increase your voltage range without increased degradation then that is a legitimate claim to having increased the energy storage capacity of the battery cell. If not then you're trading capacity for battery life. So what is it you're suggesting that you have information showing?
I have no means to check back regarding your reservations, all i heard is that they didnt find what they were expecting and were surprised enough for information to be sent around to more then usual recipients within the company.
If S90 show higher then usual range loss it may validate my concerns. Maybe someone like EVTV will pick up a salvaged S90 and check out the cells, or someone else does
If S90 show higher then usual range loss it may validate my concerns. Maybe someone like EVTV will pick up a salvaged S90 and check out the cells, or someone else does
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Well OK then. Let's see what the degradation data shows as time passes with the 90 vs 85. And if you do get anything else than this rumor then post it. For all we know the only difference is the Si in the anode which makes for very similar charge/discharge/resistance/impedance characteristics and the same weight. So you'd have to know what to look for before saying "the cells are the same".
There's range loss data in this thread but that doesn't necessarily prove or disprove this theory.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Tesla seems to rate their cell/pack capacity higher than most tests would indicate. I would not put much significance into someone else getting a lower capacity reading when testing. Tesla also rates their capacity with brand new cells hot off the presses, so to speak. Any cell taken out of a pack with some miles on it will show less capacity, since the fastest capacity loss happens in the first few cycles.
It's gotta be new chemistry. The P90D performs better at any SOC compared to the P85D. How is this reconciled if they use the same cells?
MorrisonHiker
S 100D 2021.4.12
Mercedes used to charge $600 extra to enable Range Mode on the B-Class Electric.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
LargeHamCollider
Battery cells != scalable
If it was just software then P85DL performance would equal P90DL performance, but this is not the case.
Similar threads
