Ads which illustrate why I am so pissed about Tesla's marketing of the 160

[NigelM]

It's clear from other threads and various members conversations with Tesla staff that not even everything for the U.S, is finalized yet. I have to believe that Tesla is going to be smart enough to recognize the different needs of other markets/continents, but isn't it also quite likely that they haven't gone to all those final decisions yet?

P.S. where did this thread go so far OT?

 

[stopcrazypp]

Stop: If they just supported what is becoming the de facto standard, they wouldn't have to bother building out a network of chargers for 160 mile range as others will do it for them.

I think it's a bit early to say Tesla's plug standard will become "de facto". The only thing we have confirmed at this point is that Tesla wants to build their own supercharger network and if it is to work for the 160 mile packs, then the distance between chargers will have to be roughly halved.

Again this goes back to my main question: is the hardware required for quick charging already in the 160 mile version? If it is, then Tesla can choose to open up the supercharger/quick charge to 160 packs in the future with a firmware upgrade, when it really becomes "de facto". I think JRP3 makes a valid point that Tesla might want to limit access to the superchargers at this point (we'll have to see what "optional" means in the 60kWh case to really know).

 

[dpeilow]

I think it's a bit early to say Tesla's plug standard will become "de facto".

We're not... I should have been more clear - the de facto rapid charge is rapidly becoming CHAdeMO (as they spotted up thread).

 

[VolkerP]

a little remark towards the thread title.

Elon repeatedly stated things like "there's no competition for Tesla right now" and "C'mon guys, how hard can it be?"

BUT there is the LEAF and the Mitsubishi i and there were Aptera and Think! and others. Methinks Elon disregards these EVs as competition because he designed Tesla as a "long range EV" only brand. This rules out cars with small packs that can be quick charged multiple times on a road trip. Tesla's ESS architecture is all about energy density which is a natural opponent of power density in today's cell chemistries. The consequences are 1) no discharging >4C 2) no quick charging 3) pack warranty designed towards <0.5C charging.
The consequence is, the 160miler base model is not suitable to do the same things that you could do with a LEAF or i. It is not a better LEAF in any aspect even if it costs north of $10k more! I can see how this is a bitter disappointment for some.

Edit: I will keep my original writing since it was quoted below, but what I indented to write is "It is not a better LEAF in every aspect even if it costs north of $10k more!"

 

[dpeilow]

I wondered whether a pack that was a mix of the A123 cells and high energy density Panasonic 3.1Ah cells might work. One could have 30kWh of A123 and 10kWh of the Panasonics.

Charge the A123 at 3C and 0.6C for the Panasonic.

Any hints on Tesla's costs for the 3.1s?

 

[surfingslovak]

3) pack warranty designed towards <0.5C charging

Volker, great comment. I would tend to agree with everything you said with the exception of this. If you used a '<=' sign, it wouldn't be a problem. A while ago, I found a report on battery degradation, which determined empirically that charging at 0.5C is best for long-term battery health. I know it's hard to generalize, but I believe that the rationale for this is balancing heat development with the overall length of the charging process.

In this context, 20kW charging would likely be ideal for the 160-mile Model S trim. I believe that Chademo is capable of throttling its output current. I have only passing familiarity with the Chademo protocol, but I believe that the charging current, among other parameters, can be negotiated between the vehicle and the external DC charger.

The problem with the 20 kW twin-charger configuration is that not many L2 stations will support this power level. This is likely the reason why Roadster owners did not utilize their 18kW onboard charger fully, which in turn prompted Tesla's decision to make it optional, and save some money. It's is just one man's opinion, but as additional details about Tesla's fast charging strategy trickle out, it's a mistake not to support Chademo quick charging. Via an adapter or a factory-installed option.

 

[stopcrazypp]

The consequence is, the 160miler base model is not suitable to do the same things that you could do with a LEAF or i. It is not a better LEAF in any aspect even if it costs north of $10k more! I can see how this is a bitter disappointment for some.

I think that is more than a bit unfair (and probably just a reflection of the bitterness of expecting QC included or available as an option on the 160 pack). The Model S is better in the following ways: better performance, better luxury, better passenger/cargo space, better looks, better handling, better range, better level 2 charging, included common 240V socket, etc. The only thing the Leaf/i can do that the base Model S can't is QC, but there's a lot more stuff the base Model S can do that the Leaf/i can't do.

And looking at this thread, I think people are giving Leaf/i + QC a bit too much credit:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/7085-Leaf-vs-40kW-Tesla-race.
It seems it would take a trip of 300+miles before the Leaf with QC will beat the base Model S charging on 20kW level 2.

 

[brianman]

I wondered whether a pack that was a mix of the A123 cells and high energy density Panasonic 3.1Ah cells might work. One could have 30kWh of A123 and 10kWh of the Panasonics.

Sounds like a worst of both worlds situation. You don't maximize charge amount, you don't maximize charge rate, and you introduce new reliability and predictability concerns by having a mixture.

Put another way, mixing battery types has some of the same types of problems that hybrids have vs. EV.

 

[dsm363]

It's clear from other threads and various members conversations with Tesla staff that not even everything for the U.S, is finalized yet. I have to believe that Tesla is going to be smart enough to recognize the different needs of other markets/continents, but isn't it also quite likely that they haven't gone to all those final decisions yet?

P.S. where did this thread go so far OT?

I agree. Should we start a new thread with this battery discussion? This hasn't been about someone angry about Tesla's marketing of the 40 kWh pack for a long time.

 

[JRP3]

Put another way, mixing battery types has some of the same types of problems that hybrids have vs. EV.

There has been discussion of using some high C rate cells such as A123 to help support a lower C rate higher energy density pack to produce needed current under high demand, and take high levels of regen, but only for short periods. I think some of the DIY crowd has tried it, not sure of the results at this point, but I don't think it's the same level of complexity as a hybrid.

 

[VolkerP]

If you used a '<=' sign, it wouldn't be a problem.

Yup, fully agree. Technically, you can draw 20kW of which some power goes into A/C+fans so we arrive below 0.5C that go into the 40kW pack.

In this context, 20kW charging would likely be ideal for the 160-mile Model S trim. I believe that Chademo is capable of throttling its output current. I have only passing familiarity with the Chademo protocol, but I believe that the charging current, among other parameters, can be negotiated between the vehicle and the external DC charger.

Sounds plausible to me. Here again rises the argument that an EV uses a charge point that cannot make full use of its power, like a GM Volt or LEAF charging on a 30A/240V J1772 or a LEAF with (hypothetical) Tesla->CHAdeMo adapter quick-charging on a 90kW Tesla SuperCharger... call that "charge point enviousness" but it has been brought up. The proposed solution is to have additional plugs for 20kW AC charging at every super charger installation that can be used on an adjacent parking slot.

The problem with the 20 kW twin-charger configuration is that not many L2 stations will support this power level. This is likely the reason why Roadster owners did not utilize their 18kW onboard charger fully.

Most Roadsters road trip stories report that trips are planned around existing HPCs. All of UK and most of Germany is covered with HPCs. California has a fair coverage. Many Roadster owners initiated setting up HPCs for public use in the blind spots between POIs. Most HPCs are wired to deliver the full 70A, some at 208V, some at 240V. If they are converted to J1772 plug, you will find >14kW on the road with the standard J1772 adapter that comes with Model S.

The Roadster on board charger is not put to full use for most of the time because most charging happens at home and overnight (~8h) on a 3/4 full pack. Heat and fan noise are greatly reduced at 32A/8kW. Even Hans-Jörg von Gemmingen who puts >200miles on his Roadster every day is charging at 32A.