Elon said on the call that Model X has about 10% worse economy so a 6% larger pack means about 4% less range compared to the Model S.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Elon said on the call that Model X has about 10% worse economy so a 6% larger pack means about 4% less range compared to the Model S.
brucet999
Active Member
Elon stated that the 90 kWh pack has "partially silicon anodes" and that it represented a case of tiptoeing into silicon anode technology. Since silicon anodes swell/shrink on charge/discharge, there are problems to solve in keeping the electrical connections inside the cell from breaking. I suspect that they have some higher silicon content cells in testing and are waiting for confirmation of durability before putting them into production.
My view was that it is going pretty close to what they projected. Another way to look at it: Capacity can increase for same price, or price can decrease for same capacity. Both fit the expected curve.
Look at the 60 vs 70. Barebones 60 was originally about $70k. (Supercharger access was additional 2k). New 70 is $70k. Includes supercharger access, and more base features. So 10kWh increase for same price is around 16% increase. Seems to fit the curve to me, and maybe exceeds it if you factor in better options.
I was not, because even in Tesla Motors there are no wizards. They are just use the best technology currently available at the market for their battery packs in the term of driving range of the vehicle.
So right now there is just no better technology, than is used in the 90 kWh pack. And Yes this particular 5% improvement is the only progress in volumetric energy density of 18650 cell made from 2012 (but significant progress has been done in power density and life cycle of those cells, mostly caused by widespread using of the SiO additives in 2014)
BEV market is still much smaller than consumer electronics. So the improvement in battery research will be firstly shown here. The industrial grade version of this ~12,6Wh automotive grade cells used in 90kWh pack (85kWh uses the some count of cells but 12Wh) are already used by consumer electronics for a last few months. They are already mass produced by Sanyo, LG and Samsung.
Indeed, I (we?) may be taking those 7% annually a bit to exact as if every each year capacity went up for 7%.
Progress does not consider statistics. It may very well happen that someone figures out how to deal with silicon without it destroying the cells and capacity will lift for 30% in one step.
If he needed 5 years to figure it out there will still be 7% average annual increase and 5 years of no increase in capacity.
Progress does not consider statistics. It may very well happen that someone figures out how to deal with silicon without it destroying the cells and capacity will lift for 30% in one step.
If he needed 5 years to figure it out there will still be 7% average annual increase and 5 years of no increase in capacity.
ArtInCT
Always Learning
JB's prediction was 7% increase in capacity for the same manufacturing cost. I suspect that Tesla had fairly low margins on that 85 kWh pack in mid 2012. I suspect their margins for the mid 2015 90 kWh pack is much improved.
Bottom line, we have no idea what capacity/cost improvements Tesla has made since we don't know their costs, only what price they are selling the overall car at. @trilsOn is right, look at the 60 to 70 kWh price difference for a completely different curve.
Bottom line, we have no idea what capacity/cost improvements Tesla has made since we don't know their costs, only what price they are selling the overall car at. @trilsOn is right, look at the 60 to 70 kWh price difference for a completely different curve.
cpa
Active Member
Here is my silly and unscientific explanation: :wink:
Right now, Tesla has the ability to offer a larger battery than 90kWh if they chose to--just how much I don't know, but I will guess 100kWh, or pretty darn close. This is just my personal speculation, so do not quote me.
I remember the announcement last October when the D was unveiled, and there was a fair amount of displeasure from many new purchasers who had just plunked down a lot of money for a P85+. Some owners took the news well, but others were upset because they would have waited a couple more months to get the D had they known. There was a bit of a backlash on this forum and over at Tesla Motors as well. Many felt that Tesla handled the whole situation poorly.
Perhaps Tesla's marketing and sales executives are taking a more circumspect approach with increasing the battery capacity by only 5kWh. The additional range (12-15 miles) is generally not enough for most folks to be concerned about, even though they just had their cars delivered within the past few weeks. However, if a S100/P100D-sized battery had been announced instead (effectively increasing the range by 40-45 miles), that may have triggered another negative reaction from people who would have wanted it, and would have waited for this much larger battery to be available.
Increasing capacity in smaller increments seems like a more sensible thing to do from a customer relations point of view. And since we can upgrade to larger capacities for an additional fee, this may mitigate ill feelings from most of the new owners or recently ordered customers whose cars are in the production queue.
Finally, it may give Tesla some good data to see how compelling a 5kWh increase in capacity is to customers in order to determine the next battery size increase in the future.
Right now, Tesla has the ability to offer a larger battery than 90kWh if they chose to--just how much I don't know, but I will guess 100kWh, or pretty darn close. This is just my personal speculation, so do not quote me.
I remember the announcement last October when the D was unveiled, and there was a fair amount of displeasure from many new purchasers who had just plunked down a lot of money for a P85+. Some owners took the news well, but others were upset because they would have waited a couple more months to get the D had they known. There was a bit of a backlash on this forum and over at Tesla Motors as well. Many felt that Tesla handled the whole situation poorly.
Perhaps Tesla's marketing and sales executives are taking a more circumspect approach with increasing the battery capacity by only 5kWh. The additional range (12-15 miles) is generally not enough for most folks to be concerned about, even though they just had their cars delivered within the past few weeks. However, if a S100/P100D-sized battery had been announced instead (effectively increasing the range by 40-45 miles), that may have triggered another negative reaction from people who would have wanted it, and would have waited for this much larger battery to be available.
Increasing capacity in smaller increments seems like a more sensible thing to do from a customer relations point of view. And since we can upgrade to larger capacities for an additional fee, this may mitigate ill feelings from most of the new owners or recently ordered customers whose cars are in the production queue.
Finally, it may give Tesla some good data to see how compelling a 5kWh increase in capacity is to customers in order to determine the next battery size increase in the future.
scottf200
Well-Known Member
I think they did just enough to get to 300 for multiple reasons.
Image: http://i.imgur.com/DINI3Lm.png
OK, cool, thanks.
- - - Updated - - -
I suspect you are right... I recall a reference somewhere that the 6% additional energy would "help offset" the impact to range the X was expected to take...
- - - Updated - - -
The 60KWh pack has dummy cells in it.. you can see they are a different color/material and not soldered in to the pack.
- - - Updated - - -
I strongly doubt this.
Electricfan
Active Member
This was interesting, it explains a little about the new battery chemistry and what Tesla might be doing.
http://qz.com/459315/why-did-elon-musk-passed-up-a-chance-to-boast-about-a-scientific-coup/
http://qz.com/459315/why-did-elon-musk-passed-up-a-chance-to-boast-about-a-scientific-coup/
However you want spin it or slice and dice it, 6% increase over 3 years is a bit disappointing. All these 'Tesla is doing it in smaller increments to not upset current buyers' is just pure conjecture.
We simply don't want to accept that perhaps this is all Tesla R&D could achieve.
The first thing a 90D owner should do is to weigh the car. If it is more than 85D that is super bad. If it is the same then good, less super good.
We simply don't want to accept that perhaps this is all Tesla R&D could achieve.
The first thing a 90D owner should do is to weigh the car. If it is more than 85D that is super bad. If it is the same then good, less super good.
There doesn't seem to be much need to increase the capacity if there is no competitive threat. Tesla's Model S is still the longest range EV on the market today. Tesla is achieving its range improvement through a new anode, not through new cell chemistry. Since the new anode is smaller, it allows more power-storing chemicals to fill the cell. That is where the increase is coming from. Tesla's prediction of 5% annual improvement would seem to indicate that they plan on introducing more and more silicon into the anodes over time, reducing the anode sizes and increasing the volume of the other chemicals in the cell that store power.
Since this is the route Tesla is taking, it seems to me that is the best path forward to increase cell capacity. There is only so much they can do. Adding silicon to the anode is a difficult technical challenge because it increases anode degradation. Mitigating this degradation is a top area of Li-ion research. Samsung and other companies are furiously working towards solutions in this area, but Tesla is the first company to actually do it in a commercial product. Tesla has found a way to do something the others haven't, and they seem ahead of others in implementing these new technologies.
We should be celebrating this breakthrough rather than criticizing Tesla for not doing enough. Haven't they already done enough in the last few years?
I think one difference here is that we, on the outside, cannot see what Tesla is doing, on the inside. So public general statements like "5% improvement on average per year" can be very accurate, but that doesn't mean Tesla must include a 5% range increase or 5% price reduction every year in what they sell. They are working to THEIR timetable, trying to change the world, and remain in business long enough to force/lead that change.
Given the great strides Tesla has made, and the clear evidence of very good strategic thinkers (supercharger network... Powerpak... willing to test, and dump, battery swapping... the list goes on and on), I'm willing to trust Tesla in their judgement of overall timing. Of course we all want more, better, NOW (well, except me, because I can only afford what I have now). Manufacturing is complicated and requires long planning and development lead times.
For this post, I'm looking at this from a long-term perspective. In the short term there are examples on TMC where customers are upset, either with good reason or from some perceived minor injustice, with how Tesla makes decisions and meets deadlines. It's like raising a child - there will be daily mistakes, blown "promises" this week, but the overall goal is to get a productive, happy member of society out the door (hah!!!) in 20 years. Tesla's timeframes are a little shorter than that, hopefully.
Tesla can easily make a more energy dense pack, but you have to look at the big picture. If Tesla put out a pack that was 100kwh or more it would have hurt their resale values. This goes double for their CPOs and buybacks.
This small increase works in 2 ways, it helps Tesla get larger profit margins on their packs while allowing cars resale value to not be hurt as much.
Tesla will continue to slowly increase range to have a wider gap in range when the Model 3 comes. Tesla will then have a leap in energy density for the refresh of the Model S probably along the lines of 500 miles range.
Another thing to consider is Tesla is focused on the gigafactory which will have larger than 18650 cells. These cells are where Tesla put most of their improvements into. But at this point they can only mass produce 18650 cells.
This small increase works in 2 ways, it helps Tesla get larger profit margins on their packs while allowing cars resale value to not be hurt as much.
Tesla will continue to slowly increase range to have a wider gap in range when the Model 3 comes. Tesla will then have a leap in energy density for the refresh of the Model S probably along the lines of 500 miles range.
Another thing to consider is Tesla is focused on the gigafactory which will have larger than 18650 cells. These cells are where Tesla put most of their improvements into. But at this point they can only mass produce 18650 cells.
SW2Fiddler
We Are Cognitive Dissidents
If the 90 seems like it could have been more, I pretty much agree...
We know the 'names' of the packs are not the exact kWh capacity but something close that's memorable and marketable.
The Seventy and Ninety are stipulated, they are openly marketing these at this time.
I give a 60-70% probability of an "Eleventy" (110) announced along with Model X.
Zero chance of a Thirteenty sooner than "several" years though.
We know the 'names' of the packs are not the exact kWh capacity but something close that's memorable and marketable.
The Seventy and Ninety are stipulated, they are openly marketing these at this time.
I give a 60-70% probability of an "Eleventy" (110) announced along with Model X.
Zero chance of a Thirteenty sooner than "several" years though.
Similar threads
