Centuries?
I suppose you could stretch the definition of automobile a ways, but I don't think experience with steam powered cars 200 years ago would have much relevance.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I suppose you could stretch the definition of automobile a ways, but I don't think experience with steam powered cars 200 years ago would have much relevance.
Centuries?
I suppose you could stretch the definition of automobile a ways, but I don't think experience with steam powered cars 200 years ago would have much relevance.
I believe Mercedes dates their founding to the Benz Patent-Motorwagen in 1886. So, more than one century, but much less than two.
The companies which merged to form Auto Union (now Audi) all date from the early 20th century.
Centuries?
I suppose you could stretch the definition of automobile a ways, but I don't think experience with steam powered cars 200 years ago would have much relevance.
Oooops
i meant decades! @Sandpiper. I agree with basically everything you say. Tesla has a very strong guiding light in Elon Musk and the start-up approach they are taking with in-house soft-ware heavy solutions. And they design it from scratch, which is ever so impressive. But, once other car makers see the result and disassemble it, they can probably catch up pretty fast unless they react to slow (and after building a battery factory).
The highest RPM motor I could quickly find was that of the Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG Electric Drive. It operates at 13000 RPM. Tesla's third(?) generation motors can run at 18000 RPM. A rotor spinning at 18000 as opposed to 13000 RPM will experience literally 91% greater centripetal force (proportional to velocity squared). This is without looking at differences in physical dimensions and power.
The inverter is a bit more difficult to quantify with available info, but given that improvements in IGBTs allowed Roadster to move to a single-speed gearbox, the complexity visible in images makes it difficult for me to believe that this could be easily replicated.
Depending on what weight you use for Tesla's battery, either few or no other packs have 2/3 the specific energy of Tesla's. Note also that Tesla expects a 10-15% chemistry improvement in specific energy in a few years.
"Laptop batteries" refers to shape. The chemicals inside are more important than the shape of the container.
Agree on Superchargers.
Figuring out the shape of the car is relatively easy, but making the components perform well is hard.
PHEV batteries need to have more power, so making an EV battery later with more energy will be somewhat different, not to mention how the transition will look to consumers.
Having a design for years does not necessarily mean that the product will be competitive. See Audi e-tron.
Skotty
2014 S P85 | 2023 F-150L
So I dont know why my last comments didn't come through... Anyways
@ckessel yea that should be 'decades'
@sandpiper I do agree with most stuff you say!
@arb1ter Well a lot of companies have been producing electric devices for decades (centuries? without getting the edge that Tesla has. But that is not necessarily because they cant do it, but because it's never been cost effective. When it comes to "laptop batteries", at the current state i don't think that Tesla is at all involved in the chemistry of the battery cells on a detailed level. They just managed to pack them and utilize the efficiently (and may be push and encourage Panasonic to produce and ship them the best tech). That will soon change though with the GF.
What Tesla is doing more than technology development, is making smart technology decisions so that others can follow their lead. Before Tesla does anything, noone knows what they are gonna do. When they did it, it makes so much sense and seems obvious. That's why the visions of EM and some other leaders are so important to the company.
@ckessel yea that should be 'decades'
@sandpiper I do agree with most stuff you say!
@arb1ter Well a lot of companies have been producing electric devices for decades (centuries?
without getting the edge that Tesla has. But that is not necessarily because they cant do it, but because it's never been cost effective. When it comes to "laptop batteries", at the current state i don't think that Tesla is at all involved in the chemistry of the battery cells on a detailed level. They just managed to pack them and utilize the efficiently (and may be push and encourage Panasonic to produce and ship them the best tech). That will soon change though with the GF.What Tesla is doing more than technology development, is making smart technology decisions so that others can follow their lead. Before Tesla does anything, noone knows what they are gonna do. When they did it, it makes so much sense and seems obvious. That's why the visions of EM and some other leaders are so important to the company.
Get me right now, I'm a huge Tesla fanboy, but if anyone thinks that no-one else is near Tesla from a tech standpoint, look at what Mate Rimac has created with Rimac Automobili, using a staff of 20 ish people. His car, the Concept_One, is super expensive (~900 000) but it does 0-60 mph in 2.8 seconds and has four independently controlled motors that are produced in-house just as the battery packs etc.
For that price it should also be capable of vertical take offs and landings and travel at Mach 1.
So in reality it isn't that impressive for the price.
First, note that the product is a result of the technology and not the other way around. Rimac made a high-performing car by using a large amount of less advanced tech.
The motors are permanent-magnet type. This type of motor benefits from using expensive neodymium and dysprosium -- recent Nissan Leafs use less dysprosium in exchange for 10% less torque. With the price tag, Rimac can use as much of these as they want. Also, the motors max out at 10600 RPM. Put together, the motors and gearboxes weigh roughly 300 kg, though it appears the inverters are included in this number. Controlling four motors is a software problem, and not an overly complicated one.
The batteries use lithium iron phosphate, which allows for high power at the expense of lower specific energy. That they are able to fit 92 kWh in various locations means the car must have a high battery mass fraction. To move downmarket, you need more energy at a lower price. There are better ways to increase the amount of power that can be given to the motors.
It's easy to forget that Concept_One is a pure supercar, while the Model S is a well-rounded vehicle.
Oh, do they really?
Where are they building their own 'gigafactory' that will supply them with batteries needed for +200m EV in at least xx.xxx annual numbers?
LG Chem broke ground in Nanjing for new factory capable of making batteries for "100.000 EV". Their total capacity is going to be "~400k EVs" per year
I bet they are counting at most 20kWh per EV i.e. ~8 GWh max annual production rate.
For a +200m EV you need at least 55kWh battery pack, so all their capacity together suffices for 140k such EVs.
And don't forget a real Tesla rival must have a longer range to be really seen as a rival. So +85kWh per vehicle, bringing the number down to 100k such vehicles annually.
Still a huge number, but then remember that LGChem's production is already sold out to many different manufacturers, each of them buying in x00 MWh annual quantities.
Tesla's GigaFactory will be more than 4 times larger than whole LGChem.
GigaFactory will be feeding Teslas (only?) and all others and their grandparents are buying from LGChem.
Tesla is the name of the game.
Krugerrand
Meow
Botbldr45
Member
Put that stuff on the road with an infrastructure to support it and I will be impressed. Until then it's just 'big oil' stirring the pot hoping to seed unrest.
The more you construct a tower of suggestion, fantasy, and lies the more people will jump on the elevator........ after all GM said THEY could build the ModelS........
......and the pigs keep flying...
The more you construct a tower of suggestion, fantasy, and lies the more people will jump on the elevator........ after all GM said THEY could build the ModelS........
......and the pigs keep flying...
MassModel3
Member
Isn't the battery Panasonic provides to Tesla minus a portion that provides overheating prevention in lieu of Tesla's building that into the battery packs? That is direct involvement right there. Even though the design is essentially off the shelf batteries, they are still made to Tesla's specifications.
http://www.teslamotors.com/de_CH/forum/forums/battery-chemistry
"Many people say it is standard Panasonic battery, but a Tesla person who should know told me it is actually custom made to Tesla specifications. I did not ask for the exact chemistry."
Put that stuff on the road with an infrastructure to support it and I will be impressed. Until then it's just 'big oil' stirring the pot hoping to seed unrest.
The more you construct a tower of suggestion, fantasy, and lies the more people will jump on the elevator........ after all GM said THEY could build the ModelS........
......and the pigs keep flying...
Yeah, don't confuse us with the facts!
As for who's going to be using the output from the Gigafactory, we know that Solar City will be using them for storage of solar power for home users to avoid peak energy price spikes, and to provide some non-grid power after the sun sets.
What I've never seen mention of is whether Panasonic reserves the right to sell their batteries outside of Tesla, or if the agreement is that all Panasonic batteries produced in the GF will only slide down the line to Tesla.
Last edited:
I don't think total capacity's really an issue. A new cell factory can be up and running in under 2 years so they'd be able to respond.
I think Tesla's potential really comes from an holistic approach that says:
- We need lots of capacity
- We need production costs as low as possible and that can only achieved by minimizing transportation and logistical costs through scale and co-location
- In the long run we can lower costs and environmental impact with renewable energy; and we'll get a PR bonus that will help sales
- If we're really cheap, the static storage market will open up.
M67v
I just work here
Sure you are right about that, and i did mention the high price for that reason. The point is more that the development of high performance tech is possible from other manufacturers too. And if these guys prefer to do a hand built supercar with slightly more efficient and much more expensive motors, that's their choice, but the big manufacturers would do it differently, faster and cheaper.
Having a say in the specification of the battery is very different from controlling the battery chemistry.
Similar threads
