BTX7 Battery on the latest Tesla EPA filings: 80kWh, 350v, 16 modules

[Krash]

john pane is our lone BTX7 contributor to the Performance Metrics. Interestingly his BTX7 battery (part number 1119235-00-A) coded with upgradable battery option code BR05, has been out performing the BTX5 batteries with similar torque and maximum power specifications. Today he came across Reddit user Teslike referencing these EPA documents: 39834, 39835 and 39836.

Looks like we have a 80kWh battery with 16 modules at 350v currently software locked to 75kWh. Has to be the BTX7.

We are looking for other BTX7 users to contribute runlogs. Especially interesting would be from a quarter mile.

I assume by test weight, that weight is subtracted from the car for testing...

..since the car does weigh more...

 

[t2now1]

My car just completed production and is due for delivery next week. Is there a way for me to check if I have the new pack?

 

[apacheguy]

Interesting that these packs have the same nominal capacity as the Model 3 packs. Yet they are 350 V while the Model 3 is 400 V. Hmm.

Edit: Ok, got confused. Looks like the Model 3 is 350 V. So is this the same pack?

 

[LargeHamCollider]

80P refers to number of cells in parallel. These packs are 80P84S for a total of 6720 cells. Full 100 packs are 86P96S for a total of 8256 cells. I verified this with total KWh ratios. Cars with the new packs should have 8% more range, so 280 miles instead of 259, they should also have 8% more power.

These are definitely not Model 3 packs.

Somewhat entertainingly, these "75" packs hold more energy than the original "85" packs.

This is almost certainly being done because Tesla currently has 2 different types of modules going into MS/X and they would like to shut down the old 444 cells/module manufacturing line in favor of the new 516 cells/module line.

 

[Krash]

My car just completed production and is due for delivery next week. Is there a way for me to check if I have the new pack?

Your option code for battery should say BTXx. You used to be able to right click the car image in "my tesla" and select copy link to see all your codes before delivery. Worst case you wait until delivery and use Visible Tesla. Or just look at the sticker in the passenger front wheel well.

 

[apacheguy]

80P refers to number of cells in parallel. These packs are 80P84S for a total of 6720 cells. Full 100 packs are 86P96S for a total of 8256 cells. I verified this with total KWh ratios. Cars with the new packs should have 8% more range, so 280 miles instead of 259, they should also have 8% more power.

Ok, so sounds they are still using 18650s in this pack. By the way, where did you get the 80P84S? Looking at the OP I don't see this info.

Also, how do you figure that these packs hold more energy than the original 85? A brand new 85 kWh was actually ~82 kWh.

 

[Cory151]

I can confirm as of my tour today, Fremont is still building 18650 modules as fast as they can 24/7. Now if the chemistry of those cells is changed to reflect whats in the new 2170 cells, I have no idea.

 

[LargeHamCollider]

Ok, so sounds they are still using 18650s in this pack. By the way, where did you get the 80P84S? Looking at the OP I don't see this info.

Also, how do you figure that these packs hold more energy than the original 85? A brand new 85 kWh was actually ~82 kWh.

80p almost certainly means "80 cells in parallel" there is no way Tesla would be making some cars with 18650s and some with 2170s, moving to 2170s will require structural changes.
If we assume that 80p does mean "80 cells in parallel," since we knew the old pack had 74 in parallel we'd expect to see an 8% improvement in total capacity, which is exactly what we see. This puts it at 6720 cells total, multiply by 1.06% for chemistry improvements and you get >7104, which was the cell count in the original packs.

 

[Tech_Guy]

Awesome info!!

 

[dennis_d]

As of firmware 17.44 they remove references to 60, 60D, 75,75d from Performance Demo mode and added 80, 80D to a list.

No full list looks like 80, 80D, 90D, P90DL, 100D, P100D, Max (which is limits out out to whatever battery can deliver)

 

[vigge50]

As of firmware 17.44 they remove references to 60, 60D, 75,75d from Performance Demo mode and added 80, 80D to a list.

No full list looks like 80, 80D, 90D, P90DL, 100D, P100D, Max (which is limits out out to whatever battery can deliver)

You do mean “now” in that last sentence?

Do I understand this correctly that this would make it possible for even the smaller pack version to charge at 120 kW at supercharger compare to around 100 kWh for 60, 70 and 75 kWh battery pack?

Really interesting news.

 

[Krash]

As of firmware 17.44...full list looks like 80, 80D, 90D, P90DL, 100D, P100D, Max...

Nice catch. Was the P100D an option before or were P90DL and max the previous top entries?

 

[dennis_d]

Nice catch. Was the P100D an option before or were P90DL and max the previous top entries?

Don't know I got only one version of firmware to look at, verygreen should have multiple versions to confirm

 

[vigge50]

As of firmware 17.44 they remove references to 60, 60D, 75,75d from Performance Demo mode and added 80, 80D to a list.

No full list looks like 80, 80D, 90D, P90DL, 100D, P100D, Max (which is limits out out to whatever battery can deliver)

Shouldn’t the firmware be fore all versions or is that specific version only for certain cars? If they only have new models they should remove 90D and P90DL too. And will they really go back to RWD again after just have removed it with a new 80?

 

[t2now1]

my 75D just completed production & scheduling delivery for next week. source code shows BTX5

 

[evster]

Thanks @Krash for posting. This is very interesting!

Might indicate that Tesla won't move to 2170-cells for X/S for a while? Because if they had plans doing that next year, they probably would not bother to streamline the battery production for S/X and have the same base module for 100/80 but with different number of cells.

Are there many BTX7 delivered in the US to date? Looking into the Design studio, the factory code is still BTX5 for new orders, but this might not say so much about reality anyway.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Thanks @Krash for posting. This is very interesting!

Might indicate that Tesla won't move to 2170-cells for X/S for a while? Because if they had plans doing that next year, they probably would not bother to streamline the battery production for S/X and have the same base module for 100/80 but with different number of cells.

Are there many BTX7 delivered in the US to date? Looking into the Design studio, the factory code is still BTX5 for new orders, but this might not say so much about reality anyway.

Tesla makes a lot of small changes so streamlining like that wouldn't be unusual.
With Model 3 the emphasis and not wanting to work on a major change to the S/X for a while, it makes sense that they'd want to shift the base to the same packing. Capacity is range, driving power and charging power.

Plus, Tesla's current 18650 contract was for a quantity of cells. The faster they can complete the contract the better.

 

[blincoln]

On the other side of acceleration is charging; I am now collecting charging data from ABRP users - see A Better Routeplanner . There is currently one registered user with BTX7 battery sharing data, but still no supercharging sessions.

If you own a BTX7, feel free to log in to MyTesla in ABRP and share your (anonymous) data with the rest of us!

 

[Tintorera]

Ok, so sounds they are still using 18650s in this pack. By the way, where did you get the 80P84S? Looking at the OP I don't see this info.

Also, how do you figure that these packs hold more energy than the original 85? A brand new 85 kWh was actually ~82 kWh.

The 85 kWh pack has a total energy of 81,5 kWh and usable (available) energy is 77,5 kWh, thus the 80P holds more usable energy.

 

[Reciprocity]

I think this is the future of Tesla batteries. They will be slightly oversized and software locked. The cars will probably lose the pack size from the model number and bagging like the model 3 LR and SR. The idea is that the battery never drops below 5-7% and never is charged much over 90%. This allows for a "reserve" on the bottom end and protection as well as speeding charging by never getting to 100% where charging gets rediculusly slow. I'm also guessing that as the battery ages, some of these software locked miles will be allowed to be used. So if a car is rated at 300 miles, that would be 86% of the total capacity of the battery. As the battery ages, a few precent are freed up to combat degradation. Charging will get slower and slower over many years, but the rated range will remain 300 miles for many many years before the degradation hits 14%, but really 10% because you always have to have the anti-brick 2-3%. This is more about the common owner and not is fanatics. It's about setting expectations for owners that are not as savvy as is forum dwellers. It's about having a million mile power train that has 300+ rated miles for the entire million miles. I'm theory, the software lock could take into account weather and temperature and route planning to allow for more charge dynamically, with the first of maintain as best as possible that 300 Mile range. Obviously, bad weather would be impossible to completely offset as it can lower range by 20% or more, but maybe an extra 10% could make a huge difference. Also, disasters like hurricanes could unlock the 10% of buffer.

I might be crazy, but I think you already see it with the model 3 that was tested by the EPA at over 340 miles for a car with 310 mile rated range. In the EPA test, they run the car to zero to test range.

How many is you drive 20+ miles with your fuel light on in your ICE? I know I do. It's for those people, you know, normal people.