Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register
  • We just completed a significant update, but we still have some fixes and adjustments to make. Please see this thread for more details and to find out how to revert to the old design. Cheers!

Blog Cadillac Introduces Luxury Electric SUV

Zorg

Active Member
Oct 24, 2017
1,976
1,828
Fremont, ca
NOT kWh. kW

The significance is simple. You can cut the charging time to almost half.
You can have the car waiting for you rather than waiting for the car.

Actually, with current battery technology, this is not true at all. The 250KW charging power is a bit of a gimmick as it only occurs for a very brief period and then tapers down very quickly. Fact is that it's very hard to charge batteries at faster than 1C on average, which is why it's close to an hour to go from nearly empty to 100%. So, unless we have new batteries in the next couple years that can somehow take over 2C of charging current for long periods of time, 150KW is perfectly fine and will not be materially slower than your 250KW Tesla peak charging power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DanCar

Saghost

Well-Known Member
Oct 9, 2013
8,224
7,086
Delaware
Actually, with current battery technology, this is not true at all. The 250KW charging power is a bit of a gimmick as it only occurs for a very brief period and then tapers down very quickly. Fact is that it's very hard to charge batteries at faster than 1C on average, which is why it's close to an hour to go from nearly empty to 100%. So, unless we have new batteries in the next couple years that can somehow take over 2C of charging current for long periods of time, 150KW is perfectly fine and will not be materially slower than your 250KW Tesla peak charging power.

All about the chosen design and chemistry compromises. There’s nothing inherently magical about 1C charge rates - there are chemistries in production today that are perfectly happy doing 5 or 10C every day, like the Lithium Titanate ones used in some of the California buses.

But the energy density and cost per kWh suck compared with the ones Tesla is using. So that particular choice isn’t right for Tesla.

I think it is reasonable to expect faster charging rates going forward as more money gets poured into battery research.
 

Zorg

Active Member
Oct 24, 2017
1,976
1,828
Fremont, ca
All about the chosen design and chemistry compromises. There’s nothing inherently magical about 1C charge rates - there are chemistries in production today that are perfectly happy doing 5 or 10C every day, like the Lithium Titanate ones used in some of the California buses.

But the energy density and cost per kWh suck compared with the ones Tesla is using. So that particular choice isn’t right for Tesla.

I think it is reasonable to expect faster charging rates going forward as more money gets poured into battery research.

Indeed, but we have a long ways to go before 250KW peak charging rate is significantly faster than 150KW peak rate on a 100KWh battery. Now that 250KW gonna come in real handy on the 200KWh CT battery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DanCar

SageBrush

REJECT Fascism
May 7, 2015
12,806
17,137
New Mexico
Actually, with current battery technology, this is not true at all. The 250KW charging power is a bit of a gimmick as it only occurs for a very brief period and then tapers down very quickly. Fact is that it's very hard to charge batteries at faster than 1C on average, which is why it's close to an hour to go from nearly empty to 100%. So, unless we have new batteries in the next couple years that can somehow take over 2C of charging current for long periods of time, 150KW is perfectly fine and will not be materially slower than your 250KW Tesla peak charging power.
You are presuming a 0 -> 100% SoC charge but that is not required or even preferred. I can average ~ 200 kW in my Model 3 LR over the bottom-ish 30% of its SoC. No gimmick there, and extremely useful. It gives me the needed flexibility to almost never wait for my car to charge up to the amount I want.
 

Zorg

Active Member
Oct 24, 2017
1,976
1,828
Fremont, ca
You are presuming a 0 -> 100% SoC charge but that is not required or even preferred. I can average ~ 200 kW in my Model 3 LR over the bottom-ish 30% of its SoC. No gimmick there, and extremely useful. It gives me the needed flexibility to almost never wait for my car to charge up to the amount I want.

No, I was not. I'm only highlighting that the average charging speed from 0 to 100% is about 1C in current electric cars. Conversely, you're assuming that everyone is interested in charging speed from low single digit SOC to 30%. For most users that charge from say 20 to 80% (or thereabout), the 250KW peak charging rate is marginally faster than 150KW. It's even more so true in an S or X. Now, hopefully the next 2 years will bring about all kinds of wonderful advances in the world of batteries and higher sustained charging rates will become the norm. Until then, 150 vs 250KW peak charging doesn't materially impact charging speed for the average user.
 

msm859

Member
Oct 23, 2019
435
796
California
No, I was not. I'm only highlighting that the average charging speed from 0 to 100% is about 1C in current electric cars. Conversely, you're assuming that everyone is interested in charging speed from low single digit SOC to 30%. For most users that charge from say 20 to 80% (or thereabout), the 250KW peak charging rate is marginally faster than 150KW. It's even more so true in an S or X. Now, hopefully the next 2 years will bring about all kinds of wonderful advances in the world of batteries and higher sustained charging rates will become the norm. Until then, 150 vs 250KW peak charging doesn't materially impact charging speed for the average user.

Except your analysis assumes that the 150kw "peak" on the Cadillac will not drop off like the peak with the 250kw charger. "peaks" are nice to talk about but it is the more sustained or perhaps average charge rate that matters more. I would hope if the peak is 250kw it will also have a higher sustained charging rate than a care that peaks at 150kw.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Earl

Zorg

Active Member
Oct 24, 2017
1,976
1,828
Fremont, ca
Except your analysis assumes that the 150kw "peak" on the Cadillac will not drop off like the peak with the 250kw charger. "peaks" are nice to talk about but it is the more sustained or perhaps average charge rate that matters more. I would hope if the peak is 250kw it will also have a higher sustained charging rate than a care that peaks at 150kw.

If Cadillac cells work like Tesla, a 150KW peak will last longer than a 250KW peak. In a model X (and I assume S), the current 200-250KW peak lasts exactly 10 seconds.

For clarity, I think that 250KW peak charging rate is awesome, however, I also don't think that it's a game changer vs 150KW charging rate on current size batteries and with the current battery technology.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SOULPEDL and redalf

RubberToe

Supporting the greater good
Jun 28, 2012
3,177
8,016
El Lay
Interesting take from several of you. Polarized like a permanent magnet motor. In the absence of facts as none were provided such as cost or battery innovation, this is merely a discussion of emotion and a function how people are invested in the markets.

Not quite an absence of facts. GM produced the EV1 (crunched), Volt (discontinued), ELR (more spent on advertising than vehicle revenue), Bolt (don't get me started). Now something new is being proposed a couple years from now.

I used to bet the horses a lot. People study the past performance, cause past performance is often a good indicator of future performance. A horse that finishes last in 4 straight races isn't going to win the Kentucky Derby in the next race. That's GM.

RT
 

tonybelding

Active Member
Aug 17, 2006
1,484
838
Hamilton, Texas
I wrote before in another thread, and don’t want to belabor the point(s) too much, but…
  • They have nothing like Tesla’s Supercharger network.
  • Super Cruise doesn’t work — at all — on the vast majority of roads.
To me those are serious shortcomings. A HUD and some walnut burl is not going to compensate for that. There will be more CCS stations built by the time Lyriq actually ships, and I’m sure GM will get more “compatible” highways mapped into the Super Cruise system by then, but that just brings us around to the point that Lyriq won’t be shipping for A While yet.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: SageBrush

ItsNotAboutTheMoney

Well-Known Member
Jul 12, 2012
11,066
8,882
Maine
No, I was not. I'm only highlighting that the average charging speed from 0 to 100% is about 1C in current electric cars. Conversely, you're assuming that everyone is interested in charging speed from low single digit SOC to 30%. For most users that charge from say 20 to 80% (or thereabout), the 250KW peak charging rate is marginally faster than 150KW. It's even more so true in an S or X. Now, hopefully the next 2 years will bring about all kinds of wonderful advances in the world of batteries and higher sustained charging rates will become the norm. Until then, 150 vs 250KW peak charging doesn't materially impact charging speed for the average user.

Why assume 20% to 80%? Only Tesla would know that.
Fastest non-nerfed travel strategy is more like 5%/10%-70% (or less).
And anybody who charges at home would often be charging to just-enough-to-get-home%.
 

SageBrush

REJECT Fascism
May 7, 2015
12,806
17,137
New Mexico
Why assume 20% to 80%?
Fastest non-nerfed travel strategy is more like 5%/10%-70% (or less).
And anybody who charges at home would often be charging to just-enough-to-get-home%.
Exactly. Or to the next destination type charging. That could be a meal, a hotel, home, a tourist spot ...

Most trips are not x-country cannon balls runs.
 

SOULPEDL

Active Member
Jul 25, 2016
3,731
15,567
Arizona
If anyone's still comparing GM Liriq, our 2018 Model 3 just charged to 306 mi last night for a road trip.

It's 2 yrs old, 20K mi odometer, Phx Az, 94 deg at time of photo (heat also degrades some, not just cold). I drive it very hard at times (more in the first year though), and is based on ave 70 mph freeway, and many short trips (affects the calculated range displayed).

upload_2020-8-9_11-49-24.png


I put GM at least 4 years behind Tesla in Range just on this fact alone (2022 GM - 2018 Tesla). These are facts, not projections.

To be fair, our Model 3 only had 310 mi new, but then Tesla gave more for free to 325 mi range on the LR RWD only. There is some flattening to the curve, but considering the heat in Arizona along with our driving style, I'm impressed, but not by GM.
 

Products we're discussing on TMC...

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC