Can 5G be added to Model 3?

[dmurphy]

I monitor cellular tech and T-Mobile still supports 2G! So when can expect 4G to be terminated? I see various non-official sources saying, don't worry about it. But I see that Sprint has announced termination of 4G-LTE by June 30, 2022. Not sounding so good now is it?

That’s because they’re shutting down the entire Sprint infrastructure. It’s wholly redundant to T-Mo’s, and frankly, inferior. The core was built to handoff to Sprint’s CDMA network, and believe me, that handoff is an incredibly complex beast. They’re consolidating IMS cores, as they should. Wholly different infrastructure.

Much of what we call “5G” is really 4G with some additional slicing features. There’s a tremendous difference between the 5G RF air interface and the core IMS network elements.

As an example, Verizon’s EV-DO network went live in January 2002. That’s a 21 year run by the time it shuts down. 3G and LTE were entirely separate core networks, so shutting down 3G will save a bunch of money in licensing and equipment costs.

Their LTE network went live at the end of 2010. So it’s 11 years now. If we use 3G as a comparison, that’s another decade at least. But it’s going to be much longer than that. 4G and 5G share a common IMS core. Shutting down 4G would allow some spectrum refarming, but no core savings. They can refarm a decade from now and keep LTE up for a long long time beyond.

In other words, LTE’s with us for the long long haul. There’s no sunset plan unlike the move from 3g to 4G, where everyone and their brother couldn’t wait to turn off 3G.

 

[tm1v2]

@gnuarm I think @dmurphy made this clear, but just in case, here's my phrasing:

If you were a Sprint customer, you are now a T-Mobile customer and you have access to T-Mobile's 4G / LTE network. T-Mobile/Sprint customers are not losing 4G / LTE.

 

[gnuarm]

@gnuarm I think @dmurphy made this clear, but just in case, here's my phrasing:

If you were a Sprint customer, you are now a T-Mobile customer and you have access to T-Mobile's 4G / LTE network. T-Mobile/Sprint customers are not losing 4G / LTE.

I'm not sure how that is relevant. My cell phone is not what I'm worried about. My concern is that my car won't be supported before I get rid of it. With all the problems I've had with the damn thing, I often wish I had never bought it. They recently did an update that literally changed every part of the UI. Now I can't find diddly squat on the screen, and I'm fed up with Tesla crapping in my car.

Why can't they give us an option of keeping a given UI? The UI is just that, a UI. It has virtually nothing to do with the inner workings of the car. It's not even the icing on the cake, it's just the box the cake comes in.

I've found my peace with Windows 10. At least I can avoid any major updates and don't have massive UI changes forced on me. To avoid updates in my Tesla, I have to deal with a F***ing pop up every time I put the car in gear!

 

[jjrandorin]

I'm not sure how that is relevant

Its relevant because the car uses 4G, so everything that @dmurphy and @tm1v2 said is relevant to the comparison you are trying to make of the sprint network being turned off and a vehicle with 4G still having network access.

The rest of the post that I did not quote is UI complaints and should be made in a thread about the UI, in one of those threads, in the software subforum, not this thread on 3G or 4G networking.

 

[gnuarm]

Perhaps you don't understand analogies.

 

[frodebh]

That's not the issue with 3G is it? The problem is the level of service won't be supported because they can make more money supplying 5G. Why would a cell phone company care that your car loses connectivity? They expect you will contact your car dealer and buy the upgrade... or a new car. They don't care which.

The problem you are running into here is that wireless tech is outpacing the expected lifespan of your car.

But why cant they just keep the old towers, and run all the Gs then? That is because the towers are expensive to maintain and run, but also because they are big, unsightly, and some people are even afraid of radio waves emitted from them. It is not trivial to find places to put new towers. So you swap out the old for the new in-place.

Discussion around US telecoms, any gripes you may have with them, and/or their regulations, is one that I can thankfully excuse myself from

 

[dmurphy]

2GHz and 5GHz are the frequencies that the WiFi uses. There are lots of devices that don't use 5G, although the number is getting smaller. Not sure what the car is using.

Completely separate discussion. Talking about the car’s cellular capabilities, not wifi.

You’re right though - we can’t transition wifi to 5GHz fast enough!

 

[gnuarm]

The problem you are running into here is that wireless tech is outpacing the expected lifespan of your car.

Yes, I understand that perfectly. It seems to be others who don't understand this issue.

But why cant they just keep the old towers, and run all the Gs then? That is because the towers are expensive to maintain and run, but also because they are big, unsightly, and some people are even afraid of radio waves emitted from them. It is not trivial to find places to put new towers. So you swap out the old for the new in-place.

I don't recall anyone asking for the cell companies to maintain "all the Gs". The equipment does not need to be retained to support older standards. But that's not the issue here. I'm pointing out that it is folly to only support 4G in the cars, knowing, as you say, the wireless technology will obsolete that standard while the car is still being driven. 5G is not a technology that is expensive or difficult to implement. There is no reason why upgrades to the cars or the cars themselves would need to be built without including this technology. Just as cell phones support multiple standards (they are mostly in software anyway) the cars can support multiple standards and use the ones that are most appropriate.

It would seem Tesla is behind the eight ball on this one, using the low tech solution exclusively.

 

[dmurphy]

I'm pointing out that it is folly to only support 4G in the cars, knowing, as you say, the wireless technology will obsolete that standard while the car is still being driven. 5G is not a technology that is expensive or difficult to implement.

Nobody said Tesla isn’t moving to 5G compatible chips - in fact, that’s exactly what’s in the latest builds. Now whether they’ve signed on with a carrier for a 5G data plan for their cars, that’s a different question. There’s been no compelling event to do so, and likely won’t be for a while. But when the time comes, the latest cars are good to go; older ones will need a retrofit. Totally sane strategy.

And I’m glad you think 5G isn’t cheap or difficult to implement. I’d disagree, but what do I know? I’ve only been in the wireless business since the late 90s.

 

[gnuarm]

Completely separate discussion. Talking about the car’s cellular capabilities, not wifi.

You’re right though - we can’t transition wifi to 5GHz fast enough!

I'm not sure what you think 5GHz wifi is about. In general with radio waves the lower the frequency, the longer the range for the same power. There is also the issue of 5GHz not passing through walls as well as 2.5GHz. So 2.5GHz wifi will give better range overall than 5GHz wifi. 5GHz wifi was introduced as a way to reduce crowding in the band in urban environments. So 5GHz may give better results in some environments. While 5GHz has the potential for higher data rates, data rates of up to 300 Mbps are supported on 2.5GHz.

In general there is no real advantage to using 5GHz unless you are in an apartment building and see dozens of wifi signals in your connection list. That, or you actually need data rates in excess of 300 Mbps which you most likely don't have from your Internet service provider.

 

[gnuarm]

Nobody said Tesla isn’t moving to 5G compatible chips - in fact, that’s exactly what’s in the latest builds. Now whether they’ve signed on with a carrier for a 5G data plan for their cars, that’s a different question. There’s been no compelling event to do so, and likely won’t be for a while. But when the time comes, the latest cars are good to go; older ones will need a retrofit. Totally sane strategy.

And I’m glad you think 5G isn’t cheap or difficult to implement. I’d disagree, but what do I know? I’ve only been in the wireless business since the late 90s.

5G has been on the road map for a long time. The devices to use 5G have been designed and there is no reason why Tesla needed to drag their feet about it. There is zero need for connecting any cars to a 5G network at this time. But they need to keep up with advances in technology and not ship cars that are obsolete. I know 5G phones have been available for at least a year because it was a year ago that ATT would not accept my phone in a service switch and insisted I buy a 5G capable phone.

Tesla would not develop a cell modem for their cars. They would most likely buy a module that comes with FCC certifications. Mount it on the appropriate board for their cars and voilà, 5G capability. No messy certification testing, modifications, retest, lather, rinse, repeat.

It just seems crazy that a company which is all about keeping their cars updated over the air, would be behind the eight ball on the tech to keep their cars connected.

 

[dmurphy]

I'm not sure what you think 5GHz wifi is about. In general with radio waves the lower the frequency, the longer the range for the same power. There is also the issue of 5GHz not passing through walls as well as 2.5GHz. So 2.5GHz wifi will give better range overall than 5GHz wifi. 5GHz wifi was introduced as a way to reduce crowding in the band in urban environments. So 5GHz may give better results in some environments. While 5GHz has the potential for higher data rates, data rates of up to 300 Mbps are supported on 2.5GHz.

In general there is no real advantage to using 5GHz unless you are in an apartment building and see dozens of wifi signals in your connection list. That, or you actually need data rates in excess of 300 Mbps which you most likely don't have from your Internet service provider.

2.4Ghz is crowded. Ridiculously so.

5GHz also enables much wider bands, as well as MU-MIMO. QAM256 encoding, much much larger packet sizes, so on and so forth. Yes, wall penetration is less than 2.4GHz but that’s not the usual challenge. It’s much easier to another 802.11ac access point than address either the crowded spectrum on 2.4, or the limitations of 802.11b/g/n. With the introduction of home-oriented mesh routers, it’s easy as pie to deploy a 5GHz network and end up with better propagation than possible with 2.4.

And before you make assumptions, I’ve got a gigabit symmetric fiber optic connection to my home, with asymmetric 400mbit cable as a backup.

 

[gnuarm]

2.4Ghz is crowded. Ridiculously so.

Absurd. My microwave only runs for maybe 30 minutes of the day and I'm not using Internet then. Otherwise it is nearly pitch black here in the 2.4 GHz band. Like I said, if you live in an apartment building, you will see more congestion. That is what 5GHz wifi is all about.

5GHz also enables much wider bands, as well as MU-MIMO. QAM256 encoding, much much larger packet sizes, so on and so forth. Yes, wall penetration is less than 2.4GHz but that’s not the usual challenge. It’s much easier to another 802.11ac access point than address either the crowded spectrum on 2.4, or the limitations of 802.11b/g/n. With the introduction of home-oriented mesh routers, it’s easy as pie to deploy a 5GHz network and end up with better propagation than possible with 2.4.

And before you make assumptions, I’ve got a gigabit symmetric fiber optic connection to my home, with asymmetric 400mbit cable as a backup.

I'm very happy for you. Enjoy your 5GHz band router. I stand by every statement I made.

 

[dmurphy]

Absurd. My microwave only runs for maybe 30 minutes of the day and I'm not using Internet then. Otherwise it is nearly pitch black here in the 2.4 GHz band. Like I said, if you live in an apartment building, you will see more congestion. That is what 5GHz wifi is all about.

I'm in a quiet, suburban, single family home neighborhood and still see 27x 2.4GHz networks from my desk as we speak. So yeah, nowhere near an apartment building, but it's a crowded frequency.

 

[gnuarm]

I'm in a quiet, suburban, single family home neighborhood and still see 27x 2.4GHz networks from my desk as we speak. So yeah, nowhere near an apartment building, but it's a crowded frequency.

But your 2.4GHz still works, right? You may "see" them, but they aren't strong enough to cause any interference.

 

[dmurphy]

But your 2.4GHz still works, right? You may "see" them, but they aren't strong enough to cause any interference.

Have a fantastic day.

 

[smatthew]

Yes, I understand that perfectly. It seems to be others who don't understand this issue.




I don't recall anyone asking for the cell companies to maintain "all the Gs". The equipment does not need to be retained to support older standards. But that's not the issue here. I'm pointing out that it is folly to only support 4G in the cars, knowing, as you say, the wireless technology will obsolete that standard while the car is still being driven. 5G is not a technology that is expensive or difficult to implement. There is no reason why upgrades to the cars or the cars themselves would need to be built without including this technology. Just as cell phones support multiple standards (they are mostly in software anyway) the cars can support multiple standards and use the ones that are most appropriate.

It would seem Tesla is behind the eight ball on this one, using the low tech solution exclusively.

Tesla uses AT&T. AT&T's 5G network is pitiful. Literally no reason for 5G on AT&T yet....... Putting 5G in cars in a few years will be much less expensive and have better performance as the 5G networks grow in size and coverage.

 

[gnuarm]

Have a fantastic day.

That's what I thought. No problems with 2.5 GHz. You probably see the same channels on 5 GHz since all the newer routers support it. Lots of signals with no one on them.

 

[gnuarm]

Tesla uses AT&T. AT&T's 5G network is pitiful. Literally no reason for 5G on AT&T yet....... Putting 5G in cars in a few years will be much less expensive and have better performance as the 5G networks grow in size and coverage.

5G is not expensive now. They've been selling 5G phones for over a year. You probably can't buy a phone from the cell companies that doesn't support 5G. There's nothing more expensive about a 5G modem than a 4G modem. Same as computers. By the time something has been out for a year the shiny is off it and the high price is gone. It's a commodity market.

 

[dmurphy]

That's what I thought. No problems with 2.5 GHz. You probably see the same channels on 5 GHz since all the newer routers support it. Lots of signals with no one on them.

I tried to walk away, but just can’t leave it with a snide comment like “That’s what I thought.”

Same access point, same location, just changing frequencies:

2.4GHz:

5GHz:

With that, once and for all, have a fantastic day.