Disappointing DC charge performance from the 4680 Model Y

[positiv]

Hey people I just saw an interesting video you might like.

The guys over at out of spec reviews ran a 15 minute charge test from 10% SOC to simulate road trip conditions. Unfortunately the 4680 Model Y only got from 10% to 49% (i.e 39% added) in that period. That seems a bit slower than the LFP packs, and has me wondering if the charge rates are somehow restricted by Tesla?

For comparison from my own experience with the LFP CATL cells, they can add about 50% in 15 minutes from a low starting SOC.
Hopefully Tesla can find a way to unlock better charging performance from the 4680 cells.

 

[tmoz]

Seems like 4680 cells are not super robust at the moment, and do not charge as fast as we thought they would.
Perhaps one day... but that day is not today.

 

[beatle]

Are the packs all the same capacity? Better to talk in kwh added instead of percentage added to know if the battery is truly charging faster or slower.

 

[positiv]

Are the packs all the same capacity? Better to talk in kwh added instead of percentage added to know if the battery is truly charging faster or slower.

No they are different capacity. The MY 4680 pack has about 68kWh and the MY/M3 LFP pack has about 62kWh.

The reviewers have kindly uploaded a spreadsheet with kWH figures - Out of Spec 10% Challenge
This shows the MY 4680 charging 27kWh in 15 minutes, whereas the M3 LFP charged 29kWh in 15 minutes. That is quite impressive given that the LFP pack has a lower total capacity and thus would be sustaining a higher C-rate. The MY LR charges even harder than either of them but they haven't given kWh figures. I'd estimate around 38kWh.

 

[fhteagle]

This is totally a guess, but I'm wondering if Tesla wanted to limit the fast charging rate for awhile until they figured out how well the dry battery electrode process will hold up to Supercharger use. I would assume, if the longevity data looked good, that there might be some increased speeds allowed in the future. Again, no sources on that, just my assumptions.

 

[dafish]

So 16 minutes to 29kw vs 15? Having a hard time seeing a problem here

 

[positiv]

So 16 minutes to 29kw vs 15? Having a hard time seeing a problem here

Yeah if you're happy to wait then it's not a big deal.

But if you scale the performance by battery size then it appears that the 4680 cells are underperforming their peers by 15-20%. That's a bit of a bummer given that at their 2020 Battery Day, Tesla claimed that the tabless design would allow the 4680 to charge almost as fast as the smaller cells. The Tesla website actually quotes higher charge rates for the 4680 (230kW) than the LFP models (170kW). That's quite misleading as the opposite is true.

I'm hoping Tesla finds a way to unlock more performance for the 4680.

 

[dafish]

Yeah if you're happy to wait then it's not a big deal.

But if you scale the performance by battery size then it appears that the 4680 cells are underperforming their peers by 15-20%. That's a bit of a bummer given that at their 2020 Battery Day, Tesla claimed that the tabless design would allow the 4680 to charge almost as fast as the smaller cells. The Tesla website actually quotes higher charge rates for the 4680 (230kW) than the LFP models (170kW). That's quite misleading as the opposite is true.

I'm hoping Tesla finds a way to unlock more performance for the 4680.

The table shows 27.2KW vs 29, right? And from this you get 15-20% underperformance? new age math?

 

[tmoz]

The table shows 27.2KW vs 29, right? And from this you get 15-20% underperformance? new age math?

Regardless, the expectation was that one would see a notable decrease in charging time. This isn't happening yet.

 

[positiv]

The table shows 27.2KW vs 29, right? And from this you get 15-20% underperformance? new age math?

Charge rate scales with battery capacity. The figures are a bit rubbery but we know the 4680 has ~10-13% more capacity than the LFP cells. Thus it would be expected to absorb about 10% more energy (kWh) over the same period. In reality the 4680 charges less over the time period which means that it is significantly underperforming its capacity.

Unfortunately some users are reporting even worse results. Brandenflasch has published some charging curves which are discussed here:

 

[gtg465x]

I love the Out of Spec 10% challenge. The advertised peak kWh charging rate manufacturers give us tells us practically nothing about charging performance. I would have assumed from looking at spec pages that the Model Y 4680 would be a better road trip car than the Model 3 RWD because it has more rated range and much higher peak charging rate. As Out of Spec has showed, you’re going to spend a LOT (potentially 50%) more time charging a Model Y 4680 than a Model 3 RWD on a road trip.

 

[DrChaos]

Hey people I just saw an interesting video you might like.

The guys over at out of spec reviews ran a 15 minute charge test from 10% SOC to simulate road trip conditions. Unfortunately the 4680 Model Y only got from 10% to 49% (i.e 39% added) in that period. That seems a bit slower than the LFP packs, and has me wondering if the charge rates are somehow restricted by Tesla?

For comparison from my own experience with the LFP CATL cells, they can add about 50% in 15 minutes from a low starting SOC.
Hopefully Tesla can find a way to unlock better charging performance from the 4680 cells.

That's just the reality of LFP cells vs NCM/NCA cells---LFP is very good at getting charge in and out with low resistance & heat, at cost of lower energy density. LFP is better at everything than NCM/NCA except cold-weather performance and energy density (mass and volumetric).

I don't think the charge rate is restricted except as needed for safety and long term longevity---you could push through more current to the NCMs but might cause damage and seriously lower their lifetime.

 

[positiv]

Looks like the 4680 Model Y has been pulled from sale. I wonder why.

Tesla Model Y AWD disappears from online configurator in the US

Tesla has mysteriously pulled the Model Y All-Wheel Drive (AWD) from its website in the US. The Model Y AWD in the US was the variant built at Giga Texas and the only one featuring […]

driveteslacanada.ca

 

[GMan324]

Looks like the 4680 Model Y has been pulled from sale. I wonder why.

Tesla Model Y AWD disappears from online configurator in the US

Tesla has mysteriously pulled the Model Y All-Wheel Drive (AWD) from its website in the US. The Model Y AWD in the US was the variant built at Giga Texas and the only one featuring […]

driveteslacanada.ca

I was lucky enough to buy a MY new with the 4680s and have loved it. After over 30k miles, the batteries have only degraded from 279 to 270 miles at 100% SOC. 3% degradation is way better than my P3D- with 2170s which is over 10% at 58k miles. The SC rate was slower at first but got better over time. I’m sure Tesla was just being conservative with the new batteries.

 

[DblOSmith]

Looks like the 4680 Model Y has been pulled from sale. I wonder why.

Tesla Model Y AWD disappears from online configurator in the US

Tesla has mysteriously pulled the Model Y All-Wheel Drive (AWD) from its website in the US. The Model Y AWD in the US was the variant built at Giga Texas and the only one featuring […]

driveteslacanada.ca

Probably to make room for the CT that uses the same cells. That'd be my guess.