doctorwho
Active Member
/thread and I'll take your Model S:smile:I'll bet my Model S that we'll hit 1000 posts here prior to the announcement
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Elon "About to end range anxiety"
- Thread starter Lump
- Start date
Ok, it appears that you are talking about the Charge Characteristic (it was not clear from what you've posted before). Isn't it true that charge characteristic is controlled by the car software? So, if the hidden capacity is indeed hidden, why is it not reasonable for car to charge as if the battery is still 85kWh?
I think that the only definitive way to prove/disprove this theory is to test the new cell separately. Testing the pack which is treated by the current software version as 85kWh to see if it actually has larger capacity does not seem to be the correct approach.
For the same reason there are 915 posts in the main Elon thread. It's fun to speculate.
Sure, the software controls the charging. But the software can't violate the chemistry. The cells can't reach the same CV voltage as fast if they have additional capacity. The also can't be drained to the same low voltage point as fast if they have additional capacity. Doesn't matter what you do with the software reported SoC, the voltages don't lie.
I feel like you don't have sufficient knowledge of the subject matter to make the assertions you are making because the facts that I've stated undeniably point to equal capacity packs.
X starting voltages, add Y kWh, end up with Z ending voltage. If capacity is the same, Z will be the same. If the capacity is larger, Z will be smaller. If the capacity is less, Z will be higher or level off faster. In this case, Z is equal for both D-packs in my P85s (traded and fiance's) and my P85D's E-pack.
Last edited:
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
But you need to turn that thought around. If other vendors use the same patents then more people will end up providing charging. Maybe not free, but pretty much at cost.
Remember, gas stations make most of their money with the little stores.
I know this has been brought up in one form or another before... think Mercedes and VW agree to use Tesla plug and Tesla supercharging protocol. Think Exxon and BP start adding superchargers to all of their gas stations. Limited to 20kWh (so there are no long lines) and $10 per charge.
It's scalable, it solves range anxiety (the gas station will get you enough electrons to get to a 'real' supercharger), it makes business sense for everyone involved.
Winning.
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
Since the moderators apparently don't feel like merging these... I think when Elon says "entire fleet" I don't think he's saying 100%. He has been rather imprecise before. So I wouldn't be surprised if that meant "entire fleet that has tech package".
That said, adding something that's not quite off-line turn by turn yet at least "navigate to destination including charging stops" shouldn't be too hard. You'd have to keep only the next few steps in memory and assume that you'll get network coverage frequently enough that you can just string the user along with a Google Maps based solution.
That said, adding something that's not quite off-line turn by turn yet at least "navigate to destination including charging stops" shouldn't be too hard. You'd have to keep only the next few steps in memory and assume that you'll get network coverage frequently enough that you can just string the user along with a Google Maps based solution.
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
I'm pretty sure the "entire fleet" doesn't include Roadsters either. 2.5 years ago he made a similar comment about 120kW Supercharging that everybody assumed really meant the entire fleet, but didn't - he was only talking about cars released after the final announcement (and a few lucky ones before it).
He's really not that precise with his language. He likes to make bold claims and create a big buzz. After the reveal, there will be people disappointed, and we'll see a whole bunch of "Well, that doesn't really solve range anxiety!" And Elon's OK with that, because this is all part of his $0 marketing plan. Many people will tune in for the announcement, and both before and after we are talking about the product for him. Not everything being said will be good, but what do you expect for $0? It's a lot better than not talking about it at all.
He's really not that precise with his language. He likes to make bold claims and create a big buzz. After the reveal, there will be people disappointed, and we'll see a whole bunch of "Well, that doesn't really solve range anxiety!" And Elon's OK with that, because this is all part of his $0 marketing plan. Many people will tune in for the announcement, and both before and after we are talking about the product for him. Not everything being said will be good, but what do you expect for $0? It's a lot better than not talking about it at all.
Hey, take it easy, there is no need to jump to conclusions about somebody's expertise, let's focus on discussing the essence :smile:
Now, to your point, aren't you missing the fact that Charge Characteristic, including the transition from the Constant Current to Constant Voltage mode, although designed with the specific battery in mind, is controlled by the charger?
So, if you want extra capacity to be hidden, you just let the charger charge as if the battery has lower capacity, i.e. you let it transition to CV mode at the point corresponding to a 85kWh battery, not 93.5kWh battery. You will end up charging the 93.5kWh battery to 85kWh.
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
There are no more cells, same 7104 cells, each having slightly higher (say 10%) capacity.
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
Technically a press conference is a lot more than $0, but other than that I wholeheartedly agree
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
Then they have higher terminal voltage? Where do these cells cone from? Has anyone seen a data sheet for them?
And anyway, how does this address the entire fleet?
And anyway, how does this address the entire fleet?
dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
Yes. I keep repeating that. He said OTA. There is no new hardware OTA. And sorry, I don't believe in the miracle extra hardware that is suddenly enabled. See my earlier comment about the towel...
For every 200 miles you charge at home you save +-5 minutes at a gas station.
Enter a destination in your GPS, Tesla will assume a round trip and automatically give you a route including best chargers with a message saying " you need to charge x many minutes but don't worry you've already saved 50x minutes at a gas station."
Having read most of this thread and about 50 bowls of popcorn, this is the only thing left out.
Enter a destination in your GPS, Tesla will assume a round trip and automatically give you a route including best chargers with a message saying " you need to charge x many minutes but don't worry you've already saved 50x minutes at a gas station."
Having read most of this thread and about 50 bowls of popcorn, this is the only thing left out.
So to summarize this thread
- Elon tweeted about a press release
- which indicates it's probably a big deal, but then again maybe not
- but no one has a clue
- so it is probably upgraded trip planning software
- or unicorns
My guess is upgraded trip planning software with a promise ofunicorn in the near future.
- Elon tweeted about a press release
- which indicates it's probably a big deal, but then again maybe not
- but no one has a clue
- so it is probably upgraded trip planning software
- or unicorns
My guess is upgraded trip planning software with a promise ofunicorn in the near future.
I feel like this thread is a case study to be placed alongside the "NCAA March Madness bracket activity costs workplaces $1.9B annually" studies.
TMC I am so disappointed. NO ONE thought to make a press release zany theory NCAA-style bracket? Now its too late...
Elon's tweet said this would affect all Model Ss, so not the Roadsters. But all Model Ss certainly does include non tech package variants. I don't believe Elon would be SO imprecise.
Similar threads
