TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

EM on Twitter: 'I think we will probably stop at 100 kWh on battery size'

Discussion in 'Model S' started by Model S M.D., Sep 16, 2016.

  1. Model S M.D.

    Model S M.D. Ludicrous Radiologist

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2015
    Messages:
    724
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Apologize if posted before but EM dropped this nugget a few hours ago:

    Twitter

    'I think we will probably stop at 100 kWh on battery size'
     
  2. KJD

    KJD Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2013
    Messages:
    629
    Location:
    SLC, UT
    The 100 kWh battery will be good enough as soon as they fill in the gaps on the super charger map, until then.....:(
     
  3. liuping

    liuping Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,858
    Location:
    San Diego
    As batteries improve from here, if the packs stay the same energy, the weight and cost will continue to drop. Reduced weight mean more range. That why the Bolt gets 238 range out of a 60kWh battery.

    With enough weight reduction, the Model S could get probably get 400 miles of range from 100 kWh pack, which I think is a very reasonable range to stop at.
     
    • Like x 2
  4. Stoneymonster

    Stoneymonster Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    Messages:
    1,554
    Location:
    Aptos, Ca
    Nooooo!!! INFINITE RANGE!!!! I want to buy the car and never charge. Like alkalines.
     
    • Funny x 6
  5. LargeHamCollider

    LargeHamCollider Battery cells != scalable

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2015
    Messages:
    477
    Location:
    United States
    Seems very unlikely, it does seem likely that they will stop at this cell count but if chemistry improves by 5% it's not likely that they will then reduce cell count by 5% to compensate. 315*1.05 = 331... These improvements are really starting to add up. Possibly what he means is that they'll increase cycle life/charge speed/power density rather than energy density given the choice...
     
  6. Model S M.D.

    Model S M.D. Ludicrous Radiologist

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2015
    Messages:
    724
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Excited about potentially faster charging, increased efficiency and lower costs as well. JB has mentioned that it would be possible to get the supercharging down to 5 minutes...we'll see!
     
  7. Neohippy

    Neohippy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2016
    Messages:
    92
    Location:
    Florida
    I can't see them getting much weight reduction. The car already is aluminum.
     
  8. number12

    number12 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2016
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Tesla
    #8 number12, Sep 16, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2016
    The literal only reason for that tweet is a shift in his business model of completely osborning products as he has previously done.

    That't it. Part of a final Q3 push as well as linking to articles about how well tesla holds its value compared to other vehicles.
     
    • Helpful x 2
    • Like x 2
  9. RogerHScott

    RogerHScott Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2016
    Messages:
    1,350
    Location:
    Lafayette, IN
    If you're mainly an around-town driver, and/or the SpC network is good enough, why would you want to carry around the extra
    weight of an ultra-high-capacity battery rather than having a smaller, lighter battery that allows your car to be more nimble and
    consume less energy on average? I predict, as the SpC network continues to expand, that the obsession with battery size will
    increasingly be a throwback to early EV days. This is one of the reasons I think the new 60s are so exciting -- they exist in a different
    world than existed when the original 60s came out.
     
    • Like x 6
    • Love x 2
  10. Mo City

    Mo City Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2016
    Messages:
    20
    Location:
    USA
    He said "probably". I bet in 2-3 years (maybe longer) we will see 110 or 120 kwh for the MS & MX.

    On the other hand, if the number of superchargers explodes to the extent many expect, maybe not.
     
  11. RogerHScott

    RogerHScott Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2016
    Messages:
    1,350
    Location:
    Lafayette, IN
    Fewer battery cells, and correspondingly less (or, at least, lighter) cell management hardware?
     
    • Like x 1
  12. number12

    number12 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2016
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Tesla
    yeah i botched it, but I think the point is made.
     
  13. rypalmer

    rypalmer Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2014
    Messages:
    282
    Location:
    Canada
    100kWh is fine for sedans, but 100 kWh is not nearly enough for the Model X or any future truck-like vehicles that can be used for towing.
     
    • Like x 7
    • Informative x 2
  14. RogerHScott

    RogerHScott Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2016
    Messages:
    1,350
    Location:
    Lafayette, IN
    For such vehicles might it make more sense to have two smaller batteries rather than one bigger one? Seems like a lot less
    development would be required for that solution. Something like an EV pickup truck would certainly have room.
     
  15. jbcarioca

    jbcarioca Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2015
    Messages:
    1,299
    Location:
    Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and Coral Gables, FL
    It's not the chassis or body, It's the battery weight. That is why as energy density rises, maintaining the same kWh will still delivery higher performance and longer range. Within the constraints of currently expected technology advances with higher silicon levels in anodes, nano-technolgies and others, we still should see energy density rise by 25% or so in the next couple of years with cost reductions of 50% or so per kWh. At a minimum we ought to expect vehicle weight to drop by 15% or so, coupled with improved electrical efficiency in inverters, ancillary reductions in energy use by converting to 48V a/c with the rest of the industry and so on.

    All of that will give, say, 25% range increase, 15-20% better energy consumption plus marginally higher performance.

    All that is not vaporware, but probably will be Model 3 and revised S &X. We cannot underestimate the technical progress happening with the overall industry and Tesla specifically. Nobody knows the precise details. So, Elon is only suggesting that higher kWh is not the only way to go.
     
  16. number12

    number12 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2016
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Tesla
    That is what my lawn mower has... greenworks yard equip is great btw
     
  17. Boourns

    Boourns Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2016
    Messages:
    662
    Location:
    Dallas
    The tweet he replied to was talking about the S. My interpretation (mostly because it's what I think) is that he was saying 100 is good enough for the S now that it has reached 300 miles. Maybe this could also apply to the X, but I think it could benefit from a 110 or 120. For truck/semi they will obviously need to go well beyond 100 for total capacity, whether from a bigger pack or a bunch of 100s working together.
     
  18. SW2Fiddler

    SW2Fiddler Bannd Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,693
    Location:
    Houston TX
    Well, we are also starting to fix peak-susceptible grids, 100kWh at a time.

    I still hold out hope for an Eleventy 110kWh special edition/option.
     
    • Funny x 2
    • Like x 1
  19. xborg

    xborg Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2015
    Messages:
    153
    Location:
    London
    don't believe it. it's a trap.
    :)
     
  20. tenstringer009

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2012
    Messages:
    211
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    I don't know nearly enough about battery chemistry and supercharging, but would having two smaller batteries (e.g 2 60kWh for a total of 120) increase the supercharging time given the whole 'don't want to fill a glass too quickly at the top' metaphor?
     

Share This Page