Is Musk lying on maximum battery capacity?

[R.S]

Possibly. Ford has slipped to 20. Jaguar may make it but will compete at the top end. The new Leaf is nice, but is no threat to Model 3. BMW will have a 3 series in 2019 model year with no charging infrastructure. I doubt there will be real competition before 2022, But I agree that it will be fierce in the fairly near future.

IDK about charging infrastructure. VW's diesel fallout might help lot's of makes that weren't planning on building an own charging infrastructure. Other than that, BMW and Nissan have built chargers before and with their cars getting more competition from Tesla, I think they will increase their efforts.

And don't say it can't be done, Tesla wants to raise their number of stalls from 6000 to 10,000 in just halve a year. I am pretty sure Nissan could do the same. And it isn't like the SC network is not working with 6k right now. It could be better, but it's sufficient, for now.

But generally I don't worry too much about Tesla, even with competition. They have established themselves as a cool, new luxury brand and that's worth a lot. If they can bring the Model 3 to market without messing it up, they'll be fine. the premium market is ever growing and the easiest market to make money in. High volumes meet high margins. It's no surprise that anyone, from Hyundai to Ford wants to establish their own.

 

[Cloxxki]

Just think about Porsche. Do you really think the current fanbase will like a smooth and silent EV ? IMO it will take a generation for that image to be re-built and Porsche will really struggle to find a new identity in EV space because the upcoming Tesla Roadster 2 will beat its capabilities in every possible way.

Porsche has telegraphed their intent years before their loyal customer base can take delivery of a silent Porsche. Also, the most epic of Porsches, sold out, was a hybrid. The 2013 918 is still their fastest car ever.
Porsche may listen to customers more in building their cars. They'd not present a car with awkward boot lid that way, I wouldn't think.
And the NextGen Roadster MAY have a future Porsche beat in a straight line (no real reason why they couldn't make a quick accelerating BEV), but around a corner, will it even keep up with the Caymans? let alone around a lap?
Porsche announced an 800V battery system for MissionE which will have a high C rating. Unlikely it will be short on accelerative power, or ability to keep performance up. The latter has been Tesla's Achilles. Cheap low C cells, nice for range and weight, not so much for agressive driving.
All we know of the Tesla Roadster is that it will do 0-60 a few tenths quicker than a Model S P100D. Not the battery size, weight, output, etc. For all we know, Porsche's first attempt at a BEV will be hunderds of kilos lighter than the NextGenR, and be a Porsche underneath with superior handling.
A Tesla badge doesn't make a product superior by default to all thers. They've enjoyed a decided head start, but now that there is money to be made, challegers will arrive to the market.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Gotcha. Possibly a side affect of how our deregulated electrical market. It had some growing pains at first, but we now pay lower than the national average:



Thanks! I built it back in 99, and in the early 2000s got hit with a major financial crunch due to the economy. The company I worked for did layoff after layoff until they couldn't anymore, at which point they did a cross-the-board paycut in order to keep the doors open. The 20% loss in income caused me some major financial issues, which resulted in my viewing debt quite a bit differently than before. It was touch and go for a while, but picking up the occasional side job enabled me to keep my head just above water. My only debt now is the house, which I refinanced at a lower rate and have been paying extra on in order to eliminate sooner.

You are doing exactly the same thing I'm doing. I'm paying my home off early as well. $50 per week day in extra principal so long as I can afford it. I won't be able to retire with my house note. I refinanced 2 years ago because my house was underwater. Interest rate = 1.9% fixed

 

[gregincal]

OK, maybe other manufacturers can come out with competitive cars. That would be great, although I've been hearing that for years and have yet to see it. However, with costs continually lowering Tesla can easily adjust prices, they change configurations and pricing all the time. I don't see the need to price for competition that doesn't yet exist.

And average margins don't mean the margins have to be uniform for every component. It's quite possible that the margins are slimmer on the base Model and have to be made up for by charging higher margins for larger batteries. After all, the high margins on the Model S batteries are exactly what allow them to have the overall margins they have. If they lowered the battery pack margins to 30%, then the overall margins would decline to lower levels.

 

[Jayc]

And the NextGen Roadster MAY have a future Porsche beat in a straight line (no real reason why they couldn't make a quick accelerating BEV), but around a corner, will it even keep up with the Caymans?

I could have said a Model S P100D already beats Porsche in a straight line. The next roadster will do corners in style, otherwise why would Tesla even bother when their 7 seat family car is as quick as a Porsche GTR in a straight line. The track worthiness argument has been brought up again and again by the ICE crowd and TBH it is insignificant because a handful number of track racers cannot not keep a luxury performance car company afloat. Likes of Next EV is attacking that front anyway.

Have you seen this:

 

[Cloxxki]

You wrote "in every possible way.". You have now defined that to "in a straight line".
But really, you mean the couple dozen meters it takes to reach 60mph, I now gather?
Porsche 918 Spyder from 2013 smacks the P100D around the face over merely 1/4 mile.

With a young passenger on board. So just about a second quicker than a P100D without weight mods.

If you compare to a renowned sportcar contender "in every possible way", this will be about more than a very specific piece of acceleration. You need to win longer accelerations, various braking distances, set a higher top speed, and plainly beat it around all mainstream asphalt tracks conceivable. And if the Porsche is a BEV, at the very least also for range and ideally also consumption. City, highway AND at say 200kph (mild Autobahn cruise).

Back on topic for a moment.
What will the upcoming loner range Ioniq EV do for cargo space vs Model 3? Look at that awesome hatch opening.
26.5 ft² the video says.

2017 Hyundai Ioniq - In-Depth Review

No frunk needed?.
With an increased battery, not unlikely Ioniq EV will challenge Model 3-60 (let alone 55) for range. It's the most economical BEV in its class for now.

Funny as well as some relevant comments here.
Ioniq vs. Tesla Model 3 Video... - Hyundai Ioniq Forum

 

[scaesare]

So Tesla learned what, to do it correctly like Rimac? Find a better transmission builder?

They stuck with a single speed gear box design.

 

[JeffK]

I just wonder what Tesla's collective engineering brainpower will come up with when planning the next gen roadster.

 

[ravich]

Based on the statements so far, I am sure Mr. Musk is lying about the battery capacity. 95D barely gives 250 miles range. I am sure the other EV cars will beat Tesla very soon

 

[Garlan Garner]

Based on the statements so far, I am sure Mr. Musk is lying about the battery capacity. 95D barely gives 250 miles range. I am sure the other EV cars will beat Tesla very soon

He is not lying. The posted numbers on Teslas website are true. Otherwise investors would flee.

 

[cdub]

Based on the statements so far, I am sure Mr. Musk is lying about the battery capacity. 95D barely gives 250 miles range. I am sure the other EV cars will beat Tesla very soon

I presume you mean 85D?

 

[Zaphod]

Based on the statements so far, I am sure Mr. Musk is lying about the battery capacity. 95D barely gives 250 miles range. I am sure the other EV cars will beat Tesla very soon

What's a 95D? No such thing. It's either 75, 85 (no longer produced), 90 (just recently no longer produced) or 100. May want to research more before spouting off baseless statements as it totally discredits yourself.

 

[Garlan Garner]

What's a 95D? No such thing. It's either 75, 85 (no longer produced), 90 (just recently no longer produced) or 100. May want to research more before spouting off baseless statements as it totally discredits yourself.

The title of this thread is baseless.

 

[Troy]

Somebody just uploaded a Model 3 video here. They were trying to find the Model 3 battery sticker but they couldn't because the battery stops before it reaches the front tires. Therefore it is flush with the bottom. You can see where the battery ends. It stops before the front tires. In comparison, the Model S battery has the circular cutouts to make room for the wheels.

In this picture, you see 14 modules in the large rectangle section and the two stacked modules in front, between the front wheels. These two modules don't exist in the Model 3 battery. It is just a rectangle now. What this means is, they could have made the battery 2/14= 14.3% larger if it had the double stacked section. That would be 85.7 kWh. But because they wanted to keep production costs low and reduce production times, they made a simple rectangle.

I think this is a mistake. The battery section between wheels added more protection against head on collisions. Also, the Model S can never compete with the Model 3 in terms of price for an ~300 mile EV. Yesterday Tesla confirmed they will discontinue the S75 like I predicted they would (see my predictions here and here). The S75D has no chance to survive either and 100 kWh Model S is also in trouble and sales will drop sharply.

The Model S needs a complete redesign to make it cheaper to produce and they need a completely new Model S production line as automated as the Model 3 production line to bring down Model S prices. Otherwise, 100 kWh Model S sales will drop sharply. Listen here where Elon says the Model 3 production line is a lot more automated than S and X.

Tesla is betting on the wrong idea by trying to make the older, less automated and difficult to produce version the premium car. What they should be doing is to release an 85 kWh Model 3 and charge $10K extra for it over a 70 kWh Model 3. They are now at 28% gross margin. With this strategy, they would go over 30% easily.

Instead of 55/75 kWh, they should release 55/70/85 kWh Model 3 versions. The Model S 100 kWh versions will never be as profitable as the 85 kWh Model 3 could be until they redesign the Model S and create a more automated production line. Elon said when they designed the Model S, they were just trying to make it work and didn't think much of making it easy to produce but that was their main focus with the Model 3.

 

[Cloxxki]

Somewhat on topic, is Tesla now lying about the new S75D's being 75's? Was that picture of an 85kWh pack really a new car? Back to a software upgrade? Or just about to lift the minimum range a Model S/X gets to (well) above the base Model 3? If you think of it, when they make the base Model 3 a 60 in stead of 55, its range would be barely lower than an S75(D).
An 85kWh smallest Model S (biggest until 2014 or so?) would be quite a statement of progress.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Somebody just uploaded a Model 3 video here. They were trying to find the Model 3 battery sticker but they couldn't because the battery stops before it reaches the front tires. Therefore it is flush with the bottom. You can see where the battery ends. It stops before the front tires. In comparison, the Model S battery has the circular cutouts to make room for the wheels.

In this picture, you see 14 modules in the large rectangle section and the two stacked modules in front, between the front wheels. These two modules don't exist in the Model 3 battery. It is just a rectangle now. What this means is, they could have made the battery 2/14= 14.3% larger if it had the double stacked section. That would be 85.7 kWh. But because they wanted to keep production costs low and reduce production times, they made a simple rectangle.

I think this is a mistake. The battery section between wheels added more protection against head on collisions. Also, the Model S can never compete with the Model 3 in terms of price for an ~300 mile EV. Yesterday Tesla confirmed they will discontinue the S75 like I predicted they would (see my predictions here and here). The S75D has no chance to survive either and 100 kWh Model S is also in trouble and sales will drop sharply.

The Model S needs a complete redesign to make it cheaper to produce and they need a completely new Model S production line as automated as the Model 3 production line to bring down Model S prices. Otherwise, 100 kWh Model S sales will drop sharply. Listen here where Elon says the Model 3 production line is a lot more automated than S and X.

Tesla is betting on the wrong idea by trying to make the older, less automated and difficult to produce version the premium car. What they should be doing is to release an 85 kWh Model 3 and charge $10K extra for it over a 70 kWh Model 3. They are now at 28% gross margin. With this strategy, they would go over 30% easily.

Instead of 55/75 kWh, they should release 55/70/85 kWh Model 3 versions. The Model S 100 kWh versions will never be as profitable as the 85 kWh Model 3 could be until they redesign the Model S and create a more automated production line. Elon said when they designed the Model S, they were just trying to make it work and didn't think much of making it easy to produce but that was their main focus with the Model 3.

Please stop.

There is no Lying by Elon nor inferior design by Tesla.

 

[JeffK]

I love how Troy brags about his predictions of the Model 3 75 kWh but also says they could have made the battery bigger...then goes as far as saying Tesla is making a mistake.

Welcome to our line of thought Troy! It was quite a journey, but you are here now.

Also to correct your math. The Model 3 has always been shown to have 8 modules.

75/8 * 2 means you'd add 18.75 kWh unless the 75 and 55(60) have different layouts. This brings possible capacity to 93.75 kWh figure out a way to put another module in the back or stack them under the passenger seat and you'd got over 100 kWh.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

Somebody just uploaded a Model 3 video here. They were trying to find the Model 3 battery sticker but they couldn't because the battery stops before it reaches the front tires. Therefore it is flush with the bottom. You can see where the battery ends. It stops before the front tires. In comparison, the Model S battery has the circular cutouts to make room for the wheels.

In this picture, you see 14 modules in the large rectangle section and the two stacked modules in front, between the front wheels. These two modules don't exist in the Model 3 battery. It is just a rectangle now. What this means is, they could have made the battery 2/14= 14.3% larger if it had the double stacked section. That would be 85.7 kWh. But because they wanted to keep production costs low and reduce production times, they made a simple rectangle.

I think this is a mistake. The battery section between wheels added more protection against head on collisions. Also, the Model S can never compete with the Model 3 in terms of price for an ~300 mile EV. Yesterday Tesla confirmed they will discontinue the S75 like I predicted they would (see my predictions here and here). The S75D has no chance to survive either and 100 kWh Model S is also in trouble and sales will drop sharply.

The Model S needs a complete redesign to make it cheaper to produce and they need a completely new Model S production line as automated as the Model 3 production line to bring down Model S prices. Otherwise, 100 kWh Model S sales will drop sharply. Listen here where Elon says the Model 3 production line is a lot more automated than S and X.

Tesla is betting on the wrong idea by trying to make the older, less automated and difficult to produce version the premium car. What they should be doing is to release an 85 kWh Model 3 and charge $10K extra for it over a 70 kWh Model 3. They are now at 28% gross margin. With this strategy, they would go over 30% easily.

Instead of 55/75 kWh, they should release 55/70/85 kWh Model 3 versions. The Model S 100 kWh versions will never be as profitable as the 85 kWh Model 3 could be until they redesign the Model S and create a more automated production line. Elon said when they designed the Model S, they were just trying to make it work and didn't think much of making it easy to produce but that was their main focus with the Model 3.

In all fairness, though, since we don't know what battery sizes will be available, who is to say the one in the video wasn't the SMALLER of the two (predicted) packs available at launch?

 

[Model 3]

75/8 * 2 means you'd add 18.75 kWh unless the 75 and 55(60) have different layouts. This brings possible capacity to 93.75 kWh

Yes, but if it is 70/8*2 then it is 17,5kWh for a total 87,5kWh pack - labeled 85 ;D That they *could* fit 75kWh is that space do not tell us that they have done that...

 

[zenmaster]

If you compare to a renowned sportcar contender "in every possible way", this will be about more than a very specific piece of acceleration. You need to win longer accelerations, various braking distances, set a higher top speed, and plainly beat it around all mainstream asphalt tracks conceivable. And if the Porsche is a BEV, at the very least also for range and ideally also consumption. City, highway AND at say 200kph (mild Autobahn cruise).

I was reading where Electric GT measurements showed that the Tesla motor stator is responsible for the rapid heat up during acceleration. The coil acts like an oven heating element, limiting the period of hard acceleration use to a maximum of 3 or 4 minutes before a long cool down period is needed. (Whereas, an ICE car's available acceleration is simply limited by fuel level.) That power availability disadvantage will always prevent Tesla from competing against ICE cars on the track unless they redesign the motor or cool it more effectively - could be a difficult engineering task.

Limiting that "P" in Performance to 0-60 times or even 1/4 times is rather misleading, due to the level of overall performance the auto industry takes for granted with performance oriented cars. It would be nice to see an EV manufacturer produce a car that matches ICE-level of overall performance (braking, handling, endurance, etc) for comparable price.