Is Musk lying on maximum battery capacity?

[Garlan Garner]

yes, but a Model 3 75 should have better 0 to 60 times as it has less weight is less exposed/fat.

Btw quite interesting how the 0 to 60 time is now so similar between dual and single drives... How come? A while ago there was quite a big difference.

Great question.

Which sponsors an additional question. What happened to allow these times to go down. Why isn't this a simple software upgrade? What did tesla do?

There are some hardware revisions that allow this to happen.

There are 3 main parts of any EV that allows it go from 0-60 quickly.
1. Battery
2. Inverter
3. Motor

The Batteries are DC ( Direct Current ) providers .... Just like the Li batteries in your cell phones.
The Motors are AC ( Alternating Current) powered....just like your refrigerator.
The Inverter is a translator that converts DC to AC to power the motor and then AC to DC to charge the batteries from an AC source like your house.

Tesla didn't change the motor nor the battery in the Model S. They changed the inverter and fusing and wiring associated with the inverter so that the motor can pull more juice out of the batteries at a faster rate. Thereby allowing the car to reach faster speeds - quicker.

So.... a gigantic Motor - in the non D(ual) version of the Model S ( slower model ) only needed a different inverter and fuse and wiring and it can perform very similar to the D(ual) version with a medium motor and another smaller one combined.

Now I have to think to myself.

What if they did the same thing with the Model 3? Is waiting for the Dual Motor Model 3 going to provide me with more than 0.1 seconds of increased acceleration over the NON Dual Motor Model 3? Hmmmm. I'm not sure.

I want Ludicrous = Dual Motor Model S and X only so far.
I would like 4WD, but I really don't need it.
Increased range? 215 would do me fine.

So I'm waiting for the configurator to find out what the Dual Motor times are compared to the Single Motor.

 

[Garlan Garner]

In fact, if you look at the survey data around cell V80 here, it shows that the S60 has 313.8 Wh/mi average efficiency. That's worse than what you calculated. It means 58,500/313,8= 186 miles average real world range for the S60.
Troy:
I would expect a larger, heavier, earlier-generation car to have worse efficiency when compared to a smaller, lighter, newer design. My point in running the numbers "backwards" was as a sanity check for some approximate real-world ranges. As someone who'd like Tesla to succeed, I remain concerned that a base Model 3's range might be less than a base Bolt's, and the effect that might have on potential first-time EV buyers.
BTW, I think the suggestion that Musk was "lying" is ridiculous.
He has been guilty of overpromising before, though.
Robin

I agree. Elon isn't lying.

As I said in another post: It seems like every time Elon starts talking about technical stuff.....people fall asleep and ask unrelated non-technical questions once they wake up....such as "What kind of food are you serving at the next reveal party"?

So he calms is statements down to appease the masses.

How many miles is the Model 3 going to get per charge. He throws out 215 ( the $35k car number )
Now people find out that the Model 3 PxxD version gets 315 miles per charge and people say ...... "He Lied".

That's Ludicrous to me. lol

 

[Topher]

BTW, I think the suggestion that Musk was "lying" is ridiculous.
He has been guilty of overpromising before, though.

Agreed. Elon is an engineer, lying is counterproductive to the enterprise. I don't even think he overpromises, he just falls victim to the planning fallacy.

But how could saying that the Model 3 will only be able to have 75 kWh battery maximum, possibly be considered 'overpromising'?

Thank you kindly.

 

[Troy]

I'm curious to see if they made the model 3 a little too good.

The Model 3 is too good by design aka better than the Model S in some aspects. For example,

• The Model 3 is lighter which means 0-60 time of the Model 3 75D should be better than the Model S 75D. I wouldn't be surprised if the Model 3 P75D has the same 0-60 time as the Model S P85D (3.1s).
• The Model 3 is 15-17% more efficient than the Model S which means 15-17% more range, 15-17% cheaper to charge, 15-17% slower degradation (because of fewer charge cycles) and 15-17% shorter supercharge sessions.

Model 3 75 should have better 0 to 60 times as it has less weight is less exposed/fat.

I agree but I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with some creative advertising methods to make the more expensive cars look better. For example, when Tesla launched the first dual motor cars, they wanted more people to buy the Model S P85D. So the design studio initially showed 3.2s for the P85D and 5.2s for the S85D (source). There is a big difference between 3.2s and 5.2s. Many people thought the P85D was worth it. Then S85D's advertised time dropped to 4.4s (source) and then to 4.2s (source), a full second less than initially advertised. Also, notice how the range numbers were initially advertised as "range at 65 mph" in the first screenshot instead of estimated EPA rated range in the other screenshots.

 

[N5329K]

Agreed. Elon is an engineer, lying is counterproductive to the enterprise. I don't even think he overpromises, he just falls victim to the planning fallacy.

But how could saying that the Model 3 will only be able to have 75 kWh battery maximum, possibly be considered 'overpromising'?

Thank you kindly.

That's one clear example of when he didn't. I think Musk is genuinely impatient with limits, but he also uses "overpromising" to achieve spectacular results. If the boss thinks something is doable, everyone down the ladder is encouraged (!) to think it's doable. That's how rockets land on boats.
Problems arise when the boss doesn't stop at setting those extremely tall goals, but "architects" the details (and designs) of how those goals might be best met. That hasn't always worked out so well.
Robin

 

[Garlan Garner]

That's one clear example of when he didn't. I think Musk is genuinely impatient with limits, but he also uses "overpromising" to achieve spectacular results. If the boss thinks something is doable, everyone down the ladder is encouraged (!) to think it's doable. That's how rockets land on boats.
Problems arise when the boss doesn't stop at setting those extremely tall goals, but "architects" the details (and designs) of how those goals might be best met. That hasn't always worked out so well.
Robin

I disagree.


11 years ago Elon set a Master Plan. Not a car in sight. Not even the roadster or any car.
Elon stated.
My day job is running a space transportation company called SpaceX, but on the side I am the chairman of Tesla Motors and help formulate the business and product strategy with Martin and the rest of the team. I have also been Tesla Motor's primary funding source from when the company was just three people and a business plan.
As you know, the initial product of Tesla Motors is a high performance electric sports car called the Tesla Roadster

1. As you know, the initial product of Tesla Motors is a high performance electric sports car called the Tesla Roadster
2. Without giving away too much, I can say that the second model will be a sporty four door family car ( Model S )
3. Use that money to build an affordable car ( Model 3 )
4. Use that money to build an even more affordable car ( ? )

However, some readers may not be aware of the fact that our long term plan is to build a wide range of models, including affordably priced family cars. This is because the overarching purpose of Tesla Motors (and the reason I am funding the company) is to help expedite the move from a mine-and-burn hydrocarbon economy towards a solar electric economy, which I believe to be the primary, but not exclusive, sustainable solution. The Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan (just between you and me)

_____________
Original Master Plan - Done

There is a point in life where you can no longer fail. Elon has reached that point in his life. He has set goals and reached just about all of them. Self funded Tesla from the beginning and is now on the cusp of being one of the greatest contributors to mankind concerning pollution and sustaining the echo system of the entire planet. Multi Billionaire....ten times over. Still fighting for the advantages of mankind across the planet.

I can't remember.....what was/is his criticism again?

 

[Garlan Garner]

I remember seeing some dolls on sale named Bill and Warren. Can you guys help me find them. I can't seem to find them anywhere. I look for them every day and can't find them. Some people tell me great stories about them. I just want to see for myself. Maybe they have a website or something where I can find out more about them?
Warren donates record $3.17 billion in Berkshire Hathaway stock to Bill.

Now what were we talking about? Oh yeah....that's right.... criticizing Elon.

 

[N5329K]

I can't remember.....what was/is his criticism again?
Garlan:
Description. Not criticism.
I think Musk executed the Secret Master Plan (SMP) extremely well; maybe better than almost anyone else could have. Certainly better than Tesla's founders were likely to.
But the SMP predated Mr. Musk's arrival on the scene (as did Tesla's incorporation...not just its "business plan"). The strategy of changing how people think about EV's (via a high-performance Roadster), using commodity batteries to power them and charging a lot in order to fund designs with broader appeal was baked in from the start (the model for EV innovation diffusion was refrigerators....first a wildly expensive luxury for first adopters, then something well-off people could afford and show off, and finally full market penetration where virtually anyone could have one).
Musk's SMP's brilliant execution (with a few well-known veers off course) has brought us to where we are today: the eve of introducing an EV for almost anyone, with just about every other auto maker struggling (or at least pretending to struggle) to play catch up.
That's a pretty good result of that Secret Master Plan.
Robin

 

[brucet999]

Since the 3 motor is in front of the rear wheels, that opens up space behind the wheels, space which could be used for a second 2 or 3 layer battery pack. But people here seem to love to cry about the trunk space, like it is in the top 10 list of things to think about. God forbid Tesla makes the trunk even the least bit smaller than the maximum size it can be, even if it allows more battery and 50 plus more miles.

2nd battery aft of the rear axle would introduce three new problems; connectivity with the main battery, impairment of rear crumple zone, and most importantly, it would shift weight distribution rearward, causing steering and handling problems.

 

[keydiver]

Yeah...what about 0-60 times? I'm interested in that.

My guess is that we're going to find out later that the 5.6 second 0-60 only applies to the base $35,000 Model 3, and I'm hoping that the bigger pack will be sub-5 second. It is interesting to now see that my 5.2 second S 70D is "slow" compared to the S 75D's that are now rolling off the line.
As far as the base pack size, my gut tells me that EM will make sure the pack is just big enough to beat the Bolt's EPA. I hope I'm right.

 

[Garlan Garner]

I can't remember.....what was/is his criticism again?
Garlan:
Description. Not criticism.
I think Musk executed the Secret Master Plan (SMP) extremely well; maybe better than almost anyone else could have. Certainly better than Tesla's founders were likely to.
But the SMP predated Mr. Musk's arrival on the scene (as did Tesla's incorporation...not just its "business plan"). The strategy of changing how people think about EV's (via a high-performance Roadster), using commodity batteries to power them and charging a lot in order to fund designs with broader appeal was baked in from the start (the model for EV innovation diffusion was refrigerators....first a wildly expensive luxury for first adopters, then something well-off people could afford and show off, and finally full market penetration where virtually anyone could have one).
Musk's SMP's brilliant execution (with a few well-known veers off course) has brought us to where we are today: the eve of introducing an EV for almost anyone, with just about every other auto maker struggling (or at least pretending to struggle) to play catch up.
That's a pretty good result of that Secret Master Plan.
Robin

There was no SMP. That's fake news.

 

[Garlan Garner]

My guess is that we're going to find out later that the 5.6 second 0-60 only applies to the base $35,000 Model 3, and I'm hoping that the bigger pack will be sub-5 second. It is interesting to now see that my 5.2 second S 70D is "slow" compared to the S 75D's that are now rolling off the line.
As far as the base pack size, my gut tells me that EM will make sure the pack is just big enough to beat the Bolt's EPA. I hope I'm right.

Indeed 5.6 will be the base model. Its already been stated. 5.2 70D isn't slow.

 

[N5329K]

There was no SMP. That's fake news.

???
Robin

 

[gregincal]

1. As you know, the initial product of Tesla Motors is a high performance electric sports car called the Tesla Roadster
2. Without giving away too much, I can say that the second model will be a sporty four door family car ( Model S )
3. Use that money to build an affordable car ( Model 3 )
4. Use that money to build an even more affordable car ( ? )

Um, that's not the text from the original post, you've strangely added number two and changed things pretty substantially. I'm pretty sure he considered the Model S to be the "affordable car" and the Model 3 to be the "even more affordable car".

The statement you shortened to create your invented number 2 spells it out:

Without giving away too much, I can say that the second model will be a sporty four door family car at roughly half the $89k price point of the Tesla Roadster and the third model will be even more affordable.

 

[JeffK]

Exactly:

So, in short, the master plan is:

1. Build sports car [Roadster]
2. Use that money to build an affordable car [Model S/X]
3. Use that money to build an even more affordable car [Model 3]
4. While doing above, also provide zero emission electric power generation options [Solar City]

Don't tell anyone.

 

[206er]

Not sure S and X really qualify as "affordable".

 

[JeffK]

Not sure S and X really qualify as "affordable".

The lowest end model S was nearly half the price of the Roadster...

 

[Garlan Garner]

Um, that's not the text from the original post, you've strangely added number two and changed things pretty substantially. I'm pretty sure he considered the Model S to be the "affordable car" and the Model 3 to be the "even more affordable car".

The statement you shortened to create your invented number 2 spells it out:

Without giving away too much, I can say that the second model will be a sporty four door family car at roughly half the $89k price point of the Tesla Roadster and the third model will be even more affordable.

What? I didn't invert anything.

My quote lines up with my link.

 

[gregincal]

What? I didn't invert anything.

My quote lines up with my link.

Um, I cannot find the list you quoted in the link you provided anywhere (and I didn't say you "inverted" anything, you added an extra bullet point between 1 and 2). I see:

1. Build sports car
2. Use that money to build an affordable car
3. Use that money to build an even more affordable car
4. While doing above, also provide zero emission electric power generation options

 

[Model 3]

and 200 mile usable range (whatever that means)

Elon explains it here: Elon Musk Comments On Minimum Range For Electric Cars

200 miles is minimum threshold for an electric car. We need 200+ miles in real world. Not 200 miles in ‘AC off, driving on flat road mode. Anything below 200 miles isn’t passing grade. Most people looking for 20% more than that.

So I could interpret "200 miles usable range" as "240 miles EPA range". So, someone may have to recalculate their predictions

... so now the question is what Elon was talking about with his "215+ miles range", was he still talking about 215+ miles usable range? (215*1.2=258)
Or was he talking about 215+ miles EPA range? No-one can say that 240 miles EPA range is not within "215+ miles EPA range"

But no, I do not expect a battery with 55kWh *total* energy to deliver 240 EPA miles, but if we are talking about 55kWh(+) *usable* energy it may be more realistic. And no, I do not think he *really* was planing on 240+ EPA miles, but something close like maybe 230+ miles EPA range. A battery with 55kWh(+) *usable* energy may be labeled as "55" or "60" just as a battery with 70kWh(+) usable energy (and therefore about 75kWh total capacity) may be labeled as "70" or "75".