Why did they release a 279 mile 4680? They likely built a full pack 4680 and it fell short of the current 2170 MY in some way (weight, range, acceleration) so they reduced amount of cells and are selling that variant. Tesla does not want to have 2 different LR variants with different specs on the market at the same time.
Well, everything you just wrote is speculation. I can think of many possible scenarios and explanations. If you take the time to watch and interpret what was presented in the battery day presentation one of the points you’ll notice was that the 4680 battery is 5x the volume which corresponds exactly to the ‘5x the energy’ point they claimed. Although the electrode tab design changed, the fundamental battery chemistry is the same meaning the energy density (=kWh/kg) is the same. There are other factors which may change the total vehicle weight (battery pack housing, cooling, etc, but I’ve seen zero information on any of that thus far.
I agree my comment is speculation. That’s why I used the word LIKELY in my comment. I didn’t say they did.
In your original post, you presented it as fact, no ‘likely’ or other qualifications.
www.nextbigfuture.com
Which original post? The one you quoted? This is a screenshot. Please show me where it doesn’t say likely. The second part about 2 different models should be a fact. If Tesla wants to sell one model to the eastern US that is different from the one going to the Western US, they are asking for trouble. No sane company would ever do that.In your original post, you presented it as fact, no ‘likely’ or other qualifications.
There is no link in this thread regarding a battery analysis, either. The only analysis I’ve seen was a link to a tear down video of a damaged battery that looked at physical characteristics. Because it was a damaged cell there was no electrical analysis done. Sandy Munro has started a battery pack tear down as of but the last video I saw they hadn’t even gotten the pack full open, much less been able to extract and analyze a battery.
My 5x statement was based strictly on geometry and the 4680 cell is actually about 5.5x the total volume, so even with thicker walls the actual electrode volume will still be very close.
Edit: I just did another search and all I found was this stating the batteries had a higher energy density. This was apparently a 6 month old battery and not necessarily the final production design, though.
Tesla 4680 Battery Analysis | NextBigFuture.com
Jordon at the Limiting Factor is a battery expert and he has had a detailed analysis of a six month old 4680 Tesla battery.
How does the Texas delivery exactly work?
Elon making claims that we’re more goals for the future….that’s an interesting way to spin the BS that comes from Elon’s mouth. Just like FSD is right around the corner.
I think the science including the weight and battery capacity of the 279 mile MY AWD 4680 proves that statement to be true. A 15% larger battery does not mean 15% more range. Again, you also have to ask yourself why Tesla would not use 4680 LR AWD if it could get 330 miles. Instead they built a separate 2170 line. Either 4680 LR isn't up to snuff or there is something else going on. Neither answer will sit well with anyone on this board who thought the 4680 was a revolution in battery performance and would instantly add range and speed compared to the 2170 based cars of the same battery specs.
I posted something like that before - can't remember if it was this thread or not. Tesla would have a lot of discontent if cars from one plant had 20% more range than those from another plant. Even if they suddenly had a battery that could give 50% more range it would financially be better for them to put fewer cells in the pack to achieve an equivalent range and/or start offering an extended range model for more money. Regardless the only ways a battery cell alone can increase range is either by increasing energy density or by increasing efficiency (via lower internal resistances yielding lower power loss during charging/discharging.) Beyond that it's simply cramming more cells in the battery pack.
Please stop saying a 4680 LR will have 20% more range than 2170 LR. There has never been anything said or printed to validate this point. Battery Day was not about increasing range in vehicles. It was showing that a new format could save money from a manufacturing standpoint by allowing them to get more range out of less cells (less kwh). However, it was all hypothetical and current production of 4680 has not lived up to their hypotheses form a performance standpoint. The MY AWD from Austin is 50 miles short on range and doesn't show the expected weight savings. A "full pack" 4680 LR MY would likley have less range than the current 2170. On this point we can agree that Tesla doesn't want to have two different spec LR MY available. You think Austin would be producing a 400 mile MY. This will NEVER happen. MX doesn't have 400 miles. MX doesn't have 2170 so why do you think it will get 4680? MX is still the pinnacle of Tesla SUV so selling a MY with much more range will essentially kill the MX.
When you read your post, it seems like you are supporting that Tesla didn’t release a LR 4680 because it would compete and be different than the 2170. You don’t say it would be worse. You say:
What is someone to infer from this statement if it’s not that a 4680 LR MY from Austin would have 20% more range than a comparable 2170 LR from Fremont? It sounds like it’s not your intent but it’s how it reads. It’s how this myth that 4680 is superior to 2170 in terms of range and capacity is perpetuated. Random people read well intentioned quotes and then take them to another level.
