Long-Term Fundamentals of Tesla Motors (TSLA)

[chickensevil]

I made a comment about range before and it was sorta covered here in response to the question by saying that if you had an 800 mile pack then you would be able to get to 400 miles in 20 minutes using current technology. This should be highlighted as my only major NEED for a larger pack as it gives an angle toward getting more miles on the bottom half quicker. Do you NEED more than 200 miles for normal driving? No, not really, but there is plenty of circumstance that you would NEED to get a recharge of that 200 miles back relatively quick (say around 5 minutes). Our current cells can safely handle around a 2C rate max. So if you had a larger pack your C rate is therefore higher, so your 2C max becomes higher thus filling the pack back at a faster rate.

So what they need to do and focus on, is getting charging times lower. One shortcut to that would be the ability to sustain a high kW rate in the pack for a longer period. Even if they *cant* go higher than 135kW, being able to stay at that rate for a much longer period would mean more miles faster. If your taper curve didn't hit on that 135 until after you were at a half charge it would cause a pretty big difference in recharge times.

The final point I would make is that I strongly feel that the better sweet spot is actually 300 REAL miles. Not 200. There is a reason I went with the 85kW pack for my driving needs and there have been plenty of times where I wished I had just a *little* bit more range. I wasn't doing any crazy road trip, it was all just normal local driving, and as it turned out, just toward the end of the day I had to go out of my way to get some extra miles on my car to finish out my day's driving. Maybe this is more of a problem with the spread-out DC metro area.... but it is not uncommon for many people in my part of the country to go north 30 miles, then south 60 miles, and then west 40 miles, (and so forth) all in the span of one day.

Most cars on the market easily have 300+ miles of range on them under most all driving conditions. It is what people are used to having access to. Yes, 2 seater sports cars and other crazy high performance cars are the exception to that, but even most of the large luxury easily have more than 300 mile gas tanks on them.

I am happy with my range, and I make it work for me as my only car, but there have certainly been moments of inconvenience that a non-enthusiast would not be willing to put up with... recharge times and a *slightly* larger battery would fix all of that. I really am nit-picking here though, since it has no real impact on the success of the company, since there is plenty of market for their current cars given their "limitations" just make it cheaper and we will be good. But in the future, I expect we will see 400 mile packs become the standard, and combined with a 5 minute half charge time, and there will be no excuse not to switch by really anyone out there...

 

[jerry33]

I am happy with my range, and I make it work for me as my only car, but there have certainly been moments of inconvenience that a non-enthusiast would not be willing to put up with... recharge times and a *slightly* larger battery would fix all of that. I really am nit-picking here though, since it has no real impact on the success of the company, since there is plenty of market for their current cars given their "limitations" just make it cheaper and we will be good. But in the future, I expect we will see 400 mile packs become the standard, and combined with a 5 minute half charge time, and there will be no excuse not to switch by really anyone out there...

This pretty much says it all. Eventually it won't be an issue (assuming the current rate of SC buildout continues so that it covers state highways and other non-interstate roads). Until then there are many routes (and a few urban/suburban situations) where the non-entusiast just won't put up with the current limitations (even if they are only imagined limitations--and there are plenty of limitations that are real). I envision the EV range path to be

- 250 (now)

- 300 (+2-3 years)

- 400 (+3-5 years)

- 500 (+5-8 years. At this point there the major shift to EVs will start and continue for several years because virtually all the excuses will be gone.)

- 300 to 400 (+15-20 years. SCs are now common enough that almost no routes requiring slower charging will exist and most of the competition will be based on price. Batteries will be small enough and cheap enough that they should be DIY plug ins.)

Currently, the major obstacles to EV adoptions are "I don't want to have to stop for hours to charge", "I live where there is no possibility of charging", and price. Price will take care of itself in a few years as costs are reduced. The lack of home charging is more serious and harder to overcome, but more range is helpful because of the frequency of charging and the faster charging speed.

Currently there is enough range for most urban/suburban driving and many trips, provided the trip is limited to only the busiest interstate highways. Within two years that will change to most interstate highways. There will still be the many non-interestate routes that people would like to/need to use. Eventually that will be solved by having enough SCs, but it will take many years, so the work-around until then is to have longer range vehicles. If you have a 500 mile range--which goes down to 400 during adverse conditions--the "needs more range" excuse becomes hard to sustain. The faster charging a 500 mile range battery provides will also help. 80% of 500 miles in 20 minutes means that the only charging stop is for lunch during a day's long distance driving.

 

[FANGO]

500? That's crazy and unnecessary and won't be standard in 5 years. It also won't be the tipping point for adoption. That will happen earlier, and will happen with cats with lower range than 500 miles because they cost less. Fast charging is much more important to focus on. Your last step, the decrease to 300-400, will happen earlier and the range number will be lower than that. I expect consumer EVs to settle around 150, maaaayyybe 200.

The people who make the excuses you speak of more likely either lack knowledge or are just resisting change. There are vanishingly few people whose needs would not be served by a 60+SC right now. The people who make excuses will likely make excuses regardless, until EVs become "normal". Their buying decision won't be a response to improvements in EVs but more a result of increasing their own awareness and seeing EVs as something less foreign

 

[JRP3]

Remember 150 can become 100 or less in bad conditions, exactly when people fear running out of charge the most. Plus the public is used to 300+ miles of range and a quick fill up anywhere. I'd expect at least 200 miles to be the norm eventually.

 

[FANGO]

Right, the public being used to it is what has to (and will) change though, not the cars. It's silly to think that we need to offer the exact same thing - you can only fill up at electricity stations, it costs a lot, there are only a ew companies running the stations and they're all evil, etc etc. it's simply not going to be the same, we can't expect it to be the same, and it's a good thing that it's not going to be the same. Which is why I think making it exactly the same is far less important than educating the public about how EVs work and then watching people get used to it. This is how change happens, not by making things exactly the same as they used to be.

The reason the public needs to go 300 miles between fill ups is because going to a gas station every day would be a horrible experience. Not so with charging at home. And because the marginal cost of increasing gas tank size is much lower than that of increasing battery size.

 

[RobStark]

People will want 300 mile real world range on a standard charge regardless of how they drive and in what conditions they drive in regardless of how much public education EV advocates engage in. To be free of range anxiety real or imagined. People buy on wants not fact based needs.

That will be at least 500 rated miles.

Mass adoption at 150 rated miles will only happen with punitive taxes or other government coercion.

As a rule voters/consumers don't like being coerced.

 

[Johan]

Right, the public being used to it is what has to (and will) change though, not the cars. It's silly to think that we need to offer the exact same thing - you can only fill up at electricity stations, it costs a lot, there are only a ew companies running the stations and they're all evil, etc etc. it's simply not going to be the same, we can't expect it to be the same, and it's a good thing that it's not going to be the same. Which is why I think making it exactly the same is far less important than educating the public about how EVs work and then watching people get used to it. This is how change happens, not by making things exactly the same as they used to be.

The reason the public needs to go 300 miles between fill ups is because going to a gas station every day would be a horrible experience. Not so with charging at home. And because the marginal cost of increasing gas tank size is much lower than that of increasing battery size.

Sorry but I have to disagree with you just a bit here. These "daily driver EVs" already exists and they're OK for what they are but what Tesla are trying to do here is bridge the gap completely and create a fully competitive EV, for virtually all use cases. And unfortunately 265 EPA miles and Supercharging with the current tapering curve just isn't cutting it. I speak from my own experience here from multiple 350 km drives to my family in Sweden, with three small children in the car, in snow or rain at speeds of around 120 km/h (70 mph) and even with 2 SC along the route I feel I'm finding the need to compromise even if slightly. Now, for me that's completely fine but in order to win over the hearts and minds of the whole car owning population Tesla needs to improve on the remaining two variables where ICE cars still have the upper hand: range and fill-up time. These two are intimately connected as one can, but only partly, compensate for the other: fast and ubiquitous fills mitigate the need for very long range - very long range mitigates the need for tight spacing of fill-ups and high speed of fill up. In my opinion Tesla should (and will) continue to improve on both these variables by:

Further expanding the SC network geographically.
Improving SC rates and delaying taper (if possible).
Providing even larger batteries.
Providing battery swapping.

The consumers will be the weighing machine here - the consumers will decide how large the batteries will need to be, how ubiquitous and quick the Superchargers need to be and if there is actual demand for swapping (and at what price). This is uncharted territory and Tesla are wise to keep improving on all of these and let it play out.

I think we as early adopters will definitely have a tendency to underestimate what the average car buyer will expect with regard to battery size, fill-up time (SC or swapping) and price. To replace ICEs EVs need to be better on all levels.

RobStark: us northeners think alike

 

[bluenation]

EV heads who dismiss the real importance of having 200mi real world range (aka 300 mile batt pack, or near that amount) are, thankfully, not the CEO of Tesla. otherwise, EV adoption for the masses would be screwed.

Let's not act as dismissively as Petrolheads. We are better than that, hopefully.

personally, i wouldn't buy anything less than 200mi real world range, and i'd only buy it when "range anxiety" is as common as it is with my ICE car - in other words, very rare.

and like many people in Europe/Asia, im not as priviledged to have my own garage where i can install my own charger. not happening.

 

[ggies07]

I think range needs to be in the middle of what we think and what the other consumers think they need, so i agree around 200.....unless battery makers can find a way to make them not loose range in bad weather conditions. If they can then 150.

My mom is a director of technology at the private school I work for and keeps up with whats going on in the tech world, but ive had to completely educate her on the EV transition. She loves to travel the country through all the back roads and finally said to me that even as great as the Supercharger network is, she still can not see herself getting an EV because all the chargers are located on major roads. She said she would get a hybrid, but that still depends on gas and I'm trying to get her off of it when she buys her next car.

So either we get relatively cheap (20s) long range EVs or we need lots of chargers on back roads as well as major ones to get people like my mom to switch.

 

[chickensevil]

500? That's crazy and unnecessary and won't be standard in 5 years. It also won't be the tipping point for adoption. That will happen earlier, and will happen with cats with lower range than 500 miles because they cost less. Fast charging is much more important to focus on. Your last step, the decrease to 300-400, will happen earlier and the range number will be lower than that. I expect consumer EVs to settle around 150, maaaayyybe 200.

The people who make the excuses you speak of more likely either lack knowledge or are just resisting change. There are vanishingly few people whose needs would not be served by a 60+SC right now. The people who make excuses will likely make excuses regardless, until EVs become "normal". Their buying decision won't be a response to improvements in EVs but more a result of increasing their own awareness and seeing EVs as something less foreign

So I neither lack the knowledge nor am I resisting the change and I am telling you, had I not have had the option of *at least* 200 miles, I would NOT have bought an EV regardless of who made it. I am neither the farthest driver coming in to work nor the closest (there are people in my building who live less than a mile away and who live more than 50 miles away). So I feel like I can speak for myself and speak for at least others who are working in our combined buildings in the NOVA area of some 50,000 employees, that a 150 mile car would not work for likely half of our population. Especially when we live far enough north that the cold certainly has an affect on the range, combined with the hilly roads... my summer wh/mi is around 308, and my winter wh/mi spikes all the way up to 400 at some points... largely because running the heater in stop and go traffic is BRUTAL to your range.

If you want a technology that will eventually replace all your driving needs (even if we assume that you will have 2 cars per household) at least one of those cars is going to have to be a 300 mile car combined with some form of a fast recharge such that it only takes about 10-15 minutes per stop and putting back in around 200 miles in that timeframe. That was why I said for now, Tesla is perfectly fine trucking along at their current range and charge speeds. Heck, they could have gotten away with still selling their 40kWh battery car if they had wanted to. But even Tesla doesn't agree with the notion of a 150 mile car being "ideal"... why else would they drop it? It is also telling that Elon talked about a 400 mile pack for roadsters. Clearly there is some perceived notion that you need more range whether it is logical or not and Elon supports that.

 

[bxr140]

Right, the public being used to it is what has to (and will) change though, not the cars.

I think you over estimate the speed at which the public is willing to change and accept a replacement technology for their tried and true ICEs. Logic does not win here.

I don't think range will play a part in mass adoption, because that technology is advancing faster than public perception. The battery cost/mass/volume balance will settle somewhere around 300-400 miles and EVs will cost the same as ICEs...at that point the cost of electricity will sway a larger percentage of the motoring population than today. But...I believe the key technology will be the ability to quick charge an order of magnitude faster than even current Tesla superchargers. Until people can charge up about as fast as they can gas up, reluctancy will prevail.

 

[jerry33]

I don't think range will play a part in mass adoption, because that technology is advancing faster than public perception. The battery cost/mass/volume balance will settle somewhere around 300-400 miles and EVs will cost the same as ICEs...at that point the cost of electricity will sway a larger percentage of the motoring population than today. But...I believe the key technology will be the ability to quick charge an order of magnitude faster than even current Tesla superchargers. Until people can charge up about as fast as they can gas up, reluctancy will prevail.

If the only charge they need to do on a trip is one at the lunch stop, 20-30 minutes would be fine. This should be doable easily with a larger battery since a larger battery can charge more miles at a high rate of speed.

 

[bxr140]

If the only charge they need to do on a trip is one at the lunch stop, 20-30 minutes would be fine. This should be doable easily with a larger battery since a larger battery can charge more miles at a high rate of speed.

Don't get me wrong--I totally get that. I just dont believe the inflection point in public perception will be based on logic and reason. It will be a one for one comparison against their ICEs, and the EV will basically need to take every category.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

Does anyone think that Model X will have a much larger effect on electric car adoption than anyone realizes?

Model S is the "Generation 2" automobile in the secret plan, and the X is sort of a "Generation 2.5" vehicle. I saw in another thread that someone heard rumors about prototype X vehicles coming off the line as looking way more awesome than the concept that was introduced 3 years ago. Model S is a great car with pretty decent cargo space, but it's not quite an SUV replacement, whereas that Model X has the "minivan" passenger and load capacity. I've got a hunch that the more expensive Model X has the potential to vastly outsell Model S, and bring in a lot more profit margin and overall profit.

Sourcing enough batteries will be the big problem, which makes the Gigafactory all the more critical.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

People will want 300 mile real world range on a standard charge regardless of how they drive and in what conditions they drive in regardless of how much public education EV advocates engage in. To be free of range anxiety real or imagined. People buy on wants not fact based needs.

That will be at least 500 rated miles.

Mass adoption at 150 rated miles will only happen with punitive taxes or other government coercion.

As a rule voters/consumers don't like being coerced.

In the USA, I think 200 rated is enough, because most household have multiple vehicles. The 2nd vehicle provides the safety net.

 

[pz1975]

This is hilarious. This is the third time I remember now this range argument coming up here. It's always FANGO vs everyone else. I'm not taking sides but it's like Groundhog Day!

 

[FANGO]

EV heads who dismiss the real importance of having 200mi real world range (aka 300 mile batt pack, or near that amount) are, thankfully, not the CEO of Tesla.

In fact, the ceo of tesla thankfully agrees that ever increasing range numbers are not necessary for adoption, and also understands that fast charging is a more important focus.

Though it would be nice if people who ought to know better would stop arguing against him. No, EVs will not settle around 400 miles.

 

[Johan]

In fact, the ceo of tesla thankfully agrees that ever increasing range numbers are not necessary for adoption, and also understands that fast charging is a more important focus.

Though it would be nice if people who ought to know better would stop arguing against him. No, EVs will not settle around 400 miles.

In all fairness they also thought the 40 kWh option would sell well. They were quick to cancel it when very few bought it. It's 95% about perceived need. Elon gets this too. The customer is always right, right?

 

[chickensevil]

In all fairness they also thought the 40 kWh option would sell well. They were quick to cancel it when very few bought it. It's 95% about perceived need. Elon gets this too. The customer is always right, right?

What was the 0-60 times? That might have played just as much of a role in canceling the 40kWh option as well. He did say it felt like a hobbled product (not his exact words, but something to that nature). He talked about it being a two fold reasoning. People didn't want to buy it and it didn't feel like a good product. So for whatever the reason they didn't think it was a good product we can argue forever, but part of that has to likely do with the pack size since that was pretty much the only difference...

So:

In fact, the ceo of tesla thankfully agrees that ever increasing range numbers are not necessary for adoption

Is not entirely a truthful statement. Yes, at some point too many miles are too many miles... but considering he is always talking about *at least* 200 miles of range for any of their products, I am going to go with anything less than 200 they don't think it is a good product. Which goes against your point FANGO, that the sweet spot in range will settle around 150.

Even if I had charging at work (which I don't and likely never will... grrrr I hate our building management)... I *still* would not have wanted a 40kWh MS. And I know people who have the 60kWh pack that have stated that there have been times they wished they had bought the 85. Especially if you decide to road trip it, because it is quite a noticeable difference in the supercharge speeds.

One such friend set off from DC to NY a solid 2 hours ahead of me, and not only did he stop at each charger along the way, he was there much longer than I, to the point where by the time I caught up with him at Syosset, NY he was just finishing charging at around the same time that I was. Me on the other hand was able to go 250 miles on the first leg not stopping until Edison, NY, and then a very short charge to get the last 70 miles to Syosset. That right there is reason enough to me that going with a larger pack is more beneficial because it is easier to get a higher charge speed out of it. Which has been one of my critical points on the whole thing. Barring some great chemistry change, increasing the pack size is going to be the fastest path toward faster supercharging. Combine that with vampire losses, the cold effect, and elevation changes during travel, and having an extra hundred miles on the pack would be very welcome.

If I could be guaranteed 250 miles regardless of driving conditions up through around 80MPH then I would be fine with that... because I am not, and there is a decent amount of guesswork involved in determining your range then I am not quite happy with where things currently shake out on the range side. Yes, this is still the best car I have ever owned, and I would never willingly go back to something else, but denying that there is room for improvement is folly.

 

[JRP3]

This is hilarious. This is the third time I remember now this range argument coming up here. It's always FANGO vs everyone else. I'm not taking sides but it's like Groundhog Day!

Yes, FANGO is pretty much alone on "limited range island" every time. I drive a 50 mile max range EV but I know that just because I can make it work in my situation it's never going to be acceptable to the general public. People don't "need" smart phones but they've come to think that they do. People "need" more range because they are used to having more range, and many have a lifestyle that does in fact require more range. Taking a step backwards is not going to sell to the general public. Especially when range can be drastically cut in extreme conditions.

In fact, the ceo of tesla thankfully agrees that ever increasing range numbers are not necessary for adoption, and also understands that fast charging is a more important focus.

Though it would be nice if people who ought to know better would stop arguing against him.

Right, the same CEO who when asked about a 400 mile pack said why not a 500 mile pack? Seems the only person arguing against the CEO is you. Even most of the dedicated early adopter Tesla owners want more range than they currently have, and you expect the less motivated general public to settle for less? At some point you have to realize that your viewpoints are completely out of touch with the mass market.