Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Model Y - Gigafactory Texas Production

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
#2,361
Did everybody reading these documents just skip past the testing methods guide? In the section from the 10/1 application for the original 2022 LR AWD MY certification, Tesla says to test battery current on HV cable extension cable under rear seat.

1647231483689.png


For the new 2022 AWD MY they show lifting the car and measuring the rear motor output, front motor output and heat pump output. Maybe the single cable under the front seat wasn't providing the proper measurements and led to inaccurate results? Also of note, the pictures of the DCDC output HV Cable was changed between the two revisions.

1/27/22
1647231785686.png


2/10/22
1647231809308.png


It looks like the large HV extension cable under the rear seat has been replaced. Also, this looks different under the seat, the black brace to the left of the opening in the picture below do not appear to be present in the first picture above. It also appears the show the seat bottom as tilting up as opposed to having to be pulled off with the current 2170 design. If the floor is solid, there is no reason to need to lift the seat off to access components underneath it. Are these the first views of the structural pack? Anyone care to go to https://dis.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=54971&flag=1 and on page 19 (the view above) and try to zoom in on the part number tag "A" and clean it up to see what it says? It looks suspiciously like the battery label on the front of the current packs. I am not famliar with this view of the current Model Y. Anyone have a similar picture from a 2020 or 2021 MY with the rear tray removed?

1647232024096.png


In a leaked manual it mentions the structural pack having slightly different lift points. The picture in the application looks similar to the one in the manual so maybe it didn't change all that much in the final production version? That language is missing from the current online manual.
1647232358751.png

1647232394039.png


Also, the 1/27 report was tested at Kato while the 2/23 was tested at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory. Mileage was slightly lower at the latter testing site but required less energy to recharge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ProjectTrinity, MumblzA10 and Terminator857
#2,362
Mrbrock said:
Did everybody reading these documents just skip past the testing methods guide? In the section from the 10/1 application for the original 2022 LR AWD MY certification, Tesla says to test battery current on HV cable extension cable under rear seat.

View attachment 780548

For the new 2022 AWD MY they show lifting the car and measuring the rear motor output, front motor output and heat pump output. Maybe the single cable under the front seat wasn't providing the proper measurements and led to inaccurate results? Also of note, the pictures of the DCDC output HV Cable was changed between the two revisions.

1/27/22
View attachment 780550

2/10/22
View attachment 780551

It looks like the large HV extension cable under the rear seat has been replaced. Also, this looks different under the seat, the black brace to the left of the opening in the picture below do not appear to be present in the first picture above. It also appears the show the seat bottom as tilting up as opposed to having to be pulled off with the current 2170 design. If the floor is solid, there is no reason to need to lift the seat off to access components underneath it. Are these the first views of the structural pack? Anyone care to go to https://dis.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=54971&flag=1 and on page 19 (the view above) and try to zoom in on the part number tag "A" and clean it up to see what it says? It looks suspiciously like the battery label on the front of the current packs. I am not famliar with this view of the current Model Y. Anyone have a similar picture from a 2020 or 2021 MY with the rear tray removed?

View attachment 780554

In a leaked manual it mentions the structural pack having slightly different lift points. The picture in the application looks similar to the one in the manual so maybe it didn't change all that much in the final production version? That language is missing from the current online manual.
View attachment 780556
View attachment 780558

Also, the 1/27 report was tested at Kato while the 2/23 was tested at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory. Mileage was slightly lower at the latter testing site but required less energy to recharge.
Click to expand...
My thinking on this portion of the application / documentation is that it is boilerplate, repetition of what was originally submitted for the initial Model Y.
 
#2,364
Another thing that hasn’t been discussed in all the speculation they will use the new Austin production capacity to immediately start building a cheaper model ... Many orders have been on the books so long they are price 1-2-6K below the current pricing. If costs are going up, they make more money by getting these off the books ASAP and selling more at the new price, which doesn’t seemed to have slowed demand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrGriz
#2,365
advocate8 said:
Another thing that hasn’t been discussed in all the speculation they will use the new Austin production capacity to immediately start building a cheaper model ... Many orders have been on the books so long they are price 1-2-6K below the current pricing. If costs are going up, they make more money by getting these off the books ASAP and selling more at the new price, which doesn’t seemed to have slowed demand.
Click to expand...
While they could offer to 'swap' buyers into those models like they did awhile back with the newly introduced LFP models, they can't just bait-and-switch you into that. If you bought an MYLR - even at below current prices - they cant just say 'this MYLR-1 model is close enough, take it and shut up!'. If they did offer up a lesser range model for a few bucks cheaper, they likely would sell very easily and help to stem some of the demand.

Ultimately, as we've seen from gaming systems that become impossible to get, demand management is an interesting thing. You don't really want to completely satiate the demand as that can risk over-saturation. Maintaining an element of exclusivity helps to keep the demand pump flowing. To an extent, it 'forces' the potential buyer into making a decision. If I know that I have to wait 6 months to get a Tesla, I may be more likely to execute vs knowing I can just show up at a showroom and drive one off the lot anytime I feel like it.
 
#2,366
slacker775 said:
While they could offer to 'swap' buyers into those models like they did awhile back with the newly introduced LFP models, they can't just bait-and-switch you into that. If you bought an MYLR - even at below current prices - they cant just say 'this MYLR-1 model is close enough, take it and shut up!'. If they did offer up a lesser range model for a few bucks cheaper, they likely would sell very easily and help to stem some of the demand.

Ultimately, as we've seen from gaming systems that become impossible to get, demand management is an interesting thing. You don't really want to completely satiate the demand as that can risk over-saturation. Maintaining an element of exclusivity helps to keep the demand pump flowing. To an extent, it 'forces' the potential buyer into making a decision. If I know that I have to wait 6 months to get a Tesla, I may be more likely to execute vs knowing I can just show up at a showroom and drive one off the lot anytime I feel like it.
Click to expand...
Sharp marketing theory. That makes a lot of sense. There is a similar phenomenon with pricing strategy... hitting a price that suggests exclusivity rather than bargain basement is a thing. Tough to tease a perfect number out of data though.
It does feel though at this point like the waiting list has either gotten out of hand or is close to it, for the purposes you describe. Three months? might do it. Six, eight, nine months or many people are going to say no, I need a car. Some will be hooked... witness all the CBT passion and Rivian orders. But for the kind of volume Tesla wants to do, there is probably a point no more than just a few months out they want to shoot for.

And as to accepting a “280” mile car which in real like is probably more like 220... It could happen. But I wouldn’t be one of the ones switching over. But we’re all different here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrGriz
#2,367
Mrbrock said:
Did everybody reading these documents just skip past the testing methods guide? In the section from the 10/1 application for the original 2022 LR AWD MY certification, Tesla says to test battery current on HV cable extension cable under rear seat.

View attachment 780548

For the new 2022 AWD MY they show lifting the car and measuring the rear motor output, front motor output and heat pump output. Maybe the single cable under the front seat wasn't providing the proper measurements and led to inaccurate results? Also of note, the pictures of the DCDC output HV Cable was changed between the two revisions.

1/27/22
View attachment 780550

2/10/22
View attachment 780551

It looks like the large HV extension cable under the rear seat has been replaced. Also, this looks different under the seat, the black brace to the left of the opening in the picture below do not appear to be present in the first picture above. It also appears the show the seat bottom as tilting up as opposed to having to be pulled off with the current 2170 design. If the floor is solid, there is no reason to need to lift the seat off to access components underneath it. Are these the first views of the structural pack? Anyone care to go to https://dis.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=54971&flag=1 and on page 19 (the view above) and try to zoom in on the part number tag "A" and clean it up to see what it says? It looks suspiciously like the battery label on the front of the current packs. I am not famliar with this view of the current Model Y. Anyone have a similar picture from a 2020 or 2021 MY with the rear tray removed?

View attachment 780554

In a leaked manual it mentions the structural pack having slightly different lift points. The picture in the application looks similar to the one in the manual so maybe it didn't change all that much in the final production version? That language is missing from the current online manual.
View attachment 780556
View attachment 780558

Also, the 1/27 report was tested at Kato while the 2/23 was tested at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory. Mileage was slightly lower at the latter testing site but required less energy to recharge.
Click to expand...
Seems almost like a job for Sandy’s tear-down people. They would probably know instantly just from looking at the photos what if anything important, has changed. Is that explosive fuse still under the rear seat?
 
#2,369
Mrbrock said:
Did everybody reading these documents just skip past the testing methods guide? In the section from the 10/1 application for the original 2022 LR AWD MY certification, Tesla says to test battery current on HV cable extension cable under rear seat.

View attachment 780548

For the new 2022 AWD MY they show lifting the car and measuring the rear motor output, front motor output and heat pump output. Maybe the single cable under the front seat wasn't providing the proper measurements and led to inaccurate results? Also of note, the pictures of the DCDC output HV Cable was changed between the two revisions.

1/27/22
View attachment 780550

2/10/22
View attachment 780551

It looks like the large HV extension cable under the rear seat has been replaced. Also, this looks different under the seat, the black brace to the left of the opening in the picture below do not appear to be present in the first picture above. It also appears the show the seat bottom as tilting up as opposed to having to be pulled off with the current 2170 design. If the floor is solid, there is no reason to need to lift the seat off to access components underneath it. Are these the first views of the structural pack? Anyone care to go to https://dis.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=54971&flag=1 and on page 19 (the view above) and try to zoom in on the part number tag "A" and clean it up to see what it says? It looks suspiciously like the battery label on the front of the current packs. I am not famliar with this view of the current Model Y. Anyone have a similar picture from a 2020 or 2021 MY with the rear tray removed?

View attachment 780554

In a leaked manual it mentions the structural pack having slightly different lift points. The picture in the application looks similar to the one in the manual so maybe it didn't change all that much in the final production version? That language is missing from the current online manual.
View attachment 780556
View attachment 780558

Also, the 1/27 report was tested at Kato while the 2/23 was tested at the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory. Mileage was slightly lower at the latter testing site but required less energy to recharge.
Click to expand...
Also, can you explain the concept of “charge depleting range” as EPA is using it in this paperwork?
I’ve google it from a number of courses and none seem to be able to explain the concept, they all make it sound like straightforward range, which can’t be the case from the numbers here, 253 in one case, 380, 400-plus in two places....
 
#2,370
CRIMSON_DATE said:
Maybe they decided to come clean and just release real world mileage for the Y instead of those numbers which you never get. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Maybe. I get about 95% charge efficiency at 240v/32a. They are getting 89% at 208v. Weight and overall efficiency are about the same so is it a 70kwh total battery or is it the 82kwh battery with a larger buffer so the reported range is lower? Doesn’t make sense to software lock the 82kwh battery.
 
#2,371
advocate8 said:
Sharp marketing theory. That makes a lot of sense. There is a similar phenomenon with pricing strategy... hitting a price that suggests exclusivity rather than bargain basement is a thing. Tough to tease a perfect number out of data though.
It does feel though at this point like the waiting list has either gotten out of hand or is close to it, for the purposes you describe. Three months? might do it. Six, eight, nine months or many people are going to say no, I need a car. Some will be hooked... witness all the CBT passion and Rivian orders. But for the kind of volume Tesla wants to do, there is probably a point no more than just a few months out they want to shoot for.

And as to accepting a “280” mile car which in real like is probably more like 220... It could happen. But I wouldn’t be one of the ones switching over. But we’re all different here.
Click to expand...
My Y LR already had 220 mile range on the roads I drove a lot. Unless they are getting real about the actual range for most people the 280 figure would be closer to 180 for me.

OTOH my M3LR comes pretty close to making its numbers. My Y LR, was 317 Wh/mile and the 3 LR it is at 249 Wh/mile driving on similar roads, speed and traffic.
 
#2,373
slacker775 said:
While they could offer to 'swap' buyers into those models like they did awhile back with the newly introduced LFP models, they can't just bait-and-switch you into that. If you bought an MYLR - even at below current prices - they cant just say 'this MYLR-1 model is close enough, take it and shut up!'. If they did offer up a lesser range model for a few bucks cheaper, they likely would sell very easily and help to stem some of the demand.

Ultimately, as we've seen from gaming systems that become impossible to get, demand management is an interesting thing. You don't really want to completely satiate the demand as that can risk over-saturation. Maintaining an element of exclusivity helps to keep the demand pump flowing. To an extent, it 'forces' the potential buyer into making a decision. If I know that I have to wait 6 months to get a Tesla, I may be more likely to execute vs knowing I can just show up at a showroom and drive one off the lot anytime I feel like it.
Click to expand...

I was thinking they might put 2170 cells in the new model and 4680 cells into the current higher priced models to burn out excess inventory.
 
#2,375

Attachments

  • 66DEBCC3-C3F8-4723-BC01-743CC40B1BB1.jpeg
    66DEBCC3-C3F8-4723-BC01-743CC40B1BB1.jpeg
    355.6 KB · Views: 96
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mrbrock, Pricedm, JimMay and 1 other person
#2,376
LibertyEV said:
From the EPA .PDF. It says Long Range was tested but the updated data listed is for the AWD variant. The LR and P data did not change. It’s a little confusing.
One thing is for sure this appears to be the first VIN out of Austin
Click to expand...
There’s of course a difference between the first assigned customer VIN and the first Austin VIN. By ‘first Austin VIN" standards, no, that is number 67. And there are another 400-plus cars with Austin VINs sitting outside the factory.
with 1,700 miles on it already? we’re going to take convincing its not yet another hoax, although ginning up a non-customer VIN seems less likely as its an even greater waste of time. where did you pull that one from?
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: JimMay
#2,378
LibertyEV said:

Page 51
Click to expand...
Fair enough, sharp eye. A few things. First, again, it is far from the same thing as the first assigned Austin customer car. All 400-plus sitting outside the factory have VINs, no big deal
It could be a computer-generated image Tesla provided to the EPA rather than a photo. In which case any info one it may be kinda random. Or aimed at stirring up Ryan Shaw, Bearded Tesla Guy etc.
But... what it is, if it IS a photo or accurate representation of an actual vehicle screen (and the fact it has decent miles on it suggests that) is a clue supporting MYLR production out of Austin. Not SR, not P, though they could be as well.
A lot of the generic info in the application page there at EPA has stuff like that not tied directly to the new standard AWD version, whenever something generic is required... so it’s not unusual per this paperwork that a screen from a slightly different kind of vehicle is shown.
Who knows if it means anything re: LR’s. May or may not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
identifying Model Y trim level using GVWR
Replies
0
Views
345
Model X: Ordering, Production, Delivery
pintx
P
T
How do you tell if your 2022+ driver seat has airbag on both sides?
Replies
0
Views
686
Model Y: Interior & Exterior
tamagoliu
T
G
  • Question
2023 MYLR Inventory Vehicle Delivery Time
Replies
4
Views
1K
Model Y: Ordering, Production, Delivery
Dracaris
Dracaris
J
What motor does your 2023 Model Y have?
Replies
395
Views
89K
Model Y: Ordering, Production, Delivery
petemill
P
M
Question about VIN received
Replies
36
Views
4K
Model Y: Ordering, Production, Delivery
mdwstMY
M
Top
Back
Blog
New
Forum list
Marketplace
Menu