Model Y - Gigafactory Texas Production

[advocate8]

How many miles have you logged on the new Austin Y or do you have driving review videos that you can link so we can all know the facts your concerned about? Do you Know the new model won’t handle better? That the battery Won’t handle more cycles? That it’s for sure Not lighter? I must have missed all the car in hand reviews.

The only two measures I flatly said they were worse at…range and quickness, they absolute do have less range and less 0-60 quickness than MYLR and are according to numbers filed with EPA only apparently 25-75 lbs lighter, which is negligible. Same car, same weight, can’t handle better.
Except for battery cycles, which are probably a moving target as they work out the issues, this has all been dealt with directly and indirectly in the thread above. You need to do your own reading of it.
And while you’re at it, lose the attitude. I’m not emotionally invested in the cars being better or worse and you shouldn't be either.

 

[SageBrush]

Same car, same weight, can’t handle better.

You don't know that. The center of gravity and the mass distribution and dispersion may differ.
As for your statement that the range is "worse," note that the current Austin Model 'Y' is standard range while the Model Y LR is long range.

The only statement of yours so far that is a fair criticism is that a Model Y that is less range than the LR and uses 4680 cells was expected to weigh hundreds of pounds less. I would also like to know why this is not the case. LFP would explain things but I'm under the impression that chemistry was not used.

My real interest is seeing a charging curve.

 

[jsight]

I am just curious, if they are not planning to use Austin factory to produce LR and P, considering the demand for AWSR is small, what good to build it if it can't help to ease the demand. Sth. is off...

I'm not sure that demand for that will be small, tbh. If the charge curve ends up being good, it might end up being a great option.

I'm guessing that we'll hear a little more about further production plans at the next quarterly call in July though.

 

[Mrbrock]

But still not started, right? So sth. is not right. Either 4680 not progressing as planned or not enough 2170 to support Austin MY production, or Austin need time to make change to take 2170 which is not original plan. Sth. is not going according to the plan.

It is all going according to plan. No one has ever known the plan. Not even Elon.

You don't know that. The center of gravity and the mass distribution and dispersion may differ.
As for your statement that the range is "worse," note that the current Austin Model 'Y' is standard range while the Model Y LR is long range.

The only statement of yours so far that is a fair criticism is that a Model Y that is less range than the LR and uses 4680 cells was expected to weigh hundreds of pounds less. I would also like to know why this is not the case. LFP would explain things but I'm under the impression that chemistry was not used.

My real interest is seeing a charging curve.

The range is worse because it has almost the same weight and has much lower range. The car was supposed to have more range and less weight than the current LR. If you think they can increase from 279 miles to 330+ and only add 75# of weight, you need to join the engineering team and tell them your ideas. And based on all the other battery day hype that hasn’t not come true, do you really think the charge curve is going to be any different? There is 0 reason for Tesla to make the 4680s better in terms of customer realized performance in any aspect. It’s all about them saving money leading to higher profits.

I'm not sure that demand for that will be small, tbh. If the charge curve ends up being good, it might end up being a great option.

I'm guessing that we'll hear a little more about further production plans at the next quarterly call in July though.

Your charge curve will maybe save you 5 minutes from 10-90%. Do you know many people that would accept a car tomorrow to maybe save 5 minutes every time they charge but give up 50 miles range? No. People want the car tomorrow because they don’t give a damn about overall range. They don’t want to pay $6.50/gal for premium in their BMWs. The demand is high because people want any Tesla they can get their hands on.

If you where able to back out the full cost of FSD, there’s only a $2700 difference for a car that is 2 years older with 29,000 miles. Old console, single glazed front windows, less range, no usb c, all those extra charge cycles leading to battery degradation, etc. And people are paying way more than $64k at regular dealers. Tesla can and will sell whatever vehicles they can produce at any price point under $70k. See the 7-10 month wait time above.

 

[Yelobird]

The only two measures I flatly said they were worse at…range and quickness, they absolute do have less range and less 0-60 quickness than MYLR and are according to numbers filed with EPA only apparently 25-75 lbs lighter, which is negligible. Same car, same weight, can’t handle better.
Except for battery cycles, which are probably a moving target as they work out the issues, this has all been dealt with directly and indirectly in the thread above. You need to do your own reading of it.
And while you’re at it, lose the attitude. I’m not emotionally invested in the cars being better or worse and you shouldn't be either.

Lol. Do you ever read what you write? You named 5 items and even Stated you would be happy if 2 were there. I don’t have an attitude I simply like to answer to what’s written lol. Your not emotionally invested Yet you‘re here on a forum sharing your emotional discontent. Totally makes sense.

 

[advocate8]

Lol. Do you ever read what you write? You named 5 items and even Stated you would be happy if 2 were there. I don’t have an attitude I simply like to answer to what’s written lol. Your not emotionally invested Yet you‘re here on a forum sharing your emotional discontent. Totally makes sense.

Prob good idea to hone your reading comprehension.

 

[advocate8]

You don't know that. The center of gravity and the mass distribution and dispersion may differ.
As for your statement that the range is "worse," note that the current Austin Model 'Y' is standard range while the Model Y LR is long range.

The only statement of yours so far that is a fair criticism is that a Model Y that is less range than the LR and uses 4680 cells was expected to weigh hundreds of pounds less. I would also like to know why this is not the case. LFP would explain things but I'm under the impression that chemistry was not used.

My real interest is seeing a charging curve.

CG and weight distribution so similar it woukd be impossible to tell the difference without some of the ultra sensitive machinery McLaren uses in race suspension setup.
This is splitting hairs that aren’t even visible.
Charging curve could be interesting. But same chemistry so it won’t be wildly different, to degree say, iron base would

 

[MontyFloyd]

They can't just add 2170's they need to retool a line that handles them . Its like what Germany is doing and how slow their ramp is with 2170's. IT will be a few months before they are ready to produce 2170 cars.

As far as 4680's there is simply not enough production to support the MYP or MYLR. The 4680's will likely only be on the SR for the next few years ( as well as the Semi and CT).

4680's can be progressing fine but it would be chaos for them to release a MYP or LR with a 2170 & 4680 simutainously so the SR seems to be a compromise . They also have 3 years worth of Cybertruck orders which may need two times as many batteries as a MY so I can't see them restricting production of all vehicles because they are sharing a limited resource in the 4680. I son't expect to see a MYP or MYLR using 4680's until after the CT has began production.

Sandy says Austin is a modular line, uses robot sleds, so is possible to even build a 2170 and 4680 at same time, alternating the battery.

A PURE guess here is there is much work still going, so production is limited. Even the building is not 100% finished (at least still mounting PV's)

 

[boulder.dude]

.Charging curve could be interesting. But same chemistry so it won’t be wildly different, to degree say, iron base would

Charging curves are only level 3 charging, aren’t they? So only a road trip concern.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

I am just curious, if they are not planning to use Austin factory to produce LR and P, considering the demand for AWSR is small, what good to build it if it can't help to ease the demand. Sth. is off...

Oh they WILL end up producing MYLR's in Austin - it's simply a matter of how soon. It appears they're going to do the early ramp with 4680's in MYAWD form, hone the technology, and then roll everything (including Fremont, Berlin etc) to 4680 big packs...at some point.

 

[Mrbrock]

Sandy says Austin is a modular line, uses robot sleds, so is possible to even build a 2170 and 4680 at same time, alternating the battery.

A PURE guess here is there is much work still going, so production is limited. Even the building is not 100% finished (at least still mounting PV's)

The only way they can build 2170 on the same line as 4680 is if the battery component is identical format. So the 2170 would need to be structural which they have said they will not do. This would require an entirely new pack production instead of just shipping the current 2170 packs from Nevada.

 

[MontyFloyd]

The only way they can build 2170 on the same line as 4680 is if the battery component is identical format. So the 2170 would need to be structural which they have said they will not do. This would require an entirely new pack production instead of just shipping the current 2170 packs from Nevada.

battery component is completely irreverent.

The structure between front and rear castings is the issue, not what's inside them. All the "structural battery" does is pass SOME of the structural load to the batteries.
Tesla will create 2 versions of the battery box, both will fit in same space, everything gets bolted on. There will be 2 input lines for the box into production stream, one is 4680, another 2170.

It will be amazingly easy for Tesla to make that happen.

 

[MontyFloyd]

Oh they WILL end up producing MYLR's in Austin - it's simply a matter of how soon. It appears they're going to do the early ramp with 4680's in MYAWD form, hone the technology, and then roll everything (including Fremont, Berlin etc) to 4680 big packs...at some point.

Agree.

IMHO one reason for current slow production is insufficient 4680 production. As Mrbrock and others say, the production needs to significantly increase, by like a factor of 10

 

[Twiglett]

battery component is completely irreverent.

The structure between front and rear castings is the issue, not what's inside them. All the "structural battery" does is pass SOME of the structural load to the batteries.
Tesla will create 2 versions of the battery box, both will fit in same space, everything gets bolted on. There will be 2 input lines for the box into production stream, one is 4680, another 2170.

It will be amazingly easy for Tesla to make that happen.

I thought they have already said that 2170 would not be a structural pack

 

[MontyFloyd]

I thought they have already said that 2170 would not be a structural pack

No, do not think of "structural" or "non-structural" inside, think only of the box between the front and rear castings.

It can be a fish tank for all I care, as long as it fulfils the structure requirements, then it does its job. Tesla cars are very modular, just plug in the desired module, like a Lego brick.

PS, I am sure a reason why 2170 pack not good structurally is the cumulative amount of adhesives between batts would not be able to transfer the loads, with the larger 4680 has less adhesive, more load carrying ability.

 

[BMWY]

Not that this will come to a surprise to anyone, but Tesla is absolutely having issues with the 4680s. A good friend of ours who is a battery engineer was recently recruited by Tesla to work on the 4680 development team.

Obviously they wouldn't/couldn't go into too many details, but they did tell me that things seem like a mess with the project, as they haven't been able to realize the theoretical gains in real world testing. I'm not sure if that meant power, range, etc. At this point, they are just throwing as many people as they can at the project, hence the recruiting effort (our friend turned the job down, btw).

I know some of you will laugh at this, but it is 100% true. At least in terms of what I was told...

 

[GOVA]

Charging curves are only level 3 charging, aren’t they? So only a road trip concern.

LOL. Really? I don't know about you, but I do use my cars for road trips most of the time. Yes, the longer ones.

I'd not minimalize that aspect for sure.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

No, do not think of "structural" or "non-structural" inside, think only of the box between the front and rear castings.

It can be a fish tank for all I care, as long as it fulfils the structure requirements, then it does its job. Tesla cars are very modular, just plug in the desired module, like a Lego brick.

PS, I am sure a reason why 2170 pack not good structurally is the cumulative amount of adhesives between batts would not be able to transfer the loads, with the larger 4680 has less adhesive, more load carrying ability.

The design geometry of 4860 is simply better suited to carrying loads vs the skinny not-intended-for-pressure 2170's

It's leggo bricks vs toothpicks

 

[CVChief]

I saw something today that Duracell ramped up 4680 prototype production and delivered a bunch to Tesla and supposed are looking to build a plant for them in the US?

 

[CRIMSON_DATE]

...as they haven't been able to realize the theoretical gains in real world testing. I'm not sure if that meant power, range, etc. At this point, they are just throwing as many people as they can at the project, hence the recruiting effort (our friend turned the job down, btw).

I know some of you will laugh at this, but it is 100% true. At least in terms of what I was told...

If this is correct then I don't know what to make of it but you don't throw bodies at proven chemestry. They Build prototypes to prove the chemestry and manufacturing so theoretical gains has nothing to do with it, they know what the battery is capable of before they had the manufacturing equipment built.

I would think it was related to manufacturing/Yield because they are simutainously asking Panasonic to start mass production and they have sent sample to Tesla already for testing. Its possible that the manufacturing process is producing viable batteries with less gains do to a manufacturing problem.

Lets wait to see what one of these SR AWD cars are capable of . We really don't even know the real size of the battery pack in them ( just the usable portion)