Next iteration of battery and drivetrain for Model X?

[scaesare]

When Tesla has a pack that has far less thermal runaway tendency ...

Do you know for a fact that the Leaf's battery chemistry is less susceptible to thermal events given a similar violent intrusion in to the pack by a foreign object?

...and does not necessitate a vampire drain then we'll talk about a ten-year advantage.

The vampire loss in the Model S has to do with it's subsystems (system computers, 3G connectivity, etc..). This has been demonstrated by all but eliminating it by enabling low power mode, or shutting the car off. How is this a battery capability issue?

 

[scaesare]

Yes, I do. The thermal breakdown temperature of the LEAF chemistry is much more favorable for avoiding thermal runaway.

I'm not entirely sure that a few screwdriver punctures to one cell removed from the pack enclosure equates equally to something the size of a trailer hitch impaling an entire group of cells while they are still densely packed in to the enclosure.

Ditto for the torch. Do we now for a fact that scorching the outside of some Tesla cells for a few seconds at a time has a different result?

I'm not stating the results would certainly be different, but without similar testing under like circumstances I don't see how that video supports your assertion.

Perhaps I am using the wrong terminology, but my understanding is that the Tesla runs a coolant pump to equalize the cell temperatures, and also heating/ac to maintain battery temperatures within certain parameters, even when the car is parked, which is why you are advised to not leave the car unplugged for extended periods for fear of draining the pack. This is what I was referring to.

The active thermal management (pumps, etc...) for the Model S hasn't been observed to run while the car is parked under even very hot or cold conditions, at least that I am aware of, but only while either driving or during charging sessions, specifically superchargers.

If the car is powered down when parked, it will last for times similar to what you state for the Leaf, I believe. If you don't power it down, there can be some parasitic draw form the on-board systems... but even then if the car finally gets to a point wher eit needs to preserve the pack it will auto-shut down where it can hibernate for months without the pack being damaged.

As the issue is load presented by the car's systems, and not the pack depleting itself, the issue would be the same regardless of if it were battery chemistry similar to the Leaf's, no?

 

[Phition42]

One should check out Stanford's latest battery improvement......the challenge of a 100% lithium battery may have been overcome with the addition of a little graphene. Estimate 5 years to commercialization with doubling of capacity. This is going to be quite a ride and there is little doubt that ICE will be antiques.

 

[WarpedOne]

I understand that the "bricking" issue has been mitigated.

There was NO "bricking" issue.
STOP spreading FUD.

 

[Teo]

Here is a long video here comparing Nissan, Tesla, Volt batteries. Professor Dahn says Nissan's first generation battery lost 27% range in first year because of poor battery choice and lack of cooling. He said the batteries Nissan used were tested only for less than 30 days. With such poor choices the people at Nissan don't look like they knew what they were doing.

Somebody from this forum wrote to him and asked his opinion on Tesla's batteries in the Model S and he said they might last a few decades. Here is that topic:
Why do Li-ion Batteries die? And how to improve the situation? - Page 2

 

[scaesare]

However the thermal stability characteristics of the different chemistries support my claim. Sorry I don't have links; you can look it up.

I go under the premise that if you make the assertion, you get to support it, not that it's anybody else's responsibility to do so.

Furthermore, Tesla doesn't publish what their chemistry is, so how can one compare it to Nissan's?

No, my assertion was that the nature of the battery chemistry was driving the need for ancillary systems to run during vehicle idle time. Or even during operation, where they are still an energy drain.

Again, please provide evidence this happens.

Certainly wasn't the case during the infamous "Brodering" incident

Have you read the Tesla rebuttal regarding the Broder incident and the subsequent "apology" from the NYT?

 

[WarpedOne]

The precise Tesla chemistry is proprietary, but the general class is less stable than LiMnO.

So? Gas is even less stable. Your point is nonexistant.
What counts is whole product in all of its dimensions.

The safest battery is an empty one. How much will you pay for it?

- - - Updated - - -

There was a bricking issue with the Tesla Roadster. As I said, now mitigated.

No, there wasn't.
There was only direct and repetitive disregard of simple instructions.

Don't come here pulling "arguments" out of your *** repeating FUD and expect to be treated with respect.
We respect truth, you earn it with truthfulness.

 

[scaesare]

I made assertions based on my reading. I don't save every link I visit and I don't have time to search for you.

Anyone can claim whatever they want.

If you can't be bothered to take the time to support your own assertions, I find it interesting you expect others to do so ​for your claims.

The precise Tesla chemistry is proprietary, but the general class is less stable than LiMnO.

Please provide references indicating the "general class" of Tesla's battery chemistry/

Yes I have. I think Broder was despicable. However, he was (intentionally in my opinion) exploiting some of the very weaknesses I have described.

Please illustrate how Border's deliberate depletion of the battery while driving supports your assertion that Tesla has a pack that "a vampire drain" or any other weakness you have described.

There was a bricking issue with the Tesla Roadster. As I said, now mitigated.

Given that roadsters could prevent bricking be disconnecting the ESS (i.e.- the pack) from the load presented by the car, please explain how this is a battery chemistry issue as you have asserted.

 

[Johan]

As I said explicitly, you can choose to do so, or not. I am making no demands and asking nobody to support my claims. As I sad, explicitly, you can look up the information if you are interested. If I didn't pique an interest, then feel free to disregard.

I am not defending a Masters thesis. Do you think every discussion must come with a bibliography? I explained my understanding and how it led to my conclusions. Trash it as you see fit. Given your tone and open hostility I'm not inclined to discuss this further with you.

Good day to you sir. You may now leave this thread.

 

[RDoc]

Could we stop the Troll feeding and move back somewhere close to the subject?

 

[WarpedOne]

I was replying to the idea that Tesla batteries are 10 years ahead of Nissan batteries.

Tesla's lead is much more than 10 years.
When will Nissan reach 244 miles EPA range that Tesla had in 2007? In 2017? I rather doubt it.
What really matters about battery is its (lifetime) range in an end product.
Nissan fails miserably - its customers needed to sue them to get replacement packs for undeperforming packs that were loosing capacity prematurely.

About fires - don't confuse absence of proof with proof of absence. Leaf is not sexy, no-one cares when it goes up in flames.

My opinion then, as it remains, is that those bricking events were a consequence of bad design and failure to mitigate problems that ultimately stemmed from the nature of the battery chemistry. Again, my opinion. The truth is up to you to decide.

Every existing Li-Ion chemistry suffers permanent damage under too-low-discharge condition. Fact of life.
The only "bricking mitigation" is: don't let it discharge to low. From Leaf's owners manual:

Don't buy into marketing to much. If they don't confess, it does not mean they are not guilty.

Re Leaf settlement:

How is a mere 70% a fair result? Plenty of people have dropped to that in the first 2 years of ownership. 70% of 73 miles is a measly ~ 49miles range from a FULL charge on a car that retailed in the $30K range.

I wouldn't fear bricking such a brick.
When Nissan introduces +250 mile EV with annual capacity loss of few % we may begin to talk about whether they are catching up.

 

[scaesare]

As I said explicitly, you can choose to do so, or not. I am making no demands and asking nobody to support my claims. As I sad, explicitly, you can look up the information if you are interested. If I didn't pique an interest, then feel free to disregard.

I am not defending a Masters thesis. Do you think every discussion must come with a bibliography? I explained my understanding and how it led to my conclusions. Trash it as you see fit. Given your tone and open hostility I'm not inclined to discuss this further with you.

Bibliography? Of course not.

But you have to admit, when you show up: 1)making claims counter the conventional understanding; 2)implying special knowlege; and 3)using non-sensical statements to support your assertions, you are going to raise some questions.

If you expect to then say in essence: "I read it somewhere once, I can't be bothered to actually support my statements" and not be challenged then, as they say, you must be new here.

As for hostility? Hardly... don't impute motive that isn't there. I'm as interested in learning something new as the next guy. But when you do silly things like use the example of Broder driving to deplete the pack as a basis for an assertion that vampire losses are a problem, you aren't helping your case much.

 

[Nubo]

...As for hostility? Hardly... don't impute motive that isn't there.

I seriously apologize for directing that at you; it was another member who was rather vigorously pushing that button. I was multitasking and a bit surprised at how heavily I was being tag-teamed. Should have waited until I had more time to respond.

I am disappointed though, by responses from multiple posters accusing me of spreading FUD, dishonesty, trolling, etc... Way out of line, imho.

I've removed the offending posts and won't be making that mistake again.

Hope everyone enjoys their Model X as will we. I'm sure it's going to be a fabulous vehicle.

Regards.

 

[Jeff N]

There is a lot of talk about the energy density of gasoline. But one gallon of gas will never produce more energy. An ICE can at best only use 15% of that energy at its peak efficiency, which goes down with age and wear.

While I agree with your overall viewpoint, gas engines really have made big improvements during the last few decades.

An ordinary Prius engine has a peak efficiency of 37% or so (not 15%) and can operate near that efficiency much of the time during typical driving. Honda's new hybrid engine does similarly and Toyota is aiming for 38% engine efficiency in their new Prius design coming out next year and is targeting up to 45% efficiency in the future.

Toyota targets 45% thermal efficiency for engines in next-gen hybrids

When I was first learning to maintain gas engines they needed their engine oil replaced every 3,000 miles and constantly needed new "points" in the distributor, new spark plugs, valve adjustments, and timing adjustments. Now the oil is synthetic and needs replacing as little as every 2 years or 15,000 operating miles (in my Volt). Spark plugs are now platinum tipped and gas has been modified so plugs are only replaced every 100,000 miles. Valve adjustments and timing are done automatically by the engine computer. Distributors and their points have been replaced with electronics. Engine coolant now lasts up to 150,000 miles.

As I mentioned in another thread, I've spent only $35 for a single oil change while following the maintenance schedule for my 2011 Volt during the first 3.7 years and 92,000 miles of driving it (32,500 miles on the gas engine).

 

[Red Sage]

Jeff N: Thanks for the reply! Thanks also for the data on the Prius. I'll keep that in mind for future reference.

Mostly, I was speaking of cars that have a performance profile that approaches that of any Tesla Model S trim level. The energy efficiency of those vehicles is generally below 15%, hovering between 8% and 12% or so. They probably would have been far worse 40 years ago.