No Plans to take X, S (or 3) above 100kWh

[ohmman]

If the vehicle's range only meets one's median daily usage, then by definition it's inadequate for half of their trips. The more appropriate question is whether it meets a much higher percentile, perhaps 95th or 97th, such that it covers most of the owner's needs. There is, of course, some intersection with range to a Supercharger and whether that's an acceptable waypoint, but I think we have to get away from averages or medians as the yardstick for range.

 

[Zythryn]

Argh! Unless you've done a properly designed survey, then you're simply not qualified to make such a statement. You're attempting to speak for the market with no actual supporting information other than comments from your buddies.
...

I will not speak for you. I will not claim that Tesla shouldn't offer a range of smaller batteries. And I won't claim that there aren't a bunch of urbanites who are very happy with a 60-70 kwh battery. Don't attempt to speak for me or those who aren't buying Teslas right now because the limited range (particularly winter range) forces unacceptable compromises. And don't make claims on the size of the market for longer range vehicles, because you simply don't know.

I haven't, and won't speak for you. And you are correct, I have not done a scientific survey of the market.
What I do base my opinion on is the surveys showing how far Americans drive each day as well as length of trips. I also am influenced by personal experience and the hundreds of people I have had lengthy discussions with about EVs and to a lesser extent, the thousands of shorter conversations I have had.

I am not trying to tell you that "YOU" don't need a bigger battery. I am just saying, in my experience you are an edge case and more of the market doesn't need a bigger battery, than does.

Yet people upgrade every day. It would be good to know the 100/75 kWh sales breakdown. Are those numbers available?

I'd love to know those numbers, they would be quite enlightening, although not definitive.

I'm not sure I'd qualify "living in places such as Chicago" an edge case... *chuckle*

You can be an edge case of distance required and not an edge case in regards to geographical region. One does not preclude the other.

I understand you said "if"... but what do you define as "very small", and Tesla's "market"?

The market I am considering is the car owners in the U.S. By 'Very Small" I mean the market share that requires a battery larger than 100kWh to be no more than 15% of the market of car buyers in the U.S.
Granted, these are speculations based on the experiences and scant info I have. If you have more data I would appreciate it.

 

[PJFW8]

I haven't, and won't speak for you. And you are correct, I have not done a scientific survey of the market.
What I do base my opinion on is the surveys showing how far Americans drive each day as well as length of trips. I also am influenced by personal experience and the hundreds of people I have had lengthy discussions with about EVs and to a lesser extent, the thousands of shorter conversations I have had.

I am not trying to tell you that "YOU" don't need a bigger battery. I am just saying, in my experience you are an edge case and more of the market doesn't need a bigger battery, than does.



I'd love to know those numbers, they would be quite enlightening, although not definitive.



You can be an edge case of distance required and not an edge case in regards to geographical region. One does not preclude the other.




The market I am considering is the car owners in the U.S. By 'Very Small" I mean the market share that requires a battery larger than 100kWh to be no more than 15% of the market of car buyers in the U.S.
Granted, these are speculations based on the experiences and scant info I have. If you have more data I would appreciate it.

I would like to know how many prefer, not how many could live with 100kWh.

 

[Viking1]

So much discussion back and forth! I need it! No you don't (or at least I don't).

Adding a larger or smaller gas tank to a car is probably not a big issue. So I think the range of ICE car is probably representative of what is desired by the population as a whole. Yes, ICE is not impacted as much by colder weather as a BEV. Yes, if you have a garage you can set up a filling station there. But I'm talking range, not kWh.

Range will increase as battery tech improves. We may well have 1,000+ mile cars at some point for special uses.

 

[abasile]

I would like to know how many prefer, not how many could live with 100kWh.

Yes, exactly. The vast majority of car owners ought to be able to live with a 100kWh battery or smaller. That doesn't mean that a great many wouldn't prefer a larger battery if available.

Personally, as much as I appreciate the awesome Supercharger network, I'd find it even more cool to ultimately be able to take longer trips and only need to use destination chargers. Or perhaps limit Supercharging to once per day.

We already do ~200 mile regional drives using only our home EVSE, and we've found that we really appreciate the convenience of taking our Model S 85 and never having to stop to charge or refuel. Thanks to our decision to purchase a Tesla with the largest battery size available in the earlier models, those ~200 mile drives don't require us to waste time exiting the freeway to stop at smelly gas stations, we don't have to detour through SoCal traffic to Superchargers, there's no worry that we'll have to wait in line for a charger, and we can stop exactly where we want to and nowhere else.

Who wouldn't appreciate that same level of convenience on longer trips? I personally know Tesla owners who, rather than owning a second Tesla, keep an ICE so that they can travel without bothering with charging. Yes, that would be anathema to me as an EV enthusiast, but their perspective is far from unique, and they have tried Supercharging and decided they didn't like having to spend time that way.

One more thing - I'd expect to see a positive correlation between those most likely to desire larger batteries and average annual transportation fuel/energy consumption. Getting these drivers out of ICEs will have a real impact.

 

[DarkMatter]

So much discussion back and forth! I need it! No you don't (or at least I don't).

Adding a larger or smaller gas tank to a car is probably not a big issue. So I think the range of ICE car is probably representative of what is desired by the population as a whole. Yes, ICE is not impacted as much by colder weather as a BEV. Yes, if you have a garage you can set up a filling station there. But I'm talking range, not kWh.

Range will increase as battery tech improves. We may well have 1,000+ mile cars at some point for special uses.

ICE might be impacted more than you think. I tracked tank mileage on my last ICE. Worst winter (excluding towing) to best summer was around a 27% increase in energy usage. That would be the same as a Tesla going from 300 Wh/mi to 385 Wh/mi, which is actually really close to the change I saw this year on my P85. I have not been as meticulous at tracking the energy consumption change there. My best to worst on a previous vehicle (again excluding towing) had a much wider temperature swing thanks to a couple of cold winters, and it was up to a 47% increase in energy consumption during the winter. That would be the same as a Tesla going from 300 to 441 Wh/mi. These numbers all sound pretty familiar for some of the winter numbers that have been tossed around.

Let's compare this to an ICE. I've picked the Mercedes S600 as it has a similar 0-60 to the 100D, and a similar footprint/capacity. That has a rated highway fuel economy of 22 MPG and a fuel tank of 26 gallons. So a no-compromises car similar to the 100D has about 570 miles of range. Funny enough I looked around at some competitors such as the S7 and they also were in the mid-500s for range. Looks like if Tesla hits good infrastructure density and a battery size of around 165 kWh for parity with other no-compromise similar vehicles. (all of these range numbers are done assuming brimmed to dry, and using the highway mileage number quoted by the EPA)

Of course there are plenty of vehicles that don't have a 500 mile range. Ford Escape Ecoboost? 350 miles. Fiat 500 Abarth? 345 miles. Jeep Compass 4WD? 335 miles. It seems that lots and lots of vehicles I looked up in checking these numbers come in around the mid-400s, so that's probably a more realistic target for what people expect. That would put the Model S around a 150 kWh battery for parity with the typical ICE.

Interesting thought experiment. I still believe that increasing infrastructure density is far more important in the short and medium term. For a huge amount of travel the fact that you leave the house with a full charge every single day means that you literally never think about range, even in bad weather. There are plenty of examples to the contrary of course (and plenty in this thread). But again, more infrastructure helps everyone. There are still substantial portions of the country where you'd need a much, much bigger battery to make trips that would be a piece of cake of Supercharger density matched even the east coast.

Part of my conclusion there is based on the recent AAA study: Missing 1-2 Hours of Sleep Doubles Crash Risk | AAA NewsRoom - it's downright dangerous to do these 400 mile drives that people say they do straight through. You really should stop every few hours, Supercharger or no. Something around 20% of fatal accidents are because of drowsy driving, and self driving just isn't here yet to save us from this. I personally find a short break every two or three hours to be practically mandatory on a trip. Right now my biggest annoyance to Tesla road tripping is that those stops are pinned to so few Supercharger locations.

 

[jaguar36]

For me the range is not an issue for roadtripping, or daily use. Its for when you go and stay some place for a few days where there is no charging available where you are sleeping (hotel, friend, family). You can easily blow throw most of a battery just by driving around town when its hot or cold out for a few days. Then you can be forced to spend a couple of hours just to go back to the closest supercharger and recharge.

Hopefully in the future as charging becomes more prolific at hotels this won't be an issue, but for now its the main reason I want a pack bigger than 100kwhr

 

[scaesare]

I I am just saying, in my experience you are an edge case and more of the market doesn't need a bigger battery, than does.

Here is what Wikipedia, as well as several other sites, define "edge case" to mean: "An edge case is a problem or situation that occurs only at an extreme (maximum or minimum) operating parameter."

It's not just "more of the market" isn't in that same situation, which would imply 49% of people are edge cases. We are typically talking single-digit percentages or less.

You can be an edge case of distance required and not an edge case in regards to geographical region. One does not preclude the other.

Look at what @croman said about living in and around Chicago. He's talking about taking an occasional winter trip. Or to see his in laws some distance away. Or folks that live in rural hilly areas.

These aren't uncommon needs in uncommon places for several months out of the year. These are huge swaths of people.

If you think that it's a small fraction of folks who don't need to ever be able to drive more than 75-100 miles one-way during their winter in many regions, then I think you are mistaken.

If, instead, you think those represent "edge case" uses for them. then clearly a car with only 150-200 mile winter range is a compromise for those folks. Do you expect them to rent a car several times each winter instead?

The market I am considering is the car owners in the U.S. By 'Very Small" I mean the market share that requires a battery larger than 100kWh to be no more than 15% of the market of car buyers in the U.S.

That's not Tesla's market. They sell globally. Around half of their shipments aren't within the US. They have something like more Teslas per capita then any other country in Norway.

When Elon speaks of plans for battery capacity, do you think he's ignoring half of his customer base? What's more, 15% of your market is not "very small". Companies go to great lengths to grab or retain even a couple percentage points of market share.

 

[Zythryn]

Look at what @croman said about living in and around Chicago. He's talking about taking an occasional winter trip. Or to see his in laws some distance away. Or folks that live in rural hilly areas.

These aren't uncommon needs in uncommon places for several months out of the year. These are huge swaths of people.

If you think that it's a small fraction of folks who don't need to ever be able to drive more than 75-100 miles one-way during their winter in many regions, then I think you are mistaken.

I do not, and I apologize if I gave you the impression that I thought that. I have driven that far, and further in winters in MN.
However, that isn't the group of people I am talking about as edge cases. And yes, edge MAY be to strong, but it is not many people.
The edge category, as I see it, is the group of people that have trips longer than 150 miles in winter between charge opportunities, and have trips shorter than 175 miles in winter (about half of a 120kWh pack's range in winter), in a northern climate (range isn't impacted by as much by winter in Georgia, Southern California, etc).
In my winter trips, I use one of the many superchargers in the area. As the SC network grows, those edge cases will be less and less.

...

That's not Tesla's market. They sell globally. Around half of their shipments aren't within the US. They have something like more Teslas per capita then any other country in Norway.

I have no data, nor personal experiences with driving habits of people outside the U.S. It would be an interesting comparison. Do you have any such data you can share?

When Elon speaks of plans for battery capacity, do you think he's ignoring half of his customer base? What's more, 15% of your market is not "very small". Companies go to great lengths to grab or retain even a couple percentage points of market share.

Sure they do. But why spend great effort to go after 15% of your market when you can much more easily go after 84% of your market?

As Tesla advances batteries more and more, they very well may offer larger packs. However, I see that more as a side affect rather than their main goal.

 

[scaesare]

I have no data, nor personal experiences with driving habits of people outside the U.S.

But that's not what you said. You consider Tesla's "market" to be the US.

Clearly Tesla sells outside of the US. So you do have data. You are just choosing to exclude it.

In any case, I get it. You don't think it's a large enough customer base to go after. As you said:

My point is, if the people that need a battery pack >100kWh make up a very small portion of the market, I would hope Tesla wouldn't spend the resources on designing and producing it.

I find that a narrow view just because it isn't a need you have, and makes up a smaller portion of the market.

I'd rather target the current sweet spot and expand offerings to cover more and more use cases as needed until Elon's goal of "no compromises" is reached. And clearly "drive for 2 hours, supercharge for 1" for 10's of millions of potential customers ain't it.

I suspect that's about my last post on this one.

 

[PJFW8]

I do not, and I apologize if I gave you the impression that I thought that. I have driven that far, and further in winters in MN.
However, that isn't the group of people I am talking about as edge cases. And yes, edge MAY be to strong, but it is not many people.
The edge category, as I see it, is the group of people that have trips longer than 150 miles in winter between charge opportunities, and have trips shorter than 175 miles in winter (about half of a 120kWh pack's range in winter), in a northern climate (range isn't impacted by as much by winter in Georgia, Southern California, etc).
In my winter trips, I use one of the many superchargers in the area. As the SC network grows, those edge cases will be less and less.

...



I have no data, nor personal experiences with driving habits of people outside the U.S. It would be an interesting comparison. Do you have any such data you can share?



Sure they do. But why spend great effort to go after 15% of your market when you can much more easily go after 84% of your market?

As Tesla advances batteries more and more, they very well may offer larger packs. However, I see that more as a side affect rather than their main goal.

 

[PJFW8]

What is your source for 15%?

 

[Zythryn]

What is your source for 15%?

I made a guess that those needing a larger battery was 15% of the U.S. market. That number was used when someone asked me a question.

I'd be happy to entertain other numbers if there are any.
Per the user surveys, AAA surveys and personal discussions, that is, I feel, close. It very well may be incorrect though.

 

[hill]

There are more people on Earth without ability to use a home charger, and without partical SC coverage to make up for it.
You can focus on the market you already conquered, or the large beast still waiting too be challenged.

If Tesla truly TRULY cared about what customers say they want, rather than what they think they need, they'd make a longer range version. ......snip......

it's the exact same reason Tesla built their battery swap-out station ... hydrogen tried to say it was "better" because it'd re-fill faster than a Tesla. BAM - Tesla conquered the perception before it became an issue. it's also the exact same reason Tesla built a 100kWh traction pack . . . . perception is everything & hydrogen took ranges up to 300 miles & tried to say it as "better" for that.
Now? Tesla - if they want to continue to be "the" game in town, will necessarily have to do it again. Other manufacturers want to claim the longest of the long range EV's . . . and the other manufacturers are right around the corner.
Perception . . . not necessity.
.

 

[Cloxxki]

it's the exact same reason Tesla built their battery swap-out station ... hydrogen tried to say it was "better" because it'd re-fill faster than a Tesla. BAM - Tesla conquered the perception before it became an issue. it's also the exact same reason Tesla built a 100kWh traction pack . . . . perception is everything & hydrogen took ranges up to 300 miles & tried to say it as "better" for that.
Now? Tesla - if they want to continue to be "the" game in town, will necessarily have to do it again. Other manufacturers want to claim the longest of the long range EV's . . . and the other manufacturers are right around the corner.
Perception . . . not necessity.
.

Plus, cost is no longer a real factor. Tesla is selling many cars North of $150K with just $10K in cells.
With the 2170's announced (in an investor call) to have 10-15% greater density than current 18650's in terms of chemistry alone, then 7.7% taller AND a maybe 5% more efficient form factor in terms of floor surface, a 100kWh pack would be EMPTY for a significant part. And may even weigh a bit less than the original 85 (really 81) pack the chassis was designed around.

If a child grows taller and stronger, don't you feed it more?