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

[sandpiper]

Serious question that sounds snarky: how rural do you have to be to need more than 100kWh? Isn't that a 100 mile round trip even in dreadful conditions? I'm trying to understand the benefit to a bigger battery instead of building out more and faster charging.

If you're driving in -20 or -25C (not at all unusual for a lot of folks, including me), at highway speed in a comfortable cabin, you literally lose half of your range. Your 335 miles becomes 170ish. And if you're travelling in rural areas, there are often no superchargers at all.

It's very easy to construct scenarios where this won't work. I currently can't use my P85D Tesla on a lot of the trips I need to make. A 100D would be better for sure, but only somewhat.

 

[ecarfan]

What do people expect him to say, oh yes we have a 120 kWh pack in R&D right now and lose all sales of his current high end offering? Use some brain cells folks! Of course larger packs are coming as energy density increases. That's a no-brainer. But don't expect the CEO of a company who depends on sales to reveal a future roadmap that could tank those sales.

I agree with the basic message of your post (though not the tone . Higher capacity packs will be offered in the future simply because battery energy density will improve over time, as has been demonstrated by the significant improvements made over the past few decades.

Tesla is unlikely to offer a higher capacity pack this year or even next year. While using 2170 cells in the S/X pack apparently would give it over 100kWh, Gigafactory production will likely be taken up with the Model 3 and Powerpacks/Powerwalls for the foreseeable future (this is of course speculation on my part, I have no inside information or even any particular expertise in this area).

I believe it is reasonable for Elon to state that there are "no plans" to take Tesla cars above 100kWh. That is a sufficiently vague statement to be accurate as of now. He didn't say "no immediate plans" or "we will never". And he qualified it by pointing out the obvious: that a semi truck vehicle would need a larger battery and that a Tesla pickup truck could get a larger battery.

Personally I would love to have an X 150D for towing (if I could afford it). But Tesla has to balance available battery supplies with market demand and company revenue. There certainly is a market for a larger battery in their passenger cars, but it would raise the vehicle price and a relatively small number would be sold compared to the number of cars sold with much smaller packs. For every three 120kWh S/X cars Tesla could make about five 70kWh Model 3 cars. To advance the cause of sustainable transport, it makes sense to focus on selling more lower cost EVs like the Model 3 and not offer > 100kWh packs that only a very small percentage of the car-buying market can afford.

 

[Gizmotoy]

Would adding a second gear, or taller gear ratio on the one gear we do have, also be a way to improve range for a given battery size?

..when what we're shooting for is long range, above other factors such as "quickness". Even if the car remains a fixed-gear drive, I wonder if we'll have a factory option to order the "long ranger" version or the "high performer" version for a given car configuration... and they select the corresponding drive train at build time?

Or does the electric coil induction motor have a much wider RPM range on its efficiency curve that this topic basically doesn't matter?

The motor does have a very wide RPM range. A second gear would probably help a bit, and the Model S does start to get a little sluggish at upper highway speeds. The reality, though, is that aerodynamic effects are the big driver once you're going that fast. So a second gear could potentially net you a small to modest range boost at highway speeds, and a nice bump to the top speed (German buyers would be ecstatic).

The tradeoff is complexity and reliability. Tesla's tried the 2-speed thing before, in the Roadster, and it did not go well. The electric motors put down massive torque, and that's hard on a transmission. There are some high-torque vehicles that seem to not implode their transmissions, so it can be done, but it's a risky endevour.

In summary, that second gear carries a bit of benefit, but a lot of risk. Simplicity has served them well so far, best to stick with it.

 

[brianman]

A S90D gives 294 miles but in winter, make that 230. 200 mile round trip cuts it far too close. Yes, they live so far out (and in the mountains) that 294 rated miles isn't enough. The extra 40 miles to the 100D makes it close enough to justify.

The solution to this is to find a way to add charging near the destination after the first leg (and/or along the route), not to keep adding capacity to infinity.

TLDR: Improve charging opportunities not capacity. The latter is well into diminishing returns / $ already.

 

[drklain]

+1 --- I suspect that Elon's words are entirely consistent with what he has said and what the company is doing. Of course research always takes place looking for a way to get more range, but right now I think their focus is on:

- Model3 packs (which will be 2170-based and likely much less than a 100KWh size due to space constraints...maybe a 60 or 75 KWH).
- Increasing charge rates in both the 3 (2170-based) and S/X (18650-based) packs to reduce charging times.

As others (and I) have said before, there likely will be a 2170-based S/X pack in 2+ (more likely 3+) years which may either:
- have a higher rating (maybe 120KWh) due to increased energy density of the cells
OR
- have a much faster charging rate by providing increased cooling and staying at 100KWh by creating additional space/room for cooling through use of a smaller number of cells (2170 vs. 18650).

Over the last 12+ months, Elon has consistently said he believes 100KWh is the "sweet spot" for the cars and that his focus is shifting to faster charging. Why so many people on these forums don't believe him is the what confuses me...

 

[ecarfan]

The solution to this is to find a way to add charging near the destination after the first leg (and/or along the route), not to keep adding capacity to infinity.
TLDR: Improve charging opportunities not capacity. The latter is well into diminishing returns / $ already.

Exactly. The number and density of charging locations is improving rapidly, and will continue to improve as EVs become more common, making more and more remote locations accessible without requiring EV enthusiasts in cold weather climates to spend many thousands more dollars on higher capacity batteries.

In addition, as @drklain noted, Supercharger charge rates will improve, reducing charging times.

 

[sandpiper]

The solution to this is to find a way to add charging near the destination after the first leg (and/or along the route), not to keep adding capacity to infinity.

TLDR: Improve charging opportunities not capacity. The latter is well into diminishing returns / $ already.

You need both. I'm sorry but having an effective deep winter range under of well under 200 miles, makes a lot of trips impractical. I simply cannot own a Tesla as my only vehicle with that range. And I'm not alone. You have the same issue in most of Canada, and northern US.

You don't need infinity. Roughly 150kwh would cover pretty much all of my use case scenarios. 130-140 would be okay.

 

[sandpiper]

Exactly. The number and density of charging locations is improving rapidly, and will continue to improve as EVs become more common, making more and more remote locations accessible without requiring EV enthusiasts in cold weather climates to spend many thousands more dollars on higher capacity batteries.

- says a guy from California.

You'd think that a person like me, who's now on his 3rd Canadian winter in a Tesla, would know something about this. Charging is great. But we still need a bigger battery.

 

[Uncle Paul]

I believe that Tesla decided to solve the range issue with more closely packed SuperChargers and faster charging speeds instead of adding more batteries which add weight the effects handling, ride, tire wear and range.

Some ICE cars and motorcycles only have about 200 mile range but few care as gas stations are most everywhere.

I predict that in the future there will come a point where, for environmental reasons, tons of gas stations will be closed down, and people will buy electric cars because fuel is hard to come by.

 

[Troy]

Here is my take:

• Model S and X will switch from 18650 to 2170 cells in Q1 2018. They are working on the design of these packs and they have decided that the largest pack should remain 100 kWh.
• A modest range increase should be expected because of weight reduction with 2170 cells. The S100D's range might increase from 335 miles to 345 miles.
• Supercharging speed might increase with 2170 cells.
• Reduced weight will also improve handling and performance. 0-60 times will improve by 0.1s.
• The Model 3 75D will have 305 miles rated range. Increasing Model S's range would increase the gap between the two. Therefore a larger MS battery won't be released until they offer a larger Model 3 battery in Dec 2018.

 

[BluestarE3]

Tesla should just let people plan in the dark and then get angry later? That doesn't work in the long run. Tesla needs to open up its communication not shut down. This kind of style didn't work for the Communists.

On the other hand, there was this guy named Adam Osborne who was a bit too eager in revealing his company's future product plans...

 

[scottm]

I'll second the need for (winter) range. Battery or any other tricks... skinnier tires... more aerodynamics.. taller gear ratio.

I cannot take the Tesla to the mountains.. well I did once... and family won't let me do that again. We had to seek refuge and stop at a private home with a charger (plugshare) landing with less than 10 miles of "range" in the tank.. that really would only give us about 5 in the temperatures we were experiencing.. Range mode ON, driving like a granny below highway speeds, heat was turned OFF at -20C outside... we're all bundled ... kids silent... everyone staring at the screen closing in on a plug watching the battery sink... wife starts to cry. Not fun.

So we still have a gas car.


Dear Tesla,
Make a plan for 100+
And I'll buy the car.
Regards,
Scott

 

[MountainRatMat]

The motor does have a very wide RPM range. A second gear would probably help a bit, and the Model S does start to get a little sluggish at upper highway speeds. The reality, though, is that aerodynamic effects are the big driver once you're going that fast. So a second gear could potentially net you a small to modest range boost at highway speeds, and a nice bump to the top speed (German buyers would be ecstatic).

The tradeoff is complexity and reliability. Tesla's tried the 2-speed thing before, in the Roadster, and it did not go well. The electric motors put down massive torque, and that's hard on a transmission. There are some high-torque vehicles that seem to not implode their transmissions, so it can be done, but it's a risky endevour.

In summary, that second gear carries a bit of benefit, but a lot of risk. Simplicity has served them well so far, best to stick with it.

A second gear will not be offered. If you look back to the roadster days all original roadsters had two gears. It was a reliability nightmare. Tesla retrofitted all two speed roadsters with a single gear because the two speed gearbox kept breaking. With the amount of torque these electric motors are delivering it is cost prohibitive to put in a two speed transmission.

 

[BluestarE3]

Fara Faro announces 130 kWh so Tesla should plan it too!

That's for the Stage 2 Phase 2 FF91, whenever that may come out. The initial Stage1 Phase 1 model, like their down-sized factory, will be 1/5 the size at 26 kWh.

 

[scottm]

I'm not asking for a 2-gear box.

I would settle for a choice of having a second gear offering, that gives taller overall gear ratio. Fit at the factory.

p.s. I'm pretty sure Borg Warner can make a 2-gear box that could handle a Tesla motor.
Just Tesla couldn't do it in time for the Roadster. BW fits with All America theme too... so Trump friendly.

 

[sandpiper]

I'm not asking for a 2-gear box.

I would settle for a choice of having a second gear offering, that gives taller overall gear ratio. Fit at the factory.

p.s. I'm pretty sure Borg Warner can make a 2-gear box that could handle a Tesla motor.
Just Tesla couldn't do it in time for the Roadster. BW fits with All America theme too... so Trump friendly.

A taller gear ratio would not improve range appreciably for 2 reasons:

1. An electric motor has a much flatter power curve, and your loss at high RPM is much less.
2. The D models already have, effectively, two gears. The front and rear gear ratios are different. The car splits power to each of the two motors as required to optimize efficiency. It's why the D models are a bit more efficient than the RWD cars.

 

[dhanson865]

Rural drivers need to travel further to get to places, including charging stations and use more battery doing more tasks. I live in a big city but I have in laws who live in a rural area (that is cold for 6 months out of the year). They cannot get an electric car simply because the infrastructure won't allow them to unless the battery size is 100kwh or greater. They cannot afford an S100D but if a 130 or 150kwh battery comes out, it will push down prices for the 100kwh range and allow them to obtain a larger battery which will allow them to actually use an electric car for their commute or daily tasks. Elon's pick up might be the only option for them to totally eliminate ICE vehicles but a sedan like the S100D would eliminate at least one of their ICE vehicles.

A S90D gives 294 miles but in winter, make that 230. 200 mile round trip cuts it far too close. Yes, they live so far out (and in the mountains) that 294 rated miles isn't enough. The extra 40 miles to the 100D makes it close enough to justify.

I rated that post as informative and I agree it is a valid take on some people's situation so don't take this as purely negative.

95% or more of the US population has better infrastructure than the use case you just described. Elon won't be targeting the extreme ends of the spectrum. Some people just won't be able to go EV before the rest of the world gets to.

 

[sorka]

No plans is Tesla codeword for -- wait 6 months.

Actually, even when he 90 came out, he said to 85 owners to wait until a larger battery came out before upgrading so he was already hinting a larger battery then. But he's been quoted multiple times saying the 100 will be the largest for at least several years.

Just waiting for them to offer it for the P85D so we can finally have our *almost* 691 hp they originally promised rather than the 463 hp that was actually delivered

 

[dhanson865]

I thought such a pack is only about 12 months away.

2170 packs are months away but Elon/JB say they won't transition S/X to the 2170 cells until after Model 3 backlog is satisfied (paraphrasing they didn't mention backlog, just that it would happen later, not in the near future).

 

[scaesare]

The solution to this is to find a way to add charging near the destination after the first leg (and/or along the route), not to keep adding capacity to infinity.

TLDR: Improve charging opportunities not capacity. The latter is well into diminishing returns / $ already.

I must disagree. There are plenty of not-uncommon scenarios where the range of current cars requires 40 mins of charging for <2 hours of driving.

More charging locations are also needed, but doesn't solve the case of additional capacity needed for many use cases.