Nothing beyond 100kWh?

[flashflood]

Elon just tweeted this: @danielringdahl @P100D Glad you like it! I think we will probably stop at 100 kWh on battery size.

Really?

On the one hand I see the logic: if the goal is to bring down price, you want to use better chemistry to make the pack smaller and lighter and cheaper while holding capacity constant. On the other hand, I think there's real value in getting from the current 300 mile range to more like 4-500.

Maybe in the future we can have a dual battery option instead of a bigger single pack?

 

[J1mbo]

Where would you put a second pack?

Smaller tweaks like reducing weight and improving efficiency will increase the range. Tesla have always had a focus on this.

 

[number12]

Elon just tweeted this: @danielringdahl @P100D Glad you like it! I think we will probably stop at 100 kWh on battery size.

Really?

On the one hand I see the logic: if the goal is to bring down price, you want to use better chemistry to make the pack smaller and lighter and cheaper while holding capacity constant. On the other hand, I think there's real value in getting from the current 300 mile range to more like 4-500.

Maybe in the future we can have a dual battery option instead of a bigger single pack?

He is trying to sell cars. Hinting at new products (especially) hardware kills current sales. Telling people p100d is latest and greatest for a while helps people pull the trigger.

 

[RobStark]

Elon said 100 kWh is approaching the theoretical limit using the current 18650 cell.

He also said ~2 years ago to expect a bump in kWh every year or two.

At some point we need to expect some normal business practices not over the top Elon frankness.

You can't keep osbourning your current products by telling people there is a much better product just around the corner.

Elon also said $35k will be the cheapest Tesla ever made because of ride sharing a cheaper BEV is not needed.

Doubt that too.

Even if there are no current plans for a 110 kWh or 120 kWh Model S at some point Porsche Mission E or Jaguar EXJ will force the issue on Tesla. At some point there will be competitive long range EVs and Tesla will not be able to dictate to customers what they can and can't have. E.G. Model 3's "at least 215 miles of range" may have already turned into at least 238 miles of range.

 

[number12]

Even Elons Twitter is on Q3 push mode. Making sure people accept their orders, posting about deprecation... Etc.

 

[Saghost]

I think RobStark is probably right about this.

Even if Tesla wanted to go bigger, they can't for the moment - the P100D not only uses the most advanced cells that they have, but from the guidance we're getting it also uses some black magic to shoehorn extra cells into each module.

I don't think it'll be possible for them to go larger in the current pack geometry until they get a new chemistry or a new cell geometry - which presumably means not until they start shipping packs built with 20700 cells (late spring?)

 

[Troy]

What Elon means is, because the longest range Model 3 with 2170 cells will have less than 343 mi EPA range, they don't want to widen the gap between S and 3 by increasing the Model S battery capacity when they switch to 2170 cells. Here is what I mean:

Nov 2016: Model S 100D : 343 mi EPA (with 18650 cells)
Jun 2017: Model S 110D : 377 mi EPA (with 2170 cells) << Cancelled because would make Model 3 look bad.
Jun 2017: Model S 100D : 348 mi EPA (with 2170 cells) << 5 mi range increase because of reduced weight.
Sep 2017: Model 3 55D : 225 mi EPA (with 2170 cells)
Sep 2017: Model 3 80D : 300 mi EPA (with 2170 cells)

 

[Saghost]

What Elon means is, because the longest range Model 3 with 2170 cells will have less than 343 mi EPA range, they don't want to widen the gap between S and 3 by increasing the Model S battery capacity when they switch to 2170 cells. Here is what I mean:

Nov 2016: Model S 100D : 343 mi EPA (with 18650 cells)
Jun 2017: Model S 110D : 377 mi EPA (with 2170 cells) << Cancelled because would make Model 3 look bad.
Jun 2017: Model S 100D : 348 mi EPA (with 2170 cells) << 5 mi range increase because of reduced weight.
Sep 2017: Model 3 55D : 225 mi EPA (with 2170 cells)
Sep 2017: Model 3 80D : 300 mi EPA (with 2170 cells)

I don't know that I buy this theory - $100k cars are supposed to be more capable than $50k cars, and it is doubtful anyone will really be comparing or cross-shopping the two.

 

[jbcarioca]

Elon just tweeted this: @danielringdahl @P100D Glad you like it! I think we will probably stop at 100 kWh on battery size.

...

Wait a minute!! He did NOT say there would snot be increases in range nor improved performance. Just recall JB speaking a year or so ago about advances in other areas being more substantial than in cells or motors. What we will see is reduced vehicle weight as energy density rises. What we will see is improved range as vampire drain reduces. What we will see in improved real world performance due to better electrical infrastructure, call design, packaging etc. We might well have all the improvements for the next couple of years with no need for greater battery capacity.

Maybe not, but that interpretation is consistent with everything that had been recently said. It is also consistent with the P100D being only 4% heavier than the P90D with identical cells.

 

[RobStark]

Marginal city range improvements once you pass 200 miles is relatively unimportant. Range anxiety is eliminated already.

To cover long distances steady state highway speed range is what is important.

Here aerodynamics is far more important than weight. Reducing Cd and frontal area much further risk delving into weirdmobile territory.

Reducing weight to reduce acceleration times is kinda cool and grabs headlines but getting further and further below 2.5 seconds from naught to 60 becomes less and less important to the vast majority of buyers.

Cutting battery pack weight in half to ~600 lbs will not dramatically increase highway range. Nor will reducing vampire drain of ~2% per day in half.

 

[Boourns]

Marginal city range improvements once you pass 200 miles is relatively unimportant. Range anxiety is eliminated already.

Tell that to the people who are saying the Bolt is already better than the Model 3 because it has 23 more miles of range.

 

[RobStark]

Tell that to the people who are saying the Bolt is already better than the Model 3 because it has 23 more miles of range.

Those are mostly people that won't consider buying an electric car and just want to see Tesla fail.They cheer on "American car companies". Except one evidently. And I will tell them that to their face all day long.

And we don't know what Model 3 city range is yet. We just know that the combined EPA number will be at least 215. Just like the Bolt number would be "at least 200."

 

[Boourns]

Those are mostly people that won't consider buying an electric car and just want to see Tesla fail.They cheer on "American car companies". Except one evidently. And I will tell them that to their face all day long.

And we don't know what Model 3 city range is yet. We just know that the combined EPA number will be at least 215. Just like the Bolt number would be "at least 200."

Oh I agree with you. My point was that it's disconcerting to hear people say that when (1) the 215 miles is being treated as gospel when Elon has made it clear it's minimum 215, and (2) even if that's how it turns out to be, it's not relevant given your point about city mileage and the Supercharger network for long distance. I just hope once the 3 is out it is compared on equal footing to the Bolt. I hope both are good, but I expect the Model 3 to be superior.

Your other point about supporting American automakers got me thinking: Why does this happen? The conspiracy theorist in me says is the Big 3's ties to the oil industry. Even the Bolt-effusive Farhad Manjoo NYT column made the point that the Bolt is valuable to GM because it allows them to continue selling 12-mpg trucks and SUVs.

 

[flashflood]

A really cool option, if they can make it work mechanically, would be to have a smaller and thinner 75kWh pack, but with an option to stack two of them for 150kWh. It would only add a few inches of vehicle height -- possibly problematic for sedan aesthetics, but certainly not for an SUV or truck. And in the truck case, you could also put the larger motor in both front and rear for 1,000 hp heavy towing.

 

[aesculus]

At current charging rates I think a 150 kWh battery is needed. If they could reduce the charging times to 1/2 or 1/3 then I could live with the 100. Right now there is nothing compelling in the 100 over my 90 IMHO.

 

[djplong]

The Tesla minivan (aerodynamics) and Tesla pickup truck (aero and weight penalties) may very well *require* more than 100KWh. However, that would be off in the future/

 

[cronosx]

And the semi truck will surely need more.. but surely he was talking about the model S 100kw pack, and again, we need to remember that elon think that 3 years is an age, so "long time" can be 1 years

 

[FlatSix911]

I think Tesla will find a way to just exceed the 238 mile range of Bolt ...

 

[J1mbo]

Shouldn't be too hard with the same battery size and a better Cd..

 

[Brovane]

Maybe Tesla is focused on reducing the cost of the battery versus increasing capacity. The battery pack makes up a significant % of the overall cost of the vehicle. By reducing the cost of the battery pack they can either cut prices (Maybe compensate when the EV Credit's expire) our get a higher margin on each vehicle sold which would help their bottom line.