Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
+1 Jon - that's progress. Self-service has started in Canada where apparently there are "EV service stations" handling out of warranty Tesla repairs. Ordering parts and service manuals should not be as hard as it has been. CPOs will age-out of the warranty window and are there now in some cases. Some of the "Drag racing boys" will also want to possibly do some fiddling on cars that have ended warranty support. Extending service and support capacities will actually increase value of the CPOs and used-car market.

Many folks like Tesla Pilot (6) and spentan (9+) are "taking" new cars and eventually will turn them into used cars through the various upgrades done to get new features. They're helping Tesla grow and repeat-buyers are definitely "to be thanked". However, without the constant upgrading to take new features, some folks would still be driving their 2013-2014 cars as long as possible. A P85DL is certainly fun - but when someone has the resources, a P100DL looks funner. And I suspect something like a P110DL is soon to be even funnerer.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hostman
I would like to add to your bits about the environment the "Tesla Trade-in" plan of 12-18 month tech innovation. With AP 2.0 on HW2, you need to trade-in any HW1 or prior cars to get it. If HW2 is enhanced in 18 months, you may have to trade in again to get it. This feeds the CPO "down market" and keeps EVs flowing through the used-car segment. However, sustainable transportation really should be entirely OTA upgrade driven and not physical upgrades required. To be green, one would buy one car and keep it 10+ years. To be "fun" one simply upgrades every 1-2 years to the latest new version (if they can afford it). Heck, some guys even drive hard enough to have silly accidents leading to a new purchase. Maybe too much acceleration and performance in the wrong hands is not exactly green in the long run if it causes wasted resources.

It's nit-picking, I know, but I plan to drive my cars usually 8+ years when i buy them and even have done this with ICE vehicles in the past in order to demand less from the world's resources. Some say that the 100 kWh upgrades were "needed" and yet some here on TMC have said that if the P85D was as fast as a P100DL, they wouldn't want or need those extra 15 kWh. Range is one segment while performance is another. With enough superchargers, 85 kWh may be easily enough for most drivers. And for others, 120KW-135KW is not fast enough for superchargers, so 350KW is being talked about. I do suspect that hardware upgrades or trade-ins will be required to utilize that, once it is brought forth. Will Model 3 be able to use the future 350KW charge rate? If that battery is 55kWh, then that is 7C charging and most likely some level of throttling will be done. The 100kWh and larger performance models of S, X and so on will most likely be able to use 350KW. Daily 3C charging may start to cause limitations on longevity of the NCA cells as well so perhaps some limits may be imposed on how many "Hot charges" will be allowed on the current cell chemistry. All EVs will be pushing their chemistries hard if the 350KW charging rates come to fruition. It could be that new chemistries of batteries will need to evolve before it really becomes commonplace. I suspect that 350KW will also be a "shared maximum" between A/B stalls on the supercharger. Two cars sharing a supercharger on A/B would most likely share the 350KW.

All the changes above (faster superchargers, constant upgrades) are polishing-the-chrome. The real need for the EV movement is to get cheaper cars so more consumers can afford them. This means going down market with high volume and more supercharger locations to match. This is going to be an interesting time for the EV industry and Tesla. I keep saying it will take nearly two times the resources of today to sell twice the number of Model 3 for the same amount of revenue - so I am eager to see how things pan-out as things scale up and more "consumer class" buyers emerge.
You may think that more vehicles at a lower price is what is needed, and certainly that will help things, but many people are used to just rolling up to a gas pump located every 5 miles and plugging the vehicle in and transferring chemical fuel in 3-5 minutes. To convince those people to truly switch, long range and quick charge rates are key. 7C charging is not that ridiculous, btw.

I have a friend who refuses to spend the money on a Tesla at the moment (he can afford it). He bought a Leaf, drove it for a few months, and has now traded it in for an ICE until the Model 3 comes out, as the range/charging time was simply impractical. He *wanted* to drive an EV but the product isn't there in the price range he wants it to be.
 
Just sent you a note on that -- in the works!
@JonMc that is great to hear. Have you spoken with the Equipment and Tool Institute, which handles this information for most of the world's car manufacturers? Equipment and Tool Institute - Home

On another note, I'd love to start a dialogue regarding loaner vehicle speed limiting. My vehicle gets serviced in Cleveland, and consequently the loaners are limited to 78/79mph (cruise is limited to 75 mph). Typical road speeds in Michigan, even for semi trucks, range from 80-90mph (and limits are going up to 75); consequently I have to hold the pedal down for hours (deactivating all of the safety features) to get anywhere (and it's been well-substantiated that going slower than traffic is substantially less safe than going the same or faster - I can provide the references if interested). I wrote a long essay on several occasions on this topic, but the key points are:

1) no OEM that I have ever dealt with supplied speed-limited loaners
2) if you are going to do so, for safety reasons, the margin should be high, i.e. not 5mph over the local highway speed limit
(I propose max limit within 500 miles + 15/20mph)

Thanks for your consideration.
 
Hmm, that would be a tougher nut to crack, I don't know that I'd willingly shell out as much for that, maybe 3-4k for the extra range...

They're only charging 3k extra for the 100D pack, yet giving something on the order of an additional 15kWh. I would bet their cost is even lower than the current 90 pack. They should split the difference of their projected warranty costs (potentially every pack failing) and the cost of the new pack with current owners and give them a new pack. I'm sure they can also find a use for the still functional 90 pack which isn't scrap and recycle.

I'm not going to buy into the current limiting, unless it's limiting to P90Dl v3 power for all P90Dl owners. There's more Tesla has to deliver on here.
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
  • Love
Reactions: MP3Mike and hostman
Just sent you a note on that -- in the works!

Read every post in this thread and as an owner of a roadster coming out of Extended Warranty, this is music to my ears!
Not sure there's enough of us to create a true third-party repair market but it will sure help if the info is readily available.
Thanks for listening and choosing Ingineer to have a chat with on the subject...he's certainly one of our community most valuable Salvaged S asset!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: hostman
There have been some pack/cell improvements, not to mention they are bringing cell manufacturing in-house.

No they aren't brining the 18650 cell manufacturing in-house. Panasonic still makes them in and they are shipped in.

When they start using 2170 cells made in the Gigafactory I can see costs going down.

Because it's been 1.5 years since P90D pack was released.

But that means the cost of the 90 pack has come down too, so I can't see how the 100 pack could cost less than then 90 pack.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: hostman
Talking of Occam's Razor, I do have a hard time agreeing that the simplets answer would be counter-based limitations being applied after mere months on Performance powertrain would be symptomatic of protecting a 20 year lifespan. Especially one where an 8 year warranty battery is quite likely at the center of the issues.

I mean, sure I am one of those people who appreciates the shades of grey and uncertainties. Do I agree it is possible Tesla was protecting a 20 year lifespan with the counter limitations - sure, in theory. But, really, at the same time it seems very far fetched to use a number like that. I would say the simplest, likeliest answer is the counters - being applied as soon as they were - were protecting a lifespan much shorter than that, perhaps around the battery warranty period. If I had to pick a number from hat, I'd at the very least pick 10 years, rather than 20.

I don't think the known facts fit very well with the 20 year idea - especially if taken to mean the counter limiters were designed to help reach that goal.

If you are just saying Tesla has a general goal of 20 year lifespan for their powertrains, then perhaps they could, but even there the 8 year battery warranty and understood battery replacement schedules kind of suggests differently. 10 years before major replacements, sure. 15 years, maybe... The same battery after 20 years? Hmm.

It just seems overly generous to throw around a number of 20 years in this context IMO. Overly optimistic.
Maybe for the battery it would be optimistic, but as a whole considering Tesla saying they had an internal "million mile" goal, I don't see a design spec of 20 years as optimistic (presuming the problem is in the drivetrain).
 
Just sent you a note on that -- in the works!
Thx for informing us on this imminent corporate policy change, J.

The positve effects of this move cannot be overestimated, IMHO.
E.g.:
+ support for owners and small scale enterpreneurs working on Tesla's
+ lower support/maintenace/repair cost for existing owners
+ compliance to EU regulations
+ more value of damaged cars and parts (both to owners and insurance companies)
+ less 'economically totalled' cars
+ lower insurance rates
+ higher prices for used cars altogether

Very interested how this will play out...
 
Thx for informing us on this imminent corporate policy change, J.

The positve effects of this move cannot be overestimated, IMHO.
E.g.:
+ support for owners and small scale enterpreneurs working on Tesla's
+ lower support/maintenace/repair cost for existing owners
+ compliance to EU regulations
+ more value of damaged cars and parts (both to owners and insurance companies)
+ less 'economically totalled' cars
+ lower insurance rates
+ higher prices for used cars altogether

Very interested how this will play out...
Good points...
I would also add that there are times that the SC is swamped, and it takes a while to get service. I would expect that providing a path to third party companies to service cars, would help alleviate the delays etc. Course this would only affect people out of their warranty period.
 
Good points...
I would also add that there are times that the SC is swamped, and it takes a while to get service. I would expect that providing a path to third party companies to service cars, would help alleviate the delays etc. Course this would only affect people out of their warranty period.

That's not necessarily true.

For example, if someone had an issue that they could get fixed under warranty for free, but it would take three weeks to get an appointment at the service center, or they could have it repaired on their own dime today, some people would choose the latter, at least for some inexpensive repairs.

Also, if the service centers are incredibly swamped, for some simple and inexpensive things Tesla may institute a policy where owners can get service elsewhere, and get reimbursed. This would likely be a stop-gap measure, until there are enough service centers. But with the Model 3 coming out, I would think there may be a need for this kind of thing, at least in some situations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Walta and hostman
Read every post in this thread and as an owner of a roadster coming out of Extended Warranty, this is music to my ears!
Not sure there's enough of us to create a true third-party repair market but it will sure help if the info is readily available.
Thanks for listening and choosing Ingineer to have a chat with on the subject...he's certainly one of our community most valuable Salvaged S asset!!
It's actually required under the "Right to Repair" legislation.
 
No they aren't brining the 18650 cell manufacturing in-house. Panasonic still makes them in and they are shipped in.

When they start using 2170 cells made in the Gigafactory I can see costs going down.

But that means the cost of the 90 pack has come down too, so I can't see how the 100 pack could cost less than then 90 pack.
When did the word "bringing" become past tense? It's fully possible that the timing of this upgrade will be coincident with the in-house battery manufacturing.
 
Teardown of new 100 kWh Tesla battery pack reveals new cooling system and 102 kWh capacity

Looks like the battery technology is not so different from the 90kWh pack vs the 100kWh pack... just 2 additional cooling loops :cool:

Hughes’ teardown of the pack revealed that the new modules have 516 cells for a total of 8,256 cells per pack. That’s a ~16% increase over the number of cells in the 85/90 kWh packs. In a blog post, Hughes describes the new module and cooling architecture:

Basically they crammed a couple more rows of cells into the module. But what about the rumors around cooling? Well, they did modify the cooling, but not in any exotic way. The new modules simply have two shorter and thinner cooling loops per module. This way the coolant doesn’t have to run past so many cells before exiting. And he shared a few pictures (the one on the left is a comparison of a module from a 85 kWh pack (top) vs a module from a 100 kWh (bottom)):

upload_2017-1-24_20-0-58.png