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

Pics/Info: Inside the Tesla 100 kWh Battery Pack

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
It should produce less heat, not more, given equal power demands.

Likely true driving, unless, of course, you are tweaking like Jason is.;)

But Supercharging could be different. There's typically a greater thermal load when charging than discharging. Given the taper will be different for a 100kWh pack, there could be significantly higher duration of sustained current up front.

I know that the hardest I've ever heard (or felt) my cooling system running has been during some supercharge sessions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gavine
I originally posted this on my projects site, but will also post here.

All rights reserved. Images may not be copied or used without my express permission.

Pics and Info: Inside the Tesla 100kWh Battery Pack | wk057's SkieNET

Jason Hughes on Twitter

---

So I recently purchased the first known salvage auction Tesla with the new 100kWh battery pack, a P100D VIN 159k.



p100d_badge.jpg




There have been tons of rumors flying around how what changes Tesla had made to increase the capacity so drastically. Rumors of new cooling patents, increased voltage, new cell double bond wiring, incompatible with older cars, and all sorts of things.



Personally, I figured Tesla wouldn't reinvent the wheel just yet and go with a whole new pack design, but who knows. Not me, so that had to be corrected.
grin.png




Without further ado, here is a shot of a module from the 100 kWh pack.







So, immediately with one picture we have a lot of answers.





  • They're 18650s
  • There are more of them (12 more per group to be exact)
  • Single cell fuse/bond wires
  • Still six cell groups (no voltage change)

Awesome. 516 cells per module. That's 8,256 cells per pack, a ~16% increase vs the 85/90 packs.

A comparison with an older module makes the added cells more clear:



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 doesnt have to run past so many cells before exiting.







What about compatibility with other/older cars? Well, the pack itself has the same high-voltage connection, the same low voltages connectors, and the same cooling connector. However, the pack has the newer ring around the high-voltage connector. So, it's plug-and-play (for the most part, firmware and config changes needed) on the Model X and refreshed Model S, however it would require a different spacer ring on the high voltage connector. Tesla even has a part number for it, so it should be pretty simple to put into any Model S/X.



p100d-rapidmate-1920.jpg




The six screws on the orange HV connector can be removed to replace the ring with one compatible with older Model S.
smile.png




As for real capacity, the BMS reports usable capacity at a whopping 98.4 kWh. It also reports a 4 kWh unusable bottom charge, so that's 102.4 kWh total pack capacity! Congratulations, Tesla. A high capacity pack that meets its nameplate rating!



Also, the BMS reports a max discharge current of 1,760A for the P100D Ludicrous pack. The normal Ludicrous P90D/P85D packs report 1,520A. This makes perfect sense with scaling, since it's 74 vs 86 cells per group.



Additionally, the pyro fuse in the 100 kWh is labeled differently. I couldn't find any physical differences between the normal ones, but it is labeled "DISCONNECT,PYROTECHNIC,HYBRID,100kWh", which suggests it has a different setting for the higher current. It also still has the two non-rechargeable lithium ion cells in the case, suggesting it will need replacement at some point like the rest of them.



It's great to put rumors about this pack to rest. No exotic cooling, is compatible with older cars (physically), no new cell type, etc. Just a new module design that packs more cells into each one.



Enjoy.



-wk

In your opinion, what would the reasoning be for Tesla to claim that the 100D is not compatible with pre-refresh vehicles (especially considering the adapter you mentioned being needed has a part number already)?

In addition, what do you think the challenges are to Tesla offering 100D pack upgrades to pre-refresh cars on an official battery upgrade program with a reasonable core discount for your old battery (depending on capacity and health).
 
In addition, what do you think the challenges are to Tesla offering 100D pack upgrades to pre-refresh cars on an official battery upgrade program with a reasonable core discount for your old battery (depending on capacity and health).

I'm not attempting to answer for Jason, whom I'm sure will answer himself, but I would have to think that one of the challenges would be simply moving the packs--old and new--around. That can't be easy or cheap.
 
I'm not attempting to answer for Jason, whom I'm sure will answer himself, but I would have to think that one of the challenges would be simply moving the packs--old and new--around. That can't be easy or cheap.
This is why I outlined a plan back in August. Tesla introduces their Battery Upgrade Program. Part of the program is to set a value per kwh based on degradation of your current pack and the current Cost Per kWh for manufacturing. There would be two additional charges. A installation charge and a destination. The latter could be waived if the battery was going to someone in your service center area.

Basically Tesla takes your old battery, certifies it that is will charge to XXX miles, removes it, installs the new pack and charges you the new pack cost (based on a current manufacturing cost per kwh plus reasonable markup), reasonable install charge (2 guys @ 2 shop hours), and then subtracts your battery trade-in value of your old battery.

This is the way I envision it with semi-made-up numbers. Purchase a 100kwh battery that costs Tesla $250 per kwh to make for a total cost of $25k. Your 90kwh battery is worth $250 x 90 - 10% cell degradation for a trade-in credit of $20500. So your bill ends up being $25,000 + $1000 destination charge to ship battery somewhere + $750 install + $500 certification fee for a total out of pocket of roughly $7000 which is double the price of upgrading at time of purchase for $3000 (so as to force people to think hard about a new purchase).

Then AndyW comes along and says, here is a battery from supra that is a 90kwh pack minus 10% degradation. I want to upgrade my 60kwh pack. Rinse and repeat the same process above. And your 60kwh core is then recycled or reused as a certified warranty replacement so as to not waste it. Battery warranty is still good for everyone since only the ownership changed.

I'm sure the numbers overall could be adjusted to make it more profitable for Tesla, within reason. And by setting the trade-in value at current manufacturing cost per kwh, you make the trade-in value more fair to the next guy in line. I've had two 60kwh battery pack owners tell me they would absolutely pay the above markup to get into a 90kwh battery even though it's double the cost per kwh than they would pay if they just ordered a new vehicle.
 
Been waiting for this for a while, Huge thanks to wk057! @Yggdrasill (and myself;)) called 96s86p shortly after the 100 was announced.

Great to see that it's likely backwards compatible.

@garsh, Lithium primary cells can be good for 20+ years with sufficiently low loads, of course I have no clue what loads they might be experiencing.

@wk057 Did you weigh the packs?
I'd really like to see a mass number for one of the new modules as well.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: garsh, Gen3 and GSP
I'm sure the numbers overall could be adjusted to make it more profitable for Tesla, within reason.

As much as I'd like to see that happen, I think it disincentivizes people to buy new cars, and to just upgrade their battery packs.

The biggest problem I see with this, in addition to the problem Hank pointed out above, is that right now, and for the foreseeable future, the Tesla Service Centers are so incredibly overworked that the last thing they would want is the additional work this battery swap program would entail.

Don't get me wrong--I think it is a great idea. I just don't see Tesla going for it.
 
This is why I outlined a plan back in August. Tesla introduces their Battery Upgrade Program. Part of the program is to set a value per kwh based on degradation of your current pack and the current Cost Per kWh for manufacturing. There would be two additional charges. A installation charge and a destination. The latter could be waived if the battery was going to someone in your service center area.

Basically Tesla takes your old battery, certifies it that is will charge to XXX miles, removes it, installs the new pack and charges you the new pack cost (based on a current manufacturing cost per kwh plus reasonable markup), reasonable install charge (2 guys @ 2 shop hours), and then subtracts your battery trade-in value of your old battery.

This is the way I envision it with semi-made-up numbers. Purchase a 100kwh battery that costs Tesla $250 per kwh to make for a total cost of $25k. Your 90kwh battery is worth $250 x 90 - 10% cell degradation for a trade-in credit of $20500. So your bill ends up being $25,000 + $1000 destination charge to ship battery somewhere + $750 install + $500 certification fee for a total out of pocket of roughly $7000 which is double the price of upgrading at time of purchase for $3000 (so as to force people to think hard about a new purchase).

Then AndyW comes along and says, here is a battery from supra that is a 90kwh pack minus 10% degradation. I want to upgrade my 60kwh pack. Rinse and repeat the same process above. And your 60kwh core is then recycled or reused as a certified warranty replacement so as to not waste it.

I'm sure the numbers overall could be adjusted to make it more profitable for Tesla, within reason. And by setting the trade-in value at current manufacturing cost per kwh, you make the trade-in value more fair to the next guy in line. I've had two 60kwh battery pack owners tell me they would absolutely pay the above markup to get into a 90kwh battery even though it's double the cost per kwh than they would pay if they just ordered a new vehicle.
As much as I'd like to see that happen, I think it disincentivizes people to buy new cars, and to just upgrade their battery packs.

Which is why you find a balance. As I said above, the final cost per kWh to the owner is double what they would pay if they just bought a new car with a bigger battery. Many many owners want reasonable battery upgrade path options, and some don't (whether it's because of the hassle or they want the rest of the car new). A certified battery upgrade program creates revenue for Tesla, long-term confidence in ownership, plus increases/stabalizes the value in "out-of-date" Tesla's since any Tesla could be upgraded at any time battery-wise and still be competitive in the used car market.
 
The biggest problem I see with this, in addition to the problem Hank pointed out above, is that right now, and for the foreseeable future, the Tesla Service Centers are so incredibly overworked that the last thing they would want is the additional work this battery swap program would entail.

Don't get me wrong--I think it is a great idea. I just don't see Tesla going for it.
Well, they are going to have to get their stuff together pretty damn quick because there are half a million Model 3 owners about ready to happen. Battery upgrades are going to be a freaking drop in the bucket compared to 50k chrome trim pieces that don't line up right and the hipsters want it fixed.
 
Which is why you find a balance. As I said above, the final cost per kWh to the owner is double what they would pay if they just bought a new car with a bigger battery. Many many owners want reasonable battery upgrade path options, and some don't (whether it's because of the hassle or they want the rest of the car new). A certified battery upgrade program creates revenue for Tesla, long-term confidence in ownership, plus increases/stabalizes the value in "out-of-date" Tesla's since any Tesla could be upgraded at any time battery-wise and still be competitive in the used car market.
ok, they will probably announce it 2 days after the next quarter ends and we'll discuss whether to cancel or not....
 
  • Like
Reactions: supratachophobia
The biggest problem I see with this, in addition to the problem Hank pointed out above, is that right now, and for the foreseeable future, the Tesla Service Centers are so incredibly overworked that the last thing they would want is the additional work this battery swap program would entail.

Don't get me wrong--I think it is a great idea. I just don't see Tesla going for it.

That battery you could have swapped out twice in the time it takes to fill the tank on an A8? o_O
 
This is the way I envision it with semi-made-up numbers. Purchase a 100kwh battery that costs Tesla $250 per kwh to make for a total cost of $25k. Your 90kwh battery is worth $250 x 90 - 10% cell degradation for a trade-in credit of $20500. So your bill ends up being $25,000 + $1000 destination charge to ship battery somewhere + $750 install + $500 certification fee for a total out of pocket of roughly $7000 which is double the price of upgrading at time of purchase for $3000 (so as to force people to think hard about a new purchase).

Then AndyW comes along and says, here is a battery from supra that is a 90kwh pack minus 10% degradation. I want to upgrade my 60kwh pack. Rinse and repeat the same process above. And your 60kwh core is then recycled or reused as a certified warranty replacement so as to not waste it. Battery warranty is still good for everyone since only the ownership changed.

I'm sure the numbers overall could be adjusted to make it more profitable for Tesla, within reason. And by setting the trade-in value at current manufacturing cost per kwh, you make the trade-in value more fair to the next guy in line. I've had two 60kwh battery pack owners tell me they would absolutely pay the above markup to get into a 90kwh battery even though it's double the cost per kwh than they would pay if they just ordered a new vehicle.

I follow the logic but I don't see the incentive on either end.
most people aren't going to upgrade from 90 to 100, mostly people with 60's or 70's I would think.
The problem is that the new battery pack at $250/per is good but the used pack can't have the same value. A 90 degraded to 81 can't be worth 81x250. It would have to be priced as used. So take a 60 degraded to 55 and give it a used value of 200. Now you have trade value of 11k. Even after labor Tesla would still need to make a profit for hoking around. I believe they operate at 25% margins on the cars and 50% on accessories. So you'd get like 6k trade in and be out of pocket ~20k to upgrade an old car that has none of the new cool Tesla features. I just don't see it happening. Anyone with 20k to drop w/o financing is going to want a newer/better car.