Roadster 3.0

[ekotysh]

Has anyone heard about the pricing or availability yet?

 

[dpeilow]

Tesla also gets its cells from Samsung. The posted specs is 70kWh. 6831cells x 2.85ah x 3.6V = 70kWh. As for aggressiveness with thermal management, maybe that was the wrong word, a better word is responsiveness.

The 70 kWh is net of the margin on depth of discharge.

 

[dpeilow]

Covered in the Roadster 3.0 thread in the Roadster forum.

 

[wiztecy]

I don't understand why they're trying to penny pinch the mileage with some odds and ends improvements. I totally welcome the improvements but, was anticipating that the improvement in the battery technology alone to trump any drag improvement modifications to the car. I've seen opportunities to lower the drag coefficient on the Roadster. One attack is a 3 to 5 element rear diffuser that extends approx 4-6" off the rear. That's easy pickings for lowering drag. I can also see them putting covers on the rear aluminum cover plate, to make the drag less running across the bottom of the rear pan. Other than that, possibly a re-designed front nose or even some side skirts but that's minimal improvement on drag. But that's an increase in cost, both for Tesla and the consumer. I also don't want to change the look of the Roadster all though I'd take a rear diffuser that's more functional. But some people don't like that look even though it is more efficient. My only guess on the lower capacity cell in the Roadster is mostly due to cost, that with this they can offer an attractive price for the pack.

It also appears they may be doing some sort of full float rotor possibly to reduce the friction drag of the pad to rotor. But that's just my own speculation. A disadvantage of a full floating rotor makes lots of noise when cornering. So I don't see taking that compromise of making the car noisier to reduce some brake drag. Possibly they're doing something different there? There is no mention of bigger and better brakes which for sure the Roadster needs. Its directly correlated to the safety of the driver, passenger as well as other on the road. Not to mention to keep the Roadster driving in one piece for a very long time. Hence our own pursuit to improve braking capabilities using the Carbotech pads in addition to the custom 2 piece floating slotted rotor with the inner aluminum hat:

Custom Aluminum Rotors - A possibility

I'm not saying any this in a negative way, just was expecting a higher capacity cell, and that this new cell by itself would give us the 400 mile range alone under a 55mph driving condition. It appears to hit this 400 mile benchmark we need all the bells and whistles including the lower rolling resistant tires. That's one place I'm not going to compromise, I want and need sticky tires on the Roadster.

I do commend Tesla for their continued support of the Roadster. Thank you!

 

[dhrivnak]

Disclaimer - I am not a Roadster owner. Having said that I don't understand the lure of more range with respect this specific car. Looking at the purpose and function of the Roadster, isn't performance the desired attribute? Can one (or would one want to) even sit in the roadster for 5-6 hours nonstop between LA-SF? To me it feels like Tesla is doing a magic trick - distracting with the 400mi talk - while behind the scenes/quietly working on the performance (i.e. acceleration) figures. Is it unreasonable to expect that 3.0 will have awesome/super car 0-60 #s with the new pack and that's the real news?

YES and this is from someone who is a Roadster owner. I have driven many 500 mile trips (in about a day) and some 400 mile trips. But the reality is charging is a real pain as few public stations are over 6 KW. But with a "400" mile pack add in a stop for lunch and dinner and 450 is now quite possible. That would fully meet my needs. Super acceleration is of little value if when you get to your autocross or mountain driving road, often 100 miles away, you now only have enough battery to head back home.

 

[flankspeed8]

Pretty darn cool that they are offering this for an out of production vehicle. Shows that despite their flaws (no company is perfect), Tesla is not just about selling you a car today, but establishing a long-term lifecycle for their products.

 

[AndrewBissell]

I know - but you have to know to get to post number 1016! Roadster 3.0 - Page 102

Also - it is news.

Happy Christmas!

 

[ecarfan]

To me the most remarkable aspect of the "Roadster 3.0" announcement is that Tesla didn't just plug new cells into the Roadster battery enclosure, they looked at multiple aspects of the car -- aerodynamics, wheel bearings, brake drag, tire rolling resistance -- and made improvements in all those areas that contribute to the claimed increase range increase.

I am surprised and pleased that Elon and Tesla were willing to put in the engineering time to do more than simply plug new cells into the battery enclosure so that they could continue to offer owners replacement batteries. They did much more than that. This announcement demonstrates that Tesla continues to support the Roadster and should also help support Roadster market values.

Thank you Elon and Tesla! Now please post pricing.

 

[Doug_G]

Since they're using a new chemistry I wonder if they'll allow the battery pack to run warmer? That would reduce power draw and increase the availability of the cabin air conditioner. And perhaps make it just a little more track-worthy.

 

[ecarfan]

Everyone is assuming I5, why not Highway 1?

I would suggest Hwy 101.

 

[tomsax]

For me, the exciting part of this news is that Tesla is making progress on delivering new battery packs for the Roadster. I'm hoping that we will soon have the details on pricing and availability so that we all know that the cars we love won't become bricks when our current battery packs reach end of life.

It's nice that the new battery packs have more range, but that's really not important to me, and I'm hoping they won't be prohibitively expensive as a result. Before the Roadster entered production, we were told to expect that by the time we needed new packs, batteries would be better and cheaper. I hope they are able to deliver on both parts of that.

 

[dpeilow]

I'm wondering whether the "70 kWh delivered" in fact means a very conservative depth of discharge so that the packs will last thousands of cycles and therefore hundreds of thousands of miles. That would be a win win so that we can keep these cars until they are bona fide classics and Tesla doesn't have to revisit the issue again in five years.

 

[JRP3]

One would hope this chemistry is far more durable than the original Roadster cells. Plus a "400" mile pack means 400,000 miles after only 1000 full cycles.

 

[tomsax]

Disclaimer - I am not a Roadster owner. Having said that I don't understand the lure of more range with respect this specific car.

Personally, as a Roadster owner, I don't think more range holds much appeal. My driving tends to be either well within the current pack's range (anywhere in the Puget Sound region) or far beyond it (crazy trips to California). More range would make the Seattle-Ellensburg-Spokane drive easier, but that's a rare trip for us.

For folks who want to drive from San Francisco to LA non-stop, it may hold more appeal. When I drove from Seattle to Monterey for Teslive this summer, I found that stopping at the 70A HPC charging spots down I-5 made the drive quite pleasant, far less exhausting and probably much safer, than driving 400 miles at a stretch without a stop. I had WiFi at most stops and was able to work while charging. The car was always ready to go before I was.

Looking at the purpose and function of the Roadster, isn't performance the desired attribute? Can one (or would one want to) even sit in the roadster for 5-6 hours nonstop between LA-SF? To me it feels like Tesla is doing a magic trick - distracting with the 400mi talk - while behind the scenes/quietly working on the performance (i.e. acceleration) figures. Is it unreasonable to expect that 3.0 will have awesome/super car 0-60 #s with the new pack and that's the real news?

Better performance would require a new PEM and motor.

Dropping new cells into the same battery package format doesn't sound like it would take much engineering effort, although I'm sure it's more complicated than it sounds; it always is. They will also need to update the firmware, at the very least for a different charging profile and SOC calculation. Those sound doable for a tiny market, as a gesture of goodwill for the early supporters that made their current success possible, and a sign to Model S owners that they won't be abandoned when Model 3 become Tesla's flagship vehicle.

Designing a new PEM and motor sound like much more significant investments in engineering and manufacturing, things that seem wholly impractical for a tiny, and constantly shrinking, market.

The same holds true for Supercharger support. It would be great, but it would require a big investment in designing and manufacturing a new PEM, which I just can't see ever happening.

 

[Johann Koeber]

I hope the new roadster update does something about the mud on the door-sills.

Wouldn't larger battery imply more power available to the motor? Could keep the full power output for a longer period of time? Or was the PEM and/or the motor the limiting factor?

This opens up a lot more questions. But is great news for all of us roadster owners. Hope it is affordable

 

[Ingenieur]

I wonder what the price will be, battery is probobly ca. 20k$, then new wheels, new aerodynamic kit (and paintjob for it, may also need to paint the whole car to avoid colour differences), new wheels, new bearings.
Sounds like 30k$.
You can probobly get a new i3 for the money (if you deduct the tax credit)

 

[dpeilow]

One would hope this chemistry is far more durable than the original Roadster cells. Plus a "400" mile pack means 400,000 miles after only 1000 full cycles.

We all know that this upgrade will give 250 miles at real highway speed. But 250,000 miles lifetime would be ok. Somewhere I read the Model S cells last 2000 cycles anyway.

More importantly they will still achieve ~170 miles at end of life, so we are no worse off than today.

 

[jimmyz80]

I've been on the fence about buying a roadster for a few months, since I have a LEAF going off-lease soon and want to stick with an EV but get back to my Z06 driving roots. The new announcement has re-sparked my interest but there's one thing I'm really curious about. How does the 3.0 upgrade relate to existing 1.0, 2.0, and 2.5 models? I'm assuming Tesla would shoot for full support, since omitting any of the Roadster varieties would result in a very small number of upgradeable cars. Really excited to hear more details.

 

[tomsax]

One would hope this chemistry is far more durable than the original Roadster cells. Plus a "400" mile pack means 400,000 miles after only 1000 full cycles.

Great point! That probably is the greatest benefit of a pack with increased range.

 

[Doug_G]

This is very positive for the long-term viability (and value) of the Roadster. This upgrade would also make it easy to drive Ottawa to Toronto on a single charge.

That said, with the rollout of Superchargers it will soon be much easier to do the trip in our Model S, which is a more practical road trip car. So I'm not sure I'd pop for the upgrade until the pack wore out.