TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Sacrifice frunk to increase range

Discussion in 'Model 3' started by Chrisuk83, Apr 17, 2016.

?

What would you sacrifice if anything to increase range?

  1. Nothing, the range whatever it may be will be enough for me

  2. I would sacrifice part of the frunk or trunk to increase battery size

  3. I would sacrifice the whole frunk to increase range

  4. I would sacrifice the frunk and more to greatly increase the range

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. Chrisuk83

    Chrisuk83 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2016
    Messages:
    60
    Location:
    Uk
    OK, so for some like myself the range on the TM3 and even the s and x are not really enough to be comfortable without needed to find a charging station. My commute is around 300miles round trip and due to my job I am not always going to the same destination so an extra boost in battery capacity will be a massive help.
     
  2. Zoomit

    Zoomit Part 3 Awaiter

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2015
    Messages:
    318
    Location:
    SoCal
    Your impication is that the battery could replace the frunk or trunk. These are not feasible battery options.

    The battery will only be between the axles and kept out of the crumple zone. Additionally, the weight and systems complexity of splitting the battery in multiple areas in the car makes that design path very undesireable, to put it mildly.
     
    • Like x 3
    • Informative x 1
  3. Vitold

    Vitold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2015
    Messages:
    990
    Location:
    NM
    This is really bad idea. Frunk is a crumple zone, plus putting batteries there would make car front heavy.

    With that said - I'm pretty sure that Model 3 will have 300mile variant.
     
    • Like x 2
  4. aronth5

    aronth5 Long Time Follower

    Joined:
    May 8, 2010
    Messages:
    1,436
    Location:
    Boston Suburb
    Agree with both comments. Improving range and allowing long commutes will need to be addressed with improved battery chemistry and supercharger expansion not messing with the Frunk.
     
  5. James Anders

    James Anders Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2014
    Messages:
    745
    Location:
    Southampton, PA
    It may be that unless you have a Supercharger along your commute a Tesla may not be the best choice for you.
     
    • Like x 1
  6. igotzzoom

    igotzzoom Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    838
    Location:
    Laguna Hills, CA
    200-ish is plenty for me. As battery technology improves, we will have 300-mile range in the same physical package size as today's 200-mile packs. Also, charging infrastructure will continue to improve. As these factors converge, the need for physically larger batteries will diminish.
     
    • Like x 1
  7. Zoomit

    Zoomit Part 3 Awaiter

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2015
    Messages:
    318
    Location:
    SoCal
    I agree. ICE vehicle range between 300-450mi. They could carry more gas, but they typically don't. You could argue that BEVs need a longer range than ICEVs to counter the slower "refill" time, but I think the opposite is true. BEVs will have smaller (<= 300 mi) batteries because you can leave on every journey with a full tank and a far majority of the time the extra battery mass and cost would be wasted.

    For a strickly commuter BEV, 125-150mi range is about the sweat spot in efficiency, cost, and around town flexibility. But a household with this car will (generally) need something else for easier long distance trips.
     
  8. cdub

    cdub Future Model 3 owner

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2014
    Messages:
    180
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Putting any battery in the frunk would make the car very unsafe in a front end collision. That crumple zone is important.

    I trust Elon's engineering skills over people on the internet.
     
    • Like x 2
  9. Craig9080

    Craig9080 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2016
    Messages:
    100
    Location:
    GA
    Yeah...like everyone else said. A battery in the frunk would make the car unsafe in a collision and make it handle like crap.
     
  10. Tiberius

    Tiberius Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2016
    Messages:
    270
    Location:
    SoCal
    Besides safety, it looks like the frunk has been partially sacrificed as it is to make more room on the interior. That's assuming the production models will have the same layout as the prototypes, which they most likely will.
     
  11. stopcrazypp

    stopcrazypp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    7,050
    I didn't vote because I didn't think it was a good question. Besides what others mentioned, putting it in the frunk will raise the center of gravity. This will adversely affect handling and may need suspension changes to handle.
     
  12. Chrisuk83

    Chrisuk83 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2016
    Messages:
    60
    Location:
    Uk
    I wouldn't imagine it being much different to having the weight of a decent sized engine up front. Suspension changes would not be a huge problem, yes the center of gravity would be higher but again it is in an ICE vehicle. Audi have been putting the engine in front of the front wheels for years.
     
  13. Fanatic1

    Fanatic1 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2016
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area, CA
    #13 Fanatic1, Apr 18, 2016
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2016
    Front end collisions force the engine into the passenger compartment. Not good. Most every ICE company puts their engines in the front. Tesla is trying to do everything better not just doing things because it's been done that way for years. Nevertheless, I wouldnt use what Volkswagen (Audi's parent company) does as the best example for anything these days... Just saying IMHO....
     
  14. stopcrazypp

    stopcrazypp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    7,050
    Audi designed their whole platform around having an engine in the front, while Tesla designed their platform with the frunk compartment being used for cargo, not a high weight density part like a battery pack in the frunk. Having a battery there would require a significant redesign that is simply not worth it. Battery density will naturally increase over time (Tesla's success depends on this to achieve cost savings) and that is where additional capacity will come from, not simply finding some space to stuff more cells.
     
    • Like x 1
  15. physicsfita

    physicsfita Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2014
    Messages:
    424
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Let's not forget that the Models 3 we saw at the reveal were RWD, and it was reported that the frunk was between the RWD and AWD variants of the Model S in size. Given that the AWD Model S can basically carry a gym bag in its frunk, I expect that the AWD variant of the Model 3 will have a very small frunk indeed.
     
  16. Zoomit

    Zoomit Part 3 Awaiter

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2015
    Messages:
    318
    Location:
    SoCal
    I thought that the reveal cars were AWD and the frunk size is repesentative.
     
    • Like x 1
  17. physicsfita

    physicsfita Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2014
    Messages:
    424
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, MI
    I thought I heard that in one of the videos. That said, when I was searching again, in one of the test-drive videos the driver said it was AWD, but we didn't see the frunk in it. If they somehow managed to make the AWD frunk bigger in the Model 3 than the Model S, that is very impressive.
     
  18. AudubonB

    AudubonB Mild-mannered Moderator Lord Vetinari*

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2013
    Messages:
    4,244
    Location:
    Denali Highway, Alaska
    I'm torn, because as for me, I want to have my cake and be able to store it, too.
     
    • Like x 1
  19. geoffreak

    geoffreak Model 3 Reservation Holder

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2015
    Messages:
    132
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    My understanding is that this is a hypothetical question. Would you give up the frunk to have a larger range vehicle. This isn't the same as would you fill the frunk with batteries to increase range. As others posted, that's not the best of ideas, so we should stick to the hypothetical for the sake of conversation.

    Also, I'm pretty sure that I heard in one of the reveal videos that they're going to compact everything in the production cars, allowing for more trunk and frunk space.
     
  20. WarpedOne

    WarpedOne Supreme Premier

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,657
    Location:
    Slovenia, Europe
    Numbers game: How much more range for how much less storage space?
    20% more range for 30% less storage space and much worse handling.

    Car battery (i.e. range) is not space limited, it is price-limited.
     

Share This Page