Hi, the only spec I found for Powerpack is the 50 kW AC output from Tesla Powerpack do you have another source for its charge rate?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Shocked by the new Roadster rolling out of the Tesla Semi!
- Thread starter rudholm
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Roadster 2020
Hi, the only spec I found for Powerpack is the 50 kW AC output from Tesla Powerpack do you have another source for its charge rate?
It's an automotive term also. You use high (dis)charge rated cells. Think, 10x faster charger than Tesla cells. And much less prone to heating under high load. Many hybrid cars have tiny little packs that put out enough power to drive decently.
A 200kWh pack to fit such a sleek car is not possible with today's tech. Many have been promising 3-fold energy density, this would be the first one to make it to a prototype of this scale if true. But if true...why a 3 year wait? Car seems to work.
Hopefully they have cooling enough to allow sustained track performance.
No reason the batteries couldn't be those we are using today. One of the individual battery cells will charge 80% in 30 minutes. Hook a bunch of them all up at the same time and they can all charge 80% in 30 minutes. The only difference is how many cells you are charging, which only affects the required charging power. Model X/S, new Roadster, or Semi.
It kind of appears that they have something like two Model 3 battery packs stacked one on top of the other (the car was reportedly only a little smaller than the M3 and with a higher seating position), plus maybe an extra 2/3 pack worth stuffed into the frunk and trunk areas. No obvious frunk or trunk gaps that I could see on the prototype. Maybe they're full of batteries and motors?
No reason the batteries couldn't be those we are using today. One of the individual battery cells will charge 80% in 30 minutes. Hook a bunch of them all up at the same time and they can all charge 80% in 30 minutes. The only difference is how many cells you are charging, which only affects the required charging power. Model X/S, new Roadster, or Semi.
It kind of appears that they have something like two Model 3 battery packs stacked one on top of the other (the car was reportedly only a little smaller than the M3 and with a higher seating position), plus maybe an extra 2/3 pack worth stuffed into the frunk and trunk areas. No obvious frunk or trunk gaps that I could see on the prototype. Maybe they're full of batteries and motors?
Ah! power pack, not Powerpack. Sort of like a super capacitor module? Seems it would be hard to hide the recharging that would be need at such an event.
Such a 0-70 run and back doesn't take a lot of energy. A large pack from power cells (really, it's Tesla that's using cheap slow cells, there is a whole world of 5-10x faster cells out there) could be (a couple) dozen kWh and suffice to demonstrate the function of motors and tires.
If Tesla actually already has a 200kWh pack that fits a Roadster, the 0-60 performance shown in testrides is not the big news.
Thanks - still clicked the Roadster link at the top
Yup, trucks are not that interesting.
Although Elon's leather jacket means we can now add "Trucker Musk" to the range alongside "Executive Musk", "Spaceman Musk" and "Chippendale Musk" (from the D launch)
This is a really interesting point you make. Because the recycling rate on the metals in the cathodes at least should be nearly 100%. Nobody is going to throw away hundreds of kilograms of what's effectively super-high-grade nickel-cobalt ore, and nor is there a reason that any meaningful percentage of it should get lost in the recycling process. Nickel and cobalt demand are only going to continue to grow over time, so when the metals from your battery go back onto the market, they displace what otherwise would have had to be mined at that point in time.
In short, by "consuming more" by buying a vehicle with a larger battery, you're not actually causing more mining overall. You're just making it happen sooner. More mining now, but reducing nearly the same amount of mining later.
Either just “Roadster” or it won’t have any name badge on it at all, just like the Model 3.
I believe I understand your point, however I think Elon feels that this new Roadster is an effective way to show the world of automotive enthusiasts that any attachment they may still have to noisy ICE supercars is deeply irrational. The new Roadster outperforms them for a fraction of the price.
I would not rule out a lower priced version of the new Roadster at some point, with half the range (most people don’t need 620 miles of range) and less power.
Elon was referring to the Tesla Semi truck when he made that comment.
Producing a thousand or so of the new Roadsters every year while simultanteously producing a half million Model 3s should even the scales.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
The idea that this new Roadster is somehow "wasteful" is beyond ridiculous. It's a smaller car than the Model 3 and more aerodynamic than an "economy" car like the Bolt. That means it's a more efficient vehicle, i.e. less wasteful. 99% of the time these Roadsters will be driven at normal speeds on normal roads and will return amazing wh/mi figures.
Just to revive a thread I started 8 years ago (!), I did a very back-of-the-envelope comparison of the (obviously original) Roadster to a bicycle in terms of marginal carbon footprint, comparing the electricity used to power the Roadster to the food used to power a bike. The answer was that they were actually pretty comparable (with lots of caveats pointed out by me and others on the thread).
If you believe 620 miles on 200kWh, then the new Roadster will be less efficient (323 Wh/mile), but still will be tons better than most gasoline cars. So, calling this out for not being green is kind of silly.
Bike vs. Roadster
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I think the actual range will be better than that and highway efficiency will be better than the original Roadster. The aerodynamics almost guarantees it.
You'd think. I was a little surprised. IIRC, an ideal mile in the original Roadster is 238 Wh. In practice, as we all know, it's really hard to get that, but to get as bad as 323 you either have to drive really aggressively, it has to be really cold, or there has to be a lot of rain.
The new Roadster will clearly be a lot heaver than the old one, though. It's much bigger and has a bigger battery, too. How much that offsets the better aerodynamics is hard to say (and in any case it depends on driving profile).
With a 200kwh battery and 7k+ lbs of torque on demand, I don't think anyone driving this will give a living crap about efficiency lol. Put me behind the wheel of one of these and watch me do 250+ from LA to SF and not blink an eye... Ill gladly stop halfway to supercharge. Cops still wouldn't catch up with that stop LMAO
WannabeOwner
Well-Known Member
Does your carbon footprint stand scrutiny?
They may not have been sustaining the headline figure, but the joyriders certainly seemed impressed! and the audience putting down $50K deposit is presumably already familiar with, and comparing against, Ludicrous launch and the cars were launching "all night long", for me its hard not to draw the conclusion that it was "sustained"
There was nothing implied that they recharged during the night. Sure, they may well have done, but Tesla is going to look pretty stupid if that comes to light and the employees / drivers were lying on camera about it. I'm happy to believe that they were "launching all night" and that that was on a single charge.
It is clear that nobody here has an idea how they could accommodate 200 kWh in such a small space and how much it will weigh, unless the cells have a magic chemistry.
If it is too good to be true, then most likely it is.
If it is too good to be true, then most likely it is.
Then still, even if it had to recharge like 5 hours instead of 0,5 , it's still absolutely amazing
Maximilien
Member
Maximilien
Member
My guess is that when other ICE companies worked their asses off to catch up 2.0 second 0-60 by 2020, Tesla will ruin it with a surprise by announcing 0-60mph in 1.6 seconds!!
Looks like Tesla enjoys trolling other companies.
GG ICE...
Looks like Tesla enjoys trolling other companies.
GG ICE...
In the video here the driver says they are getting times under 1.9 seconds
