Should you wait for 2023 Tesla Model Y Long Range with 4680 Battery or by Tesla now? [Jan 2023]

[Mrbrock]

It is conceptually possible, but unlikely in near-term. Currently available battery tech would add a great deal of volume and weight to the car. Adding weight would likely require adding more structural weight to support it. And then all the safety testing. It is more involved than just adding more kWh, if the car even has the space for it.

The alternative would be new battery tech that increases power density by 50%. I have not read about anything like that available in the near-term.

If Tesla had sights on a 500 mile Model Y Long Range+, I could see that in a next generation (where the structure was designed for it going in) and future battery tech has increased energy density.

They would introduce a 500 mile Model X long before Model Y. Same reason Model S has longer range than Model 3. Much higher margins on X/S.

If the main thing you want a car that feels slightly more solid, this makes sense. But that’s highly personal and specific to you.
That’s about number 20 on most people’s list of what they’re looking for in a car, esp given the MLYR is plenty stiff as it is.

... slower acceleration, more than 50 miles less range, less proven battery for roughly the same money isn’t an equation that works for me and clearly it doesn’t for most people. At no point in a MYLR normal lifespan is the range going to drop to anything like the 4680. And it’s extremely likely the 4680 will have the same or similar rate of decline. The form factor is different but the chemistry, not so much. We aren’t talking about an iron battery here.
And its not just range, its acceleration, it’s weight -- 4680 so far is looking heavier for same range -- and frankly its reliability. The smaller batteries are well proven. That’s real. Some imagined 4680 POTENTIAL attributes like longer life aren’t.
Im beginning to wonder what it will take for people to simply accept the 4680 isn’t going to be a better performing battery. The battery day spin effect is still running strong.
Anyway, my work on this thread is done. I’m surprised this all came up again.

Tesla only warranties the battery below 70%. 269 is 81% of 330 so the battery can fall below 269 miles and Tesla would consider this "normal" for 8 years or 120,000 miles. As far as the rest of your 4680 points, yes, we are in agreement there and have been for a while. The other factor is there are other vehicles that will be more profitable for Tesla to use 4680 like Cybertruck and Semi so while they are ramping production, supply will not go to 4680 for a while. There is no current range for a 2170 CT so the 4680 CT doesnt havent expectations so it will likely be less than a 2170 CT would be but with nothing to actually compare to, people can't complain about it being less. Maybe they will do they max range Tri Motor as 2170 and 4680 for the rest, but we won't know until they actually release final specs and start production.

No, MYAWD was new and the MYLR was a dealer demo, I did not check the milage but I think the Vin was in the 49 range if I remember correctly, same wheels but did not look at tires.

So a brand new car vs one that has been driven hard on test drives? Where the suspension has been broken in and will likely feel less stiff?

 

[GreenCoffee]

They would introduce a 500 mile Model X long before Model Y. Same reason Model S has longer range than Model 3. Much higher margins on X/S.


Tesla only warranties the battery below 70%. 269 is 81% of 330 so the battery can fall below 269 miles and Tesla would consider this "normal" for 8 years or 120,000 miles. As far as the rest of your 4680 points, yes, we are in agreement there and have been for a while. The other factor is there are other vehicles that will be more profitable for Tesla to use 4680 like Cybertruck and Semi so while they are ramping production, supply will not go to 4680 for a while. There is no current range for a 2170 CT so the 4680 CT doesnt havent expectations so it will likely be less than a 2170 CT would be but with nothing to actually compare to, people can't complain about it being less. Maybe they will do they max range Tri Motor as 2170 and 4680 for the rest, but we won't know until they actually release final specs and start production.


So a brand new car vs one that has been driven hard on test drives? Where the suspension has been broken in and will likely feel less stiff?

It was more than the suspension but I get your point, it was not a fair comparison. Some people will eventually come along with a scientific approach that will address the differences between these two builds using new vehicles and my best guess is that they find what I experienced, I may be wrong but as more are delivered and compared we will see.

 

[m888x]

MYAWD = 4680
MYLR = 2170

@GreenCoffee Austin is also building MYLR? Does the Austin factory ship both models with new/same suspension? Or is it possible the Austin LR's have the old horrible suspension?

 

[GreenCoffee]

MYAWD = 4680
MYLR = 2170

@GreenCoffee Austin is also building MYLR? Does the Austin factory ship both models with new/same suspension? Or is it possible the Austin LR's have the old horrible suspension?

My understanding is all new Y's have the new suspension

 

[tangible1]

MYAWD = 4680
MYLR = 2170

@GreenCoffee Austin is also building MYLR? Does the Austin factory ship both models with new/same suspension? Or is it possible the Austin LR's have the old horrible suspension?

yes, Austin builds BOTH the MYLR and the MY-AWD.
the vast majority of production is the MYLR, and it does NOT use the front magacast or the 4680 batteries in a structural battery pack.

 

[EVer Hopeful]

Wait - I thought they were ALL AWD - or at least Dual Motor

I thought they made the Performance model and then the "other" one which was both "Long Range" AND "AWD"?


...for a while they made a Standard Range Y, but that didn't last long - they probably had some smaller batteries they wanted to get rid of

 

[E90alex]

Wait - I thought they were ALL AWD - or at least Dual Motor

I thought they made the Performance model and then the "other" one which was both "Long Range" AND "AWD"?


...for a while they made a Standard Range Y, but that didn't last long - they probably had some smaller batteries they wanted to get rid of

They are all AWD in US but Tesla calls the “standard range” model in the US “Model Y AWD”

 

[Midpack]

Wait - I thought they were ALL AWD - or at least Dual Motor

I thought they made the Performance model and then the "other" one which was both "Long Range" AND "AWD"?


...for a while they made a Standard Range Y, but that didn't last long - they probably had some smaller batteries they wanted to get rid of

They haven't made the MYSR for quite a while, but they are making a limited but steady stream of 269 mile range MYAWD's with a 4680 structural pack with front and rear megacastings (from Austin?). And of course the MYLR and MYP, both 2170 batteries and no front megacasting so far.

I don't think they had "smaller batteries to get rid of" - they have limited 4680 production capacity, but they want to get 4680s and front castings out in the wild to guinea pig some buyers (and correct issues if any) before going wide 4680 structural packs etc. They can use smaller battery packs on M3RWD.

 

[tangible1]

Wait - I thought they were ALL AWD - or at least Dual Motor

I thought they made the Performance model and then the "other" one which was both "Long Range" AND "AWD"?


...for a while they made a Standard Range Y, but that didn't last long - they probably had some smaller batteries they wanted to get rid of

correct, the MYP is also made at Austin. very low volume compared to LR.
also correct, all current MY in North America are Dual Motor (ie, awd).

the 'standard range' MY was very short-lived, only ever made at Fremont in N.A., ended long before the MY-AWD was introduced, and seems to have died around the time Tesla decided to get into the battery-making business. which, as is now apparent, is not going as originally planned. a bit behind schedule and harder than it seemed, but it remains important to cost reduction goals.

I think Tesla hoped to consolidate the MY around the 4680 battery, and build battery packs of various energy densities to flesh out the model variations.
unlikely soon, as 2170 performance improves and costs decline.

 

[GreenCoffee]

correct, the MYP is also made at Austin. very low volume compared to LR.
also correct, all current MY in North America are Dual Motor (ie, awd).

the 'standard range' MY was very short-lived, only ever made at Fremont in N.A., ended long before the MY-AWD was introduced, and seems to have died around the time Tesla decided to get into the battery-making business. which, as is now apparent, is not going as originally planned. a bit behind schedule and harder than it seemed, but it remains important to cost reduction goals.

I think Tesla hoped to consolidate the MY around the 4680 battery, and build battery packs of various energy densities to flesh out the model variations.
unlikely soon, as 2170 performance improves and costs decline.

The last article I had read suggested that they were saving approx. $3,600 per pack on the 4680 vs. 2170, of course i'm sure these were guesses and the accuracy is suspect for sure, I did not see anything about the expected cost savings of the front casting but depending on the savings there then it appears the MYAWD is more profitable.


With any success obtained in the dry electrode process the costs can only go down, I believe they chose the larger format 4680 because they knew from experience it was going to be a more cost effective format, just because it is not optimized at this point and on par with the 2170 there is no reason to think that the 4680 battery will not eventually be up to the task of replacing the 2170.

 

[tangible1]

The last article I had read suggested that they were saving approx. $3,600 per pack on the 4680 vs. 2170, of course i'm sure these were guesses and the accuracy is suspect for sure, I did not see anything about the expected cost savings of the front casting but depending on the savings there then it appears the MYAWD is more profitable.


With any success obtained in the dry electrode process the costs can only go down, I believe they chose the larger format 4680 because they knew from experience it was going to be a more cost effective format, just because it is not optimized at this point and on par with the 2170 there is no reason to think that the 4680 battery will not eventually be up to the task of replacing the 2170.

to be sure, the 4680 CAN eventually save Tesla money.
but not soon. no one outside Tesla knows their true costs, and breakeven is distant.
the costs associated with the engr development and facility build-out are quite large, so 'savings' are an illusion for now.

and the 2170 is not a static entity - it's performance has improved over time, and it's costs lowered due to scale.
cost reductions going forward are going to be difficult, given that WW demand has become obvious.

note also that the MS and MX did NOT change battery types with their refresh. I suspect the MY will also stay 2170 until any design refresh; 4680 will go to CT and SEMI.

recall that the relationship between Panasonic and Tesla has been a bumpy one, especially when Pana refused to lower prices and Tesla then decided to pursue the 4680.
for now, they're buddies again, and Pana has agreed to make 4680s - particularly since Tesla has discovered the real world - it's NOT "just batteries - how hard could it be".
Tesla battery demand is huge and growing, resources and supply are key competitive advantages, and the Legacy boys are YEARS behind that curve.
Pana can reap $$$ right now, as Tesla is the gorilla customer in the marketplace, now and for the foreseeable future.
no one is going to touch Tesla volume for quite a while - regardless of the internet hype and marketing fluff from the Legacy boys and their mouthpieces.

 

[GreenCoffee]

I think the refresh of the 3 and Y that is supposed to be coming soon, ? , will be the structural pack with 4680's, Gigacastings front and rear, 48v architecture, more? it will be interesting to see the next model and the optimization they use to bring costs down for both labor and materials.

 

[tangible1]

I think the refresh of the 3 and Y that is supposed to be coming soon, ? , will be the structural pack with 4680's, Gigacastings front and rear, 48v architecture, more? it will be interesting to see the next model and the optimization they use to bring costs down for both labor and materials.

M3 refresh is imminent.

MY refresh might be next year, maybe.
remember, they've got the MY-AWD just introduced....
they may yet do a MY-SR version for N.A. for the price point - using reduced pack of 2170 batteries to keep the tax advantage (all the LFP are Chinese, and M3 Sr suffers for it).

 

[GreenCoffee]

M3 refresh is imminent.

MY refresh might be next year, maybe.
remember, they've got the MY-AWD just introduced....
they may yet do a MY-SR version for N.A. for the price point - using reduced pack of 2170 batteries to keep the tax advantage (all the LFP are Chinese, and M3 Sr suffers for it).

They could based on the architecture of the MYAWD refresh the body, change to 48V wiring, improve the wh/kg of the existing 4680 while adding another Parallel row and possibly have a range topping new Y without a complete retooling, I thought I heard that the 3 and the Y were going to be refreshed at the same time?

 

[bluenycom]

correct, the MYP is also made at Austin. very low volume compared to LR.
also correct, all current MY in North America are Dual Motor (ie, awd).

I don't think MYP are built at Austin at this time. I am sure they can but the last I heard, both LR7 and P are only built at Fremont. It makes sense to built "low" production vehicle at one site to keep cost down. Same reason the MX and MS are only built in Fremont. It makes more sense to duplicate works/supply chains with high volume vehicles at multiple sites. Tesla is famous for cost cutting measures.

 

[tangible1]

I don't think MYP are built at Austin at this time. I am sure they can but the last I heard, both LR7 and P are only built at Fremont. It makes sense to built "low" production vehicle at one site to keep cost down. Same reason the MX and MS are only built in Fremont. It makes more sense to duplicate works/supply chains with high volume vehicles at multiple sites. Tesla is famous for cost cutting measures.

there is video evidence of MYP production at Austin.
Visit Joe Tegtmeyer's site

regardless, MYP is a very small percentage of MY production, as much due to tax credit policy as anything.
but at the time delivery waits were 9 months, the MYP was popular because you could GET it.

 

[tangible1]

They could based on the architecture of the MYAWD refresh the body, change to 48V wiring, improve the wh/kg of the existing 4680 while adding another Parallel row and possibly have a range topping new Y without a complete retooling, I thought I heard that the 3 and the Y were going to be refreshed at the same time?

Refresh of the M3 is due for release soon. Note the various 'spy' photos of M3s running around NoCAL with covers.

A refresh of the MY has not begun in any public sense but is likely going on behind the curtain.
While Tesla does continuous refinements, a MY refresh will be next in line, and there are many possibilities.
All will be focused first on reducing costs and improving manufacturability.
the M3 refresh, when revealed, will offer some clues. Until then it's all speculation and wishful thinking.

 

[EVer Hopeful]

I wonder if a MY refresh would keep or degrade the "70% commonality of parts" between it and the M3

 

[tangible1]

I wonder if a MY refresh would keep or degrade the "70% commonality of parts" between it and the M3

never a question. it will.

 

[TomServo]

And look what Tesla can get from their 1860 cells used in the current S and X. Bet the 2170s have a lot more capability to be unleashed. The 2170s will be Tesla's proven 'bread and butter" cells and will be around for many years.