SR+ LFP Battery Design

[RobDickinson]

No. Not even close to the same design. Different chemistry, different battery design (pouch vs. 2170 design), different manufacturer.

The CATL LFP pack cars have pouch cells not 2170's

The chemistry is well different though and they are much more stable and safer

 

[stopcrazypp]

The CATL LFP pack cars have pouch cells not 2170's

The chemistry is well different though and they are much more stable and safer

Nitpick but an important one given the recent battery events with LG Chem pouch cells. The CATL LFP packs use prismatic cells not pouch cells.

 

[dmurphy]

All hogwash.

Tesla's LFP batteries are from CATL, not LG. They are prismatic, but not the same design as LG. Not even close.

The Bolt batteries have NMC cathodes - nickel/magnesium/cobalt.
The LFP batteries have iron cathodes.

Wholly different ends of the spectrum as far as composition is concerned.

Have no concerns. None at all.

@cdswm3 - I saw your disagree on this post. Is there something I misstated? Genuinely curious; if I have invalid info I’d be happy to be corrected. Thanks!

 

[ThomasD]

I dont know, but someone will probably try. If I were into this sort of thing (I am not) I would look to see if there was precedent for someone suing an ICE manufacturer for an ICE vehicle not being able to achieve EPA rated numbers under any circumstances.

If tesla provided a monroney that says 262 but their EPA filing for the car provided shows the delivered vehicle "can never" reach that, even under EPA testing..... shrug.

This is one of those things where Tesla's ineptitude for details really hurts them, because the monroney for these vehicles should state the EPA estimate for the battery thats in the vehicle (so these should not say 262 if thats not what testing shows).

User @Blackbart said "Everyone says the sticker says 262...." It doesnt matter what "everyone says" it matters what was on @Blackbart 's specific monroney sticker. If they didnt get one (because tesla doesnt give them out when they are supposed to), they should get one and see what it says. "everyone says the sticker says" isnt relevant.

FCA, Cummins Being Sued Over Inflated Fuel Economy Numbers​

Share
Tweet
Subscribe
By Stephen Elmer Jul 04, 2017


A new class-action lawsuit has been filed against Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) and Cummins over issues with certain 2013-2017 RAM 2500 and 3500 heavy duty pickups.
The lawsuit, filed by Hagens Berman, claims that a defect in the engine can lead to lower gas mileage, higher emissions outputs and expensive repairs.
In all those trucks fitted with a 6.7-liter Cummins diesel engine, the suit claims that the selective catalytic converter (SCR) system breaks down, allowing the filter to get clogged, resulting in the need for more fuel to be burned. In an attempted fix, FCA dealers have been re-flashing the computers on these trucks, but the suit claims that this also prompts the truck to burn more fuel to keep the filter clean.
Advertisement

 

[Scottish mod3]

Sr+ model 3, LFP battery MIC, software version 2021.32.21. My range estimate on a full charge... I've only clocked 400 miles so far...

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

I'm coming from a Chevy Bolt and leaving for obvious reasons. On the Bolt forums, many of us are moving over to Model 3s. Whenever someone posts they are moving to a model 3 LFP, people are commenting that we will have the same issues as the Bolt. They claim the LFP is the same pouch design (and possibly made by LG?) as the Bolt.

Is any of this true or is it all hogwash? I read the NCA uses cylindrical battery cell design, but does anyone know about the LFP? Is what these people on the forums saying true at all? They just keep pushing it that anyone buying an LFP will have the same risks as the Bolt, but at double the price (teeeheee!!).

Any chemistry can use any form factor.

LFP != LNMC
LFP is well-known for being more durable and more stable, having a high cycle life and using cheaper materials. It hadn't been used much for cars outside of China because:
(1) lower energy density.
(2) patents, which were free for Chinese products. Those patents expire in 2022, I believe.

What manufacturers like CATL are doing is to modify the architecture to allow them to eliminate the overhead of the modules, which allows pack density to increase. Combine that with improved drivetrain efficiency and now you can have a very functional vehicle.

Over the next few years, I expect large growth in the use of LFP for light vehicles. It helps that vehicles are getting larger. It might be contributing to the increased vehicle sizes we're seeing.

In any case, the problems with the Bolt and Kona weren't really the result of the chemistry or cell form factor, they were the result of a combination of manufacturing defects and maybe battery management design errors.