Tesla BEV Competition Developments

[RobStark]

Has anyone seen any detail around the expected cost/performance of the Ultium cells? It's quite tricky to tell if these cells are legit - or at least "good enough" even if they are more expensive or poorer performing than Tesla cells.

GM Reveals New Ultium Batteries and a Flexible Global Platform to Rapidly Grow its EV Portfolio


As far as cost goes all they have said is it will be below $100/kWh. Or the point where electric powertrains match cost of equivalent combustion powertrains.

GM said Ultium equipped cars will be profitable from day 1.

They gave some pack performance specs but not cell performance specs that I know of.

 

[Discoducky]

View attachment 638234
GM Reveals New Ultium Batteries and a Flexible Global Platform to Rapidly Grow its EV Portfolio


As far as cost goes all they have said is it will be below $100/kWh. Or the point where electric powertrains match cost of equivalent combustion powertrains.

GM said Ultium equipped cars will be profitable from day 1.

They gave some pack performance specs but not cell performance specs that I know of.

I fear/worry that they will do the same thing they've done in the past, which is make something that has lower quality than is acceptable in the marketplace that Tesla competes in.

Hope I'm wrong, but without a spin-off or some huge shake up in management I don't see how that will be attainable.

 

[JRP3]

Being able to stack large format pouch cells horizontally or vertically is not unique in the least. Take a look at the Nissan LEAF pack from 10 years ago for example. More marketing BS from GM.

 

[MP3Mike]

As far as cost goes all they have said is it will be below $100/kWh.

But notice the language, "GM's joint venture with LG Chem will drive the drive battery cell costs below $100/kWh."

1. They are talking cell level not pack level. They need to get pack level costs below $100/kWh.
2. It "will" drive the costs that low. But when? At start of production? Probably not.

 

[RobStark]

I fear/worry that they will do the same thing they've done in the past, which is make something that has lower quality than is acceptable in the marketplace that Tesla competes in.

Hope I'm wrong, but without a spin-off or some huge shake up in management I don't see how that will be attainable.

They haven't invested in a 30 GWh factory in the past nor vehicle assembly factory specifically designed to manufacture 400k BEVs per year.

 

[RobStark]

But notice the language, "GM's joint venture with LG Chem will drive the drive battery cell costs below $100/kWh."

1. They are talking cell level not pack level. They need to get pack level costs below $100/kWh.
2. It "will" drive the costs that low. But when? At start of production? Probably not.

Nobody gives super specific cost curves.

That is a competitive trade secret.

Since the cheapest ultium car will be ~$59k at the start, GM projects ultium BEVs will be profitable from day one.

 

[ammulder]

The odd thing to me is how they claim the pack will be 50-200 kWh and will enable estimated ranges of 400 miles or more.

Am I right that the speculation is that the refreshed Model S will get 400+ miles of range from a 90 kWh pack?

I know that GM probably means to put the 200 kWh pack in trucks/large SUVs, but even so, their claim doesn't look that impressive next to the Model S efficiency.

As far as the cells go, I can't see GM and LG Chem committing to this giant factory build if it's worse than just buying cells on the open market. They must believe they can get either better cells for a similar cost, or equivalent cells cheaper. You know, once production is scaled and all that.

 

[Discoducky]

They haven't invested in a 30 GWh factory in the past nor vehicle assembly factory specifically designed to manufacture 400k BEVs per year.

Ok, what's your prediction for GM BEV deliveries world wide next year?

 

[petit_bateau]

Ok, what's your prediction for GM BEV deliveries world wide next year?

Excluding anything in China that is <50% GM-owned, I'd say less than 50,000 BEVs from GM in 2021. Simply on the basis that they are barely a global rounding error in 2020.

 

[Discoducky]

Excluding anything in China that is <50% GM-owned, I'd say less than 50,000 BEVs from GM in 2021. Simply on the basis that they are barely a global rounding error in 2020.

For 2021 I hope they deliver, to customers, not dealerships, not employees, that many cars. For 2022, I hope Ultium makes them competitive on specs and in 2023 competitive in their earnings. I just don't see how with the engineering details I've seen so far. If others have, please share.

 

[wdolson]

The odd thing to me is how they claim the pack will be 50-200 kWh and will enable estimated ranges of 400 miles or more.

Am I right that the speculation is that the refreshed Model S will get 400+ miles of range from a 90 kWh pack?

I know that GM probably means to put the 200 kWh pack in trucks/large SUVs, but even so, their claim doesn't look that impressive next to the Model S efficiency.

As far as the cells go, I can't see GM and LG Chem committing to this giant factory build if it's worse than just buying cells on the open market. They must believe they can get either better cells for a similar cost, or equivalent cells cheaper. You know, once production is scaled and all that.

Should still be 100 KWh on the S/X.

 

[RobStark]

Ok, what's your prediction for GM BEV deliveries world wide next year?

I believe they will be production constrained not demand constrained.

Their order book is filled for Hummer EV and they are not yet taking reservations for Cadillac Lyriq.

How many can they produce? I have no idea because they have not given guidance.

Plus, the Ultium vehicles for the Chinese market will almost certainly be produced in China.

Edit. I think the Ultium vehicles will be production constrained. The Bolt/Bolt EUV demand will be highly contingent on getting the Fed Tax Credit back.

 

[RobStark]

 

[ammulder]

Should still be 100 KWh on the S/X.

That doesn't explain the weight loss or the range going down on the X.

But, of course, it's still speculation.

 

[SmartElectric]

That doesn't explain the weight loss or the range going down on the X.
But, of course, it's still speculation.

Re: reducing weight in the Model S/X refresh, there are a number of possibilities irrespective of reducing kWh capacity.

1. pack structure optimization, more similar to 3/Y reducing per-module weight
2. higher energy density of Japan 18650 cells, a few percent improvement goes a long way on 7000 cells!
3. HVAC equipment no longer requires separate PTC heater for pack and cabin, along with air conditioning compressor, all-in-one now
4. speculation : MCU/computer systems packed in tighter package that may transition to Model 3/Y (some are guessing HW 3.5)
5. reduced insulation which was known to be less effective than active noise cancellation tech

#3 alone is 20 lbs, I know from the water heating cores and piping required on my old Model S, both were replaced, and I saw the pulled components, large, heavy and metal (fins, etc) dominated.

 

[Doggydogworld]

Re: reducing weight in the Model S/X refresh, there are a number of possibilities irrespective of reducing kWh capacity.

1. pack structure optimization, more similar to 3/Y reducing per-module weight
2. higher energy density of Japan 18650 cells, a few percent improvement goes a long way on 7000 cells!
3. HVAC equipment no longer requires separate PTC heater for pack and cabin, along with air conditioning compressor, all-in-one now
4. speculation : MCU/computer systems packed in tighter package that may transition to Model 3/Y (some are guessing HW 3.5)
5. reduced insulation which was known to be less effective than active noise cancellation tech

#3 alone is 20 lbs, I know from the water heating cores and piping required on my old Model S, both were replaced, and I saw the pulled components, large, heavy and metal (fins, etc) dominated.

Mostly #1, I'd guess. S/X cells weigh ~400 kg, so 5% better density buys you 20 kg. Maybe cut cell count from 8256 to 7872 while keeping kWh the same. The other stuff sounds small. Do we know for sure they eliminated resistance heat? I could see gains in motor and power electronics as well as structural stuff they've learned to do better.

 

[Jetpad]

Re: reducing weight in the Model S/X refresh, there are a number of possibilities irrespective of reducing kWh capacity.

1. pack structure optimization, more similar to 3/Y reducing per-module weight
2. higher energy density of Japan 18650 cells, a few percent improvement goes a long way on 7000 cells!
3. HVAC equipment no longer requires separate PTC heater for pack and cabin, along with air conditioning compressor, all-in-one now
4. speculation : MCU/computer systems packed in tighter package that may transition to Model 3/Y (some are guessing HW 3.5)
5. reduced insulation which was known to be less effective than active noise cancellation tech

#3 alone is 20 lbs, I know from the water heating cores and piping required on my old Model S, both were replaced, and I saw the pulled components, large, heavy and metal (fins, etc) dominated.

Also the switch to the lithium 12 volt battery should free up a good bit of weight.

 

[Buckminster]

Nice exterior plus fast charging:
Hyundai unveils Ioniq 5 electric car: Out-of-the-box EV loaded with attractive specs and features - Electrek

 

[WarpedOne]

Battery source?

 

[diamond.g]

Battery source?

Supposedly SK Innovation
Will The SK Innovation Ban Affect Hyundai Ioniq 5 Launch In U.S.?