Tesla confirms Model 3 will have less than 60kWh battery option

[Red Sage]

Yeah, but last we heard the Gigafactory cells were only going to be used in TE and the Model 3. Model S/X cells are still going to come from Panasonic in Japan. (Continue to use the 18650 cells.)

For now...

I think it is clear that in the future S/X cells will come from a Tesla Gigafactory. When that will occur, I do not know.

If I remember correctly, the Panasonic 18650 battery cells that Tesla uses in Model S and Model X were actually supplied from their Chinese factory, using materials prepared at their Japanese factory. Also, it was said long ago, prior to the now known demand for Model ≡, that the Gigafactory #001 would start pilot manufacturing of 18650 battery cells and battery packs using them for Model S and Model X in late 2016. That plan may well have changed at some point after March 31, 2016.

 

[WarpedOne]

It would help if these calculations were based on actual battery capacity and not on model names.

 

[wdolson]

Incorrect. He said that it would be enough for 1 million *cars*. That is Model S+3+X - and maybe also Y.

So you have to count in "a few" Model S+X with 75,90(?) and 100kWh packs into this.

For the time being the Model S and X will get batteries from Japan and all the automotive batteries from GF1 will be for the Model 3 or 3 and Y. There may be three pack options for the 3, say 55, 70, and 80. I would lean towards just two packs though, probably a 55 and an 80.

The early test mules aren't going to have production sized packs as there weren't enough 2170s to build production packs until very recently. They are probably producing small batches of automotive 2170s now for the test mule packs.

 

[wdolson]

If I remember correctly, the Panasonic 18650 battery cells that Tesla uses in Model S and Model X were actually supplied from their Chinese factory, using materials prepared at their Japanese factory. Also, it was said long ago, prior to the now known demand for Model ≡, that the Gigafactory #001 would start pilot manufacturing of 18650 battery cells and battery packs using them for Model S and Model X in late 2016. That plan may well have changed at some point after March 31, 2016.

I believe late last year someone at the company (probably Elon) said that the plan at that time was to continue to build Model S/X with 18650 from Asia and only build batteries for stationary storage and the Model 3 at the GF 1. The stationary storage business is something they weren't planning for when they started the GF and it's probably going to be a pretty good sized chunk of the business soon.

 

[Model 3]

For the time being the Model S and X will get batteries from Japan and all the automotive batteries from GF1 will be for the Model 3 or 3 and Y.

Correct for the time being. But from the quotes I had in this post it's become clear that Elon was talking about all 3 (or 4) models when calculating on batteries from GF-I for 2020:

So he is clearly speaking about one million cars - S+3+X - in 2020. And as @ecarfan said - what you said is "for now".

... and while I can agree that it would probably be two different battery packs, and that the smallest would be the 55, I think the biggest would be a 75, and start to lean more towards just 70. But if it gets 3 different batteries I agree that it would probably be 55, 70 and 80.

The stationary storage business is something they weren't planning for when they started the GF

Yes it was. From day one of the planning for GF-I. What they now seems to have realized - that they had not by that time - how big that part of the business would be.
From this PDF you can see that they planned to produce 35GWh of battery cells and 50GWh of battery packs for ~500k cars. At the last Q&A Elon talked about 70GWh for ~1 million cars in 2020. (Double # of cars, and double 35 to 70). The last 15GWh in the original plan was planned to be imported from Asia and/or for stationary storage. ( Eg: 15GWh could be imported and put into cars, and 15GWh could be produced at GF-I and installed in stationary storage).

 

[stopcrazypp]

I think all of you are reading way too much into the quote. Looking the direct quote and how big a range he gave (60-70 kWh), it just seems like a offhand estimate, not something he would have done a lot of math on.

 

[JeffK]

As far as the 18650s for S/X Tesla signed a contract with Panasonic in 2013 for 2 billion cells from 2014 - 2017. It's likely they might not even reach that number into 2018 though. After this I'm sure they'll switch as it's more cost effective.

 

[JCLwek]

If their focus is now on manufacturing as quick as possible, then maybe we should look at the powerwall 2 and how they might use that same battery structure in the Model 3. They're both being manufactured in the same place, so wouldn't it make sense that they share some design similarities.
Powerwall 2 = 13.5 kWh
Multiple 13.5 by 4 = 54 kWh
That sounds right around where the base Model 3 might be.
13.5 x 6 = 78 kWh high end capacity?

 

[JeffK]

If their focus is now on manufacturing as quick as possible, then maybe we should look at the powerwall 2 and how they might use that same battery structure in the Model 3. They're both being manufactured in the same place, so wouldn't it make sense that they share some design similarities.
Powerwall 2 = 13.5 kWh
Multiple 13.5 by 4 = 54 kWh
That sounds right around where the base Model 3 might be.
13.5 x 6 = 78 kWh high end capacity?

Powerwall 2 and Model 3 will both use '2170' cells but with different battery chemistry. Model 3 contains 8 battery modules (from the reveal images)

 

[wdolson]

The capacities of the Model S/X modules range from 4.4KWh to 6.4 KWh. I would expect the Model 3 modules to be somewhere in that range. I expect the Powerwall 2 probably has 2 modules, though with a different chemistry, the capacity of the individual cells and hence the modules would likely be different from the car modules. Though the module designs could be identical just with different chemistry cells.

If the Powerwall modules and the car modules do happen to have the same capacity, 8 modules would give you 54 KWh, which Tesla would likely round up to 55 KWh. It's possible they might get 10 modules into the Model 3 larger pack version, which would be 67.5 KWh which they might call a 70 KWh pack. They may also be making a denser packed module and a lighter packed module like they did for the original 60 and 85 KWh packs.

The S/X platform has 14 or 16 modules. The current modules are 5.36 KWh for the 75 and 90 and 6.4 KWh for the 100KWh pack. They currently don't make a 14 module pack using the new layout for the 100 KWh pack, but if they did, they could make a "90" KWh pack with 14 modules that has 2 KWh more energy than the current 90 KWh pack (which is really closer to 85 KWh and the original 85 pack was really around 81 KWh).

With only 8 modules shown on the layout on the reveal, I expect the capacity of each Model 3 modules to be a little bigger than the Model S/X. The Model 3 is 90% the size of the Model S overall. The wheelbase is 3.5 inches shorter and the width is 3 inches less. The square area between the wheels on the Model S/X is 9000 sq inches and the Model 3 is 8380 sq inches. That's only 7% less. If the cells are oriented the same way, the Model 3 can definitely have more capacity per module. It is possible the cells will lay flat though. 2170s lying on their side and stacked 3 layers is 63mm, just 2mm less than the length of the 18650. The length of the 2170 is 3.9X the diameter of the 18650, so 3X 2170s oriented on their side instead of upright would take up just about the same space as 4X 18650s.

Overall I think 3 layers of 2170s is a more efficient layout than the upright 18650s. If they wanted a little more headroom, they could gain a little less than an inch by only having 2 layers deep instead of three.

Ultimately we are left guessing without enough data right now.

 

[scaesare]

It would help if these calculations were based on actual battery capacity and not on model names.

I tend to agree. I've posted several times on the chemistry being the real differentiator in overall energy density... the format is much more of a logistical consideration.

For the moment, the 2170 is understood to have a new more energy-dense chemistry than the current 18650 cells, so this "shorthand" of referring to the different cell types by model # generally makes the point.

However, incorporating the next-gen cell chemistry in the 18650 format should be a snap. Once the chemistry has been proven out, rolling it in to the cell casing is the easy part. They've already upgraded 18650 chemistry once (partial silicon anode)

Thus, Tesla can upgrade capability for the existing S/X platforms without having to redesign packs to use different cell sizes. It also means that if they have any obligations to Panasonic for 18650 purchase, they can honor those while also moving the technology forward.

I'm sure at some point S & X will switch over to 2170's... but until then I do agree that referring to chemistry might start making sense here:

AUTOMOTIVE

• Gen1: Original LCO li-ion cells used in Roadster (18650 only)
• Gen1.5: Upgraded li-ion cells (chemistry?) for Roadster pack upgrades offered in 2014 (18650 only)
• Gen2: NCA li-ion cells used in S&X 2012-2014 (18650 only)
• Gen3: NCA li-ion w/ silicon anode cells used in S&X 2014-current (18650 only)
• Gen4: New li-ion cells (chemistry?) planned for initial use in Model 3 (2170 initially)

STATIONARY

• Gen1: Original NMC li-ion cells used in PowerWall/PowerPack v1 (18650 only)
• Gen2: NMC(?) li-ion cells used in Powerwall/PowerPack v2 (2170 only)

Corrections for errors/ommisions appreciated.

 

[0ptions]

kWh is kWh. Better technology may give you more kWh per volume and/or longer re-charge longevity or something, but 50kWh is still 50kWh. The rest of your analysis I agree with more or less, though I lean toward 50kWh pack as the base configuration myself.

Sorry, but it's not that black and white. Power could be released as heat instead of movement. Efficiency is a major component of electric vehicles and Tesla has been working on this for years. Just because a battery holds a certain capacity of current, doesn't mean it can use it effectively.

 

[JeffK]

Sorry, but it's not that black and white. Power could be released as heat instead of movement. Efficiency is a major component of electric vehicles and Tesla has been working on this for years. Just because a battery holds a certain capacity of current, doesn't mean it can use it effectively.

I think the comment in context was as it relates to "old battery technology" kWh is kWh. This is a measure of capacity and not power.

The argument that you'd only need 50kWh seems a little hopeful. Teslas are not the most efficient electric cars. The lighter weight hyundai ioniq would barely get 200-221 mi with 50 kWh and that's only if it didn't add any weight to the car. This also goes against Elon's quote that says most people want 20% more than 200 mi of range.

One might argue that the 215 mi stated minimum at launch also goes against his quote. Look at the Bolt, they made Elon's quote into practically a reality (238 mi). I fully expect Tesla to do the same.

 

[Booga]

I think the comment in context was as it relates to "old battery technology" kWh is kWh. This is a measure of capacity and not power.

The argument that you'd only need 50kWh seems a little hopeful. Teslas are not the most efficient electric cars. The lighter weight hyundai ioniq would barely get 200-221 mi with 50 kWh and that's only if it didn't add any weight to the car. This also goes against Elon's quote that says most people want 20% more than 200 mi of range.

One might argue that the 215 mi stated minimum at launch also goes against his quote. Look at the Bolt, they made Elon's quote into practically a reality (238 mi). I fully expect Tesla to do the same.

If they advertised it as being even more, it would have harmed S and X sales at least a little bit. Their larger size is undoubtedly going to impact range. I bet their is a bump across the board of battery packs this year before option prices for the 3 are announced.

 

[JeffK]

If they advertised it as being even more, it would have harmed S and X sales at least a little bit. Their larger size is undoubtedly going to impact range. I bet their is a bump across the board of battery packs this year before option prices for the 3 are announced.

Not if they still have 18650 cells to purchase as part of their contract with Panasonic to order 2 billion of them. (unless they renegotiated... but I haven't heard that)

 

[Booga]

Not if they still have 18650 cells to purchase as part of their contract with Panasonic to order 2 billion of them. (unless they renegotiated... but I haven't heard that)

Well they're already including more with the S60. A bump could simply mean no more 60 and the new lineup is 75, 85/90, 100. Doesn't have to be any more drastic.

 

[JeffK]

Well they're already including more with the S60. A bump could simply mean no more 60 and the new lineup is 75, 85/90, 100. Doesn't have to be any more drastic.

I could see the 60 moving up to whatever would provide the same range as the base Model 3, especially if they decide to give the Model 3 a range near or exceeding the Bolt.

 

[lmaccaro]

I tend to agree. I've posted several times on the chemistry being the real differentiator in overall energy density... the format is much more of a logistical consideration.

For the moment, the 2170 is understood to have a new more energy-dense chemistry than the current 18650 cells, so this "shorthand" of referring to the different cell types by model # generally makes the point.

However, incorporating the next-gen cell chemistry in the 18650 format should be a snap. Once the chemistry has been proven out, rolling it in to the cell casing is the easy part. They've already upgraded 18650 chemistry once (partial silicon anode)

Thus, Tesla can upgrade capability for the existing S/X platforms without having to redesign packs to use different cell sizes. It also means that if they have any obligations to Panasonic for 18650 purchase, they can honor those while also moving the technology forward.

I'm sure at some point S & X will switch over to 2170's... but until then I do agree that referring to chemistry might start making sense here:

AUTOMOTIVE

• Gen1: Original LCO li-ion cells used in Roadster (18650 only)
• Gen1.5: Upgraded li-ion cells (chemistry?) for Roadster pack upgrades offered in 2014 (18650 only)
• Gen2: NCA li-ion cells used in S&X 2012-2014 (18650 only)
• Gen3: NCA li-ion w/ silicon anode cells used in S&X 2014-current (18650 only)
• Gen4: New li-ion cells (chemistry?) planned for initial use in Model 3 (2170 initially)

STATIONARY

• Gen1: Original NMC li-ion cells used in PowerWall/PowerPack v1 (18650 only)
• Gen2: NMC(?) li-ion cells used in Powerwall/PowerPack v2 (2170 only)

Corrections for errors/ommisions appreciated.

How do you know if your car has Gen2 or Gen3 battery?

What real world difference does the silicon anode make?

 

[wdolson]

How do you know if your car has Gen2 or Gen3 battery?

What real world difference does the silicon anode make?

The 75, 90 and 100 packs are Gen 3. The original 60 and 85 are Gen 2. I think the 70 pack was Gen 3 too. The original small pack had fewer cells per module than the large pack and I believe the 70 was the same cell count as the 60 pack, but with the new chemistry.

Silicon can absorb more li-ions than just graphite, so the battery can hold a bigger charge. Silicon is a tricky material in li-ion batteries though. The silicon expands when it absorbs lithium ions and the constant expanding and contracting can destroy a battery in a short amount of time. Tesla and Panasonic figured out how to get a cell to work with just a small amount of silicon which boosts the energy density of the cell a little bit. The increase in energy density is about 5% over the Gen 2 cells.

 

[scaesare]

@wdolson is spot on.

I'm not sure what pack-model designations (as seen on the label visible through the wheel-well) represent the GEN3 packs, but that would be nice to know.

I'd also be interested in absolute confirmation that all current packs now use the GEN3 cell chemistry. All indications are that's the case, but would be good to have some confirmation of that...