Maybe. There was talk of allowing 85'ers to upgrade to 90 at a price of $22500 but I am not aware of anyone actually having done so? Those who think it would cost a mere $5k or less are kidding themselves I fear.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Maybe. There was talk of allowing 85'ers to upgrade to 90 at a price of $22500 but I am not aware of anyone actually having done so? Those who think it would cost a mere $5k or less are kidding themselves I fear.
Today you have a 90kWh pack with ~7000 cells and you are suggesting 100kWh with ~5600 cells, which is a ~39% increase in density. Unless Elon has unicorns in the GF, don't see that happening in 18 months
Silicone anode is supposed to increase capacity by 30% when fully utilized.
Tick to 90kWh used a tiny bit of silicone (5%) in anode, just to feel the waters and see how it behaves in reality.
Now they are getting more data, they feel confident to use a bit more.
If they jumped right into it, you would get 110kWh capacity overnight from same 7104 cells and 85kWh from 5600 cells.
Silicone comes with its own can of worms though, cycling degradation being one of the nastiest.
Tick to 90kWh used a tiny bit of silicone (5%) in anode, just to feel the waters and see how it behaves in reality.
Now they are getting more data, they feel confident to use a bit more.
If they jumped right into it, you would get 110kWh capacity overnight from same 7104 cells and 85kWh from 5600 cells.
Silicone comes with its own can of worms though, cycling degradation being one of the nastiest.
Leprechauns riding unicorns frolicking over rainbows. And who says the battery pack has to be 20% smalller?
Just because the firmware has a placeholder for a 100KWh model doesn't mean it's going to happen anytime soon. I don't expect any battery pack upgrades until the Gigafactory is up and producing batteries for S and Xs. Tesla has been very quiet about the GF lately. Sometime last year they were expecting production to begin around Q3 of this year.
The software I'm developing right now has three unused product names buried in the code only I know about. They are place holders for future products that may come along at some point. It was easier to create a bunch at once than adding them one at a time.
My guess is the programmer who was in charge of that part of the code wanted to make some place holder models and figured P100D and 100D were pretty likely to happen eventually. They may have been in there for a couple of years, we don't know when those first went into the code.
The software I'm developing right now has three unused product names buried in the code only I know about. They are place holders for future products that may come along at some point. It was easier to create a bunch at once than adding them one at a time.
My guess is the programmer who was in charge of that part of the code wanted to make some place holder models and figured P100D and 100D were pretty likely to happen eventually. They may have been in there for a couple of years, we don't know when those first went into the code.
Krugerrand
Meow
Tesla has always maintained the M3 will be ~20% smaller than the M3. Recently JB Straubel specifically mentioned the Audi A4 as comparable size. The footprint (W X L) of the A4 is about 80% of the footprint of the MS, so I think is a safe bet that that M3 pack will be a smaller form factor.
Taking the S/X pack from 90kWh to 100kWh is more in line with the 5%/year comment Musk made last summer when they rolled out the 90 kWh pack and the Ludicrous upgrade.
Makes some sense for a pure code scenario, but no need to add the actual graphics of the new logo/badge if all you need is placeholders.... Wk also hintes to other non-disclosed parts
If you missed it he actually showed the graphics.... Not only references to code-snippets.
EcoHeliGuy
Member
That's not going to happen. If anyone got a free upgrade it would be on the Founders cars. Sigs are limited production, nothing more.
The only way to get a non D now is in a 70kwh, both of which have a pretty good chance of discontinuation after the Model 3 arrives and the Model S is no longer an entry model.
Doesn't mean that it will be stable or robust enough to for production let alone for a car.
Longevity and robustness are primary traits in manufacturing.
Panasonic and Tesla are partners on the battery chemistry. There is no reason new tech wouldn't be available when needed, and I suspect the Gigafactory won't be covering 100% production for awhile.
Tesla has always been fairly quite about the factory. "News" really has come from trespassers.
Elon has been good in the past about articulating battery upgrades and availability. the 90KWh packs were announced a good bit before we could configure with them on the S. I have no doubt that we'll see 100KWh and higher as the batteries and pack design improve. Don't plan on these packs magically appearing anytime real soon. I would guess at some point next year. After Model X production has fulfilled primary demand, the Gigafactory is up and running and other conditions are right.
To upgrade a Model S from 85KWh to 90KWh is do-able, and I know someone who got a quote to do the full upgrade of P85D to P90DL. Expensive for sure, but there is also value in their 85KWh pack that they could sell on the open market or which Tesla would pay them a reasonable core charge to take it back. Ultimately this person decided it was not worth it to them. I can't remember exact dollar figures, but I think the net cost after all the dust settled was in the realm of $12~$15K, and keep in mind that $5K of that was the special price offered for the Ludicrous upgrade.
I would say that if the Model X just doesn't quite meet your range needs and you just need another 11% on that battery to justify buying, you may want to wait. Bigger battery packs are always around the corner. For me, I'd like the X to have more range, but it's also great the way it is. For me I think the magical MX range would be around 400 miles, or what I can get with my nearly identical-sized Ford Explorer in ideal. To me that means while keeping the battery pack at the same weight, it needs a 144KWh pack. You know what, I'm going to enjoy my X when I get it here in the coming weeks and perhaps that bigger battery and 400mile+ range will be a reality in 4 to 6 years when I'm ready to get a new X or whatever.
To upgrade a Model S from 85KWh to 90KWh is do-able, and I know someone who got a quote to do the full upgrade of P85D to P90DL. Expensive for sure, but there is also value in their 85KWh pack that they could sell on the open market or which Tesla would pay them a reasonable core charge to take it back. Ultimately this person decided it was not worth it to them. I can't remember exact dollar figures, but I think the net cost after all the dust settled was in the realm of $12~$15K, and keep in mind that $5K of that was the special price offered for the Ludicrous upgrade.
I would say that if the Model X just doesn't quite meet your range needs and you just need another 11% on that battery to justify buying, you may want to wait. Bigger battery packs are always around the corner. For me, I'd like the X to have more range, but it's also great the way it is. For me I think the magical MX range would be around 400 miles, or what I can get with my nearly identical-sized Ford Explorer in ideal. To me that means while keeping the battery pack at the same weight, it needs a 144KWh pack. You know what, I'm going to enjoy my X when I get it here in the coming weeks and perhaps that bigger battery and 400mile+ range will be a reality in 4 to 6 years when I'm ready to get a new X or whatever.
EcoHeliGuy
Member
Of course, Tesla being Tesla, they wouldn't call it 100D and P100D, but A0D and PA0D instead. OK, probably not
On the 80% comment, I always wondered if it meant volume, or each of the length/width...
if the length and width didn't change they wouldn't need a new platform. It will more then likely be volume.
Mayhemm
Model S P85+ "Lola"
I've been told that an 85kWh->90kWh upgrade is possible, but only on dual-motor cars. Regretfully, this disqualifies my S from consideration.
Makes some sense for a pure code scenario, but no need to add the actual graphics of the new logo/badge if all you need is placeholders.... Wk also hintes to other non-disclosed parts
If you missed it he actually showed the graphics.... Not only references to code-snippets.
I missed that point in my quick read of the article. It is possible for the software to be way ahead of other things though. I've had code I wrote sit for 2 years waiting for the hardware to catch up.
- - - Updated - - -
Of course, Tesla being Tesla, they wouldn't call it 100D and P100D, but A0D and PA0D instead. OK, probably not
On the 80% comment, I always wondered if it meant volume, or each of the length/width...
It has to be total volume, if you shrink each dimension 20% you get something the size of a smart car that is so low only children would be able to fit in it. 20% less total volume gives you a car with just about the same dimensions of a BMW 3 Series, which is the size target Elon has talked about for years.
thegruf
Active Member
I saw (P)100D and thought big deal, it is coming sooner or later anyway.
I did wonder if this meant the next step is 100 instead of 95KWH.
(and just as a point of order wk released the hash, which to almost all is a meaningles code, it was other(s) who "cracked" it and made public statments as to its reference)
There was, and still is, no info about timing which would indeed be sensitive.
Not sure why Tesla would make a big deal of it in the way that they have, had they kept quiet as is their established way of managing "difficult" news, it would have been a bit of short term excitement that would have just blown over.
Guess Tesla response vs Elon's response just shows the different class of ppl involved.
Is easy to see why Elon inspires with a cool reponse like that.
Should be easy to resolve if all parties want it resolved.
Get it done folks and move on
I did wonder if this meant the next step is 100 instead of 95KWH.
(and just as a point of order wk released the hash, which to almost all is a meaningles code, it was other(s) who "cracked" it and made public statments as to its reference)
There was, and still is, no info about timing which would indeed be sensitive.
Not sure why Tesla would make a big deal of it in the way that they have, had they kept quiet as is their established way of managing "difficult" news, it would have been a bit of short term excitement that would have just blown over.
Guess Tesla response vs Elon's response just shows the different class of ppl involved.
Is easy to see why Elon inspires with a cool reponse like that.
Should be easy to resolve if all parties want it resolved.
Get it done folks and move on
Ulmo
Active Member
So: S85 is ~80,701Wh. If we assume a 100D battery is 100,000Wh, then: 100,000Wh/80,701Wh=1.239. That's an increase of 24%. You said the max is around 30%.
Now, let's look at the ratio of the S90D to the S85D battery: 288 EPA rated miles / 270 EPA rated miles = 1.067. That's an increase of 7%, which is what they did in the 90, possibly, anyway.
So, if Tesla has been doing studies on using Silicone anode, perhaps they're ready to increase the anode effectiveness to about 3.6x of what they already have.
There are a few other things I could wildly connect with no real foundation on why they have to be connected:
1. They have done some careful charger programming in the latest firmware update, that is much more careful about ramping up. Perhaps they have better profiles about how to charge their Silicone anode batteries without as much degradation. Similarly, they have been adjusting the temperatures and aggressiveness that the batteries can take regeneration from slowing down.
2. Super wild crazy ass speculation that is most likely untrue: What if all the new 90D's coming off the line in the last couple of weeks are actually 100D's with the more delicate battery chemistry, and Tesla is in a BIG hurry to send updates to those cars to not over-tax the new delicate chemistry?
I've had a boring life, so I need the fun speculation. Please don't blame me for being excessively creative.
Last edited:
This might not be that super crazy at all. At least not from some abstract enough point of view.
Battery chemistry is a complex mix of chemicals, solid materials and dimensions of different parts. They are being tweaked all the time with various degrees of changes. The amount of energy that battery can accept and output is controlled by digital systems that work according to some digital model i.e. between set of parameters.
You can try to push 100kWh into 85kWh battery. Just don't expect that battery to last for 8 years and 200k miles.
Also don't expect all 85kWh cars will see exactly the same lifetime even under exact same conditions. Tesla is in constant process of improving the battery, in some time all those improvements accumulate into big enough pile to warrant nameplate change.
satheesh.net
President | Tesla Owners Club Norway
My only concern is that the Model X is now open for design and ordering in Europe. The Sigs will be locked and confirmed on the 15th of March, but if they where to release a higher battery pack a couple of months down the road. Well, that would really suck... I would most definitely have chosen the 100kWh if the option was available.
Could we be in for a surprise at the unveiling of Model 3? Would they announce a 100kWh battery pack for the Model S and Model X so they don't risk cannibalising the sales for their top models? And would it be upgradeable for cars in production right now or soon to be? Guess we'll find out soon enough.
Personally I think I would wait for a 100kWh pack if it takes a few months extra, rather getting the 90kWh pack. Range is everything IMHO (especially if you want to use the towing a fair bit).
Could we be in for a surprise at the unveiling of Model 3? Would they announce a 100kWh battery pack for the Model S and Model X so they don't risk cannibalising the sales for their top models? And would it be upgradeable for cars in production right now or soon to be? Guess we'll find out soon enough.
Personally I think I would wait for a 100kWh pack if it takes a few months extra, rather getting the 90kWh pack. Range is everything IMHO (especially if you want to use the towing a fair bit).
Perhaps, but that's a bit different than releasing firmware for 3 years that doesn't have that particular graphic and then adding it.
It would be interesting to note if anybody has data on when [P]90D and 70D graphics were added to the firmware.
- - - Updated - - -
Math error. 100 decimal = 0x64Of course, Tesla being Tesla, they wouldn't call it 100D and P100D, but A0D and PA0D instead. OK, probably not
On the 80% comment, I always wondered if it meant volume, or each of the length/width...
Well 0x90 + 0x10 = 0xA0 :biggrin:
Back when I was writing assembly language I was good enough with hex to do multiplication and division in it. It's not quite as easy these days. I just don't have to think in hex 8 hours a day anymore.
As they say, there are 10 types of people in this world, those who know binary and those who don't...
