Tesla readies revamped Model 3

[ZenRockGarden]

Seems you missed my post just above. CATL are launching this year batteries with twice the energy density. You'd be right on expensive at least initially but it'll drop in price. Very wrong on it weighing more or being very inefficient.

You are missing the point. There's plenty of places I could stop for a break and the toilet that don't have a charger. There's chargers where I could stop that they have no toilets or a place to buy a drink or eat. You are forced to plan your trip around charging vs with a long range ICE you plan your trip to do whatever the hell you want safe in the knowledge you can fill up in 5 minutes easily from a plentiful amount of locations. Can still stop in an ICE to stretch your legs but you won't always have to be filling up your car.

I imagine short range cars will still exist if you only want a short range one. That's fine but I'll pay more for one that has closer to ICE range thanks when they hit the market.

Following up in a different direction, the super importance of the claimed CATL 500 wh/kg battery isn't cars, but aircraft where that power-density thing is absolutely vital since weight is vastly more impactful on the ability to make an electric aircraft work.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

I hear you, but first off the CATL thing seems a bit optimistic given it's 2x past what ever other well motivated group have been able to actually bring to market (and it doesn't exist yet despite promises it's coming this year).

Second, assuming the existence of a 2x denser battery tech that also has decent charging time, longevity, safety, temperature tolerance, and costs... you still have to trade off: Do you want a car that's 500 pounds lighter and thus more efficient all-the-time, or do you want a heavier less efficient car that can offer that joyous 8 hour non-stop pee-in-a-cup marathon drive? The answer to your tangent of "but what if there's no charger in a good convenient spot" is to Drive A Tesla with the best charging network on the planet.

Third niche for much-denser batteries is heavy towing and trucking, where the weight of the battery deducts directly from the capability of the platform to haul large heavy objects.

 

[ACarneiro]

Great! Let those niche industries spend the big bucks bringing the tech to mass production and we’ll have it when they’ve made it cheaper.
A car with the M3’s current specs and twice the range? Sign me up!

 

[HenryT]

I think that based on what Musk has said, the likely response from Tesla would be to produce cars with a similar range as currently, but with a smaller battery. The net effect would also increase efficiency, given lower weight.

 

[Jason71]

I think that based on what Musk has said, the likely response from Tesla would be to produce cars with a similar range as currently, but with a smaller battery. The net effect would also increase efficiency, given lower weight.

I think there is middle ground. I agree they would be unlikely to put in a 150kwh pack in an M3 even if it was small and light enough but 100kwh for a real world 400mile range. I could see that. And if Tesla didn't do it others would.

 

[Bouba]

I think that based on what Musk has said, the likely response from Tesla would be to produce cars with a similar range as currently, but with a smaller battery. The net effect would also increase efficiency, given lower weight.

Another possibility is no announced increase in range but a massive buffer...so you can always charge to 100%, your battery will never lose capacity and almost no warranty claims

 

[FastLaneJB]

I hear you, but first off the CATL thing seems a bit optimistic given it's 2x past what ever other well motivated group have been able to actually bring to market (and it doesn't exist yet despite promises it's coming this year).

Second, assuming the existence of a 2x denser battery tech that also has decent charging time, longevity, safety, temperature tolerance, and costs... you still have to trade off: Do you want a car that's 500 pounds lighter and thus more efficient all-the-time, or do you want a heavier less efficient car that can offer that joyous 8 hour non-stop pee-in-a-cup marathon drive? The answer to your tangent of "but what if there's no charger in a good convenient spot" is to Drive A Tesla with the best charging network on the planet.

So in the UK the charging network, even if you have a Tesla which is the best option still has problems in places. Overall though for the EV market there’s not enough fast chargers vs quantity of EV’s on the road. It’s workable at the moment but it’s heading in the wrong direction as sales outstrip charger installations need to support those sales each year.

And even if you want to stop every few hours and charge, a larger battery will charge faster than a smaller one so you'd not have to stop for so long and you'd free up a charger faster for others.

Weight when it comes to efficiency is not as big a factor you think it is when it comes to range and efficiency. Don't believe me go watch the Engineering Explained video on the Mercedes EQXX where he covers this.

 

[FastLaneJB]

I think there is middle ground. I agree they would be unlikely to put in a 150kwh pack in an M3 even if it was small and light enough but 100kwh for a real world 400mile range. I could see that. And if Tesla didn't do it others would.

Yes I agree they won’t just go and slap 150kWh in straight away just because it’ll fit, be technically possible or even cost neutral. A smaller increase and a price drop is more realistic on a model 3. Model S and X is where I expect they should be pushing for more range hard at least in early days.

I do hope that overtime though the cost of batteries will drop so low that adding more capacity won’t move the needle much on cost. Other makes will be doing it I suspect and will force Tesla to respond vs having a much lower range EV compared to the competition. Range is an marketing point of EV’s just as mpg was of ICE cars, don’t see that changing.

Also remember the Plaid would be faster if the battery could supply more peak power. Don’t know the details on these new batteries but chances are a larger pack size means a larger peak power. Not driven one and it’s already I’m sure fast enough but it’s all about bragging rights here by this point.

 

[Jason71]

Yes I agree they won’t just go and slap 150kWh in straight away just because it’ll fit, be technically possible or even cost neutral. A smaller increase and a price drop is more realistic on a model 3. Model S and X is where I expect they should be pushing for more range hard at least in early days.

I do hope that overtime though the cost of batteries will drop so low that adding more capacity won’t move the needle much on cost. Other makes will be doing it I suspect and will force Tesla to respond vs having a much lower range EV compared to the competition. Range is an marketing point of EV’s just as mpg was of ICE cars, don’t see that changing.

Also remember the Plaid would be faster if the battery could supply more peak power. Don’t know the details on these new batteries but chances are a larger pack size means a larger peak power. Not driven one and it’s already I’m sure fast enough but it’s all about bragging rights here by this point.

I have no doubts that when our children tell their children about the cars that their parents drove in their youth they will think a 75kwh battery is quaint, At least once the concept of a car is explained to them as being a bit like a boat or snowmobile but with wheels. I am sure it will bring a moment of levity to the bunker.

 

[FastLaneJB]

I have no doubts that when our children tell their children about the cars that their parents drove in their youth they will think a 75kwh battery is quaint, At least once the concept of a car is explained to them as being a bit like a boat or snowmobile but with wheels. I am sure it will bring a moment of levity to the bunker.

Indeed. Why I’m not too keen on owning an EV at the moment but rather just lease or finance for a period of time. They are still in the early days where the rate of change is high and want to keep up.

In the later years of ICE they change models and engines say every 10 years and you’d get like 1 - 2mpg improvement and 20 more bhp. The rate of change on the power train front was pretty slow as they’d been improving on it for a 100+ years. Rate of change is high now but it’ll get to the point the power train will slow down or just be not that important as it’ll be more than good enough already. Maybe 20 - 30 years of big improvements still to go in EV powertrains before it might slow down.

 

[Jason71]

Indeed. Why I’m not too keen on owning an EV at the moment but rather just lease or finance for a period of time. They are still in the early days where the rate of change is high and want to keep up.

In the later years of ICE they change models and engines say every 10 years and you’d get like 1 - 2mpg improvement and 20 more bhp. The rate of change on the power train front was pretty slow as they’d been improving on it for a 100+ years. Rate of change is high now but it’ll get to the point the power train will slow down or just be not that important as it’ll be more than good enough already. Maybe 20 - 30 years of big improvements still to go in EV powertrains before it might slow down.

I had a 2019 M3 and comparing that to cars on sale today the range and efficiency seem positively........ still pretty much as good as anything else out there except a newer M3

 

[WannabeOwner]

The answer to your tangent of "but what if there's no charger in a good convenient spot" is to Drive A Tesla with the best charging network on the planet

I've stopped at plenty of Tesla Superchargers where there was "nothing".

In olden times when we drove to France we'd choose a nice restaurant for lunch ... off the motorway, have a break. Now in EV we stop at "somewhere that has superchargers and food" ... the food is fine, of course, but not the same as "We're on holiday, lets have a nice break at a nice restaurant".

I agree they would be unlikely to put in a 150kwh pack in an M3 even if it was small and light enough but 100kwh for a real world 400mile range. I could see that. And if Tesla didn't do it others would

I think M3 is 70 kWh-ish? and 4 miles/kWh - so 280 miles. If they put in a 100kWh battery, same weight, presumably that too would be 4 miles / kWh? if so that's 400 miles - quite a step up especially given that "contingency" is probably still 30-miles/whatever, so usable range goes from 250 miles to 370 (none of which will be real-world, of course, but I think the relative numbers are valid?).

Better still might be to do mid-point, so say 85kWh, that would weigh less than current battery (i.e. if weight of 100kWh new = 70kWh old), so 15 kWh more battery, and a weight reduction which might be worth 10% on efficiency??

Not driven one and it’s already I’m sure fast enough but it’s all about bragging rights here by this point.

Its brutal. Not sure that more-fast would be enjoyable. But, yeah, I suppose I could persuade myself that I need the bragging rights!

 

[FastLaneJB]

I had a 2019 M3 and comparing that to cars on sale today the range and efficiency seem positively........ still pretty much as good as anything else out there except a newer M3

It takes time but 500kWh per kg vs most cars on 220kWh is a major step change. Cars that get this battery are going to be quite a bit superior to ones that came before it. Either weight or range advantage.

 

[init6]

It takes time but 500kWh per kg vs most cars on 220kWh is a major step change. Cars that get this battery are going to be quite a bit superior to ones that came before it. Either weight or range advantage.

Huge typo there. It's 500Wh/kg not kWh. And those magic words 'up to' in the CATL presentation.

 

[FastLaneJB]

I've stopped at plenty of Tesla Superchargers where there was "nothing".

In olden times when we drove to France we'd choose a nice restaurant for lunch ... off the motorway, have a break. Now in EV we stop at "somewhere that has superchargers and food" ... the food is fine, of course, but not the same as "We're on holiday, lets have a nice break at a nice restaurant".



I think M3 is 70 kWh-ish? and 4 miles/kWh - so 280 miles. If they put in a 100kWh battery, same weight, presumably that too would be 4 miles / kWh? if so that's 400 miles - quite a step up especially given that "contingency" is probably still 30-miles/whatever, so usable range goes from 250 miles to 370 (none of which will be real-world, of course, but I think the relative numbers are valid?).

Better still might be to do mid-point, so say 85kWh, that would weigh less than current battery (i.e. if weight of 100kWh new = 70kWh old), so 15 kWh more battery, and a weight reduction which might be worth 10% on efficiency??



Its brutal. Not sure that more-fast would be enjoyable. But, yeah, I suppose I could persuade myself that I need the bragging rights!

Well not the Model 3 Performance but also you don't get 4 miles/kWh in the winter I'd think even on a LR or SR+.

You are exactly right though and the point I'm getting at. Extra range gives you more options, each stop doesn't have to be planned around a charge as you won't always need to charge. As I see it and ignoring any cost here and I don't buy it needs to be vastly more heavy or that has a massive difference either:

• Charging will put more miles per minute into a battery than a smaller battery if the charger is high powered enough
• Less chargers needed because cars don't have to charge as often and when they do will be there for less time if they only need to do a partial charge say to get home
• More useable range in the winter. Don't have to do things like turn off the HAVC and just use heated seats to try to eek out more range.
• Able to drive at 70mph vs say 60mph and yes have a hit on range but like with ICE cars, you have enough range that at least some won't care
• Can tow if you want a reasonable distance with a heavy or not all that aerodynamic load
• Battery will last longer because you'll be putting it through less charge cycles for the same range so degradation will be reduced.
• Faster Plaid or even faster Model 3

Frankly I other than it might make a car more expensive or if you only need a city run around car. I don't get the people in this thread that actually seem to not want more range. You might not want to pay for it and that's different but I really don't think they've got to optimal range levels yet in the real world. They are great cars and this is their one negative if you ask me.

 

[FastLaneJB]

Huge typo there. It's 500Wh/kg not kWh. And those magic words 'up to' in the CATL presentation.

Haha. My bad and thanks for correcting.

Sure, maybe car versions will be lower to keep cost down but it's still a doubling vs what's on the market now. Unlike all these other battery announcements this one is from the largest name in the business and they say it's going into limited production this year. Ramp up will take a while but this one seems real vs the ones they can get working in a lab but cannot produce in scale. I expect it'll be many more years still before you see something like this in a Model 3 priced car but all these things tend to start expensive and then trickle down in price.

Wasn't too long ago car Lidar was around $100k per sensor to put on a car. Now some cars come with them added as standard.

 

[WannabeOwner]

Extra range gives you more options, each stop doesn't have to be planned around a charge as you won't always need to charge

I get that, and I've chosen to pay top-$ to have MS LR with max range. But for anyone not doing 300-mile-a-day trips at least once a month it won't be economic and, consequently, manufacturers won't offer it - until the price drops very significantly

If you want better range, now, get an MS instead of M3P

 

[ACarneiro]

Huge typo there. It's 500Wh/kg not kWh. And those magic words 'up to' in the CATL presentation.

Well, the KWh vs Wh being a typo was already a given.
That “up to”, though, is doing a lot of work in that announcement… :/

 

[dfwatt]

Yes a little too young to get that reference but thanks for the video to give me reference. I understand and to be fair on a long trip I would drive or slower to eek out the range but if I drive it like I drive my Disco its close to a 200 mile range car vs a 600 one is all.

The new Model 3 I suspect will get down to a 0.20cd like the Model S. That's going to help nicely on range. If they can improve battery density, maybe not at the same time but get closer to a 100kWh battery without adding weight. Still a few more improvements they can make to the drive train and maybe they can even reduce weight a bit by switching to structural battery pack. That should get the LR probably close to 500 claimed miles and maybe 400 real world. Not all maybe I'm this refresh but just over time they'll hopefully get there.

As a guess this could all be do-able by 2030 you'd think and might well save us from the quantity of chargers the country needs if most EV's are still 200 - 250 mile real world range cars.

I think the best you're going to see on the new Model 3 Highland with some version of aerodynamic improvements, efficiency improvements in the motor and perhaps some modest weight reduction is a 400 Mi claimed range on the EPA driving cycle. 500 miles would require significantly higher energy density than they've got to work with right now or significantly larger battery than they're willing to put in the car. Nice idea but next generation not this one. We've actually learned to live pretty well with our under 300 mile range on our 2 2018 Model 3 performance cars. We've gotten a little bit of improvement in range from lowering the cars and from a front splitter. Experimenting with some aero Wheels in a 20-inch size but so far not looking like they have a big benefit maybe at most 15 watt hours per mile. My wife is only good for two and a half hours in the car before needing a rest stop so the range actually fits in with that pretty nicely.

The big advantage frankly of a much larger battery pack is that when you want to, you can have very short charging stops in other words just stay between 10 and 50% where the battery charges up really quickly. You never get into the tapering charge rate so in that sense of 500 Mi range battery would be nice.

Doubt I would ever drive 450 Mi though between stops. The evidence is that that much sitting particularly as we get older is really bad for us and is undesirable. Even 2 hours is actually thought unhealthy.

 

[FastLaneJB]

I get that, and I've chosen to pay top-$ to have MS LR with max range. But for anyone not doing 300-mile-a-day trips at least once a month it won't be economic and, consequently, manufacturers won't offer it - until the price drops very significantly

If you want better range, now, get an MS instead of M3P

If only they sold MS in the UK. Still even those could do with bigger batteries. Just a matter of time as the price will drop. The top models more than anything should be the ones pushing the Rangel limits first due to their higher prices.

Think I read the next Audi A8 will be 120kWh. I think the other makes had a massive efficiency deficit in the past but they are getting closer.

I’m not expecting major battery changes as in increased capacity on the new Model 3. They’ll get extra range by improving the aerodynamics, lowering the weight maybe by using a structural battery pack, etc. Nice improvements none the less.