Tesla sales rep said MY with 4680 will NOT have longer range

[ZenRockGarden]

It weighs the same now. It has less range. Case closed.
They can add another row, or double the amount of batteries or whatever, but for the weight -- which is a crucial part of understanding energy density -- the 4680’s are just not as good.
This means sure they may be able to do an MYLR with 4680 now, but its not going to be as good, as it will be notably heavier.
And there are growing signs Tesla is thinking the 4680s may never be better than current small batteries. Probably heat management issues... at Earning call, lot of obfuscation, and seeming to be saying will use them in fewer vehicles. Nixed them for the semi, dodged on on the CT, and used weasel words hen describing production volume.
They have sold a LOT of MYLR. If they could ease some of that backlog with 4680s, they would. The battery’s lack of performance is the only thing holding that back.
I don’t care what Elon said on battery day. It had little basis in fact and a lot in spin, hype and hope.
There is some chance they’ll figure it out in a few years. But not this year and not next year.

Agreed.

4680 and structural battery turns out to be harder to optimize than hoped. It exists today as a slightly inferior alternative to MYLR from a range standpoint, it's the same weight, and the big win is it's simpler to manufacture and assemble which is what Elon was really after.

I would totally expect them to iterate on the design based on what they learned in the first attempt with the MYAWD and start hitting MYLR-parity in a year or so. They'll then move to that opportunistically based mostly on 4680 cell capacity (which has other things like CT fighting for it).

Long term they'll get it right and see the gains they wanted for costs to build and assemble.

 

[jsight]

Which is why I commented in my original post that started this mini-brouhaha that when I am ready to replace our leased MY LR, if (big "if") there is an LFP version of the MY being offered at that time would it be more prudent of us to order the LFP version or stick with the LR version.

For the record we have found our LFP M3 SR to be a very practical travel vehicle. We've had the M3 since end of August and have had only a single +700 mile round-trip completed in that car but found it to be most suitable for distance travel (no, not as good as the MY, if for no other reason than it does not carry as much "stuff"). One leg of our return trip was over 200 miles (Wickenburg AZ to Green Valley AZ. None the less, I would not hesitate to take the LFP M3 on a trip from the west coast to the east coast.

That's what I think about when people act like range is king and the only way EVs can work is to have massive amounts of range. According to ABRP, a trip from Wilmington, NC to Los Angeles, CA takes 5.5 hours of charging in a M3 LR. Running the same estimate for the standard Model 3 shows 7.5 hours. If range is the only factor, would you really pay the difference for that?

And for most people that I know, a 700 mile road trip is more like their version of a long road trip than a coast to coast trip like that. Its less than 30 minutes difference. Its really hard to justify the extra expense based purely on time taken.

If they could make a MY SR with something like a 65KWH pack, it'd sell really well, IMO.

 

[Bouba]

Surely it is not relevant that the two battery packs weigh the same....the advantage is that the structural pack takes weight off the car

 

[ZenRockGarden]

Surely it is not relevant that the two battery packs weigh the same....the advantage is that the structural pack takes weight off the car

The video addresses that exact topic - there has not been (so far) an overall weight savings by the structural pack plus surrounding frame - they saved some weight for not having a redundant battery cover, but there's added weight in the details of seat mounting and the single-casting vs (harder to make but actually lighter) multi-piece front and rear frame.

They can optimize further, and probably shave weight - but right now it was a total wash. The finished car was within a few pounds of the prior one (and carrying a lower capacity pack)

 

[boulder.dude]

That's what I think about when people act like range is king and the only way EVs can work is to have massive amounts of range. According to ABRP, a trip from Wilmington, NC to Los Angeles, CA takes 5.5 hours of charging in a M3 LR. Running the same estimate for the standard Model 3 shows 7.5 hours. If range is the only factor, would you really pay the difference for that?

And for most people that I know, a 700 mile road trip is more like their version of a long road trip than a coast to coast trip like that. Its less than 30 minutes difference. Its really hard to justify the extra expense based purely on time taken.

If they could make a MY SR with something like a 65KWH pack, it'd sell really well, IMO.

Cold weather, rain, headwind, 80mph, or towing all cause “true” range to be 0.5-0.7 of the rated change. So yeah many people need more range.

 

[RichAZ/CapeCod]

Cold weather, rain, headwind, 80mph, or towing all cause “true” range to be 0.5-0.7 of the rated change. So yeah many people need more range.

While all of the above is true I believe the primary advantage to additional range in an EV is faster charging time to 70% SoC. For local driving most EVs can do very well being kept at a nominal 60% or so of SoC. On the road, looking to get in and out of charging stations quickly during the day's trip, I'd really like an EV with a "400 mile range" that I can Supercharge/DCFC charge to around 300 miles in about fifteen or twenty minutes.

Just sayin'...

Rich

 

[boulder.dude]

While all of the above is true I believe the primary advantage to additional range in an EV is faster charging time to 70% SoC.

If you think the primary advantage is faster DC charging, you probably live where it isn’t cold for half the year. Btw I’ve seen DC charging crawl when it is below 0 F even when preconditioning (which itself gobbles range).

Interestingly it looks like 800V architecture enables a faster charging curve? Not sure why.

Kia EV6 crowned the best charging EV in the latest P3 Charge Index

P3 has announced results of its third annual Charge Index, 21 cars took part in research looking for the king of charging speed and efficiency.

www.arenaev.com

 

[Bouba]

If you think the primary advantage is faster DC charging, you probably live where it isn’t cold for half the year. Btw I’ve seen DC charging crawl when it is below 0 F even when preconditioning (which itself gobbles range).

Interestingly it looks like 800V architecture enables a faster charging curve? Not sure why.

Kia EV6 crowned the best charging EV in the latest P3 Charge Index

P3 has announced results of its third annual Charge Index, 21 cars took part in research looking for the king of charging speed and efficiency.

www.arenaev.com

Is there any data about the long term effects on the batteries when they get regularly cooked at such high voltage?

 

[jsight]

Is there any data about the long term effects on the batteries when they get regularly cooked at such high voltage?

The cells don't see any higher voltages than a 400V setup. The cars haven't been out long enough to judge long term reliability. I haven't heard of any issues so far, though.

I'd love to know how they are doing it.

 

[Bouba]

At last (another) miracle battery ....

Battery from StoreDot can endure 1,000 super fast charging cycles

StoreDot announced its production-ready XFC battery achieved 1,000 charging cycles before degrading below 80 percent.

www.arenaev.com