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

[ElectricIAC]

Yeah, could you imagine… being stuck on the side of the road out of juice, but your Tesla app allows you to unlock that extra 50 miles for an extra $5K.

I love the smell of class action in the morning.

 

[anilkapur]

I’m guessing they plan two 4680 range models, high (400 mile) and standard (280 mile). They’ve introduced a standard that is 280 which is awfully similar to the current long range at 315. They realize most people when given the $2k price difference will purchase the older battery tech with 315 range. This will allow Tesla to slowly put the 4680 into production testing both quality and quantity, make some good margin, and maybe iron out the kinks of the 400 mile 4680 with the batteries fully stocked. It’s good pricing and packaging. Hats off to their marketing folk ( if that is indeed their plan) just speculation of course.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

I’m guessing they plan two 4680 range models, high (400 mile) and standard (280 mile). They’ve introduced a standard that is 280 which is awfully similar to the current long range at 315. They realize most people when given the $2k price difference will purchase the older battery tech with 315 range. This will allow Tesla to slowly put the 4680 into production testing both quality and quantity, make some good margin, and maybe iron out the kinks of the 400 mile 4680 with the batteries fully stocked. It’s good pricing and packaging. Hats off to their marketing folk ( if that is indeed their plan) just speculation of course.

400 would be nice, but given the cell count they're at with thee 279 mile pack and the max space available, we should be looking at more like 340 miles for the "4680 LR" pack whenever they get around to making it.

I do find it fascinating watching them pitch slower-lower-range-MYAWD's to people with MYLR reservations at equal-to-slightly-higher-prices (since those waiting in line often had an earlier lower price). I suppose some are eager enough for the chance to jump the line and get something now, but other than the cool-factor of getting something from the new factory, the MYAWD on paper is uniformly inferior. It's not even lighter.

 

[tangible1]

I’m guessing they plan two 4680 range models, high (400 mile) and standard (280 mile). They’ve introduced a standard that is 280 which is awfully similar to the current long range at 315. They realize most people when given the $2k price difference will purchase the older battery tech with 315 range. This will allow Tesla to slowly put the 4680 into production testing both quality and quantity, make some good margin, and maybe iron out the kinks of the 400 mile 4680 with the batteries fully stocked. It’s good pricing and packaging. Hats off to their marketing folk ( if that is indeed their plan) just speculation of course.

No one knows (outside of Tesla) what the range potential of a MY with a fully configured 4680 battery pack might be. Only speculation. Nothing factual.
But aside from Tesla's serious production limitations, 2 other factors will conspire to prevent anyone finding out any time soon.
1. The CT and SEMI require massive quantities of 4680's and are designed around them exclusively. So they'll get them before a longer range MY happens.
2. No competition is pressing Tesla to add more range to the MY. None. Further, none will be available in any quantity for a couple years.
You can expect Tesla will continue to hint and 'leak' but they're so well controlled you'll not know anything until they are ready.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

No one knows (outside of Tesla) what the range potential of a MY with a fully configured 4680 battery pack might be. Only speculation. Nothing factual.
But aside from Tesla's serious production limitations, 2 other factors will conspire to prevent anyone finding out any time soon.
1. The CT and SEMI require massive quantities of 4680's and are designed around them exclusively. So they'll get them before a longer range MY happens.
2. No competition is pressing Tesla to add more range to the MY. None. Further, none will be available in any quantity for a couple years.
You can expect Tesla will continue to hint and 'leak' but they're so well controlled you'll not know anything until they are ready.

I would agree that Tesla's move here seems to be two simple factors with the MYAWD: They minimize the number of 4680 cells needed per car while struggling to ramp that battery line (thus allowing Austin to make more cars for a given volume of cells), and they avoid having two different "MYLR's" on the market at the same time with different details.

I do also wonder if they ran into thermal cooling or impact-safety challenges with the new structural pack, since what they did was basically fill the two outer edges with padding instead of fully populating the space with the maximum array of cells.

 

[tangible1]

I would agree that Tesla's move here seems to be two simple factors with the MYAWD: They minimize the number of 4680 cells needed per car while struggling to ramp that battery line (thus allowing Austin to make more cars for a given volume of cells), and they avoid having two different "MYLR's" on the market at the same time with different details.

I do also wonder if they ran into thermal cooling or impact-safety challenges with the new structural pack, since what they did was basically fill the two outer edges with padding instead of fully populating the space with the maximum array of cells.

I've not seen any specifics on what/how the current MY AWD battery pack is populated. Only that it's not fully packed.
I would have speculated inert cells to be used, not padding. But who knows?
The fact that the MY AWD only weighs 75-ish pounds less than the MYLR is another head-scratcher.

Clearly, Tesla remains opaque about anything risking their interests. It's a one-way conversation; they hype what benefits and clam up on what doesn't.
Still, they've literally years ahead of any other carmaker on several fronts, but have themselves in a bind of their own making regarding the 4680.
Notably, no one else will be delivering 4680 batteries for a couple years yet. Partly that's about profitability, but is it technical problems too?

 

[ZenRockGarden]

Here's exactly what they did for the MYAWD pack (photo from Giga Texas cyber rodeo). Note the sets of 6-wide 4680 cells, and then on both outer edges they have about a half-rack of black padding instead of cells, which is how they arrived at the smaller pack.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

Here's exactly what they did for the MYAWD pack (photo from Giga Texas cyber rodeo). Note the sets of 6-wide 4680 cells, and then on both outer edges they have about a half-rack of black padding instead of cells, which is how they arrived at the smaller pack.

The result is a pack with about 20% less capacity than the fully-populated design. 279 miles vs ~350 if you assumed the existence of a 5th full rack of 6-wide cells in there instead of the padding.

 

[boulder.dude]

The result is a pack with about 20% less capacity than the fully-populated design. 279 miles vs ~350 if you assumed the existence of a 5th full rack of 6-wide cells in there instead of the padding.

20% capacity but same weight as MY LR? So if they fully fill out 4680 it’s a much heavier car (or they have found a way to make the whole thing lighter in 2023-2024)?

 

[Mrbrock]

400 would be nice, but given the cell count they're at with thee 279 mile pack and the max space available, we should be looking at more like 340 miles for the "4680 LR" pack whenever they get around to making it.

I do find it fascinating watching them pitch slower-lower-range-MYAWD's to people with MYLR reservations at equal-to-slightly-higher-prices (since those waiting in line often had an earlier lower price). I suppose some are eager enough for the chance to jump the line and get something now, but other than the cool-factor of getting something from the new factory, the MYAWD on paper is uniformly inferior. It's not even lighter.

By the time (if at all) a LR 4680 comes out, the 2170 LR will be rated for 340 miles due to efficie day improvements in software.

Here's exactly what they did for the MYAWD pack (photo from Giga Texas cyber rodeo). Note the sets of 6-wide 4680 cells, and then on both outer edges they have about a half-rack of black padding instead of cells, which is how they arrived at the smaller pack.

Padding is cheaper and lighter than fake cells. And probably stronger since fake cells would be hollow and not very structurally sound. Or they found during a side impact that the frame member would bend and damage the structural pack so it needed some buffer from the frame.

20% capacity but same weight as MY LR? So if they fully fill out 4680 it’s a much heavier car (or they have found a way to make the whole thing lighter in 2023-2024)?

And heavier means less range so an equivalent 82kwh 4680 pack would likely be heavier than 2170 so less range. So they’d need 90kwh to make up for the additional weight which means 4680 needs to cost more than 10% less than 2170 or Tesla loses money switching from 2170 to 4680.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

20% capacity but same weight as MY LR? So if they fully fill out 4680 it’s a much heavier car (or they have found a way to make the whole thing lighter in 2023-2024)?

I would imagine they'll refine the pack design and trim weight from it over time. Even with no improvement, a theoretical "full" 4680 pack with the 5th rack of cells is only going to add ~150 pounds to the overall car weight of 4500 pounds. It's not going to make a big difference in efficiency.

 

[SageBrush]

It's not going to make a big difference in efficiency.

Indeed, although more along the lines of trivial.
I wish people would emphasize highway efficiency since range mostly matters for trips.

In the case of highway driving the added mass m adds about m*g*0.009 Newtons of extra friction. Each 100 Kg is about 2.5 Wh/km

 

[Mengy]

20% capacity but same weight as MY LR? So if they fully fill out 4680 it’s a much heavier car (or they have found a way to make the whole thing lighter in 2023-2024)?

Yeah it's the weight which confuses me, something here isn't adding up properly. Maybe the structural battery pack design is heavier than anticipated? If so then a full structural pack in a MY LR 4680 might weigh more than a MY LR 2170 does today? Maybe they have some work to do yet on reducing structural pack weight?

 

[Bouba]

Yeah it's the weight which confuses me, something here isn't adding up properly. Maybe the structural battery pack design is heavier than anticipated? If so then a full structural pack in a MY LR 4680 might weigh more than a MY LR 2170 does today? Maybe they have some work to do yet on reducing structural pack weight?

Perhaps they are still using the old bodies…so not taking advantage of the extra structural rigidity

 

[Mrbrock]

Perhaps they are still using the old bodies…so not taking advantage of the extra structural rigidity

Old bodies? The body hasn’t changed. The structural parts underneath have. It is using the one piece front and rear megacasts. The front should save maybe 100# which is why the weight is confusing. Save weight there and the battery is supposed to save weight yet the battery is smaller amd the weight is almost the same. Again, I lead towards more weight was added to the pack through extra rigidity and padding. Remember, all the battery day number were theoretical. No 4680 cells or physical structural pack had been built at that point. Once they started building, they ran into some obstacles which led to more weight.

 

[Twiglett]

Yes there are old and new bodies, old bodies have a floor in them which has the seats etc bolted on.
You can see those in the videos from Fremont and Giga Berlin. Those bodies use the standard battery packs.
The new bodies from Giga Austin don't have a floor, because the floor IS the structural pack to which the seats are fixed to.

 

[tangible1]

Perhaps they are still using the old bodies…so not taking advantage of the extra structural rigidity

can't do the structural battery pack with the 'old' chassis. The pack is integral to the chassis and requires both F+R megacastings, making it a 'new' chassis.
there is a chassis variant that uses a non-structural pack with 2170 batteries and with F+R magacastings, which may be being built at GigaBerlin (if it isn't LFP batteries).
It would be interesting to see what the weight of a Giga Berlin MYLR is vs the Fremont MYLR.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

can't do the structural battery pack with the 'old' chassis. The pack is integral to the chassis and requires both F+R megacastings, making it a 'new' chassis.
there is a chassis variant that uses a non-structural pack with 2170 batteries and with F+R magacastings, which may be being built at GigaBerlin (if it isn't LFP batteries).
It would be interesting to see what the weight of a Giga Berlin MYLR is vs the Fremont MYLR.

The only use of LFP packs is out of Giga China utilizing non-Tesla pouch cells to create a "standard range" pack.

Giga Berlin is making MYLR and it is very clearly NOT LFP - it's 2170 NMC

 

[tangible1]

The only use of LFP packs is out of Giga China utilizing non-Tesla pouch cells to create a "standard range" pack.

Giga Berlin is making MYLR and it is very clearly NOT LFP - it's 2170 NMC

Fremont is also using LFP for M3 Std Range
However, yes, Berlin MY is 2170 assuming the info from Tesla blogs is true, but Giga China deliveries to Euro Zone were LFP.

 

[Mrbrock]

I guess by bodies I take that to mean the non structural elements. Doors, roof, etc. the floor is part of the chassis so, yes that is obviously different but the structural pack has not changed the doors, roof, frunk, trunk, glass. The parts that bolt to the mega casts and floor have not changed.