Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Hey guys. Remember the big infrastructure bill that was signed by Biden back in Nov. 15 2021? it contained 7.5 billion for EV charging... well after about 7 months hey finally issued a statement about the progress...

Wow! The administration is taking HUGE steps toward electrifying thee federal fleet. Look at this:

  • The Department of Defense launched a pilot project to install 20 Level 2 EV chargers for government fleet vehicles at the Pentagon along with a planning study for future additional installations. The Senior Pentagon Climate Working Group also created a sub-working group focused solely on removing barriers to installing EV charging infrastructure that supports the Department’s zero-emission vehicle acquisition goals.

The Pentagon is going to install *ten* times as many Level II chargers as I did at my home four years ago! I guess this administration thinks *BIG*!

/S
 
This is the best article I can find on the subject, where they used a Chademo adapter so they could see the kWh reported by the EA station vs the kWh reported by the vehicle screen:



Electrify America- brought to you by the same folks who brought us dieselgate. Wouldn't be shocked if they fudge those numbers a bit as well.
 
People spend a lot of money to drop that much weight on cars for performance reasons. I think nearly 200lbs dropped is pretty great. 2170 pack weights 1060lbs. So if half that savings is from the pack and half from the castings, then it looks even better. Obv things like seats, motors, etc. are unchanged.

If memory serves me, the original estimates from structural pack + dual castings was ~400 lbs (9-10%). This is far less impressive, and honestly I find it underwhelming, especially given that it's probably not the LR version (which you are comparing weight to), and to hit the same range you are going to have to add in some more 4680 cells and therefor close that weight gaps some (probably 1-1.5%).
 
If memory serves me, the original estimates from structural pack + dual castings was ~400 lbs (9-10%). This is far less impressive, and honestly I find it underwhelming, especially given that it's probably not the LR version (which you are comparing weight to), and to hit the same range you are going to have to add in some more 4680 cells and therefor close that weight gaps some (probably 1-1.5%).
I really don’t think castings will save much weight… they might even add a slight amount. They mainly make manufacturing so much easier as their main advantage. ~4-5% LR to LR would be my expectation when all is said and done with chemistry changes
 
I really don’t think castings will save much weight… they might even add a slight amount. They mainly make manufacturing so much easier as their main advantage. ~4-5% LR to LR would be my expectation when all is said and done with chemistry changes

I concur. I like the manufacturing simplicity that the castings bring (especially as an investor), but weight savings doesn't seem to be a key component or core design tenant for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: henchman24
Wow! The administration is taking HUGE steps toward electrifying thee federal fleet. Look at this:



The Pentagon is going to install *ten* times as many Level II chargers as I did at my home four years ago! I guess this administration thinks *BIG*!

/S
Was just reading DoE announce they've selected a supplier for an advanced nuclear microreactor to help power the Pentagon.

It goes online in 2024. <-- (they literally printed that)

These clowns came out yapping about their mission being absolutely storage centric, the minute Granholm was named Energy Secretary. Then once the wallet came out it's all "green" hydrogen, carbon capture, and nuclear.

Unbelievable.
 
My apologies if this has already been posted. Pretty quick turnabout by Tesla Shanghai... and they're hiring!
 
Breaking my self-imposed exile from this thread to point out that Model Y is now available to order in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore & Japan.

Two models available: rear wheel drive (aka Standard Range) & AWD Performance

Delivering from August.
Great news! I am planning to move to either NZ or Aus, just need to make up my mind for which country, and would be great to not have to cancel my MYP order for Europe! Observed pretty few Teslas in both countries. Let’s hope the new Aussie government will improve the situation. Renting a Tesla is pretty easy in NZ with Go-Tesla.

Previously Shanghai has been exporting a lot of 3/Y to Europe, now lots of Y for Europe will be replaced by Berlin ones and Shanghai can focus on other markets. Once Australia, NZ etc are getting saturated I hope Thailand/Indonesia will see some expansion also. I was in Jakarta last week and managed to get a taxi Model X(got super lucky, they only have 2 Tesla Taxi with Silverbird) from the airport. Driver claimed autopilot didn’t work, but not sure if he was just not allowed to use it.
9CF3955A-0C50-4C54-A39A-24EF3069AACE.jpeg

I think a smaller Cybertruck would be great for Asia, Model 2/Q/C would also be great but I think best would be a Cybervan(rich Asians loves vans as they have drivers).

Model S/3/Y doesn’t really make much sense for Indonesia/Thailand etc to be honest. It will sell some, but it’s not the ideal car for the countries.
 
We also need to think about the other targets for 4860 Model Y production:-
  • Lower costs / higher margins.
  • Smaller pack size / less weight and raw materials.
  • Rapid scaling of volumes with the lowest possible capex and a low risk manner.
We could argue that these targets as just as important as how fast the car charges and the aim might be to be significantly better than a Model Y produced in Shanghai/Fremont/Berlin.

As 4680 production ramps, up and we have additional innovations introduced, like more silicone in the anode the charging speeds might improve.

If I had to choose, lower cost and less raw materials are more important in terms of the mission, as long as the end product is good enough.
Psst! Its silicon, not silicone - that`s something else.:)
 
Just looked it up, and I'm pretty sure the +kWh display on the vehicle screen reports only the energy actually used by the vehicle and is already net of losses. The vehicle saw +59 kWh enter the pack from 9% to 97%.

So unless the Model Y AWD expends a ton of energy cooling the cells, I don't think it could be far off of 67 kWh usable.

The 4680 doesn't need to have amazing energy density or charge speed to be an incredible innovation. It can be an innovation in terms of cost and ease of manufacturing.
I don`t think that is what the customers have been waiting for..
 
The 4680 doesn't need to have amazing energy density or charge speed to be an incredible innovation. It can be an innovation in terms of cost and ease of manufacturing.
Musk and Baglino said pretty clearly at the last earnings call that the 4680 cells had no Major chemistry changes.

For the moment, the 4680 is “Merely” 1/5 as expensive to build than a comparable cell factory. There are other cost savings as well in terms of labor costs, energy costs, and it produces far less chemical by products which need to be disposed of, but they didn’t quantify these other savings.

From the sounds of it next year is when they are introducing the chemistry changes which will improve charging speeds and energy density. Any savings at the moment is strictly from weight savings and in lowered cost to production.
 
Last edited:
This guy is hard core, he just went to truck scales and weighed the car (with himself and a carseat).


Net weight for the 4680 Austin Y is 4220 lbs he reports.

EDIT - for comparison, the Model Y | Tesla site at the bottom lists the MY LR as 4363 lbs.
Was the battery full charged when he weighed it? You have to account for these things.


/s
 
I don`t think that is what the customers have been waiting for..
See my comment above.

Tesla hasn’t pitched this to customers. Battery Day was at the annual shareholder’s meeting. Are you suggesting as a shareholder you are disappointed that Tesla has reduced the capital cost of battery factories by a factor of 5?

Dry Battery Electrode is arguably the single most important innovation brought up on battery day and it appears to have exceeded their expectations in terms of cost savings. If none of the other things discussed on Battery Day happen, the 4680 is an absolutely smashing success.
 
Imo very bullish that this is so soon. 10.13 will improve UPL and median behavior and a lot of the one step backwards of 10.12. Plus wide rollout will probably add lots of new data for autolabel improvements from operation vacation.

Dry Battery Electrode is arguably the single most important innovation brought up on battery day and it appears to have exceeded their expectations in terms of cost savings. If none of the other things discussed on Battery Day happen, the 4680 is an absolutely smashing success.
Yeah, 4680 is super underappreciated. It will enable Tesla to scale as fast as they can for a few more years, improve demand and most importantly improve margins. Not only will they be getting better cheaper batteries, they will also get the profit that Panasonic/CATL/LG would have made on those batteries. But it will take another year for this to fully show on the income statements. If they get a 10% cost savings on a $5000 battery, that’s another $500 profit for each vehicle. Plus logistics costs.

More FSD tweets: