In your back and forth with Karen, I think you need to get some facts straight first.
The 270wh/kg is for the cell level density of the Taycan pack, NOT the pack density.
250wh/kg is Tesla's cell level density: Tesla Model 3 2170 Energy Density Compared To Bolt, Model S P100D
Audi's battery pack weighs 700kg, but the Tesla P100D weighs over 600kg (extrapolated, since we only have: Tesla's 85kwh battery pack weighs 540kg, and the 100 weighs at least 130 lbs more than that). So their pack weights are much closer than your original number.
The Audi pack is considerably heavier by design - follow the link to see how they have the cooling system cool the cell modules instead of the cells directly, and the cell modules are individually incased in an aluminium crash cage.
Factor all that together, and it is most definitely reasonable to assume that Audi's cell density is comparable to Tesla's or Porsche's cell density. With that, you can definitely say that those cells are energy-dense versus power-dense by design.
Thanks but I think my grasp of the facts is more than adequate:
1. KarenRei supplied the figure of 270Wh/kg energy density for the Taycan cell, which I immediately took at face value.
2. Tesla's NCA 21700 cell specific energy density was calculated at 247Wh/kg by Jack Rickard in a teardown video, also yielding 240Wh/kg for the S85 cell. The 100D cells, which are upgraded with silicon, are presumably somewhat better than those in the 85kWh packs and claimed at 250Wh/kg in the link you provided.
3. My 590kg for S100D pack stems from Den, a site admin at EV Compare.io - Find the electric car which suits you best
Don't know how accurate that is but >600kg is a quite vague. How much closer is "much closer"?
4. The Audi pack is stronger by design for crash-resistance but we do not know for instance that it contains a lower proportion of net cell weight than the Tesla S100D pack. It could for example be that Tesla had to expend a larger percentage of its pack weight into cooling the NCA cells with higher internal resistance hence heat generation, such that non-cell weight for each pack could end up being roughly the same despite the differing constructions. This can only be decided once we have a full spec for the Audi cell.
5. The Audi NCM 622 is from LG CHEM and thus presumed to be closely related (chemically) to the Bolt EV cells, which are given in that same link with a comparable specific energy density but a volumetric energy density 61.6% that of the best Tesla NCA cell [100D]
6. I think from all that it is not unreasonable to infer that the Audi e-Tron cells have roughly the same energy density in weight terms as Tesla but are still considerably worse for volume, thus quite probably leading to a relatively bulky [and heavy] pack which is overall less energy dense than the S100D.
7. I agree that the Audi cells seem to be designed for a good balance of energy-density and power-density, at the expense of greater volume, compared to Tesla's NCA, which exhibits supreme volumetric energy density at the expense of lower specific power [==charge rate].
i.e. the old "you can pick any 2/3" rule: specific energy density, volumetric energy density or power density.
If this is case it tends to refute the false dichotomy of KarenRei that because Audi's cells are relatively energy dense they cannot be as power dense as Tesla's NCA and thus Audi must be frying their packs by design.
Last edited: