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.
Also, almost none of the viewers are under age 50. Rob Mauer's daily videos get 80-180k viewers, I'd bet he has 3-5x the coveted under 55 viewers CNBC does.

Legacy media is dead.
Rob deserves 30x-50x the viewers. He’s a total treasure. With almost every other YouTuber, I can usually find errors. It is nearly impossible with Rob.
 
Month over month deliveries comparison in China --- once again...demand problem:

1623201275821.png
 
You should look into the Terra ecosystem. Interview with Ark Invest on this POS (eco-friendly) blockchain founded by Stanford engineer and backed by Coinbase, Galaxy Digital, and Robinhood CEO - The Terra Blockchain with Do Kwon - ARK Podcast
Terra and other stablecoins are interesting. They use various means to peg the value of a coin to the value of a fiat currency. In the case of Terra, they have TerraUSD which is pegged to the dollar and TerraLUNA a 2nd currency which can be burned to maintain the dollar peg of TerraUSD. These stablecoins are potentially useful as proxies for currency for doing secure online transactions. But transactions conducted in dollar-pegged stablecoins are effectively commerce being conducted in dollars.

The Basis project was actually trying to create a cryptocurrency with fiat currency style seignorage and a monetary policy that would ensure stable prices. Their work was extremely interesting, but realistically I think something like it will have to come from governments rather than private companies.
 
Did you typo and meant "energy density is the energy contained"? "Power" is "energy" delivered per unit of time.
I did misspeak when I stated 4680’s 6X power and 5X energy implies a 1.2X Power density increase.

It really means a 4680 pack containing the same energy as a 2170 pack would have 1/5 as many cells each with 6X the power, so the pack would have a 1.2X power increase (Better C-Rate).

However Tesla said it will have a 54% (or 56% I can’t recall) range increase which I assume means roughly a 1.6X improvement in energy density.

Therefore the power density vs a 2170 pack would improve by 1.6 * 1.2 = 1.9X (not 1.2X).

Put another way: a 4680 pack of the same energy content as an old 2170 pack would have 20% more power. A 4680 pack of the same weight as a 2170 pack would contain 60% more energy capacity and provide 90% more power.

If everyone remembers the CYBRTK event mentioned a 250 kW+ charge rate with the PLUS to be revealed later. Also the Limiting Factor hypothesized Silicon anodes could drastically improve charging rates.

I’m hoping Thursday’s surprise is Tesla revealing the PLUS and a higher charge rate for S&X than expected. Even though the new S&X probably won’t have 4680’s, maybe they’ll have tabless and Silicon anodes and be able to accept 500 kW. Just the larger pack alone should enable 300 kW+ vs Model 3 which can take 250 kW.
 
Last edited:
 
Any “one more thing“ you would want to be something that doesn’t pull demand from the Plaid S (Tesla still has Plaid S as available for delivery in June, so obviously has plenty of spare production capacity at present) Maybe the semi or a new commercial van, possibly the final CT Design, ATV. would be awesome to see a model S plaid pulling in after completing a coast to coast FSD trip without any deactivations (outside of recharging stops).

I would be happy if it’s just all focused on Plaid S.
Final CT design. Steals back thunder from Ford, Osborns nothing.
 
Final CT design. Steals back thunder from Ford, Osborns nothing.
I would like this. As we know the tri motor CT variant will also have the plaid powertrain.

So maybe all plaid models on display/test ride? S/X/CT plaid would be cool. But I won’t hold my breath.
 
So many cars sitting in a parking lot (with no buyers in sight), clearly a huge demand problem!
I bet you in a few weeks Tesla will dump them all into the sea to pretend they have been sold.
We have seen this story play out many times, just ask Mark BS or any other seasoned TSLAQ veterans...

/s
You had to bring up toilet boy. Is he now big into crypto? Buy high, sell low gets them every time.
 
I did misspeak when I stated 4680’s 6X power and 5X energy implies a 1.2X Power density increase.

It really means a 4680 pack containing the same energy as a 2170 pack would have 1/5 as many cells each with 6X the power, so the pack would have a 1.2X power increase (Better C-Rate).

However Tesla said it will have a 54% (or 56% I can’t recall) range increase which I assume means roughly a 1.6X improvement in energy density.

Therefore the power density vs a 2170 pack would improve by 1.6 * 1.2 = 1.9X (not 1.2X).

Put another way: a 4680 pack of the same energy content as an old 2170 pack would have 20% more power. A 4680 pack of the same weight as a 2170 pack would contain 60% more energy capacity and provide 90% more power.

If everyone remembers the CYBRTK event mentioned a 250 kW+ charge rate with the PLUS to be revealed later. Also the Limiting Factor hypothesized Silicon anodes could drastically improve charging rates.

I’m hoping Thursday’s surprise is Tesla revealing the PLUS and a higher charge rate for S&X than expected. Even though the new S&X probably won’t have 4680’s, maybe they’ll have tabless and Silicon anodes and be able to accept 500 kW. Just the larger pack alone should enable 300 kW+ vs Model 3 which can take 250 kW.
The problem with what you are doing is Tesla was illustrating how the 4680 cells would be better than the current 2170 cells. That is the most important part.... the current 2170 cells. Some of the improvements can be applied to the 2170 cells as well. And the net effect is the 4680 cells size makes it far cheaper to make, but it does in effect have a worse C rate when improvements are made to the 2170 as well. will they make these improvements to the 2170? We don't know. Will all of the improvements be made to the 4680 as Tesla hopes? We don't know.

But if you step 10 feet away, the 2170 cell has superior C rate in general. Will it matter for a a non performance car? No.
 
I would like this. As we know the tri motor CT variant will also have the plaid powertrain.

So maybe all plaid models on display/test ride? S/X/CT plaid would be cool. But I won’t hold my breath.
A Plaid Y is probably hoping too much, and will pull so many demand levers that Tesla possibly will not be able to handle the surge.

But hear me out : a 4680 Long Range + / Ludicrous Y ?

JMHO/speculation - it could be within the realm of possibilities. When Austin starts cranking out the 4680 Ys: how would Tesla be able to differentiate between the Austin 4680Y and the Fremont 2170Y if they were of the same range/features. Why would anyone in the US want to get a Fremont Y if priced the same with the same range, but know that the Austin Y has the 4680 + structural pack.

Which is what makes me root for a new Y tomorrow as the one more thing. Use Kato Road's stockpile of 4680s to kickstart a low volume, high margin product line at Austin while working on the battery production ramp at Austin. Fremont continues to make the regular Ys until 4680 volume production is met late 2022 at which point if needed the Fremont Y lines can be retooled if needed.
 
The more traditional looking pickup to go alongside the Cybertruck & really take from the Ford F-150 Lightning reservation holders/target market.
Tesla could easily sell every CT they can make for 36 months. No need for an 'alternate' model. There are just not enough batteries. Tesla could start to make a delivery van or class 4 stakebody next, when they actually have the batteries.
 
A Plaid Y is probably hoping too much, and will pull so many demand levers that Tesla possibly will not be able to handle the surge.

But hear me out : a 4680 Long Range + / Ludicrous Y ?

JMHO/speculation - it could be within the realm of possibilities. When Austin starts cranking out the 4680 Ys: how would Tesla be able to differentiate between the Austin 4680Y and the Fremont 2170Y if they were of the same range/features. Why would anyone in the US want to get a Fremont Y if priced the same with the same range, but know that the Austin Y has the 4680 + structural pack.

Which is what makes me root for a new Y tomorrow as the one more thing. Use Kato Road's stockpile of 4680s to kickstart a low volume, high margin product line at Austin while working on the battery production ramp at Austin. Fremont continues to make the regular Ys until 4680 volume production is met late 2022 at which point if needed the Fremont Y lines can be retooled if needed.
If they are priced the same and has the same specs, why would anyone care which Y they get?
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncaNed
I did misspeak when I stated 4680’s 6X power and 5X energy implies a 1.2X Power density increase.

It really means a 4680 pack containing the same energy as a 2170 pack would have 1/5 as many cells each with 6X the power, so the pack would have a 1.2X power increase (Better C-Rate).

However Tesla said it will have a 54% (or 56% I can’t recall) range increase which I assume means roughly a 1.6X improvement in energy density.

Therefore the power density vs a 2170 pack would improve by 1.6 * 1.2 = 1.9X (not 1.2X).

Put another way: a 4680 pack of the same energy content as an old 2170 pack would have 20% more power. A 4680 pack of the same weight as a 2170 pack would contain 60% more energy capacity and provide 90% more power.

If everyone remembers the CYBRTK event mentioned a 250 kW+ charge rate with the PLUS to be revealed later. Also the Limiting Factor hypothesized Silicon anodes could drastically improve charging rates.

I’m hoping Thursday’s surprise is Tesla revealing the PLUS and a higher charge rate for S&X than expected. Even though the new S&X probably won’t have 4680’s, maybe they’ll have tabless and Silicon anodes and be able to accept 500 kW. Just the larger pack alone should enable 300 kW+ vs Model 3 which can take 250 kW.
Hmmmm ... my question was to BeltsBear, whose post was deleted by him/herself. The fact that you would respond to correct yourself ... 🤔 tres sus
 
Getting closer to deliveries. The first report of a Plaid Model S vin

 
The problem with what you are doing is Tesla was illustrating how the 4680 cells would be better than the current 2170 cells. That is the most important part.... the current 2170 cells. Some of the improvements can be applied to the 2170 cells as well. And the net effect is the 4680 cells size makes it far cheaper to make, but it does in effect have a worse C rate when improvements are made to the 2170 as well. will they make these improvements to the 2170? We don't know. Will all of the improvements be made to the 4680 as Tesla hopes? We don't know.

But if you step 10 feet away, the 2170 cell has superior C rate in general. Will it matter for a a non performance car? No.
You apparently did not bother to read my posts before disagreeing as I had already made that exact point.