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

The material now needed for the ARMOR PLATE

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
2000lb steel plate to protect you from dangerous Tesla fires? I have a better idea. Stay home and get one of these:

bubble-boy.jpg


You'll be super safe!
 
1)It's only a pile of rust if it's made of a ferrous material.
2)We're talking about it because a non-punctured and non-burning battery is better than a punctured and burning one even if there was zero danger to the occupants.
3)The danger to the occupants is non-zero. It is not at all difficult to imagine a scenario of a large metal object that not only punctured the battery but also forced the vehicle off the road and into trees or into a ditch or some other structure that caused enough damage and/or injury to the occupants that they could not get themselves out of the vehicle. A burning battery, in this case, could ignite the material on the ground, and spread around the vehicle. While the firewall history so far is impressive, that doesn't mean it's perfect.
Would just like to point out that the danger to occupants from meteor strikes is also non-zero. That doesn't mean the roof needs an armor plate.

So, if there is a practical, cost effective way to better protect the battery from damage, even if there is zero safety risk, then you're helping avoid a lot of inconvenience and expense for replacement of a damaged pack.
I'd agree that if there is a practical, cost-effective solution, that would be good. And I think Tesla has already implemented that practical, cost-effective solution - namely raising the suspension. It's extremely unlikely any physical alterations to the battery packs would be cost effective.

IMO, comments like "This care is perfectly safe" are quite dangerous. Someday it is highly probable that someone will be killed while in a Model S and it is also highly probable that there will be someone killed in a Model S with a fire involved. Whether they would've been killed in a conventional vehicle as well will be irrelevant and the quotes about safest vehicle and all that will be pulled up and used against Tesla.

I believe it is one of the safest if not the safest cars out there...but that does not mean it can't be made more safe and that seeking to better protect the vulnerabilities isn't a wise move. It's magical thinking to believe that this, the first production vehicle out of Tesla, could not be made better.
Tesla should attempt to improve the battery pack when they roll out their 100 kWh (?) pack. At that point they can implement any changes at minimal cost. If this includes altering the armor plate remains to be seen. Maybe tapering the armor plate would be meaningful. If Tesla uses 0.35" aluminium for the front half of the battery pack, and 0.15" aluminium for the rear half, that should improve the road debris impact characteristics, without affecting weight, range, cost, etc.

Maybe swapping the massive aluminum plate for a 0.5" carbon fibre/aluminium honeycomb plate would reduce weight, increase range/performance and improve road debris impact characteristics at a sufficiently low cost. We will see.
 
Would just like to point out that the danger to occupants from meteor strikes is also non-zero. That doesn't mean the roof needs an armor plate.
and thus such an eventuality wouldn't meet the practical, cost-effective critieria. It is impractical for such a rare and highly unlikely event. The battery is, and always will be, low to the ground, cover a larger surface area and there will always be signficant risk of roadway debris. Thus, an analysis of the situation and consideration of a practical cost effective means of attenuating the risk of damage makes sense. If meteors fell at a rate of 100/hr along roadways then roof armor would make sense. There's a point of diminishing returns on anything like this and it is up to those better equipt to make the determinations of where that line is to decide of additional armor or other design changes are a good idea.

I'm not arguing for improving the armor...or against it. I'm arguing that it is an argument based upon ignorance to be vehement either way--there's simply not enough data to say and even if there were I suspect few of us would have the capacity to fully interpret it.

I'd agree that if there is a practical, cost-effective solution, that would be good. And I think Tesla has already implemented that practical, cost-effective solution - namely raising the suspension. It's extremely unlikely any physical alterations to the battery packs would be cost effective.
You can think that, I can think otherwise (I don't), but neither of us can justify that belief with facts.

Tesla should attempt to improve the battery pack when they roll out their 100 kWh (?) pack. At that point they can implement any changes at minimal cost. If this includes altering the armor plate remains to be seen. Maybe tapering the armor plate would be meaningful. If Tesla uses 0.35" aluminium for the front half of the battery pack, and 0.15" aluminium for the rear half, that should improve the road debris impact characteristics, without affecting weight, range, cost, etc.
Again, maybe that's the way it should/will be done...I don't know. Maybe all they need is a layer of styrofoam, maybe a thinner plate is just as good and will lower the weight...just zero facts to make that call.

Maybe swapping the massive aluminum plate for a 0.5" carbon fibre/aluminium honeycomb plate would reduce weight, increase range/performance and improve road debris impact characteristics at a sufficiently low cost. We will see.
Again, maybe so...and I think this is the point you're grasping what I was attempting to get at. In light of the battery damage (fire or not) it's reasonable to reassess the safety of the battery for purposes of damage and passenger safety and give consideration to possible design changes. It's just possible that this will be the inspiration for a dramatic, cost effective improvement that actually lowers the overall weight as you suggest with your design idea...it's also possible that the analysis will show that there is no practical cost effective way to make the battery protection measurably better. In either case, it's time well spent.
 
Ice floor board impalement compared to a battery bullet proof vest

http://www.teslamotors.com/forum/fo...impalement-compared-battery-bullet-proof-vest

This posted on TESLAMOTORS.COM by d_v. It will make you feel all warm and fuzzy about your (grin of) Teslas...

Just for the record (and to highlight my talent for stating the obvious) I would much rather have my MS burn to the frunk than experience any of these impalements. Now let's put this a little more into perspective: coming out of such an incident I get a brand new MS (thanks to the new TM warranty) versus possible injury or death to myself or my family.
 
Last edited:
Just had to resurrect this thread, and in hindsight it's an interesting read because it somewhat captures the emotions of the time. Isn't anyone going to say "I told you so?" No wait, nobody mentioned titanium...lol.

No because it was entirely unnecessary. They've basically made an armored car just short of a humvee armored for land mines. Just to reassure scared and foolish consumers who cannot rationally calculate risk. Sure it lives up to the purpose of Tesla motors - to bring forward the mass adoption of electric transport. However humans=stupid.
 
No because it was entirely unnecessary. They've basically made an armored car just short of a humvee armored for land mines. Just to reassure scared and foolish consumers who cannot rationally calculate risk. Sure it lives up to the purpose of Tesla motors - to bring forward the mass adoption of electric transport. However humans=stupid.

True, true...you know I think it's time for a YouTube Hummer H1 Versus Tesla Model S landmine video, and while we're at it, how about showing an S-class, 7-series, A8 or the like running over that concrete tile and tow hitch...I wonder if they would catch fire?
 
Just had to resurrect this thread, and in hindsight it's an interesting read because it somewhat captures the emotions of the time. Isn't anyone going to say "I told you so?" No wait, nobody mentioned titanium...lol.

To be fair Tesla isn't changing the Aluminum armor plate on the battery pack with this change anyway. They are building a 'trip wire' and placing a smaller armor plate behind it to protect other bits in front of the battery.

- - - Updated - - -

The impact energy must be absorbed by a dedicated crash structure to avoid damage to vital car parts.

VolkerP basically hit the nail on the head with what Tesla has done on post #3 as well. At least in concept.