TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

What am I 99% chopped liver?!

Discussion in 'Model S' started by de704, Dec 21, 2011.

  1. de704

    de704 XP268

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    Messages:
    355
    Location:
    Lawrenceville GA
    In light of the model S specs being release I wanted to share my opinion (in a constructive way) with my fellow reservation holders & Tesla fans & hopefully some Tesla employee might happen across this.

    I think the case could be easily made that those of us planning on buying the 160 mile Model S are probably “aspiring” or stretching ourselves harder to get a Model S than those getting a signature model and I understand money talks, but…. As I put away over a thousand dollars a month in anticipation of the Model S. Let’s just say... it will be unacceptable for me to be treated like a step child by Tesla. If that is the case I may have to re-evaluate my EV plans. Don’t get me wrong, I probably won’t, but I felt that other may share my opinion and that it’s worth mentioning.

    Let me explain.

    Even though I am buying a 160 range Model S (you could call It the 99%’ers S), I still want to go on long distance trips. Give me the option to pay extra for the super charger and don’t tell me there’s a technical reason it can’t be done. So only charge the battery half way at level 3, and then slow the charging to level two this would keep the batteries safe. I even planned on getting every option on a 160 mile Model S. Now I’m being told that I’m going to spend $60k+ out of pocket. ( I know there’s a rebate but my loan will for the full price of the car, after down payment) to get the “Windows 7 Basic” version of the Model S that can’t do half of the things advertised over the past 3 years.

    I think tesla is leaving money on the table here. What if I’m just trying to get my foot in the Tesla/EV door & I want to upgrade my battery later. Let me do it. Ok!, So make me pay for everything extra. I understand Tesla needs to make money & I want to see them succeed. I will pay extra for the 5.6 motor on my 160 mile S, I will pay extra for a non-conservative color on my 160 mile S; maroon is my favorite color :(. I will pay extra for my Super charger on my 160 mile S, don’t just say no Supercharger not possible on 160 S. I have waited 3 years because I felt the model S would be the best thing to me to save money long term.

    Tesla, don’t tell me what I want. That’s what the big three does. I will tell you, and I’ll gladly hand over more money if you give more options to do it…. on the 160 mile S.

    A 70 thousand dollar car (230 mile S with tax) is out most earthlings reach.
    60 ok, that’s upper middle class, but 70s push’n it.
     
  2. dsm363

    dsm363 Roadster + Sig Model S

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    18,235
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    This has been talked about is a few other threads but I understand people's frustrations. Realistically, I don't think Tesla is giving you a crippled car or treating those reservation holders with bad intentions. While they should have been more explicit when they figured out Super charging wasn't available for the 40 kWh pack and the 0-60 acceleration, they decided to wait until now to share those plans for some reason. Anyone not living on the east or west coast is probably looking at driving their Model S (regardless of battery pack size) without a Tesla super charger ever 100+ miles for a year or two anyway. You'd need to develop an alternate charging strategy for road trips which would likely depend on charing from other Tesla owners, campgrounds or the public J1772 30A chargers.

    I hope Tesla means that the Super Charger isn't included in the cost of the 40 kWh pack and maybe it will be a paid option and you'll be able to charge at a slower rate. Enough people have contacted Tesla so maybe we'll get an answer soon.
     
  3. VolkerP

    VolkerP EU Model S P-37

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    Messages:
    2,455
    Location:
    Germany
    #3 VolkerP, Dec 22, 2011
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2011
    Want to point out a few things on the (real and supposed) limitations of the 160 Model.

    You will toast your cells when charging at a rate of 320mph replenished. And that is a technical reason. It stems from Tesla using modified laptop cells with low-power, high energy density. You still have the option to do road trips using Tesla HPC, HPC 2.0, or [email protected] charge points. You would charge at ~20kW instead of possibly 40kW that your pack could absorb at most, doubling the time to get the same amount of miles replenished.

    A 40kWh Model S with every option totals to $77k before tax credit, shipping & destination, and sales tax. We all agree that the list of options includes many features that were expected to come standard, some at a steep price. OTOH it is well known that going full optioned can double a car's price.

    Fully agree. It would be silly to block later upgrades.

    The 5.6 is not limited by the motor but by the power delivery of the pack. Again, the power limit of the cells, being high energy density ones. BUT you will see same acceleration in 40kWh as in the 85kWh model up the point where drawing 900A hits the power limit of the 40kWh pack. I guess that's around 30-35mph. You will burn every other ICE sedan at the stop lights.
     
  4. WhiteKnight

    WhiteKnight _____ P85 #549 _____ Sig Red / Sig White

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    627
    Location:
    Atlanta
    My fellow Atlantan, the Model S really will not cut it for road trips, I'm sorry you thought it would, but it won't, even with 85 kWh it would still not be as good as the trusty ICE car.

    Talking about it here:
    Highway Range Ignorance

    But, take heart, realistically how often do you take a road trip (over 100 miles)? In my case, it's a half dozen times a year and then we take my wife's minivan. Save the $10K or $20K, get the 40 kWh version and rent a car or fly the next time you've got a long trip to take.
     
  5. de704

    de704 XP268

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    Messages:
    355
    Location:
    Lawrenceville GA
    I would have to disagree with you. If their are enough charging stations the Model S could easily be a long distance car. A car that would be cheaper to operate than any ICE could ever be.

    I am not a baby steps kind of guy. Once I get the Model S. I never want to own a ICE vehicle again. You just have to be a little patient with recharge times. You could always surf the web while you wait.

    Convince is a over priced luxury that makes us fat and lazy!... IMHO
     
  6. surfingslovak

    surfingslovak Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    223
    Location:
    N/A
    #6 surfingslovak, Dec 22, 2011
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2011
    You know, mere repetition will not make this more true. I wouldn't know of any fast charger outside of lab environments that would charge with a constant current, start to finish. To say that you cannot connect a 40kWh pack to a supercharger because it couldn't handle its current is a simplistic and likely incorrect view.

    The supercharger will very likely be able to negotiate the charge current with the car, and it will throttle the current with rising SOC above 70% charge. Tesla sales personnel at the Santana Row store mentioned to smorgasbord the other day that they are concerned about the impact frequent quick charging will have on the battery. They would like to offer 8 years of warranty, and since the 40kWh will likely have to be fast charged more often, and it will be stressed more throughout its lifetime due to its smaller size, they do not allow supercharger access.

    I can accept this explanation, because it does make some sense. However, to say that the 40kWh pack is not capable of fast charging due to some mysterious technical reason is misleading. There are smaller packs on the market that can do this. Yes, they might be using different cells, but the point is that fast chargers are typically capable of throttling their current. This is a necessary design requirement, since cars are not all made the same and they come with different pack sizes.

    I would also argue that Tesla is going to use the same cells in all Model S trims. It does not make sense to order two separate batches from Panasonic just to give the 40kWh car owners weaker and cheaper battery packs. And it would make the manufacturing process more complex as well.

    In regards to the fast charge current. All cells are typically tested with 1C, so 40kWh maximum power is a given for the smallest pack. Many cells can go significantly higher than that, and 1.5 or 2C could be possible on occasion with the Panasonic cells. I didn't look at the spec sheet, but I wouldn't tell someone that their pack can only absorb 40kW at most, not without more data.

    Schönen Abend noch.
     
  7. TEG

    TEG TMC Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Messages:
    17,252
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    We are back to the old thought that it would be nice to rent a 300 mile pack for those occasional times you need to make a long trip.
    I don't think there is any sign they intend to do that, but the car is designed for easy pack swaps, and now you would not only (temporarily) gain the ability to drive further on a charge, but also be able to charge faster when on the long distance drive.
     
  8. WhiteKnight

    WhiteKnight _____ P85 #549 _____ Sig Red / Sig White

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    627
    Location:
    Atlanta
    I am of the thought it would be nice to rent an ICE car or fly in a plane when you need to make a long trip.
     
  9. NigelM

    NigelM Recovering Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2011
    Messages:
    13,257
    Location:
    Sarasota, FL
    Back in October I talked about the idea with Straubel and Blankenship. They realistically said that as good as the idea was there was no infrastructure to facilitate that and it would be many years before it would be possible. The truth is that there has to be a critical mass of users to make that viable and that means, as JB said to me, "we have to sell the cars first".
     
  10. Doug_G

    Doug_G Lead Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    15,853
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    I wouldn't make that assumption. If larger wires are required for fast charging, they will not be present in the 40 kWh pack car.
     
  11. NigelM

    NigelM Recovering Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2011
    Messages:
    13,257
    Location:
    Sarasota, FL
    #11 NigelM, Dec 22, 2011
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2011
    In all honesty, and I apologize in advance if it seems like I'm lecturing as that's not my intention, I would be very worried about buying the 160 Model S and trying to use it for regular roadtrips. Driving a Roadster is a joy and it's tough not to have a heavy foot when driving on the freeway. Unless you have supreme self-control and like drafting behind trucks (and there are a few who can do that) you will probably find yourself needing to charge a 40kWh battery pack after 120 miles and even with QC you would be driving for >2 hours and then charging for ~2 hours. (There's lots of rounding in those numbers and many variables so nobody throw rocks at my statement please). Lack of charging infrastructure will also be a major factor for you; it simply isn't there yet with the frequency that you require and it may not be there for many years.

    FWIW, as an EV driver I would always recommend that if you want to do regular roadtrips go for a bigger battery size and leave off other options to keep the price down.

    P.S. My comments about infrastructure are US-centric!
     
  12. de704

    de704 XP268

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    Messages:
    355
    Location:
    Lawrenceville GA
    On second thought I did some research on the average cost of ownership of ICE cars and the 230 range Model S isn't looking so bad. Just needed a way to justify It to myself :wink:

    Average car ownership nearly $9,000 a year, says AAA. And these figures are low given the current price of gas.
    That's $90k over 10 years.
    Average car ownership nearly $9,000 a year, says AAA - Boston Overdrive - Boston.com

    HOW MUCH DID THE AVERAGE AMERICAN FAMILY SPEND ON GAS IN 2011? $4,155
    How Much Did The Average American Family Spend On Gas in 2011? | TheBlaze.com
     
  13. dpeilow

    dpeilow Moderator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2008
    Messages:
    8,572
    Location:
    Winchester, UK
    What's the average price of PHEV ownership?
     
  14. stopcrazypp

    stopcrazypp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    7,054
    #14 stopcrazypp, Dec 22, 2011
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2011
    There's so much back and forth on this. It entirely depends on if your definition of "supercharger" is by the rate in mph, or by the time you spend there (so a 40kW charger will still qualify as "supercharger). The former is likely limited for technical reasons; the latter is not. Volker is defining "supercharger" as a 320mph charge, so he's technically right.

    And the point about charging current starting out higher in the earlier part of the charge cycle is largely irrelevant because that is comparing peak C-rate to average C-rate. For example assuming 1C average for 85kWh and 2C average for 40kWh for the same charging power. Even if there is a point in the 85kWh charging that reaches 2C, that only means there is a point in the 40kWh charging that reaches 4C. You can't compare peak to averages and say it is safe.

    The smaller packs use significantly different cells that have 2x+ the C-rate and cycle life of 18650 lithium cobalt cells. Almost all packs, besides from Tesla's, use a more robust chemistry (like lithium manganese spinel, lithium iron phosphate, or lithium titanate) in a prismatic cell.

    Nissan demonstrated a liminate cell of the same chemistry can charge/discharge at 2.6x the C-rate of a cylindrical cell, with the cylindrical still ending up with 2.6x the temperature increase (which is the enemy of battery life and limits the charging rate):
    http://www.eco-aesc-lb.com/en/laminatecell.html
    Lithium manganese spinel also has significantly better thermal stability than lithium cobalt:
    http://www.eco-aesc-lb.com/en/mnliion.html

    The Toshiba SCiB cells used by Mitsubishi are cycle tested at 10C/3.75C charge/discharge vs 0.5C-1.0C/1.0C charge/discharge for typical 18650 while lasting 12x longer (6000 cycles vs 500 cycles). The SCiB cells can truly quick charge at 10C all day long and still last much longer than the 18650 cells.
    http://www.toshiba.com/ind/data/tag_files/SCiB_Brochure_5383.pdf

    Tesla just makes up for these deficiencies by building packs that are at least twice the capacity of competitors.

    On the fast charger throttling, it would depend on how Tesla designs it. The typical design is the fast charger makes no assumption about the battery in the car and it's the car computer that tells the charger the appropriate voltage and current. However, we do know the 90kW supercharger is just 9 10kW onboard chargers put together, so this may not be the case. But personally I feel the typical design is more likely, because any other design makes the supercharger very inflexible (bad for future-proofing).

    We know this is not true from previous discussions. Tesla already announced they will use NCR18650A cells (3100mah high capacity cells using Panasonic's new NNP chemistry) in the 300 mile Model S. They have indicated the 230 pack will use the same amount of cells as the 300 pack, which guarantees they will be different cells (and won't have NNP because Panasonic doesn't make a low capacity 18650 NNP cell). The 160 and 230 packs might use the same cells though. It actually makes the pack manufacturing easier if the cells are of different capacity because you can use the same amount of cells in all three packs (just different ones).
     
  15. surfingslovak

    surfingslovak Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    223
    Location:
    N/A
    #15 surfingslovak, Dec 22, 2011
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2011
    Thank you for your thoughtful response, I didn't have time to analyze it properly, but the first paragraph is likely based on a misunderstanding. I was not talking about average and peak current, not at all. While we know precious little about the design of the supercharger, I would be very surprised, if it was only capable of outputting a certain power at a certain charge current. It's much more likely that it will designed with some flexibility, and can output any current in a certain DC voltage band, much like other commercially available chargers are.

    That's the main point I was raising and I'm surprised how strenuously some folks defend their specific idea of how the supercharger will be designed, and use hypothetical design limitations as the main reason why the 40kWh pack wont' be allowed to quick charge.

    I could agree that fast charging can generally become an issue if a less robust cell chemistry is used, but I would prefer not to speculate about the design of the supercharger. We could get hung up on things that might not even be present in the real device. I believe that it would be better to use other similar and commercially available devices as a point of reference, nothing more. I can also appreciate that the 40kWh pack, if it will ever be allowed to quick charge, will use a lower charging current, which technically won't qualify as supercharging. I get that, but that's not what my post was about.

    I think prospective buyers would like to use level 3, or DC charging, and I would be surprised if they cared whether this process can technically qualify as supercharging or not. I can also appreciate Volker's point, and again, with all due respect, I believe that he is incorrect and the supercharger won't be implemented according to his assumptions.

    We are collectively still looking for reasons why quick charging is not allowed for 40kWh packs. It appears that warranty could be one. Different cell chemistry could be another, and I will look at technical information you have posted later today.
     
  16. Robert.Boston

    Robert.Boston Model S VIN P01536

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,842
    Location:
    Portland, Maine, USA
    Irrelevant, as there's only one PHEV that's in the same category of quality/comfort/features as the Model S, and that's the Karma.

    If one is comparing the Model S to a Camry or an Accord, then trying to do a head-to-head on cost is just silly.
     
  17. VolkerP

    VolkerP EU Model S P-37

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    Messages:
    2,455
    Location:
    Germany
    #17 VolkerP, Dec 22, 2011
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2011
    @survingslovak

    I am not making any assumptions on the "supercharger" device beyond what was stated before. Instead, I would not define "QC capability" = "can be hooked to a supercharger". When I and others point out that 90kW will do no good to a 40kWh pack, you answer "well reduce the power, any DC charger can do that". That's still quick charging but in my book that's no longer super charging.
    The quick charging capability as touted by Tesla earlier would mean 80% for the 40kWh pack = 32kWh in 45minutes = 42.7kW. If you insist on Tesla delivering what they advertised, that's the average power of quick charging. Not 90kW.

    And then there are lots of other threads pointing out that the 40kWh model is not suitable for road trips even with QC capability. So I will not go into that here.

    Schönen Abend auch, hoffe es macht weiter Spaß zu diskutieren.
    Volker
     

Share This Page