-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
What is Tesla Motors' biggest flaw/challenge?
- Thread starter Yggdrasill
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Tesla Inc.
dmckinstry
Model X 2019
I don't think the 40kWh pack uses the new batteries, so the full range might not be available on it, unless they're underrating the pack.
evinfairfax
Member
Is there a difference between the 40kWh and the 85kWh other than size/number of cells?
To be clear, she and I were discussing the 85kWh pack in the performance model, which is what I had been planning to get. I'm not sure if that applies to the other packs also, but I would guess it does.
Hi Kevin,
Tesla just tweeted that the Model S in Europe will be capable of three phase charging.
Larry
Well, you pay for it, of course, but after the initial engineering cost, parts cost is so small that they chose to include 44 kW charging as standard even in the little Zoe.
Come to think of it, what Tesla ought to do is to integrate the charger in the inverter and charge early adopters (read: idiots like me) 2k euro for it while there's no competition to worry about and pocket the money. That should make the stockholders happy
Except that would be difficult in practice, they would have to sell two different inverters. Oh, well.
Last edited:
Norbert
TSLA will win
So if we are lucky, with the hints that range might actually be above 300 miles, it might come close to having 300 miles available for "daily" use. Leaves me curious about the logic of those 5%.
Norbert
TSLA will win
That wasn't spelled out, but it appeared to refer to the Model S being measured in the same way as the Roadster. Of course, it is possible that might be done with the aero wheels, but in general the aero wheels are described as giving additional range. My assumption is that these details are still subject to change until first production-identical cars have been built. Also, the 5% might be available as "reserve", and as you don't have to charge in a special way, these 5% would always be available when you really need them (unlike with range mode). Of course, for regular use it is probably better not to touch the lower 10% or even 15%.
evinfairfax
Member
What they explained to a couple of us on Sunday is that the vehicle will not allow you to drive below the 5% threshold. So that's a hard stop (no more motion). The 5% is there to give you 30 days to plug in and avoid any sort of bricking situation.
Norbert
TSLA will win
Thanks for clarifying and getting this information. Perhaps that could mean that 95 % = 300 miles, but I guess it is also possible that 95% = 285 miles ?
95% must be 300 miles. Seems there'd be legal complaints if Tesla said "300", but you couldn't actually use it.
Norbert
TSLA will win
Which would be even better. Appears to mean the range would be 300 miles (@55mph) in what corresponds to standard mode for the Roadster.... Almost too good to be true.
Thanks. After the blog stuff, I think that's smart.
I still think you should reconsider the Model S or at least check out a production car and its interior. It should be sufficient enough and the performance and driving an EV might make up for the less refined interior.
With apologies for posting several days after the last post, I think the biggest challenges for Tesla are competition from established car makers as they enter the EV market, and public attitude about batteries.
Speaking for myself, I have never been a potential customer for luxury cars or sports cars. I have owned a Jeep CJ-5, a Honda Civic, and Prius, in that order. Before buying my Roadster I drove a Zap Xebra for four years. I spent most of a year waiting for a Nissan Leaf and only bought my Roadster after Nissan lost my trust/goodwill with six months of repeatedly screwing up my order and refusing to give me any reliable information about it. And yet the Leaf is, by all accounts, an excellent car, and when I test drove one I really liked it. At 1/4 the cost of the Roadster, it was actually my first choice. Nissan only lost me by a prodigious amount of incompetence stretched out over a half a year. If they get their act together, they will be serious competition for those drivers who, like me, just want an electric car. By the time Tesla is ready to introduce a $30,000 EV, Nissan will have several years head start in that segment, and others may have entered as well. That's a major challenge.
The other is batteries; their inherent limitations and public acceptance of them.
Batteries are expensive and have far less energy density than gasoline. They take a long time to charge, and their useful life is uncertain but seems much less than a gasoline engine and drive train. Even with fast charging, assuming an infrastructure is eventually built, it takes several hours to recharge a 300-mile car, compared to five minutes to gas up a stinker. Most people want their cars to be capable of extended road trips without having to spend the time needed for recharging. This could change with an all-day car capable of recharging overnight. But that's not a trivial matter. Assuming 300 Wh/mile, ten hours driving at 65 mph would need a 195 kWh pack. Charging that in 12 hours at a hotel/motel would require a 16 1/4 kW charger. That's 68 amps at 240 volts. The technology is no problem at all. The capital cost for hotels to provide that is not trivial.
So, widespread adoption of EVs by the public will require a change in expectations about travel. Or it will require significant advancement in both battery technology/price and charging infrastructure.
As for gasoline prices driving EV acceptance, people pay far more for gasoline in Europe than we do here. As long as the rise is gradual, people will accept it.
This leaves attitudes about gasoline as a possible motivator for public acceptance. Again, speaking for myself, it was my attitude about gasoline that got me into EVs, and yet I still have the Prius for road trips. Even the 300-mile Model S will not work for me for my yearly summer trip up to Canada for hiking. Even with my anti-gasoline attitude, I'm not willing to take two days instead of one for that drive each way, because with nothing but 120 v. available on my route I'd need an overnight charge each way, plus make arrangements to leave the car plugged in somewhere at each of my hiking locations. With the stinker I can make the drive in a day and leave the car parked anywhere.
Finally, it is too early to know how long the batteries will last. Ten-year-old Rav4EVs are still going strong, but will lithium packs do as well? We simply won't know until they've been on the road for a few years. Until then the market is limited to early adopters, willing to take the risk, or people like me who are so committed to electric for non-financial rasons that we're willing to pay the cost of replacement batteries if we must.
So these are the challenges I see for Tesla:
Competition, unknown battery longevity, battery cost, and public acceptance of the inconvenience of charging batteries on road trips.
Speaking for myself, I have never been a potential customer for luxury cars or sports cars. I have owned a Jeep CJ-5, a Honda Civic, and Prius, in that order. Before buying my Roadster I drove a Zap Xebra for four years. I spent most of a year waiting for a Nissan Leaf and only bought my Roadster after Nissan lost my trust/goodwill with six months of repeatedly screwing up my order and refusing to give me any reliable information about it. And yet the Leaf is, by all accounts, an excellent car, and when I test drove one I really liked it. At 1/4 the cost of the Roadster, it was actually my first choice. Nissan only lost me by a prodigious amount of incompetence stretched out over a half a year. If they get their act together, they will be serious competition for those drivers who, like me, just want an electric car. By the time Tesla is ready to introduce a $30,000 EV, Nissan will have several years head start in that segment, and others may have entered as well. That's a major challenge.
The other is batteries; their inherent limitations and public acceptance of them.
Batteries are expensive and have far less energy density than gasoline. They take a long time to charge, and their useful life is uncertain but seems much less than a gasoline engine and drive train. Even with fast charging, assuming an infrastructure is eventually built, it takes several hours to recharge a 300-mile car, compared to five minutes to gas up a stinker. Most people want their cars to be capable of extended road trips without having to spend the time needed for recharging. This could change with an all-day car capable of recharging overnight. But that's not a trivial matter. Assuming 300 Wh/mile, ten hours driving at 65 mph would need a 195 kWh pack. Charging that in 12 hours at a hotel/motel would require a 16 1/4 kW charger. That's 68 amps at 240 volts. The technology is no problem at all. The capital cost for hotels to provide that is not trivial.
So, widespread adoption of EVs by the public will require a change in expectations about travel. Or it will require significant advancement in both battery technology/price and charging infrastructure.
As for gasoline prices driving EV acceptance, people pay far more for gasoline in Europe than we do here. As long as the rise is gradual, people will accept it.
This leaves attitudes about gasoline as a possible motivator for public acceptance. Again, speaking for myself, it was my attitude about gasoline that got me into EVs, and yet I still have the Prius for road trips. Even the 300-mile Model S will not work for me for my yearly summer trip up to Canada for hiking. Even with my anti-gasoline attitude, I'm not willing to take two days instead of one for that drive each way, because with nothing but 120 v. available on my route I'd need an overnight charge each way, plus make arrangements to leave the car plugged in somewhere at each of my hiking locations. With the stinker I can make the drive in a day and leave the car parked anywhere.
Finally, it is too early to know how long the batteries will last. Ten-year-old Rav4EVs are still going strong, but will lithium packs do as well? We simply won't know until they've been on the road for a few years. Until then the market is limited to early adopters, willing to take the risk, or people like me who are so committed to electric for non-financial rasons that we're willing to pay the cost of replacement batteries if we must.
So these are the challenges I see for Tesla:
Competition, unknown battery longevity, battery cost, and public acceptance of the inconvenience of charging batteries on road trips.
smorgasbord
Active Member
You compare to Nissan for experience, but the Roadster has been out longer than the Leaf. I believe Tesla has more experience and better technology. Nissan, BMW, etc., have more money to invest in R&D and marketing, but to date no-one except Tesla produces a car that goes more than 100 miles. The nearest competitor to Tesla goes less than 1/2 as far.
No, fast charging charges at about 4-5 miles per minute when the pack is enough less than full. I've heard quotes of 30 minutes to add 150 miles to the 85kWh battery from Tesla and a total of 45 minutes to add over 200 miles. So, SF to LA is now possible with one 30 minute stop. That's maybe 10 minutes longer than a normal bathroom break/gas stop for me.
EVs don't need to go 10 hours of continuous freeway driving to be successful. I haven't done a 600 mile drive in a day - ever - in my life. Very few people do that, and even fewer would do two days back to back like that. Once an EV does 500 miles, the quick charge thing becomes moot - you drive to your destination and then charge for a couple days while you visit.
Tesla warranties Model S batteries for 8 years, for at least 100K miles (unlimited miles on the 85 kWh). Is there any ICE car being sold today that warrants their drivetrain for 8 years/unlimited miles? No.
The real issue here is battery replacement costs and public perception of how long the batteries will last, not how long they actually last.
The competition is worse than Tesla in terms of battery cost and range, and show no signs of surpassing Tesla. The issue of battery cost is getting better and better, and gas is going up in price. Charging on road trips goes away as batteries hold more juice (we've had a double in the capacity of the 18650 cells Tesla uses between 2004 and today), and 30 minute quick charging for the occasional really long trip will be fine for almost all.
You think the real challenges for Tesla are the challenges for EV acceptance, and then throw in that other companies will be better than Tesla. Well, if EVs can beat ICE cars, then the competition doesn't matter. Yours are all long-term challenges. The real issues for Tesla are short and medium term. Can they deliver Model S in quantity and quality on schedule? Are there enough people wanting to buy them at a 20K/year after 30K have been sold (And that's not an EV thing as much as it is a $75K car market thing). Can they make a Gen-3 for $30K and enough range? Medium term, will people start to realize the long term cost benefits of EVs despite their higher cost? (It's like of like solar in that regard, and Americans have a tough time seeing that, which is why they have the "solar lease" thing).
Yeah. I understand why they'll put the chargers along the coasts first and have no problem with that. I hope they put at least three chargers in Texas soon after as that would cover most of the travel between the 4 major cities.
I don't view the range as much of an issue for Tesla. At this point in time, the range is good enough that the market for EVs will take off. I think Tesla could grow to sell 100k cars globally per year even if battery tech didn't improve at all. The growth limitations aren't in the batteries at the moment, it's in bringing a working car company online.
I also think Tesla has chosen a very good strategy by selling more than one battery pack. This allows Tesla to market the car much more broadly. For people driving around in a Leaf, the 40 kWh battery is a significant improvement on the Leaf, and it might be affordable while the 85 kWh battery might be unaffordable. I think we will see battery options replacing motors as the primary choice to make beyond what car to buy. At least in the 10-30 year perspective. We might eventually see a point where the batteries are no longer a significant percentage of the cost of the car, and people just get the 1000 mile battery as standard.
I also think Tesla has chosen a very good strategy by selling more than one battery pack. This allows Tesla to market the car much more broadly. For people driving around in a Leaf, the 40 kWh battery is a significant improvement on the Leaf, and it might be affordable while the 85 kWh battery might be unaffordable. I think we will see battery options replacing motors as the primary choice to make beyond what car to buy. At least in the 10-30 year perspective. We might eventually see a point where the batteries are no longer a significant percentage of the cost of the car, and people just get the 1000 mile battery as standard.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
So true, and not only have I never done a 600 mile drive in one day, I never would want to! The majority of the population never does such a drive either.
Similar threads
