-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Why hasn’t Tesla published the range & HP on the new great 4680 battery? Sr. VP has been driving around Texas with a new MY (4680) for days now. 🤷🏻♂️
- Thread starter Msicario
- Start date
Because the specs will be the same as the current model Y
RoBoRaT
PoPeYeD'SaiLoRDuDe
ATPMSD
Active Member
Here are the EPA stickers for the 2022 Model Y, not sure of this is helpful as I do not know if the 2022s have the new battery or not
insideevs.com
2022 Tesla Model Y Receives Official EPA Range/Efficiency Ratings
The official EPA range and efficiency numbers for the 2022 Tesla Model Y are in. No surprise in terms of values, but the presence of the RWD version is.
insideevs.com
According to Tesla they are manufacturing units now and promised customer delivery before Q1 (March) you think they don’t have the Range & HP specs yet
These specs are for the 2022 MY with the 2170 batteryHere are the EPA stickers for the 2022 Model Y, not sure of this is helpful as I do not know if the 2022s have the new battery or not
2022 Tesla Model Y Receives Official EPA Range/Efficiency Ratings
The official EPA range and efficiency numbers for the 2022 Tesla Model Y are in. No surprise in terms of values, but the presence of the RWD version is.
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
Given official range is dependent on the EPA, they very likely don’t.According to Tesla they are manufacturing units now and promised customer delivery before Q1 (March) you think they don’t have the Range & HP specs yet
An insider driving a test mule doesn’t mean they’re going to release a bunch of specs in advance to nerf current sales.
According to Tesla they are manufacturing units now and promised customer delivery before Q1 (March) you think they don’t have the Range & HP specs yet
I think the earnings announcement was worded something like the first MY should be delivered to a customer before the end of Q1 assuming completion of certification which was expected 'soon.'
RoBoRaT
PoPeYeD'SaiLoRDuDe
BOOM
I think your on target.. Lucid Air CEO who used to work for Tesla, said pretty much the same thing. I agree as well.Tesla timelines aren't always on time.According to Tesla they are manufacturing units now and promised customer delivery before Q1 (March) you think they don’t have the Range & HP specs yet
According to Tesla they are manufacturing units now and promised customer delivery before Q1 (March) you think they don’t have the Range & HP specs yet
They do have the spec and it's the same for model Y as some other poster has pointed out. The battery is more efficient and have more capacity so they will just use less to meet the current spec of model Y. The car might be lighter and also cheaper to make.
However, knowing Tesla, they will most likely put in a "full" battery pack but soft limit to the current spec. Then either sell you the software upgrade or magically unlock range as Fermont catches up.
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
I see a few possibilities.
1) spec stays identical and there’s no spec/marketing differentiation at all between Austin/Fremont Model Y. I see this as somewhat less likely as there is a considerable contingent out there that couldn’t possibly stand it if someone had “bigger cells” than they did and there will be all sorts of gamesmanship to try and get one vs the other by the Elon Army.
2) Tesla will introduce a new sub-model and will differentiate trims between Fremont/Austin. For example, the current 2170 Y produced in Fremont becomes the “standard” Model Y, and an updated LR/Performance trim is introduced at a price premium with 4680 cells and is manufactured in Austin. I see this as somewhat more likely.
3) All Model Y production shifts to Austin and extra capacity at Fremont is used for more Model 3s. This might be the long-term best solution.
Guess we’ll see.
1) spec stays identical and there’s no spec/marketing differentiation at all between Austin/Fremont Model Y. I see this as somewhat less likely as there is a considerable contingent out there that couldn’t possibly stand it if someone had “bigger cells” than they did and there will be all sorts of gamesmanship to try and get one vs the other by the Elon Army.
2) Tesla will introduce a new sub-model and will differentiate trims between Fremont/Austin. For example, the current 2170 Y produced in Fremont becomes the “standard” Model Y, and an updated LR/Performance trim is introduced at a price premium with 4680 cells and is manufactured in Austin. I see this as somewhat more likely.
3) All Model Y production shifts to Austin and extra capacity at Fremont is used for more Model 3s. This might be the long-term best solution.
Guess we’ll see.
Mrbrock
Active Member
No chance they put in a bigger pack and software limit. They will make the car perform the same as 2170 MY and enjoy the benefits of cheaper production costs. The “full” battery pack for 4680 is going to be less kWh than a comparable 2170.
And/or they make a 'full'er battery build with say, 400+ miles of range, and charge an extra $5k for the 'larger' battery.
Why not? Tesla has done it before. using the same battery pack saves time in production lines and also gives tesla the ability to charge money later. The cost is already low or the same (if they fully pack the empty structural with 4680, it will still be cheaper than 2170)
Tesla remotely extends range of vehicles for free in Florida to help owners escape Hurricane Irma
Millions of people are currently affected by the evacuation of Florida as Hurricane Irma starts reaching the state and creates...
electrek.co
"Tesla used to offer the option to buy a Model S or Model X with a 75 kWh battery pack software-locked at a capacity of 60 kWh. The option would result in a less expensive vehicle with a shorter range, but the option to pay to remotely enable the longer range at a later stage."
Mrbrock
Active Member
In the case of the MS, they offered the software locked 60 to create a lower priced entry level vehicle. In this instance, you would be asking Tesla to create a SR MY again with a LR pack. And with 100k reservations for the MY, they don’t need an entry level vehicle to boost sales. They also already have a SR pack from the M3 so why waste cells?Why not? Tesla has done it before. using the same battery pack saves time in production lines and also gives tesla the ability to charge money later. The cost is already low or the same (if they fully pack the empty structural with 4680, it will still be cheaper than 2170)
Tesla remotely extends range of vehicles for free in Florida to help owners escape Hurricane Irma
Millions of people are currently affected by the evacuation of Florida as Hurricane Irma starts reaching the state and creates...
"Tesla used to offer the option to buy a Model S or Model X with a 75 kWh battery pack software-locked at a capacity of 60 kWh. The option would result in a less expensive vehicle with a shorter range, but the option to pay to remotely enable the longer range at a later stage."
Even though Elon says Tesla is not cell constrained right now, that is with 2170 and they haven’t shifted to 4680 and when they do, they will want every cell that is put in a car to be paid for right now. Not maybe sometime in the future. And this “same battery pack” you allude to doesn’t exist yet. And even then we are only talking 10-15 miles extra range (4-5%). Would you pay $1k or $2k for 15 miles of range?
The MY isn’t the top vehicle in the range (MX is) so Tesla would want that to have the best range. People are going to be paying at least double the price of a MY so Tesla will want that premium vehicle to have the best range. Pretty simple business here. It costs more to put more cells in the car. The extra cost would be multiplied by 100k right now. Gets pretty expensive when you look at profitability of the 4680. And they have spent untold millions redesigning the palladium MX that no one would want to buy if the MY gets much better range.
Similar threads
- Article
