350 mile range Quad Motor rumored to be 1st trim launched

[CyberGus]

Sea lioning! Sea lioning!

Sponsored

 

[LDRHAWKE]

A lot of people DO use trucks for truck things, just not most. A lot of those people live in Texas. I've been there once, almost got murdered in my M3, while casually interrupting a drug deal. Not looking forward to going back, you people don't think the same way i do .

Normally that is a good thing, but you guys got guns, and like to use your vehicles as weapons. Soooo..

I think you belong on Twitter……People that live in Texas, guns, vehicles as weapons, drug deals……

 

[cvalue13]

I certainly asked more questions than you...

was even one of those about the truck discussion?

Mon the trim discussion, I’ve told you as much as I can

 

[Baldey]

was even one of those about the truck discussion?

Mon the trim discussion, I’ve told you as much as I can

Right, because i am asking about subjective things. Why would i want to ask about objective things when one can look those up? I thought we were still talking about trim, and why we believe the things we do. What truck discussion, like the "truck things" one?

"Better" can be both subjective and objective. Subjectively, you can enjoy driving your big truck daily; obliviously getting in everyone's way, and air passages. But objectively, there are better options. Assuming your objective is to not suck on the road, anyway.

 

[JBee]

Right, because i am asking about subjective things. Why would i want to ask about objective things when one can look those up? I thought we were still talking about trim, and why we believe the things we do. What truck discussion, like the "truck things" one?

"Better" can be both subjective and objective. Subjectively, you can enjoy driving your big truck daily; obliviously getting in everyone's way, and air passages. But objectively, there are better options. Assuming your objective is to not suck on the road, anyway.

Are you bored and looking for human reaction, or just not good at making a point?

Read my last post on how some of your assertions aren't "realistic" concerning the why and how motors and battery cells are interlinked or not.

 

[Baldey]

Are you bored and looking for human reaction, or just not good at making a point?

Read my last post on how some of your assertions aren't "realistic" concerning the why and how motors and battery cells are interlinked or not.

Probably, both. Sorry i did not think you were replying to me, and TL;DR'ed, Reading now..:

Aah.. There seems to be a misunderstanding, motors are not engines. Batteries are not gas tanks. The power comes from the whole system. You can not have an over powered motor using an underpowered battery. Well, you can, but you will not like your results. When creating an EV, whether thats a car, a drone, a scooter, bike, whatever, you match the components of the system to each-other best that you can, making tradeoffs where needed.

Rare earth free does NOT imply induction. You can have ferrite magnets, its just another tradeoff. I can list references if you want. But why would this matter anyway? Quad is not likely till higher density cells, and because they can achieve better efficiencies by disconnecting motors while cruising, like they do in the semi.

A 2170 structural pack would not be as strong, because of the weaker cell walls. yes the webbing would be denser, but also weaker. Again, more is not always better..2170's are for vapes and laptops, not cars. You could address this, but you would likely run into other issues like cooling. If tesla COULD do it, they WOULD have.

 

[cvalue13]

"Better" can be both subjective and objective. Subjectively, you can enjoy driving your big truck daily; obliviously getting in everyone's way, and air passages. But objectively, there are better options. Assuming your objective is to not suck on the road, anyway.

glad to hear you wont be buying a Cybertruck - only left unclear as to why you're here

yes, it was clear from the start that combined with your admission that you've never owned a truck you meanwhile have some set of moral principles that for you is the basis of some philosophy of "trucks are bad, cars are good"

what's going to *really* blow your mind: there exist people who think *cars* are bad, too!

so as it turns out, we're both morally flawed!

see, e.g.:

no such thing as ethical consumption

to level-set:

• RE outcome of trim option availability: i know what i know, and invite you to ignore me
• RE Tesla's reasons for trim option availability: lots of reasons available for/against any number of outcomes, I don't know Tesla's reasons/priorities
• RE trucks are bad: moral failings are my calling-card

 

[JBee]

Probably, both. Sorry i did not think you were replying to me, and TL;DR'ed, Reading now..:

Aah.. There seems to be a misunderstanding, motors are not engines. Batteries are not gas tanks. The power comes from the whole system. You can not have an over powered motor using an underpowered battery. Well, you can, but you will not like your results. When creating an EV, whether thats a car, a drone, a scooter, bike, whatever, you match the components of the system to each-other best that you can, making tradeoffs where needed.

Rare earth free does NOT imply induction. You can have ferrite magnets, its just another tradeoff. I can list references if you want. But why would this matter anyway? Quad is not likely till higher density cells, and because they can achieve better efficiencies by disconnecting motors while cruising, like they do in the semi.

A 2170 structural pack would not be as strong, because of the weaker cell walls. yes the webbing would be denser, but also weaker. Again, more is not always better..2170's are for vapes and laptops, not cars. You could address this, but you would likely run into other issues like cooling. If tesla COULD do it, they WOULD have.

The batteries can easily handle the discharge C rate, it's actually the thermal performance that is a problem, in fact by that metric, it's the reason the Plaid still uses 18650 formfactor to keep cooling under control on high performance bursts. That's a 1000hp from a 100kWh of 18650 cells, how much more do you think the CT needs? I doubt it will achieve 350miles on less than 120kWh, so 1200hp should be achievable even with 18650s.

A quad motor could have smaller motors. In fact the semi has smaller but more powerful ones because of the CF wrapped rotors but with higher gearing. As mentioned previously you also need to consider how long you expect the performance to be demanded (this is measured in seconds btw, and only limited by heat build up from the motor inefficiency) and how this applies to available traction. The Plaid can't even put down the max HP until well over 60mph, because it doesn't have enough traction to do so.

I haven't seen anything yet regards to using ferrite magnets in a high power/high torque EV performance motor by any EV manufacturer. Especially considering their low magnetic flux that is up to an order of magnitude less than neodymium and less than induction which needs no magnets at all...and is the most produced Tesla motor type they make?

So what am I missing here?

As for the cell walls, can you provide me with a comparison of the difference between a 2170 and 4680 cell wall thickness and cell packing density, and how that effects the shear stresses on the webbing of the structural sandwich of the pack? Even if the 4680 is twice as thick (500 μm) than a 2170 (250 μm) a 2170 pack would have 4x as many cell walls. Let alone that the foamed glue they use to bond the top and bottom layers probably would suffice by itself for the webbing, as most of the forces are distributed through the top and bottom layers of the sandwich spaceframe, and not the cell walls?

The point is that motors and batteries are not as interdependent as it might as first seem for the CT.

This also ignores another point why a lower range CT might be more important for Tesla: cost. Do we have any recent cost metrics per 4680 cell? Maybe that is their least profitable item on the CT, so shipping less of them in a lower range model is better for the bottom line? I'd imagine a high failure rate would also be a good reason why they can't get production up to speed?

There are quite a lot of variables here, most of which we can't define without Tesla defining at least some of them for us.

 

[wtibbit]

glad to hear you wont be buying a Cybertruck - only left unclear as to why you're here

yes, it was clear from the start that combined with your admission that you've never owned a truck you meanwhile have some set of moral principles that for you is the basis of some philosophy of "trucks are bad, cars are good"

what's going to *really* blow your mind: there exist people who think *cars* are bad, too!

so as it turns out, we're both morally flawed!

see, e.g.:



to level-set:

• RE outcome of trim option availability: i know what i know, and invite you to ignore me
• RE Tesla's reasons for trim option availability: lots of reasons available for/against any number of outcomes, I don't know Tesla's reasons/priorities
• RE trucks are bad: moral failings are my calling-card

I've been mildly amused by Baldey's messages in this thread along with various others' responses, but I've been surprised that it turned into an education moment for me. Somehow, I had never encountered the term "sea lioning" (although had encountered the phenomenon that is sea lioning too often.) Now that I'm slightly better informed, I'd like to make this observation. Apparently, Baldy "...couldn't help but overhear..."

 

[cvalue13]

I've been mildly amused by Baldey's messages in this thread along with various others' responses, but I've been surprised that it turned into an education moment for me. Somehow, I had never encountered the term "sea lioning" (although had encountered the phenomenon that is sea lioning too often.) Now that I'm slightly better informed, I'd like to make this observation. Apparently, Baldy "...couldn't help but overhear..."

I'd never heard the term either - feels right

 

[Baldey]

I've been mildly amused by Baldey's messages in this thread along with various others' responses, but I've been surprised that it turned into an education moment for me. Somehow, I had never encountered the term "sea lioning" (although had encountered the phenomenon that is sea lioning too often.) Now that I'm slightly better informed, I'd like to make this observation. Apparently, Baldy "...couldn't help but overhear..."

Haha, I'm just toasting in this epic bread. I made no illusions to being "polite", but i feel that i have been civil. I just have strong opinions that i enjoy being challenged. To make them stronger. That is why i argue. I didn't know of this term either though, learning moment for me too!

 

[Baldey]

• RE Tesla's reasons for trim option availability: lots of reasons available for/against any number of outcomes, I don't know Tesla's reasons/priorities
  • Kinda determines the outcome, doesn't it? How can you know one without the other?
    
• RE outcome of trim option availability: i know what i know, and invite you to ignore me.
  • Deal, we can come back to our bookmarks after delivery day.
    
• RE trucks are bad: moral failings are my calling-card

glad to hear you wont be buying a Cybertruck - only left unclear as to why you're here

What makes you say that? I don't mind sucking on the road once in a while, everyone does it right? Define sucking: well i won't be asleep in the left lane, but I'm definitely gonna be blocking the view ahead of anyone following too close. Every lane change will be an event so clear, everyone around me will mark it on their calendar. Curbs will fear me now. And although there woun't be a black cloud coming out for every time i gun the accelerator, someone somewhere will still have an ashma attack.

so as it turns out, we're both morally flawed!

see, e.g.: no such thing as ethical consumption

Here i can agree ?

 

[cvalue13]

Kinda determines the outcome, doesn't it? How can you know one without the other?

asked and answered, counselor

you just didn't like/catch the answer

 

[Crissa]

This is why I'd advise people to not engage with him, @Baldey

-Crissa

 

[Baldey]

The batteries can easily handle the discharge C rate, it's actually the thermal performance that is a problem, in fact by that metric, it's the reason the Plaid still uses 18650 formfactor to keep cooling under control on high performance bursts. That's a 1000hp from a 100kWh of 18650 cells, how much more do you think the CT needs? I doubt it will achieve 350miles on less than 120kWh, so 1200hp should be achievable even with 18650s.

A quad motor could have smaller motors. In fact the semi has smaller but more powerful ones because of the CF wrapped rotors but with higher gearing. As mentioned previously you also need to consider how long you expect the performance to be demanded (this is measured in seconds btw, and only limited by heat build up from the motor inefficiency) and how this applies to available traction. The Plaid can't even put down the max HP until well over 60mph, because it doesn't have enough traction to do so.

I haven't seen anything yet regards to using ferrite magnets in a high power/high torque EV performance motor by any EV manufacturer. Especially considering their low magnetic flux that is up to an order of magnitude less than neodymium and less than induction which needs no magnets at all...and is the most produced Tesla motor type they make?

So what am I missing here?

As for the cell walls, can you provide me with a comparison of the difference between a 2170 and 4680 cell wall thickness and cell packing density, and how that effects the shear stresses on the webbing of the structural sandwich of the pack? Even if the 4680 is twice as thick (500 μm) than a 2170 (250 μm) a 2170 pack would have 4x as many cell walls. Let alone that the foamed glue they use to bond the top and bottom layers probably would suffice by itself for the webbing, as most of the forces are distributed through the top and bottom layers of the sandwich spaceframe, and not the cell walls?

The point is that motors and batteries are not as interdependent as it might as first seem for the CT.

This also ignores another point why a lower range CT might be more important for Tesla: cost. Do we have any recent cost metrics per 4680 cell? Maybe that is their least profitable item on the CT, so shipping less of them in a lower range model is better for the bottom line? I'd imagine a high failure rate would also be a good reason why they can't get production up to speed?

There are quite a lot of variables here, most of which we can't define without Tesla defining at least some of them for us.

Yes they can handle it, but just because you can doesn't always mean you should. Ever wonder why there is no standard range performance model 3? If you spread the stress over more cells, they last longer. And Tesla has a pretty generous battery warranty, one that i have already taken advantage of when my battery died at 61k miles..

If you have a tri or even quad motor configuration, it will be capable of higher discharge rates than dual. Plain and simple. You will need a battery capable of higher discharge rates to compensate, assuming your first design was finely tuned. This means more cells, because there is only one cell type possible: 4680. Because structure:

-Here you can see a man struggle to open a 4680 for 30 minutes, and hear his commentary of the ordeal. And they measure the can thickness around 1 hour 6 minutes and 50 seconds in...

-Here you can see a kid cut into an 18650 with a razor blade:


The 4680 is ~650 microns thick, a 2170 is ~250. Pretty sure, the steel used is also different. I don't know how the math works out on that as far as force transfer goes, pretty sure you need modeling software and a super computer for that. But there are no structural 2170 cells on the market as far as i know.. 4680 cell is designed to be. The foam is not enough, you need the whole system. We've seen structural packs in the MYs. But only using 4680 cells, for a reason.

This whole video is a speculation on tesla's future motors. Induction, not-as-rare earth, ferrite, and more is covered. He sites his sources. Enjoy!


My point is motors and batteries are always very interdependent. You can have four smaller motors, doesn't mater if they are carbon wrapped or induction, thats fine. Their total maximum kW rating determines the minimum battery capacity (and ofcourse C rate), if you want to avoid severe voltage sag. Then you match the KV rating to the voltage of the pack. Then you know your pack's voltage, peak power and expected capacity. Now you divide that into modules and arrange the modules in a Series/Parallel configuration that add up to that requirement. Then design a BMS and ESC for the whole mess, its a very involved process..

So this, to me, means that a tri motor trim and especially the future quad motor plaid variant, will need progressively bigger packs over dual motor to accommodate the additional weight and available power. This was so obvious to me that it was always assumed, i did not think there was need to vocalize it. This already happens on every existing trim. Cory sure seems to agree:


Yes, there are a lot of variables, which is why this is all fun speculation and we will all probably be wrong. I think it is safe to say the cell is the most profitable part of the vehicle for tesla, they probably loose money on the steel frame and glass/plastics/electronics/assembly. Especially at the start of production, manufacture costs improve from there. Tesla makes BANK on their cells, because they get paid on both ends: customer buys the cell, and then the government gives them regulatory credits which they sell. And if they get to charge an even higher premium for the same number of limited cells by selling a higher trim, well that just makes too much sence to me still..

They would sell the Quad variant if they could. I just don't think the 4680 energy density is there yet. For Tri, sure. Need the cathode plant up and running for a few months i think, before we can start thinking of elon's favorite plaid quad model. Or are you saying that 4 wheels means 4 motors better? Because that is a different discussion..

Sponsored