More 500-mile range rumors!

[HaulingAss]

There is a lot of toy hauling and here in AZ. I am not sure where they go, the Rim? Glamis? but they are out somewhere in the vast west. It could be nice to have enough power to compensate for the extra drag/rolling resistance so that the CT could calculate range and Supercharging without forcing people to do mental calculations. If Tesla designed the trailer if could be configured many ways but aerodynamic and plug-n-play (rear cameras? auto backing..) and even as a live-in camper.

Yeah, I understand the desire to toy haul, my main point was that niche use cases don't need to be addressed by Tesla until they have a lot more marketshare than 3%-4%, especially when those niche uses are just occassional use type of activities.

Tesla wants to aim for the biggest, most impactful markets first, not start catering to special needs when they have only just begun to meet more mainstream needs. They will leave niche markets to their competitors. I mean, Tesla's competitors need customers too, Tesla cannot supply 100% of market needs.

Sponsored

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

Respectfully disagree. The 4680 was revealed as including silicon, which would give it much higher Wh/cell, but has not yet done so (as far as anyone knows).

In fact, most of Battery Day was around improving the cost of energy storage. Of course, if the cell capacity can be improved, the cost per Wh improves as well. These two goals have significant overlap.

Cost, weight, power. Not density. There is more Wh per cell because it’s bigger, not more energy dense.

 

[SSonnentag]

Yeah, I don't know why I missed that. They were both aging platforms by 2017, I think the updated versions have embedded better technology, longer ranges and better battery thermal management systems to manage the batteries. Constant improvement driven by the flood of data always streaming into the mothership. The 2170 batteries are superior to the 18650's. Do they still use the 18650's in the S&X?

Yep, they keep getting more efficient. I'm still amazed that the same capacity battery pack now gets an extra 60 miles of range in the same car. For my somewhat unique rural western US use case, I really need a new vehicle range of 360 miles to be able to meet my needs efficiently for 10 years. Unfortunately, that excludes the 3 and Y. I'm really hoping the Cybertruck will meet that spec.

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

Tesla will not sell a lot of 300+ mile Cybertrucks? Huh? The 300+ mile EPA range Cybertruck will be Tesla's best-selling configuration, due to lighter weight and more affordable purchase cost.

People want bang for their buck, most people (more than half) don't need to be hauling around well over a ton of expensive batteries everywhere they go, when it's a rare day they drive over 100 miles. Value matters more to the average truck buyer than whether they have an additional 150 miles of range they rare ly use (and if they did need it, a quick 15 minute rest break at a Supercharger would fix it).

I'm not financially contrained so I will probably get one with 300+ miles, to start with, and one with 500+ miles, when it's available.

My wife and I have been driving Model 3's for over 5 years and we both charge them as high as we need, up to 100% at home, and discharge them as low as necessary, whenever it's more convenient. On road trips I target 5%-10% SoC when I arrive at a Supercharger and charge to 100% on destination chargers, whenever possible. I don't know what this 20%-80% fake limitation is all about, you are leaving 40% of your range on the table when it sounds like you could actually use it! We still have over 300 miles of EPA range on all three of our 2018 Model 3's, it's not a problem to use all the range, when needed. None of them even have the octovalve or the heatpump for supeior range and battery thermal management. The newer Model 3's and Model Y's are even better!

The daily 20%-80% recommendation is only for when you won't benefit from a higher or lower state of charge, you don't want your battery sitting around at 100% SoC for hours or days! We have charge stations that charge at 48 amps, so it makes quick work of topping off to 100% before we leave on a long trip. And we can still get 300 miles in the real world, over 5 years later, even when it's 50 or 55 degrees outside. If it's 25 F outside, it drops to around 250 miles, still excellent. Our average road trip Supercharger stop is super short. Don't artificially limit yourself or worry-wart yourself to death over potential battery degradation, just drive the damn things and enjoy the heck out of how capable they are! Revel in their performance too!

My older brother drives a frickin' Nissan Leaf with about 60 miles total range, from 100% down to 0%. It sounds like you get range anxiety when your car drops as low as his Leaf charged to 100%, LOL!

Right, “Tesla will not sell a lot of 300-mile only Cybertrucks” to people that have to drive on the highway more than 300 miles. If they only drive in the city then they will be fine. Even so they will only be getting 60% of that 300 unless they don’t care about longevity of their battery, so 180 miles. Still, that is completely doable in the city as long as your one-way trip is 90 miles or less and you don’t mind charging every night at home. Clearly you and your wife fall into this envelope and that is great for you.

 

[HaulingAss]

Right, “Tesla will not sell a lot of 300-mile only Cybertrucks” to people that have to drive on the highway more than 300 miles. If they only drive in the city then they will be fine. Even so they will only be getting 60% of that 300 unless they don’t care about longevity of their battery, so 180 miles. Still, that is completely doable in the city as long as your one-way trip is 90 miles or less and you don’t mind charging every night at home. Clearly you and your wife fall into this envelope and that is great for you.

That's a bunch of bullshit. Charging to 100% isn't going to ruin your battery unless you let it sit at a high state of charge for long periods of time. The range is there to be used if you need to go that far, most people don't. My wife drives more than I do, she has 91,000 miles on her 2018 Tesla and it still has 300 miles of range. It was delivered with 310 miles of EPA range. Our other 2018 RWD Model 3 has 72,000 miles and still has 305 miles range with a charge to 100%.

Driving more than 300 miles on the highway is not a problem when you can add 100 miles of range in only 8 minutes. Our average Supercharger stop is somewhere between 15 and 20 minutes. But my main point was that most people don't drive for hours and hours on a regular basis. My wife drives quite a bit more than the average American motorist whose annual average is around 12K miles. Most of her driving is not very close to a Supercharger, we just charge it up each night at home. It's a rare person averaging 300 miles per day, that would be over 100,000 miles per year, if done consistently, each day.

It definitely sounds like you are too timid in terms of using all the capacity your battery has to offer (when you need to drive more miles than usual). Don't be afraid of using your car how it was meant to be used!

 

[HaulingAss]

The reported no. 1 reason people are hesitant to switch to EVs (especially truck owners) is range anxiety. 500 miles is a number that silences any EV skeptic. 300 is not.

You must be new to Internet EV discussions.

I mean, you didn't know that some EV skeptics cannot be silenced, even with 500 miles of range?

You could show them a magical EV with 900 miles of range, that had the interior space of a Dodge work van, went 0-60 in under 3 seconds, only consumed one kWh to go 5 miles, that could tow 20,000 lbs. for 500 miles, had tires that went 60,000 miles and magically converted themselves to winter tires whenever it got below 36 degrees, and was designed by a top Italian supercar designer and they would still say, yes, but whadda 'bout all those children in the congo?

When you told them it was an iron based battery containing zero cobalt, they would want to know what you do when you find yourself with a flat battery miles from anywhere?

And, if you told them it had a special hydrogen micro-turbine for emergencies just like that, and it could add 100 miles of range in 5 minutes with a 2lb. tank of hydrogen, they would say, yeah, but I like the vrooom vrooom noises, I could never commute to my job 400 miles and two states away without hearing those beautiful vroom-vroom noises.

EV experts know there is no silencing a die hard EV skeptic, not even with quad channel, 16 speaker surround vroom vroom sounds. Because everyone knows you can't change the engine oil and filter on an EV! That's an American rite of passage many would hate to give up! ?

 

[CyberGus]

Cost, weight, power. Not density. There is more Wh per cell because it’s bigger, not more energy dense.

Respectfully re-disagree. More Wh per cell can be achieved as part of the normal improvement cycle, as it has for the previous cells. They've already improved from the 4680 version-1 cell.

And again, using silicon will greatly increase Wh per cell, if they can "crack the code".

Of course they can improve pack-level energy density by streamlining the packaging, but that will only go so far.

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

Respectfully re-disagree. More Wh per cell can be achieved as part of the normal improvement cycle, as it has for the previous cells. They've already improved from the 4680 version-1 cell.

And again, using silicon will greatly increase Wh per cell, if they can "crack the code".

Of course they can improve pack-level energy density by streamlining the packaging, but that will only go so far.

They can improve the energy density of the cell. What I'm saying is, increased cell density was not part of the Tesla 4680 claims on battery day. You're not disagreeing with me, you're disagreeing with Tesla if you say otherwise. They claimed cost, weight, power as the advantages of the new format. Not density.

 

[CyberGus]

They can improve the energy density of the cell. What I'm saying is, increased cell density was not part of the Tesla 4680 claims on battery day. You're not disagreeing with me, you're disagreeing with Tesla if you say otherwise. They claimed cost, weight, power as the advantages of the new format. Not density.

I re-re-disagree. The use of silicon certainly implies it.

 

[jerhenderson]

Was the quad motor “announced”, or just possible? Was it in a tweet, or a press release or something like that? I haven’t done a great deal of homework on a quad. I know originally at the reveal they mentioned a tri with a 500+ mile range.

the quad was never announced..... Elon only mentioned it.

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

I re-re-disagree. The use of silicon certainly implies it.

Imply is one thing. Show me a statement that says 4680 cells will have greater energy density. I'll wait...

 

[charliemagpie]

Tesla may have chosen only to disclose the 4680 roadmap they were confident enough with to get us to where we are now.

Elon has mooted a couple of different chemistries, nevertheless, battery day forecast is our current benchmark.

We do know Tesla has other irons in the fire, and there has been a lot of time between battery day and now.

 

[HaulingAss]

the quad was never announced..... Elon only mentioned it.

Incorrect. Twitter (now X) is registered with the SEC as an official source of company communication through Musk's Twitter account. This includes material financial information, new product releases, and other material information.

Musk announced via his official Twitter account there would be a Quad motor Cybertruck and it would be the first one released.

Just like the official new product announcements of any company, Tesla is within their right to change their mind, but it has been officially announced. No other specs were announced at the time, besides that it would have four motors and four-wheel steering and be the first version released.

Gettin' close!

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

Cost, weight, power. Not density. There is more Wh per cell because it’s bigger, not more energy dense.

Didn’t I provide a link just yesterday to where they talked about energy density improvements in the 4680 during Battery Day? And you are still talking this nonsense?

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

Didn’t I provide a link just yesterday to where they talked about energy density improvements in the 4680 during Battery Day? And you are still talking this nonsense?

No, you didn't. You posted a link to the most recent financial call, where they talked about improving the density of 4680 cells to acceptable levels. Careful using the word nonsense, when you have no idea what you're talking about, and not even what event you're linking.

Sponsored