Who is eating crow? Final predictions.

tidmutt

Well-known member
First Name
Daniel
Joined
Feb 25, 2020
Threads
8
Messages
603
Reaction score
992
Location
Somewhere hot and humid
Vehicles
Model Y Performance, Model X P100D
Occupation
Software Architect
Country flag
As for bio defense, that's safety but that's extreme, worst case scenario, we are in danger because of a possible attack sort of scenario. I don't think that level of filtration is needed at all in a vehicle.
That being said, I want it whether it's needed or not. But we also have to look that the model 3 and Y don't get bio defense mode either (I think the Y is getting it in China). It's not really a necessity, even if it can be beneficial. I remember reading an article of a Tesla owner driving near raging forest fires with it on and he felt very safe. As great as it would be on all vehicles, it's more of a luxury option at the moment.
It was used during some California wildfires. They put the elderly and susceptible inside Model X vehicles.
Sponsored

 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Threads
4
Messages
3,213
Reaction score
3,403
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
I'm hoping for 350-400kW charging.
I'd like to see that too but I'm not at all hopeful.

...so far average level 3 chargers that I have seen are mostly 20-50kW which would take hours to charge a Cybertruck from 15-80% while a supercharger could do it in in like 20 minutes.
You have been looking at the CircuitElectrique CCS/Chademo chargers that are indeed mostly 50 kW max. The smallest Tesla SuperCharger is 70 kW, the V2 is 150 kW and the V3, the largest, tops out at 250 kW. All Tesla's current cars are 400V architecture which means 625 A for 250 W. That's a lot and requires a glycol cooled cable. There is talk of a 350 kW charger. That would require 875 A at 400 V. The cooled cable on the V3 chargers is pretty skinny compared to the uncooled ones on the V2 chargers so I suppose 875A is not beyond the realm of belief. But an 800 - 900 V architecture seems much more appealing. There may be a V4 SC in some Tesla Skunk Works somewhere but I haven't heard anything about that.

Then there are the batteries themselves. The ones in the current portfolio of Teslas require that charging be slowed way down as the cells approach full charge in order to prevent loss of lithium (resulting in shortened battery life). That means that the initial charge rates must be very high to get a reasonable overall average charge rate around 1C (full charge in 1 hr or so). Assuming the CT batteries to be more or less like the current crop WRT taper it would take more than 350 kW to get 1C. So we need a new battery that can handle a higher average rate and a less dramatic taper than what we have now. It is a thing to be devoutly wished. At 1C it would take 39 minutes to charge 65% (15 - 80%). If 1.2C could be achieved with new batteries time would drop to 32.5 minutes, etc.
Sponsored

 
 




Top