-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
100D or 105D speculation
- Thread starter No2DinosaurFuel
- Start date
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
At the current moment, using the same amount of cells, they can make a 90kWh pack by swapping the 3400mAh cells for 3600mAh ones. That hardly seems worthwhile. They would need 4000mAh cells with the same cell voltage in order to get to 100kWh. However, Panasonic's 4000mAh cells (which had a lower 3.4V nominal voltage, so energy equivalence is more like a 3800mAh cell) have been delayed since 2013 (predicted release announced in 2009) with no public release date at the moment.
It doesn't make a lot of sense to add more cells because it would require a change in the battery architecture, which doesn't make sense at the current point in the Model S/X platform life-cycle.
It doesn't make a lot of sense to add more cells because it would require a change in the battery architecture, which doesn't make sense at the current point in the Model S/X platform life-cycle.
I'm all for more capacity as long as there is no weight penalty. With more superchargers (which are being added all the time), the need for increased capacity becomes less important. Most of the time extra capacity is being hauled around and is not used or needed. The only downside of less capacity but more superchargers is time spent charging. For trips one or more of the charging stops may not be needed. Also less on board capacity reduces vehicle weight and cost. There is no perfect solution.
I am not an owner (yet) but do look at a 350 mile trip I take several times per year. The optimum supercharger midway of the trip is undersized (at Bethesda-Montgomery Mall) and usually has a wait (hard to sell to the SO that the 5.5 hour trip in an ICE will take 8 hours in a Tesla). An 85 will most likely make it with one charge stop, with just enough reserve if I have to use an alternate charging location. However with a 70, unless I am guaranteed that limited midpoint Supercharger is available, I need to make 2 charging stops.
I am not an owner (yet) but do look at a 350 mile trip I take several times per year. The optimum supercharger midway of the trip is undersized (at Bethesda-Montgomery Mall) and usually has a wait (hard to sell to the SO that the 5.5 hour trip in an ICE will take 8 hours in a Tesla). An 85 will most likely make it with one charge stop, with just enough reserve if I have to use an alternate charging location. However with a 70, unless I am guaranteed that limited midpoint Supercharger is available, I need to make 2 charging stops.
I've done many trips from NJ to NC.
Yeah, Bethesda is definitely the worst supercharging spot I've ever seen. I went there one time, just to check it out. Never, ever, never never never will I go to that location again. I wish I could delete that charger from the list. It probably took me longer to get from the highway to the charger and back than it did for me to charge there. Only 2 stalls in a busy parking garage. Tesla store has vehicles there that may or may not be charging, so potentially only one customer stall available during the day. Completely pointless location.
So, personally, I would suggest not counting on Bethesda.
Woodbridge, VA is OK. It's a little more off the highway than I'd prefer, and during busy traffic hours that's not much fun. But at least it's 8 stalls and in a location unlikely to be ICEd. Probably south of where you want to go from NJ since you're considering Bethesda.
Newark, DE is usually pretty good these days. Only 4 stalls, but a lot of people who used to need to charge there to make it to Glen Allen, VA tend to skip it now it seems. I rarely see other Model S there. Odd because I find that location to be one of the most convenient, literally in the middle of the highway virtually zero miles out of the way.
Hamilton, NJ is probably too close for you to really make work, but you could almost definitely make Hamilton, NJ to Woodbridge, VA nonstop in an a 70 with 100% charge. Definitely in an 85. The I-95 traffic jams actually come in handy for increasing range... lol.
Overall, the superchargers make the travel experience pretty pleasant and I definitely prefer them to quick, expensive, and smelly gas pumping stops.
I think the key to enable longer trips really is having many more charging stations. It will take a long time before we can double battery capacity at the same size and weight. It's a future technology that will take time. The technology for Superchargers or other DC fast chargers is already well established. The grid is existent pretty much everywhere. The only reason we feel the need to have a larger battery is because there are way too few fast charging stations.
Here is an ICE analogy. Most ICE cars have an average range of 400 miles. But unlike EV that are topped off every night, we let the tank go down until it's close to empty and then hit a gas station. So on average, we drive around with about half a tank. That's exactly the range of the Model S. Why is it OK for the ICE car but not for the EV? Because there are gas stations almost everywhere. We don't have to worry about range, we just start driving and then fill up on the way. If we have a decent amount of fast DC chargers and Superchargers, we would be just as confident with the range we have right now, because it really doesn't matter. We just charge on the way.
Here is an ICE analogy. Most ICE cars have an average range of 400 miles. But unlike EV that are topped off every night, we let the tank go down until it's close to empty and then hit a gas station. So on average, we drive around with about half a tank. That's exactly the range of the Model S. Why is it OK for the ICE car but not for the EV? Because there are gas stations almost everywhere. We don't have to worry about range, we just start driving and then fill up on the way. If we have a decent amount of fast DC chargers and Superchargers, we would be just as confident with the range we have right now, because it really doesn't matter. We just charge on the way.
Right, but filling up a ICE car is much much faster. It usually takes me 5 minutes MAX to fill up my ICE car which has 300+ miles range on the highway if I am in a hurry. If you do that math, this is like charging at 3600 miles per hour. The Tesla can do 170 miles in 30 minutes. Or best case, 340 miles per hour. So as you can see, even using the Supercharging station, it is still 1/10 of the rate you can put back compared to ICE.
Now I am not saying we should stride to match gasoline fill up rate. But Tesla should at least stride to sustain the 170 miles in 30 minutes rate until we are actually near full. With this solution I agree having more supercharging stations will negate the need for bigger capacity battery. However given the max rate now and sometime for the foreseeable future, I would say we need large capacity battery because the longer I drive, the longer I am willing to rest and wait for the battery to charge up. Moreover, with bigger capacity batteries, hopefully the supercharging station can sustain the higher rate charging for much longer, essentially allowing the bigger capacity battery to gain more range faster compared to lower capacity battery as proven when comparing the 60KWh vs the 85KWh version.
Some here have claimed it is the wire heating up that slows the charging down, not the battery. But I would disagree. It is essentially the limitation of the battery that prevents the sustained high rate of charging. We see it clearly on the 60KWh and 85KWh supercharging comparison. The Amps taper off much faster on the 60KWh compared to the 85KWh. Hence it's not the wires heating up faster on the 60KWh that causes the slow down, it is the lower capacity battery. I believe, tesla chose this rate because it can damage the battery if the high rate of charging is sustain until near full capacity.
Now I am not saying we should stride to match gasoline fill up rate. But Tesla should at least stride to sustain the 170 miles in 30 minutes rate until we are actually near full. With this solution I agree having more supercharging stations will negate the need for bigger capacity battery. However given the max rate now and sometime for the foreseeable future, I would say we need large capacity battery because the longer I drive, the longer I am willing to rest and wait for the battery to charge up. Moreover, with bigger capacity batteries, hopefully the supercharging station can sustain the higher rate charging for much longer, essentially allowing the bigger capacity battery to gain more range faster compared to lower capacity battery as proven when comparing the 60KWh vs the 85KWh version.
Some here have claimed it is the wire heating up that slows the charging down, not the battery. But I would disagree. It is essentially the limitation of the battery that prevents the sustained high rate of charging. We see it clearly on the 60KWh and 85KWh supercharging comparison. The Amps taper off much faster on the 60KWh compared to the 85KWh. Hence it's not the wires heating up faster on the 60KWh that causes the slow down, it is the lower capacity battery. I believe, tesla chose this rate because it can damage the battery if the high rate of charging is sustain until near full capacity.
No doubt, larger batteries have many advantages, including longer range, fast charging, longer life. We all want larger capacity batteries, no one disagrees on that. I wasn't trying to argue against it, but the current technology sets a hard limit that will take many years to push to a significant amount. Doubling capacity at the same size and cost will take a while before it becomes mass produced. In the mean time charging stations can solve the problem to a great degree. And they could be built very quickly. One way or another, we need them. There will me many many more EVs on the streets.
In most cases charging limitation is battery protection. I believe battery protection is a primary goal and one of the more unique elements of the Tesla design.
For me Hamilton is already near my house and does not help. If I must avoid Bethesda then it's definitely 2 stops with a 70. (Newark DE & Woodbridge VA). The 222 miles from my house to Woodbridge under most conditions would be doable in an 85, but cutting it too close for a 70. My final destination is Charlottesville VA which requires using back roads to cut west if visiting the Woodbridge surpercharger. A supercharger on 95 in the Baltimore area (there are plenty of rest areas) would be perfect for me.
The ICE we use now for this trip is a BMW 335D (diesel). I still have 1/2 tank when I get there (340 miles).
For me Hamilton is already near my house and does not help. If I must avoid Bethesda then it's definitely 2 stops with a 70. (Newark DE & Woodbridge VA). The 222 miles from my house to Woodbridge under most conditions would be doable in an 85, but cutting it too close for a 70. My final destination is Charlottesville VA which requires using back roads to cut west if visiting the Woodbridge surpercharger. A supercharger on 95 in the Baltimore area (there are plenty of rest areas) would be perfect for me.
The ICE we use now for this trip is a BMW 335D (diesel). I still have 1/2 tank when I get there (340 miles).
Last edited:
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
It's both. The 60kWh has the bottleneck at the battery (the lower voltage gives it a proportionally lower power), but I would not be surprised 85kWh has it at the wires (at least for the peak power).
From the post here, they are pushing 333A@400V when charging at 120kW through wires at are 2 AWG. The 135kW chargers would be 375A. They are already pushing 2-3x what NEC would recommend through such wires. And at the start of the charge the current will actually be even higher since the voltage is lower.
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...-Model-S/page2?p=638680&viewfull=1#post638680
Last edited:
Yeah, the limitation is not the just batteries. There is absolutely no way the supercharger could sustain the peak charge rate for too much longer than it does without overheating the wiring of the supercharger connector and/or the wiring in the car. The connector just couldn't handle it. As I've previously mentioned, the handle already gets super hot really fast, but the taper keeps it from melting down.
If that is the case, I think Tesla should start considering larger cables inside the car for charging or maybe 2 ports and 2x the wires they are using now. So if someone is really in a hurry and no other tesla around, then they can plug in 2 plugs and charge 2x as fast, provided the batteries can handle it.
It's not just the cables in the car. It's the cables on the supercharger, the connector on the supercharger side, and the charge port on the car, and all the wiring in between (including probably the quick disconnect used for the battery pack itself) that would all need to be updated. No small task with thousands of cars on the road and thousands of supercharger stalls already.
Cottonwood
Roadster#433, Model S#S37
The wiring from the Supercharger Cabinet to the Pedestal is large enough per NEC to carry the 330 Amp current as labeled on the Supercharger Cabinet. The NEC is pretty conservative. Just like the wiring inside the car, the UMC, and the HPWC, the wires in the cable of the Supercharger Pedestal are smaller than the NEC requires, but as I understand it, the NEC does not apply inside these devices.
I have used many Superchargers with the current at 330 to 250 Amps. I have found the cable and the connector to be slightly warm during these charge sessions, they have not been what I would call hot. While a 105 kWh battery would probably stay at peak current for about 20% longer, and then taper 20% slower (always charging faster than a smaller battery in mph). My bet is that the wiring is large enough for 330 Amps continuous, and certainly large enough for the 20% longer charging.
That being said, I gut feeling is that it will be a couple of years before we see a battery larger than 85 kWh.
For the older cars, no updates.
For the newer cars, put in another charge port. Making it have 2 charge port and users can plug either on in. Now making the change at the supercharging station so they can actually charge faster might be difficult. I.e. none of the 1A 1B slots But just full power charge port seperate to each.
IMO, it should be natural tesla to put another charge port on the other end of the car so users can plug however they want and charge. And like i said before, if supercharging stations stalls are empty, then users can double supercharge by plugging in both ports to get faster charge provided the batteries can handle the charge rate.
For the newer cars, put in another charge port. Making it have 2 charge port and users can plug either on in. Now making the change at the supercharging station so they can actually charge faster might be difficult. I.e. none of the 1A 1B slots But just full power charge port seperate to each.
IMO, it should be natural tesla to put another charge port on the other end of the car so users can plug however they want and charge. And like i said before, if supercharging stations stalls are empty, then users can double supercharge by plugging in both ports to get faster charge provided the batteries can handle the charge rate.
Just a quick note: remember the internal wiring of the supercharger system isn't necessarily subject to NEC rules. Consider the HPWC, which uses #6 conductors rated 105 degC to supply 80A to the car.
wk, what's your charity? I'll keep the checkbook warmed up just in case.
wk, what's your charity? I'll keep the checkbook warmed up just in case.
Not suggesting the NEC has authority over it, just as a general guideline it makes sense still.
As for the charity, I tend to donate around a couple thousand per year to my local volunteer fire department, even when I wasn't living in the area.
I guess we should establish the ground rules for the bet. If I lose, do I donate to your charity or mine?
Then I shall consider your fire department the payee should I lose - of course, I won't.
Similar threads
- Poll
