-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Elon "About to end range anxiety"
- Thread starter Lump
- Start date
I know a charging partnership may not be part of it... But it just occurred to me; not McDonald's Walmart Costco Starbucks etc. why not Shell or BP? Right distribution/location. Mini marts. Bathrooms. Of course it will cost. 60 kW stations. Why would big oil turn down incremental revenue whilst hedging bets!
Just another crazy idea:
Tesla will give new buyers a free HPWC if they agree to join Tesla Comunity Charging Program. All chargers in TCCP will be available to everybody and listed in MS navigation. 50.000 new charging points in 2015 only
Tesla will give new buyers a free HPWC if they agree to join Tesla Comunity Charging Program. All chargers in TCCP will be available to everybody and listed in MS navigation. 50.000 new charging points in 2015 only
Can I just add to my previous note of sadness about journalists, by saying that I have not found a single news article that has said, oh yes it'll be more accurate range prediction and Tesla's been working on it for ages and already did an update that takes terrain into account. Some have just said it'll be an increase in range (because science!), some suggest that it could be either. Some even suggest that better navigation and range prediction wouldn't be worth a press conference.
Not one (that I've found) has done a simple "what if" exercise on the impact of accurate range prediction and routing through Superchargers. None. How do people not get that a high level of accuracy plus a buffer would make things easy.
Not one has considered that Tesla continues to expand the Supercharger network, continually improving the ability to make new routes. Not one has done Robert's basic math that less than 600 Superchargers would be needed to allow Superchargers every 80 miles on Interstates. Not one has noted that if you slow down you reduce energy consumption by _a lot_ (Tesla has a graph!), so short of being stranded in a very slow or stopped traffic jam for hours traffic that slows you down will _save_ energy.
Not one (that I've found) has done a simple "what if" exercise on the impact of accurate range prediction and routing through Superchargers. None. How do people not get that a high level of accuracy plus a buffer would make things easy.
Not one has considered that Tesla continues to expand the Supercharger network, continually improving the ability to make new routes. Not one has done Robert's basic math that less than 600 Superchargers would be needed to allow Superchargers every 80 miles on Interstates. Not one has noted that if you slow down you reduce energy consumption by _a lot_ (Tesla has a graph!), so short of being stranded in a very slow or stopped traffic jam for hours traffic that slows you down will _save_ energy.
Last edited:
Of course Tesla could via an OTA update provide ALL cars with full turn-by-turn navigation plus many improvements because all nav features are firmware based. It doesn't matter that there are non-Tech Package cars out there that currently just have maps and no nav, they can be updated to full nav via an OTA update.
You seem to think that the non-Tech Package cars are missing some hardware that is required for full nav. That is not correct.
HankLloydRight
No Roads
I'm surprised nobody has suggest this yet -- Elon's going to send every owner 11 alternators to mount on the outside of their car to charge the battery while driving! Voila! No more range anxiety!
*It's a JOKE people!
I know that's not "OTA".
*It's a JOKE people!
I know that's not "OTA".
He is speaking generally, and saying that in general for personal transportation people will rely on Superchargers and pack swapping will not become common place for personal transportation because it's not needed.
Projecting into the future, for commercial traffic, meaning trucks, pack swapping will often make sense because time is money. Unless a trucker is stopping to eat or sleep, a pack swap would be b better than waiting for a charge.
Think big. Someday commercial trucks will be electric.
And of course they will be driven on Auto Pilot.
Zarwin
Member
As far as Nav goes. It is my understanding from other posts (though I've never seen anything official) that for those without the tech package, adding Nav was only possible if you had the premium sound option. Otherwise it required a $5,000 hardware upgrade of the center screen/computer to support it. Of course this requirement may not exist if this ends up being completely new Nav software, unrelated to the existing 3rd party Nav.
Since I have one of those rare Teslas without tech or sound, I was wondering, what is the actual hardware difference between mine and all the others? Anyone know? less memory/slower cpu/less flash?
Since I have one of those rare Teslas without tech or sound, I was wondering, what is the actual hardware difference between mine and all the others? Anyone know? less memory/slower cpu/less flash?
I have not dissected, but logic says those posts are baloney and computer is the same. It would cost Tesla much more to ship different units, given low cost of components. I'd trust those who say it is software limited.
Very true.
And he could also be referring to commercial people transportation via taxi/limos/Uber/Lyft with Model S and X.
Many fleet owners have -at least- two drivers per car, working 10 hours shift and returning to base for cleaning & refuelling, which any ICE can do.
Basically they need a car that can run almost 24/7.
Today, the Model S can't fit that, which is a key complaint -and reason- against fleet buys.
It's still a single-shift car because of charging speed and that kills its commercial economics, even with fuel saving.
E.
sub
Active Member
I'll say this again, those of us without teslas have/had no idea the model S didn't already do everything everyone is suggesting regarding NAV. I'm assuming the response of the general public would be "I assumed it already had that capability" if it is simply better NAV and trip planning with superchargers. I've test driven P85 multiple times but did not touch NAV system. Why do a press conference that will have a "well duh" reaction from most people? I'm probably wrong but that's my contribution.
Since I have been arguing/begging for a 'valet/safe' mode for months (maybe a year plus now) one component of the range increase will be the ability to set acceleration and top speed...saving maybe a tiny bit of energy??:wink:
*Psst* - It's called a "train"
Seriously, though, I doubt the Teamsters will ever let their drivers be replaced by auto pilot (call me a cynic).
Kalud
Active Member
I don't know if it makes any sense and its just pure speculation but...
The internal Model S charger GEN 1 are about 11kW (370V x 30A) (nothing new).
I just found out that that the latest GEN2 (ASY,CHRGR,GEN2) are rated for a lot more, they are rated for 45A out instead of 30A and the input range is higher too. I would estimate the rating to be around 16.6kW (370V x 45A).
Just a remember that a Supercharger cabinet has 12 of those.
Basic maths:
Imagine a Supercharger cabinet with
Gen1 chargers: 12 times 11kW = 132kW (label says 135kW)
Gen2 chargers: 12 times 16.6kW = 200kW
If they found a way to increase the max charge rate (currently at 1.4C for a 85kWh Rev.D pack) to 2.3C then we could see increased charging rate.
What about 170mi in 18 min, 80% in 24 min or 100% in 45 min? Still not the end of range anxiety but...
I don't think its fantasy as JB Straubel said that Tesla Aims to Charge Electric Cars in Five Minutes.
The internal Model S charger GEN 1 are about 11kW (370V x 30A) (nothing new).
I just found out that that the latest GEN2 (ASY,CHRGR,GEN2) are rated for a lot more, they are rated for 45A out instead of 30A and the input range is higher too. I would estimate the rating to be around 16.6kW (370V x 45A).
Just a remember that a Supercharger cabinet has 12 of those.
Basic maths:
Imagine a Supercharger cabinet with
Gen1 chargers: 12 times 11kW = 132kW (label says 135kW)
Gen2 chargers: 12 times 16.6kW = 200kW
If they found a way to increase the max charge rate (currently at 1.4C for a 85kWh Rev.D pack) to 2.3C then we could see increased charging rate.
What about 170mi in 18 min, 80% in 24 min or 100% in 45 min? Still not the end of range anxiety but...
I don't think its fantasy as JB Straubel said that Tesla Aims to Charge Electric Cars in Five Minutes.
Last edited:
zag2me
Member
If I was going to end Range Anxiety, I would update the software so a circular area was drawn on the map showing chargers and range. Just a thought!
mknox
Well-Known Member
So many suggestions about hardware and infrastructure things... I though this was going to be an OTA software update? Best guess would be a configurable "reserve" tank, some sort of power limiting capability (maybe based on Nav directions - would adjust power level to let you reach destination) or similar.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
It seems that Tesla wants to push the higher C rates only on the 65 KWh packs. Maybe to reduce exposure/liability for rebuilding/refurbishing failed or diminished packs if they push it too far. They run the 60KWh closer to failure and then later use that data on the 85 KWh when they are confident on the failure rates.
Max charge rate isn't just 1.4C
90 KW (85 KWh A battery pack, near 1.06C charge rate)
105 KW (60 KWh with older battery pack, 1.75C charge rate)
111 KW (60 KWh with newer battery pack, 1.85C charge rate)
120 KW (85 KWh B or D battery pack, near 1.41C charge rate)
we don't know the max limitation on an E pack or on any pack with a 135KW or higher rated supercharger.
It would be reasonable with no other changes to assume that D pack 85KWh could go up to the 1.85C seen on the 60KWh. That gets you up to 150KW supercharger rates. I could see an announcement about 135KW rates now but they would have to qualify it applying to only D packs or newer or risk the wrath of the TMC crowd again. :wink:
It may be that E packs or later could do a higher C rate and could take us to 180KW superchargers at 2.12C for the 85KWh pack and around 155KW (2.42C) for the 65KWh packs but that seems overly aggressive. It might take until F or G packs to push 2C charging rates.
<speculation> I'm going to guess that the coming table would be
90 KW (85 KWh A battery pack, near 1.06C charge rate)
105 KW (60 KWh with older battery pack, 1.75C charge rate)
111 KW (60 KWh with newer battery pack, 1.85C charge rate)
120 KW (85 KWh B battery pack, near 1.41C charge rate)
125 KW (60 KWh E battery pack, 1.92C rate)
135 KW (85 KWh D or E battery pack, 1.58C charge rate)
150 KW (85 KWh D or E battery pack, 1.76C charge rate)
</speculation>
Last edited:
Similar threads
