New battery option 70D, is 105D next?

[Bangor Bob]

Do you have a source for this? It's even simpler to fill in the holes in the existing modules with the same cells you use everywhere else. Occam's Razor and all that.

"Efficiency" is the wrong word, cell capacity is the proper metric. I believe it was discussed in the Roadster 3.0 thread. Also the Panasonic NCR18650A cell is 3100mAh, the NCR18650G is 3600 mAh. We've heard Elon and JB say the Tesla chemistry is slightly different, but it also fits that a change from the A to the G revision of the cell would be responsible for the capacity increase. Presumably production capacity on the G cell hasn't ramped up to the point where they can supply all production yet? But yeah, I'd say a 99.8kWh pack (100kWh with slightly adjusted charge limits, or just rounding) is quite likely soon.

 

[scaesare]

"Efficiency" is the wrong word, cell capacity is the proper metric. I believe it was discussed in the Roadster 3.0 thread. Also the Panasonic NCR18650A cell is 3100mAh, the NCR18650G is 3600 mAh. We've heard Elon and JB say the Tesla chemistry is slightly different, but it also fits that a change from the A to the G revision of the cell would be responsible for the capacity increase. Presumably production capacity on the G cell hasn't ramped up to the point where they can supply all production yet? But yeah, I'd say a 99.8kWh pack (100kWh with slightly adjusted charge limits, or just rounding) is quite likely soon.

Cell capacity (in Watts) for the "new" Roadster cells is still less than that for existing Model S cells.

While different Roadster cells were selected for the "3.0" pack. This does not imply any changes to Model S cells.

Cells for the Model S, while manufatured by Panasonic, do not map to any specific Panasonic cell model. Newer cell introductions by Panasonic do not equate to Tesla using higher capacity cells in the Model S.

Again I ask: what source is there for Tesla using different cells of greater capacity in current packs?

 

[dirkhh]

The 70D introduction is definitely a preparation for the upcoming ModelX.
On the Model S 70D, EPA is 240 miles... (vs. 85D with 270). 35 miles range worth $10k? I think many more will opt for 70D now for ModelS.

This has been pointed out by others, but just to make sure it doesn't get lost. The blog post talks about "240 miles at 65mph". That's what Tesla calls the "cruising range" and there the 85 (and P85D) used to be listed as 285, the 85D even with 295 miles (see this old blog post). My suspicion is that the "240 miles EPA" range is a typo in the design studio that will be fixed. Assuming a similar cruise/EPA range as with the 85D the 70D more likely will see a 220-225 miles EPA range... so the difference to the 85 is more like 45 or 50 miles (and 55 miles in "cruising range")...

 

[ScepticMatt]

Quite a few people seem to be confused about this. There still is a single motor / RWD S85. You just have to FIRST select the S85D, THEN you can go back to select only one motor and get a $5k "credit" for that.

I feel that's because the S85 is getting the axe next.

 

[dirkhh]

I feel that's because the S85 is getting the axe next.

I doubt it. But then I've been wrong before.
For some odd reason Tesla wants four different Model S.
40 / 60 / 85 / P85
60 / 85 / P85 / P85+
60 / 85 / 85D / P85D
70D / 85 / 85D / P85D
There were brief times with fewer or more models, but usually within a few weeks they went back to having four models. Not having a RWD model would seem like a big mistake. There are so many people who don't need or want AWD. Look at all the posts lamenting the fact that there is no longer a P85+. And to the best of my knowledge, the 85 is their best selling car...

 

[strangethingintheland]

Elon has said 300~350 real range is the sweet spot. Anything more will add cost and weight with diminished return. The strategy seems to be more and quicker SC to make long trip more convenient in the future.

Actually, IIRC he said 250-350 is the sweet spot. I wouldn't be nitpicking but for the fact that it has implications for market positioning of the model 3 as well as today's announcement. See this thread started by efusco: Model 3 Range per 3/19/15 Press Statements

 

[WSE51]

My family is scheduled to take delivery of an 85D in 3 weeks (our family's second Model S) and I just texted my contact at Telsa, who is a very senior person in the sales organization, to ask whether it will soon be retired in favor of a 100D or whatever.

His reply was "85D is not retiring"

 

[Bangor Bob]

Again I ask: what source is there for Tesla using different cells of greater capacity in current packs?

It's conjecture, just like everything else in this thread. However, 3600/3100 just happens to be within 0.5% of 70/60. Convenient, no?

 

[scaesare]

It's conjecture, just like everything else in this thread. However, 3600/3100 just happens to be within 0.5% of 70/60. Convenient, no?

I'm talking about the source for your points about changes to existing Model S cells here that wasn't conjecture but attributed:

I believe it was discussed in the Roadster 3.0 thread.

The Roadster thread discussed all sorts of variations that may be used in the Roadster, but in the context of this thread about Model S cells airj1012 said "Tesla has already said that they're increased efficiencies in their cells.". You then corrected that to say: "Efficiency" is the wrong word, cell capacity is the proper metric."

So I'm asking for either where in the Roadster thread, or in any of the earnings calls (I've listened to many of them, and read transcripts), is there a source for increased efficiency or capacity for Model S cells​, as has been asserted as having been stated or discussed?

As an aside, you seem to think that Tesla has been rev'ing their cell's in step with Panasonic's model revisions? I highly doubt that, and have seen no evidence of that.

 

[brianman]

And to the best of my knowledge, the 85 is their best selling car...

This is hard to gauge. One reason it's hard to gauge is they tend to have faster delivery on the top end configuration. Taken to the extreme the entire fleet would be P85D. We're not seeing that, of course, so it's not quite that simple.

 

[lodenthal]

I believe the 70kw battery is for the Model X. The X won't be as aerodynamic as the S and to get a similar range they would need a bigger battery. Obviously, this is highly speculative but to get approval for the new battery, they needed a"currently available" car. My guess is that the Model X might come out with a range similar to the 60kw Model S. But....that's pure speculation on my part! LOL!

 

[dirkhh]

And to the best of my knowledge, the 85 is their best selling car...

This is hard to gauge. One reason it's hard to gauge is they tend to have faster delivery on the top end configuration. Taken to the extreme the entire fleet would be P85D. We're not seeing that, of course, so it's not quite that simple.

I realized I should have provided a source. When our local service center had all these P85D to deliver in March I was joking with one of the folks there that this must be just like every quarter with mostly top of the line cars and his response was "no, this is the first month that the plain 85 wasn't the most frequent car we delivered".
So sample of one, unauthorized, and unscientific source.

 

[goneskiian]

My family is scheduled to take delivery of an 85D in 3 weeks (our family's second Model S) and I just texted my contact at Telsa, who is a very senior person in the sales organization, to ask whether it will soon be retired in favor of a 100D or whatever.

His reply was "85D is not retiring"

Nobody said they thought the 85D was going away. They said they thought the S85 might be next to get axed.

 

[nwdiver]

OK... the first person to get a 70D needs to get it weighed... then compare that to the weight of a 60.... OR tear open the pack and count the modules... whichever is faster :wink:

 

[Alysashley79]

The main reason for this change is to support the D functionality. Let's face it. The D doesn't get as good of EPA rated miles as the RWD counterparts. So 70D is logical so that those people that don't need the full 85Kw pack can still have AWD

 

[vandacca]

The main reason for this change is to support the D functionality. Let's face it. The D doesn't get as good of EPA rated miles as the RWD counterparts. So 70D is logical so that those people that don't need the full 85Kw pack can still have AWD

Actually, D gets better EPA mileage than the RWD. The reason is because they replace the 1 big motor with 2 lighter ones that are geared differently. Since the original Roadster, Tesla has been trying to work on a gear box to allow the single motor to work within its most efficient RPM range, but they couldn't come up with a reliable solution. That is, until they decided to put two separate motors. Now they effectively have 2 gears and the motors are both tuned to different speeds.

I'm surprised - Tesla and Elon mentioned many times how they improved the mileage by going to the D.

 

[dirkhh]

Actually, D gets better EPA mileage than the RWD. The reason is because they replace the 1 big motor with 2 lighter ones that are geared differently. Since the original Roadster, Tesla has been trying to work on a gear box to allow the single motor to work within its most efficient RPM range, but they couldn't come up with a reliable solution. That is, until they decided to put two separate motors. Now they effectively have 2 gears and the motors are both tuned to different speeds.

I'm surprised - Tesla and Elon mentioned many times how they improved the mileage by going to the D.

Yes, he keeps talking about it. Yet no one has actually seen it in real life. And since the "EPA testing" is done by Tesla and not by an independent third party, so far there doesn't appear to be independent proof of this claim.

 

[scaesare]

I'm talking about the source for your points about changes to existing Model S cells here that wasn't conjecture but attributed:



The Roadster thread discussed all sorts of variations that may be used in the Roadster, but in the context of this thread about Model S cells airj1012 said "Tesla has already said that they're increased efficiencies in their cells.". You then corrected that to say: "Efficiency" is the wrong word, cell capacity is the proper metric."

So I'm asking for either where in the Roadster thread, or in any of the earnings calls (I've listened to many of them, and read transcripts), is there a source for increased efficiency or capacity for Model S cells​, as has been asserted as having been stated or discussed?

As an aside, you seem to think that Tesla has been rev'ing their cell's in step with Panasonic's model revisions? I highly doubt that, and have seen no evidence of that.

I got a PM from somebody who wished to remain private with an excerpt from the Q2 2014 conference call purporting to provide the conference call source for changed cell chemistries:

The other person didn't have a source but I do. Listen from 25:23 Elon Musk on Tesla’s F1-like service approach - Q2 2014 Earnings Call (2014) AUDIO - YouTube

Sorry, I can't respond in forum topics. I'm officially not here.

Transcript: July 2014 Tesla conference call

25:23 Journalist: On the Gigafactory, is the chemistry going to be the same battery chemistry that you're currently using or is that part of the discussions that are going on with Panasonic?
25:34 Elon Musk: There are improvements to the chemistry, as well as improvements to the geometry of the cell. So we would expect to see an energy density improvement and of course a significant cost improvement. JB, do you want to add anything?
25:53 JB Straubel: Yeah, that's right. The cathode and anode materials themselves are next generation. We're seeing improvements in the maybe 10% to 15% range on the chemistry itself.
26:09 Elon Musk:Yeah, in terms of energy density.
26:09 JB Straubel: Energy density. And then we're also customizing the cell shape and size to further improve the cost efficiency of the cell and our packaging efficiency.
26:22 Elon Musk: Right. We've done a lot of modeling trying to figure out what's the optimal cell size. And it's really not much. It's not a lot different from where we are right now but we're sort of in the roughly 10% more diameter, maybe 10% more height. But then the cubic function effectively ends up being just from a geometry standpoint probably a third more energy for the cell or maybe 30%. And then the actual energy density per unit mass increases.
27:09 JB Straubel: Yeah. Fundamentally the chemistry of what's inside is what really defines the cost position. It's often debated what shape and size, but at this point we're developing basically what we feel is the optimum shape and size for the best cost efficiency for an automotive cell.
27:25 Elon Musk:Yeah.
27:28 Journalist: The chemical formula will be the same, it's just shaped differently or?
27:32 Elon Musk: No.
27:32 JB Straubel:No.
27:35 Journalist: Is it a different formula?
27:37 Elon Musk: Yeah.

This problem is that this context clearly states it's referring to cells that will be produced in the gigafactory. Those cells are not in production, as the GF isn't even close to being finished yet. This in no way supports the idea that current cell chemistry have changed and thus there are new cells in the 70KW battery pack.

 

[vandacca]

This problem is that this context clearly states it's referring to cells that will be produced in the gigafactory. Those cells are not in production, as the GF isn't even close to being finished yet. This in no way supports the idea that current cell chemistry have changed and thus there are new cells in the 70KW battery pack.

Do you think they will be building these brand new, state-of-the-art cells for the first time in the brand-new GigaFactory? Or do you think they'll work with Panasonic with the new design/chemistry, who will start building them for Tesla, whom will then test them and then eventually put them into their vehicles with the eventual plan to mass-produce them in the Giga factory?

 

[Rashomon]

Do you think they will be building these brand new, state-of-the-art cells for the first time in the brand-new GigaFactory? Or do you think they'll work with Panasonic with the new design/chemistry, who will start building them for Tesla, whom will then test them and then eventually put them into their vehicles with the eventual plan to mass-produce them in the Giga factory?

Any new cells will be first produced in a lab in Japan, then on a pilot line, then likely test manufactured at speed in on a standard manufacturing line in Japan, all before equipment to make them is shipped to Nevada. They would have extensive use, aging, and abuse testing at the cell and pack level before they were ever approved for mass manufacture. I would bet they are already running in Tesla mules, perhaps even in Elon's own S. Generally, the cell companies are very, very conservative with automotive products, because the life of the vehicles is so long and warranty issues could be so incredibly expensive.

As to the S60 versus S70 cells, that's a very interesting question. I have seen claims that the S60 runs different, lower energy (2.6Ah) cells than the 3.2Ah S85 cells, cells that were at a sweet spot in the cost versus energy trade-off. If so, changing to the S85 cells would have been sufficient to get the increase. Someone on this forum almost certainly knows whether this is true or not.