No Model III until 2019?

[Jeff N]

Take a look at their roadmap:
http://insideevs.com/lg-chem-supply-200-mile-battery-2016/

LG has indicated they will start production of their next gen cells around 2017, that doesn't mean they will be ready for a pack yet, or a car.

That roadmap says they will start volume production of the new "200 mile" cells intended for these automotive companies in 2016 when GM will need them for its 2017 model year 200 mile car. These cells are designed specifically for automotive use and GM almost certainly has engineering samples of them today and has carefully tested them for suitability.

The reason the Silicon Valley battery startup Envia failed was because GM, one of their investors, demanded engineering samples to test and then discovered the cells didn't work as advertised. LG Chem has also had an excellent durability and QA record with their existing Volt cells.

 

[tftf]

I think you mean in the hundred million range, not multi-billion. And a vast majority the LG Chem contracts you are talking about are for hybrids and PHEVs, not BEVs. These contracts would be using the lower density LMO/NMC hybrid chemistry, which is not at all viable for a 200 mile BEV. (...).

The Model 3 might not "beat them to market", but at the same time the Model 3 might not be in the same market position either. It's no secret the Model 3 is aimed at the 3 series (a RWD premium compact), while for example the Bolt is based on the Sonic hatchback (a FWD economy subcompact). Given the limited price gap between the two that's how the Tesla will "stand out".

I did mean billion in USD since LG will have over 10 trillion KRW (Won) in EV-related sales in total, the biggest customers will eat up the majority of the contract sizes:

Another Achievement: LG Chem to Supply Electronic Automobile Batteries to Audi | BusinessKorea

There are sources with much higher projections until 2020, this one is even low with "over 10 trillion" Won. LG will achieve close to 3 trillion KRW in EV-related sales this FY already.

For a quick comparison, Samsung recently signed a contract with a single EV battery customer (BMW) over several billion EUR:

“We spent a lot of money on this and are definitely thinking long term,” Robertson said. “There are going to be others in the BMW i lineup.”
The supply deal is worth worth “multi billions of euros,” Gyeonggi, South Korea-based Samsung SDI said in a separate statement, without giving details such as the exact value.

BMW Boosts Battery Supplies on Electric-Car Rollout Plans - Bloomberg

Yes, these contracts include both PHEVs and BEVs.

Regarding the appliance questions: Yes, Tesla might try to position the Model 3 in a different (more upscale) market segment than the GM Bolt or the Nissan LEAF. If so, we will have to see how the earlier promises and projections, especially the $30-35k base price, hold up. If the Model 3 is supposed to be a BMW 3 series competitor in all respects, it may end up costing $40-50k base, quite a different sales volume and price range than once communicated. Expect a lot of German EV and PHEV competition in this upper price range, which is not mass-market any longer. If so (price hiked), it remains to be seen if Tesla can really move 500k units per year by 2020 or (no price hike) risks low margins on the Model 3.

I also don't think DC fast charging will be an issue any longer in China, Japan and Europa by 2020.
Lots of stations are being built since 2014 with public funds. The coverage may still be a little spotty in North America, but it won't be a dealbreaker. Many customers outside the key segments for EVs will still prefer PHEVs or regular ICE cars or have a second car available for long trips anyway. The charger coverage in EV hot spots like California and similar states will likely be plentiful well before 2020.

 

[stopcrazypp]

That roadmap says they will start volume production of the new "200 mile" cells intended for these automotive companies in 2016 when GM will need them for its 2017 model year 200 mile car. These cells are designed specifically for automotive use and GM almost certainly has engineering samples of them today and has carefully tested them for suitability.

LG Chem's CEO has clarified they are talking ~2017 calendar year, not model year. And GM has never promised a release date for their planned car. It's all speculation by others.
http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=274204

- - - Updated - - -

I did mean billion in USD since LG will have over 10 trillion KRW (Won) in EV-related sales in total, the biggest customers will eat up the majority of the contract sizes

So you mean multi-billion TOTAL including all their hybrid, PHEV, and BEV contracts using completely different chemistry (which was already existent for many years and well proven). That has no bearing on what will happen with this new chemistry that LG has said is still under development. They don't have multi-billion in contracts for this specific chemistry (while Tesla does for theirs).

While LG has a good track record, it's still a new unproven chemistry. Nissan/AESC back in 2009 said they would have their version due this year (2015), but has since indicated it'll be ready in a "few" years after now.

 

[Matias]

Large car companies have billions to invest each and every calendar year.

Samsung and LG are expanding factories and building new ones in Asia. Same in America and Europe next to (car) customer facilities.

I don't imagine the OEMs and LG/Samsung signing multi-billion battery supplier contracts without a clear road map, volume projections and scenarios in case demand rises.

As for pricing, why should LG's batteries cost twice in the future? Nobody knows how effective Tesla's pricing will be against future plants from competitors. LG and Samsung don't stand still until 2017-2020, they know a thing or two about manufacturing efficiently on mass-scale.

There seems to be hubris in some Tesla believers. They think Tesla and Elon have all the geniusnes in the world and all others are stupid.

 

[WarpedOne]

There seems to be hubris in some Tesla believers. They think Tesla and Elon have all the geniusnes in the world and all others are stupid.

It only takes *one* genius move from others to prove that. So far we only see stupidity.

 

[JRP3]

Tesla better get those repair costs down by about 90% for Model 3. Else just breathing on it way and it may become salvage.

Since it's not likely to have aluminum body panels repair costs will automatically be lower.

I also don't think DC fast charging will be an issue any longer in China, Japan and Europa by 2020.
Lots of stations are being built since 2014 with public funds.

None of them are even half the speed of a supercharger that I'm aware of.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

The quoted Automobile article (linked by greencarreports) contained quite a few errors concerning Porsche and is incomplete.

Your list above only summarizes what has been announced publicly, some car makers play their cards close to the chest (Ford is one such example). There are many other companies working on BEVs such as VW (besides Audi), Mitsubishi, Renault, Volvo and lots of others that are strong in Europe and Asia.

Take for example Hyundai: They only announced their 2016 EV plans publicly in mid-2014. Had you compiled that list in early 2014, Hyundai wouldn't be on it.

Ok, so tell us this:

(1) What is the correct information for Porche (I note that you don't contest anything written about BMW, MB, or Audi), and what is your source?

(2) What information do you have that is not "publicly announced" on EVs from other companies, and what is your source?

I wrote about Hyundai's efforts, which you appear not to have read. Hyundai has yet to prove that they can build a mainstream car that doesn't have a garbage chassis and the associated terrible handling and ride quality. They can't even make a car that handles as well as a Toyota. They are trash compared to Honda. What makes you think they can build a sport sedan that can compete with a BMW 3-series or a Tesla?

Tesla had an opportunity to make the Model 3 stand out had it launched in 2015-2016. Now it will likely be just one of a dozen available EVs in the $30-50k price segment, especially it it arrives by 2019 only. My prediction at the moment is H2 2018, but that could turn out to be quite optimistic.

You continue to miss the point: being a standout doesn't necessarily mean being the only vehicle in the EV category. If the other "dozen available EVs" and PHEVs are not good cars and don't have the support of a fast charging infrastructure, it won't be difficult for the Tesla to stand out.

For the record, I've predicted that Model 3 will be delivered in Summer 2018, which is similar to your prediction.

 

[Vger]

I was just basing it on the fact that the price of a Tesla has not fallen.

I believe the price of Model S is driven by demand and not costs. They are pushing the gross margin up as high as possible while demand is overwhelming. They are doing this precisely to generate maximum revenue to reinvest in getting to Model 3 as soon as possible. Growing a company a 50% YOY is hard. Growing a high-tech manufacturing company at at 50% YOY is incredibly hard.

The mission of the company is Model 3. Everything else is preparation.

BTW, recall that the gigafactory is manifestly ahead of schedule, and will begin producing next year (2016), according to Elon's recent comments on 3Q CC.

 

[Jeff N]

LG Chem's CEO has clarified they are talking ~2017 calendar year, not model year. And GM has never promised a release date for their planned car. It's all speculation by others.
http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=274204

Here's the actual "2017" quote from that article:

Battery maker LG Chem Power Inc. plans to offer a new cell chemistry that could serve as the foundation for an affordable electric car with a 200-mile driving range by 2017.

I don't see any contradictions between LG being ready for battery production in 2016, as stated by their CFO in South Korea, and GM producing 2017 model year cars that are sold in 2017. The indications are that GM has been working seriously toward producing this 200-mile car for at least a year or two already.

LG Chem to supply batteries for 200-mile electric cars in 2016-CFO - Yahoo Finance

For instance, LG had to have the Volt batteries ready for production in 2010 for the 2011 model year Volt which had beta production test runs in the summer of 2010 and began production in November 2010 for sale in mid-December 2010 but predominantly 2011.

Of course, the model year for the Bolt is not confirmed publicly by GM and schedules can change but Detroit News reported:

Chevrolet Bolt electric concept has 200-mile range

According to analysts and some GM employee profiles, the Chevrolet Bolt, known as the "BEV2" internally, is due out by the 2017 model year.

Also, Design News isn't necessarily more precise or accurate than many other media sites. For example, they say the Volt doesn't use NMC but actually it does use a form of NMC. The new 2016 Volt will use a modification of that NMC/LMO chemistry.

The new lithium-ion cells will be based on a nickel manganese cobalt oxide (NMC) chemistry, Patil said. That’s a departure for LG Chem, which had notably used a manganese spinel chemistry on the well-known Chevy Volt battery.

But actually...

Green Car Congress: First look at all-new Voltec propulsion system for 2G Volt; “the only thing in common is a shipping capâ€￾

In terms of chemistry [in the 2016 Volt], Wallace [GM battery engineering director] said:
"We are still NMC and LMO. We changed the ratio a little bit—a little more NMC and a little less LMO.

 

[Trev Page]

I think you mean in the hundred million range, not multi-billion. And a vast majority the LG Chem contracts you are talking about are for hybrids and PHEVs, not BEVs. These contracts would be using the lower density LMO/NMC hybrid chemistry, which is not at all viable for a 200 mile BEV. Take a look at their roadmap:
http://insideevs.com/lg-chem-supply-200-mile-battery-2016/

For their next generation high density NMC chemistry, the only ones we are pretty much sure they have a contract for is GM and Renault (with Nissan being a possibility). Looking more closely at the Hyundai announcement, it was ambiguous enough that Hyundai could be talking about lower density LMO/NMC cells also (since Hyundai didn't mention significant range improvements, it's only the speculation of the article writer).

LG has indicated they will start production of their next gen cells around 2017, that doesn't mean they will be ready for a pack yet, or a car.


The Model 3 might not "beat them to market", but at the same time the Model 3 might not be in the same market position either. It's no secret the Model 3 is aimed at the 3 series (a RWD premium compact), while for example the Bolt is based on the Sonic hatchback (a FWD economy subcompact). Given the limited price gap between the two that's how the Tesla will "stand out". And Tesla's supercharger network is also a huge strength. I would know as I'm in the market for such an EV. If by 2017 the CCS/CHAdeMO networks are not build out yet to allow a comfortable trip from SF to LA, the Model 3 will be the only choice for me. All that range is useless if there is no charging network to allow longer trips.

^ This. You nailed what I've said all along. Model 3s price and market target are exactly what will set it apart from all the others. Add in the Supercharger and it's the unbeatable car in the $30-50$ price range.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Here's the actual "2017" quote from that article:

LG Chem is not saying whether any automakers are testing the new battery or planning to add it to future vehicles. He noted only that the new battery chemistry “would support vehicle timing of the 2017 calendar year.”

I'm referring to this part. That would appear to be a direct quote of the CEO, and not just paraphrasing.

I don't see any contradictions between LG being ready for battery production in 2016, as stated by their CFO in South Korea, and GM producing 2017 model year cars that are sold in 2017. The indications are that GM has been working seriously toward producing this 200-mile car for at least a year or two already.

A 2017 model year car typically launches in the summer of the year before (for example 2015 Volt launched in August 2014, 2016 Volt is being unveiled already this month and it might launch earlier than August). So calendar 2017 would be a 2018 model year. Just a relatively small nitpick, as the time table given means they can launch around that time.

For instance, LG had to have the Volt batteries ready for production in 2010 for the 2011 model year Volt which had beta production test runs in the summer of 2010 and began production in November 2010 for sale in mid-December 2010 but predominantly 2011.

Of course, the model year for the Bolt is not confirmed publicly by GM and schedules can change but Detroit News reported:

For the Volt time-line, concept (Jan 2007) to finished product (December 2010) took 3-4 years. The Bolt is not even in concept stage yet. Assuming they show the concept this month, that would mean sale in December 2018. Of course they may be much closer to production ready if they are working behind the scenes. But I still think it is significant that they have made no public promises of a released date yet (while Tesla has) and that bears mentioning.

Also, Design News isn't necessarily more precise or accurate than many other media sites. For example, they say the Volt doesn't use NMC but actually it does use a form of NMC. The new 2016 Volt will use a modification of that NMC/LMO chemistry.

Yes, the Volt has used a LMO/NMC hybrid since 2011. However, it is still primarily LMO and still half the energy density of high density NMC.
http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2011-01/gm’s-new-battery-chemistry-it’s-already-chevy-volt
Here's a very good article that goes in depth on the issues. Basically in order to approach the energy density of NCA (using the common ~3.7V nominal voltage), NMC has to operate at at above 4V (article mentions 4.7V and 4.2V) in which case there is significant voltage fade. All the work so far by the major players is trying to address this issue.
http://qz.com/234345/the-most-promising-electric-car-lithium-ion-battery-needs-saving/

 

[Jeff N]

Basically in order to approach the energy density of NCA (using the common ~3.7V nominal voltage), NMC has to operate at at above 4V (article mentions 4.7V and 4.2V) in which case there is significant voltage fade. All the work so far by the major players is trying to address this issue.

Argonne National Labs created the "layered-layered" approach that Envia, GM, and some others licensed 4 years ago. The ANL researchers admitted last summer that their approach turned out to have problems where the chemical structure changed to a less desirable configuration within the first year of use. So, it's puzzling why LG Chem appears to be rapidly moving toward production on these next gen batteries unless they are following a different approach.

The present Volt batteries are about 155 Wh per kg. I read something in the last day claiming the new Bolt cells would be 200 Wh per kg but I can't remember where I saw that now or how credible the source seemed to be. Today's Tesla/Panasonic cells are widely claimed to be 240 Wh per kg. Envia was aiming for 400 Wh per kg. That implies that the Bolt will be stuffed to the gills with battery cells and that LG must have found a way to make them cheaper. I've also seen hints that they may have found ways to somewhat reduce the need for active thermal management leading to lower packaging costs and less packaging overhead.

I'm looking forward to hearing more details about the actual cell specifications and chemistry. They may be getting much of their improvement from the anode side rather than the cathode. We just don't know.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Argonne National Labs created the "layered-layered" approach that Envia, GM, and some others licensed 4 years ago. The ANL researchers admitted last summer that their approach turned out to have problems where the chemical structure changed to a less desirable configuration within the first year of use. So, it's puzzling why LG Chem appears to be rapidly moving toward production on these next gen batteries unless they are following a different approach.

I think what LG Chem will do is sacrifice energy density/high voltage in order to release a cell on time without that voltage fade problem (it'll be NMC, but won't be *high density* NMC). It'll still be better than the LMO/NMC hybrid in the Volt, but it won't be 2x that of the current chemistry (the 200Wh/kg you heard might be in the right ball park). So I agree with your guesses (they might stuff the car with batteries / reduce packaging overhead and improve density in areas other than cathode). That's by far the least risky approach (and possibly only the viable approach at this stage). However, the problem with this approach is it increases your material cost per kWh (because of lower density), that's why I've been implying that it'll be tough to be on time AND on budget.

Today's Tesla/Panasonic cells are widely claimed to be 240 Wh per kg. Envia was aiming for 400 Wh per kg.

245Wh/kg is the 3100mAh NCR18650A that everyone guessed Tesla was using (esp. given Tesla announced it early on). Recent threads guessing the cell count in the Model S pack peg the cells in the current Model S in the 3400mAh range, so the NCR18650B is closer, and you can calculate it's about 254Wh/kg:
http://industrial.panasonic.com/www-cgi/jvcr13pz.cgi?E+BA+3+ACI4002+NCR-18650B+7+EU

As for Envia, they claim to get 400Wh/kg using not only high voltage (in the most problematic 4.7V range, not just 4.2V) but also silicon anodes.
http://www.enviasystems.com/#!materials/c19nj
Of course with Argonne's admission and the whole patent lawsuit within Envia, GM doesn't appear to be relying any longer on them delivering.

 

[bluenation]

as i said earlier....if we take for granted that GM and other legacy companies succeed in a 200mi EV with that price, to me at least, the 3 would be a wash.

until you look at SpC and see that there really is no competition WRT comparable high speed charging infrastructure. Where are their superchargers?

that, and the GF.

really, nothing else seems to matter at this point. Sorry, GM, but you know it's da troof.

I wrote about Hyundai's efforts, which you appear not to have read. Hyundai has yet to prove that they can build a mainstream car that doesn't have a garbage chassis and the associated terrible handling and ride quality. They can't even make a car that handles as well as a Toyota. They are trash compared to Honda. What makes you think they can build a sport sedan that can compete with a BMW 3-series or a Tesla?

.

the new genesis is a great car. so is the new sonata.

you're a couple years out of date, mate.

 

[Red Sage]

tftf: I believe that Tesla Motors will have ramped up production on the Model X to nothing less than 400 units per week by December 2015. I expect they will do far better than that, reaching around 800 units before the end of the year. You don't have to believe the same, but I consider that meaningful.

Franz von Holzhausen joined Tesla Motors in late 2008. Nine months later the first prototype of the Tesla Model S was shown. The final Model S was delivered into the hands of owners beginning mid-2012. Tesla delivered a few over 2,500 of them that year.

It usually takes five years for a traditional automobile manufacturer to bring a new car from the design table to the dealership lot. It was considered miraculous when Dodge was able to create the original Viper production car only three years after the first show car was displayed.

The Model X was first revealed in early 2012. i have faith that Franz and his Design Studio have been very busy, with multiple designs, since then.

 

[tftf]

tftf: I believe that Tesla Motors will have ramped up production on the Model X to nothing less than 400 units per week by December 2015. I expect they will do far better than that, reaching around 800 units before the end of the year. You don't have to believe the same, but I consider that meaningful.

This thread is about the Model 3 getting delayed (my optimistic estimate for now is H2 2018, could well be even later). I didn't mention the Model X in detail here. But its delays could have a ripple effect on the Model 3 timeline.

If Tesla delivers a few thousand Model X in Q3 and Q4 2015 that's still a delay of two years compared to the original plan (launch in 2013).

As for the competition to the Model 3: I reiterate my prediction that companies like GM (Bolt) and Nissan (Leaf 2) will deliver their long-range EVs in this price segment well before the Model 3 is ready for sale. In addition, we could see BMW upgrade its i-series battery pack and new competitors like Hyundai/Kia and many others. There will be at least 5-10 EVs competing with the Model 3 on price and range.

The big news coming from GM today was not the Bolt car or design, the big news was the Bolt's battery, its price and the 2017 timeframe in my opinion.

As I wrote earlier in this thread, LG, Panasonic and Samsung can deliver similar batteries to any large car maker by 2020 (and smaller plants don't necessarily have significant drawbacks according to studies: Green Car Congress: CMU/MIT study finds large-scale battery manufacturing will do little to reduce unit costs past a 200-300 MWh annual production level ).

That means anyone from Audi to Subaru can create compelling EVs and PHEVs.

Big car companies can also commission or partner with others to have thousands of multi-chargers (Chademo, CCS plugs) installed within 1-2 years globally - if so needed or desired by customers for a rollout beyond EV hotspots. We already see this happening in Japan and Europe where many initial installations are funded by public initiatives, there won't be many coverage holes left around 2020.

We will see the final results on Tesla's valuation once the GF is built and the Model 3 is shipping.

 

[JRP3]

The Bolt and future LEAF are not in the same category as the Model 3 no matter what their range and price, (unless they both have a complete redesign into another class of vehicle), any more than a Sonic and Versa are in the same category as the BMW3. This is an indisputable fact that cannot change no matter how often you may try to do so. Additionally we now know the Bolt price is really going to be $37K, not $30K.

 

[tftf]

As I wrote above we will only know once the Model 3 ships or at least gets shown in finalized form. So far it's based on vague specs and promises to make it a future EV competitor to the BMW 3 series.

Yes, the Bolt base price is around $30k with an asterix attached (after incentives/subsidies), I expected that - and that's why I don't think Tesla can introduce a different, more upscale car at the same price points.

Again, the "problem" for Tesla is not the Bolt, but various other large car companies using similar battery packs from LG, Samsung and Panasonic. GM was just the first to showcase its entry, many others will follow.

I won't speculate further until we see Model 3 announcements and specs. All I estimate for now is that it gets harder and harder for Tesla to introduce this car by 2017. I will be back when more information is available.

 

[Model 3]

I won't speculate further until we see Model 3 announcements and specs.

You forgot something here

"And the announcements and specs on any production car that I assume will be a competitor of the Model 3"...

 

[stopcrazypp]

The big news coming from GM today was not the Bolt car or design, the big news was the Bolt's battery, its price and the 2017 timeframe in my opinion.

We already know the plan for a ~200 mile, $30k EV from GM months ago. The Bolt didn't really clarify any battery information as there were no battery specs, and the price is actually a step back (now it's $30k *after* incentives, which means the same price as the Model 3). As for time-frame, notice that GM made zero mention of when they plan to produce the car (2017 remains speculation by others). I expected them to announce something in this regard, but they didn't.