Except they don't do that. When they have done these limited size batteries in the past, they method they use it to pick a fixed % of the total battery capacity to use, and apply it to whatever total amount of energy the battery has. So let's say they pick that you get only 80% of the total. As the total battery energy capacity goes down from 82 kWh to 80 kWh to 79 kWh to 73 kWh or whatever, they don't compensate that in the capped batteries. They are still applying the same ratio, so their capacity reduces as well.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
-
On today's TMC Podcast, we ask the question "What is the Tesla Cybercab?". Join us on YouTube live at 1PM and participate in the chat.
Tesla is capping batteries again to get more sales?
- Thread starter meomyo
- Start date
vcor
Tech Specialist
This thread is now a non-issue. The Model SR is gone (I suspect none were delivered) and the LR has dropped in price by $10K and there is now no charge for any color paint too. Looks like the SR was a test to see the demand at a lower price. I guess the test was successful, and they elected to just drop the price. Likely a combination of lower production costs and competitive pressure. Making the Model X now qualify for the $7500 credit may have also forced the S price to be a bit lower than the X. Interesting times!
Are you suggesting that none were ordered? Or that those that ordered one were given an LR for the same price?
brainhouston
Active Member
I don't get this logic...
How come there's no ICE cars with 5 gal tanks?...
They don't use all the gas in one day n have gas station on every corner..
Its like a gun, better have it n not need it than need it n not have it.
Industry will balance itself out once EVs mature n settle on some acceptable range just like ICE cars did (~300mi)
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
Because there's a logical point where you get to "enough" and the drawbacks of more outweigh the benefits.
We don't have 100 gallon fuel tanks in passenger cars because the packaging requirements and efficiency issues with carrying around 900 pounds of fuel outweigh the benefits.
The same sort of logical limits apply to batteries at current cost and energy densities. Carrying around an extra thousand pounds of lithium at an up-front cost of an extra $10,000 (hypothetical example) that you have a "need" for once a year is not a good value proposition, particularly when charging is available and abundant almost everywhere.
brainhouston
Active Member
i'd agree with u but
old S/X batteries were all same size just extra room in the pack
on new packs, 2 modules are like 100lbs diff.. thats less than the junk ppl throw in the car sometimes
in this thread we're talking about software locking which saves u nothing..
also worth mentioning, bunch of small range EVs will soon crowd all chargers so its beneficial to manufacturers to bump up the range
i think 100kw is good number for now, we'll see what happens later...
This is because there's a process involved with refueling. You have to drive there and pump it... people don't want to do that daily.
With home charging, daily refueling is actually the norm. EV owners are already doing it... it's just that most of them are charging from 60-80%, or 30-50% or whatever. Most people only need a minority of a Tesla battery for daily driving.
I think 40kWh is plenty. Of course there are exceptions (professional drivers)... but as the technology improves, energy density will improve, charging times will improve, and even someone who drives for 8 hours a day won't mind stopping twice a day for 5 minutes each time.
Last edited:
brainhouston
Active Member
All valid points yet we have so many threads about ppl complaining they not getting epa range
I think most ppl prefer range in 300+ miles
BTW, 40kwh means nothing unless u also say the efficiency number. Cybertruck or X won't get too far on 40kwh..
Definitely not enough for me, after driving X 90D (76kwh usable) i told my self i won't buy anything less than 100kwh or Long Range for 3/Y
Yes i can manage but i need that buffer even if i only gonna use it few days in a year
Home charging is great but too many variables still... apartments, failed charger/breaker, power outage, cold weather impacts.. etc etc
My 2c.
@brainhouston - good points. I'm a bit of a dreamer, and like to think of things in terms of "ideal"... what things *could* be if humanity tried our best.
That's true, but that's more to do with missed expectations than actual battery needs. Some owners expected 350 miles per charge because "that's what the sticker says", but they only get 250 and feel betrayed. Guess what though... they more than make due with the battery they have.
Yeah, good point. If we can average 5 or 6 miles per kWh across all vehicles, that'd be great. Larger vehicles will need larger batteries, but hopefully more people drive smaller cars... *much* smaller.
We need better financial incentives against the giant trucks that are so popular in the US today.
Generally though, I do think 150-200 miles of true range is suitable for almost everyone, or at least it *will* be once the fast DC charging network is ubiquitous and fast charging gets even faster. Stopping for 5-10 minutes every two hours is acceptable, and people will not only get used to that pattern, they'll come to appreciate it. So a mid-size sedan like the Model 3 might have a 35-40kWh battery, while a smaller two seater pod might only need 25kWh for the same range.
I think with today's infrastructure, you need that buffer even if only a few days a year... but once EVs hit critical mass, everything will change.
Fast DC charging will be every 10 miles, and instead of towing EVs that run out of juice, other vehicles will readily "jump" them. EV range anxiety will become a thing of the past.
We won't even worry about driving to remote areas because... those will have charging too.
Unfortunately, there will be people that will not have home charging. For them, they'll miss out in the convenience of having a "full tank" every morning, but it'll *still* be better than gas stations.
They'll plug in where they park - at work, at the pay-to-park garage, or even at the public curb. When they have to, they'll intentionally visit a charging station for a 5 minute "fill".
--
Once again, I'm thinking more from an idealist perspective, but we *know* the charging network will continue to grow, and we *know* that vehicle prices need to drop significantly. Those two knowns seem to paint the future very clearly in my mind - smaller batteries.
There's a bit of a catch-22 in that we can't shrink the batteries without more public charging, and public charging will only grow as long as EV sales continue to grow, and EV sales won't grow with vehicles that can't drive far enough to make it to the next charger... so for the time being, batteries will stay larger.
It makes sense that once public charging is everywhere, many people will happily buy 35kWh vehicles for $17k. They'll charge almost exclusively at home, but once a year when they drive long distance they'll just stop every hour or two to charge. Or take a maglev train.
That's true, but that's more to do with missed expectations than actual battery needs. Some owners expected 350 miles per charge because "that's what the sticker says", but they only get 250 and feel betrayed. Guess what though... they more than make due with the battery they have.
Yeah, good point. If we can average 5 or 6 miles per kWh across all vehicles, that'd be great. Larger vehicles will need larger batteries, but hopefully more people drive smaller cars... *much* smaller.
We need better financial incentives against the giant trucks that are so popular in the US today.
Generally though, I do think 150-200 miles of true range is suitable for almost everyone, or at least it *will* be once the fast DC charging network is ubiquitous and fast charging gets even faster. Stopping for 5-10 minutes every two hours is acceptable, and people will not only get used to that pattern, they'll come to appreciate it. So a mid-size sedan like the Model 3 might have a 35-40kWh battery, while a smaller two seater pod might only need 25kWh for the same range.
I think with today's infrastructure, you need that buffer even if only a few days a year... but once EVs hit critical mass, everything will change.
Fast DC charging will be every 10 miles, and instead of towing EVs that run out of juice, other vehicles will readily "jump" them. EV range anxiety will become a thing of the past.
We won't even worry about driving to remote areas because... those will have charging too.
Unfortunately, there will be people that will not have home charging. For them, they'll miss out in the convenience of having a "full tank" every morning, but it'll *still* be better than gas stations.
They'll plug in where they park - at work, at the pay-to-park garage, or even at the public curb. When they have to, they'll intentionally visit a charging station for a 5 minute "fill".
--
Once again, I'm thinking more from an idealist perspective, but we *know* the charging network will continue to grow, and we *know* that vehicle prices need to drop significantly. Those two knowns seem to paint the future very clearly in my mind - smaller batteries.
There's a bit of a catch-22 in that we can't shrink the batteries without more public charging, and public charging will only grow as long as EV sales continue to grow, and EV sales won't grow with vehicles that can't drive far enough to make it to the next charger... so for the time being, batteries will stay larger.
It makes sense that once public charging is everywhere, many people will happily buy 35kWh vehicles for $17k. They'll charge almost exclusively at home, but once a year when they drive long distance they'll just stop every hour or two to charge. Or take a maglev train.
Tesla has made their case that a 100 kWh battery is about as large as they want to go. Bigger batteries mean they can build fewer cars, and that it also weighs lots more. Feels that 100 kWh is a sweet spot between battery volume constraints, cost, weight and range.
They intend to gain additional range through more aerodynamic design, power train efficiency improvements, weight reduction, battery chemistry and more efficient electronics.
In addition, they feel that increasing the Supercharger speeds and adding more locations, the long distance charging experience will be competitive.
They intend to gain additional range through more aerodynamic design, power train efficiency improvements, weight reduction, battery chemistry and more efficient electronics.
In addition, they feel that increasing the Supercharger speeds and adding more locations, the long distance charging experience will be competitive.
There's also the fact that bigger battery can be charged and discharged at a higher rate. So you get faster supercharging and quicker acceleration and also the battery probably lasts longer as the cells are not stressed that much.
100kWh might indeed be a sweet spot here. 35kWh might be enough capacity but I doubt people would like if supercharging speed and motor power is dropped to 35% ...
100kWh might indeed be a sweet spot here. 35kWh might be enough capacity but I doubt people would like if supercharging speed and motor power is dropped to 35% ...
For now, but can we rule out entirely the possibility of a 35kWh battery being charged from 0-100% in 5 or 10 minutes?
EV batteries need to cost a few thousand dollars, not $10-20k. Recycling might help though.
went to 2 diff sc today after dropping off the gf at dia... the 1st one was pathetic for 250kw i was getting 48. i had 100 miles but wanted to get to 150 but got frustrated ..a shame...and it was not even crowded... the next one i was getting 80 to start and then it went down to 60 then 40(same as at home? wtf)..i was at 125 but wanted to get to 200 but only stayed till it was 175....why do they tout it at 250kw charging when many cars get only 40-80? this makes me want more range battery in general to charge less
Last edited:
You get 40kw home charging?!? That's nuts.
I suspect some confusion. The "250kw" fast DC chargers are *MAX* of 250kw. To get that speed, your battery has to be at the ideal state of charge and temperature (I think 104°F). So first, ensure you've got navigation to your destination so that the car preconditions the battery for supercharging... and second, you're only going to get 250kw under like 20% state of charge.
My guess is that your home charging is more like 11kw or less.
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
I see from your post history you have a 2017 75D.
The MAX you will ever see in terms of charge rate for your car is about 150kw under the most ideal conditions - perfectly warm battery and between 15-25% state of charge. My 75 hit 152kw for a hot minute a month ago, that’s as high as I’ve ever seen it in ~7 years.
After that initial spike you’ll settle in and provided your battery is completely warm and preconditioned you’ll see a more or less linear charging curve that follows the equation (120) - (state of charge in percent) = max supercharger output.
So if your battery was at “100 miles” like you said above, that’s maybe 44% state of charge on a normally degraded S75D. So the max you should expect to see when supercharging is 120 - 44 = ~76kw.
Your second stop where you “waited until 175” miles: 175 miles is about 76% of a normally degraded 75D so you should expect to see a max rate of 120 - 76 = ~44kw. Sounds like that’s more or less exactly what you were seeing so you were getting the best case.
The car charges slower as the battery gets fuller. Just a reality of the way these things work.
Final point RE 40kw being “same as home, wtf”: you are confusing kilowatts, which is what the supercharger is showing, and amps, which is how people often measure charging at home. If your car is charging at 40 amps on the mobile connector at home using a 240v circuit, that’s about 10 kilowatts, not 40 like you were seeing at the supercharger.
Similar threads
