Huh? Who said Tesla was lying? Not me, I said you were interpreting the graph wrongly, unless you were trying to say a tabless 4680 would charge slower than a tabless 2180, that would follow from the data. However, I didn't see anyone arguing that point, rather people are comparing 2170 single tab to 4680 tabless, and you can't derive their relationship from that graph.
For each design, the graph shows increase from their base 21mm diameter; that does not mean they have the same inital charge time. Given Tesla only increased the diameter 3mm from the previous industry standard 1865 to make the 2170, I'd be very surprised if tabless would not improve 2170 charge rate. Could it be the case that tabless doesn't help 2170 (for the same kWh)? Doubtful, but even if so, you can't pull that from this graph.
If the tabless 0 point is 10 minutes vs 15 for tabbed and the 21->46 delta for tabless is 4 minutes, the 4680 tabless would still charge faster than the 2170 tabbed.
With the lack of vertical scale label, we can't say what the displacement even means. Is it minutes, %, inverse log?
Stock equivalent, which has the higher share price?
View attachment 780532
On a tangent: for any situation where the pack is not tapering (bulk of most non-supercharing), any increase in efficiency boosts the effective charge rate as more of the charger power is converted to SOC vs heat.
