Apr 19, 2015
CarlK One more reason we need P105D.�
Apr 19, 2015
billarnett Wouldn't 6C for a 85kWh pack be 510kW? (85 x 6 = 510 )�
Apr 19, 2015
AmpedRealtor You're ordering a car that goes 0-60 in 3.1 seconds. I have no sympathy for your issue. None! lol
�
Apr 19, 2015
krisg81 You'll definitely have no sympathy for the guys ordering the 2.8s version of the Model S then�
Apr 19, 2015
dsm363 Your P85D still goes 0-60 0.1 seconds faster than when you first bought it. It's still an awesome car. Why would an update make you upset? What amount of time would erase any chance of you or anyone else in the world being upset? 1 year? 2 years? Let's say 2 years. What happens to the person who buys a P85D 5 months before the P100D. Shouldn't they get their 2 year buffer from an upgrade coming out to be fair? Unless Tesla pre-announces the P100D coming out then they will be just as shocked and have the same right to be upset. If Tesla does pre-announce then of course they'll kill off sales of the P85D for the 6 months or so after the announcement.
I waited 3.5 years for a P85 and 6 months later the P85+ comes out then a little later autopilot then the D. My car is still fun to drive and if I wanted the latest and greatest then I would upgrade. It's not a problem for Tesla they are improving the product so quickly but a good thing. Like buying a computer or iPhone the 'latest and greatest' isn't the greatest for long. This is not your traditional car company and not the traditional model year roll out.�
Apr 19, 2015
Fiver
Well, Telsa could pre-announce the 100+ variant & it's pricing without killing sales. The only way to do this and avoid the Osborne Effect would be pricing the 100 above the existing 85[D], and leaving the 85[D] available even after the 100+ model is released.�
Apr 19, 2015
dsm363 April 30th Event SPECULATION: 100kWh Battery + 2.8s 0-60 Model S to be announ...
Agreed. My guess is that Tesla will roll things out similar to Apple and the iPhone where the product gets better but the price point for the good, better, best product line remains roughly the same. I guess the announcement window could still be an issue though as who would want a P85D when they could wait X months and get the P100D for same price.�
Apr 19, 2015
stevej119 Has Tesla ever pre-announced anything after the Model S actually went into production? I will continue to state that I think everyone looking at why they would or wouldn't introduce a new battery based on what affect it would have on 85 sales, 85D sales, or P85D sales is looking at this from the wrong side. The one model we know is coming with absolute certainty is the model X. So I will say, again, that the question is what size battery will most likely be coming on the high-end Model X? Whatever that battery is will most certainly become the new standard for the Model S, and it will be because it's what's needed for the X, not because of how it will make any current Model S owners, P85D or not, feel.�
Apr 19, 2015
wk057 I was using the 19A per cell number for the 485kW number.
19A * 3.6V * 7104 cells = 485913.6W. Using Tesla's rating of 85,000Wh would be 11.965 Wh per cell. 11.965Wh / 3.6V nominal = 3,323.6mAh cells. Comes to ~5.72C. Factor in the huge voltage drop that will happen at that load and the amperage will be what I said, about 6C.�
Apr 19, 2015
deonb There's no way.
The 85D represents a top-of-the-line product. Pre-announcing a higher top-of-the-line will basically cause all 85D sales in China to be cancelled before Google can even index the tweet.
There's a lot of buyers that care more about having the best car, rather than having a great car.�
Apr 19, 2015
MartinAustin Elon said there would be no significant changes to the Model S hardware for a year... last October. The 70D is pretty darn close to a significant change, but it's using the same ol' batteries, just more of them now that Panasonic's production has ramped up. More of these batteries will not fit into the battery case, so 85KWh is it, until new chemistry is debuted. That will be debuted for the Model X.
The only way they have figured out a way to further improve the acceleration will be to change the existing car.
I suggest there are two outcomes to this - new wiring from the battery to the invertor, which is a retrofittable change if you want it (and not a significant change), OR new software. One wonders why they would go two steps (from 3.2 to 3.1 and then from 3.1 to 2.8) but I guess they had two improvements to try and weren't sure the 2nd one was going to be OK?
This could easily be debuted before April 30th. The two events should not be confused.�
Apr 19, 2015
OrlandoKen How about home Solar Panel announcement?�
Apr 19, 2015
Stoneymonster How would that be different from Solar City?�
Apr 19, 2015
sickfox So............ anyone selling their P85D after owning it for 5 months? If so, how much will you sell it for?
I remember when the P85D was announced, 1-2 year old P85s were selling at about $85K-95K price range.
I don't mind buying a used P85D... :wink::wink::wink:�
Apr 19, 2015
mhpr262 That would be more along SolarCity's lines I think ... btw I have been wondering a bit that the home battery is being offered with a Tesla badge and not a SolarCity badge as it would fit in much better with the kind of products SC offers. Tesal has built quite bit of street cred over the past few years with battery powered products, maybe they want to cash in on that.�
Apr 19, 2015
LetsGoFast Anything remotely as big as a new 100 KWh battery would be the subject of its own tweets and press conference, not slipped in before this one or bundled with the expected home storage solution. They had a five day tease and huge press conference to announce a stupid navigation upgrade, no way they just slide some major battery or performance upgrade out there as a "warm up" no matter what goofy tweet comes from Elon.�
Apr 19, 2015
Mario Kadastik It's the home battery pack. They promised unveiling in a couple of months about a couple of months ago.
nothing to see here�
Apr 20, 2015
Stoneymonster Totally agree LetsGoFast. No way is a major change like that in the cards right now.�
Apr 20, 2015
krisg81 I would have agreed with you up until I saw how the 70D was dropped on the market unexpectedly. It seems Tesla's way of handling a battery change/upgrade is to just announce it unexpectedly to ensure people don't hold off on orders up into the event launch. Why did the 70D not have its own tweets or special event/press conference? I can see the navigation tease being great for marketing and not affecting existing orders, but dropping a product upgrade would likely be handled the way the 70D was.
�
Apr 20, 2015
Stoneymonster Frankly, the 70D is a very minor update compared to what a 100-105kWH would be. They were updating the low end of the line. Let me put it a different way: what benefit does Tesla get going to 100 soon? More demand? They can't meet what they have. Better manufacturing synergy? Nope, they just have to use more cells per car now and maybe cells that are in shorter supply due to new chemistry.
So please explain the sense of this. The 70D adds a few cells, perhaps settles the line on a single cell type and simplifies the line by making most cars AWD.�
Apr 20, 2015
stevej119 It all depends upon your definition of "soon." To me, "soon" is whenever the Model X hits the design studio. At that point, S orders will come to a grinding halt if S has a smaller battery than X. That is the "sense" of introducing a larger battery "soon." And that's why, after selling my five month old 85S a few days ago, I'm sitting tight for now.
My definition of "soon" is any time in the next 90 days. I'm sure a lot of others here at TMC are thinking 1-10 days when they read soon. It's all a matter of perspective.�
Apr 20, 2015
krisg81 Design studio will look like this very soon, IMO:
MODEL S
70D
85D (no more single motor config)
P100D (want the longer 300ish EPA range + better performance? Step up to the P100D)
MODEL X
85D (240ish EPA range)
P100D (275ish EPA range)�
Apr 20, 2015
Andyw2100 I disagree about S orders grinding to a halt if X has a bigger battery.
The S and X are very different vehicles. As a recent S purchaser, I wouldn't consider the X. I don't want or need an SUV, and I greatly prefer the styling of the S over what I've seen of the X. I think the falcon wing doors are one of those things that you either love or hate. I think there are plenty of people who, like me, would not consider an X over an S.�
Apr 20, 2015
krisg81 I agree with this. The Model S has just as much, if not more storage/cargo space than many SUV's on the market now, excluding the large ones. The Model X is literally a taller version of the Model S with more ground clearance and gimmicky falcon doors. Since the Model S has AWD, performs better, and will get better range/efficiency with the same battery size - it would be tough to justify getting a Model X over an S. I think many people are going to be surprised when they can't even open the rear doors in their garage. I still think those doors will come back to bite them..�
Apr 20, 2015
gregincal Sure, but if they have a larger battery for the X you know absolutely that they can do the same for the S and will sooner or later, so why would you buy one instead of wait for them to announce the larger battery?�
Apr 20, 2015
stevej119 I suppose that's possible, but I'd personally be shocked if you couldn't buy a Model X with over 240 mile range for less than $120k. It seems lost on a lot of folks here that the P85D or XP85D is not going to be the bulk of the sales volume. If you take away your proposed P100D X model at $120K+, you're left with an $90k+ SUV with only 240 mile range. I just don't see that being a successful product lineup.�
Apr 20, 2015
Stoneymonster Most ICE SUV/Crossovers have bigger tanks than sedans do, because they must to match range. They also take a performance penalty based on weight for that. Would it be so crazy for Tesla to do the same? Frankly, I've always thought the battery size as the model number was dumb and would get them in this sort of trouble eventually. I'd rather they stuck to what the car can do (range, performance) and HIDE the battery spec. Seriously, I'd prefer this. Come at me.
EDIT: In fact, I'd go so far as to say in the future, they won't tell you the battery capacity. I think that's an artifact of how electric cars are currently perceived and how charging works. Once things are more ubiquitous and commonplace, it won't matter as much and they can drop it. How many ICE cars have their tank capacity as the top line spec?�
Apr 20, 2015
stevej119 Exactly. That is why I expect the Model S will have a larger battery the moment the Model X hits the design studio.
- - - Updated - - -
We should really have a separate thread for this battery size discussion. Any moment now someone is going to jump in, AGAIN, with "I think they're going to talk about a stationary battery."�
Apr 20, 2015
krisg81 I never even thought it about that way man. You are totally right. Basing your model naming convention based on the gas tank/battery size is starting to look more and more stupid as time goes on, especially with the coming competition in the EV market in the next couple of years.�
Apr 20, 2015
dsm363 If the Model X has a 90kWh pack but gets the same range I doubt people who like sedans over SUVs will jump ship to the Model X for that reason. Even if it's a 100kWh it depends on how much of an increase in range the X has over the 85D.�
Apr 20, 2015
wk057 This is correct. I see no way to cram more cells into the 85kWh pack as it stands.
Would love to know where you get this information, since I highly doubt it is true.
My money is still on no bigger battery pack/better chemistry until the gigafactory is operational. Would make little sense otherwise.�
Apr 20, 2015
Andyw2100 I'm sure some people would wait. I just don't think Model S sales would come to a complete stop. There are always going to be people who want the car now and don't want to wait, as well as those for whom the current battery offerings are sufficient. There are also likely to be purchasers who realize that the larger battery will come with an increased price, and since they'd be satisfied with the current battery size, they'll still buy now.
I agree that there will be some potential S purchasers that will choose to wait to make their purchase if the X is announced with a larger battery than an 85 kWh. I just don't think a complete standstill in S sales is likely.�
Apr 20, 2015
stevej119 Whether it makes sense (aside from whether it's possible - I know, minor detail) depends upon what the range of Model X is with the 85kwh battery. Ultimately, that depends upon the relative aerodynamics and weight of the X vs. the S.
- - - Updated - - -
I didn't mean to imply anyone would jump ship from the S to the X. That's not what I think will happen. What I do think is that people will potentially delay their purchase of an S if it does not immediately have the same battery option because they know it is coming soon.�
Apr 20, 2015
dsm363 Ah, that makes sense. Misunderstood what you posted.
I agree that would happen. My guess is Tesla would make that gap very small by announcing the X then also the new battery pack for the Model S that would be available very soon.�
Apr 20, 2015
wk057 Considering the X is basically a Model S with a slightly larger front profile and potentially a bit more weight, I suspect the 85kWh pack will be fine and that an Model X85D will clock in a few ticks below the S P85D range wise. I'm also suspecting that the Model X is not going to be available in RWD due to the efficiency gains.
So, unlikely a *need* to release a pack with more energy, IMO.
Speculation.�
Apr 20, 2015
brianman Ok, while we're speculating....
For the moment, assume that swapping doesn't "really exist for customers" (ever). With that assumption, is it important to Tesla Motors that the S and X have the same battery pack volume or shape? I'm guessing not.�
Apr 20, 2015
tekstrand24 Exactly!�
Apr 20, 2015
stevej119 For purposes of economy of scale, it is important that the shape/size is the same. Less expensive to make twice as many of one thing than half as many each of two.�
Apr 20, 2015
brianman I'm not getting the twice/half point. Elaborate?�
Apr 20, 2015
stevej119 �
Apr 20, 2015
brianman I'm not sure that's true -- or at least not to a degree that matters, compared to having the flexibility to do something "new and better" for Model X given the larger vehicle size that it is expected to have. Same goes for the pickup truck market. A "super duty" 2x85kWh truck is likely pretty compelling, but if you can bump it to 200kWh by using a different packaging that might be worth your effort.�
Apr 20, 2015
wk057 Does it have to? No of course not. Will it? More than likely.
Tesla just eliminated a variation in battery pack component by eliminating the 60kWh pack by using the same modules from the 85kWh pack for the 70D. (Unconfirmed speculation, but only logical conclusion based on data available.) The 70D would still use the 14 module slots the 60kWh pack used, except with more cells per module. So no change there. Not even a change in voltage from the original 60kWh pack. Literally an updated field in the programming of the pack BMS to adjust the module capacity. The pack housings are the same with different innards near the nose. Switching to one module type is logical and eliminates a complexity.
Adding another complexity (a completely new pack that holds more modules) would seem to undermine the need for production optimization.
Again, considering the Model X is basically built on the Model S "skateboard" (wasn't this officially said somewhere?) then it is logical that it will use the same battery form factor.�
Apr 20, 2015
brianman I generally agree. My point for raising the question was for evaluation purposes (devil's advocate, etc.). We tend to have a bit of group think of "well the simple/logical is ... and thus of course Tesla will ..." and then Tesla surprises us in one way or another by "meandering" from the path we expect only to point out that they had one or more additional long-term targets we weren't aware of. (Long sentence alert!).
Regarding your first sentence, one could interpret differently...
�
Apr 20, 2015
wk057 I'm not sure optimizing a sub unit then adding a new main unit would quite balance out... but, OK, I could maybe see them doing this. It is Tesla afterall.
I still don't buy it, though.�
Apr 21, 2015
DjiM What if the announced product is a very rapid DC home charger that approaches SuC speeds?
If you add a home-installed buffer battery to the mix, a home supercharger could become a possibility.
While the car is absent, the buffer battery that is installed at home is charged using solar power or grid power. When the car returns, it can be charged quickly, draining DC from the buffer battery (might even use the SuC protocol).�
Apr 21, 2015
Stoneymonster I don't see a general use case for that. The number of times I would have needed this in the last two years is zero. Plus you'd have to have a pretty big buffer battery (at least half the size of the car's) to make it worthwhile. Most of the home installations Tesla has talked about and deployed are in the 10kWh size.�
Apr 21, 2015
DjiM Would allow you to charge at night using solar power�
Apr 21, 2015
krisg81 For solar owners, rates are the cheapest at night. You would want to have the battery charge up using the grid at night, at Super Off Peak rates, and that battery discharges / powers your home at more expensive rates. During the day, solar will be sold back to the utility.
In a perfect world, a home battery would do something like this for me:
Midnight to 6am (Super Off Peak, $0.09/kW): Fully charge 15kWh home battery to 100%
6am to 2pm (Off Peak, $0.21/kW): Over-generate / sell solar power back to utility
2pm to 8pm (On Peak, $0.34/kW): Home switches to 15kW battery
8pm to midnight (Off Peak, $0.21/kW): If home battery discharged, buy back power from utility at $0.21/kW - same price that was sold to them earlier in the day.�
Apr 21, 2015
tga For your utility on your rate plan maybe, but don't project that onto everyone.
I'm on a municipal power company in MA. They don't offer TOU plans, and my utility does not do net metering (in MA, muni's are exempt from the net metering law). They pay wholesale (currently $0.06/kWh) for excess generation, and charge me retail (currently $0.15/kWh) for power I draw from the grid.
Edit:
I wouldn't mind a system that allowed me to capture excess production and store it during the day (rather then sell at $0.06/kWh), and draw from it when consumption exceeds production. However, I think integrating that into my system, and monitoring the Enphase microinverter system for production data and energy flows would be tricky.
I envision the Tesla system as being a grid-tied string inverter with integrated batteries, giving a single point of control to manage power flow to/from the grid, from the panels, and to/from the batteries.�
Apr 21, 2015
krisg81 Great, I am not projecting that to everyone. So your solar can over generate / charge the battery and then you can use the battery vs drawing from the grid then. If they are ripping you off and only paying wholesale, a battery makes sense for you too.�
Apr 21, 2015
tga You made a blanket statement that "For solar owners, rates are the cheapest at night." I just gave an example where it wasn't necessarily true. Seemed like you were assuming everyone had a similar situation as you.
Agree, but we will have to see if it can integrate with the particulars of my system. I have a multi-level roof, with a couple of large dormers. The result is that a few of my 36 panels (sometimes 1, sometimes 4) are in shade morning/afternoon. Microinverters allow my system to continue to get maximum output from the panels that still have sun throughout the day. If I had to replace them with a Tesla battery-equipped string inverter, my production would drop to near 0 during those morning/afternoon times.
Also, I have to be able to outright purchase it. My utility doesn't allow grid-tied leased (non-customer owned) equipment, so no leases through Solar City.�
Apr 21, 2015
krisg81 Damn your utility is a bunch of nazi's! LOL
Its great you have a microinveter system as well, also for when panels start outputting less power all of your panels are not affected.�
Apr 21, 2015
tga Could be worse - here muni's aren't even required to pay for excess generation. They're doing me a favor paying me wholesale instead of nothing.�
Apr 21, 2015
AmpedRealtor A new owner at TM Forums was told by a service technician that the 70D used next generation battery cells with a higher power density.�
Apr 21, 2015
Stoneymonster I wouldn't be surprised if a service technician said that the Teslas secretly ran on ground up smurfs at this point. They say all kinds of stuff.�
Apr 21, 2015
qwertzy Balance | Tesla Motors
Related reading on power density and energy density.�
Apr 21, 2015
AmpedRealtor A month ago JB spoke at an energy symposium. He said that Model S batteries improved by 20%-30% since Roadster, and that the Model 3's batteries will improve another 20%-30% from today's Model S. JB said that the improvements to energy density in lithium-ion cells can continue at this rate for a really long time. Well, Model 3 is only two years away. If the 70 kWh pack was based on higher density cells, then it represents a 17% improvement. The numbers appear to scale according to what JB has said.�
Apr 21, 2015
qwertzy And here it says there has been an increase in density from 233wh/kg to 300wh/kg
Predictions for new battery | Forums | Tesla Motors�
Apr 21, 2015
ecarfan Definitely not a reliable source.�
Apr 21, 2015
JRP3
But Elon is not necessarily talking about cells currently in production. From his tone it sounds as if he's talking about lab grade cells that might be close to production.�
Apr 21, 2015
AmpedRealtor lol true�
Apr 22, 2015
mhpr262 The service technician probably read my post on here from a while ago in which I predicted that new cells were being used in the 70D ... :wink:�
Apr 22, 2015
MarcG News as of this morning: Tesla Utility-Scale Battery
I think we can stop speculating now :biggrin:�
Apr 22, 2015
bonnie You must be new here.
�
Apr 22, 2015
MarcG Oh Bonnie it was wishful thinking (hence the smiley...)�
Apr 22, 2015
bonnie (and my smiley in response...�
Apr 22, 2015
krisg81 It doesn't address the "warm up act" to the April 30th event... Speculation can continue�
Apr 22, 2015
Krugerrand 10 sit ups, 15 push ups, and 10 jumping jacks?�
Apr 22, 2015
MarcG I personally didn't read much, if anything, into the comment within Elon's twitter referring to a "warm-up act". To me, he was just daydreaming about getting 0-60 under 3 sec. and was throwing it out there as potential "wow factor" to get some attention before the unrelated-to-cars announcement on 4/30. But I digress - please feel free to speculate away!�
Apr 24, 2015
scott jones I don't know if that's a "Stoneymonster" original, but that's a good one! I almost spit up my drink... "secretly ran on ground up smurfs." ha!�
Apr 24, 2015
AudubonB Bonnie came so close to figuring the new reveal some ten or so pages ago.
It's just for this forum's members, and it's a shampoo.�
Apr 24, 2015
bonnie Awww, someone noticed!�
Apr 24, 2015
MBE I don't think P85D owners have anything to worry about this month. Then again, I don't think a P100D would be any reason to be upset, unless it came in at almost the same price as a P85D (and it won't).
If I had bought a P85D (and I didn't, I ordered a 70D), it would have been for the performance the car has. Tesla has even improved performance for some AFTER they had purchased - unheard of previously. A P100D doesn't make a P85D any slower, any shorter range, etc.
The only thing it could detract from is the sense of owning the bleeding edge of technology. But that's the thing with bleeding edges of technology - they quickly turn into mere "cutting edge"!
If you bought it from a car performance perspective, it shouldn't be bothersome. If you bought it from a high tech toy perspective, your dissatisfaction probably stems from treating a $130k car like it's an iPhone.�
Apr 28, 2015
krisg81 Only a couple days left until the event, and Tesla has already announced it will be about the home battery system... So no surprises there, maybe that leaves room to mention another battery.. The one that will be in the Model X and will replace the 85kWh pack, as well as allow the Model S to achieve a 2.8s 0-60 time?�
Apr 28, 2015
WarpedOne I just had an Aha! moment... So, this is about home batteries that contain different cells than new car batteries. There is this problem of what to do with used car batteries after they are EOL-ed. Using them as stationary storage seems like a no brainer but someone still has to repack and check them. What if tesla announces thy will buy back your 8 years old car battery or deduct its worth from new battery price? What if they announce a program when they do it upfront - they sell a new battery with used price already deducted and you oblige you will return the battery in 8 years (if not sooner).
In this way you own the battery but you also pay quite a bit less upfront. This could be a big way how to reduce model 3 buying price.�
Apr 28, 2015
wk057 While this might sound reasonable at first, it's completely impractical. There is no way Tesla can essentially invest in used batteries like that for an upfront cost reduction. What about the vehicles that will be totaled? No one's going to write Tesla a check for the difference when that happens. Plus they'd have to gamble that they picked an appropriate "used" value over 8 years.... and that's not going to happen either.
Would be millions to subsidize such a thing with no return in sight for 8+ years. No investor would go for that.
I do agree, however, that they should buy used batteries for use in stationary storage where they would have extended life, however. Doing it as an upfront cost reduction doesn't seem to make any sense, though.�
Apr 29, 2015
bonnie Or a combination of new/recycled. All that matters to me is that the battery I have has (or exceeds) the storage capacity I signed up for.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét