[Bacardi]

UNVERIFIED & unnamed source, Tesla Model 3 to get 74kWh packs first then 60kWh later

http://insideevs.com/tesla-invests-216-million-into-model-3-battery-line-at-gigafactory/

“According to our source, the base Model 3, as of now, will start at 60kWh. This capacity comes in higher than what we original expected and should deliver more range than Tesla had originally announced. Tesla is reportedly concentrating on the production of the premium battery at first, which is slated to be 74kWh.”

Because all we can do is speculate...Range? Cost between batteries? I will note that the Tesla X75D has an EPA range of 237 miles, I'd argue that if Musk was losing sleep over being beat by the Bolts range he'd challenge his engineers to find a way to get it to 238-240...But perhaps since there's so many comparisons to the Bolt he may want to beat it at range...I also personally do not think that if the Tesla actually met their goal of 215, it wouldn't result in mass cancelations as I don't think a person driving a BMW 3 series who preordered a Tesla M3 cares that the Bolt has 20-30 more miles of range...

My WAGs...RWD 60kWh: 230...RWD 74kWh: 275...$9000-$10K to upgrade batteries...

 

[Qinsp]

My guess is 56kWh of usable capacity (60kWh) is going to sink the Model 3. The car is going to be too heavy, too expensive, and still not match the Bolt EV's actual real world range in identical conditions.

Elon Musk does not understand what an ace in the hole the Tesla name and Supercharger network are worth. A 45 kWh usable (49kWh) battery will make a transcontinental Model 3, and cost far less, and yield better Wh/mi.

He's been wrong about specifications so many times, that one more isn't going to be a death sentence. Heck, he screws up, and the sales go UP not down.

He needs more separation between the Model S and Model 3, and range is a big carrot.

 

[MTN Ranger]

Where the large battery pack is most important is for long trips. In this case, the low drag coefficient will yield superior highway range compared to the Bolt EV. In the city, the Bolt EV should easily have longer range compared to the Model 3's base battery pack. Personally, I'm getting the larger pack and a few options.

 

[Bacardi]

Yeah, I'm on the same page with Qinsp...Personally I was really hoping for a 50kWh or even 45kWh which could get to 215 along with descent passing acceleration at highway speeds...

Where the large battery pack is most important is for long trips. In this case, the low drag coefficient will yield superior highway range compared to the Bolt EV. In the city, the Bolt EV should easily have longer range compared to the Model 3's base battery pack. Personally, I'm getting the larger pack and a few options.

Cd is only one part of overall aero with frontal area being another large part, for example the Bolt is be narrower...Yet, while there is a highway rating, it'll probably be the faster you drive the more efficient the Tesla is compared to the Bolt EV...

 

[Neromanceres]

Cd is only one part of overall aero with frontal area being another large part, for example the Bolt is be narrower...Yet, while there is a highway rating, it'll probably be the faster you drive the more efficient the Tesla is compared to the Bolt EV...

True.

Not to mention that powertrain design plays a huge role in highway efficiency. It's clear GM designed the Bolt EV powertrain to be much more capable at higher speeds and that has translated into better highway efficiency.

 

[Qinsp]

Where the large battery pack is most important is for long trips. In this case, the low drag coefficient will yield superior highway range compared to the Bolt EV. In the city, the Bolt EV should easily have longer range compared to the Model 3's base battery pack. Personally, I'm getting the larger pack and a few options.

The Model 3's specs at this point are the same height, and 3.1" less width but shorter. So while it will lose some frontal area, it will lose Cd by the area to length ratio. Long and skinny is fast. Short is worse than long.

I'll bet the CdA (real drag) isn't going to be significantly better than the Model S. They did a very good job on the Model S body.

 

[jsmay311]

Whoa there! There's a whole lot of conclusions being jumped to based on very sparse and unsubstantiated info here.

All this tells us (if it's true/accurate) is that Tesla changed their mind from having a <60kWh base battery to a 60kWh base battery. Any inferences to cost, weight, range, efficiency, etc are much more speculative than folks here are presenting.

Elon Musk does not understand what an ace in the hole the Tesla name and Supercharger network are worth. A 45 kWh usable (49kWh) battery will make a transcontinental Model 3, and cost far less, and yield better Wh/mi.

You might be one of the only people I've seen advocating for a smaller battery. Since they've already announced the base price, I'd think most people would want a bigger battery for the same price. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And knocking off 11 kWh wouldn't make it cost "far less". I'd guesstimate $2000-3000. And it would mean slower supercharging in addition to less range.

 

[Qinsp]

Whoa there! There's a whole lot of conclusions being jumped to based on very sparse and unsubstantiated info here.

All this tells us (if it's true/accurate) is that Tesla changed their mind from having a <60kWh base battery to a 60kWh base battery. Any inferences to cost, weight, range, efficiency, etc are much more speculative than folks here are presenting.



You might be one of the only people I've seen advocating for a smaller battery. Since they've already announced the base price, I'd think most people would want a bigger battery for the same price. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

And knocking off 11 kWh wouldn't make it cost "far less". I'd guesstimate $2000-3000. And it would mean slower supercharging in addition to less range.

$3k is a lot when it's profit. But it's not just battery cost. Lower battery weight means less motor and inverter needed, and less chassis and wheel weight. Which is also cost. The better your Wh/mi are, the more miles per hour it will charge at.

 

[jsmay311]

$3k is a lot when it's profit. But it's not just battery cost. Lower battery weight means less motor and inverter needed, and less chassis and wheel weight. Which is also cost. The better your Wh/mi are, the more miles per hour it will charge at.

If you believe Tesla's state $/kWh numbers, it might be more like $1500.

And the chassis/suspension will also have to be beefy enough for the larger/heavier battery pack options anyway.

Anyway, bottom line is customers want more range, not less. And Musk is not gonna want to have the Model 3 come out with significantly less range than the Bolt. That would be a huge embarrassment for him and Tesla IMO. (I could still imagine the Model 3 coming up a bit short of the Bolt's 238 EPA miles as long as Tesla can claim more highway miles than the Bolt.)

 

[Bluesideup]

My guess is 56kWh of usable capacity (60kWh) is going to sink the Model 3. The car is going to be too heavy, too expensive, and still not match the Bolt EV's actual real world range in identical conditions.

Elon Musk does not understand what an ace in the hole the Tesla name and Supercharger network are worth. A 45 kWh usable (49kWh) battery will make a transcontinental Model 3, and cost far less, and yield better Wh/mi.

He's been wrong about specifications so many times, that one more isn't going to be a death sentence. Heck, he screws up, and the sales go UP not down.

He needs more separation between the Model S and Model 3, and range is a big carrot.

You do understand that Tesla has come up with a new battery (2170 cell) that the gigafactory is producing for the model 3 that provided a 60% increase in size and weight while increasing capacity 100%.

This means for the same 60kWh that the Bolt is using the pack for the Tesla will weigh 40 percent less. So, weight is not an issue especially when you think it is ok for the Bolt but somehow bad for the Tesla.

The only thing I see is that you are afraid if Tesla does put a 60kWh pack in their base model then the range will exceed that of the Bolt right from the start.

 

[llninja]

Not surprising. Early model S and model X sales were fully optioned out, there's no reason for Tesla to not do the same to maximize their revenue. The fun part will be explaining how to actually buy a model 3 for $35k.

 

[Bacardi]

Not surprising. Early model S and model X sales were fully optioned out, there's no reason for Tesla to not do the same to maximize their revenue. The fun part will be explaining how to actually buy a model 3 for $35k.

Musk said he was an idiot for naming the it the 3 due to people thinking its like the latest and greatest iPhone when in reality it's a iPhone SE (smaller and lesser specs)...If this source is true than it would make logical sense that Musk wanted a 74kWh to not be confused with the 75kWh...

Musk said he'd build the "simplest" first; many claims that Tesla uses dead cells in the smaller packs to keep the weight and structural strength the same and therefore they don't need to do various testing such as crash testing with every single battery size...Case and point, "active" vs "dead" cells are just as simple to assemble...

 

[Qinsp]

You do understand that Tesla has come up with a new battery (2170 cell) that the gigafactory is producing for the model 3 that provided a 60% increase in size and weight while increasing capacity 100%.

This means for the same 60kWh that the Bolt is using the pack for the Tesla will weigh 40 percent less. So, weight is not an issue especially when you think it is ok for the Bolt but somehow bad for the Tesla.

The only thing I see is that you are afraid if Tesla does put a 60kWh pack in their base model then the range will exceed that of the Bolt right from the start.

You believe in magic, I believe in engineering.

I would be very happy if Tesla will sell me my Model 3 for $35,000 with a 60kWh battery in it and have it weigh 3300lb like you suggest.

I won't be happy if Tesla cannot make money selling Model 3's or delivers a >3800lb car.

 

[Fourdoor]

You do understand that Tesla has come up with a new battery (2170 cell) that the gigafactory is producing for the model 3 that provided a 60% increase in size and weight while increasing capacity 100%.

This means for the same 60kWh that the Bolt is using the pack for the Tesla will weigh 40 percent less. So, weight is not an issue especially when you think it is ok for the Bolt but somehow bad for the Tesla.

The only thing I see is that you are afraid if Tesla does put a 60kWh pack in their base model then the range will exceed that of the Bolt right from the start.

The new Tesla cells are larger and more energy dense than the old Tesla cells... the Bolt does not use the old school Tesla cells, it uses an advanced design and chemistry cell structure totally unrelated to anything from Tesla, so you can not do a comparison unless you show figures from GM showing it's energy density vs figures from Tesla on their new cells.

Keith

 

[llninja]

Musk said he was an idiot for naming the it the 3 due to people thinking its like the latest and greatest iPhone when in reality it's a iPhone SE (smaller and lesser specs)...If this source is true than it would make logical sense that Musk wanted a 74kWh to not be confused with the 75kWh...

Musk said he'd build the "simplest" first; many claims that Tesla uses dead cells in the smaller packs to keep the weight and structural strength the same and therefore they don't need to do various testing such as crash testing with every single battery size...Case and point, "active" vs "dead" cells are just as simple to assemble...

Hey, I love my iPhone SE - there isn't enough room in my pants for the iPhone 7 plus and the package nearby. Phones need to be small. Cars need to be bigger. It's either a Model S or something else. The model 3 is too small to add to my fleet.

 

[Bluesideup]

You believe in magic, I believe in engineering.

I would be very happy if Tesla will sell me my Model 3 for $35,000 with a 60kWh battery in it and have it weigh 3300lb like you suggest.

I won't be happy if Tesla cannot make money selling Model 3's or delivers a >3800lb car.

First it seem you believe in fairy dust that weighs a ton. Second what the hell are you talking about? The Bolt weighs almost 3,600 pounds why would you care if the Model 3 weighed 200 pounds more?

What is this magical engineering that you believe in? Please tell me more about it because last I checked the engineering was pretty straight forward on the 2170 cells which were 60% larger but gave a 100% increase in power. I don't think they used Harry Potter's
wand to get that but then again I am not a chemical engineer but I do take their word on it.

 

[Bluesideup]

The new Tesla cells are larger and more energy dense than the old Tesla cells... the Bolt does not use the old school Tesla cells, it uses an advanced design and chemistry cell structure totally unrelated to anything from Tesla, so you can not do a comparison unless you show figures from GM showing it's energy density vs figures from Tesla on their new cells.

Keith

The cells on the Bolt were from LG. Both the bolt and the old Tesla 60kWh packs weigh right around the same mid 900 pounds and that was with the Tesla using the 18650 cells that panasonic made. This means the Bolts energy density is close to the same as the old 60kWh Tesla pack.

With the advent of the 2170 cells they can reduce the battery size and weight by around 40 percent to get the same 60kWh. I don't know how much they will be able to reduce the total pack weight and size but reducing the battery size and weight by 40% should mean that they could shave a couple hundred pounds off the total weight of the pack.

 

[bro1999]

The new Tesla cells are larger and more energy dense than the old Tesla cells... the Bolt does not use the old school Tesla cells, it uses an advanced design and chemistry cell structure totally unrelated to anything from Tesla, so you can not do a comparison unless you show figures from GM showing it's energy density vs figures from Tesla on their new cells.

Keith

The cells on the Bolt I thought were from panasonic but I am not sure on that. Both the bolt and the old Tesla 60kWh packs weigh right around the same mid 900 pounds and that was with the Tesla using the 18650 cells that panasonic made. This means the Bolts energy density is close to the same as the old 60kWh Tesla pack.

WRONG, LG Chem makes the Bolt's cells. GM only told us that over a year ago. When you can't even get simple widely known facts like that right, that says something.

So when you expect to get your Model 3? September? Lol

 

[llninja]

The cells on the Bolt I thought were from panasonic but I am not sure on that. Both the bolt and the old Tesla 60kWh packs weigh right around the same mid 900 pounds and that was with the Tesla using the 18650 cells that panasonic made. This means the Bolts energy density is close to the same as the old 60kWh Tesla pack.

With the advent of the 2170 cells they can reduce the battery size and weight by around 40 percent to get the same 60kWh. I don't know how much they will be able to reduce the total pack weight and size but reducing the battery size and weight by 40% should mean that they could shave a couple hundred pounds off the total weight of the pack.

The bolt battery comes from LG Chem, not panasonic. Though I have to admit, everything I've ever purchased that was a Panasonic broke 1 month after the warranty ended. There was a 2 line phone and a microwave. Lesson learned, I stopped buying consumer reports recommended crap as it was feature rich but lacked quality. It was Sony and Amana from that point forward, until Sony lost its innovative ways and Amana got acquired by maytag who got aquired. I think almost everything is Westinghouse now on the appliance side of things outside of the Koreans (LG and Samsung).

Back to topic, it should be easy for Tesla to make some strides on the battery front since much space of the S and X was lost to the cylindrical shape of the Panasonic batteries.

 

[Taser54]

The new Tesla cells are larger and more energy dense than the old Tesla cells... the Bolt does not use the old school Tesla cells, it uses an advanced design and chemistry cell structure totally unrelated to anything from Tesla, so you can not do a comparison unless you show figures from GM showing it's energy density vs figures from Tesla on their new cells.

Keith

even then, GM uses a larger cell format, less connections and less cell casings suggest less weight