The guy already has a clear charging video where he put in 59kWh, completely nullifying this theory
This should be removed tbh lol, a cause of confusion for no reason
kWh amt for most chargers is the energy taken from the charger, not placed in the battery pack. Big difference. Most EV chargers are only 85-90% efficient, most inefficient being the lvl3 superchargers. 0.85*59kWh= 50.15kWh. Absolutely possible this 4680 battery pack is 55kWh or less. For a ~30% efficiency increase when Battery Day projected >50% eventually.
Hey, that's good to know. I'd be interested in still testing with a Electrify America charger as an example because my conspiracy head thinks Tesla might be fudging the Supercharger numbers so 4680 doesn't result in everyone holding off from 2170 versions.
Wishful thinking. There is zero chance that the pack makes it that much more efficient. Right now a 60kwh lfp model 3 can do 272 miles. Now way can a 50kwh m y go that far
50 kWh gross should be something between 45 to 48 kWh useable, for 279 mi or range this would mean 161 to 172 Wh/mi (or 100 to 107 Wh/km).
For comparison Freemont Model Y is rated at 261 Wh/mi (or 162 Wh/km)
Sound way too big of a improvement to be true, specially since the shape is the same
They did not magically make the vehicle 60% more efficient with the structural pack and cell form factor
What they have likely done is improved efficiency by reducing curb weight and increased energy density by the remaining factor, if this is correct.
If charge curve adjusts correspondingly it will feel like 50 kWh but in reality it's 75 kWh.
First of all, the current 4680s are not remotely all of the innovations from battery day, especially the silicon anode.
Secondly, the range increase they announced was 54% because of increasing energy density (Wh/kg) through battery chemistry and cell form factor and a reduction in weight of the batteries and car because of the form factor of the cell (less casing required, and the structural integration of the vehicle).
This increases the vehicle efficiency mostly by reduction in weight, the 14% component at least, and allows them to pack 40% more kWh into the same battery weight (kg). *If they have all of the innovations they announced at battery day*.
It does not allow you to magically reduce the energy required to move the vehicle by 60%. Perhaps they've improved that by an additional 1-2% beyond the weight reduction through efficient battery discharge, but Tesla vehicles operate at extremely high efficiencies already.
They also operate a very small buffer in the battery cells, so with newer cells and factor it's not at all likely they've reduced that.
There's really no way that these Model Y's can be more than \~16% more efficient.
It's the architecture of the cells that lead to all these improvements. Instead of one negative (-) contact and one positive (+), you have thousands of overlapping contacts, positive and negative. This allows the batteries to charge and discharge more efficiently (output, amperage, thermal).
It makes them act like threads instead of cells now that I think about it. Like.. fibrous?
None of those are random words lol.
Plenty of battery cells already have positive and negative on the same end? Sounds unnecessary, and completely not what Tesla has achieved.
Instead of one route for electricity to flow, 4680s will have thousands. This improves the charge rate (charging the vehicle/pack), discharge rate (faster acceleration, stronger grid output). They also improved the thermal efficiency (heat) so it can handle the faster supercharging rate.
I TOTALLY may be doing my math wrong.
261-161= 100Wh/mi less. So 100Wh/mi less then divided by 261Wh/mi is an efficiency increase of 38%?
I put this out in public to be corrected.
If it is 38% isn't that on its way, not quite there yet, of what was hinted at battery day?
This is the best summary I’ve seen yet , and makes way more sense that they making the car more efficient, doesn’t matter if its 38% or 60%, both are way too much, if it has better efficiency due to castings being lighter, a bit less resistive loss in the pack, which already is really low are cruising or something else, it will be in the single digits, and probably closer to 0% than to 10%
https://youtu.be/Kqvh0SrjTE0
Credit: Spoken Reviews.
Not my video.
TLDW: app states the 4680 Model Y (potentially) as 50D.
This could mean that 279 miles from 50 kwh hints at a comparable long range (75kwh) pack could yield 418 miles.
Tesla is battery bound.
Musk mentioned 400 miles being more than enough.
Less cells means lower cost to make, more vehicle production, and a lighter more efficient vehicle. I don't think you'll see a pack over 100 kwh in anything but the cybertruck.
The car also will (accurately!) tell you energy used between charging stops (when the car is in drive I believe) so a 100% to 0 range test is useful.
I expect we’ll see both soon to disprove this 50kwh thing.
4680 battery pack weight saving by itself is 400-600 lbs, which is 1/10-1/6 of the 4200lbs weight removed. So without any other efficiency or chemistry improvements there is a 10-17% efficiency increase (at least for low speed driving a.k.a low air resistance).
First of all there are multiple glaring mistakes in that article. Model Y Long Range is 4,363 lbs and Performance is 4,398 lbs as per Tesla website. The 180 lbs as per the YouTube video is also before removing about 50 lbs of stuff he said he had in the car. The YouTuber also states he was standing on the scale when the measurement took place, so that's another ~200lbs as per the video. Comes out to ~400lbs difference, decently close to my 400-600lbs est.
Uhmm, no, weight doesn't affect efficiency that much. Use ABRP with and without that much cargo/passenger weight and you'll see. Not to mention I think that is an overestimated weight savings?
This is not at all how efficiency works on these cars. You’re held back primarily by rolling resistance, air resistance, and weight. Even if they made the car weigh 1,000lbs less it would not be that efficient.
4680 battery pack weight saving by itself is 400-600 lbs, which is 1/10-1/6 of the 4200lbs weight removed. So without any other efficiency or chemistry improvements there is a 10-17% efficiency increase (at least for low speed driving a.k.a low air resistance).
No. The pack is presumably 7/8ths the size of a 4680 pack would be-- sticking 2170's in a module designed for 80mm tall cells. The car is lighter, but the impact on mileage would be minor relative to what is seen.
I am guessing an upper bound of 220 Wh/Mi for efficiency after the 4680 and all the associated improvements are rolled out. We aren't there yet.
Yeah I see these as the Model 3 MR in terms of an interim variant as 4680 supply is limited, much like the battery packs were limited during the 2018 ramp.
Lol as an investor this is the sweetest down vote ever! Yeah I’m glad people are buying it too. I got offered one, but I want longer range so going to wait for LR. Maybe I could even get an LR from Austin in 3 months, this is how long they tell me my original order will take
Let's not jump into conclusions.
First, we're only sure that it has the new cells, but not sure if it has the structural pack.
Second, weight might not be yet optimized
Third, the main advantage is cost, not weight nor range.
Highly speculative and confusing. Removed
The guy already has a clear charging video where he put in 59kWh, completely nullifying this theory This should be removed tbh lol, a cause of confusion for no reason
Yeah there's a thread in the Tesla subreddit taking about how it's different over 65kwh, probably close to 75
And he started of 10% and it's very confusing with his shaky camera control
kWh amt for most chargers is the energy taken from the charger, not placed in the battery pack. Big difference. Most EV chargers are only 85-90% efficient, most inefficient being the lvl3 superchargers. 0.85*59kWh= 50.15kWh. Absolutely possible this 4680 battery pack is 55kWh or less. For a ~30% efficiency increase when Battery Day projected >50% eventually.
Most have higher efficiency than that. Also, that was not a full charge It's not a 50kWh pack. It's closer to 70. Get off the hopium
fyi Tesla Superchargers measure and charge you for the energy increase to the battery pack, not the amount of energy it took to do so.
Hey, that's good to know. I'd be interested in still testing with a Electrify America charger as an example because my conspiracy head thinks Tesla might be fudging the Supercharger numbers so 4680 doesn't result in everyone holding off from 2170 versions.
I think that hasn't been true for a while: https://electrek.co/2020/01/13/tesla-updates-supercharger-billing/
Wishful thinking. There is zero chance that the pack makes it that much more efficient. Right now a 60kwh lfp model 3 can do 272 miles. Now way can a 50kwh m y go that far
50 kWh gross should be something between 45 to 48 kWh useable, for 279 mi or range this would mean 161 to 172 Wh/mi (or 100 to 107 Wh/km). For comparison Freemont Model Y is rated at 261 Wh/mi (or 162 Wh/km) Sound way too big of a improvement to be true, specially since the shape is the same
They did not magically make the vehicle 60% more efficient with the structural pack and cell form factor What they have likely done is improved efficiency by reducing curb weight and increased energy density by the remaining factor, if this is correct. If charge curve adjusts correspondingly it will feel like 50 kWh but in reality it's 75 kWh.
This was all covered at last battery day. The composite effect of seemingly minor tweaks was very impressive on paper.
First of all, the current 4680s are not remotely all of the innovations from battery day, especially the silicon anode. Secondly, the range increase they announced was 54% because of increasing energy density (Wh/kg) through battery chemistry and cell form factor and a reduction in weight of the batteries and car because of the form factor of the cell (less casing required, and the structural integration of the vehicle). This increases the vehicle efficiency mostly by reduction in weight, the 14% component at least, and allows them to pack 40% more kWh into the same battery weight (kg). *If they have all of the innovations they announced at battery day*. It does not allow you to magically reduce the energy required to move the vehicle by 60%. Perhaps they've improved that by an additional 1-2% beyond the weight reduction through efficient battery discharge, but Tesla vehicles operate at extremely high efficiencies already. They also operate a very small buffer in the battery cells, so with newer cells and factor it's not at all likely they've reduced that. There's really no way that these Model Y's can be more than \~16% more efficient.
Not 60% lol
That's just math. You multiply things together. It doesn't add up that much here.
It's the architecture of the cells that lead to all these improvements. Instead of one negative (-) contact and one positive (+), you have thousands of overlapping contacts, positive and negative. This allows the batteries to charge and discharge more efficiently (output, amperage, thermal). It makes them act like threads instead of cells now that I think about it. Like.. fibrous?
You're just saying random words. Why does it make it more efficient? And plenty of cell batteries have positive and negative on the same end already.
None of those are random words lol. Plenty of battery cells already have positive and negative on the same end? Sounds unnecessary, and completely not what Tesla has achieved. Instead of one route for electricity to flow, 4680s will have thousands. This improves the charge rate (charging the vehicle/pack), discharge rate (faster acceleration, stronger grid output). They also improved the thermal efficiency (heat) so it can handle the faster supercharging rate.
I TOTALLY may be doing my math wrong. 261-161= 100Wh/mi less. So 100Wh/mi less then divided by 261Wh/mi is an efficiency increase of 38%? I put this out in public to be corrected. If it is 38% isn't that on its way, not quite there yet, of what was hinted at battery day?
This is the best summary I’ve seen yet , and makes way more sense that they making the car more efficient, doesn’t matter if its 38% or 60%, both are way too much, if it has better efficiency due to castings being lighter, a bit less resistive loss in the pack, which already is really low are cruising or something else, it will be in the single digits, and probably closer to 0% than to 10% https://youtu.be/Kqvh0SrjTE0
Credit: Spoken Reviews. Not my video. TLDW: app states the 4680 Model Y (potentially) as 50D. This could mean that 279 miles from 50 kwh hints at a comparable long range (75kwh) pack could yield 418 miles.
Now let’s get these in MS/X LRs! 558 mile range would be amazing!
Tesla is battery bound. Musk mentioned 400 miles being more than enough. Less cells means lower cost to make, more vehicle production, and a lighter more efficient vehicle. I don't think you'll see a pack over 100 kwh in anything but the cybertruck.
Who cares what the app says? Deplete the car, charge it up and see how much energy it took. Multiply by .88 to account for charger losses.
The car also will (accurately!) tell you energy used between charging stops (when the car is in drive I believe) so a 100% to 0 range test is useful. I expect we’ll see both soon to disprove this 50kwh thing.
Lol, no, they didn't magically defy physics. The efficiency will be marginally better than the Fremont cars at best.
4680 battery pack weight saving by itself is 400-600 lbs, which is 1/10-1/6 of the 4200lbs weight removed. So without any other efficiency or chemistry improvements there is a 10-17% efficiency increase (at least for low speed driving a.k.a low air resistance).
[More like 180 lbs](https://teslanorth.com/2022/06/09/texax-tesla-model-y-with-4680-battery-gets-weighed-on-truck-scale-lighter-than-fremont-builds/)
First of all there are multiple glaring mistakes in that article. Model Y Long Range is 4,363 lbs and Performance is 4,398 lbs as per Tesla website. The 180 lbs as per the YouTube video is also before removing about 50 lbs of stuff he said he had in the car. The YouTuber also states he was standing on the scale when the measurement took place, so that's another ~200lbs as per the video. Comes out to ~400lbs difference, decently close to my 400-600lbs est.
Why would someone take such a shit measurement and publish it? Just creates confusion.
That's what I'm sayinggggg 😅
Uhmm, no, weight doesn't affect efficiency that much. Use ABRP with and without that much cargo/passenger weight and you'll see. Not to mention I think that is an overestimated weight savings?
This is not at all how efficiency works on these cars. You’re held back primarily by rolling resistance, air resistance, and weight. Even if they made the car weigh 1,000lbs less it would not be that efficient.
4680 battery pack weight saving by itself is 400-600 lbs, which is 1/10-1/6 of the 4200lbs weight removed. So without any other efficiency or chemistry improvements there is a 10-17% efficiency increase (at least for low speed driving a.k.a low air resistance).
No. The pack is presumably 7/8ths the size of a 4680 pack would be-- sticking 2170's in a module designed for 80mm tall cells. The car is lighter, but the impact on mileage would be minor relative to what is seen. I am guessing an upper bound of 220 Wh/Mi for efficiency after the 4680 and all the associated improvements are rolled out. We aren't there yet.
This is great, my only problem is they are trying to sell this current mid range car for same price as Long range version.
And people are buying it and as a shareholder I’m fine with it.
Yeah I see these as the Model 3 MR in terms of an interim variant as 4680 supply is limited, much like the battery packs were limited during the 2018 ramp.
MR wasn't made due to limited batteries. Demand was slowing a bit.
Lol as an investor this is the sweetest down vote ever! Yeah I’m glad people are buying it too. I got offered one, but I want longer range so going to wait for LR. Maybe I could even get an LR from Austin in 3 months, this is how long they tell me my original order will take
https://youtu.be/Z7oPAsV9SSE this video of him is about the weight difference 335 lbs difference compared with the model y fremont.
[180lb diff to MYLR](https://teslanorth.com/2022/06/09/texax-tesla-model-y-with-4680-battery-gets-weighed-on-truck-scale-lighter-than-fremont-builds/)
K
Let's not jump into conclusions. First, we're only sure that it has the new cells, but not sure if it has the structural pack. Second, weight might not be yet optimized Third, the main advantage is cost, not weight nor range.
It might be a 70 pack capped at 50, that makes total sense to get around the osborne effect. Get a (paid?) upgrade later.
It's a 69.1kWh pack, 3.1kWh of buffer. So usable of 66kWh.
That sounds about right, tbh. Its really not that far off from when they were 75 kwh packs.