This is Henrik's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Henrik's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Henrik
Recent Activity
One of Musk's main arguments for using small cells is that they contain less energy per cell relative to a large cell and the net effect is that Tesla can pack the cells more efficient will less need for heavy fire protection material between the cells in order to prevent a thermal runaway in one cell from propagating into other cells. Tesla ends up with a battery pack that is as safe as it should be but also has much higher Wh/kg at the pack level. That is another reason Tesla is the only carmaker with well over 200 miles range for their BEVs. But you are quite right that Tesla can have a cell made in any size they desire as it will become the most mass produced cell in the world. I would not be surprised if the next version of Tesla's battery packs will use something else than 18650 if that could improve on the wh/kg at the pack level. Maybe something even smaller than 18650.
The CEO of a 200 man strong company doing specialist jobs for Nasa and other high tech companies has not anything to do with mass production. What is the most units of anything they have done. 10, 100, or a 1000? Musk and Panasonics 6500 man strong battery factory is going to make billions of 18650 cells per year. The Mars rover battery is nuclear decay based as a recall, not chemistry based. I am sure it is one of a kind and I do have a lot of respect for people doing basic research but it does not make them experts in mass production and its costs. My problem with this study is that it will be used by some people in large automakers to argue that the Tesla way is wrong and should not be copied as it is a dead end because batteries will always be too costly to be relevant for mass market vehicle production. That would be a pity IMO.
So the million dollar question is who should we trust the most? Panasonic and Tesla saying they can reduce production cost of battery packs from current state of the art production by 30% minimum with their 50GWh factory or a few academics who never got their hands dirty with actual production? I think Musk said the savings would primarily be from vertical integration and the fact that when a factory buys 10 or 30 times more machines, raw materials and semi-manufactories than other battery factories out there they get significant discounts. Something the researchers did not analyze.
@EP for other carmakers to use Tesla's charging network they will have to pay dearly to Tesla. To be profitable with BEVs GM, Nissan etc need to build their own supercharger network and my point is they have not even started and surely will not be ready with a global network by 2017. The Tesla thing about "free to use patents" was only for those who has other patents to free that Tesla find equally valuable as in "You get usage right to our technology if we get the same from you." BMW is IMO the only carmaker that can make such a patent trade with Tesla. BMW is ahead of Tesla in terms of using low cost carbon fiber materials for car manufacturing. Tesla could benefit from using that in their coming cars.
It is not crazy if you believe, as Tesla do, that the cars electronic systems are a crucial competitive factor and a major source of utility for the vehicle owner. Sadly this study is too old to mention Tesla's new autopilot system which could evolve to become the most important of all its electronic systems. To see how extensive this is consider this quote from Tesla's enthusiasts blog. "The launch of Dual Motor Model S coincides with the introduction of a standard hardware package that will enable autopilot functionality. Every single Model S now rolling out of the factory includes a forward radar, 12 long range ultrasonic sensors positioned to sense 16 feet around the car in every direction at all speeds, a forward looking camera, and a high precision, digitally controlled electric assist braking system." http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/dual-motor-model-s-and-autopilot Tesla believe they can evolve this standard autopilot system into a fully autonomous autopilot system in about 5 years time. It will be quite revolutionary if Tesla can make a fully autonomous car by, say, 2020. You would never need a taxi any more just use your phone to order your car to be at the location you need to travel from. Parking is not a problem either. The car can deliver you to the gate of your destination and drive away to find a free parking spot somewhere before it returns and pick you up as scheduled on your phone. If anyone can make this a standard car feature it would be Tesla. Another bit of revealing info from Tesla's blog is that Tesla list other things that have been added or improved in the new Model S dual drive including "Electrically opening, self-closing charge port door on Dual Motor Model S (delivered with Dual Motor Model S)." Now, why would Tesla add this presumably unnecessary feature unless it was because Tesla plans to soon offer a home charger with a robotic arm that can auto connect to Tesla's charging port. All of Tesla's supercharger stations could also get a robotic arm for automatic plugging. The new Tesla's can already use their autopilot to park themselves at home or at a supercharger parking lot so a robotic charging connector is a no-brainer in my opinion. To be sure, inductive charging is an inferior alternative to plugged charging because it adds significant weight to the car, it is inefficient and is currently nowhere near the 120k Watt that Tesla's superchargers can handle. PS Yes, many Norwegians are loaded (small nation with lots of oil and gas for export and many other natural riches like inexpensive hydropower and fish). A lot of ordinary Norwegians can afford a Tesla. Danes are not that lucky but we are nevertheless mostly a happy and relaxed people.
I sincerely hope that Tesla is not the only game in town but currently I have only seen Nissan being serious about BEVs and unfortunately they got off to a very poor start selling much less than they planned for. IMO because they read the market wrongly starting with a non-performance short-range BEV that is not in demand. Everybody else seems to be halfhearted with regard to BEVs although they are serious about PHEVs at long-last.
Today a Danish newspaper reported another type of Tesla Smartphone commonality. The day after Tesla announced its new Dual drive Model S and autopilot system the number of used Teslas for sale jumped 6 fold in both Denmark, Norway and Germany. http://energiwatch.dk/Energinyt/Cleantech/article7110574.ece?ref=epn Apparently many Tesla owners want to sell off their old version of the car in order to buy the new one just like it happens each time Apple launch a new iPhone. Off cause with a Tesla it could become a fairly expensive habit but it does benefit those who are in the market for a used Tesla. They should be able to get it for somewhat less.
Dave if it wasn't VW would have made it like a Tesla. Not like they do now. VWs design is fine for gassers and PHEVs but it sucks for BEVs.
Sorry for this multi posting. Another bit of revealing info from Tesla's blog on the new autopilot and D drives. Tesla list other things that have been added or improved in the new Model S including "Electrically opening, self-closing charge port door on Dual Motor Model S (delivered with Dual Motor Model S)." Now, why would Tesla add this presumably unnecessary feature unless it was because Tesla plans to soon offer a home charger with a robotic arm that can auto connect to Tesla's charging port. All of Tesla's supercharger stations could also get a robotic arm for automatic plugging. The new Tesla's can already use their autopilot to park themselves at home or at a supercharger parking lot so this is a no-brainer in my opinion. Inductive charging is an inferior alternative to plugged charging because it adds significant weight to the car, it is inefficient and is currently nowhere near the 120k Watt that Tesla's superchargers can handle.
One more thought. When Tesla succeed in making a fully autonomous autopilot for their cars I predict that the biggest customer for Tesla's cars will quickly become, well, Teslamoters. Tesla will start a taxi service with these cars that run at lower costs than other taxi services because they use electricity and does not have to pay a human driver and that are as convenient to use as Uber because they can be hired by an app similar to Uber's app. Off cause these Tesla cars will all have auto connect for Tesla's supercharger network. The wealthy will likely tend to buy their own autonomous Tesla and the not so wealthy will tend to use Tesla's global autonomous taxi service.
There will be longer range BEVs from others than Tesla by 2017 but I am afraid they will all be based on an adapted version of a gasser meaning the trunk space will be reduced and the handling will not be as supreme as it is in Tesla's BEVs that all use a flat battery embedded in the entire floor of the car where it optimally should be. Another thing that now makes Tesla's BEVs more competitive than the pack is that Tesla is now making auto-pilot standard in all of their cars. I quote "The launch of Dual Motor Model S coincides with the introduction of a standard hardware package that will enable autopilot functionality. Every single Model S now rolling out of the factory includes a forward radar, 12 long range ultrasonic sensors positioned to sense 16 feet around the car in every direction at all speeds, a forward looking camera, and a high precision, digitally controlled electric assist braking system." http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/dual-motor-model-s-and-autopilot Tesla believe they can evolve this standard autopilot system into a fully autonomous autopilot system in about 5 years time. It will be quite revolutionary if Tesla can make a fully autonomous car by, say, 2020. You would never need a taxi any more just use your phone to order your car to be at the location you need to travel from. Parking is not a problem either. The car can deliver you at the gate of your destination and drive away to find a free parking spot somewhere before it returns and pick you up as scheduled on your phone. If anyone can make this standard it would be Tesla. Also by 2017 Tesla will have superchargers everywhere in the world. What will GM, VW and Nissan have to support their long-range BEVs? I could also imagine that Tesla's future autopilot system will include an auto connector for Tesla's supercharger network so that the car can drop you off at your destination and then drive to the nearest supercharger to ensure that it has a fully charged battery when it picks you up the next time. As for Tesla and price competitiveness the fact is that Tesla is already the world's largest buyer of kWhs. They are bigger than Nissan and they are the only one with a >public strategy< to drive the battery cost further down. As I see it Tesla already has the lowest battery cost and they will continue to be lower at least until others get on with 50GWh factories. Surely if Tesla did a PHEV (as they will not) they would have higher costs than say Porsche who has patent and experience in that area that Tesla does not have. However, with long-range pure BEVs I do not see who can compete with Tesla at least not until after 2020.
I would like to add Teslamotors to this list: Their Model X and Model III have been promised for delivery respectively 2015 and 2017-18. They have not yet been officially announced and they are not concepts.
I was wrong. The rear motor in Model S D is replaced with a smaller motor probably identical to the front motor. I have confirmed it by taking a very close look of the power train picture in the Model S sales configurator at their website. It also says so at wiki but without mentioning a source. It does not change my view that 4000 USD is a very modest amount for all the benefits that 4WD give relative to the 2WD. I will be surprised if the 4WD versions do not make up for more than 50% of sales going forward. Tesla is targeting the luxury market and that market want 4WD. I will not even be surprised to see Tesla phasing the 2WD versions out if they sell in limited numbers like Tesla did with the 40kWh edition Model S40. If you want a PHEV nearly all other carmakers are making them or about to make them available. So go there and get it. Tesla is currently about making the best cars in the world (not the least costly) and the best cars are necessarily long-range BEVs. Better for the environment, less noise and vibration, better handling, higher safety etc. Tesla is still small and they need to focus their limited resources in growing ASAP so that they can also make less costly cars like the Model III. They can do that with long-range performance BEVs because nobody else can catch them at the speed they move ahead in this area. If they spread their very limited resourced to multispeed transmissions and gassers there is a wall of patents that need to be overcome but more importantly it will slow their pace in moving forward with making better long-range performance BEVs so that they end up being good at nothing and therefore unable to grow. That strategy will bankrupt them. By the time Tesla is big enough to be excellent in BEVs as well as gassers the latter will be a dying species and at that point it is irrelevant for Tesla to peruse it.
The 4000 USD for the dual motor drive is for everything that makes the 4WD possible including the new 188hp front motor. The rear motor is the same across all model versions but in version D it just gets half the current which is split evenly between the two motors. The power electronics is the same for S60, S60D, S85 and S85D so total hp stays approximately the same. The power electronics and the motor cooling system is upgraded for P85 and additionally upgraded for P85D this is why their hp increases. My point is that performance cars are less costly to manufacture when they are done as BEVs even when they come with a long-range 85kWh battery pack and the reason is the large savings on the motor and transmission that cost much more in a high performance gasser than in a high performance EV. I do not believe for a moment your cost estimates for a Tesla PHEV with Model S performance, size and utility. Porsche did it and their 96,100 USD asking price speaks for it selves. If Porsche could make it less costly without compromising the 5.2 sec requirement or anything else that matters like top speed and ability to drive in mountains at speed for hours they would have done it as that would have made their car more profitable or more competitively priced. Porsche should do as Tesla does and that is drop gas engines and multi-speed transmissions entirely and focus on long-range performance BEVs. I am not entirely against PHEVs. I think the Outlander is a good example of an area where PHEVs currently has a cost advantage to what is currently possible with long-range BEVs. That area is large non-performance vehicles. For instance, Ford should do a PHEV F150 in my opinion and all automakers should have a 0 to 60 mph at 10 sec large SUV PHEV for sale.
Porsche did a Tesla model S with a combustion engine and an electric motor. It is the 2 wheel drive Panamera S E-Hybrid starting at 96,100 USD in the US. It does 0 to 62 mph in 5.2 sec. The Model S 85D also does 0 to 62 in 5.2 sec but it is 4WD starts at 85,070 USD in the US. Which car do you prefer. The polluting more expensive, less safe and comparatively poorly handling Porsche or the Model S? Porsche currently builds the cars of the past whereas Tesla builds the cars of the future today. As Tesla gobbles up the global market for performance cars their production of battery cells expands and that is the most important thing that is needed in order for Tesla to start moving into long-range BEV that cost less. What I can tell from Tesla's new prices is that they can add a 188 hp motor and 4WD for only 4000 USD extra. That suggest the two EV motors and transmission cost as little as 10,000 USD for a 4WD system with 376 hp. A comparable combustion engine would need to be 450 hp and with a 4WD setup you can't do that for less than 25,000 USD. I think we will see Tesla launch the smaller Model III 50(kWh) in 2018 that starts at 37,000 USD for a 5.9 sec to 60mph with an EPA rated range of 200 miles. A 45,000 USD Model III 70 will have 280 miles range and do 5.4 sec to 60mph. A performance edition Model III P70 will do 0 to 60 mph in 4.2 sec for 55,000 USD. All these models will be 2WD. However, a 4WD Model III is in my opinion a certainty. The Model III 50D will cost 40,000 USD and do 0 to 60 in 5.7 sec, the Model III 70D will cost 48,000 USD and do 0 to 60 in 5.2 sec and finally the Model III P70D can do 0 to 60 mph in 3.2 sec and cost 67,000 USD. Yes, I believe Tesla can sell 500,000 units of these Model IIIs per year starting in 2020 or 2021.
Thank you Chris. I wondered because electric motors should have maximum torque from 0 rpm and up so hp and torque should be the same (proportionally at least) for electric motors using a single fixed gear ratio as model S does? Now that I have given it more thought the reason must be that Tesla has used another gear ratio providing more combined torque for the Model S Ds. The same could be the case for why S85 is faster despite being heavier and with less (peak) hp. The larger battery of the S85 may be better suited to provide higher sustained hp in model S85 than in model S60 so that could also explain the higher top speed for model S85 that should be based on what the car can keep doing until it runs out of electrons. SD I buy the spinning explanation as well. I think the only way you can make the Tesla spin is to deactivate the anti spinning system. It could be that the anti spinning system prevent the motor from ever delivering the peak 380 hp in order to achieve max acceleration. With 4 wheels working in principal twice as much power should be possible to move the car than just 2 wheels regardless of peak hp provided that peak hp will spin the wheels. Another thing is that Tesla's 4WD in combination with the most sophisticated autopilot system and a top crash rating should also make the Model S the safest car in the world.
I wonder why the lower weight model S60 has slower acceleration than the more heavy S85 as both models have the same hp? Also the S60D and S85D accelerate faster than the S60 and S85 despite having less total hp? I am curious for an explanation of both phenomenon.
The Verge has a nice comparison with the world's best gassers. There are no gassers that even get close to match the combination of acceleration, price and space of the Tesla P85D. The world's best gasser alternative (taking price into consideration) in my opinion would be Audi RS7 ($106,500): 0-60 in 3.7 seconds. Disregarding price it would be Porsche Panamera Turbo S ($180,300): 0-60 in 3.6 seconds. See for yourself http://www.theverge.com/2014/10/10/6955487/tesla-just-announced-a-supercar Now we just need the larger Model X and Tesla will by all standards be the automaker offering the world's best car. Super nice surprise that 4WD only cost 4000 USD extra for the Model S 60D and S 85D. The range cannot be compared until the EPA rating of the D models have been made. The Ds weight more so Tesla is probably required to obtain new EPA certification for these versions. Deliveries start in December so there we will know the EPA rating for the D's.
As a corporate shuttle I would say the Model X with plenty of space in the back and gull wings for easy entry and exit would be very good also. But the Model S is too small at the back seat. It is also more politically correct to drive a BEV like the Model X than a car with a polluting combustion engine. Corporations care more and more about being politically correct because it affects the public opinion and thereby their sales. --- Roger you can believe in whatever you want to but I will stick with Panasonic's official documentation that clearly says 300 deep cycles to about 80% of original capacity at 25 Celsius. That documentation also fits with Tesla's warranty on the battery. The link was http://www.panasonic.com/industrial/includes/pdf/ACA4000CE254-NCR18650A.pdf Now it seems the link is gone from that location and I have no time to find it. Panasonic own documentation for the Tesla cell trumps your source that is BS. I gave a source for the 285k dollars. I checked it and saw it is Australian dollars at 0.9 USD so it is the price in Australia. I originally thought it was a US price my fault. It may be lower in the US I can't find a source for that however. Maybe you have it.
It is a horribly antiquated design for a 285,000 USD car. Benz should take on the Tesla approach and make a long-range performance BEV instead. They could make this car with a 110 kwh battery, 4 sec to 62 mph for about 140,000 USD. It would have much more trunk space, be more fun and pleasant to drive and it would not pollute the world for everybody provided that you use renewable electivity for its charging. Benz could have it ready for production by 2021 and buy cells from Tesla's gaga factory. There is a good chance Tesla will have the capacity to sell high energy 18650 cells to others when they get to 35GWh on that factory plus 15GWh for all of Panasonics other factories. Whit a few big deals for Tesla with other automakers like BMW, Audi and Benz another 50GWh factory could be announced by 2018 and be ready for full production by 2024. With the low cost production at that Giga factory there is a now a really good business case that all future performance cars should go long-range BEV as it would make better and less costly vehicles. http://www.caradvice.com.au/308129/2015-mercedes-benz-s-class-plug-in-hybrid-review/ And Roger as I have said multiple times to you the Tesla cells are not suited for PHEV or hybrid use as they can't do the necessary recharges and power draws. But you just don't get it or you refuses to leave your own flawed mindset.
You are clearly the one who is whining here, not me. I practice free speech. That you can't handle the truth is none of my concern. Nice try about "there was no attempt" but it is the second time in this thread that you distort the facts about what I say or what you have said (first being about Norwegian BEV sales). You just don't do this twice accidently.
Dave, there is a big difference between telling someone and explaining someone. You pretend to quote me but in fact you make the text up to make me look like the villain. That is dishonest and manipulative.
Dave you seem to have a short memory. Perhaps you should read your own post at 8:36 AM this thread. When you badmouth Tesla you better be prepared for some heat because Tesla of all companies does not deserved to be badmouthed.
Musk launched Model S in China before he launched in Japan because he knows it is politically important to show some respect in that market. He also cooperates with Chinese companies and wealthy Chinese individuals to get the supercharging infrastructure up ASAP in China. Your interpretation of the Norwegian EV statistics is ignorant and outright idiotic now that you have been explained how it works. You refuse to understand or perhaps you simply can't.