Question About 4680 Cells

[ajdelange]

We don't know what the truck weighs. We don't know the battery chemistry. We don't know if they use the same battery chemistry for all 3 trucks. Sand.

Can you explain how any of these matter in estimating battery size? If you can we can have an adult conversation about it.

 

[Ogre]

The closest car in Teslas line to the CT3 is the Model X Performance. Gets 305 miles with a 100kWh battery. That's 3.05 miles per kWh.

Rivian with its range of 315 miles or so and a 135kWh battery sits at about 2.33 miles/ kWh.

Your 500 mile/ 220 kWh battery is 2.27 miles/ kWh. Thats less efficient than the Rivian. I suspect even the tri motor Cybertruck is going to be lighter and more aerodynamic than the Rivian.

If the Cybertruck splits the difference it would be at about 2.69 miles/ kWh. That would be 190kWh for the tri. The Dual would be about 120kWh.

I'm not suggesting that's what it will be, that's definitely optimistic. Likely it'll be more than that, but 220kWh is about as likely as 160kWh.

Notice... you can make a point, make a post readable, and do so without insulting anyone.

 

[John K]

I'm not doing anything other than offering a reasonable engineering estimate of the battery sizes for the two vehicles based on sound engineering principles which, like it or not and whether you understand it or not are quantitative. If you don't understand that math is the sand upon which the house of engineering is built and that these trucks are engineered products you would best remain silent in order to avoid looking foolish.

I just saw a video in which the poster estimated that Tri battery size could be as small as 135 kWh. That implies consumption of 270 Wh/mi - less than the Model X. Does anyone except the maker of this video (and perhaps our correspondent here) think the CT will consume less than a Model X?

Downhill While X goes uphill?

 

[Zabhawkin]

As far as the OP both applies to a certain extent, you can put a larger capacity and with the how much cheaper the cells are it may cost a little less.

Most of you don't live in rural areas where gas stations are pretty spread out not to mention how far apart charging stations are. This is a trip my wife and I did recently in our F-150, and as you can see the dual motor had to go well into throttling just to have enough range to make it to the next charger. Now yes we could have stuck to the freeway but we wanted to take the longer scenic route. From the Poncha Springs super charger to the Santa Fe super charger has a real long stretch of 65mph signed road that we were doing 75 on and still getting passed regularly so we would have a range loss then as well on that stretch.

 

[Bill906]

Notice... you can make a point, make a post readable, and does not insult anyone.

Makes Point
Post Readable
No insults

Awesome Job @Ogre ! I'd give you extra credit on the readable part as it was very easy to follow except for the minor typo. I think you meant "At 500 miles..." not "A 500 miles..."

 

[Ogre]

Makes Point
Post Readable
No insults

Awesome Job @Ogre ! I'd give you extra credit on the readable part as it was very easy to follow except for the minor typo. I think you meant "At 500 miles..." not "A 500 miles..."

If you look back I think I caught it in edit.

 

[Bill906]

If you look back I think I caught it in edit.

Yup. Extra Credit approved.

 

[anionic1]

Range is a function of moving mass. Doubling the battery size doubles the weight which decreases range.
The optimum battery would be no larger than ~300 miles of range (this optimal range was long established by gas vehicles). This perfect battery would need to recharge in ~10 min.
In other words. Putting a larger battery decreases miles/kwh, it decreases efficiency. Doubling the battery does not double the range. It increases the time spent recharging!

Interestingly doubling proportions actually does much more than double the weight. I think the battery volume increases by about 600%. While they only indicated a capacity increase around 500%. But we are rounding here so maybe I am rounding up and they are rounding down. I believe main reason they are increasing the size is for integration into the structural battery pack and to increase the moment of inertia of all the shapes in that battery pack to make it more rigid. Last thing you want is a battery pack with volatile chemicals moving a lot.

 

[anionic1]

I think vendors not planning on using the 4680 pack as a structural battery will stick with the 2170 pack as they will be able to get more energy density in the overall pack. The biggest efficiency advantage of the 4680 cell is its integration as a structural pack and the weight savings found in removing the heavy vehicle frame through a unibody type design. If the vendor is still using a heavy frame, they will likely use the 2170 cell.

 

[Ogre]

I think vendors not planning on using the 4680 pack as a structural battery will stick with the 2170 pack as they will be able to get more energy density in the overall pack. The biggest efficiency advantage of the 4680 cell is its integration as a structural pack and the weight savings found in removing the heavy vehicle frame through a unibody type design. If the vendor is still using a heavy frame, they will likely use the 2170 cell.

I think Ford and GM are both using pouch cells.

 

[JBee]

The douchebaggery and arrogance is like a free-rider.

You want to complain about the maturity level in a conversation when you can't make a simple reply without being an arrogant ass?

Hello Mr Pot.

Kettle? Pot? Mirror anyone?


Makes Point
Post Readable
X No insults

 

[Ogre]

Kettle? Pot? Mirror anyone?


Makes Point
Post Readable
X No insults

Hang on there buck-o.

He was being an arrogant ass. And in the same message he was pretty far off base as well.

But my behavior is far from spotless. My comment was not meant to suggest I am free of occasional douchebaggery myself. Just that that particular post was free of it.

 

[JBee]

@ajdelange

Whats your frontal area estimate for CT?
(metric works for me)

I'm wondering how much of an effect the ride height has on Cd. Also those exposed tyres are quite large.

 

[JBee]

Hang on there buck-o.

He was being an arrogant ass. And in the same message he was pretty far off base as well.

But my behavior is far from spotless. My comment was not meant to suggest I am free of occasional douchebaggery myself. Just that that particular post was free of it.

Do you have any links on the battery chemistry types that might be used in the 4680? I would have thought they would optimise one for the 4680 production line and not have to have more than one type of line.

 

[Ogre]

Do you have any links on the battery chemistry types that might be used in the 4680? I would have thought they would optimise one for the 4680 production line and not have to have more than one type of line.

Your comment is random and lacks context.