Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

https://www.tesla.com/blog/longest-range-electric-vehicle-now-goes-even-farther

by azhenley • 7 years ago

518 507 7 years ago

melling• 7 years ago

“Beginning today, Model S and Model X now come with an all-new drivetrain design that increases each vehicle’s range substantially, achieving a landmark 370 miles and 325 miles on the EPA cycle for Model S and Model X Long Range, respectively. Using the same 100 kWh battery pack”

martinpw• 7 years ago

What were the corresponding ranges before? The article does not say (just states >10% increase)

gniv• 7 years ago

335 and 295

azhenley4• 7 years ago

They also announced on Twitter: "As a thank you to our Tesla owners, all existing Model S and Model X owners who wish to purchase a new Model S or Model X Performance car will get the Ludicrous Mode upgrade, a $20,000 value, at no additional charge"

https://twitter.com/Tesla/status/1120852649400623105

RickJWagner• 7 years ago

Wow. I'd like that.

zaroth6• 7 years ago

Came here to post this exact excerpt. That’s a heck of a customer loyalty bonus, even if the margin on that particular SKU is itself quite ludicrous!

mdorazio2• 7 years ago

Alternative view: they’re desperate to get more high margin model S and X sales because owners are keeping their existing models too long.

Someone1234• 7 years ago

Slight tangent but what are you getting for $20K? Is it a software feature, or is there physical difference between the normal performance and "Ludicrous" model?

toomuchtodo9• 7 years ago

There is a smart fuse composed of an inconel alloy that is pyro-actuated to protect from overcurrent conditions when performing a Ludicrous launch (~1500 amp peak current drawn). It's not software only. Very fancy circuit breaker.

jedberg• 7 years ago

Sweet. So there will be a bunch of used model S’s coming soon!

limaoscarjuliet• 7 years ago

I read it as "there will be a bunch of crashed model S's coming soon".

alasdair_4• 7 years ago

Ludicrous Mode upgrade, a $20,000 value

I have a P85D. When Ludicrous Mode was announced, they offered it for $5000 as an upgrade.

I have no idea why it now supposedly costs $20,000.

Source: https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-drops-price-of-p85d-ludicrou...

NotSammyHagar10• 7 years ago

i think it costs more because they need the money more now. they've got a lot going on, lots of new vehicles in development and not many models or sales to amortize it over.

justinclift2• 7 years ago

That $US20k seems to be purely marketing bullshit, aimed to sucker US buyers. :(

Easy seen as such too. Compare the "Ludicrous Mode" for the Model X on the US website (US$20k) to the same thing on the Australian website (AUS$8.5k):

https://www.tesla.com/modelx/design?redirect=no#battery

https://www.tesla.com/en_AU/modelx/design?redirect=no#batter...

Note - you need to select "Performance" on the right side, for Ludicrous Mode to be shown.

Ludicrous mode is "20% faster acceleration" for both. So it very much seems like the extra cost on the US buyers is to match this marketing update.

That thing where Larry Ellison (Oracle) is now on the board of Tesla. This is the kind of crap he'd very much applaud. :(

https://www.tesla.com/en_AU/modelx/design?redirect=no#batter...

brianpgordon4• 7 years ago

Also: "In addition to our Long Range and Performance variants, we’re also re-introducing a lower entry price for Model S and Model X by bringing back our Standard Range option, now available for an even greater value with the new drivetrain and suspension updates."

They just can't leave their pricing structure alone. How does Tesla management not appreciate how unnecessarily confusing this is for consumers?

teej2• 7 years ago

You go on the website, click a couple boxes, and it tells you a price. You pay what you see on the website. How is that more confusing than a regular dealership?

floatingatoll4• 7 years ago

Consumers don’t care what yesterday’s prices or options were, prior to a purchase anyways. They care what today’s price is, what rebates are available, and what financing options are available for it.

asaph• 7 years ago

I wonder why the Model 3 isn't getting the new drivetrain.

CarVac4• 7 years ago

It already has the new motor technology. The S and X used to have induction motors front and back, while they now have a switched reluctance motor in the front.

zaroth6• 7 years ago

Indeed, the efficiency advances started in the Model 3 design stage and have now been adapted for use in the X/S.

jpgvm2• 7 years ago

Because this is the Model 3 drivetrain, it's just getting backported.

DeonPenny4• 7 years ago

The model 3 has the newest drive train the model S and X are getting the model 3 drive train and batteries.

_Microft• 7 years ago

Tesla stated that Model S and X will not get batteries based on 21700 cells because it would require redesigning more than just the battery packs themselves.

CarVac4• 7 years ago

So they added the Switched Reluctance Motor technology used in the Model 3 for the front motor, improving efficiency.

TD-Linux• 7 years ago

It's a permanent magnet motor. It's an IPM design so some amount of the torque comes from reluctance, but the majority of the efficiency is from the permanent magnets providing the field rather than having to burn energy through the induction motor's copper bars to provide it.

pitaj• 7 years ago

Which is interesting. I wonder what the math looks like, since induction motors (without the heavy magnets) tend to be lighter. I can see why they'd avoid a rotor-coiled motor, since that comes with lifetime constraints.

AFascistWorld• 7 years ago

Will it deteriorate?

ProfessorLayton• 7 years ago

This is a nice upgrade for the Model S, however, I'm really curious what Tesla's design refresh roadmap looks like for their older models. The Model S has remained mostly the same since 2012, and while the design is pretty good, very few companies can get away without a major design refresh for 7+ years.

iambateman• 7 years ago

I wonder if this still applies in the same way, considering how few Model S units there are from 2012-2014, relative to mass market cars like the Camry.

For a lot of people outside the Bay Area, a Model S still feels like a design revelation, not old hat.

CalChris• 7 years ago

Well, there’s also the facelift and all wheel drive.

prklmn2• 7 years ago

All other car manufacturers play that game.

ddoolin• 7 years ago

Does the 2016 refresh not count?

notatoad• 7 years ago

The 2016 refresh was basically equivalent to most models mid-cycle design update. It was exactly that, a refresh, not a replacement model.

rootusrootus8• 7 years ago

Not to me. I judge Tesla on the same metrics as any other car company. The Model S is getting long in the tooth.

pvelagal• 7 years ago

More than model S , model X badly needs a refresh. Thing started to look like a giant Prius.

aiisjustanif• 7 years ago

Camaro (9 years), Ford Ranger (8 years), Mustang Shelby GT500 (30 then 7 years), Acura NSX (11 years), Challenger (24 years) and the Ford GT (11 years) all come to mind.

Also keep in mind Tesla technically already did a somewhat refresh, like a generation 1.5 of sorts in 2016 [1] (New seats, slight interior changes, facelift, autopilot updates).

1. https://www.autoblog.com/photos/2017-tesla-model-s-facelift-...

jfoster3• 7 years ago

Do they have to follow the convention? Are consumers irked by their breaching of the convention?

I think existing owners would already understand that their cars are iteratively improved upon and that a Model S purchased in 2019 is going to be a lot better than one they purchased in 2013.

jac_no_k• 7 years ago

This "continuous deployment" for cars must be a logistical nightmare. To do repairs for a given vehicle, keeping track of what parts are backward compatible would be challenging. What if it's a compatibility breaking change? Then keeping inventory for older cars would become problematic.

Unless they do design with maximum compatibility. Then it gets interesting as upgrades are possible.

While B.EV cars maintenance is low, my car 7 months into ownership revealed bad battery cells that needed replacing. If the car was say five years old, would this replacement have been possible?

toomuchtodo9• 7 years ago

Tesla's supply chain management system was built in house. Combined with configuration tied to the VIN, I don't see it as being onerous. Backward compatibility, while not easy, is straightforward (dependency graph). If a subsystem incompatibility exists and parts cannot be sourced from Tesla inventory or an OEM, you replace the entire system (and pray to whatever deity you believe in it happens under warranty).

Tesla provides a very generous battery pack & powertrain warranty (8 years/infinite miles for S and X, 8 year/100k miles for Model 3); you're not going to be opening up the high voltage pack to replace cells yourself. Tesla will perform the work, or swap the pack if necessary.

EDIT: Note this is only a comment on Tesla's supply chain tracking system, and doesn't discuss their difficulty in getting replacement parts out to customers.

ummonk2• 7 years ago

Well, given that people report their Teslas sitting in the shop for months to get repaired, the logistical supply chain doesn’t seem to be working too well.

mdorazio2• 7 years ago

This is great until you want to do repairs or maintenance yourself or via lower cost aftermarket. It’s essentially locking you into the OEM service model.

mecameron• 7 years ago

I bought a 2013 Model S recently that had its wheels swapped with a 2016 Model S by a third party before sale (I didn't care for the 21" wheels that were on the 2013, and the buyer of the 2016 wanted them). Shortly after driving away from the dealer, the tire pressure sensor system reported faults. After bringing it in to Tesla they said the newer tires and older car were not compatible, but they could easily downgrade the electronics in the wheels or upgrade the electronics on the car. They were both about the same cost, so I just had them update the wheels.

walrus01• 7 years ago

I'd bet that the TPMS (tire pressure monitor/sensor) in the wheels is an off the shelf component purchased from a top-10 supplier in the automotive industry, and the problem was as simple as not having the TPMS programmed for the car. This is the same problem you can encounter if you replace all four TPMS in most any medium to high end car manufactured after about 2006, and the tire shop forgets to use their handheld wireless EEPROM flasher to apply the car's VIN to the new TPMS modules.

bluedino7• 7 years ago

I know of 2015 Ford changed their TPMS sensors so you couldn’t do a straight swap between 2013 and 2016 vehicles. Wouldn’t be surprised if the rest of the industry changed too.

Pfhreak• 7 years ago

I'm guessing they have software that contains a full bill of materials for each vehicle. Boeing does this for every individual plane, and a plane is significantly more complex than a Tesla. I'm sure they are very aware of how many of each parts are out there on the road. I wouldn't be surprised if the vehicles themselves periodically phone home with use information so they can predict wear and tear.

lallysingh• 7 years ago

AFAIK that's pretty standard for most manufacturers. I can look up my SUV's VIN online and get its full configuration.

rootusrootus8• 7 years ago

Even if Tesla can themselves manage the logistics, it's certainly a negative for potential consumers, especially second+ owners. Maybe Tesla will offer a VIN lookup so you can find out what a particular car's specs are while you're shopping.

cperciva2• 7 years ago

Is it any worse than what other manufacturers deal with? The 2019 Honda Accord shares some parts with the 2018 Honda Accord which shares some parts with the 2017 model... when something breaks in my Honda the first question is "do they still make/use this part or did they change it in newer models?"

AceJohnny22• 7 years ago

Gee, I hope they have some kind of system to track that. Maybe software even?

code_duck4• 7 years ago

I’ve had a couple of American cars and apparently year-by-year or even in the same model year the manufacturer changes the location of certain parts, which I didn’t expect. Mechanics and I have had trouble finding various parts like fan relays and cabin air filters.

michaelmcmillan• 7 years ago

A former Tesla employee, who worked on their IT infrastructure and whose NDA has expired, has revealed the technical shit show going on behind the scenes at Tesla. (I'm a Tesla fanboy as well, but this is scary).

https://twitter.com/atomicthumbs/status/1032939617404645376

DeonPenny4• 7 years ago

They have very few moving parts. I am guessing they are switching battery pack modules out so it's not that hard. Theres battery packs, motos and basically thats it.

jakobegger3• 7 years ago

There are a lot of moving parts in the suspension, the transmission, the battery cooling system, the AC, the power windows, power steering, all the other comfort features like electric seats, electric tailgate, ...

Just because it doesn't need an oil change doesn't mean that it doesn't need service.

jakobegger3• 7 years ago

Last time I had my brakes serviced, the workshop didn't know which discs to order because they used two different dimensions in the same model year. I had to come in, they had to take off the wheel, and measure the disc.

So I don't think this is unique to Tesla.

spiderfarmer• 7 years ago

I operate several websites that help people find the right part for their car or tractor. It's always a nightmare.

djaychela• 7 years ago

I doubt it's significantly different from an ICE repair point of view. I do a lot of car repairs myself, and have done things for friends in the past. One memorable time I was helping a friend who had a Toyota van for work (can't remember the exact model, this was early 90s). It needed new brake hoses. After some messing about with pattern ones that didn't fit, we went to Toyota and spoke to the parts guy who said there were TWENTY SEVEN different options for the front brake hoses on that van, and even having the VIN was no help - we needed to take the original in for him to identify it correctly, as even the microfiche (yes, we're talking that long ago) wasn't accurate enough to identify it - he ordered (I think) 5 in which looked like a match and sent the other four back.

While this is an extreme example, there are plenty of different options on most cars as the manufacturers will source different parts for different markets, and in some cases totally different subsystems which look identical externally but are totally different functionally (immobiliser and ECU on a Mk 4 golf springs to mind).

PinguTS• 7 years ago

Each OEM, including Tesla, maintain a database where each ever produced vehicles with all the options, including changes are recorded. Except, when they screw it up. They screw this up with PR samples and show cars, which are sometimes prepared by hand and finished up by hand just for the press or just for show. Then things get forgotten to record. Tesla had so such problems. Volkswagen had such problems and had to recall a 5 figure number, just because of this. Because PR and show cars are normally discarded after the show, after the press had it, but sometimes they get into the second hand market.

SmellyGeekBoy5• 7 years ago

This is true for all manufacturers. I've owned "changeover year" cars from various manufacturers that had parts from both the older and newer revisions, very occasionally resulting in a garage ordering the wrong part leading to a delay. This isn't a Tesla-specific issue.

david-cako• 7 years ago

There was a twitter chain posted here about a year back where someone described how convoluted getting a Tesla off the factory floor is. All of the systems along the way have to be installed and flashed in a particular order to ensure nothing goes belly up.

gibolt2• 7 years ago

It has been 7 years since initial release. Super excited that it got an update, right when competitors are somewhat catching up. Only took them that long to almost compete.

wil4213• 7 years ago

I always thought one of the big 3 US or German companies were betting on Tesla to fail. Once they failed they’d scoop up their tech at a discount. After the Model S’s success I think they all realized they need to play catch up.

Meanwhile Japan is still going down the Hydrogen path...

rootusrootus8• 7 years ago

I wonder what tech they'd scoop up. GM already has supercruise, and Cruise. And they released an EV back in 1996. Seems probable that their stance on EVs today is entirely by choice.

gibolt2• 7 years ago

I don't think they were hoping to buy, I think they were hoping they wouldn't have to compete.

jonknee2• 7 years ago

They're re-introducing the lower cost model, interesting move right before quarterly earnings get announced. I have to assume this means sales have been poor.

In addition to our Long Range and Performance variants, we’re also re-introducing a lower entry price for Model S and Model X by bringing back our Standard Range option

TaylorAlexander• 7 years ago

In the autonomy presentation yesterday they said they could create more robotaxis if they ship smaller batteries. So I wouldn’t assume it means sales are poor. They’re focused now on building out a self driving fleet of customer cars, which they plan to activate as taxis in the future.

rorykoehler• 7 years ago

Every move they make there are inevitably a bunch of comments that Tesla sales are poor. Only offer high spec... Bad sales. Reintroduce lower spec... Bad sales.

jacquesm• 7 years ago

In the autonomy presentation yesterday they said they could create more robotaxis if they ship smaller batteries.

More? The challenge is not to ship more of them, the challenge is to ship one.

Cyclone_3• 7 years ago

Those are great numbers, I'm really looking forward to the rivian though. It will have 410 miles for the SUV https://www.autonews.com/article/20181127/OEM04/181129763/ri...

leesec5• 7 years ago

Rivian has yet to make a single Truck. It is vaporware until they have more than just numbers.

Cyclone_3• 7 years ago

Are Tesla owners really this sensitive? I mean they do have prototypes out there, it's not like they're making up what the mileage is, they clearly have demoed that it works, it's just about producing the vehicles now.

7e3• 7 years ago

The longest range electric vehicle, at 380 miles EPA, remains Hyundai's fuel cell SUV.

tgtweak• 7 years ago

Technically it's a hybrid. Just not an internal combustion hybrid.

7e3• 7 years ago

No, it runs only on hydrogen (to EV direct drive). https://m.hyundaiusa.com/nexo/. Zero emissions, refuels in five minutes at one of California's 40 stations. Soon all hydrogen production will be renewable from solar and wind electrolysis. Exciting times.

magicbuzz3• 7 years ago

Which you can't actually buy. At least in Australia.

ecpottinger• 7 years ago

Don't see them in Canada, but there are Tesla cars here.

w0mbat• 7 years ago

That's fueled by onboard hydrogen, not onboard electrical charge, so it's not an EV.

clouddrover6• 7 years ago

Model S and Model X are now capable of achieving 200 kW on V3 Superchargers and 145 kW on V2 Superchargers. Together, these improvements enable our customers to recharge their miles 50% faster.

What does that mean exactly? I'm sure there are sections of the charge curve where it is 50% faster, but you need to consider the entire charge curve to get a better sense of the improvement.

The Tesla Model 3's charge times were improved by the combination of battery preconditioning and the faster V3 Supercharger. A charge that used to take 60 minutes can now be done in 40 minutes:

https://electrek.co/2019/03/07/tesla-v3-supercharger-action-...

I'd call that 33% faster charging. So is the Model S and Model X charge time improvement across the entire charge curve or just sections of it?

toomuchtodo9• 7 years ago

Charge times are improved at deep to moderate discharge states. Little improvement (but not necessary for charge times expressed to be realized) at 80-100% SOC (state of charge).

EDIT: @clouddrover You asked "So is the Model S and Model X charge time improvement across the entire charge curve or just sections of it?" I provided a response to that question. Sorry if you thought I was restating what you already said, that was not my intent. Please excuse my exuberance, this is one of my few passions (rapid electrification of transportation).

clouddrover6• 7 years ago

Yes, you've just restated what I've said. The question is what's the improvement across the entire charge curve.

mikeash5• 7 years ago

There’s at least some improvement across the entire curve. The added range came from better efficiency. Better efficiency means more MPH for the same kW when charging.

zaroth6• 7 years ago

Interestingly, the charge rate across the entire curve sounds like an important metric but in practice it is nearly irrelevant.

If you drive an ICE car, you are used to filling your tank. Because once you've gone through the trouble of driving to a gas station and pulling out your credit card and unscrewing the cap, well you might as well top it off, right? Life is different with electric.

You might know, for example, that most Teslas operate day-to-day with their max battery charge limit set around 80% or below (it extends battery life). Charging at night is entirely effortless, so you put the charge into the battery that you'll need for the next day, or like me, you set it to give you 4x your daily commute and totally forget about it. Only before a particularly long road trip do you pop open the app and slide up the charge limit.

For Superchargers, the model is a bit different because this is charging that's happening on-demand while you wait in the car or are off getting a bite or whatever, during your trip. The best measure is to examine the portion of the curve that actual drivers spend actually charging their cars at an actual Supercharger. So here we have it;

"V3 Supercharging will ultimately cut the amount of time customers spend charging by an average of 50%, as modeled on our fleet data."

So this is truly an average of 50% faster, for actual Tesla drivers. ICE-age drivers who love to hate Tesla will insist you have to integrate the charge-rate curve, but as usual they will be entirely missing the point.

Tesla could spend an atrocious amount of time and money improving charging speed from 90 to 100%. That might be how you charge your phone, but it's actually not how Tesla drivers charge their cars (or how the onboard guidance computer will plan to charge your car when it sets the route for you), and would have almost zero benefit for the Fleet. Charging en-route is most efficiently done to boost the battery up to 70-80% and then you get going again.

Supercharger deployment, at least in the USA, is modeled such that there are almost no trips where you would benefit from, or need to, fully charge at a Supercharger, versus making two charging stops which would add up to less time charging, and driving out of your way to the charger, overall.

clouddrover6• 7 years ago

None of these justifications answer the question I've asked. Read the link I've provided. The Tesla Model 3 can get to 90% state of charge in 40 minutes in ideal conditions. How many minutes will it now take the Model S and Model X to do the same?

The amount of time spent at a charger to get decent range matters. Read this article for an example of someone who likes his Tesla Model 3 but is getting frustrated with the amount of time he's spending at chargers:

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/mobility/20...

_ph_2• 7 years ago

It is the combination of charging faster (more energy per time unit) and using less energy for a giving distance, this means the charging speed as in adding distance charged per time unit gets improved by the combination of these two changes together.

imtringued3• 7 years ago

You're getting your numbers mixed up. It's a 33% reduction in charging time which is equal to a 50% increase in charging speed.

magicbuzz3• 7 years ago

For metric folks, this equates to nearly 600km.

That's about as much as I want to drive in the space of a single day. Conceivably however, automated driving could mean doing longer distances. And at a cost much less than an airfare - just a lot more in time.

magicbuzz3• 7 years ago

Actually they're quoting 660km on https://www.tesla.com/en_AU/models/design#battery

clouddrover6• 7 years ago

That's according to the NEDC test cycle which is the most optimistic (and therefore the least useful) range estimate. The three test cycles that are typically used are:

NEDC (too optimistic): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_European_Driving_Cycle

WLTP (better than NEDC, still a little optimistic): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldwide_harmonized_light_veh...

EPA (the most conservative): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FTP-75

The WLTP figures are okay, but I think EPA test cycle is the most useful because it's the most consecutive and most representative of real world driving.

colordrops2• 7 years ago

I can't wait to sit in my car one morning in Los Angeles, punch in Seattle, then wake up the next morning arrived.

pault• 7 years ago

If self driving trucks are on the horizon, why not self driving efficiency apartments? :)

ip262• 7 years ago

You and everyone else. The congestion will be unimaginable IMO.

m3kw9• 7 years ago

If you factor in 4-5 hours in overhead in order to take a flight, you can go a lot of places for a lot less and just slightly longer ride. I’m guessing 1/10 of the price for NY to Miami if you take 2-3 people

dannyw• 7 years ago

Depreciation matters.

jfoster3• 7 years ago

A few other bits worth noting:

- You don't need to rent a car on the other end.

- You can take all the luggage that fits into the car. (even if there's a bottle of water in your luggage!)

- You can stop along the way for some decent food and a good leg stretch.

- You can listen to the radio without headphones and roll down the windows for some air that won't dry your skin out.

- No fixed schedule or chance of missing the trip if running late.

I don't think people fully appreciate yet how amazing full, unsupervised electric vehicle autonomy might be.

dual_basis• 7 years ago

NY to Miami will still take considerably longer to drive than to fly, even accounting for the airport overhead.

wingworks• 7 years ago

And it'd be a more comfortable environment to get work done during the trip too.

viburnum• 7 years ago

Tesla’s cars are not especially energy efficient:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/06/30/what-are-the-most-effic...

jpgvm2• 7 years ago

The older models with the older drivetrain no. But this is the Model 3 drivetrain. If you look at the data you posted you will find the Model 3 is basically ball park for "as good as you will get for now".

The major difference being those other efficient drive trains aren't capable of anywhere near the torque that the M3 drivetrain is so it's not exactly an apples to apples comparison but I digress.

NotSammyHagar10• 7 years ago

The model X tesla before this upgrade was much more efficient than the latest tesla killers from europe. This article [1] showed the audi e-tron is 23% less efficient than a model x (the family truckster huge suv tesla), and the i-pace is 26% less efficient. That is before the 10% performance. Tesla has excellent efficiency, much better than these german cars.

The hundai is also a great, efficient car too. 1. https://electrek.co/2019/02/21/tesla-efficiency-range-test-a...

Brakenshire5• 7 years ago

That test doesn’t take into account increased battery buffers on the IPace or eTron, so it’s strange to call it an efficiency test.

olliej3• 7 years ago

So it sounds like the range increase is for new cars? (Other comments made it sound like a software update to existing cars)

I still wish there was more focus on range over acceleration, obviously electric motors don't suffer from general efficiency impact as ICEs do (an ICE with superior acceleration seems to take an efficiency hit at all speeds), but how much of that "faster acceleration" impacts efficiency over the course of driving a few hundred miles.

mrybczyn• 7 years ago

basically none. I've read that many electric motors are most efficient at 80%+ load...

olliej3• 7 years ago

The problem is more that you hurt efficiency when accelerating fast. I'd rather a moderately reliable increase in range than improved periodic acceleration.

Essentially this is: How much does (say) 25-55mph in 2s vs. 4s cost for overall distance in normal traffic.

That said I have better things to spend 60k on than a car. (my last car was $18k, and 42k can be used for a lot of good things that aren't a fancy car. That said I would rather a car that can accelerate faster than a Prius C - my old 9k Yaris did much better, even though it used more gas)

mikeash5• 7 years ago

Range and acceleration mostly go hand in hand. Much of the constraint on acceleration is how much power you can pull from the battery pack, and that gets better with larger batteries. It’s not like a normal car where high acceleration means a big, inefficient engine.

olliej3• 7 years ago

Agreed, that was why I noted the efficiency model for an electric engine is superior to ICE. I'd just rather "normal"-ish acceleration in traffic with range improvements over high max acceleration. I'm sure you could also reduce engine weight if you don't have to rely on extreme acceleration.

Animats• 7 years ago

This is good. It's Tesla focusing on making better cars. More range is good. Faster charging is good. Those are real things. Yesterday's claims about Tesla operating a million self-driving taxis by 2020 were, well, not taken too seriously.

The new stuff is all at the high end, though. The $35,000 Model 3 is still absent from the product line.

mikeash5• 7 years ago

It’s not absent, it’s just hidden. You can order one if you call.

reitzensteinm• 7 years ago

For now.

tristanperry• 7 years ago

The $35,000 Model 3 is still absent from the product line.

I find it bad that they hyped it up for so long and then removed it from online sales a month later, but you can still order it over the phone or in-branch.

Plus despite some rumours of 2+ month delays, they are actively being produced and have already been delivered to some customers (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQgjY2SRrck).

oblio3• 7 years ago

2020 is in 8 months. They currently produce about 400k cars per year...

O_H_E• 7 years ago

I believe the point was:

self-driving taxis

grecy3• 7 years ago

Also note the new Gigafactory in China is going up at a lightning pace, and very likely will be churning out 10k Model 3's a week by the end of 2019.

So that factory alone will put ~ 500k Model 3's on the road by the end of 2020.

sidcool4• 7 years ago

What is super cool about Tesla is their laser sharp focus on creating a good electric vehicle. From the autonomy announcement and then this one, they are creating tools purpose built for cars, like new chips for self driving, battery tech etc. They have done so much in so little time, we have come to expect more from them. There is only so much a car company can innovate, Tesla has gone beyond it.

Edit: I am a Tesla fanboy but I don't condone their false advertising around FSD.

dforrestwilson• 7 years ago

If you believe that they are doing false advertising around FSD, could they also be doing false advertising about this?

sidcool4• 7 years ago

It's highly unlikely. This is a public event and they will be held even more accountable than when Elon tweets something. Lying at such a stage would risk their reputation. So I say it's unlikely, not impossible though.

bronco21016• 7 years ago

I’m not sure they would risk lying about their EPA tested mileage rating after the VW scandal. It would surely mean the end of Tesla.

gutnor• 7 years ago

Unlikely about battery capacity and range. Tesla have consistently delivered in that side of things. The core of their car business is solid.

Their problem on the production side is not surprising. Missing deadlines and production targets is business as usual for "startups" (between quotes because they are massive, however still very much a new and small player in that field) "We will deliver million of widget in 2 years for $20" really means "we will deliver 100K widget in 5 years for $40" with the enthousiasm you expect of a company at that stage.

Every claim around autonomous driving have been bullshit and they have doubled down on their bullshit instead of owning up. The grandiose announcement, Trumpish tweeting and technical presentation that carefully avoid talking about the current technical issue they must have solved ? That smells like they are trippling down. They avoid false advertising by kicking the can down the road further. eg: they aggressively talk down LIDAR because their current car do not have it but they are bound by their claim that every car is fully autonomous ready.

taneq• 7 years ago

It's pretty hard to fake a vehicle's range. It's a lot easier to oversell an experimental system which isn't available to the general public and won't be for 6 months - ∞.

alimbada• 7 years ago

I don't condone their false advertising around FSD.

Can you elaborate on this?

sidcool4• 7 years ago

Tesla in the past has made unachievable predictions around self driving. From charging people for FSD and not yet delivering.

rsync• 7 years ago

"What is super cool about Tesla is their laser sharp focus on creating a good electric vehicle. From the autonomy announcement and then this one, they are creating tools purpose built for cars, like new chips for self driving, battery tech etc."

That's interesting that you cite that because I wish that Tesla would just focus on electric cars.

Instead I see them wasting all manner of time, energy and goodwill on autonomous driving which is not necessarily related to EVs in any way. In fact, I worry that in the long run, Tesla will be done in by autonomous driving in spite of their great vehicles.

hn_throwaway_99• 7 years ago

What is super cool about Tesla is their laser sharp focus on creating a good electric vehicle.

And don't forget leaf blowers!

sidcool4• 7 years ago

I argue that self driving is indeed the core of any car's experience. I agree when Elon says that a decade from now, a car without autonomy will be strange. They will be as common as smart phones are today. Smartphone revolution happened in less than a decade. Smartcar revolution will be little slower, but once triggered it will be unstoppable, even in developing nations.

gkfasdfasdf2• 7 years ago

Can't wait to see new 0-60 numbers w/ludicrous

xxpor• 7 years ago

Theyre quoting 3 sec on the website

goshx• 7 years ago

2.4s with ludicrous mode on the website. 3s is the performance without ludicrous.

hellllllllooo• 7 years ago

Given the huge amount of truth stretching in the autonomy anouncment yesterday anyone here with relevant battery experience want to weigh in on this?

Yesterday completely burned through some of the goodwill and trust I had for Tesla to the point that I am sceptical of anything they announce now. Is this real?

NotSammyHagar10• 7 years ago

read the motortrend article. they test drove on today and said the range they got was actually about 400 miles.

CarVac4• 7 years ago

The room was there to improve. Nothing about this is particularly implausible.

num3ric• 7 years ago

3 miles short of Montreal-NYC!

mrb3• 7 years ago

"Paired with the new more efficient drivetrain design, Model S and Model X are now capable of achieving 200 kW on V3 Superchargers"

Not sure how this has anything to do with the new drivetrain, because last month they already announced "[a V3 supercharger] supports peak rates of up to 250kW per car" (presumably without the new drivetrain as it had not been announced yet - https://www.tesla.com/blog/introducing-v3-supercharging)

Also why did Tesla claimed 250 kW in the blog post last month, but now lowered their figure to 200 kW ? I'm so confused.

Edit: found some answers: "Model 3s will be able to take full advantage of the new Supercharger capacity [250 kW] thanks to the car’s newer battery chemistry". So the Model 3 can charge at up to 250 kW, while Model S and X are currently limited to 200 kW. Source: https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/6/18253618/tesla-supercharge...

CarVac4• 7 years ago

Paired with, not as a result of.

The lower charge speed of 200 vs 250 is likely cell limited compared to the 2170 cells in the 3.

mrb3• 7 years ago

Ah, yes.

takeda• 7 years ago

From the text you cited, my understanding is that 200kW is already possible and they might be able to achieve up to 250kW using that approach.

mrb3• 7 years ago

But it's the reverse: they previously announced 250 kW last month. While this new drivetrain announcement says 200 kW. Why did they lower the charging rate claim?

davidgould• 7 years ago

New drive train probably also includes new battery management, hence new cars can charge faster. The 200kW vs 250kW is the difference between the Model S/X and the newer design packs in the Model 3.

DeonPenny4• 7 years ago

The competition just got more stiff. They are selling audi etrons for the same price with 200 mile ranges, and tesla is about to break 400.

occamschainsaw2• 7 years ago

As a bit of a tangent but a note, this is a fantastic article. When I read it in a paper [1] by Alan Kay, I always assumed that most manufacturers would release a full battery that was twice longer than their current size (probably a little bit shorter because it would require a big recharge) in order to support these new models. [1] - http://www.arxiv.org/abs/1509.0852

josh2600• 7 years ago

It’s been a while since I’ve read a paper abstract that made me feel completely out of my depth. Can you give a little more context here?

occamschainsaw2• 7 years ago

I am sorry about this, just wanted to have some fun. I posted the title in the hn comment generator[1] and copied one of the comments here. Guess it passed the Turing test.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19694578

jamilbk• 7 years ago

Question for Tesla owners: Is the recharge time ever a problem? Have you ever felt regret from not being able to just pull up to a gas station, refuel, and be on your way?

Part of me drools with child-like giddiness at the prospect of owning one, but part of me hesitates at the thought of taking roadtrips in one.

sjwright4• 7 years ago

Question for ICE owners: Is having to regularly visit a fuel station ever a problem? Have you ever felt regret from not being able to wake up every morning with a "full tank" in the car?

Point is, it's not a compromise, it's replacing one set of compromises with another. Yes, you are limited to driving for 4-5 hours before taking a 30-45 minute break (assuming your route has fast chargers) but that's fairly consistent with the needs of humans anyway. (Muscles, stomachs, bladders etc.)

[Not an EV owner.]

magicalhippo• 7 years ago

Is having to regularly visit a fuel station ever a problem? Have you ever felt regret from not being able to wake up every morning with a "full tank" in the car?

We just got an EV, and my gf loves this aspect.

She was terrible at remembering to fill gas before coming home, so would very often find herself in a situation where she had to fill up before getting on her way. Quite often this coincided with when she was already running a bit late in the morning, causing a lot of additional stress.

With the EV, plugging it in is a quick and natural part of parking in the garage and so the car is always ready to go in the morning.

SmellyGeekBoy5• 7 years ago

This is exactly it. I drive a diesel and I dread going to the fuel station. That stuff gets all over your hands (even using the little plastic gloves), it stinks and is very difficult to wash off. It's incredibly rare for me to drive more than 100 miles per day (my commute is a 60 mile round trip). I honestly can't wait for the day that I can swap it for an EV and wake up to full range every morning.

Unfortunately I just can't justify the cost of changing car at the moment, but that day will come.

bluedino7• 7 years ago

What if you forget to plug in?

What if you and your spouse or roommate have two Tesla’s and a one car garage?

What if you have three? Who gets to charge? Can you charge all three in one night?

etaioinshrdlu• 7 years ago

Yes. If you go visit an area where you cannot conveniently charge, many cities in the US you will not be within 30 mi of a supercharger, so only slow and expensive chargers are available.

It is kind of a pain in those places.

Charging at home is nice though.

leesec5• 7 years ago

I'm a recent Model 3 owner.

Waking up with a full tank everyday is SWEET.

For road trips, you just have to plan for a bit extra time, but it's often how much you would stop anyways. For example, if you're on a 4 hour road trip, you'd prolly stop for 20 minutes at some point to stretch/get gas/grab a coffee. This is really all the time you'd need to juice up, especially when Supercharger's V3 start becoming common.

It is a bit of an extra consideration but I would say it's not really a deterrent.

ben174• 7 years ago

It takes a few months to get used to. But once you know the limits of the car and get used to plugging in every night, the convenience of a gas station is not missed at all.

baoha• 7 years ago

It's funny how they put CA EV Rebate in the 'after savings' part. This rebate has income cap at $300k/household. If I made less than that, I would think really hard before purchasing a $90k car.

codeulike13• 7 years ago

Compare to the Audi e-Tron, which has a fairly massive 95kWH battery but only scores 204 miles of EPA range. They claim they're only using 88% of the battery capacity so that charging is faster and battery longevity is preserved, but thats a really weird engineering decision that belies the fact they have made a terribly inefficient (and perhaps rapidly degrading?) battery pack/drivetrain.

Meanwhile the base Model S, for $4k more, has 285 miles of EPA range, and charges faster when below 50%, although not as fast as the e-Tron when above 50%.

The smaller Kia Niro EV (if you can get one, they aren't making many because they can't source the batteries) squeezes 258 miles of range from a 65 kWH battery. Much better, but terribly production constrained. It won What Car of the Year in the UK but they can only deliver 900 to the UK for the whole of 2019. Not sure what the global Kia production rate is, but presumably far far less than Tesla which has sustained 4000+ Model 3's per week since last October (although not yet delivering to the RHD countries like the UK, alas)

Turns out making EVs is harder than everyone thought. We were told the traditional automakers would just wade in and obliterate Tesla, who were just putting 'wheels on batteries'. That hasn't happened.

tim3332• 7 years ago

...88% of the battery capacity...weird engineering decision

Musk was talking about existing packs lasting 400,000 miles and working on new ones that will do 1 million. You can't get those sort of life spans if you use the full cycle - think how long your phone battery lasts.

codeulike13• 7 years ago

Car batteries are not much like phone batteries. A car battery pack is a system in itself, with thousands of small cells supported by cooling, heating, monitoring and balancing systems.

edit: there are recommendations for Tesla daily use that say go to 90% most of the time. But still a bit different to putting 12% completely out of reach like Audi have done.

bishopknight2• 7 years ago

So it's optimal to not fully cycle batteries then? It's better to keep them mid charged and top them off?

martin_bech2• 7 years ago

I dont know if you know this, but the default for a Tesla is 90% battery capacity (You can manually override this very easily to 100% if going on a trip, or otherwise needing the full capacity)

codeulike13• 7 years ago

Do they still do that? I thought they turned that off a few years ago. Still, completely different to Audi who are completely hiding 12% from the customer.

Shivetya2• 7 years ago

A few observations, before I derail

I do not want to dismiss the efforts of Audi or Jaguar but I think their initial focus was being good examples for their respective brands with regards to their packaging. Their interior quality of a different generation and caliber than Tesla. The EV part was an important concern but secondary. They can still rack up significant ZEV credits in California letting them off the hook of buying them from others.

Tesla needs to refresh the S and X to improve interior fit and finish but also concentrate on making them quieter, an issue I have with my 3. without the drone of a motor every sound stands out and EVs tend to ride on stiffer, noisier, tires.

As for difficulty, other than i3 and Tesla cars I do not believe any other EV was a clean sheet design. Even the Leaf appears based on traditional cars. the Bolt is simply a spark when a new motor cradle and battery back pushed under it. The Hyundai/Kia models are all adaptions. Not 100% sure about the iPace but Jaguar even contracted out assembly.

The manufacturing difficulty is probably secondary to the seismic shift crossing the auto industry and associated industries. EVs don't need the large established dealership base and their included maintenance facilities. Secondary market means little use for parts stores and their suppliers. Gas stations will be right out with most charging done at destination points. Manufacturing of the autos themselves will implode the number of employees and that will lead to union difficulty in some countries; where they sit on boards and can stymie the move to EVs and loss of production jobs.

The Kia Niro EV numbers you mention are not EPA which was 258. I mention this because your other numbers were EPA.

codeulike13• 7 years ago

Thanks, sorry I gave the european rating for the Kia, have edited. I believe the i-Pace was a ground-up design.

ajuc2• 7 years ago

EVs don't need the large established dealership base and their included maintenance facilities

I never understood that. Why does power source matter in the context of dealership base and maintenance? EVs still break.

martin_a2• 7 years ago

Not 100% sure about the iPace but Jaguar even contracted out assembly.

I think I have heard they outsourced that to Range Rover. Or the Range Rover Velar (or something like that) has the same baseplate as the iPace. Not sure.

hopler4• 7 years ago

If a quiet engine makes the other noises noticeable, they don't need to silence the car, just add a little synthetic white noise like offices and movies have.

woodpanel2• 7 years ago

Good point. Having driven Model S/X/3'es as well as an e-tron and i-pace I can absolutely echo your statement.

Teslas offer a different USP than E-Tron/I-Pace alikes. It's EV vs. Premium-Cars that happen to be EVs.

If you've never owned a (premium) car and thus have no feeling for differences in interior- and general-manufacturing-quality, a Tesla is the reasonable choice (it even maybe that an Audi's interior will come across as needlessly pretentious).

However, if you've driven premium Audis/Jags you will notice what Teslas are lacking.

It's reasonable to assume that Teslas are thus more likely to be bought by newly affluent millennials (than by already affluent people), though being a TSLA stockholder I wonder how large that group of millennials might be outside of my software engineering bubble.

Duladian• 7 years ago

Slight derailing again.

1997-1999 GM EV1 Gen 1 & 2 (leased for 1 year at a time with 3 different cars), 2001 Ford Ranger EV, 2003 Toyota Rav4 EV, 2010 Nissan Leaf, 2011 Chevy Volt, and 2017 Chevy Bolt. These vehicles were owned in the household I was living in at some point.

With this being said, I've ridden in a Model 3. It is by far one of the noisiest electric vehicles I've seen.

For anyone curious, the GM EV1 was by far my favorite. Those were years ahead of their time.

nottorp2• 7 years ago

No idea what is actually going on, but the first thought that comes to my mind is that in the US you're allowed and expected to blatantly lie in marketing while in the EU you may have to keep it somewhat realistic...

codeulike13• 7 years ago

No. I'm talking about the EPA (USA) rating of the e-Tron vs other cars. EPA ratings for EVs are generally pretty accurate vs real world range, although in the real world a lot depends on driving style and weather etc.

masto• 7 years ago

A rising tide lifts all boats. I'm just happy there are an increasing number of EVs coming on the market. And people will have their reasons for choosing one or another, so it doesn't have to be that one car is objectively best across the board and therefore gets 100% of the sales.

I'm very happy with my Model 3 but what I really want to see is acceptance of electric cars as a viable and sensible option for a lot of drivers, and the infrastructure that comes along with that.

codeulike13• 7 years ago

Of course. I'm not trying to play a game of 'my EV is better than that EV' (nb I drive a Leaf). I'm pointing out that many people underestimated the lead Tesla has in EV technology. This year we've seen major, and esteemed, automakers put things into production that are clearly years behind what Tesla can do. I'm glad they are joining in, but I'm just trying to set the record straight.

FWIW the Kia Niro EV (and the Hyundai Kona Electric which is based on the same platform) are very serious competitors for the Model 3. Kia and Hyundai seem to have got the EV tech figured out. But alas they can't hardly manufacture any of them. So thats Tesla's other advantage - a whopping huge battery factory.

PeterStuer• 7 years ago

Several of the 'traditional' automakers have EV models just to comply with the EU average emission targets agreements [1]. Fiat Chrysler paid Tesla a handsome sum to have its production 'pooled' [2], and others produce subpar EV and low emission vehicles because of the perversity of 'Super credits' (one produced EV can be counted more than once when the the average is calculated).

[1]"Fiat Chrysler taps Tesla to avoid EU emission fine" https://www.marketwatch.com/story/fiat-chrysler-taps-tesla-t...

[2] "Reducing CO2 emissions from passenger cars" https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/vehicles/cars_...

Brakenshire5• 7 years ago

Compare to the Audi e-Tron, which has a fairly massive 95kWH battery but only scores 204 miles of EPA range. They claim they're only using 88% of the battery capacity so that charging is faster and battery longevity is preserved, but thats a really weird engineering decision that belies the fact they have made a terribly inefficient (and perhaps rapidly degrading?) battery pack/drivetrain.

Audi chooses to limit charging thresholds to preserve battery life and your conclusion is that they must have a rapidly degrading battery pack? More likely is they're being ultra-cautious because they don't have their own data in place for how the batteries will respond.

Turns out making EVs is harder than everyone thought. We were told the traditional automakers would just wade in and obliterate Tesla...

This is all based on the new Model S having a range 80 miles higher than the e-Tron and 50 miles higher than the I-Pace.

The danger to Tesla's ability to dominate the EV market isn't these two models, the danger is a swamp of competition. Just VW is planning to launch 50 different models by 2025 on its modular electric platform, from multiple brands and in every price point from $30k to $100k. I'd expect Tesla to still be the largest selling model within its particular niches, but its one crossover will be nipped at the heels by 20 different crossovers from competitors, all serving different use cases and price points, and the same for SUVs. It won't even launch a small city hatchback, where VW alone will have 5-10 different models.

Although I’m not even sure this should be characterised as a threat, Tesla was never going to maintain a total dominance in electric cars and that’s not required for it to become a significant and profitable manufacturer.

The question really is at what level of scale and profitability Tesla is happy to end up. The I-Pace is actually doing well for Jaguar, because Jaguar is a niche producer, it's currently providing 10% of global Jaguar sales. I'd expect Tesla to settle in as something around BMW, luxury price points, decent profit margins, solid but not massive sales numbers. The model 3 has ended up solidly within that price bracket.

codeulike13• 7 years ago

Audi chooses to limit charging thresholds to preserve battery life and your conclusion is that they must have a rapidly degrading battery pack? More likely is they're being ultra-cautious because they don't have their own data in place for how the batteries will respond.

Well, its clearly inefficient, whether it degredes rapidly or not was just a guess. My argument is that building EVs is harder than Teslas critics have admitted. If Audi don't know the degreadation state for their own battery then that kindof backs that up. The e-Tron is a nice enough car but it was trailed as being a Tesla killer and its clearly not that.

This is all based on the new Model S having a range 80 miles higher than the e-Tron and 50 miles higher than the I-Pace

My argument is not really about range, its about range for a given battery size - i.e. efficiency. Batteries are heavy and expensive - thats why building an affordable long range EV is such a challenge. If your EV is inefficient, it will be heavier and more expensive than it needs to be.

Even if the e-Tron used 100% of its battery it would still only get 230 miles of range. Still below the base Model S, which - probably - has something like a 70/80 kWH battery - smaller, lighter and cheaper.

I like the look of the i-Pace but it seems to be smaller on the inside than it should be. It supposed to be an SUV and just 500lbs lighter than the enormous Model X but its got just a slightly bigger boot than the Nissan Leaf (17 cubic feet vs 15.3). Presumably, thats because its full of big heavy battery.

I'd expect Tesla to settle in as something around BMW, luxury price points, decent profit margins, solid but not massive sales numbers. The model 3 has ended up solidly within that price bracket.

Yeah you might be right, I am disappointed that they abandoned the $35k target for the Model 3.

_ea1k4• 7 years ago

Audi chooses to limit charging thresholds to preserve battery life and your conclusion is that they must have a rapidly degrading battery pack?

I mean, that would be a weird reason to limit it, but every other reason is weird too. 12% degradation over 100k miles would be pretty high. They've started with 12% degradation from the factory by design in order to avoid it!

I can't think of a good reason for this, tbh.

blendo• 7 years ago

But the Audi e-Tron is incredibly massive: curb weight of about 5600 lbs/2500 kg.

The Model S is closer to 4600-4900 lbs. The Niro EV is about 3800 lbs.

codeulike13• 7 years ago

This is true. But if you compare it to the Model X which is about the same weight you'll still end up with the same conclusion - the battery/drive train of the e-Tron is not well engineered.

The base Model X probably has a 70/80 kWH battery - smaller, lighter and cheaper then the one in the e-Tron, and its supposed to be getting a 250 mile EPA rating.

jshowa3• 7 years ago

Funny thing is, I have a fighting chance of getting my car back within less than a week for repair if I take it to any of the 100's of dealerships available for non-Tesla vehicles.

Try doing that with a Tesla.

Tesla is struggling just as much as the other automotive companies. They just don't show it.

alkonaut7• 7 years ago

I'm wondering what types of range extension methods could be easily added to an EV. Scenario: I'm going to drive 900km/560mi and it's -10 outside (I do this multiple times per year). I want a cosy room temperature inside the cabin.

- How can I ensure I waste as little range as possible on heating, so that I don't risk having to make e.g. 2 stops instead of one?

- More critically, if I get stuck in traffic for several hours because of an accident, I need some way to ensure I don't freeze to death in my EV as I'm standing still and the battery runs out.

It seems these two things should be solvable with a single solution: a plug-in space heater to be used in emergencies and for maximizing cold weather range. The space heater could be e.g. a kerosene burner or similar. But for best effect it should of course "plug in" to the car vents.

Is this a thing? Or is heating the passenger compartment such a trivial use of energy anyway if the car is insulated, that it doesn't make a difference? In a concrete scenario: If I drive a model 3 and have 100km battery left, and I have 20km to my planned charging stop half way through my journey. Suddenly traffic stands still because of an accident and it's freezing outside. How long will the "100km" charge maintain the 30K temperature difference while still having 20km left?

Retric3• 7 years ago

Batteries heat up during discharge. So outside of the most extreme weather conditions more batteries are simply a better system.

alkonaut7• 7 years ago

Yes, but if I have more batteries I'll already factor that into my planning so I'll make fewer stops. If I have to always maintain X% battery when I'm driving in cold temps (to be able to survive N hours in case of a cold weather traffic jam) then it effectively just shortens the range. Adding X% battery to compensate this has to be very expensive compared to having a burner space heater and a gas/kerosene bottle for emergencies.

lordnacho• 7 years ago

Is this what's done? The Tesla fans air over the batteries into the cabin?

codeulike13• 7 years ago

My hunch is that heating is pretty insignificant compared to the huge power needed to move the car, like single digit percentage. But I like your question at the end and would be interested in someone running the numbers.

edit: Ok here we go - Model 3 users report using about 240 to 300 watt-hours per mile. So I think that means a 1KW heater for an hour is equivalent to about 3 or 4 miles of range.

hwillis2• 7 years ago

Note that the heater in the model S/3 is capable of ~6/4 kW. In most cases you won't be running the heater on full for an hour, but at -10 you might be. When you start talking about 12-24 miles of range per hour, that's how you get up to the worst case of ~20% range loss.

Still, that just means you want to limit your -10 degree trips to like 2.5 hours instead of 3 hours, and only if you don't have access to superchargers.

bluedino7• 7 years ago

A traffic jam is probably about the best place for your car to die in freezing weather. Just hop out and sit in the car next to you, until they run out of heat.

dqpb• 7 years ago

How is this problem specific to EV's?

alkonaut7• 7 years ago

Only because they have shorter range. I explained in another comment why the specific problem (Given the distance to be driven and the range) doesn't occur for my current ICE car.

Edit: and yes as was pointed out in another comment - heat is "free" while driving because of losses in the engine.

notawaytothink• 7 years ago

There is waste heat produced by the engine of a traditional vehicle, which is used for heating. The EV doesn't have this advantage.

razorunreal• 7 years ago

Internal combustion engines throw off heat whether you want them to or not, plus the total amount of energy stored in a gas tank is vastly greater than a battery, so wasting some of it as heat is less likely to strand you. EVs only get similar range by being much more efficient, and efficiency means less energy lost to heat.

Brakenshire5• 7 years ago

Heating is relatively significant, it can take 10-20% off the range in theory. EV’s can solve this problem in a variety of ways:

i) Preheating the cabin from mains electicity, either predictively or through user command.

ii) Using heat pumps to scavenge and move heat around different parts of the car. If you’re early in a road trip you would have enough power in the battery to heat the car for a day or more. If you’re later in the trip there will be a lot of heat in the batteries and motors which can be shifted into the cabin. Similarly heat pumps can be used in reverse to scavenge heat from the cabin and frame to keep the batteries warm if the car is left outside for a long time without being plugged in. Batteries don’t like dropping beneath a certain temperature range.

iii) Simply increasing heat insulation. It’s not difficult to insulate better, it’s just it hasn’t been needed, because there’s so much wasted heat energy in internal combustion vehicles. A human is a 100W space heater, I’d imagine you could quite easily design a cabin for a small car to hold temperature even in the absence of any other heat source.

ricardobeat• 7 years ago

you could quite easily design a cabin for a small car to hold temperature even in the absence of any other heat source

In my experience most cars do hold temperature for at least 20-30m with vents closed. You still need air exchange though for longer periods, so losing heat is unavoidable.

ip262• 7 years ago

Seat warmers are a good way to warm up with less loss.

hopler4• 7 years ago

That's why even the no-frills Nissan Leaf S has multiple seat warmers and steering wheel warmer. It's as much a range extender as a luxury feature.

gkfasdfasdf2• 7 years ago

Simple, get an RTG a la The Martian...

savrajsingh• 7 years ago

If you’re willing to drive at 25mph your range is at least 700 miles :)

NoblePublius2• 7 years ago

Former Model S, now Model 3 owner here. I can confirm this change won’t mean much for Model S or X sales as the interiors of the S and X remain stuck in 2011.

ninju• 7 years ago

For those that skipped the bottom paragraphs

so as a thank you, all existing Model S and Model X owners who wish to purchase a new Model S or Model X Performance car will get the Ludicrous Mode upgrade, a $20,000 value, at no additional charge.

Are they having trouble trying to get repeat business?

azhenley4• 7 years ago

Their cars are so good that there is no need to replace them!

Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

Related Stories