Tesla is currently bringing many important projects to fruition. Cypertruck, Semi, Model Y, Plaid Roadster S and X, Maxwell Cells, GF2, GF3, GF4, SolarRoof, MegaPack, 🇨🇳 Model 3, AutoPilot.
The following is a collection of my thoughts before the flood gates are opened. Long 🧵
The following is a collection of my thoughts before the flood gates are opened. Long 🧵
🔋: I have long been a proponent that Tesla will likely never incorporate the 2170 Cell into Performance Model S, X and Roadster. Plaid prototype chassis running the Nurburgring in test mules demonstrates exactly the reasoning.
2)
2)
🔋: Maxwell Technologies was a gift, many missed the reasonings completely. Why did Tesla buy up Maxwell uncontested? What was hiding in plan sight? What has held back cell development?
We need to take a look at current cell manufacturing.
3)
We need to take a look at current cell manufacturing.
3)
🔋: Why is the 2170 cell “considered” modern to the 18650 cell? It comes down to manufacturing reliability. It’s all about advancements in the reliability of tightly rolling jelly rolls into a finished cell without damaging the fragile Electrolyte in layer.
4)
4)
🔋: It might not sound like a big deal. But trying to tightly wind this electrolyte around a small radius, is susceptible to damage. The wider the roll, mathematically the higher probability of a defect. Completely wasting a whole cell.
5)
5)
🔋: The 18650 cell was 7.7% narrower then the 2170 cell. But also the 2170 being larger in diameter, meant that the longer roll is turned around an ever increasing radius. So the jelly roll is wider, but every successful cell has more capacity.
6)
6)
🔋: So since the both cell starts out being turned at the same tight radius initially, the completed 2170 has more capacity per cell. Less 2170’s (4.4k vs 5.9k) are required to build the same ~75KWh pack. Reducing welds in a very delicate second procedure of pack assembly.
7)
7)
🔋: Maxwells dry electrode process is a major step change in manufacturing reliability. The electrode is mixed with a polymer which binds the sensitive electrolyte. Vastly reducing manufacturing defects. And opening new cell formats to Tesla.
8)
8)
🔋: Took decades to perfect manufacturing deficiencies that restricted making a 5mm wider jelly roll. And Tesla/Panasonic ended up having cell production ramping pains that lead to manufacturing waste initially. Other manufacturers have had to settle on inferior pounce cells.
9)
9)
🔋: 2170 was superior to the 18650 cell in mass production cost efficiencies. 1400 Less cells, casings, welds, & waste, to produce the same capacity pack. With two major weaknesses: Higher susceptible rate of failure during manufacturing, & thermodynamically inferior mass.
10)
10)
🔋 : Li-ion cells have a very broad temperature range for discharging. But like many things there is an optimum point on that curve. Which drastically improves discharge and recharge characteristics. The closer you can maintain the temperature, the better the performance.
11)
11)
🔋: Unfortunately there is a broad range below the optimum point, and a very critically narrow range between the upper side and destructive degradation. The narrower you can control this optimum range, the higher currents you can achieve long term.
12)
12)
🔋: Between the BMS (Battery management system) algorithms, and thermodynamic conditioning systems, you can maintain the optimum band. The thinner the cell, the more rapid heat extraction occurs at the cells core, allowing higher current loads for longer periods.
13)
13)
🔋: So the 2170, which costs considerably less to mass produce the same capacity pack, is less optimum at long duration high current loads. And doesn’t match the peak energy output of the 18650 as seen in Model S which is a considerably larger and heavier car.
14)
14)
🔋: Maxwell allows Tesla to produce taller and narrower cells, through wider jelly rolls. Increasing Cell density, while also increasing cell surface area and decreasing cell thickness. This rapidly increases thermodynamic cooling. Plaid and Ludicrous depend on cooling.
15)
15)
🔋: While Tesla can produce new cylindrical cell formats optimized for performance, density, cost, and application; other manufacturers are settling on using prismatic or pouch cells.
Different applications require different characteristics.
16)
Different applications require different characteristics.
16)
🔋: Model 3 and Y are mass production cost sensitive vehicles.
S/X and Roadster are meant to play an important roll in performance. Requiring a taller narrower cell. (which we likely saw during the roadster unveiling, and on the Nurburgring.
17)
S/X and Roadster are meant to play an important roll in performance. Requiring a taller narrower cell. (which we likely saw during the roadster unveiling, and on the Nurburgring.
17)
🔋: Semi and Storage are such large packs, both of which require high capacity, not crazy performance as neither one actually works that hard. Perfect application for 2170 because of the cost. Moving 80,000 lbs actually isn’t that hard for Electric motor, range is.
18)
18)
🔋 : CyberTruck on the other hand is an interesting consideration. It will need to meet a cost point, and have a large pack, at volume. If this pack is twice as large as Model 3, it would also be roughly twice the current output. 10k 2170 cells vs 12k 18650.
19)
19)
🔋: Maxwell also could be the required step for the next generation of Tesla products. The Compact class and Aviation would likely go with an even thicker cell. This gets the most electrolyte density per pack. Also removing heavy metals like cobalt goes along way.
20)
20)
🚚 : CyberTruck, I know, I know, everyone is already tired of CyperTruck renders. They too make me want to 🤮. But seriously if a single render actually addressed what makes a consumer or customer purchase a pickup, then they wouldn’t look so awful. So no renders I promise.
1)
1)
🚚 : First off, the Elephant in the room. There are two very distinct pickup truck markets. North America and the rest of the Global market. The Ford F-Series out sells everything. It’s basically only sold in North America. In the 🇺🇸 it out sells all but 6 brands on its own.
2)
2)
🚚: The Toyota Hilux is the largest contender outside of North America. The Toyota Tacoma is offered in NA, loosely based on the Hilux.
(I will use the Tacoma as a comparison, because I’m familiar with the subject. But please understand they are comparable but not the same)
3)
(I will use the Tacoma as a comparison, because I’m familiar with the subject. But please understand they are comparable but not the same)
3)
🚚: Ford’s consumer North American truck lineup is diverse in capabilities. The Ranger is the closest to a global model. F-150 is the most popular truck. F-250, f-350 are Heavyduty in construction and capabilities. Ram’s truck offerings are all the same size, varying strength
4)
4)
🚚: In North America the truck beds were originally sized to accommodate one Cord of lumber (4ft x 8ft x 4ft)
So a full size pickup box is 4ft wide between the wheel wells. Global offerings also accommodate 4ft wide loads above between the frame rails.
5)
So a full size pickup box is 4ft wide between the wheel wells. Global offerings also accommodate 4ft wide loads above between the frame rails.
5)
🚚: When it comes the box lenght, three are common in NA; 5.5ft, 6.5ft and a “full size” 8ft. In the consumer market, 8ft is becoming less and less common, but commercially very common. What’s interesting is that globally, the same dimensions are being offered.
6)
6)
🚚: So if the same length boxes are being offered globally, how close in size is the North Americans best selling pickup to a global contender? This may surprise you.
Only a few inches/cm set these apart. Dimensions show that Tesla could address both markets.
7)
Only a few inches/cm set these apart. Dimensions show that Tesla could address both markets.
7)
🚚: What about cab offerings? These are also the same in both markets.
Note that usually the platform is roughly the same size, the larger the cab, the shorter the box. So easily for Tesla and their Skate design. No changes to the skate are required.
8)
Note that usually the platform is roughly the same size, the larger the cab, the shorter the box. So easily for Tesla and their Skate design. No changes to the skate are required.
8)
🚚: Cabin Space is an area, I feel Tesla dominates in. If Tesla needs to make a North American truck fit into global markets, then cabin layout and interior is the key. Tesla has already demonstrated this with the Model 3, and the falcon wing doors on the X in tight spots.
9)
9)
🚚 : As long as the box is 4 foot wide and flat. Tesla shouldn’t have a problem in either market. Ram even offers a box with storage compartments that take up the wheel well space. Leaving a 4 foot wide flat floor.
10)
10)
🚚: Payload and Towing sets North American trucks apart from global offerings. How many people outside North America plan to tow 30,000lbs+ (13.6 Metric Tons) ? Or place 8000 lbs in the box.
11)
11)
🚚: We know that pulling weight isn’t the issue for Electric vehicles. With the immense torque, electric motors can grab anything and tug away. Hill climbs are off set by regeneration on decent. Where range is effected is the aerodynamic loads from pulling a large trailer.
12)
12)
🚚: in order to pull the immense loads and the increased payloads. Heavy duty pickups are built considerably tougher. They have to absorb and control the weight in motion though pot holes, rough roads and bring them to a stop.
13)
13)
🚚: The pickup truck is a global work horse. Trades, municipalities, utilities and businesses adapt the platform to meet their needs. Many purchase “chassis cabs” and modify to suit. Tesla’s skate is very adaptable to this market.
14)
14)
🚚: So what do I think Tesla will offer?
I think we will see initially 2 cab offerings and 2 box lengths, on the same overall lenght platform. Regular cab + full size box. And a Quad cab with a 5-6ft box. That limits initial production run options.
15)
I think we will see initially 2 cab offerings and 2 box lengths, on the same overall lenght platform. Regular cab + full size box. And a Quad cab with a 5-6ft box. That limits initial production run options.
15)
🚚: I think we will see two Powertrain options. One for all global markets, built for light duty, dual motor, capable of pulling ~7000lbs (3000kgs), and around 250 miles with a large enclosed trailer, air suspension. (Hilux, f-150 markets)
16)
16)
🚚: A second Powertrain for Heavy duty markets, triple motor, capable of pulling 30,000lbs (13.6 metric tons) 250+ miles in an enclosed trailer. With a rugged air suspension and frame. (F-250, F-350, and sprinter chassis markets.
Both these frames would have same footprint.
17)
Both these frames would have same footprint.
17)
🚚: You May have noticed I suggested triple motor in the Heavy Duty. In the Tesla Semi (and possibly Plaid powertrains) Tesla has placed two different gear ratio drive units, to the same differential. Both are capable of applying torque, but utilized for different RPMs
18)
18)
🚚: I believe we will see Tesla presenting a dual platform on Nov 21st. Taking cues from he very popular MB Sprinter, which is found in almost every market. You can see some of Elon’s recent comments. I think we will see a commercial/passanger van being presented as well.
19)
19)
🚚: After initial rollout of Luxery consumer pickups. I would expect as the production costs drop, Tesla would offer commercial bare bones type offerings. Luxury trucks are a huge market in NA. They pull in $70-90k usd.
20)
20)
