Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 521 posts

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

#101

Post by jpgvm »

viburnum wrote: post #61

Tesla’s cars are not especially energy efficient: https://cleantechnica.com/2018/06/30/what-are-the-most-effic...

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.

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

#102

Post by colordrops »

magicbuzz wrote: post #55

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.

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

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

#104

Post by baybal2 »

AFascistWorld wrote: post #83
TD-Linux wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Will it deteriorate?

With adequate cooling, permanent magnet motors can last a decade or more, even in the most demanding applications

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

#105

Post by limaoscarjuliet »

jedberg wrote: post #100
azhenley wrote: post #3

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

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

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

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

#106

Post by olivermarks »

hi5eyes wrote: post #88
wmf wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's an intentional choice to optimize sales of new cars. Every part made goes into a new Tesla and there are no replacement parts available.

revolutionizing the supply chain and auto industry

Walled garden revolution. Going to the breakers/wrecking yard for parts is akin to open source software. You are locking yourself into proprietary code, parts and pricing in this Tesla 'revolution'. A wing mirror costs $550 for example. Only authorized Tesla maintenance is permitted etc etc...

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

#107

Post by hellllllllooo »

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?

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

#108

Post by baybal2 »

pitaj wrote: post #36
TD-Linux wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

Induction motors are worse at regeneration at low speeds, but as poster below said, their advantage is that they can be powered down and not impede coasting.

I think they hope to be able to match power requirements of highway cruising using a PM motor, so they don't take losses spinning AC motor way below its power rating.

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

#109

Post by selectodude »

mikeash wrote: post #87
7e wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How much does that fill up cost? That, and the relative scarcity of filling stations, seem to make hydrogen vehicles supremely unattractive.

It's like $8 per gallon of gasoline distance equivalent last I checked.

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

#110

Post by code_duck »

wmf wrote: post #91
7e wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the common definition of hybrid. Here, electricity directly powers an electric motor and there are no emissions. Is a Tesla a hybrid because some of its electricity comes from regenerative breaking? How about if some comes from from ions in an electrolyte solution?

That sounds like a series hybrid; when people say electric they mean battery electric. The point is moot since hydrogen is pointless.

Perhaps for consumer automobiles. There’s a lot of research into hydrogen fuel cells for military and space.
Post reply on HN