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

351–360 of 521 posts

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

#351

Post by fooqux »

alkonaut wrote: post #336
Retric wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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…

There are other ways to survive in the case of an emergency. Blankets, food, candles and whatnot should be in your emergency kit regardless of what you're driving.

Besides, how is this different than a gasoline-powered vehicle? In your situation, you'd still be reducing your range by X% in order to survive N hours in case something happens- your gas tank is not infinite, after all. I suppose you could make the case that you currently have more refueling options than recharging options, but I don't think it will always be that way, and it's not currently that was in some locations, such as Norway.

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

#352

Post by janlaureys »

SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #281
sjwright wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 consisten…

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…

How does the fuel end up on your hands, because I've never had that happen in 10 years of driving and refueling ?

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

#353

Post by Brakenshire »

codeulike wrote: post #244

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,…

> 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.

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

#354

Post by bluedino »

dboreham wrote: post #316
bluedino wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nowadays cars use an engine life monitor and report to the owner that they need service every 8-10,000 depending on use

Recently manufactured cars we own have those oil life monitors but some research shows they simply run down a milage count. The dealership even asks me what mileage I would like it set to. Sales pitch suggests that the vehicle is monitoring actual oil characteristics but in fact it is not.

What they do is calculate an oil lifetime based on running conditions of the engine. How long it's been on, what temperatures its running at, what RPM....

Point is that nobody should be changing their oil ever 3-5k.

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

#355

Post by dsfyu404ed »

olivermarks wrote: post #52
walrus01 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

This sort of complexity is why I like pre smog era cars

In states that don't have their head up a certain bodily orifice "pre-smog" is a rolling window. Requiring people to maintain emissions systems in their stock configuration on cars pushing 50 is insane. If you really are hell bent on making people smog stuff that's old and uncommon to the point of being a rounding error to the big picture then just stick a sniffer in the tail pipe and pass it as long as it meets or exceeds the standards it was built for.

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

#356

Post by dwighttk »

gutnor wrote: post #269
dforrestwilson wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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 y…

>but they are bound by their claim that every car is fully autonomous ready.

are they? Didn't they already claim that for cars with the previous generation of computer?

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

#357

Post by Retric »

alkonaut wrote: post #336
Retric wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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…

Range is range, your space heater idea is just a less useful plug in hybrid. Spending less money on batteries to add another system that you use a few times a year results in a generally less useful car.

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

#358

Post by bluedino »

alkonaut wrote: post #323

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…

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.

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

#359

Post by dqpb »

alkonaut wrote: post #323

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…

How is this problem specific to EV's?

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

#360

Post by bluedino »

coolgoose wrote: post #277
SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Less wear on brakes due to regenerative braking. No clutch, which is another wear item. No regular fluid / plug changes like ICE engines (and far fewer moving parts to go wrong generally). Essentially all you're left with are wipers and tyres, which don't really require a specialist / main dealer.

Well, depends on where you live. A lot o wear on my break calipers are from really shitty and sandy places :)

Depends on your vehicle as well. When I had a Jeep Wrangler the rear pads AND rotors needed changed about every 3 years.
Post reply on HN