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

511–520 of 521 posts

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

#511

Post by nottorp »

codeulike wrote: post #320
nottorp wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

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.

As I said, I have no idea what's going on in the US, but I know 2 facts:

- service providers are allowed to lie on how much a service contract will actually cost, adding/changing extra fees that were never mentioned

- Boeing of the MAX fame was allowed to self certify

One could extrapolate from there...

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

#512

Post by archi42 »

war1025 wrote: post #499
archi42 wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And various belts replaced, fluids changed, ignition plugs swapped, starters break, climate compressor (or its clutch) sometimes break... Also turbos, [automatic] transmissions and [manual] clutches are prone to cause trouble. Electric systems might misbehave due to wear and tear on cables. And with 200k+ miles on a modern small car, I would really worry for the engine (here in the EU cars tend to have less cc). Not…

Our 2006 Honda Civic (1.8L engine, which at least in the US counts as a very small engine) just rolled over 200k miles a month or two ago. We've had the car for 7 years and probably 80k of those miles. We had to get the brakes and tires replaced very early on, and have just done a second round of replacing both within the past 6 months. We needed a new muffler and starter last summer. A week ago, we replaced the fron…

The Civic is indeed renown for needing few repairs. The stuff I listed still has decent odds of breaking for most cars - while many/most of these parts are not present for BEVs.

The 100k claim is of course utter BS for a modern car (or US built quality is as inferior as some people claim - which I doubt), but it comes at a cost.

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

#513

Post by bluGill »

sjwright wrote: post #505
bluGill wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually long oil changes can be better for an engine. Oils break in: the molecules break down over time so they compensate by making the chains longer. As the molecules break down they get closer to the idea size, then the break again and get too short to protect. Tests on the oils used in my car show that you typically get least engine wear between 8k and 9k miles, with 12k being about the same as fresh oil, but 13…

That's genuinely fascinating and I'd like to learn more about it. Can you recommend some reading material for me? (Or better still an Engineering Explained-style YouTube video if someone has covered the topic well in that form.)

The above was gained from reading forums. My personal judgement is the people saying the above know more about oil than me (they at least understand enough chemistry that my college chemistry doesn't see anything wrong, but I went into computer science so I didn't take more than the basic chemistry for engineers so it is possible that they are wrong on details.

One other point they brought up: every time you open the system to add or check oil dust gets in. Modern engines are generally sealed so this dust until it is filtered out (assuming it is) is doing wear as well. Long oil changes with no checking of the oil level are thus a good thing as well - so long as your oil level never gets low - low oil is far worse than any gain from not checking oil levels.

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

#514

Post by NotSammyHagar »

rootusrootus wrote: post #419
NotSammyHagar wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

battery efficiency, drivetrain efficiency, making cars cheaper, updating software live in the field reliably. 0 to 60 speed, battery lifetime without degredation, almost worldwide charging network, supercharging without degredation, billions of miles to train your self-driving. advanced ui. summon mode. so basically there's no value there. don't forget about ~30% more efficient now than the vaunted e-tron and even mo…

I agree that Tesla's plan to put superchargers everywhere is good business, it will lock a number of customers into their ecosystem who are okay with that. Apple would be proud :). But there are quite a lot of Level 2 chargers out in the wild that everyone else can use, and that's where I pin my homes and dreams -- the last thing I want is every manufacturer building their own competing infrastructure ecosystem. Imag…

The tesla batteries don't degrade very much, mine has less than 5 miles after 45k miles, but its hard to say exactly what max charge is, it varies a bit. There are even people with multi-100k miles driven so there's lots of info out there. Compare tesla to the bad experiences with leafs. I want porsche to succeed! We need electric cars to succeed.

There are a few high power chargers around. But there's no porsche ev yet. The e-tron came out with a thud, inadequate range. If they are really using the same technology base as the e-tron they are going to disappoint people, especially if people drive aggressively they won't get even 200 miles.

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

#515

Post by baroffoos »

braythwayt wrote: post #282
baroffoos wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same reason I like bikes. I can pull the whole thing apart in a day and understand what every bit does. As soon as you start including electronics you end up with black boxes that no human could ever understand entirely.

Even with bicycles, those days are almost over. Wireless electronic shifting is trickling down from the top-of-the-line bikes. The charm of a bicycle being mechanically simple is going away...

I'm not sure if wireless shifting will ever become standard. I have an ebike with di2 and I haven't noticed any reason I would want it over regular shifting. You also have the problem that if the battery goes flat you cant shift gears.

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

#516

Post by Brakenshire »

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #486
Brakenshire wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Okay, well another way to think of it is that tesla has proven their choices for amount of usable battery to offer succeeds with half a million + cars on the road and billions of miles driven. Their battery warranty is excellent and time proven. My S is 4 years old and approaching 50k miles and no appreciable degredation. If an S and an etron has about 85kwh there's something to compare there. Comparing to these othe…

Yes, that’s a fair way of looking at it. Will be interesting to see what happens with the MEB cars, you’d think there would be a lot of effort there to work on a really solid thermal management system, and much easier to extrapolate data from one model to another.

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

#517

Post by braythwayt »

baroffoos wrote: post #515
braythwayt wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even with bicycles, those days are almost over. Wireless electronic shifting is trickling down from the top-of-the-line bikes. The charm of a bicycle being mechanically simple is going away...

I'm not sure if wireless shifting will ever become standard. I have an ebike with di2 and I haven't noticed any reason I would want it over regular shifting. You also have the problem that if the battery goes flat you cant shift gears.

One of the big reasons for electronic shifting counter-intuitively applies to “daily riders” more than to race machines, even though at current prices, electronic shifting is rare on affordable bikes.

That reason is that once you have a solenoid, sensors, and a CPU in the mechanism, you have a self-adjusting shifter. The more gears on a derailleur-type system, the tighter the spacing, and the sooner a mechanical shifter needs adjustments or replacement of the cable.

Electronic systems can adjust themselves as needed, offering a massive potential for affordable bicycles to “just work” for people who don’t have the inclination to fiddle with their own adjustments.

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

#518

Post by codeulike »

nottorp wrote: post #511
codeulike wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

As I said, I have no idea what's going on in the US, but I know 2 facts: - service providers are allowed to lie on how much a service contract will actually cost, adding/changing extra fees that were never mentioned - Boeing of the MAX fame was allowed to self certify One could extrapolate from there...

EV range is very easy for anyone to check

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

#519

Post by logifail »

slg wrote: post #459
logifail wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EVs don't have the pistons, valves, belts, fans, compressors, alternators, spark plugs, etc that gasoline engines have. There's probably order of magnitude fewer parts to break. If you buy a new ICE powered vehicle, how many of any of the parts you mention would one expect to replace in - for instance - the first three years of the vehicles' life? Our experience is that the first few years of a ICE vehicle's life i…

The average car on the road is closing in on 12 years old [1] so you can't just look at the first 3 years. The first few years of an ICE vehicle might be very similar to an EV, but that changes drastically as a car ages. [1] - https://www.bts.gov/content/average-age-automobiles-and-truc...

> The first few years of an ICE vehicle might be very similar to an EV, but that changes drastically as a car ages

If the average age of all cars on the road is 12 years, where's the data for 12 year old EVs?

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

#520

Post by martin_a »

georgerobinson wrote: post #298
martin_a wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

It's the same organization, Jaguar Land Rover / JLR.

Something new to learn every day. :-)
Post reply on HN