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

181–190 of 521 posts

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

#181

Post by natch »

olliej wrote: post #128
mikeash wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

You don’t have to floor the pedal. The tradeoff is decided by the driver. Accelerate less aggressively, get better range.

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

#182

Post by ummonk »

wmf wrote: post #24
ummonk wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

Yes, but that means their supply chain management is completely unproven at this point. Knowing which parts belong in a specific vin # is the easy bit. Making sure the right parts get out there so that each model has repair parts available is the hard bit.

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

#183

Post by olivermarks »

jdavis703 wrote: post #115
olivermarks wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

In other words, let’s kill off people [0] from air pollution so car maintenance can be simpler. 0: http://www.prevenzione.ulss20.verona.it/docs/Sisp/Inquinamen...

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2019/04/19/earth-day-2...

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

#184

Post by occamschainsaw »

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

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

#185

Post by davidgould »

mrb wrote: post #151

" 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…

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.

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

#186

Post by toomuchtodo »

MrStonedOne wrote: post #170
toomuchtodo wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. This is a choice you make as a Tesla customer (disclaimer: I have made this choice). I understand Tesla's position (brand protection, workload reduction), but also support Right To Repair; I don't have a solution I can offer in this instance. My hope is that Right to Repair legislation and Tesla's profitability intersect at some point in the future, where allowing aftermarket work is more palatable to Tesla…

>I understand Tesla's position (brand protection, workload reduction), but also support Right To Repair; I don't have a solution I can offer in this instance. The solution is to not buy a tesla. By buying one you are supporting the move away from right to repair.

The rapid electrification of transportation is more important to me than Right to Repair. Life requires compromise. We can revisit when warming trajectory has been bent downward from 4C.

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

#187

Post by josh2600 »

occamschainsaw wrote: post #184

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

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?

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

#188

Post by sandos »

notatoad wrote: post #53
ddoolin wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the 2016 refresh not count?

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

WV seems to update their cars basically every year. Also mixing and matching single parts, like updating the headlights year X, then year X+1 a total refresh with newer headlights that look almost like the smaller refresh from the year before!

I am impressed that they can do stuff like that, but they are also kinda big....

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

#189

Post by jakobegger »

jac_no_k wrote: post #15

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…

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.

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

#190

Post by dannyw »

m3kw9 wrote: post #132
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.

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

Depreciation matters.
Post reply on HN