Is the Mach-E really 7 years behind Tesla?

[Jolteon]

Elon's point in the presentation was pretty much exactly the opposite - that with cylindrical cells, the cells are actually load bearing. The cells will be part of the structure, without reinforcements in the pack.

That's what a cylinder can possibly do (no guarantee it will actually work) and a pouch cell just can't.

Sponsored

 

[Jolteon]

How do you replace the battery? If it *is* the frame, can you even replace it without basically taking the whole car apart?

I saw a similar thing about Tesla trying to make the entire body out of a single stamped aluminum piece. Cuts cost to build, but without separate (replaceable) body panels, a crash effectively totals the car.

Oh, that's a very un-Tesla thing to worry about. Service is... not a priority.

I'm sure Elon's answer is that the car will be programmed to just not crash

But perhaps the battery comes apart and the batteries can drop out from the bottom while supported on a hoist so as to not buckle the top "cover" of the battery that is also the floor?

Nobody's been able to make this concept work yet, so we won't know until someone (Tesla or other) do.. if they do.

 

[Nak]

How do you replace the battery. If it *is* the frame, can you even replace it without basically taking the whole car apart?

That is an excellent question. My guess is no. The "million mile battery" wasn't discussed at battery day, which was a major disappointment. My guess is that will have to be part of the equation. If the battery has a million mile warranty, not a problem. If not...

I saw a similar thing about Tesla trying to make the entire body out of a single stamped aluminum piece. Cuts cost to build, but without separate (replaceable) body panels, a crash effectively totals the car.

Actually it's a cast part, not stamped. Right now the entire rear structure of the Y is a single piece as opposed to hundreds of pieces. Pro's: simplified manufacturer, tight--nothing is going to loosen up over time, running changes to the design of the car vastly simplified.

I think you're right that a crash will total the car. I also think that overall that's a good thing. I know, hear me out though. I don't care if the car can't be rebuilt; insurance is going to buy me a new one. What you eliminate is all the piece of crap cars with salvage titles being "rebuilt" and sold to a public that increasingly has absolutely no clue about cars. The vast majority of those cars should have been scrapped. So I see the impossibility of selling a "salvage" car as a good thing. But wait, insurance costs will go up! Yes and no. If you have a good insurance company--I use USAA--your total insurance cost can go down. I sold a 2017 Nissan Juke and bought my Y. The Juke was valued at $17K. The Y was $69K. The Y costs more to repair than the Juke, by a lot. That part of the cost of my insurance went up significantly. BUT, my total insurance bill dropped by about $150/year. That shocked the hell out of me and I queried the USAA representative. (They're not agents.) She explained to me that while the cost to repair the Y was high, the cost to repair the people in it was low. That's an equation I can get behind.

 

[ab13]

How do you replace the battery? If it *is* the frame, can you even replace it without basically taking the whole car apart?

I saw a similar thing about Tesla trying to make the entire body out of a single stamped aluminum piece. Cuts cost to build, but without separate (replaceable) body panels, a crash effectively totals the car.

You're not replacing it, they are making them like consumer products, low selling price and not repairable. Part of the reason why the design layouts are different. On a Mach E or most other BEV, the inverter appears to be easily accessible if it needs to be replaced.

 

[Nak]

I apologize, I didn't mean anything as an insult. I seriously meant that most people don't get this. The stock dropped because a lot of investors--who are quite smart--didn't get this.

Because while the idea seems simple, it's really, really hard to do. Tesla isn't done yet, they still can't do it and they've put years of effort into it. I believe they'll get there, but it's not a "done deal". They've made functional batteries, but they have to manufacture them. There a huge gulf between a "one off" and mass production. Also, as mentioned above, it may be difficult or not worthwhile to replace the battery pack. If so, that will require a battery like the "Million Mile Battery" that I don't recall being mentioned at the presentation.

As far as the honeycomb, the filler will be some kind of epoxy or something like that. The case of the cell will be the honeycomb. Elon was pretty clear about that. It makes sense, the metal cylinder is perfect for that role. Such a design would probably rival the stiffest automobile frame made, possibly even be the stiffest period. I can't say that with any certainty because I'm not familiar with every car out there. Also, I would guess dedicated race cars would have an extraordinarily stiff frame.

 

[Jolteon]

Nobody else is doing it because they *can't* do it with pouch cells. Pouch cells make sense for other reasons, but not for structural batteries.

Tesla finally has a stiff enough cell - the 4680 cell now is stiff enough to make it happen.

Why didn't they use the 4680 cell before? Because that amount of energy in a tab-style cylindrical cell would have thermal limits, so they also needed their "tabless" innovation that they highlighted in order to break that barrier down.

Everyone's thought of it, only Tesla has so far announced plans to actually do it. We'll see if they do.

 

[JCHLi]

Nobody else is doing it because they *can't* do it with pouch cells. Pouch cells make sense for other reasons, but not for structural batteries.

Tesla finally has a stiff enough cell - the 4680 cell now is stiff enough to make it happen.

Why didn't they use the 4680 cell before? Because that amount of energy in a tab-style cylindrical cell would have thermal limits, so they also needed their "tabless" innovation that they highlighted in order to break that barrier down.

Everyone's thought of it, only Tesla has so far announced plans to actually do it. We'll see if they do.

It's a very intriguing thought to use the cells as structure and I hope it works well, or at least leads to overall improvements in the engineering used.

However, this scares me from a safety standpoint. It almost seems similar to sitting atop a gas tank and relying on it for structure and also safety in the event of a crash.

In my layman's view, they would be relying on the structure of the cells themselves to do two different and non parallel tasks. One task would be to withhold internal loads or hoop stresses which are well managed via their geometry. Then they also would relay on the cells to handle external loads which would be much more varied (compression, shear, etc).

Anyway, it would be interesting to see the engineering behind this and see if the design can be implemented efficiently and safely.

 

[dbsb3233]

I'm hoping many of the items talked about here to squeeze a few more inches and a few less pounds because high speed range is still less-than-ideal all become moot at some point. In other words, that battery power and energy density get so good (like ICE) that they don't have to compromise the frame and the build and the shape and the looks to get the vehicle to go 350 miles at 70 MPH. In vehicles shaped like Explorers and Suburbans that so many people want.

 

[MerryBrown]

That is an excellent question. My guess is no. The "million mile battery" wasn't discussed at battery day, which was a major disappointment. My guess is that will have to be part of the equation. If the battery has a million mile warranty, not a problem. If not...



Actually it's a cast part, not stamped. Right now the entire rear structure of the Y is a single piece as opposed to hundreds of pieces. Pro's: simplified manufacturer, tight--nothing is going to loosen up over time, running changes to the design of the car vastly simplified.

I think you're right that a crash will total the car. I also think that overall that's a good thing. I know, hear me out though. I don't care if the car can't be rebuilt; insurance is going to buy me a new one. What you eliminate is all the piece of crap cars with salvage titles being "rebuilt" and sold to a public that increasingly has absolutely no clue about cars. The vast majority of those cars should have been scrapped. So I see the impossibility of selling a "salvage" car as a good thing. But wait, insurance costs will go up! Yes and no. If you have a good insurance company--I use USAA--your total insurance cost can go down. I sold a 2017 Nissan Juke and bought my Y. The Juke was valued at $17K. The Y was $69K. The Y costs more to repair than the Juke, by a lot. That part of the cost of my insurance went up significantly. BUT, my total insurance bill dropped by about $150/year. That shocked the hell out of me and I queried the USAA representative. (They're not agents.) She explained to me that while the cost to repair the Y was high, the cost to repair the people in it was low. That's an equation I can get behind.

It Doesn't matter how good your insurance company is if they have to replace a vehicle every time a car is in an accident. That car will be more expensive to insure than one that does not have to be replaced.

 

[efisher]

Of course, your Mach E is a downgrade since you don't have it yet! Once you actually have one then your opinion on this might matter.

 

[efisher]

With the understanding that today was Battery Day and not Car Day, I totally get that the battery tech announcements that Tesla made are actually a really big deal. If they can improve gravametric energy density, reduce heat, and improve longevity all for 56% lower costs than today, that's HUGE. However, we shouldn't confuse battery improvements with vehicle efficiency gains. The 2021 Tesla Model S Plaid is now planned to have 520 mile range but it may take 120 kWh or more in energy to do it.

Insofar as a 450 mi ranged MME, I think we would all love to see that but Ford does not have the efficiency yet to do that with the available 99kWh of energy. Based on Lucid's presentation, there is a lot of low hanging fruit with improvements to motor design and high voltage componentry. If Ford is able to capture some of that efficiency magic then I think some amazing range numbers are possible.

But was not clear to me was if this was something unique to Tesla or was it an innovation by Panasonic. Tesla does not make their own batteries. If this is a Panasonic innovation than it will be available to all EV manufacturers.

 

[efisher]

To me the only thing Tesla offers over the Mach E is hype.

Sponsored