Search results

Pack size and motor/inverter tech is still going to matter. No front wheel drive commuter EV is going to beat a dual or tri motor performance EV.

This is one of the few companies that has real credibility. I watched their presentation which included Dr. Stanley Whittingham and Venkat Vishwanathan plus JB Straubel and was impressed. I bought into the stock before the merger with Kensington and sold most of it since I think it's over...

Another meaningless announcement. "500 miles" in Korea is not EPA so that needs to be de-rated, probably closer to 400 miles, and the wording "500 miles with 2 charges" is purposely misleading to make it seem as if it has 500 miles of range when it's really closer to 200 miles on a charge...

That depends on your specific configuration and location. They may have your desired combination on hand or nearby.

I assume you know the Model 3 comes in an AWD version as well as RWD. Though most reports say that with the weight distribution and traction control the RWD does quite well in all but extreme situations.

They were profitable the previous 2 quarters and they should be profitable after this quarter. 90% of what you read in the press is either completely wrong or skewed to be negative. I've been hearing "Tesla will be bankrupt" for over 12 years now and they are currently in better shape than...

A used Tesla Model S has large carrying capacity, long range, and access to the Supercharger network.

Why would anyone do that when Tesla already makes full sized vehicles with 100kwh packs?

Nothing is a show stopper, not even cost. You could make an overly priced, low ground clearance, excessively heavy, 100kWh, RAV4 vehicle right now. Dropping cost only removes one of the problems. Model X has an 8 inch ground clearance, a double layer pack as you propose would cut that about...

That still doesn't address the weight issue, and I for one do take my RAV off road. Not to mention one reason batteries become cheaper is because increased energy density means less actual material is needed per kWh, so it's unlikely to see significant price drops without increased energy density.

Energy density still needs to be improved. 100kWh pack would not fit in a RAV4 and would weigh too much. Model 3 has a longer wheelbase than a RAV4 and can only fit a 75-80kWh pack.

From what I can see it's nothing that special. Their non production cells are claimed to have 300wh/kg which is just slightly above Tesla's current production NCA cells. Fast charging is questionable.

More incorrect information. NMC has higher cycle life than NCA, hence why Tesla uses it in their daily cycling grid storage products instead of NCA. Much of the other data you listed is also inaccurate, I just don't have the time to pick it all apart I'd suggest you toss away any old sources...

Battery University isn't always an up to date resource, but even they show NCA as lower cost than LiFePO4, and though their graph shows LiTiO as least expensive, further down in their summary table they say the following:

NCA is more than twice the density of LiFePO4 so on a per kWh basis it is in fact cheaper. It is a prime example of why cycle life does not improve costs, as is LTO, which is the most expensive lithium based chemistry yet has the longest cycle life, the exact opposite of your claims. As I keep...

Cost is directly tied to specific energy. The more kWh you get from the same amount of material the lower the cost. Longevity has no impact on cost at this point.

Except no one is really doing that. Tesla didn't make a 100kWh pack to provide extra range at the end of the vehicle life, they did it because people want more range now. Tesla packs are showing very good capacity retention. Tesla reserves maybe 10% of capacity total, more of at the low end...

So it sounds as if you agree with me that leasing the entire vehicle would make the most sense for the type of consumer you describe, and that leasing the battery alone makes no sense at all, i.e. if leasing the pack is "good" then leasing the entire vehicle is "better".

How does leasing provide price, weight, and space advantages? You do understand that 1. you can lease the entire vehicle, not just the pack, so that's no real advantage, and, 2. leasing is more expensive in the long run, which is why it's offered, because it makes the companies more money than...

In fact we are already there for islands, as Tesla has shown. http://www.theverge.com/2016/11/22/13712750/tesla-microgrid-tau-samoa As for the rest, pack leasing, pack swapping, and football batteries are all bad ideas which will never catch on. Better Place tried both pack leasing and...