Read more.Quote:
Evan Blass (EVleaks) says that the battery will be able to be fully charged in <30 mins.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Evan Blass (EVleaks) says that the battery will be able to be fully charged in <30 mins.
Get them into electric cars and they maybe onto something
If we get EVs with a 300-400 mile range and a 30 minute charge time, from empty to full, I'm on it like a kid on sweets!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonj1611
Agreed :)
A tesla model 3, on sale right now, gets ~300 mi on a full charge and does 180 miles after just 15 mins charging from empty. Fast charging to full is challenging, but I bet we'll see 300 mi after 30 mins in a couple years with normal lithium cellsQuote:
Originally Posted by Hoonigan
at-least Graphene wont explode like lithium ion batteries.
Yeah, mid 300 mile mainstream cars are about to arrive (VW I.D. platform for instance) in the next year.Quote:
Originally Posted by XlucineA tesla model 3, on sale right now, gets ~300 mi on a full charge and does 180 miles after just 15 mins charging from empty. Fast charging to full is challenging, but I bet we'll see 300 mi after 30 mins in a couple years with normal lithium cellsQuote:
Originally Posted by Hoonigan
As charge rates significantly tail off when LI batteries approach capacity it's better to think of adding x range in y minutes, rather than "filling it up" like a fossil fueled car.
Unless of course new battery technology solves this problem in which case, the game will change again...
A load of Tesla owners just woke up to find 10% of their battery capacity (~8KW) had vanished. Tesla did an OTA update which reduced the capacity due to a couple of fires.
Teslas are also consistently scoring bottom on reliability charts. Whilst they are trying to push for better tech, they are doing too much and making a hash of it. There's a reason things move slowly in the automotive world.
The big boys are now onto proper electric cars so we'll see a change in that soon and I'm sure Tesla will either go bust as investors dry up and stop sinking their money into something which will have lost first mover advantage by then or Musk will have to throw some serious supporting cash its way.
By the way, there's a good reason those Tesla trucks aren't being widely adopted. Actually, there are a few. I'm pretty sure that was all a giant scam to get investors to throw more money at Tesla.
As for electric cars booming - there will come a point at which this happens. And I really dread to think what's gonna happen to the grid. They didn't plan properly for normal supply due to closure of generating stations and so when there is a boom and everyone expects to plug their EV into a massive supply every few nights, there are going to be insane consequences. I really do dread to think how they're going to manage if they don't get on with commissioning some real generating capacity and soon.
I don't think Tesla will have a problem sticking around. Reliability is something they seem to struggle with because they want to pack so much into a car, more parts = more chance of failure. The Model 3 is very much back to basics with far fewer parts. I guess only time will tell if that simplification of everything will reduce issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by philehidiot
They do still have a lot going for them, they're still rated very highly (if not top) for safety and they've still got at least 2 years on any other manufacturer when it comes to electric cars. Maintaining that lead is key.
Both of the reported innovations by samsung are improved lithium ion cells, and with batteries this good any short is bound to be an exciting event (the stored charge alone is enough to do exciting things, the only way to avoid high capacity cells getting very hot when they short is to not have high capacity batteries)Quote:
Originally Posted by lumireleon
very promising. I have been reading about this R&D for many years, good to see it might finally happen. I do wonder what kind of life cycle these will have and will it pollute less than current batteries. (in the long term obviously)
I think complexity is an excuse. An absurd one. If it's too complex to be reliable, don't make it so complex. That's what R&D is supposed to achieve. The majority of their major parts they buy in (like the Panasonic batteries) so they have no lead there as anyone else can do the same. The other thing about having a 2 year lead... yes and no. The lead is on a very few specific components, the rest of it is just a car like any other car. In that sense they're about 100 years behind other manufacturers and so when their door handles fall off, you know this shouldn't happen with an established manufacturer because they know how to make a door handle. Example - their cars eat standard car batteries. These are required due to the operational constraints of lithium, which is fine. What's not fine is they are charging these batteries using exactly the same protocols which are used to charge the lithium ones which destroys them at an alarming rate. Some people were going through several a year. This should have been picked up by any competent R&D department but it evidently wasn't tested fully and just assumed "it'll be good". It really shouldn't have ever made it to R&D as the person designing the charging system for the standard battery should, given that batteries are the core of their product, know how they work and how to charge them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wozza63
Because they are a new company and looking to return to investors quickly they are rushing things out and can't even get well established technology correct. The reason it has taken other car manufacturers so long to get on board is because it takes so long to do this properly. I'd rather them take their time and release a product that works (even though you expect a couple of bugs in a new product) rather than essentially charging a fortune for a beta test pretending to be a well developed product.
Musk is looking to conceal what should be a PR nightmare with marketing ploys like flamethrowers, trucks, sending a car into space, etc.
So I think Tesla's problem is trying to do too much, too fast and needing to return money to their investors. They can spin that however they like but ultimately if your product is too complex to get it through proper R&D in time to keep the bean counters happy, you need to cut down your product BEFORE taking it to market. Trying to spin this into "we tried to be too good" is just another way of saying "we couldn't do it but decided to release it anyway". It's as bad as releasing broken software to start getting money in but then trying to fix it with patches... it's actually worse because at least your software can be fixed.
To return to the subject, you have to remember the power draw for charging 60-100kWh of battery in 30 minutes would be utterly insane. This is one of the reasons his trucks (which supposedly charge 10x faster than anyone else can do but with no explanation or demonstration) simply can't work as the charging points would have to be insanely potent and the infrastructure to set up multiple trucks charging at a service station doesn't exist and would be insanely costly.