Tesla could be using a “4416” battery cell in Model 3 and next-gen S, X fleet

"The new information goes against previous speculation that Tesla will be using it’s newest high energy density 2170 cell in the Model 3."

It's not speculation - it's what Tesla has clearly stated. In fact the new 2170 cells were specifically developed for the Model 3.

If there is a 4416 Battery, for the sake of argument...

you'd be going from a 70mm long battery to 160mm. The wiring and cooling of these modules is based on a "standing-on-its-end" orientation of the batteries. A 160 mm would add over 3 inches to the floorboard...and would NEVER happen...

You have the batteries physical sizes messed up. The existing batteries in S/X are 18650, or 18mm diameter, 65mm tall. The new Powerwall batteries are 2170 (missing the eronious 0) are 21mm in diameter, 70mm tall. These new speculative batteries are 4416 (also missing the extra 0) are 44mm in diameter, 16mm tall. These are supposedly very flat cells, so would probably be stacked vertically, or laid sideways in the pack.

One Factory video referred to making Jelly Rolls. A 4416 cell would very much look like a Jelly Roll. If such speculation is true, They could have these stacked 4 layers high for 64" high (plus layers between) and the wider cells would greatly reduce packaging material per cell + require fewer cells. If a new cooling innovation or perhaps use of nanomaterials to increase surface area of cooling, this could be a big money saver. If they have proven to be able to effectively use these cells without heat issues and if these also enable faster recharge, it would make sense.

Or perhaps they use the 2170 cells on the 3 and then add new 4416 cell line to further separate range between the 3 and S, geared with upcoming Y, Pickup and Semi in mind. While they did their trade study and Panasonic and others had gone to the 2170 format, new technology or innovations in other components can quickly change things. They have many factors to juggle (size, weight, heat, range, recharge rate).

From one video it looks like they make large jelly rolls and then cut them and put into canisters, so I would imagine they realize that 1 size may not fit all and eventually the smaller 1865 cells will be replaced with something big bigger and better, as long as they can ensure safety and meet needs, it really just depends. By further increasing range, they will reduce supercharger density and further be able to fight head to head with 400+ mile gasoline vehicles. If they can also incorporate new faster recharging electrodes and ability to add even faster chargers even better than new ChargePoint tech to get recharge down to 5-10 minutes, this will also factor into the decision.

I think this is highly accurate speculation.

I suspect Tesla is also lying about not upgrading future P100D's to P120D/P130D's which it's newer battery packaging would allow them to increase the range to over 400 miles with this battery and I think were going to see that happen. Purely speculative of course.

I'd like to know when Tesla will bring solid state or other battery tech to market such as Al-air or Li-air, etc. Seems Toyota is going to bring that to market in 2022 or thereabouts.

Just because a model 3 was spotted with 300 miles of range doesn't mean this is real world range. Model S/X vehicles have a setting that allows the instrumentation to change between "rated" and "typical" where rated is very generous an rarely achievable if driving normally. It is not inconceivable that the 300 mile indication is just the rated range but "real world" range, as Elon has claimed is around 215. I hope I am wrong, just advising we shouldn't get carried away with the 300 figure spied.

I think this is highly accurate speculation.

I suspect Tesla is also lying about not upgrading future P100D's to P120D/P130D's which it's newer battery packaging would allow them to increase the range to over 400 miles with this battery and I think were going to see that happen. Purely speculative of course.

Elon only said the Model S/X wouldn't use 2170, not 44160 :P

Model 3 will be available in a 60 kWh and 75 kWh battery[/QUOTE] this is a wildly bold claim based on speculation

[QUOTE="gene, post: 7955, member: 3"]it was capable of over 300 miles of range from a 75 kWh pack

the battery size in that vehicle was unknown, so again only speculation, not fact

This is very speculative IMO.
Musk said the 3 would never be better than the S or X. S and X will be the flagship. So this would leave three possibilities to be true...
A) He lied and the 3 will have a far better battery and charging capability in which case the lawyers might get involved.
B) He will announce at the reveal that the S & X will start being delivered with the new battery system.
C) The S and the X are already using the new batteries and that simply has not been announced. Customers can possibly upgrade the range.

Realistic?
NO.
Not one of the three option.

Would I like it to be true?
YES.

This would mean that they have to redesign the pack completely as they can't have 160 mm high battery standing wish says against Teslas earlier talk about that the 100 kWh pack would use the same architecture as Model 3. Can it be that it's a miss understanding, Tesla Model 3 will have 4416 cells in one of there battery packs?

This is very speculative IMO.
Musk said the 3 would never be better than the S or X. S and X will be the flagship. So this would leave three possibilities to be true...
A) He lied and the 3 will have a far better battery and charging capability in which case the lawyers might get involved.
B) He will announce at the reveal that the S & X will start being delivered with the new battery system.
C) The S and the X are already using the new batteries and that simply has not been announced. Customers can possibly upgrade the range...........etc...
.

I think the way to read this is that at any point in time when purchasing, that being relative to other spec models at that moment. Therefore it is not inconceivable that in certain ways the Model 3 will be better than 1st generation Model S. A little like the 2008 Tesla Roadster compared to a modern Tesla Model S P100DL. We can already see Tesla changing the S and X line up to make this happen. So if I was to buy an entry Model S and Top end Model 3 on Jan 1st 2018. the Model S will be a generally better equipped vehicle. Elon is not lying, just making a comment based in relative terms. Battery system doesnt matter, end overall performance does.

If there is a 4416 Battery, for the sake of argument...

you'd be going from a 70mm long battery to 160mm. The wiring and cooling of these modules is based on a "standing-on-its-end" orientation of the batteries. A 160 mm would add over 3 inches to the floorboard...and would NEVER happen...a "laid flat" orientation also seems very unlikely...

What makes more sense in the hypothetical "4416 world" is that the battery size is optimized for either energy storage or the Tesla Semi truck...an argument could be made that a larger battery form factor is more efficient both to manufacture and for energy density in these applications.

I think this is highly accurate speculation.

I suspect Tesla is also lying about not upgrading future P100D's to P120D/P130D's which it's newer battery packaging would allow them to increase the range to over 400 miles with this battery and I think were going to see that happen. Purely speculative of course.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. They will have to announce a step improvement in ModelS and X soon, because the Model3 is too close in their current specs.

"The new information goes against previous speculation that Tesla will be using it’s newest high energy density 2170 cell in the Model 3."

It's not speculation - it's what Tesla has clearly stated. In fact the new 2170 cells were specifically developed for the Model 3.

This new cell, which I have only just heard about here, sounds like it will be for model S and X. Perhaps it is a step change again and it will first appear in Tesla's premium vehicles. If so, things are moving at Ludicrous speed in Tesla's battery world!

This would mean that they have to redesign the pack completely as they can't have 160 mm high battery standing wish says against Teslas earlier talk about that the 100 kWh pack would use the same architecture as Model 3. Can it be that it's a miss understanding, Tesla Model 3 will have 4416 cells in one of there battery packs?

one of 'their'.

How about 44mm x 16mm .. means 4.4cm x 1.6 cm ? Very wide but very short, ... So they can be better cooled by interleaving more horizontal layers of passive cooling plates, when stacking the flat cells vertically in each pack, so the pack can charge much faster at the end ... when attached to next gen SuperChargers v3 at 500KW or even 600KW, making new Porsche 350KW/800V SuperChargers only good for children toys when available (Dixit Elon) ? Dividing by 4 or more the time to Supercharge, that is required up to 15 x days per year in my case, when on long vacation trips of typically 1000km/day on southern Europe motorways at 130km/h, with all family and luggage on board, in the middle of nowhere... That would really be cool !!
Also this makes sense vs Elon quote of no plan to use 2170 cells in Model S & X, for sure.
Remember also the quote of Tesla Canadian batteries Guru, very few months ago, saying he had found an electrolyte doper that doubles the life cycles of Tesla Batteries. First saying that was already used in some Tesla Batteries in production at GigaFactory1, then correcting and saying it was not yet in any, including 2170 used for PowerWall2 and likely also the new different 2170 designed for Model 3. So they may have kept that new longer life cycles chemistry just for this new 4416 cell, which may in the same time enable much faster SuperCharging on SC v3, compared to current 1.2C limit (120KW maxi on current 100KWH Packs), with same cycles as before, hence same beloved 8Y unlimited mileage battery warranty.
This SC v3 story, that Elon keeps NOT elaborating end to end, has been delaying my own Model X purchase since 1st Qtr of this year, as it is CRITICAL for my driving profile. 4416 may just be the missing brick for it on Models S & X refresh.
This said, when further trying to connect the dots, like you do great man, I also remind the comments Tesla CTO made about the 30% improved Capacity per Litter and Kg on 2170 vs previous 18650. He said that only # 15% - means half - was coming from improved battery chemistry (Tying to Elon +5% per year quote on Battery chemistry improvement), and rest was improvement coming essentially from the 2170 formfactor itself and more efficient cooling system, with less direct liquid cooling and more passive cooling plates only liquid cooled in the background (Less non battery cell space lost in each pack w/ larger cells and new cooling system... If I missed nothing). So changing the FormFactor again here, to remove more air and/or cool better, may save another 10%, plus at best one could expect an incremental +10% on new battery chemistry, that combined could allow up to 120KWH or even 130KWH Packs w/ 4416 cells in next Gen Model S & X ... enabled for full speed charging on SC v3... Worth waiting for ten times in my case !
I also believe appetite for large battery capacities will last till they exceed 500Miles that I set on Model X SUV # 160KWH, up to 200KWH may be. Key for me related to capacity is what Mileage you get at 130km/h France speed limit on the motorways, with all family and luggage on board, as this is the only time in my driving cycle where i'll really need the largest battery that I'm keen to pay for. Today with Model X 100D I see that at # 330KM only (Consumption is a square factor of speed on the roads, whatever the energy used, if I got that right). I would accept to pay more for 120 or 130KWH packs as they would allow me to expand this beyond 400KM at 130km/h and skip one Supercharger out of 2 when needed, or may be 2 out of 3 tomorrow as SC network densifes for Model 3. Plus if SC v3 capable I may be able to access dedicated SC v3 Stalls, that may be reserved to v3 capable cars, avoiding much longer queues on the SC v1&2 stalls opened to all other cars, when Model 3 will ramp up....
So I would dream that Tesla could use the new 4416 cells in next refresh of Model S & X, fit in a new 100KWH pack enabled for 5C or more, means 500KW+ Supercharging on SC v3, and may be with 120 or 130KWH up-grades on Performance models, to better justify the huge 50K$ pricing gap with non P Model X for ex, adding more substance to P Model, to maintain and expand that €190K pricepoint further, protecting their long term profit pools on the high end EVs.
Of course this is only speculations but I really hope Elon will soon clarify the full SC v3 story so we know.

this is a wildly bold claim based on speculation


the battery size in that vehicle was unknown, so again only speculation, not fact

These are based on inside tips that were shared :)

Yes, Model 3 - using 2170. If any new cell size 4416 coming up in the future, that will not be for Model 3. PENA factory is NOT design for different size of cell, period. Just in case, there really is a 4416, that will look like rolled-robbin type (interesting!), and that will ONLY be used for other model or semi-truck at different plant (other location); maybe Giga 6/7?! The cost of redesign cell/pack/module is significant -- people need to consider from production/manufacturing feasibility, cost, and investment.

I think that is highly unlikely. The reason small cells such as 18650 are preferred is because the production yield increases. With 44160 cells, the yield could drop to 25% and make it uneconomical.

These are based on inside tips that were shared :)

inside tips are not fact

I could not find the capacity of the Model 3 base battery so I decided just to calculate it.

Given the mass difference between the two variants of the Model 3, I come out with a base battery mass of 294 kg.

Given the differential mass of the S 70 vs the S 90 single motor, it has an effective energy density of 15 kWh/108 kg. Therefore this battery is about 40 kWh. Of course if the cells are better then it could be higher. But I certainly don't expect a 50% improvement over the S pack. Probably 40-45 kWh. It is about 80% of the mass of the S so that is worth at best 25% better range. Taking the 40 kWh battery as the real figure, and the 60 kWh battery for an S, that basically agrees on the range values.

So the cost reduction of the 3 over the S in battery should be at least 25%. Goodies, Al, etc must make up the rest of the cost reduction.

Tesla says their packs cost less than 190/kWh so the battery costs 7600 USD at present. If you can buy and install one for say 10,000, then in round numbers the battery overhead on this vehicle is $0.10/mile if it runs to 100K-ish. That is almost exactly the cost of fuel at present for something like a Civic or Fit class vehicle. Of course these are different sorts of cars.

Certainly above gas fired still for total cost of ownership, even if electricity to charge it were free.

Its good though if some incremental battery improvements can be made and charger networks can be built out, this would be a viable second car to the majority of the upper middle class. Perhaps 25-30% of the total auto market.

The trailer truck is the most interesting product though in my mind because there the argument is just total cost of ownership, and there could be some nice scaling there given the volume of the vehicle. The wealthy will likely keep Tesla going for long enough for it to make a dent it looks like. If the Model 3 catches on fire a bunch or autopilot ends up with lots of dead people then the outcome might change otherwise it looks like Tesla could become profitable.