I will bet anyone here one Yankee dollar, that there is no 44160 cylindrical cell coming, from Tesla or anyone else.
note.. the reference to "4416" quantity of cells for the M3"The Roadster uses 6831 cells" [11S 9S 69P, 18650 form, 53 kWh]
"The Model S uses 5376 cells" [14S 6S 64P, 18650 form, 60 kWh]
"The Model S uses 7104 cells" [16S 6S 74P, 18650 form, 85 kWh, 1520 maxA]
"The Model S uses 8256 cells" [16S 6S 86P, 18650 form, 100 kWh, 1760 maxA]
"The Model 3 uses 4416 cells" [8S 12S? 46P?, 2170[0] form, ~80‒90 kWh derated?]
That was mainly a reference to the fact that the M3 wont have all the electronic tricks and gadgets that the S and X have.maydaverave said:Also I remember reading that the model 3 uses a fraction of the wiring of the model s. Which to me points to fewer cells.
It doesn't have balance wires?Punx0r said:A reduction in wiring in the car doesn't reflect fewer cells in parallel in the traction pack - the pack interconnects are sheet metal, not wire.
I think sizes of this nature are going to come from Tesla in the future. I think the amount of weight in steel cylinders of 21700 cells etc must weigh over a ton for the Tesla Semi truck. I bet the Tesla Semi truck has an annoyingly crap range and they need to drop weight every way they can.spinningmagnets said:I will bet anyone here one Yankee dollar, that there is no 44160 cylindrical cell coming, from Tesla or anyone else.
speedmd said:44mm diameter x 160mm long, is way too large for Ebike's IMO. If true, this is bad news unless they have some amazing new capabilities.
you may want to check the maths on that ! :wink:Ianhill said:........The reason they went with this size was due to optimise wasted space just have a quick browse on the Web and all the detail are there. With a 21700 you have the most active material while reducing waste space between cells.......
maydaverave said:It doesn't have balance wires?Punx0r said:A reduction in wiring in the car doesn't reflect fewer cells in parallel in the traction pack - the pack interconnects are sheet metal, not wire.
Hillhater said:you may want to check the maths on that ! :wink:Ianhill said:........The reason they went with this size was due to optimise wasted space just have a quick browse on the Web and all the detail are there. With a 21700 you have the most active material while reducing waste space between cells.......
Ianhill said:Hillhater said:you may want to check the maths on that ! :wink:Ianhill said:........The reason they went with this size was due to optimise wasted space just have a quick browse on the Web and all the detail are there. With a 21700 you have the most active material while reducing waste space between cells.......
I didn't do the math tesla did and they choose the size I just regurgitated the English
From the horses mouth.
Exactly with the tech they had on offer the 21700 was many jigsaw pieces that completed their battery puzzle but like you say it's not the end all and be all theres no reason they can't expand in size a little with tech improvments but for what they wanted at the time its their new standard in cylindrical cells.Hillhater said:^^^^ but, if they could make the cells with a higher C rate (lower IR,) then the warming/cooling issue would not be a consideration.
EG ..the way Nissan went with their latest packs.
..I. Suspect the real reason Tesla opted for the cylindical format is speed of production and proven production technology.
It is just a natural progressive step on from the 18650 processes , thus minimising the manufacturing learning curve.
But then as you say, size is limited by the other considerations such as heat dispersion, and manufacturing equipment capacity.
It seems what is better for performance is not as good for range and cycle life. ....Hillhater said:^^^^ but, if they could make the cells with a higher C rate (lower IR,) then the warming/cooling issue would not be a consideration.
EG ..the way Nissan went with their latest packs.
..I. Suspect the real reason Tesla opted for the cylindical format is speed of production and proven production technology.
It is just a natural progressive step on from the 18650 processes , thus minimising the manufacturing learning curve.
But then as you say, size is limited by the other considerations such as heat dispersion, and manufacturing equipment capacity.