We only saw one new vehicle, and people got to inside it, video it, and share it with
us too.
We didn't get to see some new long range Model Y with 400 miles of range.
Or some new performance Y with even more outstanding acceleration.
No, all we got was a Standard Range Model Y, granted it did happen to be AWD, and was
even worthy of sporting the Plus name too.
But no 4680 Long Range, or even Long Range Plus.
Yet, we were also shown all these new 4680
cells and battery packs at the same event.
In fact Tesla were not hiding the cells from us, it was even made clear enough to count
exactly how many cells went into each battery pack.
Now I have been trying to deal with several
different vehicles that we know about, and work out how many of them are actually the
same vehicle, and what kind of cells they use.
We had been told in the earnings call that they were making 4680 Model Ys at Texas, and
even been driving them.
We had a new Tesla registered with the EPA, an AWD Model Y.
We also had a hacker discover a Standard Range Plus being made in Texas.
And we have been witnessing these new Model Ys being parked outside of the Austin factory.
Is it possible that all of these are actually the same vehicle?
In that Tesla are making this new Model Y Standard Range Plus AWD, with 4680 batteries
in Texas, with these EPA efficiency ratings?
I mean it wouldn't be too hard an imaginable stretch would it?
In fact if we estimate each 4680 cell to be
about 90 Wh, based on having 5 times as much energy as a 18Wh 2170 cell.
As we managed to count all the cells in a 4680 structural pack, then this battery pack
comes in at 74.5 kWh capacity.
And if we also estimate the battery size from the EPA figures, well for the Long Range Model
Y we have 28 kWh per 100 miles.
So with a range of 330 miles it took 92.4 kWh.
With an 80 kWh usable battery that would be an efficiency of 13.4%, i.e. the amount of
energy that is taken from the grid, compared to the amount that actually goes into the
battery.
If we use that same efficiency for the Model Y AWD, then we would estimate that the Model
Y AWD has a usable battery of 67.5 kWh.
Therefore this would not match the energy stored in the 4680 packs.
But perhaps the 4680 chemistry is not yet reaching that high a level.
This would mean that just 81.5 Wh per 4680 cell.
Which would only be 4.5 times more energy than 2170.
But there are others, with sources who claim more accurate figures for the amount of energy
in each 4680 cell.
We don't know how reliable these are, but they claim 98 Wh per 4680 cell, compared to
18.2 Wh for a 2170 cell.
With 828 cells then we are at 81 kWh for a standard range AWD Y, with 4680 batteries.
We are getting less range with 4680, with a larger battery than 2170.
Which doesn't seem likely.
We saw the new battery pack, it is absolutely beautiful when compared to the old battery
tray of the 2170.
The thing is we are basing a lot of these
figures on the EPA, as if their data is perfectly accurate, but after talking to some people
in the community I deem credible, apparently there are
It is strange that the weight of this new AWD would be identical to weight of the 2170
Long Range version, if the new version was using 4680 cells.
In fact even if it was using 2170 cells, there should still be fewer cells, and the weight
should still be less.
I think this is where the LFP theory creeps in, and is the only thing you could base it
on, but I would say the LFP weight would still be higher than this, and of course every single
other metric is saying it's not LFP either.
Alright so it's highly likely this new pack
is in the region of 67.5 kWh.
If there are 828 cells, then that is 81.5 Wh per cell.
Which would be less than 5X the energy of a 2170 cell.
But this was just the cell and doesn't include any chemistry improvements.
This would just be the efficiency of the 4680 cells compared to the 2170 cells.
It doesn't even factor in structural packs.
As we know the LR and AWD get just about identical MPG equivalents.
Apparently there will be several versions
of the 4680 cells, with improved chemistry over the years, they will keep getting more
energy dense, and perhaps it won't be until then we will see the actual results of what
were told on Battery Day.
Maybe these batteries are still using the same chemistry, or perhaps at least the same
anode, i.e. no silicon in them yet.
Which was the major chemistry advancement.
Except the thing is, there is instantly about a 500 lbs saving in mass just from having
a structural battery pack.
And an instant 16% range increase from using 4680 batteries, that use less casing and save
a lot of weight as a result.
Therefore even if the chemistry was going to be only a slight improvement over time,
well the structural battery pack, and cells with a different form factor, would be noticed
instantly.
So if there are 828 cells in there, then how
could a Standard Range Plus only get that little amount of range.
Well some of the cells in there could actually be empty.
Why have them at all then?
Well what if Tesla needs them for the structure still.
This is a possibility.
Of course this would also assume the mass of the vehicles the EPA state are incorrect.
And Elon said they were delivering these vehicles
now, to whom though?
No one can order a Standard Range plus Model Y AWD on the web.
Also Tesla can't even sell vehicles from Texas.
Maybe they were sold out of state or something, either way it's strange.
And who were these lucky recipients of the new Model Y, just employees?
Could it be that if Tesla launched the new
Model Y Long Range, or Long Range Plus, that it would have Osborned the current Long Range.
I actually made quite a few videos last year about discussing the transition of introducing
a new 4680 Model Y.
My theory was that they would just launch a Long Range Plus, charge an extra $5,000
for it or so.
No Osborne effect, and no consumers hesitant to order in case they receive the dreaded
2170 version.
There were plenty of ways to get around it.
What Tesla are playing out now, would not be a necessary way to circumnavigate the Osborne
effect.
So what conclusions can I draw about this
vehicle.
Well I can't can I?
You have seen the same numbers, I can't draw any conclusions that match all of the numbers.
So we are left with several theories: There are 828 4680 cells in this standard
range, and it has 67.5 kWh battery.
This would mean that potentially some of the cells in there are empty or rejects, used
for the structure.
This would also mean that the EPA weight is wrong.
It would also be a disappointing range if this is all we are seeing from the Battery
Day technology.
There are 828 4680 cells, and it actually has around 75 kWh battery, then the range
is being limited with software, to some how affect the EPA rating, as to let too much
information out about the 4680 efficiency.
I don't know how possible this actually is to do.
This also means the EPA weights are incorrect too.
Or the other option is it is somehow a 2170 vehicle.
Which does seem to match all the specs the closest.
But the thing is it's made in Texas, and Tesla are only making 4680 vehicles there.
This is all very strange.
So sorry, this gives us more questions than
answers, perhaps something will be revealed in the earnings call.
But from an overall view I think one of two things is happening, either Tesla are trying
to sandbag the specs of the 4680 vehicle, or Tesla are trying to hide how much trouble
they are having with the 4680 battery line.
That line was never going to be easy, and they bet the future of the company on it.
We were told Tesla would produce 100 GWh this year on Battery Day, we think they have reached
close to 200 MWh, or 0.2% of the amount.
Perhaps these new cells don't have the new chemistry yet either.
Even if it took a whole extra year until they sort out 4680 batteries, it would still be
worth the wait as an investor, I guess it's just a bit disappointing to see how far behind
they are, and also to not have been given any updates from Elon or Tesla about the progress.
This is also likely why we see continual delays with the Cybertruck, as it depends on 4680
cells.
I hope we get an update on the earnings call, or someone is smart enough to ask a question
about it.
I was just looking for some confirmation on whether this was a time to leverage my position
further, but I am not there yet.