Problem with electric cars is their relatively short range and poor power.
Tesla has solved both problems. I would buy one tomorrow if it didn’t cost an arm and a leg.
Is the very high cost of a Tesla justified? Are they using some proprietary engineering that Ford or Toyota can’t copy much more cheaply?
And, just mechanically, how does Tesla get such amazing 0-60 acceleration and also have super long range? Are their batteries different in some way? Their motors different in some way?
Just a shitload of batteries. That ain’t cheap.
Again, just a shitload of batteries. If you want long range and blistering acceleration, you need to pay extra for the ugpraded battery pack and inverter (total, $87K). If you don’t mind substantially less range and acceleration, you can shell out just $64K. That still gets you 0-60 in 5.9 seconds, which is pretty good. The Chevy Volt does 0-60 in about 8 seconds, and its electric range is a lot less - but then it also costs only about $40K, and it’s got a gasoline engine that boosts its overall range to well beyond that of a Tesla.
A shitload of batteries. That is a bunch. But the more batteries you put in a car, it seems the more it would weigh and be counter-productive.
And what kind of batteries? NIMH type or the more expensive Lithium?
What kind of voltage is generated by a Tesla battery pack?
And does Tesla use any kind of unusual motor?
Have you read the Tesla Wikipedia page? Looks like most of your questions will be answered by the overview there, and the reference links.
I think the answer lies in a shitload of batteries.
Great article. Thanks
Well hopefully the cost of Lithium Ion batteries will come down with time. And of course Tesla’s patents will eventually expire. Is it still 17 years?
And maybe I’ll be able to afford their technology. Problem is I’ll be in my 90’s then.
IMHO, I don’t think the performance of Tesla’s cars is the result of patented technology. Part of it is that they are selling an expensive vehicle and the price can justify technology that’s not present in something like the Nissan Leaf. Although part of the reason for the high cost is Tesla’s relatively small production.
US patents now last 20 years, in line with other countries.
The biggest difference between US and other countries is that we’re still “first to invent” rather than “first to file”.
I wouldn’t hold your breath on the cost of the battery dropping too much unless Tesla finds a new type or format to use. Tesla currently uses 18650-size Li-Ion cells, which are commodity cells that you’ll find in damn near every laptop battery on the planet among a bunch of other things. I wouldn’t expect them to get much cheaper.
Tesla got the range and power they did by cramming as many cells into the battery as they could. They’re succeeding because they made the car nice enough to where they could ask a price that makes the cars profitable.
The Model S costs that much because they have a strong growth plan that requires capital, and a luxury sedan is close to the optimal product point given their current limitations and needs.
They could have made it significantly cheaper, partly by cutting profits and partly by reducing the luxury elements. But that would reduce their margins, so they’d have to sell more of them, which means they’d have to produce more of them, which they can’t do right now (because they need to build out their factory more).
Tesla is on a good path to produce mid-range cars in 5 years or so, but for now it’s smart for them to focus on high margin products. If anything, the Model S is too cheap–they’re selling every one they make and have a long waiting list.
False (though you can be forgiven since it changed recently).
It seems like there’s a good chance of that happening. 18650 cells have worked well for them, but there’s no reason to think they’re optimal. For a low volume car like the Model S it’s probably a good idea to stick with a known commodity, but for future vehicles they’ll probably want a custom design. The metal can is a lot of dead weight for their purposes.
By that logic, the best number of batteries is zero.
More batteries = more range. It also makes the vehicle heavier, but to preserve/enhance acceleration, you can install a bigger electric motor. Electric motors don’t have crappy part-load efficiency like IC engines do, so there’s not really an efficiency penalty for having a bigger motor that’s operating at low loads most of the time; it just costs more to make a big motor.
Heavy batteries + heavy motor means more energy required to accelerate to a given speed, but with regen braking, you recover most of that on decel, so it’s not much of a penalty during city driving. Unlike the Prius, the Tesla motor/batteries are substantial enough to be able to absorb power rapidly during braking events.
The OP is a contradiction.
If it costs an arm and a leg, even with a shitload of taxbreaks and state incentives, there is no technological breakthtough, it’s simply getting other to pay for your costs.
A car that requires so much planning to drive a long distance (say more tan 200km) is still a long way.
Rumor is that Lithium–air batteries are the next big thing.
It should be noted, even Tesla doesn’t really make any money selling cars. The only reason they were profitable last quarter was because they get special tax credits for being a “green” company, which they can sell to other companies. On an operating basis (ie, selling cars) they still lose money. AFAIK, no automaker has yet been able to produce an electric car profitably. If Tesla did ramp up production, they’d probably go out of business.
They have a store in the mall near my home. I bought a Tesla onesie for my baby that says “zero emissions – almost.” It cost $22.
Electric motors are very compact and have the very nice property that they make maximum torque at zero RPM. Tesla’s 400+ horsepower motor is about the size of a watermelon, and has enough of an RPM range that it only needs a 1-speed gearbox, not a full transmission.
Batteries have a finite power density, though. The higher-range Teslas also have increased acceleration (despite the greater weight) compared to lower-range because the more batteries they have in parallel, the more power they can extract from them. Cars with tiny battery packs like the Leaf don’t have this advantage, and hence have low-power motors.
Tesla uses few off the shelf components in their cars. The standard 18650 batteries are just about the only commodity item in them. The motor, power controller, etc. are all custom, because the stuff they wanted didn’t actually exist yet.
Other companies will figure this out eventually, but the first thing they have to do is stop pretending that you can bolt an electrical motor to an existing gasoline car and have a good final product. Electric cars need to be engineered differently from the start.
BTW, and this might be a hijack, but if I were designing an electric car from scratch, would there be any advantage to having a separate motor for each wheel?
Depends. Then you have to be sure the wheels turn in sync, so the car does not pull to one side; but allow for turn differences, traction issues, etc. But you eliminate the differential and axles. So what is simpler for maintenace, control, etc? Good question.
the answer is simple. Batteries still cost a lot more than a gas engine and gearbox. Longer range? More batteries, more expensive - plus a bigger engine to handle the weight.
Electric cars are a niche market. The limited range makes them less versatile than fill-up-the-tank-in-a-few-minutes gasoline autos. As mentioned, the Volt (and hybrids) solve this with an integrated gasoline engine and builtin charger. The “shitload of batteries” or the extra equipment of the batteries and engine make them more complex and expensive.
I suspect the people who buy a Tesla have a second car that CAN take those 400-mile trips the odd time they want to do so, once every few months (or can afford to rent); they typically commute short enough that the Tesla works for that.
By contrast, the average car buyer either can’t afford or doesn’t care to spend the extra to buy a car that does less and costs more.
At this time, barring a significant breakthrough, the limiting factor is the high cost of big batteries. If someone figures out how to triple the capacity of batteries while halving the cost - as news stories every few months seem to promise - then maybe electric cars will be more affordable.
Then you’ll really see the debate heat up about whether they are really green. While many areas of Canada have hydro-electric power, the majority of USA electricity is produced using fossil fuels (coal or gas). A plug-in electric does very little for the environemnt in that case.