GM: New batteries cut electric car costs, increase range

[oil pan 4]

Yeah I like how tesla can invent stuff that already exists and the fan bois automatically assume it's something new, it didn't exist before and that's the first one anything like that ever.

[oldtamiyaphile]

Yup, a Baker Electric is identical to a Model Y. No innovation required.

Tesla just updated the 3 with more power and 10% more efficiency at lower cost. Find me another vehicle maker we can say that about. For the most efficient car to make such an improvement is huge. Fords have been getting 10% more efficient year on year for 100 years, right?

Tesla are casting their entire underbody in two pieces, in a process that takes 1 second, and saving 100kg from the car. GM's been doing that for years of course.

Their speed of progress is such that nobody can keep up. Electronics industy leader Nvidea couldn't keep up so Tesla now make their own chips. FCA have been making their own chips in house for decades, of course.

Octovalves and heat pumps? Industry standard, even in Uzbekistan.

Nissan should have a huge lead but instead insist on passive battery cooling that means a Leaf is more expensive/polluting to run than a V8, certainly in hot environments. Being first to 1 million units but lacking any kind of innovation puts Nissan basically last in the EV race.

Advantage can be quickly squandered. It's often said that staying ahead is harder than getting there in the first place.

You could argue that nothing in this world is truly new any more. The wheel was nothing new, because we already had round rocks. Steam engines were nothing new because we already had water and fire. Touch screens and cell phones both already existed so the iPhone was nothing to get excited about. Going to the moon was nothing new because rockets were already 30 years old. Going to Mars will be nothing new because Apollo was 50 years ago and so on.

Caution: above post contains sarcasm

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by oldtamiyaphile

Yup, a Baker Electric is identical to a Model Y. No innovation required.

Tesla just updated the 3 with more power and 10% more efficiency at lower cost. Find me another vehicle maker we can say that about. For the most efficient car to make such an improvement is huge. Fords have been getting 10% more efficient year on year for 100 years, right?

Tesla are casting their entire underbody in two pieces, in a process that takes 1 second, and saving 100kg from the car. GM's been doing that for years of course.

Their speed of progress is such that nobody can keep up. Electronics industy leader Nvidea couldn't keep up so Tesla now make their own chips. FCA have been making their own chips in house for decades, of course.

Octovalves and heat pumps? Industry standard, even in Uzbekistan.

Nissan should have a huge lead but instead insist on passive battery cooling that means a Leaf is more expensive/polluting to run than a V8, certainly in hot environments. Being first to 1 million units but lacking any kind of innovation puts Nissan basically last in the EV race.

Advantage can be quickly squandered. It's often said that staying ahead is harder than getting there in the first place.

You could argue that nothing in this world is truly new any more. The wheel was nothing new, because we already had round rocks. Steam engines were nothing new because we already had water and fire. Touch screens and cell phones both already existed so the iPhone was nothing to get excited about. Going to the moon was nothing new because rockets were already 30 years old. Going to Mars will be nothing new because Apollo was 50 years ago and so on.

Caution: above post contains sarcasm

Well in all fairness the Tesla hasn't improved efficiency 10% every year since they started selling cars in 2008 which is 14 model years which would be a 379% improvement.

Now Ford has many times in it's past, improved efficiency and power of an updated model by at least 10% over the previous version.

Saying it takes 1 second to "cast" any part of a car is also very misleading. it takes less than that to stamp a frame rail, but of course there are 100 other steps getting it to that moment, and 100 more after before it can be installed.

If whatever they were doing was faster and better, they would have lower priced cars, with better build quality, at a faster production rate. Ford has been rolling over 2000 F-150s off the line per day for a long time in 1 or 2 plants. Tesla's best quarter averages 1300 total cars over all models and all plants. I bet an independent quality control inspection would show the average F150 to be of better build quality than a Model Y. You also get a lot of F150 for $40,000+. Teslas are cool, but so is a F150 when you look close at it.

Basically Tesla is just another car, Ford is just another truck, Apple is just a another phone/computer. Why people become so fanatic about any brand of anything is beyond me.

I guess except for Mountain Dew, there is no substitute for Mountain Dew, and I'll fight anyone who says otherwise!

[ME_Andy]

@oldtamiyaphile let's not be too hard on the blue oval. Their new Mach E looks pretty competitive. Are they gonna make a profit? That's a whole different question.

Feel free to let loose on Nissan, though. I won't defend their battery design.

[samwichse]

They're using a lithium metal anode to get this big jump.

But lithium anodes are dangerous, and short-lived. I assume they've got a jump on the fire risk issues, but the article I saw quoted only 500 charge-discharge cycles. I guess that works out to about 200k miles with a 400 mile range. About the max you can get from most GM products anyway? :-P

[jakobnev]

379% improvement.

279% improvement.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by jakobnev

279% improvement.

I still get 379% for 10% compounded annually for 14 years.

[jakobnev]

You need to subtract the one you started with to get the improvement.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by jakobnev

You need to subtract the one you started with to get the improvement.

Oh, right, brain fart.

So a 100% improvement of say 100 is 200, a 200% improvement of 100 is 300, and a 279% improvement of 100 is 379.

Thanks for the correction, I was just looking at that 379.

[oldtamiyaphile]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

Well in all fairness the Tesla hasn't improved efficiency 10% every year since they started selling cars in 2008 which is 14 model years which would be a 379% improvement.

Now Ford has many times in it's past, improved efficiency and power of an updated model by at least 10% over the previous version.

Name one time where an update resulted in a 10% efficiency increase. A full model cycle, maybe.

The ICE industry is lucky to improve by 10% a decade.

When I replaced my 15yo van with a same size and weight new one, the gain was, well zero despite the engine being 1l smaller, and having stop start. I love my Renault and I love stop start, but for it to actually work I had to install solar panels to keep the battery charged. Just an example of the have arsed compliance 'innovation' we're used to seeing from the old guard.

I was pretty surprised when my 1949 Ford clocked in at 13mpg city. That's similar to 50 year newer vehicles I've driven of the same size and weight, even with engines half the size.

Even DIY it wouldn't be hard to make the '49 20% more efficient. That would bring it line ball with the V6 Hilux which is the closest modern equivalent.

For Tesla to gain 10% on the worlds most efficient vehicle as just part of their continual development is something else. Remember too that Tesla keeps rolling out additional range and performance with just OTA updates.

Saying it takes 1 second to "cast" any part of a car is also very misleading. it takes less than that to stamp a frame rail, but of course there are 100 other steps getting it to that moment, and 100 more after before it can be installed.

If whatever they were doing was faster and better, they would have lower priced cars, with better build quality, at a faster production rate

Bare in mind this world biggest casting machine is still being built at Giga Berlin. A frame rail is quick to stamp, but like you said, there are a million steps before and after before it becomes a chassis. By comparison, casting an entire underbody is pretty much a 1 second and it's done process.

Have you not noticed that Teslas sell for half the price of anything the competition has to offer? Compare prices of Taycan vs S, Cybertruck Vs Hummer EV. I mean Hyundai's Kona EV costs the same as a Y, and perhaps the closest competition is the EQC LOL.

As ICE makers have found, building EV's in volume is a huge challenge. Saying that just because Ford can crank out F150's faster than Tesla cranks out it's cars is completely missing the point. ICE makers can't produce their EV's at a fraction of Tesla's speed, and remember, they do everything in house. The F150 is more 'assembled' at Fords factory than 'built'.

Tesla are working on the big picture stuff so some of the smaller stuff isn't always great. At the same time VW issued a recall for their ICE vans because the windows might come out, so it's not just Tesla with bonded glass issues.

Polestar (Volvo) had to recall all their cars for inverter faults, Hyundai have the Kona fires, VW have the ID4 software debacle and Mercedes haven't been able to scale the EQC. E-tron has just been a flop.

I'm no brand loyalist, I've just come to realize even with wave after wave of Tesla killers, they remain the most compelling EV. Dollar for dollar, it's no contest.