Tesla Model Y w/4680 Gets Charging Speed Boost

Awesome!!

Let's get it.

I thought that one of the upsides to the 4680 was a faster charging speed!

I think it’s not worth or matter much with a few minutes difference The scale to use to make a difference in reality is steps of divided or multiplied a factor of 2. And as soon as a typical charging session cost you less than 10 minutes, I think the hunt is over. A “typical” charging cycle is not 10-80% from my experience. That’s more an optimised scenario for todays chemistry…as the last 20% takes a lot of time. With LFP (at least the original LiFePO4 cells) the charging speed was almost constantly high to the last few %.

4680 should charge faster because of the tab-less design, because electricity flows in from all along the long edge of the rolled up battery strip instead of along the short edge (the tab) at the end of the strip. For the same reason, less heat is generated / less energy wasted from internal resistance.

It's like one of the main freaking reasons for going through the difficulties of implementing the tab-less design.

The battery in the Cybertruck is going to need to be massive in order to have decent towing range. In order to accommodate a tolerable charging time the Cybertruck will need to use a higher battery voltage as Lucid does. The V4 charger will need to support that higher voltage.

Pre conditioning batteries will help speed up charging rate.

Completely invalid conclusions without comparing the battery PACK size in watts, not the battery physical size. How many watts? That will determine charge efficiency.

You should do better your research. A Model 3 charged from 0-80% in 29 minutes. So 4680 is worst.

I thought that the 4680 cell tech was going to be faster charging than the existing cells?

They also may be a little cautious and start out a little slower and eventually keep increasing the speed of charge. I’m curious how resilient these new 4680s are going to be for thermal runaway when punctured.

Great content, but would love to see that comparison chart normalized for real world charging, and by that I mean using “time to 200 miles” instead of “time to 80%” — 80% on different vehicles is not comparable directly, even when you normalize to miles/time interval, as those are miles that you wouldn’t really sit and charge in real conditions. You charge to around 200 miles to get to the next optimal charger. That’s the chart that matters and would love to see it.

Great content. Thx.

How do you know that Tesla is not sandbagging 4680 charging speeds artificially until they can manufacture them at scale?

Hi, John 4680 Will be slowly optimized in steps to curb the Ozzie (Osbourn effect) like you say high ratev4 super charger will come to play as they are being built.Also 4686 is bit supply constraint but as time rolls on supplies will improve.

I'm a Tesla fan but also a realist. It's starting to look like Tesla pooed the bed with the 4680 cells. Either that or they just released them too early. They seem to have no benefit over the 2170 cells in that they are slower to charge and the 4680 Model Y is no lighter (or only negligibly so), so the argument that they provide structural support is out the window too. I think it all just comes down to money: the 4680 cells are simply cheaper to produce because you need fewer of them and fewer connections in the battery pack, saving Tesla money.

... Yeah! ...we don't see anything... like a King, there's no King, bro... 😍😍😍😍😍... no LIMITED!...

The kW charge rate is not a good way to compare charging speeds.

To compare batteries it is better to normalize the charge rate based on pack capacity, by comparing C-rates instead of kW.

To compare EVs, it is better to compare miles (or km) added per minute of charging, standardizing on an SOC range like 10-80%. This captures the real world charging speed benefits of more efficient vehicles with lower energy consumption and larger capacity packs.

This video and your thesis doesn't present the state of the battery at the starting time of charging. The battery temperature is very important and as well as the charger itself. If the battery temperature had a few degrees difference then this could explain the lower rate of charging at the beginning, until the battery heats up. This in turn will give you these results.

@Cleanerwatt
I would be weary of comparing charging speeds between a Standard Range and a Long Range.. I've seen consistently better charging speeds with EV's that have larger batteries, even with Tesla's.. It may not be the 4680 is slower, just the total parallel capacity doesn't allow for faster charging.

Tesla is really disappointing me. The AMAZING new battery is charging slow, has same or lower energy density as the old battery, the new structure pack is complete impossible to repair, the lack of radar makes the FSD worse than the older version(see Tesla Bjørn latest video), cyber and roadster is extremely delayed, bitcoin was a disaster, Twitter deal is a disaster as well with massive potential implications for the Tesla share price, robo taxi is still years away,.

Question:
If I buy your magazine now, do I have to buy it again when you add new models? Or is it a free upgrade?

So there is a lot more nuance to charging than just the kW rate of charge. Most batteries don't like high amperage charging, higher amps = more heat and more wear while charging of all components. This also leads to limitations of the charging station because the higher amps the thicker the cable required for charging. Based on this knowledge the way they will upgrade the charging stations without deploying much thicker cables is to change the inverters to give higher voltages while reducing the amps. The 4680 battery may not like as high amps as 2170 with all the tabs. The game changer might be when they upgrade the inverters for the charging stations. The 2170 because of their size and structural design may be capped at a specific charging voltage also have to take into account the componentry in the battery pack itself when charging.

The 4680 potential, I believe will be seen when they up the charging voltage. The current chargers probably have a voltage cap thus the system just normalizes to a specific voltage and then the battery's internal mechanism inverts this to the higher voltage before it hits the battery inside the vehicle but when connection to a latter version of the charger the internal inverter will not have to modulate the input voltage it will charge directly. This is seen when you plug into a 120v outlet vs a 220v home charger vs a super charger. The cables are roughly the same thickness except for the super chargers but then the voltage being used is significantly different as well.

As a long time, huge EV fan, I'll never consider buying a Tesla as long as the pathologically lying, employee-screwing Musk is part of the company. He went from a little odd to bat-crap crazy!! I have the Chev Equinox EV on pre-order, which looks to be an overall better car and battery pack than the Y, but hoping Tesla board fires Musk so he can go play with his Twitter.

doesn't this leave out the fact that the SR Model Y has a much smaller battery? This should be reported in kWh instead of percentage.

I think they dont want the new battery to be better, untill they have enough cells for LR and P models.