5 ms·
No I am not. If it was 113kWh net that would mean 25kWh (18%) is their buffer for a 138kWh battery. That Tesla battery has a 10kWh (9%) buffer for a 110kWh bat
by babesh 5y ago
No I am not. If it was 113kWh net that would mean 25kWh (18%) is their buffer for a 138kWh battery. That Tesla battery has a 10kWh (9%) buffer for a 110kWh battery.
That 25kWh (18%) buffer seems way too big. Also, Rob Maurer was guesstimating that its battery capacity nets between 118kWh and 124kWh based on efficency and optimistically comparing it to Tesla. A 9% buffer would be 125.5kWh net.
One possible reason it could be that big is that it probably has doubled the number of batteries in series to get to their 900V versus Tesla. But that may mean they roughly doubled their battery failure rate (for each set of batteries in series). That would be ridiculous though.
- clouddrover 5y agoYes, you are. The only "reason" for their Twitter "conclusions" is that they're not understanding the numbers they're looking at. They don't understand that the maximum voltage doesn't tell you the energy content, you need the nominal voltage. They don't understand that the EPA watt-hours per mile figures are AC watt-hours per mile. You'd be better off taking advice from Kim Kardashian. Kim's marketing and promotion with curated, staged, and edited photos of herself in bikinis is more honest than what these "prominent people in the Tesla community" (whatever that means) are doing. You really do need to stop wasting your time on social media "influencers". They are not influencing you in wise directions.