Model X delay: Battery 2.0?

Model X delay: Battery 2.0?

I am just speculating here, but could this be the reason for the delay? Maybe a new battery, let's call it 'battery 2.0' with better chemistry and who knows maybe the new slightly different format?

Musk announced that 1st cell will be produced in 2016, but there is a possibility that the cell be made in Japan by Panasonic, at least for the Model X, as a 'warm up' for their Gigafactory machinery? :)

OK, I am dreaming -- I just wish the model X will bring slightly more range, at least break the 300miles psychological barrier. That's just a 15% increase in battery capacity.

I think it is possible and that will bring a lot of customer delight that would definitely be worth the wait! :)

sbeggs | 06. November 2014

Read @Teo's extensive threads hypothesizing about added range of 105 kW batteries possibly arriving 2015 for Model X and beyond...

(Model S forum) | 06. November 2014

Dream on.
I'm in recovery from knee replacement and Model X news.
Both temporary.
Don't know which is worse.

NumberOne | 06. November 2014

Other than possible supply constraints, batteries are not what is holding back Model X. The battery chemistry is not changing in the next couple of years, and while they are improving, the improvements more likely benefit charge time and the charge cycle life.

Elon has stated a few times already, that Tesla can add batteries to increase the range, but it would make the car too heavy and even more expensive. The 85kWh pack is the max for the near term. The Super Charger network is being deployed to accommodate the +-265 mile range.

Also, it is quite easy to get to 300 miles with Model S if you do not drive. The reason that people get less, is because they drive faster than 55mph. Range varies, but the average is 265 miles.

Finally, with my estimated price for the configuration I am imagining being over $100k already, I really do not see the benefit of a larger battery pack. The cost will then approach something I am not willing to spend on a car, and certainly for its intended purpose, more than a few probably feel the same.

barrykmd | 07. November 2014

IMO, it's the problem with Doors 0.9 alpha.

Red Sage ca us | 07. November 2014

Premium. Special. Elite.

The best in the world.

Try not to be surprised when improvements take place sooner than expected.

aljjr2 | 08. November 2014

I too was concerned that the Model X is again delayed. However, taking a step back, I considered how many times the next generation Audi Q7 has been delayed. I was anticipating trading my 2007 for the upgraded 2013 Q7 (New body style, interiors and ICE's). That design was rejected by the powers to be at Audi. Then it was moved to 2014-15 model year. There were pictures of the Beta "Mules" driving in Europe. Such excitement that it was a year away and would be revealed (traditionally) at the Paris Auto Show.

The show came to pass, no mention of the Q7 replacement. Now it is 2016 anticipation. Maybe to be seen at the Detroit international Auto Show. Those delays, and the lasts climate reports got me to the Model X.

Audi is rumored to be building a $130K electric variant for 2017-18.

Two things come to mind:
1. Like Elon said -- "it is really hard to manufacture consistently a vehicle to 8000 parts and gain the quality needed. Even Audi works very hard to get it right to protect its Brand;

2. Tesla has now "forced" market dynamics so Audi, Mercedes and BMW are all looking to build a Model X contender. SUVs are some of the most profitable vehicles since the typically share a chassis with another model in the line up. The German manufactures recognize they must protect their brand by competing with the little California company.

The benefit -- collectively automotive CO2 emission will decrease at a faster rate than Tesla could ever do alone.

Most here could buy an $60-80 BMW, Mercedes or Audi ICE today. So when we all get a little annoyed, Keep in mind the "prize"... The little Blue Dot that's the 3rd Rock from the Sun.

Brian H | 09. November 2014

The little blue dot is about 20% greener than it would have been without that CO2 rise, however caused. Seen film of the liquid CO2 rising from ocean floor vents, and the superabundant sea life exploiting them?

aljjr2 | 09. November 2014

There are all types of life forms that live in what Humans would consider hostile environments.

You are correct Brian H. There are superabundant life forms living acidic CO2 vents at pressures 100X the atmosphere.

NONE ARE HUMANIOD... | 09. November 2014

Don't do it, Brian. It's a trap...

Brian H | 09. November 2014

Yeah, I know, and a superficial and trivial one at that.

Remnant | 10. November 2014

@ LeonardD (November 6, 2014)

<< Range varies, but the average is 265 miles. >>

Further range increases can be obtained from:

(1) Replacement of the rearview protruding structures (whether mirrors or stalked cameras) with flush-mounted rearview cameras could increase the range by 5 to 6 percent and is likely to be supplied in the MX from the get-go.

(2) Replacement of the brake-based torque vectoring (BTV) with an electric torque vectoring (ETV) system could increase the range by up to 10 percent. EVDrive, Inc. supplies ”Off-the-shelf” ETV Drive system conversion packages of this kind.

(3) Adoption of a new commercially available battery, such as the Amprius silicon-nanotube-anode battery or the Ryden dual-carbon battery could increase the range by up to 20%.

Gert van Veen | 16. November 2014

There is much to do on the battery capacity and range. But it is not the problem, the time required to recharge?

Remnant | 16. November 2014

@ Gert van Veen (November 16, 2014)

<< But it is not the problem, the time required to recharge? >>

Well, range and recharge rate are related, aren't they?

A longer range and a faster recharge will reduce the recharge down time and thus also the time you need to spend in transit to your destinations.

Brian H | 16. November 2014

It will be interesting to see if ANY majors acknowledge that, and go for long BEV range. So far, a wisp of vapourware is all I see from them.

Gert van Veen | 17. November 2014

Of course, a calculation.
Drive 850 miles. 85 miles / hour. Charge Required number of times, 3. Charging time is 40 minutes. Total time 12:00. If the charging time 10 minutes saves this 1:30. If two charging cycles saving 00:40.

TeoTeslaFan | 19. November 2014


After Tesla's Model X email yesterday I have now updated my predictions for the next gen battery. You can find all the data in the opening message here.

This is not vapourware. We have confirmation from both Panasonic and Tesla that the Gigafactory will produce next gen cells. JB even gave a specific number which is 10-15% improvement in energy density. In a recent Securities and Exchange Commission document (7 Nov 2014) Tesla has also confirmed that GF production will start in 2016 and the cells will be used for Model S and X. You can find all sources in that topic in the opening message. I have just updated it.

To summarize, my predictions are as follows:

New Battery Size: 105 kWh
Release Date: Aug 2016
EPA Range:
367 miles Model S105D
357 miles Model S105 & P105D
334 miles Model X105
300 miles Model S85D
290 miles Model S85
272 miles Model X85 | 19. November 2014

@Teo: your prognostications are much less vapourous (vaporous?) than in the past IMO. We are almost identical in our guesses about the future course of Tesla battery packs. I believe that there will actually be four packs that derive from GF development effort to produce a cell with superior characteristics: 60 and 85 kWh packs in a new more compact format for the Model ≡ and two in the current format: 85 and 110 kWh.

The new S and X 85 pack will be lighter and less expensive than today's version pushing MS rated range to just over 300 miles. (MS will also lose some weight by design).

I can't divulge how I arrived at these predictions. Be thankful for that.

rn | 19. November 2014

10-15% energy density improvements can be obtained with just pouring new electrolyte chemistry into the current 18650 cells that will get assembled into existent battery packs, no mechanical changes!.

This is what I predict as the next 'upgrade' for the Model X and soon for the Model S. And that upgrade can happen anytime in 2015 and that is why there is no need for the GigaFactory. I bet you Tesla will be quietly shipping new 18560 electrolyte upgrades in Mode S before Model X starts rolling out and 'reveal' the upgrade with a software patch. :)

A different battery format, about 10% taller / wider / whatever will yeld another 10-15% increase but will also require new battery pack design and that is for late 2016, IMHO. :)

2015 new electrolyte upgrade on existent 18560 batteries, no battery pack changes, both avail for Model S/X
2016 2015 electrolyte + bigger cell format, new battery pack, both will be avail for Model X and S.

TeoTeslaFan | 19. November 2014

Since my last message here I updated that topic again and added a quote from Elon's 5 Nov 2014 conference call that supports the idea that 2015 is too early for next battery. I also added details about different versions on how my predictions changed.

Thanks for comments. If you haven't checked the latest version I suggest you look at the opening message in that topic I linked above. I changed it and added more info after you wrote your message here.

rn | 19. November 2014

Thank you for the excellent information.

Brian H | 20. November 2014

It's a peculiarity of chained reasoning that uncertainties don't cancel, but multiply. In the sequence 0.1 x 0.9 x 0.99, the dominant factor is 0.1, and the result is (to the nearest significant digit) 0.09.

Just sayin'. | 20. November 2014

I changed my mind. The high end battery will be 110.09 kWh.

ian | 20. November 2014

All I can say is that when larger capacity batteries are available from Tesla, they are willing to retrofit them into older cars. For a price, of course.


annekristip | 21. November 2014

The question is what to do with used battery if someone replaces it with higher capacity? Thats too pricey today to use as power bank or recycle. I have 60 on order, if that will fail year 6 for sure there is no 60 replacement available under warranty. Probably will get a used 85 battery. I assume that the cars will stay with present battery and it makes more sense to buy a new car with higher capacity battery. There is plenty of potential buyers for Model S who can afford only used car. The need for bigger pack comes from competition, as long as nobody comes out with similar range, there is no need for it. BMW i5 is the closest thing in future, but still far away. BMW would not want to produce a car which will be significantly behind Tesla in technology, range. The real big change will happen when Tesla gets up to same build quality and interior as BMW/Porsche. To sell a premium car will need a really high brand image.

TeoTeslaFan | 21. November 2014


"need for bigger pack comes from competition".

That's not the only reason. Another reason is California ZEV rules which apply to 11 other states besides California and correspond to 28% of car sales in the US.

According the ZEV rules if Teslas have 300 mile range and Tesla opens a swap station they will qualift for higher credits. The rules specifically say 300 mile range. Neither Model X or S qualify.

They get only 3 credits per car if the range is 299 miles but they get 9 credits for 300 miles. Each credit is worth $4000. Tesla will lose $24,000 USD per car in ZEV credits in 2015, 2016 and 2017 for each car they sell in 12 ZEV states. In 2015 Tesla is expected to sell 6700 cars in ZEV states. That is $160 million lost profit. That money comes from other car makers who will pay it to Tesla. It is not government money.

According the ZEV rules car makers like Honda and Nissan need to purchase ZEV credits from car makers like Tesla. If Tesla can not provide enough credits they have to pay California $5,000 for each missing ZEV credit.

Quote: "California has unique authority under Section 209 of the Clean Air Act to issue vehicle emission standards that are stricter than the federal vehicle standards. Other states can adopt California’s standards at their discretion, but cannot adopt their own standards under Section 177 of the Clean Air Act."
(source: check discussion on swap topic page 6, third link below)

Here is the source for ZEV states being 28% of US sales:

This is the source for 300 mile requirement in ZEV rules:

And here is confirmation from Tesla that they sell cars in 11 other ZEV states besides California:

$160 million a year is a pretty good incentive for a company that is losing money. The 300 mile requirement goes into effect from 2015 and it will continue in 2016 and 2017 too. ZEV credits will continue until 2025. There is huge incentive for Tesla to introduce a new battery as soon as possible when the technology is ready. They are trying to speed up Gigafactory construction.

If S85D doesn't score 300 miles EPA, we should expect a new battery in 2015 before the Model X.

TeoTeslaFan | 21. November 2014

I meant to say Honda and Mercedes. They made the biggest purchases. Check the tables under "Manufacturer Transfers" here:

aljjr2 | 08. Januar 2015

From TESLA in the Roadster Upgrade Blog.

"The Roadster 3.0 package applies what we've learned in Model S to Roadster. No new Model S battery pack or major range upgrade is expected in the near term."

So, I would think any rumors of a new or different battery should be laid to rest. Unless something big changes in the interim "near term".

Sin_Gas | 15. Januar 2015

I wonder if Tesla gets ZEV credits for a Roadster 3.0 upgrade with 400 mile range? Not a sale but care with upgrade would. Maybe a remanufactured vehicle?

Sin Gas

Red Sage ca us | 15. Januar 2015

No. The original title on the vehicle would be the determining factor.

Sin_Gas | 16. Januar 2015

Hello Red Sage

Since the original title on the vehicle did not qualify as the range was less than 300 miles, I wonder if an upgrade program that does give the 300+++ mile range would qualify?

Seems like the car would get the ZEV credits if it was sold today with the upgrade, and it was a new car. Since it has great longevity, I wonder if some sort of exception or incentive would be in place. From what I have heard, CARB is pretty strict, but they are in the business of promoting zero emissions.

Just a thought.

Red Sage ca us | 16. Januar 2015

ZEV Credits are available for all new production vehicles with a qualifying Zero Emissions Drivetrain. But the main word there is... 'new'. Not 'like new'. Not 'refurbished'. Not 'upgraded'. Not 'customized'. That's why Chevrolet won't get ZEV Credits when I convert an old El Camino to electric drive some day.

And the 285/300 miles thing is only to qualify for additional ZEV Credits through the use of battery swap. The upgraded Tesla Roadsters are not compatible with battery swap stations. The physical configuration of the battery pack is completely different.

TeoTeslaFan | 16. Januar 2015

The latest speculation is, the MX will have 20% lighter 85 kWh battery and achieve same range as MS. This speculation originates from somebody who claimed insider knowledge here.

The guy looks credible and the things he said make sense. It is a shame the moderators there removed the CAD drawing he added of the latest MX design.

If this is true I would assume the same battery will be available to MS 6 months after the MX release. With this lighter battery MS should achieve 24 miles range improvement according my calculation and 0-60 times should improve too.

Gen3Joe | 17. Januar 2015


I'm only getting around 7 miles of range improvement at 65 mph with a 250 lb weight reduction. The big range improvement will be in city driving due to the mass reduction. I don't think anyone really cares about in city range increases though.

Gen3Joe | 17. Januar 2015

I'm betting they are going to have to put slightly more kWh in the 60 and the 85 to make up for the loss of highway range due to the larger cross sectional area. They will probably still call the models the 60 and the 85 though. | 17. Januar 2015

@Teo: a 20% lighter battery pack would save probably less than 200 pounds and would have no effect on drag. If this were to drop the weight of the MX from 5,000 pounds to 4800 pounds, that's only a 4% reduction in rolling friction which accounts for about 150 WH/mile of energy use (my guess based on 140 WH/mile for the MS85). 4% of 150 is 6 wh/mile. Suppose the MX uses 350 WH/mile at 65 mph (That equates to an estimated range of 242 miles). 6 WH per mile savings would reduce that to 344 WH/mile, resulting in a 1.7% increase in range at 65, maybe about 4 miles of added range. Otherwise, I agree with your post.

illioilli | 30. Januar 2015

Can anyone confirm that a "graphene-enhanced" battery will be used in the roadster? Stated here:

"A big breakthrough was achieved on Dec. 4 when the so-called super battery for electric vehicles which charges in eight minutes due to the graphene polymer technology was released by Spanish company Graphenano and the University of Cordoba in Spain.

US electric car company Tesla Motors announced the launch of the Roadster 3.0 on Dec. 26, 2014. The 3.0 version of the car uses graphene in the production of the battery, which increases its energy storage capacity significantly. The battery range improves by 50% which enables the 3.0 version to travel 644 km on one charge, a non-stop drive from San Francisco to Los Angeles, according to Tesla." | 30. Januar 2015

I may have to eat my words about improved Li-ion battery capacity.

This private company in Michigan, XG Sciences (, has been manufacturing graphene products for a couple years.

It is possible that Panasonic has found a way to benefit from the use of graphene in its Li-ion battery anode design. There could be some merit to the rumors re:Tesla, maybe, maybe.

aljjr2 | 01. Februar 2015

Interesting. I had to go back and look at the Roadster Blog for 3.0.
The original Roadster battery was the very first lithium ion battery put into production in any vehicle. It was state of the art in 2008, but cell technology has improved substantially since then. We have identified a new cell that has 31% more energy than the original Roadster cell. Using this new cell we have created a battery pack that delivers roughly 70kWh in the same package as the original battery.

I misread it originally as the Battery technology used in the S. After seeing the graphene enhanced article and re-reading, it seems plausible.

Will have to wait and see where it shows up in Tesla.

Remnant | 08. Februar 2015

@ (January 30, 2015)

<< .... about improved Li-ion battery capacity. >>

The immediate competitive challenge seems to come from VW/Audi/Porsche and the All Electron Battery (Patent US 8524398 B2) to be launched later this year by QuantumScape that VW has just invested in (at 5%).

vandacca | 08. Februar 2015

@Remnant, Elon Musk's primary focus is on battery technology, because that is the biggest limiting factor to Tesla today. Tesla is constantly evaluating new technologies all the time and if there is a better battery out there, you can be sure that Tesla not only has heard about it, but that they are aggressively investing in it.

As Elon stated many times, there are multiple new and disruptive battery technologies being announced every week. Show him a production ready sample, and then he'll invest in it immediately.

If QuantumScape indeed plans to show a working sample by mid-2015, I wouldn't expect them to be in a production vehicle until 2017 (at the earliest, assuming that VW aggressively implements it immediately). But like many of the super-capacitors before it, I suspect that this is vapour ware.

Remnant | 08. Februar 2015

@ vandacca (February 8, 2015)

<< I suspect [the QuantumScape battery] is vapour ware. >>

You might be right.

It seems Elon has been aware of QuantumScape for a while and is more likely to use a graphene-enhanced polymeric battery from Spain, marketed by Graphenano & University of Cordoba.

Iowa92x | 08. Februar 2015


vperl | 08. Februar 2015

Why is no one mentioning here the we get Model X battery ? Being built off campus ! 170 kW battery same size and mass with better enhanced packing of the cell structure?

Oh, well. Never mind.

Brian H | 08. Februar 2015

Wha?? Spak Engloosh mosh?

vperl | 09. Februar 2015

Brian, exactly, your a genius !

Just ask yourself !

Besides the other positions you hold on these forums, what other skills do you have ?

Heard Tesla is looking to fill a opening.

Trust me.

EQC | 09. Februar 2015

vperl: I think Brian H was suggesting that your post was unclear, possibly due to errors or type-o's. For example: "the we get Model X battery" -- what does that mean? Are you speaking of a Model X battery that "we" (reservation holders) will "get"? Or something else?

Can you clarify what you meant in your post?

Do you have an inside source telling you Tesla's Model X battery plans?

Is 170 kWh going to be one of the optional battery capacities at launch? Or it is just being developed for some future use?

Do you know why they are developing off-campus when much of their main factory is effectively unused, and could be kept "private"?

When you ask "why is no one mentioning" -- maybe it is because we don't have the info that you apparently have. We might mention it more if you made some details clear...

vperl | 09. Februar 2015


You heard it here first, it is " coming soon "

Trust me.

raffael s. | 10. Februar 2015

@vperl if someone uses the term: "Trust me." to often, I become sceptic, if he talks cryptic my specs just rises, and if he STARS USING CAPITAL LETTERS. It makes every thing he says just unbelievable. So it would be very kind of you, if you could make one post with everything you want to tell us. Like this:
-there is an battery built of campus. It has a capacity of up to 170kwh and I know/assume it because...
-It will use graphene/solid-state/hyper-space technology which i know/assume because my dogs brothers friends grandmas cat told me.
it would make reading your posts so much easier, especially if english is not your native language(like me)
Thank you in advance

jjs | 10. Februar 2015

I'm going to start making popcorn. | 10. Februar 2015

Thank you, vperl and Raffael for doing your best to communicate your thoughts in English on this Forum. Having no real second language, I would be hard-pressed to do as well in a language other than English. It must be frustrating for you to have your posts misunderstood because of linguistic issues. Keep trying anyway.