Featured Solid State Battery 10 Minute Charge Toyota - Lets Go Places

hmm. What?
Its toyota not me calling their 2021 mirai a ev, but I do agree that they put everything in there to rip out the fuel cell and hydrogen parts and just put in batteries, bms, electronics, and charger. The prime definitely is not designed at all to be a bev, and would require extensive modification.

Rav4 prime? Well toyota has already done a lot of the NRE to add a fairly large battery pack with the Toyota/Tesla Rav4 BEV. If solid state actually has twice the energy density (kwh/l) as the 2012 tesla pack then they can easily put 80 kwh in the older rav4 ev with plenty of energy and power. The motors (mg2, and mg3) are a little undersized for the task, but swap out the mg3 with the mirai motor and work on the software and you probably have a nice platform.

Then again its a small run prototype for 2021.

Take a look at the tesla model 3. you don't need that much room for batteries even to go 350 miles on a charge. Solid state are supposed to be smaller. The mirai is much bigger on the outside and a little smaller on the inside than a 350 mile bev. Those hydrogen tanks to go 400 miles are much bigger. They needed space to put the fuel cell under hood (better design) which may be why you think the hood is high, or it may just be the way they designed it for looks. Batteries are best low to the ground. It makes the car safer and handle better.

 

The Mirai has a single motor connected to the drive axle. The Prius has two plus an engine. It is unnecessarily complicated for showing off and testing new batteries.

 

A detailed analysis and assessment of something, especially a literary, philosophical, or political theory?

No, not even close.

 

Austin, I was not attributing that first statement to you. You attributed it to Toyota, and I find it odd that they would want to do that.

I do find Austin's assertion that there is that much to be done to convert a prime to 100% ev mode. Yes, it would need more batteries. Yes, it would benefit from a fast charger. But the basics for running a Prime as an EV are there. It will run for extended periods of time on battery power alone. It can charge from the grid. It runs all environmental controls from the battery. All the running gear (steering, brakes, acceleration, etc) are already "by wire" and all power assist is from the traction battery.

I agree that you don't need much in the way of batteries... I just read that the tesla battery packs can be up to 1200 pounds. Wow. I can see where reinforcing the body and suspension would be in order. Is that what you were trying to say Austin?

 

I would think that using a PHEV could be ideal. If you could use 1/2 the space for the same range it would allow an upgrade of basic existing models with less impact on the interior space. Or refitting the existing Prime design with the new batteries might allow lowering the rear deck by the few inches that were used by the current battery pack.

As a person who has run a few dozen technology test programs I can assure you that the existence of a spare motor or engine will not adversely impact testing the technology. After all, a few hundred pounds of ICE is nothing compared to the half a ton of batteries that some BEV carry in the off chance that they may want to take a long ride.

Imagine a Rav4-Prime with the same dimensions and weight as it currently has but with a 90 - 100 range in EV mode and that other 500+ in ICE mode... now THAT would be a game changer, wouldn't it?

Dan

 

The excitement over solid state batteries is in the potential they bring to BEVs. A big one is in charging speed. PHEVs will benefit, but they don't have a need for all a solid state battery could provide. An ultra fast charge speed eliminates the need of an engine.

The Prius Prime's space issue is all because Toyota dropped the ball. Other PHEVs have done better, and Toyota did better with the Rav4. No need for some battery break through.

Any 100 mile PHEV will make renewable ICE more viable. The improvements solid state bring will be easier to justify the higher cost of in a BEV in the beginning though.

 

I suspect that the 2.5x energy density over Li-Ion will make a big difference in a lot of areas. I can see a lot of "pure BEV" models losing share when you can have a PHEV that has enough range for all normal commutes without having to pay an extra $20,000 for a thousand pounds of battery that are almost never needed.

Troll bait seems to be the only one obsessed with the Prius Prime size issue. Those that have found it wanting after actually using one needed a lot more than a few extra cubic feet. When you replace a Prius Prime with an SUV you are getting a LOT more room. LOL

Dan

 

Your estimates are high there. The Model 3 long range is 500 to 700 pounds heavier than a Camry, and it's price is in line with other sedans in its segment. That's not with the cells Tesla just unveiled. Those will lower price and weight.

"Or refitting the existing Prime design with the new batteries might allow lowering the rear deck by the few inches that were used by the current battery pack." - your post I was replying to.

 

Since you chose the Model3LR and Camry, let's see how they add up.

From wiki re Model 3: The Long Range version carries 4,416 cells arranged in 96 groups of 46, and weighs 1,060 pounds (480 kg) in a 0.40 m³ volume; a density of 150 Wh/kg.

I don't think my estimates are too far off. More than 1/4 of the Model 3lr weight is battery.

So given that the battery pack is > 1000 pounds and
given the range of the Model 3LR is ~350 miles and
the average commute is less than 44 miles (google)

The obvious conclusion is that most Model 3lr drivers have paid for a battery that is at least 4 times bigger than is needed.

As for "and it's price is in line with other sedans in its segment." The Tesla MSRP (per insideevs) is $48,190. The most expensive Camry that I can find is $35,545. (Camry was used in Toll Bait's post as a comparison) Is the Tesla really 37% more than the Camry? Wow.

Oh Well. New batteries will make it all better.

 

Camry was just the first to come to mind for the weight comparison. The sales segment of Tesla is upscale and luxury. BMW and Mercedes are the price comparison.

And for those whose daily drive is met by their EV range, they paid for an ICE in their PHEV that isn't needed.

And Model 3 buyers that aren't planning on going on long trips, or wanting the fastest, will get car with smaller battery for lower price. I used the long range to show maximum weight difference. The Model 3SR is 200 pounds heavier than a Camry at most. Depending on equipment, they could weigh the same.

The big draw of solid state batteries is faster charging. The thread title claims 10 minutes. With the chargers for that in place, the main reason for having an engine in a plug in no longer exists.

That is why Toyota and others are using BEVs for demos and testing. Having an engine on production version means having to comply with emission regulations; even with a renewable fuel, which is a big expense. Part of Tesla's profits on cars is because they don't have to deal with that.

 

I watched a video published a few days ago, comparing Tesla's upcoming new battery to Toyota's effort to deliver a solid-state battery. It was a great example of how many don't recognize what leadership can truly mean. They focus on milestones, rather than where the overall journey is attempting to take them. In other words, it's the classic long-term verses short-term perspective problem. This is what I had to say about the video:

That was an understatement of goals. They are mentioned up front, but unfortunately are totally forgotten beyond the introduction. "A recharge from zero to full in 10 minutes. All with minimal safety concerns." is important information not to be glossed over. The same is for this too: "The electric vehicles being developed by Toyota will have a range more than twice the distance of a vehicle running on a conventional lithium-ion battery under the same conditions."

First problem is the "issue with cycle-life" comment. Tesla batteries reach their extreme age by not being pushed. With aggressive liquid-cooling and limited SuperCharging at slower DCFC rates, of course those cells will last a very long time. However, we know for a fact that repeated SuperCharging at the fastest speed commonly available (prior to 2021 is 120 kW) will impact their longevity, shorting life of the battery. That's the goal Toyota is working to overcome, without any special cooling, at much faster charging rates.

Toyota's efforts are to significantly surpass Tesla's charging speed, reducing it to a fraction of the time and allowing it to be charged that way on a regular basis. Failure to point out that fundamental difference is a serious oversight, especially knowing reduced need for cooling will result in cost reduction. The industry requires a means of extremely fast recharging to be able to reach consumers who won't have regular access to overnight recharging. There is an obvious benefit to long-distance travel as well.

Second, the push for solid-state is that elimination of liquid electrolyte will also deliver a significant improvement in energy-density. This will allow the physical size of the battery-pack to shrink, making it much smaller than what Tesla's upcoming new cell approach. That is vital to be able to offer vehicles without sacrificing the ability to compete directly with traditional choices.

Third, don't forget about audience. Reaching Toyota's over 10 million customers per year is far more difficult than Tesla's 1/2 million. Growth to that scale will require the goals solid-state development is striving to achieve. Without those speed, density, safety, and cost improvements, increasing sales will continue to be a major challenge. Ordinary mainstream consumers are far more demanding than early-adopters.

 

extended period? Link? 200 or 300 miles of battery? More battery means more weight -
our moderator of the north pointed out years ago, that the reason the Prius V wasn't a platform for a plugin (seems it'd be great, as it'd hold more battery being a larger foot print) because it was built as light as possible so it'd still do great mpg's. It would need to be a much more beefy frame - bigger breaks better cooling, more crash tests, many things heavier etc just to run as a plugin - much less a full ev.
As for the Mirai -
wiki reports the Mirai as having a nickel chemistry pack, akin to the Camry. Ever try & see how far a non-plugin goes on a 'full' charge from its ICE? One of several problems with hydrogen cars is akin to the Old testament story of Salomon, who suggests sawing a baby in half so each alleged mom can have a baby (excuse me if that's waxing philosophical, as john1701a eats that shizzle up ).
Big battery in a Mirai or Prime? more weight ... needs heavier frame, including more weight for heavier frame ... then it needs bigger motor for more weight ... now it costs more - and more battery means more battery thermal management tech. Toyota's keep it cheap by going air cooled. Big battery can't get away with puny cooling. So in a mostly battery powered scenario, Prime (or Mirai) become more expensive than many can afford. That doesn't bode well, "for the masses".
Put an even smaller battery in a Mirai? needs a much larger platinum fuel stack ... much more cost.
Whether it's the Solomon story, or the Mirai story or a big battery Prius Prime ... either way, no one looking at costs is satisfied ... maybe not satisfied a LOT.

Weather a plugin hydrogen car or for a prime. You do need more battery if you are on a long grade, fully loaded, going freeway speed, maybe running lots of AC .... putting your foot into it to pass on a grade ... and then you need heavier frame, better traction pack cooling etc .... hydrogen cars need less & less battery (weight) if they have a larger & larger fuel stack. Back to higher costs. It's why bloggers can't reinvent the hydrogen car OR an all-EV Prime.

chassis reinforcement versus weight/suspension is a big consideration for every car that gets heavier battery loads, & if a plugin hydrogen car (or all EV prime) has enough weight to run far on battery (plus weight of gearbox, fuel stack, hydrogen tanks etec) power, then it gets heavier via all its components & even more over-priced for the masses.
As to Tesla, its traction pack is integrated into the frame in such a way that it becomes part of the chassis' integrity - rather than a pure weight liability.

SS battery will be a game changer, eventually, if only due to weight reduction. But for now, that's pie in the sky. We'll see eventually, how the early demo versions go. Then we wait some more, for costs to come down.

car talk ... car buying ... car manufacturing isn't meant to be turned into theory. if we try & turn car topics into math theorems - (saying, "the what" ... "the who" ... etc) it confuses people & no one knows what you're talking about & it tends to make the say-er look like they're trying to sound smart. It's likely you are smart, so you don't need to do that.
.

 

Mg2 and electronics really need to be upgraded. Then the chassis is not designed to carry batteries well so more engineering work involved there. I'm not saying the body style is bad for a bev (well the look is rather eye of the beholder), but it requires work that likely doesn't have much of a payoff on a proof of concept. For 2025 sure, but by then they likely will have something better.

A model 3 standard plus is 260 mile epa range. It only weighs a little more than a prime (3552lbs versus 3365lbs for the lightest prime). Solid state is supposed to need less cooling and less volume so it would likely if designed right might be the same weight as the current prime with sold state 250 mile range. Designing it right costs money though, and Toyota appears to want to put out a demo of an electric on the larger mirai platform. At least the motor and electronics work has already been done. For me the best demo would be on a old rav4 bev. Cheap and easy swap and we could tell exactly the benefits of solid state versus those 2012 designed lion cells, which are still quite good today in 2020. Then again that might not be a great demo.

Close - the energy of the pack was 80.5 kwh about 75 kwh usable, with a battery cell weight of 320 kg, and balance of cooling loops, bms, electronics, charger, casing adding 120kg to get to those 480 kg. Full pack density 168 wh/kg for the pack. The standard plus has a slightly lower density because that other stuff take up a bigger proportion. Solid state should be able to have higher power density.

And most people don't need the 100 kg and power that awd adds. Really I drive mine in chill mode most of the time because my gf gets car sick if I accelerate close to what my lr awd car can do. I do like having awd in the nasty rainstorms we get, but really when I need it I shouldn't be driving anyway. standard plus wasn't available when I bought mine. Standard plus probably should be the comparison which weighs about the same as the camry hybrid or v6. Price is $37,990 if you get it in white and includes autopilot. Which means after fuel, maintenance, etc it is cheaper to own than the camry v6, but price is much higher than those base models.

 

I made the statement to the effect that a Prime will run for an extended period of time on battery alone. That was challenged by Austingreen as to what extensive means. Let me put it this way: I drove my Prime exclusively from late Feb to August in EV mode without switching over to ICE mode. Not even once. That included city, freeway, valleys and hills. 25 MPH in city and 65+ on the freeways.

I'm not going to bother addressing the rest of his post... He obviously has never had to build prototypes (I have) and seems to have never driven a Prime. He does not notice that the new SS technology allows installing a 125 lb battery pack in place of a 250 lb pack with the same performance and faster charging and less weight. The alternative, of course, is to install twice the power in the same form factor without changing anything except charging parameters.

I'm looking forward to the new generation of batteries, no matter how long it takes to get here.

 

No absolutely believe you, but if you are going to show off solid state batteries it is a poor demo for a car that accelerates so poorly over 40 mph. I think it was hill that challenged You Do need to show both fast charging and usable power and energy.

If you charge 8 kwh in 10 minutes with solid state, its no trick. My model 3 can charge much faster than that. The new long range model 3s can charge about 140 miles of the 350 mile pack in 10 minutes. Yes a decade ago I built lots of demos. I would never do one that performed much worse than the competition. And I did agree Toyota could do it on the prime, it just would be a more money that they have decided not to do. I'd expect at least a 200 mile pack. Charge 200 miles (80% of a 250 mile pack) in 10 minutes then you have something especially if it can cost less. Build a 350 mile pack and the infrastructure may not be there yet to do it 80% in 10 minutes. I never understood the 5 minute metric, as most of us don't need to charge that often on the road.

I too hope they show something good next year.

 

That's not the way that it works. Demos and testing don't have to be anywhere near what a production machine will be.

Demos often have large parts of the system mocked up. I attended a demo by a major computer maker who was advocating lightweight (low power) network based computers. They demonstrated a very nice system. Unfortunately someone tripped and knocked over the table where real computers were hidden which drove the demo display.

Test beds are often kludged onto existing systems with wires going all over the place. They only have to work long enough to complete the tests.

Prototypes, on the other hand, are often used to verify that the design will work in a production environment. Even so, it's not unusual to see a mule where half of the machine is old technology and half is the prototype that you are testing. This lets you test the parts that are ready will working the bugs out of the other parts.

Bringing it full 360 to the subject. While the BEV folks see the SS battery as the cure for their vexxing charging problems, the same tech can improve an already good system like the Prime since it's higher energy density with less mass. That's a win-win where longer EV range is desired.

Dan

 

The new Mirai has switched Li-ion in the 2021.

Wasn't denying it wouldn't be good for a PHEV. I and others are just saying that a BEV is a better platform for demonstrating what solid state is capable of. Then getting to production, the first cars to use SS batteries will be BEVs, because the additional benefits they'll see with it, make it easier to justify the higher cost. The weight and space savings are useful to a PHEV, but it has an engine and gas tank, why pay more for fast charging. Most PHEVs in North America don't even have a DC charge option.

Outside North America, the Prius Prime may have the DC charging option, but it is also a blended PHEV; there is no EV only mode. Call for heavy acceleration, and the car fires up the engine. Easy enough to not have the SS car do that, but without the changes @austingreen mention, it will be slower than a Prius when just in EV mode.

Meanwhile, the drive train in the Mirai is already pure EV, and the frame is ready to take batteries in where they won't compromise the car's handling. Without the fuel cell and hydrogen tanks, there is space through the car's length for batteries. Plus the frame was designed to carry the weight of the FC and tanks. There is a chance a Mirai ssBEV will outperform the FCEV model.

 

is there a link that shows Tesla isn't just as privy to SS batterries? After all - writing that Toyota's efforts are to significantly surpass Tesla's charge speed (as opposed to VW's charge speed?) necessarily means only Toyota will be using Panasonic (or whom ever else get there 1st) SS chemistry, right?
iirc - panasonic & tesla have very nice working Arrangements. Toyota at one time left Panasonic in the lurch - back in the days of old when Toyota RAV4 gen-1 tech was abandoned. So before doing the Toyota happy dance, it might take several years before we see who (if anyone) does what, regarding solid-state mass-produced, cheap, long lasting solid state batteries.
.

 

There are multiple companies working on solid state batteries. I think Ford will start testing packs from Solid Power in cars in 2022. Solid Power has already started production for prototype cars, but also have partnerships with BMW and others. Their ss cells are made on existing battery production equipment, so the switch over for their tech can be fairly quick and low cost, if the batteries work out.

Very little is known about the cells Toyota is working on. If it requires a novel manufacturing process, roll out will be slower and more expensive.

I don't see Tesla not looking into solid state, but by most accounts, it is a further out technology. What they unveiled this summer is going into commercial production before then.

 

Tesla already has a pilot plant for the 4680 batteries in California and a plan to produce there the cells at rate of 10 GWh annually, in late 2021.

The broader plan is for 100 GWh annually at some point in 2022. That would mean that somewhere there must be a new plant for at least 90 GWh annually, which would be the world's largest EV battery plant.​

Tesla Giga Austin To Produce 4680-Type Battery Cells, But When?

We should add Foxconn (Apple iPhone contract manufacturer) to the list of a number of mentioned players working on a solid state battery. They previously announced they would commercialize solid state battery technology by 2024.