Tesla 4680 vs Rivian 4695 Battery Technology | Which is Better?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 чер 2024
- Save 5% off of your JOWUA Tesla accessories Purchase: www.jowua-life.com/CLEANERWATT | Coupon Code: CLEANERWATT
NOTE: When you purchase JOWUA products using the link above, I earn a commission (at no extra cost to you) which helps support this channel.
Rivian just unveiled their new R2 SUV which should be available in 2026 which will be powered by large 4695 Cylindrical battery cells in a “highly structural battery pack.” In this video I examine Rivian’s new batteries and compare them to Tesla’s 4680 cells.
Munro Live UA-cam Video: • 4680 Battery Pack: Wha...
Support Cleanerwatt:
1. Join the Patreon Community: / cleanerwatt
2. Purchase Cleanerwatt Apparel: cleanerwatt.creator-spring.com/
Cleanerwatt Website: www.cleanerwatt.com/
** All video and pictures are used with permission or in accordance with the copyright owner's stated policies and use allowance, or applicable fair use laws. **
Image & Video Clip Sources:
1. Tesla images & video clips Courtesy of Tesla, Inc. (where noted in video).
2. Rivian video clips sourced from Rivian's website and UA-cam channel (where noted in video).
Data Sources:
Rivian 4695: www.motor1.com/news/711578/ri...
Samsung SDI 4695: www.thelec.net/news/articleVi...
Samsung SDI 4695: batteryindustry.tech/samsung-...
Rivian Layoff: uk.investing.com/news/stock-m...
www.motor1.com/news/711557/ri...
stories.rivian.com/meet-r2-an...
• R2, R3, R3X Revealed |...
NOTE: The content found in this video should NOT be regarded as financial advice. I am not a financial advisor, and this is NOT in any way a recommendation or offer to buy or sell securities. While the information in this video is believed to be accurate at the time of recording, no guarantees are being made about the accuracy of the information presented in the video. As of the recording of this video, I am NOT invested in Tesla stock or securities, nor any other company mentioned in this video. - Авто та транспорт
Save 5% off of your JOWUA Tesla accessories Purchase: www.jowua-life.com/CLEANERWATT | Coupon Code: CLEANERWATT
FYI: It is not Tesla vs Rivian. Tesla alone cannot produce enough 4680. So, they invited battery suppliers to to produce 4680. So far, three South Korean companies (LG EnSol, Samsung SDI and Kumyang) have successfully developed the 46xx. Samsung SDI will produce 4680, 4695, 46110 & 46120; LG EnSol will produce 4680, 4695, etc.; and Kumyang will produce 4695. European OEMs had asked for longer versions of 46xx. That is why the three companies have developed 46xx instead of just 4680. Kumyang announced that they had a meeting with Rivian last year regarding the 4695. The rumor is that Rivian will get 4695 from more than one supplier.
They don't produce the batteries themselves because it's cheaper to outsource to 3rd party manufacturers.
Prototypes are easy production is hard. Good luck to you battery start ups. Catl Panasonic and Tesla (Redwood) will be the only 3 standing in 5 years.
4680 ramp is ahead of the rest of the Cybertruck and since they order other types of cells cheap (and CATL & BYD cells are also structural) there's no rush to ramp Gen1 or even Gen2 4680s. They'll figure out dry coating and thinner casing and density will jump 10-15% in 2 yrs.
That said, Rivian using (currently non-existing) 4695 makes sense and using the same number of taller cells would've give Cybertruck a nice 18% range boost so rather than two rows, just using 4695 or 46120 makes sense in very large vehicles. We don't yet know how well 4695 will handle heat and internal resistance tho, ramping 4695/46120 may take even longer than 4680.
Tesla is the only one producing their own batteries.
@@Hugo-py2ce In North America, yes, but only for the low volume Cybertruck for now. BYD for example is also producing their own.
Informative and excellent info on various battery issues and designs
Very informative .. thanks.
Regarding the 18% more volume-energy density perhaps potential for even higher depending on chemistry. Aptera’s CEO Chris Anthony talked about this with their 21 mm by higher than 70mm future cells (very hypothetical still, but you get the point)because you can use a higher percentage of the cell for energy, since you don’t have to make the other buffer components larger
Cost benefit, head start, more experience in production, better experts, and a track record of doing what was impossible, my money is on Tesla
Agreed
4680 battery is a failure
@@ericp4573 keep dreaming baby 👶, wake up and smell 👃 the Tesla, your wishful thinking will surely lead you to your regrets if you don't wake up early 😂 pun absolutely intended!
4680 is also size/thermal optimal ratio for Tesla calculation. People saw 4695 and said wow it's nice to have 20% more volume but forgot to consider that battery required temperature control. If it's too hot, it's need to cool down. If it's too cold, it's need to warm up. More volume=less surface=harder to control evenly temperature throughout the cell. This is also why S/X and surely Roaster will still using 18650, because it's provide superior in thermal control for extremely use case
100%. Also, the entire reason of 4680 over 2170 was to reduce cost of manufacture. It’s possible 4695 will have worse yields over 4680 (just speculation - must be a reason Tesla didn’t go longer, as well as thermals)
Agree, Rivian does not appear to take heat transfer into consideration in their pack level design. They use cooling plates that limit contact area for conduction heat transfer and the contact points are not optimal (in some cases at the bottom of the battery). Batteries will not last as long as Tesla's serpentine cooling. Look at the Munro Rivian teardown.
Ahh yes, Tesla is expert and Rivian doesn’t know batteries get hot. I’m sure Tesla will launch a frivolous lawsuit that says Rivian can’t use 46mm diameter cell because Tesla First.
@@yolo_burrito Rivian didn't aim to make their own battery cell. So, they have no other choice but to buy it off the shelf from suppliers. This is why it has to be 46950 because it's an old standard that is available right now. Suppliers such as Samsung, CATL are planning to produce 4680 but until that's available. Rivian will stuck using inferior cell.
@@yolo_burritoHasn't the R1T been criticised for problems charging speeds plummeting during fast charging due to overheating?
Thanks John for your informative videos. Just a note, you did not consider the effect of extra battery weight (napkin calculation : 230 - 250 extra pounds) on range in your theoretical range example 4:35
True. Good point.
Hey John, I d like to know whal other 4680 battery maker are up to, any idea?
is the pink brick biodegradable?Can they at least separate the batteries out at end of life of the pack?
Will the R1t and R1S get the new battery?
Reality Check:
Tesla does not claim today that their in house 4680 battery is less expensive than batteries they buy from Panasonic or CATL. Panasonic will also supply 4680 batteries to Tesla.
Rivian, being a low volume manufacturer, probably could not build. batteries in house for less than Samsung SDI, who is also selling these batteries to BMW , GM and potentially others. In any event Rivian does not have the money to attempt to make batteries in house.
Rivian has its own brand identity and product line. The R2, which is proposed to cost $1000 more than a Tesla, has enough unique design features to not be a direct competitor.
Target does not expect to out compete Walmart directly on prices. In the near term Rivian cannot out compete Tesla on pricing. I do not expect either Target or Rivian to go out of business if they can maintain a separate identity and provide value for their customers.
While Panasonic delayed the mass production of 4680, LG EnSol will begin mass production in 2Q 2024. Samsung SDI and Kumyag will follow.
Seems a little crazy how Rivian copies Tesla whenever they can. I'm curious if they will copy Tesla's bed vault tanu cover soon?
Uhhh, you know the R1T had it First right?
@@yolo_burrito the way rivians tonneau cover works horrible, they will be doing a redesign probably like Tesla's is my point. I mean they copied their 2170 battery type as soon as it came out and they did the same now with the 4690
Good thing they’re not copying Tesla’s horrible car design.
Tesla is so far ahead of everyone and actually making money that there is no doubt anyone in this game is looking at, and analyzing Tesla's tech all the time.
@@mrwombat24 definitely not. They're going for the more vanilla mainstream look
The real question is. Is it a tablesss design . Or is it old school single tab at. The end of the roll.
It cannot be a single tab, the cell would heat up too much and too unevenly. I think it is a multi tab design instead, which should be okay but not as good as tabless.
@@tribalypredisposedYes I suspect it is multi-tab and that is why it is taller. They need additional vertical space for the multi -tab.
Large battery cell manufacturers have experience and scale of production and focus advantages over Tesla, I would not assume Tesla will be able to manufacture 4680 cells for the same cost or with the same energy density as every dedicated cell manufacturer. That Tesla can compete at all is amazing. We have no idea what the four big cell makers have coming in their innovation pipelines.
The huge advantage Tesla has is making the cells where they make the packs and cars; this means no packing, no shipping, no unpacking, no chances for damage happening in transit, no need to repack and ship defective cells. That is a huge cost and efficiency advantage.
Even though agree on the traditional battery manufacturers experience don't forget Tesla brought the 46XX to the market first and is the only one producing it at this time plus the dry process and the tabless electrodes are Tesla proprietary, makes it IMO not clear if those traditional manufacturers will produce better cells formats than Tesla.
..better and also cheaper!
BMW already announced using 4695 and 46120 cells. Rivian isn’t doing anything novel
Maybe Rivian wants its battery packs repairable and replaceable? That is a different philosophy from Tesla imo.
No one wants "repairable" battery packs. Labor is too costly. Ask folks at... who was it? Oh yeah. GM.
Exactly, Tesla wants you to throw away the whole battery
Rivian will be lucky to survive the next couple of years. The time line of two years before r2 production is awful. The fact that it’s base price of 45k is 10k higher than a RAV4 awd hybrid.
Rivian does not have Tesla's luck. Tesla had 16 years to reach profitability. Progress was tough, iffy, and nearly catastrophic, but Tesla hit profit in 2020. Rivian has to meet higher expectations...
Why are you speaking about Rivian battery, it is Samsung, LG, ... battery design, Rivian does not make batteries.
They designed them
Rivian didn't design the battery cells, they are designing the pack around the larger sized cells
Suppliers build on specs requests by the OEM. It’s not like Rivian goes out shopping and buy whatever is available.
@carlosnorris352 True, Rivian assembles the battery packs. However, the cells are standard items supplied by the manufacturers
Their batteries are probably made by either CATL or BYD, the same as Tesla.
Your whole misleading concept of Gen 1, 2, and 3 by Tesla is meaningless by saying Gen 1 by Rivian. Certainly Rivian (and all others) will have torn apart Gen 2 & 3 designs so Rivian Gen 1 is likely starting at the same place as Tesla Gen 2-3 designs.
Lol, just like completely failed to happen with the first generation of legacy automakers EVs. That said, he is wrong since Tesla is a continuous innovation company often or usually trying several different improvements at one time and constantly testing. A Cybertruck might have different battery chemistry than the one ahead of it on the production line. There are no Tesla generations.
They cannot copy the tabless design. The energy increase on Gen2 is due to a much taller jellyroll because they are able to weld the can directly to the flags. I suspect that the extra 15 mm of 4695 is to have room for multi tab design. Multi tab is the alternate technology for tabless. It has similar performance but it needs extra space so it is not as compact as tabless.
@@kazedcat wait a second ... 15 mm is 0.59 inches or 1.5 cm ... that is a LOT of space. No way tabless gets back 1.5 cm.
Tearing apart gives you ideas but they aren't copying. They still have to design their own, and figure out how to build it. For example, seeing a giga casting, and putting it into production on a new vehicle, is totally different.
@@Scott-sm9nm They also need space for PTC and current cutoffs that are not present in Tesla cells.
19% more volume doesn't mean 19% more energy.
Since you have overhead at the top and bottom (think current collectors, terminals, vents) that doesn't scale up as you lengthen the cell, the increase in energy is actually greater than the increase in volume.
Come on Jon !!! What a waste of time !!!
You don't know about the energy density of Rivian battery, you don't know the price, you don't know the life lenght (how many recharges), you don't know the behavior in cold weather, etc... In short you know nothing else than the can dimension !!!
I'm pretty sure neither Tesla nor Rivian make any batteries by themselves.
@@hermesliteratus882 Tesla's batteries are made by Tesla Themselves at Giga Texas and by Panasonic and LG. Rivian batteries are from Samsung (assembled in Illinois)
BMW is already using 4695 and 46120 cells. Like Rivian's, they are probably make using traditional battery design elements rather than Tesla's tab system and dry electrode. I believe both Rivian and BMW use anode end cooling rather than Tesla's side contact channels.
Tesla tried to reinvent core battery design and it hasn't gone well.
The rivian will definitely surprise you
Yeah, they suck.
@@KP-xi4bj Tesla cult with the deer in the headlights look. Haha, love it.
@@mrwombat24 Tesla sold 1.81M vehicles in 2023 globally and the Model Y was the best selling car in the world in 2023. Rivian sold how many? I rest my case. LMFAO SMH
Is a dry lfp 4680 possible?
Theoretically possible, but challenging in practice. Today Tesla applies the dry electrode method only to the anode side. They are still unable to do it in the cathode side. Of course the cathode is more important than the anode in term of battery performance.
@@johnshikingmountains3152Dry electrode is not about performance. The binder is not an active material so changing them does not change the batteries capacity.
I think prismatic makes more sense than does cylindrical for LFP battery cells, and this seems to be the industry trend. This is because LFP does not have the same fire risk as do nickel-based lithium-ion chemistries. A key reason to use cylindrical cells with metal cans is to compartmentalize any battery fire. Short of a sphere, a cylinder is the geometric shape that has the smallest surface area relative to its volume (i.e., lightest) and the greatest strength at resisting internal pressure. LFP is safe enough that a metal pressure container is not needed, and uses rectilinear geometries to achieve the best possible space efficiency.
@@astewart1900 Cylindrical cells are faster to produce. The machines that wound the jellyroll into tubes are much simpler than a machine that folds it.
Mr Pibb soda 🥤 is definitely a knockoff of Dr Pepper
See @mukamuka0 comment below. Is it true that 4680 has optimal thermal characteristics? If so, 4695 is a bad choice, despite its potentially larger Wh storage.
why are they going to 4680 when the 18650 is more energy dense than any other battery type? are they trying to boost the pack energy density with the larger cells?
The energy density comparison is misleading. The main reason Tesla chose the bigger 4680 is to reduce the number of cells per pack. --from thousands of 1865 cells to ~700 4680s.
@@johnshikingmountains3152 Yes, pack manufacturing is way easier with 4680…but Tesla also wanted to be able to use the cells essentially as bricks in a structural battery pack wall to lower cost of production and increase crash safety and torsional stiffness. All of the above though was secondary to the main reason, which was simply speed of production; it doesn’t take longer to make a 4680 than an 18650, but you get a lot more power from the 4680, and when you are trying to figure out how to ramp cell production to meet your expected demand, speed of production is everything.
Costs!!
@@johnshikingmountains3152 so they can make batteries much faster and use them in structural packs. and they seem to be getting close to the 18650 in terms of density, so that makes sense why they'd go with this shape of battery cells
Will ford be involved in the battery production?
Lithium battery involves sophisticated chemical knowhow. LG Chem (now LG Energy Solution is spun off from it) started developing a Li-ion battery from 10 years ago and has been pouring billions of $$$. Today there is no American company who can mass produce Li-ion batteries. Even Tesla imports Cathode materials, copper foils, aluminum foils, many cylindrical cell manufacturing equipment from Korea or China. In the joint venture between GM and LG, the arrangement is that GM pays money and LG Chem provides all technology.
@@johnshikingmountains3152 I was referring to BLUEOVALSK .
The fact that neither the us nor Europe has the capacity to produce batteries is horrible.
....... but they are working on that problem.
Goodness! I hope not. They never made one battery. Let's not ask Ford's advice on how to make a billion batteries.
@FrunkensteinVonZipperneck blueovalsk - check it out ( I'm not saying it will work)
Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery.
As long as they are not using pouch cells, we are all safer. A taller cell makes sense for a bigger vehicle, as it requires a taller pack, which makes sense in a truck. Rivian needs to partner with Tesla. The products are different enough that a partnership could work. Tesla is an EV innovator, while Rivian is more of a vehicle innovator (like Jeep).
A new Australia company has special pouch cells. Kangaroo Batty is hopping!
Is there a theoretical "optimal" battery size?
Edit : no
Tesla claims that 4680 is the optimal size. But it depends on OEMs or cars (car vs SUV vs pickup truck). European OEMs asked South Korean battery suppliers for 4695, 46110 & 46120 (for longer range or for SUV applications). As you know SUVs and pickup trucks have room for taller 46xx cells.
Optimal design is dependent on chemistry and load requirements. This is why Tesla is trying asymmetric electrodes they are optimizing the cell design for their particular load.
I guess the optimization depend on the technology used in the design. Not always the bigger is the better.
@@marioescalona1640 There is a limit to how big the cell can be because you need to be able to extract the heat from the core. How much heat you need to extract is dependent on internal resistance and the power draw. Internal resistance is dependent on chemistry and power draw is dependent on load.
In the long run Tesla will make more profit making its own cells, but all costs associated with making them costs Tesla wayyyyyyy more than it will cost Rivian to put the first 70.000 vehicles on the road. Tesla has spent billions and billions on 4680’s. Tesla is married to that design for a long time. While Rivian can easily swap out cells for new improved designs. Also Tesla is also buying 4680’s from other battery manufacturers.
Pure play bev demand remains strongly persistent if that be a term so this bodes well for continued Industry innovation far beyond now just the battery alone #Aptera although certainly there is that. "Big battery" is a big deal, absolutely true.
Problem with the fat battery is keeping them heated and cooled while charging making for issues while charging.
That’s the reason for the tabless electrode design - to reduce electrical resistance and improve heat transfer. If you’ll recall when Tesla revealed the 4680 they said they expected to achieve 5x energy (because 4680 is ~5x the volume of a 2170) but 6x power. That power increase is due to tabless.
Rivian is trying to stay afloat by issuing debt. In 2023, Rivian received $3.2 bill via convertible notes Despite the $3.2 bill injection, from '21 to '23, Rivian's assets went down... e.g., $22.3 bill, $17.9 bill and $16.8 bill vs Rivian's liabilities which went up... e.g., $2.8 bill, $4.1 bill and $7.6 bill. I don't know how Rivian stems the losses and avoids bankruptcy
Tesla wasn't profitable for 10 years. Rivian is a better looking EV, just compare the interiors.
With almost the same size as Tesla, it will come down to its composition.
..and the technology. Tesla has advantage on the dry electrode and the tabless design that may give them the advantage.
Battery modules make them mote reusable because you could replace the modules that need replacement and reusable the other onee.
Yes, but cell to pack is more space efficient - thus leads to a higher pack level energy density (more range).
So, when is a battery too tall? Answer: When it makes the floor of the vehicle too thick. It might be ok for SUVs and trucks, but not sedans.
Its not apple to apples comparison given Tesla larger cells use dry coating in comparison to a what Rivian supplier will produce 🫣. Its a bit disappointing that Rivian keeps copying Tesla instead of making their own innovation in terms of battery and structural packs. I wouldn't be surprised if Rivian copy Tesla giga casting next 🙈.
What do you mean Rivian structural battery pack all Rivian did was just copy and paste and make the battery their battery cell 0.15 mm larger to make it looks like it’s different😂
15mm, not 0.15mm. And not "to make it look like it's different" but to increase the energy that can be stored by floor area.
4680. Rivian bids 4695, do I hear 4699, 4699. 4695 going once, going twice …..
🙋♂️THANKS JON,FOR EXPLAINING THIS,WE TOO HOPE RIVIAN IS SUCCESSFUL AND THANKFUL THAT THEY ARE MAKING USE OF THE TECHNOLOGY, BUT THEY WON’T EVER CATCH TESLA 💚💚💚
@@EinzigfreierNameand even that was taken from other manufacturers Porsche, Mercedes, BMW
Probably because rj claimed publicly the r2&r3 platforms uses the cells in a structural pack without any modules&the lid is the floors base.
Ie exactly like what tesla showed at battery day and then first sold to the public in the early 2022 tx built 4680 model Y's. 👍🏻
Rivian missed an opportunity. They could have been twice as good as Tesla if they made their batteries 9630!
😂
Hahahaaa - he said a lot of their innovation…. He means a lot of Tesla’s innovation goes into a Rivian.
tesla will go probably to shorter battery. 4269 😊 ? to get new gen done down it must be shortermaybe even 4242 to get two layer 1200V to new roadster
2026? 😑
No where in thus discussion, is reliability and life of these larger cells. Heating and cooling always an issue. Bigger batteries are harder to heat and cool. My Iron Phosphate battery in my Tesla model 3 is Chinese. The new generation iron phosphate battery is faster charging and greater energy density. This is far more important than the height of the cell.
Idiotic move by Rivian. Tesla alone will make 4680 a standard size for cylindrical batteries and all the big manufacturers are gearing up for that form factor. A custom form factor just is a massive risk for Rivian in that they will either have a lack of supply or pay through the nose as there is nobody to take any oversupply out of their hands.
I think this is NACS 2.0 - the R2 is a 2026 car, early 2025 the finalized design will be a 4680
I agree - Tesla gave compelling reasons why the 4680 was the optimal size. As these are quite a bit larger than the "standard" 2170, it's easy to imagine difficulties in development and manufacturing - which is exactly what Tesla has gone through. Even experienced battery manufacturers, like Panasonic, have struggled. To add yet another form factor adds to the difficulties in supply / cost.
Battery cell manufacturers already stated, they can produce 4680, 4695 and 46120 on the same line, just changing the settings. It is in this video 10:42
@@bellumCretatusyep, question is how big of a change it is to switch lengths. Plus probably not all lines by all manufacturers will be as flexible and if you have a surplus you are sitting on it. Tesla has shown how beneficial it is to use standard 1865 and 2170 from all kinds of manufacturers
@@nikos6220 I expect 4680 & 4695 to be the new „standard“ for car battery cells. BMW & Rivian prefer the longer cells, Tesla might prefer the shorter ones for the „double decker“ pack for the CT.
Rivian copies Tesla in everything.
Like what?
Imitation is flattering.
Fewer
You need to go into Teslas SEC reports and get the real deal about the state of Tesla because the batteries are whats sinking them and where they come from is the bigger deal as it cuts into the ZEV credits thats why Tesla is importing cathode coils from china which are time sensitive from the time theyre packaged for shipping and that time is 1 week......LOL
4695 cells are approx 3% greater in volume than 4680, not 18%.
15/80 = 18.8%
Regarding the 18% more volume-energy density perhaps potential for even higher depending on chemistry. Aptera’s CEO Chris Anthony talked about this with their 21 mm by higher than 70mm future cells (very hypothetical still, but you get the point)because you can use a higher percentage of the cell for energy, since you don’t have to make the other buffer components larger
pee-pee measuring contest. "yeah? Well mine is bigger" FFS C or D cells is not going to win this.
Their headlamp design is still no vote for me.
It is not Tesla vs Rivian; it is Tesla vs other battery makers. I'll put my money on other battery makers because it is more like their core business.
These Tesla structural battery packs will drive depreciation of the EVs using those (like Tesla Cybertruck or Model Y) to the outer space. Because those battery packs are impossible to repair due to that epoxy foam which can be removed only by destructive methods.
VW announced to integrate their battery development business in the similar way as Tesla this week. And it is allegedly ahead of Tesla with their battery chemistry.
8:30 so 3rd generation 4680 battery cells is virtually the same as the oldest 18650 battery cells and you were super impressed by that?!?
The goal is reducing production costs.
The goal is not getting the most energy dense battery.
Tesla has money why can't they produce batteries at scale? Can only other companies make lives that work?
Cheaper to outsource.
@@KP-xi4bj only cheaper in the short term as whoever you buy from has to make a profit too and batteries are key to Teslas long term business. Large pack grid Semi, home solar, and cars
@@ChicagoBob123 With decreasing Tesla vehicle prices I'd say cheaper to outsource in the long run as well.
yes...yes...yes. However, TESLA's electrical is more efficient and powerful. You must take the "whole" package into consideration. Also TESLA has a much more efficient "systems" controlling package. Power management, electrical harnesses and design with less wiring, and another example the "Octal valve". All of which in comparison to RIVIAN puts RIVIAN a "whole" 2-3 generations behind TESLA. Last but not least...AI is totally absent in RIVIAN. So...far off the mark...and definitely no lollipop.
Isn't Rivian working on a like, "Septic valve?"
He he , Noice 😎
The entire auto industry is scrambling to copy everything that Tesla is doing.
They’re the only ones that can make a car with taking a L
Structural battery packs make EVs disposable. Pack breaks throw car away.
With modern cars, air bag deployment = throw car away.
Face it, electric will need 350 to 400 miles before anyone will buy them, also they need to design electric cars so they actually look sporty!
Lotus cars are making ev sport cars now evija is one example
Rivian structural battery pack R1T AND NOT 1 self concept Mr Elons coat tails gettin worn out
Very fluent intelligent English well done Mr John
Let it be written let it be told U R TOP 5 on u tube from this day forward
4:55 its important to note that he is talking pure speculation here.
I’m sure there many more in this video but I had to quit watching when I smell bs
So, to sum up, the 4680 batteries were a complete failure and a huge waste of time and money to develop.
Tesla battery density is the same as 10 years ago.
It's a FAIL.
Except is 10 times CHEAPER!
Poor imitation of the original. 😂
Such a goof. You are really going to compare a production 4680 to a cell 2 years away. This screams that you are desperate for content. Disappointing