Jump to content
Create New...
  • G. David Felt
    G. David Felt

    GM Dumping Pouch EV Cells for Cylinder 4680 Cells

      Korean sources have learned that GM is dumping the Pouch for the Cylinder and not just any average one, but the 4680 spec that Tesla is pushing in their own EVs.

    One could say that LG marketing tag line of "Life's Good" might be not so good right now.

    According to the Korean news site "thelec.net" GM is following recent announcements by BMW, Volvo, Stellantis and others that have chosen to dump the use of pouches and focus on cylinder cells using the 4680 format that Tesla has brought to market.

    The 4680 according to Tesla is five times more energy than the current smaller cells that Panasonic builds for them, increases range by 16 percent and is six time more power when you compare equal to equal size battery packs.

    This change in direction has thrown a wrench in the talks for the 4th Ultium Cell plant that GM announced last year with LG. GM has issued a no comment statement on the joint venture with LG. LG has stated that talks are ongoing but delayed.

    One would be right to question GM on "Why the Change when prismatic and pouch batteries have higher energy density?"

    The downside to cylinder cells is lower energy density due to the increased space in the battery pack when the cylinder cells are packed together.

    The answer it would seem to be is twofold, simpler production process and a solid-state future as even Tesla has stated that the advances undergoing testing would allow them to move from existing battery chemistry to solid-state on the same production line.

    Auto makers see that by adopting the 4680-cylinder design, the 80mm length of the cylinder making them longer and wider works to reduce the spaces when the cells are packed together. On top of this is that there is no need for tabs like a pouch further allowing space saving, weight reduction, and cost. 

    It would seem that along with all the various battery startups, the design thought by these companies is to support the current battery production line with a chemistry makeup that will enhance cell safety, reduce production costs and time while speeding up the rollout of the solid-state energy dense cells. The final piece is the reduction in cost of the cells.

    It would seem that the oldest type of batteries, could be what gives the EV market the biggest cost savings for entry level EVs.

    For those interested in hearing from one of the leading engineers who has torn down more Tesla's than any other company, the video above will give you Sandy Munro's thoughts on the 4680 cell and the future of batteries.

    While Samsung SDI has not confirmed or denied reports, theelec has stated that inside sources confirm a 4680 pilot production line is going online to provide test samples to Tesla and anyone else interested in the cell.

    LG Energy Solutions on the other hand has released a press statement that they see great growth in their pouch cell production and yet at the same time to enable them to be a supplier to Tesla and more has set up a mass production facility for production of the 4680 cell with a two-pronged focus on polymer-based solid-state battery cells and sulfide-based solid-state battery cells. Both designed out of colleges in the U.S.

    LGES did in the same new release state that the second half of 2023 will see increased revenue growth as cost pass-through mechanisms help drive the price of the pouch cells down as the various Ultium plants ramp up production.

    Samsung has moved their R&D from the lab to production with the use of the graphene ball, a unique battery material that enables a 45% increase in capacity, five times faster charging than traditional lithium-ion batteries and ready to go into solid-state battery cell production.

    With Samsung 4680 cells going into production, the science-based theory is that a graphene ball based 4680 battery pack of 100kWh will take 12 minutes to fully charge.

    As an alternative battery cell provider, GM is now squarely in the sights of Samsung. The Samsung Graphene ball tech along with the Nature Energy technology by Samsung will allow a battery pack of 100kWh to cover 500 miles according to Samsung.

    Samsung has built the pilot line for 4680 cells at Cheonan with an annual capacity of up to 12GWh. This is the same plant that is currently now making 2170 cells that are being sold to various EV companies including Tesla.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Since GM and the rest of the industry is all-in on Electric Vehicles, EVs have to carry their own weight and slash manufacturing costs anywhere they can.  IOW, it is as if GM wants to return the the salad days of 1945-1985ish days of the B Body, only for EVs.

    • Confused 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    17 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

    Since GM and the rest of the industry

    *sigh*

     Its NOT GM and the rest of the industry...

    Its the world's governments that have decided FOR the industry...  

    Many many... MANY countries are BANNING and have already banned the internal combustion engine by a certain date in our not too distant future.  And in 2023, that expiration date is coming quite quickly.  In just a couple of generations of vehicular platforms.  

    GM and others in the industry is just wanting to NOT be last to the party with this.  For many many....MANY reasons.   

    1st to the party.

    Not to lag in the tech

    Not to be LAST to the party to not have the pants around the ankles... 

    etc...

     

    We could be peeved at this whole EV thing all we want...   We could lay blame on the industry and we could even pin in it on one specific OEM.   

    We could NOT to that and we could be peeved at guvments trying to control us...

    All is fair game...I guess.

    But...

    *sigh*

    Unless a BETTER strategy comes along for our personal transportational needs,  to continue to burn fossil fuels to power our personal transport pods is NOT the answer going forward. 

    Are batteries and electric powertrains the answer?

    Who the hell knows???

    But we DO know that to continue to burn fossil fuels is a DEFINATE path to human destruction.  And batteries and electric motors at worst, is still a BETTER solution...for now. 

    I do NOT understand why some of us canNOT understand this???!!! 

     

    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, riviera74 said:

    Since GM and the rest of the industry is all-in on Electric Vehicles, EVs have to carry their own weight and slash manufacturing costs anywhere they can.  IOW, it is as if GM wants to return the the salad days of 1945-1985ish days of the B Body, only for EVs.

    I do not see this going backwards approach that you see.

    It totally makes sense that as R&D groups at colleges around the world and especially here in the U.S. are wanting energy density, they have also thought about the fastest way to make EVs happen with better battery packs and that is using what is already in the industry in moving to solid-state batteries faster with a proven technology form factor just a bit bigger. 

    Welcome to the 4680 races for battery tech.

    I honesty can see the 4680 carry the EV race through the next decade or two before some other form factor becomes so much stronger and cheaper. That may or may not be pouches.

    For all we know, the whole individual cell thing could become history as they figure out how to build a 400-mile energy dense battery in the current 12V auto battery size. Who knows what the future can hold.

    None of this makes me think we are moving backwards to the old days of the 40's to 80's of the 19th century mindsets.

    Or am I totally misunderstanding of your post?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    GM needs  battery capacity.  They sold 72 Cadillac Lyrics last quarter.  Don't they want Cadillac to be all EV in like 3 years?  Can't do that selling less than 1 car a day.  Instead of spending $850 million on next gen small block V8s, they should spend that $850 million on battery production.  They need more batteries. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • Posts

    • Yeah, it doesn’t pass the sniff test at all. No vehicle, not even a full size SUV, takes even 10 minutes to fill up much less 22. That doesn’t even qualify as making sense to believe it takes 22 minutes to fill up ANY vehicle that only has four tires on it. 
    • I've literally timed myself AND posted it here at one time. I don't know if your PNW nozzles are the size of a drinking straw, but it never takes more than 5 minutes at a pump.  You have lost your mind if you think you'll convince any human that you've stood at a pump for TWENTY-TWO MINUTES just filling up an Escalade. There a 100% chance you're lying if you're saying it took you 22 minutes to fill-up an Escalade from E every time.  Damn. 14 minutes. That's a good 9-10 minutes longer than it would take to fill-up most anything with a gasoline engine.  @Drew Dowdell, your Avalanche probably has the same or very similar size gas tank of an Escalade, right? Do you stand there for 20 minutes or more regularly? 
    • FUD - Unless your driving a subcompact, 5 minute fueling is not true. Compacts to Midsize to Full size can take from 8 to 22 minutes to fuel. If the filters of the gas station are dirty, it can take longer. Yes I realize not everyone drives an Escalade ESV, but that is 22 minutes of standing and fueling at Costco, longer at other stations it seem to be. Yes, I spent a few minutes waiting, but over all I got all my shopping done, so a few minutes was no different than at a gas station. I charged this morning for the wife, was 52 degrees outside and the 350kW Electrify America charger did the 80% charge from 14% in 15 minutes and then I left to go get the grandkids and drop them off at school, so the 10 to 80% charge is fast as my Escalade.
    • You just said you still had to wait a few minutes after you were done shopping. That few minutes is all it takes to go from E -> F in an internal combustion vehicle. Until you're charging at home, overnight, there is no real savings or convenience involved. Once your free trial period of public charging has expired, it costs about the same to charge publicly at those fast chargers.  At home charging is really the only way to save money and time with an EV, when it comes to fuel costs. 
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings