Mercedes trial solid state EV batteries

[dan_b]

That energy density figure is impressive. Of course what we don't need is for that to just enable big EVs to have 250kWh batteries to hit those "600 mile range like my old diesel" goals,, but rather it would be nice if that meant smaller form factor cars (ie, small family hatchbacks) could actually have more useable battery capacities and reasonable ranges...

But I'm assuming the former!

https://electrek.co/2025/02/24/mercedes ... les-range/

[Stinsy]

I too am sad when reading stories such as this. For a laundry-list of reasons:

- It perpetuates the myth that EVs need 600miles of range. They don’t. 100miles is plenty for many, 200miles for the rest.
- It makes people think some magical technology is just around the corner and makes them hold off on making an EV purchase.

Sure better energy density is a good thing. But it should help improve efficiency and packaging not add range that is t needed.

I’ve said for ages that the perfect EV needs: a 50kWh battery, 100kW charging, and 4mi/kWh on the motorway in winter. If you can make the 50kWh battery smaller and lighter then that 4mi/kWh is easier to achieve.

[Yuff]

But stinsy, the mindset is ICE driving for the majority of the population which means not having to go to a garage and fill up with dirty fuel.
Also public charging is so ridiculously expensive still, a decent range combats that. Only then will you change the sceptics view of which there are many…..currently…..

[MikeNovack]

We are unlikely to see availability of a solution. Our vehicles are USUALLY driven only short distances (<100 miles) but sometims called upon for 300 miles and every now and the trips of 500-1000 mi;es) << over here, distances greater >> Why should the vehicle pay the penalty for it rare use?

So, EV with range ~200 miles (need that capacity to have the POWER without battery damage). On long trips, probably wanting a bit more luggage room too, so a small trailer with a gas-electric or diesel-electric generator just big enough for over AVERAGE power. Comes on when battery gets below X% and shuts down if battery 80%.

So almost all of the time/mileage pure electric (no trailer) but for the annual vacation trip, add trailer. Could even be rental ... which explains why we will not see. Commodification. Rather hard to make things so that maker X's trailer couldn't be used with maker Y's vehicle or vice versa or to prevent independent maker Z sell a "universal" trailer.

[sharpener]

That energy density figure is impressive. Of course what we don't need is for that to just enable big EVs to have 250kWh batteries to hit those "600 mile range like my old diesel" goals,, but rather it would be nice if that meant smaller form factor cars (ie, small family hatchbacks) could actually have more useable battery capacities and reasonable ranges...

But I'm assuming the former!

https://electrek.co/2025/02/24/mercedes ... les-range/

We regularly make a 269-mile trip and prefer to do this all in daylight. Not having to stop to recharge on a journey that already takes 6 hrs or more is a great boon. I don't want to be constantly reminded of my first 4-wheel vehicle which was a Viva van with a range of just over 200 miles.

But yes I would hope to see this new technology eventually in lower price-point cars, ATM there are not many that can do it.

We seemed for now to be trapped in the circular logic that goes

Batteries are expensive => EVs are expensive => expensive cars must go like sh!t off a shovel yet be equipped like a living room on wheels => bells and whistles and ridiculously powerful motors add to the all-up weight => heavy cars need big batteries.

Rinse and repeat. Maybe solid-state lithium batteries will at last enable us to break out. Or sodium. Or unobtanium.

But I am not encouraged by Factorial's promise to double the range, rather than halving the weight which would bring about a virtuous circle of then needing smaller lighter motors, suspension, wheels tyres and bodywork. Had a puncture last week, new tyre cost £193, it is rated to 750kg load at 170 mph, why do I need that FFS?

[Mart]

I too am sad when reading stories such as this. For a laundry-list of reasons:

- It perpetuates the myth that EVs need 600miles of range. They don’t. 100miles is plenty for many, 200miles for the rest.
- It makes people think some magical technology is just around the corner and makes them hold off on making an EV purchase.

Sure better energy density is a good thing. But it should help improve efficiency and packaging not add range that is t needed.

I’ve said for ages that the perfect EV needs: a 50kWh battery, 100kW charging, and 4mi/kWh on the motorway in winter. If you can make the 50kWh battery smaller and lighter then that 4mi/kWh is easier to achieve.

My bold: That's an interesting, tough, but I suspect, fair target going forward.

For comparison, the base Tesla 3 is very efficient, with a WLTP range of 318 miles. The EV-database real range est is 260 miles, and the cold highway range suggestion is 185 miles. 'Cold' is actually a tough (for the UK) -10C, so that's probably about 200 miles as per your suggestion. That's from a 57.5kWh useable battery.

So .... thinking out loud ..... that car is very aerodynamic*, but not small, so a smaller vehicle, that's not too lumpy, at 50kWh and crucially a lower weight, might do it. Fingers crossed.

*Did search for a more efficient vehicle, but couldn't find/think of one. The tiny Dacia Spring is 25kWh, and 100 mile range, but ~65miles for cold highway.

[sharpener]

So .... thinking out loud ..... that car is very aerodynamic*, but not small, so a smaller vehicle, that's not too lumpy, at 50kWh and crucially a lower weight, might do it. Fingers crossed.

*Did search for a more efficient vehicle, but couldn't find/think of one. The tiny Dacia Spring is 25kWh, and 100 mile range, but ~65miles for cold highway.

Yes. Weight reduction is I think the key to all this. All the improvements in ICE efficiency in the last 20 years have been pissed away on increases in the average vehicle weight. You don't need rear lights on the tailgate as well as the body, it all adds up, wiring looms are in fact quite heavy. I was looking at some ali wheels yesterday, had 7 spokes but they weren't radial, they ran in a fancy spiral pattern, so un-necessarily long and heavy for no extra strength. Good engineering design is all about elegance.

[Stinsy]

I too am sad when reading stories such as this. For a laundry-list of reasons:

- It perpetuates the myth that EVs need 600miles of range. They don’t. 100miles is plenty for many, 200miles for the rest.
- It makes people think some magical technology is just around the corner and makes them hold off on making an EV purchase.

Sure better energy density is a good thing. But it should help improve efficiency and packaging not add range that is t needed.

I’ve said for ages that the perfect EV needs: a 50kWh battery, 100kW charging, and 4mi/kWh on the motorway in winter. If you can make the 50kWh battery smaller and lighter then that 4mi/kWh is easier to achieve.

My bold: That's an interesting, tough, but I suspect, fair target going forward.

For comparison, the base Tesla 3 is very efficient, with a WLTP range of 318 miles. The EV-database real range est is 260 miles, and the cold highway range suggestion is 185 miles. 'Cold' is actually a tough (for the UK) -10C, so that's probably about 200 miles as per your suggestion. That's from a 57.5kWh useable battery.

So .... thinking out loud ..... that car is very aerodynamic*, but not small, so a smaller vehicle, that's not too lumpy, at 50kWh and crucially a lower weight, might do it. Fingers crossed.

*Did search for a more efficient vehicle, but couldn't find/think of one. The tiny Dacia Spring is 25kWh, and 100 mile range, but ~65miles for cold highway.

I don’t see “winter” as being -10℃ for the sake of my requirements. Maybe 0℃?

And I’m happy for 60mph to be the motorway speed, but 70mph would be better.

I think the Ioniq 24 is the efficiency benchmark.

However, the point isn’t my arbitrary numbers. The point is that bigger batteries and faster charging shouldn’t be where this battle is fought. It should be efficiency.

[dan_b]

Efficiency gains can be made across the same vehicle too of course depending upon spec.

My 2023 TM3P is overall slightly less efficient (averaging 283Wh/mile) than my 2019 TM3 Long range (271Wh/mile), despite it having the heatpump which the earlier model didn't have. The difference is having the 20" alloys and stickier Pirelli tyre compound vs the 18" aero wheels and a more "economy" focused Michelin tyre.

[Mart]

I too am sad when reading stories such as this. For a laundry-list of reasons:

- It perpetuates the myth that EVs need 600miles of range. They don’t. 100miles is plenty for many, 200miles for the rest.
- It makes people think some magical technology is just around the corner and makes them hold off on making an EV purchase.

Sure better energy density is a good thing. But it should help improve efficiency and packaging not add range that is t needed.

I’ve said for ages that the perfect EV needs: a 50kWh battery, 100kW charging, and 4mi/kWh on the motorway in winter. If you can make the 50kWh battery smaller and lighter then that 4mi/kWh is easier to achieve.

My bold: That's an interesting, tough, but I suspect, fair target going forward.

For comparison, the base Tesla 3 is very efficient, with a WLTP range of 318 miles. The EV-database real range est is 260 miles, and the cold highway range suggestion is 185 miles. 'Cold' is actually a tough (for the UK) -10C, so that's probably about 200 miles as per your suggestion. That's from a 57.5kWh useable battery.

So .... thinking out loud ..... that car is very aerodynamic*, but not small, so a smaller vehicle, that's not too lumpy, at 50kWh and crucially a lower weight, might do it. Fingers crossed.

*Did search for a more efficient vehicle, but couldn't find/think of one. The tiny Dacia Spring is 25kWh, and 100 mile range, but ~65miles for cold highway.

I don’t see “winter” as being -10℃ for the sake of my requirements. Maybe 0℃?

And I’m happy for 60mpg to be the motorway speed, but 70mph would be better.

I think the Ioniq 24 is the efficiency benchmark.

However, the point isn’t my arbitrary numbers. The point is that bigger batteries and faster charging shouldn’t be where this battle is fought. It should be efficiency.

Yep, our 2018 28kWh IONIQ had a lifetime average 4.7m/kWh. [Gave it to my sister in December.] the most impressive part, IMO, is that it's based on an ICE platform with HEV, PHEV or BEV versions. The BEV was 50kg lighter than the HEV, the PHEV 50kg heavier than the HEV.

If you nursed it, in good weather, it could manage ~150 miles, 130 pretty reliable. I think the 38kWh model had a 'reliable' good weather 185 miles. But of course YMMV.