NEW Tesla Model Y w/4680 SLOWER Charging than 2170

Electric SUV Buyer’s Guide:

Tesla Model Y’s with the long-awaited 4680 batteries and structural battery packs are now in the hands of customers. The charging results are in, but so far, the results are slower than what I expected. In this video I dive into some real-world charging data and discuss why I believe the new 4680 batteries are not charging as fast as I and others expected.

Out of Spec Reviews Charging Test (2170):

Spoken Reviews Charging Test (4680):

Support Cleanerwatt:

1. Join the Patreon Community:
2. Purchase Cleanerwatt Apparel:
Cleanerwatt Website:

*** 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 & Videos Courtesy of Tesla, Inc. (where noted in video)

Data Sources:

Spoken Reviews Charging Test (4680):

Out of Spec Reviews Charging Test (2170):

LFP Range:

4680 Charging Article:

NOTE: All of the content found in this video is based on my own opinion and should not be regarded as financial advice. While the information in this video is believed to be correct at the time of recording, no guarantees are being made about the accuracy of the information presented in the video. Please do your own research or consult a licensed professional, before making any financial decisions – including the purchase of a vehicle. As of the recording of this video, I am NOT invested in Tesla, nor any other company mentioned in this video.


  1. These parameters are controlled by BMS and Tesla doesn’t want to push these new batteries very hard. If they performed much better than 2170s, no one would want a vehicle with the old battery. In the future, a software update will adjust BMS for better charging performance and possibly a few more miles of range.

  2. %age is useless unless you also include the capacity of the batteries. 80% of 135kWh is nothing like 80% of 70kWh.

  3. Jon, I don't think, at least anywhere in my family in the U.S., there is anybody more promotive and supportive of TESLA than I am. But you have to always stay steeped in REASONABILITY and, always 'KEEP-IT-REALISTIC & Practical', especially in this 'High-INFLATION' economic environment, when talking about purchasing a $67,000 dollar 'luxury' EV. All of the 'GUESS-WORK' is both unreasonable and unexceptable for an EV in this price Class & Range! – And I think TESLA is losing site of this economic reality in their Frantic RACE to high production. and I get that this may be normal at this stage in their Ramping! — But how far can TESLA Realistically EXPECT Non-TECHNICAL Consumers to go with tolerating SOO Many 'Oh-By-The-Way' disappointment before they realize TESLA, and EVs in particular, just are not there yet as far as FINISHED Product and Customer Satisfaction is concerned, even although they are the best in the game! — I for one have decided to STOP TELLING my family to go EV because THE INDUSTRY AS A HOLE, more & more appears at least another 2 years from being 'Comprehensive enough for the average, TECHNO-DUMB American consumer who are still asking 'Where To Put The Oil, and even GAS in a EV! — My fear for TESLA is not with their abilities, but more with the infantile EXPECTATION of American consumer at todays stage at least!

  4. From day one I said that battery would have cooling issues. So did Panasonic's engineer in Nevada. Resistance comes from the electrochemical charging process, not just the metal substrates. More layers = more thermal insulation.

    Your chart really needs to add Lucid for some perspective on what is possible.

  5. Ya. Tesla is sandbagging the 4680 battery performance until they have been used widely out in the wild. Then software update in incremental amounts

  6. Ya know, Jon, I ordered a Model Y in December 2021, I got a text, today asking if I'd like the Texas Model Y that has ONLY 279 miles per charge. I new in advance, after learning of the 50 mile per charge SHORTAGE, that, living in South Florida high-rise where I could NEVER Home-charge, I could not afford to loose 50 miles. What I'm very disappointed with TESLA in the last 6 months, is the sloppy and seemingly CARELESS, 'Oh-by-the-way' increasing number of reduction in PROMISED Quality as promised to get me to buy the model I chose. — Between the NERVE racking rumors I'm increasing hearing about TESLA's Service and all these 'Oh-by-the-way' WE CAN'T GIVE YOU WHAT WE ORIGINALLY PROMISED YOU NONSENSE, I am increasingly stressed over 'WHAT-ELSE' is TESLA gonna NOT GIVE ME AS promised for this $67,000 Luxury(?) EV by the most recent 'JULY 10th to August 23 forever MOVING DUE DATE! — So, there is no way in hell I'd 'Shoot-Myself-In-The-Foot' by accepting a Model Y, with 50 miles less per charge, and for a LOUSY $2000 discount, that I still may get an UNKNOWN number of 'Oh-by-the-way' YOU CAN'T get this or that, because of 'this surprise or that surprise' Unproven '4680' Almost-a-Model-Y! — Tesla is starting to disintegrate in the areas of both inventive quality and overall customer service & satisfaction quality, and I haven't even gotten my Model Y yet. — This is stretching my loyalty to new heights EVERYDAY! – So much so, I don't know WHAT I WILL be dumped with by the time I get my Model Y! – This is terrible!

  7. I suspect the reason is more simple than presented/speculated in this video: with roughly equal total battery size (in KWh) with 4680 fewer cells are building up the total battery than in a 2170 based on. So during – especially fast – charging less "parallelisation" is possible. In other words the BMS can distribute the total power input through the cable from the SuC to the car over fewer cells with the 4680 than with the 2170 at the same time (with the same SoC, battery chemicals etc) and so resulting in slower total charging speed.

  8. I call BS on charging speed, with respect. It’s not dia, there’s a number of novel moves, DBE, probably higher silicon on anode, maybe lower Co, Tesla manufacture vs Panasonic (very accomplished). Give ‘em time, they’ll gain confidence, as you say at end. I doubt "size" is software locked, others explained cells required / voltage / pack size. I can’t explain weight.
    Edit: insideevs: "we know the cell count (828 cells) so we can calculate the energy in the pack (74.1 kWh). We have estimated the series-parallel arrangement of the cells (4, 23S9P modules making a 92S9P pack)" I can’t vouch for that, but…

  9. 4680 is much more durable/reliable and can charge much faster than 18650 and 2170. 4680 semi will be using dual megachargers

  10. How long would it take for a 4 motor 500 mile CT with at least a 150kw battery to charge from 10-80%?!

  11. They released the SR+ with a charging limit of 100kW, then a few months later bumped it up to 170. I think this is the same thing happening. Not to mention they haven't fully loaded the cathode with as much silicon as they plan to in the future.

  12. How much extra energy will be needed to bring the thicker battery up to an efficient energy delivery speed……..and, in this case, energy acceptance speed ?
    I’m thinking the wh/km aren’t going to be particularly impressive either, particularly on trips of only 50 miles/80kms.
    I suspect you will have to spend more time (or higher speed) on a motorway in order to achieve the optimal cell temperature.

  13. Apparently you can charge new 4680
    to 100 percent without warning. Since we know the cells are nickel based and not iron this would also suggest a larger, software limited pack as the “100 percent” charge would actually be a lesser percent per cell with the charge distributed amongst all the cells in the pack.

  14. to avoid the ozzy osbourne effects on 2170 models (softwate limited until 4680 fully ramp)