In Production Solid State Battery Tech? Potential for Aftermarket Lightning Pack upgrades?!

[proprepper]

I'll take a box of a dozen. Throw them in the bed. Hook up when I need extra range?

Sponsored

 

[ZeusDriver]

I'll take a box of a dozen. Throw them in the bed. Hook up when I need extra range?

HA HA! And the cool thing is that the better vendors will give you 13 instead of just 12!

 

[TaxmanHog]

 

[TaxmanHog]

 

[PJnc284]

She seems to have done quite a bit of digging.

 

[ZeusDriver]

The Verge guy comes off to me as a little more believable than the Donut guy.

The bike itself doesn't appeal to me. 737 lb ft rear wheel torque is a little less that a Honda CBR600 has at 1/3 the cost. A hubless wheel does not solve any problem but adds many issues: greater unsprung weight, a zillion bearings to fail, specialized tire balancing equipment, etc, etc.

I'm no longer riding bikes, but we use to sit around at the motorcycle shop and discuss all sorts of issues relating mainly to making bikes faster around a race course. Never did we say "Wow, if we could just get rid of the hub!!?? Wouldn't that be great!" The market niche seems too fuzzy to me: the foot pegs are in the wrong place for a crotch rocket, and the bars are too wide, but the bike doesn't give off a cruiser vibe, either. Doesn't look racy. Doesn't look cushy. Doesn't look retro.

At less than half the price, the LiveWire One looks much better to me.
https://www.livewire.com/livewire-one-electric-motorcycle

 

[TaxmanHog]

 

[NikonJim]

The Verge guy comes off to me as a little more believable than the Donut guy.

The bike itself doesn't appeal to me. 737 lb ft rear wheel torque is a little less that a Honda CBR600 has at 1/3 the cost. A hubless wheel does not solve any problem but adds many issues: greater unsprung weight, a zillion bearings to fail, specialized tire balancing equipment, etc, etc.

The Honda CBR600RR produces around 44-48 lb-ft (59-65 Nm) of torque, peaking at high RPMs, typically between 10,900 and 11,500 rpm, depending on the year and source, with figures like 44.1 lb-ft (2021), 48 lb-ft (older models), or 47.2 lb-ft (2024) being cited for its ~600cc inline-four engine

A little less? It will be interesting to see the real world tests on this bike.

 

[Texas Dan]

The life expectancy of the battery packs in our Lightnings is 40+ years. I expect the battery pack in my Lightning to outlive me by several decades. The chance of me needing a new battery pack when these higher capacity solid state batteries become available as a retrofit is pretty remote.

I believe in the longevity of the Lightning but my vision may be short sighted. Vehicle designs change in unpredictable ways, manufacturers just can’t legally build vehicles the way they were built 30 years ago. Maybe there are design features in our Lightnings that would make it very undesirable to stick a new battery pack in a 30+ year old Lightning.

The idea of sticking a higher capacity solid state battery in our Lightnings is exciting. But I don’t think the concept is realistic in the near term and may not ever be realistic. Still it would be nice to be wrong and I can double the range and charging speed in my Lightning with a simple battery pack swap for less money than it would cost me to buy a new EV truck.

 

[ZeusDriver]

The Honda CBR600RR produces around 44-48 lb-ft (59-65 Nm) of torque, peaking at high RPMs, typically between 10,900 and 11,500 rpm, depending on the year and source, with figures like 44.1 lb-ft (2021), 48 lb-ft (older models), or 47.2 lb-ft (2024) being cited for its ~600cc inline-four engine

A little less? It will be interesting to see the real world tests on this bike.

That is quite the non-sequitur. I doubt that you are being deliberately deceptive (as Elon was being when he quoted Cybertruck rear wheel torque -- 10,000+ lb ft while the competition was quoting motor torque: 775 lb ft in our Lightnings).

You are not quoting rear wheel torque, but for a fair comparison, you must.

If the Donut people were being straightforward and open, they would say this: "The rear wheel torque is 737 lb ft. To put that in perspective, that is almost as much as a 600 cc crotch rocket has. Our claimed 3.5 second 0-60 time is slower than the 600's but it is still very quick."

You can use 50 lb ft as a representative figure for CRANKSHAFT torque for any of the 600 cc crotch rockets. The early YZF makes 50.2 lb ft, for example. Crankshaft torque is a very small percentage of rear wheel torque, of course. The Honda's primary gear ratio (crank to gearbox input) is 2.11. The first gear ratio is 2.75. The final drive ratio (countershaft to rear drive sprocket) is 2.69. So the overall ratio is 15.59:1. 50 x 15.59 is 779.7. 779.7 > 737, right? Honda's claimed engine torque is 49 lb ft for recent models, so rear wheel torque at that figure would be 764 lb ft. also slightly greater than 737 lb ft.

An advantage of chain drive, (in addition to lower unsprung weight) is that if you want, say, 850 lb ft at the rear wheel in your crotch rocket, you can get that just by swapping sprockets.

Per their own claim, the Verge takes 3.5 seconds to get to 60. That is a little slower than the LiveWire, and far slower than the Energica Ego. Somewhat slower than the Zero SR too. So, in terms of acceleration, there is nothing remarkable about the Verge when compared to the other electrics, and they are substantially slower than many ICE bikes.

Here is a link to the Wikipedia page of performance times for fast motorcycles:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_motorcycles_by_acceleration

None of the electric production bikes break into the under 12 second second 1/4 mile times, although some modified Energicas have done sub 12 second quarters -- even mid 10's. (And there have been loads of electric bikes that are purpose-built for quarters: 6.74 sec is the current record, I believe. )

It is worth remembering that the Ford F150 720 hp Raptor R blows the doors off our Lightnings in a quarter mile, because it has more HP and slightly less weight. (The fact that the Raptor has less torque at the crankshaft is of no consequence as a predictor of performance. ) A good exercise is to set up a spread sheet showing tractive effort (torque/tire radius) net tractive effort (after deductions for aero drag, rolling resistance gearing losses, etc) vs mass... at half second increments as the vehicle accelerates. F=MA

Also worth remembering is the fact that electric motor torque is highest at stall, and then falls off as soon as the motor begins to rotate. The same effect (at the rear wheel) occurs with an ICE powered motorcycle: each upshift reduces the rear wheel torque (and thus, the instantaneous acceleration rate.)

 

[NikonJim]

That is quite the non-sequitur. I doubt that you are being deliberately deceptive (as Elon was being when he quoted Cybertruck rear wheel torque -- 10,000+ lb ft while the competition was quoting motor torque: 775 lb ft in our Lightnings).

You are not quoting rear wheel torque, but for a fair comparison, you must.

If the Donut people were being straightforward and open, they would say this: "The rear wheel torque is 737 lb ft. To put that in perspective, that is almost as much as a 600 cc crotch rocket has. Our claimed 3.5 second 0-60 time is slower than the 600's but it is still very quick."

I supposed the issue is the new type of motor in the verge, because it is in the wheel the only way to measure it is rear wheel torque. There is no “crank” measurement. The “Ultra” model says 2.5 second 0-60 with 885 ft lbs. it becomes a question of grip for short distances like this.

Like I said, it will be interesting to see what real world tests reveal, especially 1/4 mile times.

 

[NW Ontario Ford Lightning]

If Donut has unlocked a new secret to SSB design, where are the patents?
would this be compelling evidence they have actually done something new, that is not super-capacitor based, ie real SSB design?
We have a patent att on the forum somewhere - @chl ? IIRC

 

[ZeusDriver]

would this be compelling evidence they have actually done something new, that is not super-capacitor based, ie real SSB design?

I would not take that as compelling evidence, and there are very good reasons for not disclosing a patent until after it is issued. In the US, the delay between application and issuance, even if there is no back-and-forth between the applicant and the Office, is 2 years or more... sometimes much more. During that time you would be wise to do what Donut is doing: don't talk about the specifics.

Also, although the USPTO will not issue a patent on an obvious perpetual motion machine, etc. there are loads of patented objects that do not actually work as intended.

Here is what Google AI says re that last issue:
>> While patents require functionality, a large percentage, potentially over 90%, of challenged patents are found invalid or worthless, often because they describe abstract ideas, are not novel, or simply aren't commercially viable, with some reports suggesting up to 97% don't recoup filing costs, indicating they don't deliver as expected. The USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) invalidates many claims in validity challenges, and many patents are abandoned by owners, showing a disconnect between issued patents and actual working, valuable inventions. <<

 

[chl]

If Donut has unlocked a new secret to SSB design, where are the patents?
would this be compelling evidence they have actually done something new, that is not super-capacitor based, ie real SSB design?
We have a patent att on the forum somewhere - @chl ? IIRC

I am a patent attorney.

Companies often file patents and receive as they do the research work toward developing a commercially practical application but sometimes it is many years before bringing the implementation to market if ever.

Do you have a company name or patent number you are asking about?

I have seen new reports about SSBs recently, and there are many EV companies involved in developing SSBs:

In Jan 2025: "Despite the promising benefits, SSBs remain in development. Scaling production and reducing costs are key challenges before introducing it into the EV market...."

https://evmagazine.com/top10/top-10-solid-state-battery-developers

Toyota apparently has a lot of patent in this area:

"With over 1,300 patents in this space and a plan to begin mass production in coming years, Toyota is positioning itself to revolutionize the automotive industry. These advancements promise not only to overcome the challenges of range anxiety and long charging times but also to set a new standard for durability and efficiency in electric vehicles. As Toyota paves the way for the future of EVs, their solid-state batteries could mark the next leap toward a cleaner, more sustainable future.
As Toyota races toward mass production of solid-state batteries, it’s crucial to explore the factors driving this breakthrough. From patent filing trends to global R&D efforts, let’s dive into the insights that reveal how Toyota is preparing to lead the charge in revolutionizing electric vehicles....Toyota has a total of 1700 patents globally related to solid state batteries. These patents belong to 516 unique patent families. Out of 1700 patents, 1588 patents are active."

https://insights.greyb.com/toyota-solid-state-battery-patents/

I have seen these reports below about a Chinese breakthrough patent, but haven't seen the publication (a Chinese patent) they refer to - I can't read Chinese so unless there is a translation, I couldn't verify it anyway.

I think one has to take it all with a grain of salt until something is actually produced and demonstrated. Announcing a patent filing or grant is part of business strategy often used to raise money and get publicity for the company involved.

Some news reports refer to a filed patent others to what seems to be a granted patent - not sure how the Chinese patent system works either, I work with US patents.

"A Chinese patent filed on 18 June 2025" by Hauwei a Chinese company.

https://ssrana.in/articles/huaweis-...s-with-5-minute-charge-ignites-industry-race/

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/oth...ttery-that-could-change-the-world/ar-AA1HvuJd

https://synergyfiles.com/2025/06/hu...-lot/?utm_source=syndication&pubDate=20250626

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/huaw...atent-technical-claims-industry-onorino-cshff

https://www.topgear.com/car-news/el...-gen-ev-battery-really-claim-1800-miles-range

https://www.idtechex.com/en/researc...2030-technology-patents-forecasts-players/763

The fact that so many companies are researching and developing SSBs is a promising sign that eventually they will implement that technology in a commercial form, but there is no guarantee that will happen.

There has been a lot of time, energy and money poured into fusion power for quite some time, with lots of news reports, etc., but it is far from just around the corner.

 

[chl]

I would not take that as compelling evidence, and there are very good reasons for not disclosing a patent until after it is issued. In the US, the delay between application and issuance, even if there is no back-and-forth between the applicant and the Office, is 2 years or more... sometimes much more. During that time you would be wise to do what Donut is doing: don't talk about the specifics.

Also, although the USPTO will not issue a patent on an obvious perpetual motion machine, etc. there are loads of patented objects that do not actually work as intended.

Here is what Google AI says re that last issue:
>> While patents require functionality, a large percentage, potentially over 90%, of challenged patents are found invalid or worthless, often because they describe abstract ideas, are not novel, or simply aren't commercially viable, with some reports suggesting up to 97% don't recoup filing costs, indicating they don't deliver as expected. The USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) invalidates many claims in validity challenges, and many patents are abandoned by owners, showing a disconnect between issued patents and actual working, valuable inventions. <<

Yes, patents provide the right to exclude others from making using or selling what ever the patent claims cover. So there are many filed as an insurance policy early in the development of something sometimes which may never actually be produced or make any money.

And many (most) are not "breakthrough" inventions, but rather small or large improvements in what currently exists.

I can't say how many challenged patents are invalid because they don't work as the cited AI claims, the over 90% number it claims seems too high to me. But not all patents are challenged, and because it is an expensive and sometimes very lengthy process to mount a patent challenge, it is likely only done after careful analysis that the challenger is likely to succeed.

Sometimes it is less expensive to just pay a license fee than to challenge a patent.

The poor guy (Robert Kearns) who invented the intermittent wiper and had it stolen by Ford won the case in court but it took a long time. See: https://federalcourthistoricaledmi.org/homepage-inspiro/history/historical-cases/case-kearns/

"In 1978, Dr. Robert Kearns, inventor of the intermittent windshield wiper blade, sued Ford Motor Company for infringing on his patent to his invention. After a ten-year court battle, he won a jury award of $5.1 million dollars. After indicating that he would appeal the amount of damages, Ford Motor Company paid Dr. Kearns $10.2 million dollar, twice the amount of the jury award, to settle the case. Dr. Kearns went on to sue many other automobile manufacturers – including General Motors, Chrysler, Audi, Mercedes-Benz, Porsche and Japanese manufacturers as well. In an era where the auto companies all but ruled the world, this case showed that the ‘every man’ could stand up to them – and win!

Anyway, grain of salt with SSBs for now. Probably a couple years down the road, although like you all, I hope it is sooner for the sake of humanity and the planet.

Sponsored