Posted on 05/11/2025 7:50:10 AM PDT by Red Badger
The pack will be installed in a demonstration fleet of the Dodge Charger Daytona in 2026.
* Stellantis and Factorial Energy have validated a semi-solid state battery cell.
* The milestone brings the tech one step closer to commercialization.
* Factorial's cells bring significant advantages in terms of range, charging speeds and weight reduction compared to traditional lithium-ion batteries.
******************************************************************
Massachusetts-based battery startup Factorial is having a moment. After putting a Mercedes-Benz EQS with its solid-state tech on the road for testing, it’s now teamed up with Stellantis to announce a major milestone: successful validation of automotive-grade semi-solid-state battery cells.
Solid-state batteries—which use a solid or gel-like electrolyte instead of the liquid chemical used in traditional lithium-ion packs—are widely seen as the holy grail of EV tech. The potential upsides include dramatically more range, faster charging speeds, lighter weight and superior performance in extreme temperatures.
Stellantis and Factorial have validated a 77 amp-hour cell with an energy density of 375 watt hours per kilogram, which is more than the current industry average of between 200-300 Wh/kg. The cells can charge from 15-90% in just 18 minutes at room temperature and support discharge rates of up to 4C, meaning the battery can fully discharge four times in an hour.
That could unlock absurd levels of performance in EVs. That also explains why Stellantis chose the Dodge Charger Daytona as a host vehicle for the real-world testing of the advanced cells.
The operating temperature range for these cells is -22°F to 113°F, which isn’t too different from current lithium-ion batteries—but the key differentiator could be how much range they retain in those extremities. Lithium-ion batteries lose a substantial amount of energy in colder climates whereas solid-state batteries are expected to maintain most of their energy regardless of the climate.
This breakthrough has been years in the making. Factorial’s relationship with Stellantis dates back to 2018—when it was still Fiat Chrysler Automobiles—and started with 20 Ah pouch cells before scaling up to 100 Ah. (Although the Stellantis cells are 77 Ah.)
“We went through production hell to scale up our operations,” Siyu Huang, the CEO of Factorial Energy, told InsideEvs in an interview. “It took us a long time, with a lot of scrap, plenty of material challenges and production yield challenges,” she added.
Huang then went on to show me the difference in size between the 20 Ah cells Factorial initially produced and the 100 Ah cells it has now pioneered. She held up the actual sample pouch cells that were in her office. The size difference was similar to that of an iPad and a full-size flatscreen TV.
However, the Stellantis cells are not all-solid-state (ASSB) units. They’re polymer-based semi-solid-state cells which focus on stabilizing the anode, the part of the cell where active material gets deposited during charging. This is more of an interim solution that could help pave the path towards ASSBs.
It’s also worth noting that Factorial’s cells in the Mercedes EQS and the Dodge Charger Daytona demo vehicles are substantially different. On the EQS, the cells are optimized for range and efficiency while the Daytona focuses more on performance—the chemistry however is identical.
If Factorial manages to solve scalability, both EVs will stand to benefit from weight savings—the Daytona more so than the EQS as it is an electric muscle car that currently has an absurd curb weight of 5,838 pounds.
Just on the pack level, these solid-state cells can help save 200 pounds of weight, Huang said. But because solid-state cells require far less structural bracing, less cooling, less thermal management and fewer overall components, the weight savings on the vehicle level can range from 500 to 2,000 pounds.
Going on a diet can also help with saving costs as every pound of weight loss saves about $5—something that’s a generally accepted metric among solid-state battery makers. Theoretically, companies can save $2,500-10,000 if progress continues as planned.
But Huang did not mince words when talking about the costs of these solid-state cells in their current state of development compared to lithium-ion batteries which have been widely commercialized. “They’re definitely more expensive on a small scale,” Huang said.
“The A-samples can be 10, 20 or even 30 times more expensive [than regular lithium-ion cells],” she added. Although she sounded cautiously optimistic about bringing costs down as the company scales up operations, and potentially even partners with big battery companies in the future for mass manufacturing.
Even China is going all in on the technology and these batteries can potentially solve all issues regarding range, safety, charging and longevity, according to her.
Instead of having several different solutions, “the most efficient solution is just to have one type of battery that can solve the problems for all,” she added.
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Will be his one have the hemi sound system installed? You know with the sounds of a supercharged 392?
40°C is a pretty low ceiling in the American Southwest. I’d like to see another 10° to feel at all comfortable with it. The typical military upper temperature for electronics is 125°C.
Bet it burns up real good. Nothing like sitting above a potential hazard, sort of like Russian tanks which store their ammo below the crews.
Energy density of gasoline is 12,700 Wh/kg e.g. more than 300 times higher than this battery. Just say’in. Now of course you have to compare the weight of the total engine and fuel package for both the ICEV and the EV.
I’ll know it’s real when it’s on at 2am with Vince Offer hawking it.
...faster charging speeds...
Science
How does one pump that many kWh through the existing grid without blaclouts all around the charging station....
Becoming annoyed with quotes of range, then followed by quotes of time to recharge to 90%.
What’s the time to recharge to 100%? When I fill my gas tank, I don’t fill it 90%. Regulators in the US should insist that range quotes be the 90% range, since that is the level that apparently is recommended for recharge.
> Stellantis Validates Game-Changing Solid-State Battery <
Sounds good. But many surveys have ranked Fiat and Jeep as the worst cars on the market today. Both brands are owned by Stellantis.
Just sayin’.
They were that before Stellantis.......................
Agreed. Though charging speed is kW (without the h), your point is valid. If a lot of people adopted EV's there'd be a huge drain on the grid ... and the grid in many places already needs updating anyway.
Home charging may be different, I don't know. Since EV owners have an incentive to charge at night (reducing wear on the battery by having it charged to 80% at the time you're about to leave the next morning), and some power utilities offer a discounted rate to encourage grid use in low demand hours (i.e. 9 PM to 5 AM), then maybe having some people switch to EV's doesn't tax the grid.
Few people do like I've done and have a lot of solar at home for mostly free power, including charging the EV. But I live in a climate that's good for that. Plus, my wife and I usually get home in the EV during the middle of the day (when the sun is up) instead of later at night when the sun is down (i.e. work commuters). So a solar / EV combo isn't conducive to most people's use. That's why I hate it when the Dims promote it like it's a one-size-fits-all plan.
Bottom line, nobody wants a $60K Jeep or a $90K Ram. I think we'll see consolidations and restructures in the next 2 years.
I am not categorically opposed to the idea of electric vehicles. It is just another means of propulsion. Of course, it cannot ever replicate sound and feel of a powerful gasoline motor, and as a muscle car enthusiast that is important to me.
Despite that, I could see having an EV if the technology were advanced enough. However, I don’t think we are there yet. Even with this advance, and even if it cost the same as standard lithium batteries now cost, there are still a number of problems: first, there is a tremendous safety issue - when lithium catches fire, and it does quite easily, it is almost impossible to put it out. I have certain knowledge that fire departments around the country have a policy of just letting lithium fires burn out on their own, with their job being to clear people far enough away so that it is not an immediate danger to them - and the amount of toxins released into the atmosphere from a lithium fire are stunning and immensely harmful to health. Second, the charging time is still too high. You can fill a very large gas tank completely from just about empty in 10 minutes, not from 15% to 90% full in 18 minutes. Yes, that cuts the present gap by a lot, but it is still less than half as good as a gasoline or diesel motor. Third is the simple hypocrisy of many advocates for EVs as some kind of a solution to our environmental problems. Even this solid-state battery covered here has many highly toxic materials, materials that have to be mined in dirty and dangerous ways across the globe, the raw materials have to be shipped elsewhere to be refined, shipped somewhere else again to be fabricated, and likely shipped a third time to be assembled. Then there’s the issue of how do these parts get recycled? With a gasoline or diesel motor, that’s easy, you simply melt down the metal, and maybe do a little bit of refining to purify it a bit more - but lithium batteries simply cannot be recycled, they just get buried and end up, polluting the soil. Finally, there is the 800 pound gorilla of how do these things get the power? If it was all powered by wind and solar, the advocates might possibly have a case (though if you go down one more layer and see what it costs in both money and environmental damage to build windmills and solar panels, that’s a seriously negative factor), but we know that over 89% of electricity is produced using natural gas, coal , nuclear, and in some cases oil, so there really is a highly negative case for EVs from an environmental point of view.
Again, there is a place for EVs, and I’m not going to condemn somebody who buys one of them, but there are so many technological issues involved that they are just not for me, and they are certainly not the solution that so many ill linformed and highly biased people believe that it is.
“semi-solid state”
would a gel lead-acid battery qualify as “semi-solid state”?
Corrections and additions:
80%, not 89%.
I also left out the effect upon the national electric grid. We are simply not able to power that many more electric vehicles then we have on the road right now without compromising on the already shaky reliability of our antiquated and not-so-robust electrical grid. Looking at what happened in Spain and it’s immediate neighbors last week, I would say that, ensuring the reliability of our power grid should be a top priority, well above that of putting more EVs on the road.
15% - 90% in 18 minutes ... yeah, I’m no5 seeing it. Another hype job.
The real issue - even Stellantis does not want to do business in Illinois. The plant has been sitting idle for years, but the locals are still clinging to the idea that EV batteries, the hope of the future, will restore employment to the area. In the meantime, it's a large empty place along Route 20.
80-90% for two reasons. That last 10-20% takes almost as long as the first 80%. It’s not like filling a gas tank. The electrons looking for electrodes inside the battery cell was described as a mall parking lot. When you drive in at 8am on a random Tuesday you can quickly find a parking spot in seconds. When you go at 11 am on Saturday before Christmas you’re going to be driving around a lot to find a space. So it’s much slower to get that last 10%-20% of electrons parked in an electrode as they travel throughout the circuit looking for a free electrode to park in all while other electrons are also looking for spots. Something like that anyway.
When you charge it over 80-90% the battery is at a high voltage state, and in that state it degrades the chemicals inside the battery. Why, I dunno. You can charge to 100% but it simply reduces battery life as it degrades. That is why they don’t want you to charge to 100%. If you buy one of these things you want it to go for 300,000 miles plus. If you charge it to 100% all the time it won’t last - it’s a disposable car. And yes I know some ICE cars well maintained last longer, most them either do not or are not well maintained to do so (and these days with so many electronic components and cheap aluminum engine parts ICE engines may be unlikely to last that long anymore, sadly). My current car is 26 years old with 230,000 miles and running strong.
Yeah I know it seems illogical on the surface. But anyway that was explained to me years ago by the tenured professor of battery engineering (?) boyfriend of my wife’s oldest friend. I may have gotten it a little bit wrong but I think I’m about 80% right. Good enough for cruising FR threads.
Technically, a discharge rate of 4C means the battery can output current at 4 times the capacity of the battery.
So, a 4C, 77Ah battery can supply up to 308 amps of power.
My car and my trucks work fine (none have caught fire or blown up in 60 years of driving) and get through power outages without even noticing. I even have a little gas at home for the lawnmower and “emergencies”. I’m thinking about putting a 300-gallon gravity tank up on my 40 acres out of town. I’ve always wanted my own gas station.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.