C4V Develops & Presents Working Solid-State Battery: Video

OCT 4 2018 BY MARK KANE 79

C4V presents a working solid-state battery cell.

Charge CCCV (C4V) announced that it has a working solid-state battery cell that is scheduled for production in the second-quarter of 2019.

The cell was presented on September 27, at the NY BEST 2018 Fall Conference in New York. C4V said that current version is rated a 380 Wh/kg and 700 Wh/L, but further refinement will increase energy density to 400 Wh/kg and 750 Wh/kg.

C4V expects that range of electric cars could be increased by 70% using its solid-state batteries.

According to the press release, the cells are not fully solid-state, as more than 80% of the liquid electrolyte was replaced with a solid electrolyte producing, which makes the cells a semi-solid-state. Yeah…we’ll make an exception and count it as solid-state if they can deliver an actual product.

Other than that, C4V said that the cost of these batteries will be lower than conventional cells and it doesn’t rely on cobalt.

Press blast:

C4V’s new solid state battery has arrived and is now on the road to mass production in New York!

  • Working prototype showcased by C4V at the NYBEST 2018 Fall Conference in New York. 
  • Battery’s Energy Density of 380Wh/kg achieved without cobalt.
  • System-level testing of the new battery now underway for strategic offtake partner.

Binghamton, NY, September 30, 2018 – Charge CCCV, LLC (C4V) today demonstrated a prototype of its new Solid State Battery (SSB) at the NY BEST 2018 Fall Conference in New York. The Company’s SSB solution delivers higher performance, higher density, lower cost batteries that promise to require significantly less charging time than others.

The Technology 
C4V has been able to replace more than 80% of the liquid electrolyte with a solid electrolyte producing a semi-solid-state technology with an energy density of approximately 380Wh/kg.

This technology will provide a remarkable 70% range increase for every Electric Car that employs the C4V Solid State Battery.  An Electric Vehicle today, currently capable of a 300-mile range, would with C4V’s technology be able to extend its range to 510 miles on a single charge.

The C4V Generation 3 Battery utilizes energy densities and volumetric capacities of 380Wh/kg and 700 Wh/L and the Company is already targeting a 400Wh/kg and 750 Wh/lit milestone within the next six month timeframe before commercial process optimization starts. In the first half of 2019, C4V plans to announce the availability of its commercial cells to the market.

The Company is working alongside commercial supply chains to fine-tune the compositions, chemical structures, particle morphologies and electrode processing techniques for tailored applications such as Electric Vehicles, grid back-ups, aviation needs and portable electronics requirements.

Dr. Shailesh Upreti, founder and President of C4V, emphasized in a statement today that: “It is our mission at C4V to discover solutions that solve problems lying at the materials level to create value at the Lithium-ion Battery and system level. Our unique materials technology not only reduces the cost of batteries significantly, it promises to provide relief to certain key metal supply constraints.”Dr. Upreti went on further to say: “C4V’s global joint venture companies are achieving price reductions through economies of scale by adopting its innovations. Our first generation high power and energy density batteries do not employ the use of cobalt, instead use higher voltage composite material in combination with other abundant raw materials and thus greatly reduce costs, while relying on a less volatile supply chain.”

At today’s NYBEST Annual Conference, Dr. Upreti showcased the new technology by lighting an LED with a prototype of C4V’s SSB stating in summary that, “We are very excited about  these new  developments in the Solid State Battery segment. C4V has taken a commercial approach to developing material and designs for its next generation product. We are able to demonstrate the drop-in nature of our technology which thus eliminates costly disruptions on the manufacturing floor”.

C4V continues to work closely with strategic partners as well as their established supply chain partners to bring its s latest innovations to market.”

One of the partners in the projects seems to be Magnis Resources (soon to be renamed to Magnis Energy Technologies), which issued own press release:

Working Solid State Battery Produced and Unveiled at Battery Conference in New York

  • Magnis Partner C4V has developed one of the world’s first working prototype of a Solid State Battery
  • Successful demonstration unveiled at the 2018 NYBEST Conference in New York
  • Battery volumetric capacity currently 380Wh/kg and 700Wh/L, with expected further optimisation towards 400Wh/kg and 750Wh/L
  • Targeted commercial production with availability by Q2 2019
  • New battery will lead towards lower production costs and does not rely on cobalt, reducing supply constraints in mass production

Magnis Resources Limited (“Magnis” or the “Company”) (ASX: MNS), to be renamed Magnis Energy Technologies Ltd (subject to shareholder approval), is excited to announce that its partner Charge CCCV (C4V) has completed production of a working prototype of a Solid State Battery which was demonstrated at the 2018 NYBEST Conference in New York by C4V.

C4V Solid State Battery Production

C4V’s new Solid State Battery, replaces more than 80% of the liquid electrolyte with a solid electrolyte. This effectively produces a lower cost battery that is higher capacity, higher density, higher performance, and with significantly reduced charging times than existing battery solutions. Further, C4V’s battery does not require cobalt which contributes to the reduction of costs and an increase in scalability of production without metals supply constraints.

The prototype Solid State Battery demonstrated in New York has volumetric capacities of 380Wh/kg and 700 Wh/L which is expected to increase to 400Wh/kg and 750 Wh/L through optimisation over the coming months prior to production for commercial availability by Q2 2019.

As an example of the capabilities of this battery in current implementations, the C4V Solid State Battery will be capable of delivering a 70% increase in range for electric vehicles when compared to other batteries, allowing an electric car with a current 400km range to be able to run 680km on the same single charge.

C4V is working alongside commercial supply chains to further refine and optimise compositions, chemical structure, particle morphologies, and electrode processing techniques to develop solutions for tailored applications including electric vehicles, grid backup solutions, aviation, and portable electronics.


C4V President Shailesh Upreti commented: “We are very excited about our developments in moving to a production-ready Solid State Battery design. C4V has taken a commercial approach in its development process for its next-generation product. C4V’s new Solid State Battery is drop-in ready, reducing disruption on the manufacturing floor, whilst reducing production cost and increasing production quality.

“C4V continues to work closely with our strategic partners, including Magnis, as well as our established supply chain partners to bring C4V’s latest innovation to market.”

Magnis Chairman Frank Poullas commented: “This is one of the world’s first Solid State Batteries to be produced. Volkswagen Group recently invested US$100 Million into US-Based QuantumScape which is yet to publicly produce a prototype and is targeting Solid State Battery production in 2025. The investment by Volkswagen valued QuantumScape at over US$1 Billion.”

“Our technology continues to gain serious interest and we look forward to announcing further developments in the coming quarters.”

Categories: Battery Tech


Leave a Reply

79 Comments on "C4V Develops & Presents Working Solid-State Battery: Video"

newest oldest most voted
Ron Swanson's Mustache

380 wh/kg is awful close to the 400 wh/kg where electrically-powered flight becomes viable.

Like Fox Mulder, I want to believe.

The density is out there!

So close but peddles would do for the last 20 Wh/kg. I can see it now in the future, when every seat on the Boeing Dreamliner MK2 has peddles. And the message from the captain will be “Passengers, we are about to take off, please remain in your seats, leave your seatbelts on, do not smoke and peddle like f**k.”

I think this would be good for cruise ship’s such as many cruise ships have rooms full of lead acid batteries on them if they replaced the lead acid battery room on a cruise ship with this they could have seven times the storage capacity in the same room on the cruise ship.

Founded in 2014 in Binghamton, NY with 8 employees.

Formally incorporated in 2014, Charge CCCV LLC, or C4V, has patented and refined methods of storing renewable energy and a method of extending the life of lithium ion batteries.

[My] passion is [to] take new technology from concept stage to a mature stage where it can be commonplace,” founder Shailesh Upreti said.

Upreti arrived at BU 10 years ago from India to complete his post-doctorate work along with Stanley Whittingham, a distinguished professor in chemistry and materials science and engineering at the university. Whittingham helped advise Upreti and co-founder Mark Mecenas in developing C4V.

What are the Tesla 2170 cells wH/L rated at? How bout LG cells and Samsung SDI?
Would be nice to see comparisons.
Even better would be charge rates charge/discharge and cycle life from 80% DOD to 100% DOD.

Tesla 2170 batteries at cell level are 322.3 wh/kg and 877 wh/L. This is only marginally better in that respect. If they don’t release the full specs on this battery at this point and their plan for production, this is just another pie in the sky.

Without doing the calculations myself, that sounds really high. A massive leap from the 240 or 250 Wh/kg in the 18650 cells.

21700 batteries are around that too. Chemistry is similar, there are just some savings on the casing but cooling must be more robust (core more distant from the edges) so packs don’t lose that much weight.
Even the 250Wh/kg is about the best from current liion batteries, probably car battery packs use not those cells as they should be cheap and deliver and accept huge amounts of power.

Solid state batteries must be much more tolerant with heat, so maybe even the same capacity density at cell level should be much better at pack level.

Tesla cells require a lot of safety and cooling equipment around them at teh pack level though, so perhaps these semi-solid state cells can do away with a lot of that extra weight in the pack?

Who knows, this company is awfully thin on details.

Cells are less than 322 wh/kg, the same NCA, no magic.
78270 usable Wh / 4416 cells is 17.7 Wh per cell.
Cell weight is somewhat uncertain, supposedly they used aluminum cell casing that may shed a bit of weight off, but there is a lot of BS posted on Internet by worshipers. It may be 65 – 79 grams.

If your numbers are right, the Tesla/Panasonic cells are actually smaller, but heavier for the same amount of energy stored. So they are moving sideways unless they can actually demonstrate better safety and/or charge rates, or life expectancy, etc.

Safer, faster charging batteries are all I really want in my first EV. I won’t mind having to spend 15 minutes per recharge if it gets me 200 miles on the highway in the fast lane. Most of my recharging will be done at home, so that’s a big plus.

Ask yourself; If I invent a better battery, what company, with a ready market, would I trust to help me sell it? That’s why if a better battery is available, Tesla will most likely have it first. Meanwhile, Look for a lot of FUD from ‘battery researchers.’

This is a false statement. Tesla is using dated battery cell formats.
Cylindrical consumer grade cell formats have been around forever and are mostly being dropped by everyone in industry.

What do you think was in your laptops 2 decades ago? Cylindrical cells taped together into a brick.

Li-Ion Polymer allows for more elegant packaging and can be designed to be more robust to punctures and explosions/fires if a puncture does occur. Why do you think you only see news stories of Teslas catching fire when the packs are damaged?

Also, Tesla is going for Metal-air batteries as their next “big thing.” That’s even greater wishing than solidstate batteries which have already been guaranteed to be put into production by at least 4 vehicle manufactures.

“Why do you think you only see news stories of Teslas catching fire when the packs are damaged?”

Because Tesla is able to use higher energy density cells than other EV makers. Higher energy density enabled by using smaller, cylindrical cells. Yes, there is a greater fire hazard because of the higher energy density, but that’s a trade-off for multiple other advantages… including more compact battery packs as compared to their capacity, and lower cell cost per kWh.

But despite a relatively greater risk of fire than other BEVs, Tesla’s cars are still several times safer than gasmobiles when it comes to the risk of fire.

Your claim that Tesla is using “dated” technology is 180° wrong. Tesla is using the most advanced batteries and battery pack technology of any EVs made today.

P.S. — “Li-ion polymer” cells are an older tech, used in only a few PHEVs in EVs these days, and used in only one single production BEV, the Kia Soul EV. Talk about a “dated technology”!

If you do that you’ll sell it to the ones that offer you more money. If they are more than one even better just make more.

Tesla might Not be a best bet, as their demand for quantity might be too high now! Kua, with much lower demand, might be a safer first start fir a commercial customer, for example!

Might be good Pie, in a Sky filled with non Tesla 2170 cells, though.

*Update: Plus, most focus on weight: Wh/Kg, which is important in Flight, of course, but Wh/L is equally important, as it determines the Space and Size needed to package the Battery Capacity in! Bigger Space = More Supporting Structure & Mass (Weight) to carry it. So the 877 wh/L value you show will take less space for any value of “X kWh”, than 700 Wh/L or even 750 Wh/L. So while 380 Wh/L is better than the “322.3 wh/kg”, the lower Wh/L value may balance out in additional structural mass to fit the larger Battery Pack. Or, it might still weigh more in actual use, in flight cases! Also, in flight designing, “G” loads Amplify any Excess Mass to Strength issues. A “Normal Categiry ” Rating is some 3.76 “G’s”, if I recall correctly, and Utility Category is 4.4 G’s! A little Cessna 150 is rated for Utility Category, and the Cessna 172 is Normal Category at Gross Weight with up to 4 People, and with just 2 People and 300 Lbs under Gross, is also Utility Category! Then, Aerobatis Ratings are 6 G’s! These are called “Sustained” Loads, as well. These are all “Positive G Ratings”, or forces pulling… Read more »

That’s just what someone on the internet made up.

Apples-to-oranges comparison.

Tesla uses consumer grade cylindrical cells. They lack the environmental robustness of the industrial grade cells other manufacturers tend to use. Most likely these solid state cells were designed to be industrial grade.

The benefit is of course higher energy density for cylindrical cells. The downside is lower tolerance to temperature and other external physical factors. As a result you need more complex packaging of the cells to compensate. So really, the net weight savings may be nullified when you factor in the packaging.

I would never purchase a car with consumer grade cylindrical cells.

As detailed in the article comparing battery heat dissipation, Tesla’s solution can dissipate much more heat, which allows those cylindrical cells to be effectively cooled better than comparable industrial battery products. They then use the frame of the vehicle to protect the cells, and given every Tesla has a 5* safety rating, the focus on cooling rather than impact protection seems to have paid off.

They redesigned the heat exchanger, it should have been that way from the start, the industry has been using that design for decades.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

The industry has been using that design for 2170 cells for decades?

He is, quite obviously, terribly confused.

Even the new Ribbon design, with a shorter cooling path, can be improved, and may well be, by Model Y time!

“…the industry has been using that design for decades.”

Say what?

Dude! Tesla was the first auto maker to put li-ion cells into a production EV — that was only 10 years ago — and their battery pack designs are years ahead of anybody else’s.

HEAT EXCHANGER…pay attention.

Tesla does not use consumer grade cells in their 2170 design. Doubtful that their “18650” cells are, either! They just “Appear” to be the same!

That’s correct; neither the 18650 cells nor the 2170 cells which Tesla currently uses are consumer grade. It may be that Tesla used consumer grade cells in the original Roadster, but they certainly have not used them since.

In fact, I doubt Panasonic could legally sell to consumers the batteries it makes for Tesla, since they lack certain safety features of consumer grade cells.

“Tesla uses consumer grade cylindrical cells.”

You really ought to try learning something about a subject before posting about it. Very nearly 100% of what you’ve said in your posts here is completely wrong… including what I’ve quoted there.

Tesla uses cells made to their specification by Panasonic, and they most certainly are not “consumer grade”, nor sold to consumers.

Now, you are correct to say that Tesla’s battery packs need “more complex packaging of the cells to compensate”, but — again 180° from what you’re claiming — what they compensate for is the lack of certain safety features found in consumer-grade cells!


No information about cycle life = very low cycle life.

Yep, I agree. if the specs are good, they should release them now… this is just smoke and mirrors.

I thought cycle life was one of the big advantages of going solid-state in the first place. So I’d be surprised if it were not good. Otherwise, what’s the point?

The major issue is charge rate, solid do not have this.

SolidEnergy also has a semi solid state cell, it is 450 what/kg but only 125 cycles so far.

Perhaps a 20% liquid electrolyte eliminates that problem. Other 100% solid-state developers are having problems with life cycle.

Yes, it is the interface with the anode/cathode.

On the other hand, a Prius Prime uses far more 25 miles per charge “Cycles”, than does a 310 Mile+ Range Model 3!

“Charge CCCV (C4V) announced that it has a working solid-state battery cell that is scheduled for production in the second-quarter of 2019.”

What’s the target market? I presume they won’t initially try to sell to the EV market, which needs the lowest possible prices per kWh. There are plenty of smaller markets where they could sell a limited amount of better batteries at much higher prices.

I find it odd that so many solid-state (or even semi-solid state) battery startups talk about the EV market as if that’s where they intend to sell their batteries. They should be looking at cell phones, laptops, and other high-priced consumer electronics where there is a very high demand for longer-lasting batteries. Selling to the EV market can come later, after they’ve ramped up volume and reduced prices.

Also, good to see their battery doesn’t use cobalt at all. Hopefully other battery makers will do the same.

Any future automotive battery, that can entirely remove Cobalt from the EV manufacturing supply chain, with cost and lifestyle parity aligned to current leading battery products, is definitely significant progress.

Who will be the early adopter in EV production, to demonstrate scalability in semi-solid-state battery implementation, and proof of concept?

Nissan AESC do not use cobalt.

True AESC “makes combined LMO-lithium nickel oxide cells”, with No Cobalt. But, they are not semi-solid-state, and replacing a 24 kWh battery (on a 2011-2015/16) Leaf, is prohibitively expensive with the new Nissan battery replacement pricing scheme, that was recently announced.


LMO unfortunately degrades rapidly when charged and hot

They do not have adequate cooling, which has nothing to do with cobalt.

That depends on how you go about DC fast charging your Leaf. My current 2013 battery profile, has me toasting at 110* F charging as I write, while 675 DC FC have been completed in the past 65 months. Degradation is approximately 17%, with a variable of +/- 2%.

Not too bad, considering the EV has gone over 63 k miles, in a car that is under $10k.

AESC’s battery chemistry is hopelessly inferior to the battery chemistry being used in first-tier, second-tier, or even other third-tier EVs. That’s why Leaf battery packs age prematurely, that’s why Nissan sold off AESC, and that’s why they had such a hard time finding a buyer.

In the case of AESC, the lack of cobalt isn’t a benefit — it’s a deficiency.

You are not an expert.

They do say they “do not employ the use of cobalt, instead use higher voltage composite material in combination with other abundant raw materials and thus greatly reduce costs”. So it appears on the surface they can compete in the EV realm. Phones and other electronics need miniature size batteries with no cooling requirements. Lacking specifics, it is hard to tell if they can meet that with this technology.

C-rate, thermal runaway and cycle life would be nice to know.

Cooling requirements shouldn’t be an issue in cell phones; they don’t pull much power, nor need much power when charging.

Laptops is another matter. With all the reports of laptop battery fires, something needs to be improved there. Not necessarily a cooling system, which would be bulky and would itself require power, but perhaps more spacing around cells and/or better venting of heat, and possibly battery chemistry that’s resistant to runaway overheating.

I think this is a waste of everyone’s Time . They already went From “Solid State To Semi Solid state”……..Sounds Like , “A LOAD OF CRAP” !

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

LMAO, I know right?????
Backwards move. 😛

Rite On ! A BackWards Move ! ..Keep This Up & We’ll Be Back On Led Acid …lmao… If there is anything Worth While Out there Tesla would Already Have it . …Period !

No, this seems like a good idea.

“current version is rated a 380 Wh/kg and 700 Wh/L” The Tesla/Panasonic 2170 cell is thought to be in the range of 279-322 Wh/kg and 760-877 Wh/L (various estimates I’ve seen thrown around). So in their current form this new semi-solid state battery will take up more volume per Wh but will weigh less. I’m not sure less 80 Wh/kg difference in weight compared to the 2170 cells will offset the higher volume of space needed to the tune of 70% more range though. To package these sightly more voluminous cells into say a Model 3 with the same 76 kWh capable pack might be a tight squeeze but might be possible. But then I wonder how much more range that 80 Wh/kg less weight would buy you. The pack, if assuming all other components of the pack design are the same and don’t add or subtract weight, for 76 kWh might be around 120 lbs. lighter. If the cell cycle life is similar and the cost is lower it doesn’t matter because it will still give you some amount more of range. 100-200 lbs lighter is nothing to sneeze at especially if the pack costs a little less and… Read more »

If these guys are real, they should send it to a indepedent test organization and have them publish the data.

Nice job on the number wrangling and analysis.

I think one thing that’s becoming increasingly clear is that a big battery breakthrough (BBB) in terms of performance (excluding cost) will be VERY difficult to achieve. Cost has dropped a lot, of course, and will continue to decline, which is terrific news. But it won’t be long before car designers are saying, “Well, we can price out components to make the new model go 300 miles on a charge and still be affordable, but we can’t figure out how to fit that big battery in the chassis. If we make the car bigger we need a bit more battery to hit 300 miles, plus we’re no longer aimed at the exact same market.”

To do apples to apples comparison with Model 3, you need to consider the whole pack. If you make light cells but heavy pack, there’s no point in marginal increase in power density at cell level.

For example, Model 3 long range, the pack weighs around 1200lbs. This includes the housing, thermal management (except radiator/circulation pump), BMS, insulation not to mention the charging hardware! If you count just the cells, they weigh about 1000lbs total. This means all the “other” hardware only weighs about 200lbs.

This is a remarkable achievement that no one really talks about and no competitor (including Model S & X) comes near. This has also brought the Model 3 to weight parity with ICE equivalent. That is why Jack Richart said Model 3’s battery is the most advanced in the world.

1000 lbs is too much for cells alone. That’s 180 wh/kg.

“For example, Model 3 long range, the pack weighs around 1200lbs.”

Nope, that was the approximate weight (1200-1250 lbs) back in 2012 for the Model S85, with its heavy stiff metal case.

The weight of the ~80 kWh Model 3 LR pack is reported at 1054 lbs:


“If you count just the cells, they weigh about 1000lbs total.”

That figure must also be incorrect.

Solid state should require less thermal management so simpler pack design.

Whoaw that video just blew me away. They must really have something

I wonder how much $ they wasted on that 28 seconds of useless video.

And how much bandwidth wasted on YouTube, and here at IEVs!

One single halfway decent PowerPoint slide would have been better and would have had just as much information.

How much heat is released when these semi or quasi solid state batteries charge and discharge? A true solid state battery probably won’t have much heat or exothermic properties. So short on details , are we supposed to have beggar’s belief in the Shaman’s latest invention?

Yeah, that’s a big unanswered question. Some claim solid-state batteries will have lower internal resistance, so can charge/discharge faster without overheating. If so, that could allow a significantly reduced cooling system, allowing the battery pack to be smaller, which in turn allows the entire car to be smaller and lighter.

But if it’s only “semi-solid state” rather than solid-state… who knows?

If these batteries can be mass produced, prove to be much safer than the current LI-ion batteries, have more range, recharge in half the time, deteriorate as slowly, and are less costly, they will revolutionize the EV industry. I’d pay a little more for an EV with this battery if it is that superior.

I’ve been hoping one of the many companies and universities working on a better battery would spring one on us within 5 years. I’ll keep my fingers crossed

If they are really at 380Wh/kg, perhaps send a few samples over to Tesla so they can be tested and see if the claims really hold up…
I am sure Tesla would really like a battery that can never catch fire, does not need cooling(fire proofing and cooling probably makes up about 30% of an EV battery pack, get rid of those, and 350 mile range becomes possible with even low-cost EV’s), also if it can take 240kW without overheating, thats even better(Supercharger V3, 435 mile range in 15 minutes….).

But alas, since this company has not yet backed up their claims with real-world proof, it’s just a scam…

Now if they could eliminate that 20% liquid electrolyte and it will be truly a good find noting it doesn’t use cobalt. Liquid electrolytes ate known to cause many problems including fire.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

The whole purpose/goal of the solid state was to not have 20% electrolyte.
They’re goal went from 100% electrolyte free to 20% electrolyte.


Mark Kane: Oooops! Per your opening paragraphs line “C4V said that current version is rated a 380 Wh/kg and 700 Wh/L, but further refinement will increase energy density to 400 Wh/kg and 750 Wh/kg.”, the 750 should be 750 Wh/L, not /kg!

OK, then! A nice Shiny Cell on a Turntable! And Music! Wow! Great Video!

Now, let’s see it powering an Aircraft Landing light for an hour or two! Or an eBike!

wow the video is really informative ……. “charging ahead” no technical details whatsoever ….

As mentioned here already from others 1865(0) batteries have 250Wh/kg and 2170 have 300Wh/kg so the 380Wh/kg semisolid is not that much improvement above cylindrical cells.
Tesla/Panasonic is using aluminum as transfer material instead of Cobalt, so no improvement either.

And the main problem with solid state batteries was so far that the positive charged Li-ions could not move that good through a “solid wall” than through a liquid electrolyte back and forth. Seems to be overcome with a 80% solid (grid structure ?) with some liquid filled gaps or whatever this semi-solid design is about.

Interesting would be the heat stability of those ‘semi-solid’ cells, because the advantage of ‘fully-solid’ was a much higher heat stability beside non inflammable electrolyte. Higher heat tolerance means less cooling => less weight/volume of the pack.

One thing bug me.

They talk about battery energy densities and battery volumetric capacities instead of cell densities or cell volumetric capacities.

Are they talking about the same metric?

What is it?

What about V range? (2.8-4.2 as litio)
Size? (Same as Leaf/fluence)
Ah picture pouch?
I d like this 48 new pouch in my fluence battery

So if C4V decide to make an affordable upgrade battery for the Vaxhall Ampera/Chevy Volt Gen 1 of the same weight (196kg) it could potentially have 70.480 kWh, and by comparison the Tesla model 3 extended range has 75 kWh.
I’d buy one, it’s a no brainer, probably along with the vast majority of other Chevy Volt/Ampera owners.
Now factor in upgrade batteries for the Leaf, i3 and Model S, and C4V have overnight many many willing customers, and profits. Plus by allowing the upgrade of present stock, C4V are forcing major car companies to use C4V batteries in their new vehicles, which as they are new, must be better than current stock.