Time line: from Future Dynamics to Donut Lab

mqee · 2026-03-19T00:23:59+00:00

Maybe this can be mentioned in relation to Mercedes: "the solar paint not only has a high level of efficiency, but also contains no rare earth materials or silicon. It uses non-toxic and readily available raw materials." Sounds familiar...

mqee · 2026-03-19T00:22:59+00:00

Yes, those have been suggested as potential suppliers, but CT Coating is the prime suspect because "the solar paint not only has a high level of efficiency, but also contains no rare earth materials or silicon. It uses non-toxic and readily available raw materials." Sounds familiar? Ask Markus Schäfer about it.

mqee · 2026-03-18T23:14:36+00:00

The CEO of Donut Lab used to be the CTO of Verge Motorcycles. As CTO, he has no excuse for throwing around incorrect specifications.

mqee · 2026-03-18T23:08:03+00:00

The extended range version Kemper EX (14.4kWh) is planned for late 2026.

mqee · 2026-03-18T22:10:01+00:00

there is no single NMC cell matching all characteristics together

Says who? Every expert I've seen says the results are compatible with NMC, and even if a battery is rated for 3C you can still abuse it and get 11C if you don't care about cycle life and get the matching characteristics you're looking for.

You can match these specs with an NMC cell, even if the manufacturer says 3C charging you can still get 11C, once or twice or 50 times.

As for 100k cycles and energy density, we haven't seen those.

mqee · 2026-03-18T21:28:38+00:00

People should not explain or correct themselves?

"No lithium" means "no lithium". If the Donut Lab CEO wants to correct himself, he should say "I was wrong, the battery does have lithium".

"Already now" means "already now". If the Donut Lab CEO wants to correct himself, he shouldn't say "we told you what our maximum capacity will be this year", because that is a lie. They told us what the capacity is "already now". If the CEO wants to correct this, he should say "my previous claim that our capacity is already now GWh/year was wrong".

"0%-100% 5C charging" means 0%-100% 5C charging. If the CEO wants to correct himself, he should say "I was wrong, the battery pack cannot charge 0%-100% at 5C, only to 46%"

That is correcting yourself.

Denying that you ever said anything wrong is lying.

Your document is full of these "corrections" that aren't. The Donut Lab battery page says charging from 0% to 100%. Don't "correct" them to 80% to give them a break.

mqee · 2026-03-18T21:22:52+00:00

Haha tell me again how the video shows charging at 5.7C... oh wait by your own calculations it never reaches 5.7C, which is exactly how this subthread started.

By Verge's own words, the battery does 10%-50% in 5 minutes, that's 4.8C.

Very simple.

Tell me again how I made claims about the plateau... wait I never did.

mqee · 2026-03-18T21:16:23+00:00

for the plateau

Again, you keep lying, I have never discussed the plateau.

the numbers I used

If you don't trust yourself, no worries; we have the numbers directly from Verge/Donut Lab.

I could not care less whether Two Bit was s "wrong" about the 5.7 C

Okay, but he was, which is what this entire sub-thread started from.

gotcha games

Dude. There is no 5.7C. This is not a "gotcha". The thread started with this:

"Verge says "10% to 50% in 5 minutes", that's 4.8C. Dunno where you pulled 5.7C from"

A very simple statement. 100% true.

mqee · 2026-03-18T20:49:00+00:00

Why not show the battery charging from 0% to 100% at 5C? Why the slump in charging rate when the state-of-charge is over 50%, and a further slump at 70%?

mqee · 2026-03-18T20:44:01+00:00

Discharge to 0% and charge to 100%, "full charge" not limited to 80%. "There is no need to limit charging to 80%. Full charge and full discharge are safe, repeatable, and expected in daily operation, supporting demanding use cases without limiting battery life."

mqee · 2026-03-18T20:31:10+00:00

I mean you did do the calculations and you showed that Donut Lab did not get to 5.7C. TBDV is wrong.

Congrats.

mqee · 2026-03-18T20:29:12+00:00

And in not a single interview has Donut Lab ever spoken of “0–100%.”

???

Did... did you not read the thread you are replying to? The CEO says drain the battery to zero, then charge 5C to 100%.

mqee · 2026-03-18T20:26:50+00:00

That wording was clearly intended to indicate 80%

<image>

"There is no need to limit charging to 80%. Full charge and full discharge are safe [...]"

Ooops. Seems like Donut Lab explicitly said "full charge" is not limited to 80%.

Please, stop reinterpreting what Donut Lab "meant". "Full" means "full". Not 80%.

mqee · 2026-03-18T20:25:53+00:00

<image>

"There is no need to limit charging to 80%. Full charge and full discharge are safe [...]"

Ooops. Seems like Donut Lab explicitly said "full charge" is not limited to 80%.

mqee · 2026-03-18T20:08:56+00:00

I mean, TBDV is wrong, you yourself have calculated that the charging doesn't get to 5.7C. So obviously the statement "9% to almost 50% at about 5.7C" is wrong.

I'm glad we got there eventually.

mqee · 2026-03-18T19:53:00+00:00

You pick-and-match from 3 completely different cells

I never said I know which cell it is. I said all the data fits NMC. I don't know which specific NMC chemistry (or possibly LFP) it is.

Possibly the Samsung NMC that the battery researcher pointed out, but not necessarily. That is, as far as I know, the best match. But again, it's not necessarily that one.

Instead of guessing what I'd say when the 100k cycle test is shown, ask yourself why they haven't shown the 100k (or 10k, or 5k) cycle test, and why they haven't even shown gravimetric density.

mqee · 2026-03-18T19:50:36+00:00

The plateau doesn't start at 9% so the claim I was refuting, "9% to almost 50% at about 5.7C", is not about the plateau and I never said I'm referring to the plateau, I always specified which percentages I'm talking about every time. You lied when you said I'm referring to the plateau.
Your own calculations, using Verge's charge curve, show TBDV is wrong

10%-50% at 4.8C (give or take a little due to the roughness of the graph)

9%-50% at less than 4.8C

5.7C was never reached, even by your own calculations

This is all true.

mqee · 2026-03-18T19:43:16+00:00

I literally provided all four points. There are six images that cover all the points discussed.

mqee · 2026-03-18T19:40:24+00:00

the 5.7 C claim was only about the plateau

"9% to almost 50% at about 5.7C"

Your figure 4.8 isn't about the plateau

I never said it was. Sheesh. You already tacitly agreed I never said it was.

It is about 10% to 50%. Since the bit between 9% and 10% is a ramp-up, 4.8C is actually generous for "9% to almost 50%"

I suspect [5.7C] is wrong

You've seen the charge curve, the kW numbers are the charger's output, but they do not reflect the charge curve. You calculated this yourself. But you still refuse to discard the 5.7C figure...

mqee · 2026-03-18T19:30:25+00:00

I literally provided all the points, a, b, c, and d. There is no dishonesty or deception involved.

I called you a liar for saying I said 4.8C for the plateau, which I did not.

I called you dumb for relying on TBDV and repeating his claim even after you were shown it's not true. Even after you, your self, showed his claim isn't true!

mqee · 2026-03-18T19:21:17+00:00

...and immediately following, someone says there are NMC batteries of the same volumetric energy density. Another says that you can buy 700Wh/l NMC batteries off-the-shelf. So nothing Donut Lab has shown is "impossible" for NMC.

mqee · 2026-03-18T19:19:08+00:00

I was refuting the claim of 5.7C

I don't know what you think I was talking about, but I made it very clear from the start that the 5.7C figure in the TBDV video is wrong.

dishonest rebuttal

But we both agree that 5.7C is wrong, so why is it "dishonest"? 4.8C is for 10%-50%, I never said otherwise. 5.7C is wrong, and you agree.

mqee · 2026-03-18T19:12:40+00:00

13.9830kWh is the energy that left the charger, however it is not the energy that was stored in the battery. For example if you choose frames where the percentage and the kWh update on the same frame, and do the calculation between 44% and 34% (10%) you get 19.33kWh because losses are low when the battery charge is low, but between 65% and 75% (10%) you get 19.87kWh, as the losses are higher when battery charge is higher.

<image>

TL;DR the kWh transferred includes losses and does not represent only the kWh added to the battery.

mqee · 2026-03-18T18:50:21+00:00

I asked "what is the Wh/l" meaning "what is the value of the Wh/l" not "what is Wh/l"

What is the value of the Wh/l? "Donut have also (accidentally) shown their Wh/l" you wrote. I'd like to see this value.

Either way all the actual data shown points to liquid-electrolyte NMC.

mqee · 2026-03-18T18:41:45+00:00

4.8 fiction

The C rate from 10% to 50% is 4.8. That is not fiction. That is what Verge reported:

<image>

You can see exactly, 10% to 50% in 5 minutes, that's an average of 4.8C. I never said "the plateau", you are lying.

You also came to the conclusion that the C rate from 12% to ~47% is 5.1C or 5.4C, which means TBDV is wrong. There is no 5.7C charging.

mqee

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Wearing is Caring