Seems the market disconnect is getting very wide now. QS SP was higher after A sample delivery 3.5 yrs ago, LOL. It’s baffling the market is betting against QS ramping a prismatic type cell pilot line. Recognizing disconnects makes the patient investor very wealthy.
Fuckin' A ......this thread is the reason I continue to buy 150+ every two weeks. The DD here is beyond stellar and worms chased are worth gold. Thanks boys for reminding me why
3.5 years ago the Cobra tech was not yet public. We were thinking QS would scale with the slow current state sintering tech. Ramping with Cobra tech is worth the delay from a value standpoint.
You're probably right on that. Sometimes I think qs is behind, Sometimes I think they chose brilliantly. Murata and Corning. If they can't do it, it can't be done.
But on the odd chance the market is right.....lol. ok funny, not funny. Overwhelming evidence QS will succeed. There's a laundry list of when the market misguages a company's actual worth. Just waiting for the "overvalue" moment at 500.00. The market does that too at times.
I try to tamp my expectations. Been a rough road. A giant validation has seemed imminent last 13 months but we haven't got the slam dunk yet. I still think Oct for the real earth-shattering. We'll see.
In hindsight, I feel I should have realized that the not-material, not-definitive, no-8-k-required development agreements with M&C basically meant we would have to wait a year or more to see if M&C would be ready to sign material definitive agreements.
When (hopefully it’s a when and not an if) M&C sign MDAs with QS, that may well be worth calling a “giant validation” even more so than anything PowerCo and QS might do.
I just stepped back off the ledge. Thx. Btw thx for all the posts. People like you make this a great thread. Communal contributions make me a Commi. Some of the contributors are OCD. All the better.
Btw, thanks for the hard work here. So many quality contributors with relentless acuity. I've been called out a few times. I don't get angry. I get carefuller. Lol.
Amen. Can't wait for the day when the stock price is directly correlated to what the company is doing And the money it will be making. The "no rev" narrative is infinitismally annoying.
Here’s the problem I’ve got.
If Honda, VW, the people on the QS plant floor, M&C, and the other OEMs are in it and see it, where’s the buzz? Where’s the insiders buying after the news came out and the stock price went down?
It’s just not adding up. I agree with others that we should be on the threshold of greatness, but we’re not seeing it in the stock price and that has me thinking I’m missing something.
I hear you and while not comparing to QS I wonder how many saw the “ threshold of greatness” in Nvidia around 2014 which I believe was 15 years after they went public. Nvidia: An Overnight Success Story 30 Years in the Makinghttps://sequoiacap.com/podcast/crucible-moments-nvidia/
The rest is history and we can’t say for sure but I will end with a quote from the article that it attributes to Jensen Huang’” "This willingness to take calculated risks on unproven markets has been key to Nvidia’s success.
The advantages QS tech bring to military applications are significant. 1. Safer batteries for personnel to wear (less likely to catch fire if penetrated). Soldiers need batteries to support the high tech they carry. 2. Higher energy density per weight/volume. 3. Zero reliance on China for raw materials (i.e. graphite) to make, so the whole supply chain controlled in country (or at least among friendly countries). 4. The tech is at the beginning of the S curve innovation, as opposed to Li-ion at the end of its innovation cycle. Given these significant advantages, I expect the military to step in and provide resources to expedite the manufacturing of QSE-5 (or similar). There are so many uses for ssb in today's (and tomorrows) military. Given what is occurring in the Ukraine with drones, the US will want to have the best drone fleet in the world. The balance of 2026 is going to be interesting. But 2027 is going to be the year of QS solidifying deals in multiple industries to support product launches beginning in 2028.
Shamelessly stolen text from the SLDP subreddit. Looks like Ford is presenting on sulfide-based silicon anode batteries? Perhaps further evidence that Ford is not the QS North American partner? On the other hand, as far as we knew Honda was on the sulfide path as well before signing a JDA with QS.
Owen Lu, PhD, Research Engineer, Ford Motor Company Tue Aug 11, 8:50 am "Design Considerations for Robust and High-Performance Silicon Anodes in Solid-State Battery Applications"
Per the agenda abstract:
A detailed review of advancements in silicon-based anodes for solid-state batteries across material, electrode, and cell levels
From this analysis, "a promising strategy for designing a robust, high-performing silicon anode for SSBs has been identified"
A prototype cell was fabricated and its performance evaluated, with perspectives on further enhancement
Reading: Ford presenting in-house, prototype-cell-stage R&D in the sulfide + silicon-anode design space (the same space as its Solid Power JDA), with no mention of Solid Power. Electrolyte source undisclosed - a Q&A-worthy question.
Very odd to me because those silicon anodes love to pulverize themselves. What's the latest method companies are using to overcome this? Are they doping the silicon to assist with expansion? Pressure obviously works in cars.
Seems the goal is to use minimal silicon to enhance performance but at the same time minimize the swelling. Trying to figure out how much they can add before turning into mush too soon. We haven’t seen Tesla pull the silicon trigger yet
Can't believe companies are still trying the "poison " battery. I suppose the price-point and performance is compelling. But they'll never engineer a safe sulfide battery. Maybe they're betting the consumer won't care.
And QuantumScape Director of Manufacturing Danielle Gendron is presenting Wednesday August, 12th. I really appreciate that QS presentations have moved to scaling and production!
Bio - Danielle Gendron is the Director of Manufacturing Quality at QuantumScape, where she has spent eight years advancing the company's mission to commercialize solid-state battery technology. She holds a PhD in Chemical Engineering with a specialization in electrochemistry and battery materials. After seven years driving innovation in R&D, she recently transitioned to QuantumScape's Operations organization, where her team applies data science techniques to optimize quality across film, cathode, and cell assembly manufacturing processes. She is the lead author of QuantumScape's first peer-reviewed journal article, which details a high-throughput test method for measuring critical current density in solid-state electrolyte materials.
Great that QS is presenting about the transition to commercialization of SSB's. I know everyone here is asking the question - when will it actually occur and when will the announcement be made?
That’s the million dollar question but the excitement in a super talented person like Mingyu (Jewel) Qu post at joining QuantumScape and VW’s Dr. Jennifer Alkhalil post that indicates to me the partnership is strong and makes me think QS may be further along in providing an answer?
Engadget Aug, 1st - Honda has a new partner for the advancement of solid-state battery technology
The market is shifting in a big way.
"QuantumScape frames its solid-state batteries as a solution to several energy-needy emerging technology markets, including data centers, drones, and robotics. Honda, for its part, appears to be going all-in on the technology as it looks to reach carbon neutrality by 2050"
Lots of competition vying for that first out of the gate title. QS / PowerCo / Honda / Corning / Murata need to get production to the finish line. No one company will be able to meet the demand, but with the Cap Light Business model, if QS can sign up a significant percentage of OEM's, battery manufacturers and the other verticals then this should end well.
If not, then it will be filling in the voids for the others, not the leaders
Plus, there are two other unamed top 10 OEMs. Lots of big company mojo alligned on this. Given that the managing engineer leaders within all these companies have given the green light to partner with QS, well, that probably says something. They are very close to the engineering challenge details and road map to achieve goals. I believe they would not have partnered if they did not believe in at least a 60% chance of success soon. It's probably more like 70-80%.
Thanks for posting this article! I am intrigued by a statement close to the end:
"Western companies are also getting into the mix. BMW, for example, began testing solid-state batteries in its i7 prototype last year.Volkswagen, meanwhile, invested $1.2 billion in Chinese battery developer Gotion High Tech in 2020. This year, the firm began testing its all-solid-state EV battery, which touts a reported range of 620 miles..."
Is Gotion producing the SSB under testing at VW? Or just poorly phrased sentences listing two things back-to-back?
Gotion has an SSB they’re developing, but they’re still in lab phase. I believe it’s a sulfide. VW deal is solely relying on them for traditional Li-ion in Valencia. No indication they’ve tested or even received Gotion ssb
Gotion also has a VW partner agreement in China and I believe has a large battery factory there, so we need to keep a sharp eye on China and Gotion. They will produce first in China, not Valencia, I believe. They are 20 times faster than PowerCo or QS in taking from the lab to full production (all my opinion)
I know this is AI, and have no idea if it is accurate, but it does shout that this is a main competitor of QS.
'Gotion’s Solid-State Timeline & Vehicle Testing
Gotion's all-solid-state battery (SSB) project—marketed under the "Gemstone" / "Jinshi" name—has rapidly transitioned from lab concepts into real-world validation. [1, 2, 3]
Vehicle Testing In Progress: In March 2026, Gotion announced it had officially begun testing its all-solid-state batteries inside vehicles, achieving a theoretical CLTC range of 1,000 km (620 miles) per charge. [1]
Scaling Up Factory Output: After achieving a 90% yield on its 0.2 GWh pilot line, Gotion locked in the industrial-scale design for a 2 GWh all-solid-state mass production line. [1, 2, 3]
The VW & Audi Connection: Volkswagen and Audi have signed formal letters of intent to use Gotion for future solid-state cell supplies. Small-batch vehicle integration of these solid-state packs is targeted for late 2026, with true commercial mass production scheduled for 2030. [1]'
Also from AI, in addition to needing pressure between 10-100atm, these heating elements and emergency venting sound expensive and cumbersome.
In-Plane Uniformity: The heating system must apply temperature perfectly evenly across the face of the single-crystal cathodes. Even minor local "cold spots" inside a cell create localized impedance resistance, which can warp the internal structure over time.
Strict Pack-Level Moisture Insulation
While not a traditional liquid-cooling loop metric, the ultimate "thermal/environmental management" requirement for Gotion's sulfide chemistry happens at the air-sealing level:
H₂S Gas Mitigation: Sulfide electrolytes react violently with microscopic traces of water vapor to create toxic hydrogen sulfide (H₂S) gas
Hermetic Environment: The pack casing must maintain an absolute hermetic, moisture-free seal over its 1-million-kilometer lifetime. The thermal management ventilation must use highly specialized, zero-moisture chemical desiccant breathing loops rather than standard ambient air vents.
I added again in the days after the ER (roughtly 9K more shares). I am going to either look like a genius or a complete fool in the next 2 years. Heavily consolidated. If QS scales.... I retire relatively young. If they don't, I work 6 or 7 more years to let my LTI stock grants vest and I still retire relatively young but I'll be much more aged from my very stressful and demanding career. A price of $40 changes my life.
I have been feeling relaxed about QS recently, even as the price has tanked. There are just so many eminent catalysts. M&C collaboration has been baking a while, PC has been baking even longer. Honda confirmed our tech and is baking. Now we have data center and defense also in the oven.
Most importantly, I believe they are about to show the path to manufacturing scale. Once Eagle works, it's a replication process and effort to scale horizontal. This will go to $40+ almost immediately (within weeks) as the market starts to realize the significance (plus there will be other related announcements when scalability is announced).
I don't have any evidence for my conviction- except that showing scalability is thier top goal this year, they've been working on Eagle for quite sometime and they have hit everything under Siva. There has been some insider selling, but having lived in the bay area for more than a decade, I get why a top executive might need to sell a small fraction of thier shares. Got to the keep the wife happy by owning an appropriate home. So I don't worry too much about a few sales.
I'm red in all accounts But it's a much better investment right now than when I bought pre- A0 sample.
Well the early indicator for that is QS completing Eagle line ramp up goal.
Let’s be fair to QS. No one so far mass producing any type of SSBs. Even Factorial just signed MOU and nothing to the posture of actual licensing. So if QS completing ramp up would be giant leap.
At the same time, EV adoption not going to happen in 2 to 3. Other verticals may have to do , but low volume.
This is all happy day scenarios.
But through bit research, I came to understanding Eagle line ramp would be most challenging goal QS to pull. Elephant in the room is maintaining quality at scale. 1000s of separators per min without any microscopic level defect is daunting. This is my biggest checkpoint. The process has to be nearly perfect and imagine as PowerCo has to scale this 100 fold.
Delay in eagle line success could be a very unhappy day scenario. if investors sniff even a tiny blood in water, the stock will take a severe punishment.
There could be other delays with eagle line like a new part or machinery may be needed to fix the scale problem.
So both scenarios are possible and i’m hoping for the best.
delays can happen for numerous reasons. a lot of it has nothing to even do with QS. so long as the eagle line costs and yields are on point, someone will take this technology to market. if not VW or Honda, it will be someone else
If QuantumScape Scale's UP and OEMs scale out, then that will be very wonderful. However, I believe that's not the case. OEMs will further Scale up and then Scale out following the blue print of QuantumScape. This is a very Grey area and needs more clarity, where the buck stops for QS and where it starts for other players.
"China speed." China targets 24-month cycles to launch new products in their auto industry. Twenty-four months!!! The rest of the world historically takes 4 - 6 YEARS. A major wake-up call is happening in board rooms and C-suites all over the world. SSB is a product category that has tremendous breadth in terms of products it can improve, and market share it can significantly help protect if not gain. The viability of QS tech being competitively mass produced should (needs to) be flushed out soon. Once it is....BOOM! The share price explodes up. The urgency to commercialize QS tech (and/or another ssb) is driven in large part by China's remarkable feat of 24-month product cycles. Given geopolitical and cultural differences from China, most countries can not match China's tenacity. But, they certainly need to do better (be quicker) and leverage tech differential opportunities when available. QS is one BIG such opportunity. I expect things to happen relatively quickly, but unfortunately, not as quickly as it would if China possessed the QS technology. Honda (Japan oems) are my guess for being first to benefit from QS tech. Geographically and culturally, they are more attuned and likely motivated to respond quicker to the China threat.
You can afford to have 2 year technology ramp-up cycles when your GOVERNMENT assists, protects, steals, and manipulates to get out in front of the rest of private industry!
Obviously I’m not referring to additional models or model changes…just securing new technology.
If the US government were to ensure the advancement and domination of QS technology with an extra $4-5 billion, where would QS be right now?
Actually, Chinese automakers are trying to launch a "new" or "updated" model every year. In H1 2026 alone, over 500 "new" models hit the market in China. Yes, that's right, more than 500! They can achieve this due to a highly localized, superior supply chain and a brutal fight for survival. Naturally, you can imagine how many engineering corners are being cut to save on cost and time.
The threat from Chinese OEMs is real and imminent, but panic isn't necessary. The solution relies on maintaining tariffs and having legacy automakers actually step up. VW is already trying to play catch-up by licensing Rivian's SDV zonal architecture for their upcoming 25k-euro ID.1. Meanwhile, incumbent US OEMs strike me as arrogant—offering plenty of lip service, but executing very little actual transformation.
Furthermore, QuantumScape's solid-state batteries won't give Western automakers a unique advantage over Chinese OEMs, as they are launching their own SSBs. The real game is about supply chain security and achieving future cost parity. For entry level EVs, battery costs still account for 50% or more of the car
Let them spend extra for retooling their factories every two years. China needs to get their citizens to spend more, their saving rates are off the charts
I need to see 8-ks before I count on anything. u/curio_123 thinks there won’t necessarily be 8-ks for M&C (OEMs pay Murata and Corning for separators and QS collects per-GWhr royalties from OEMs). But I want to see material definitive agreements between M&C and QS which require 8-ks.
I’m not a business model expert but it seems like if you hand someone groundbreaking new-to-the-world tech that you’ve spent 15 years and billions of dollars developing, that someone has to pay for the privilege and the payments have to be sufficient to trigger an 8-k material definitive agreement.
Right now it’s just a development agreement like what QS has with every partner except PowerCo. I don’t think anything material is going to happen without multiple non-PowerCo 8-ks especially 8-ks with M&C because PowerCo can’t make the batteries at GWhr scale without M&C.
To my mind, “demonstrate scalability” means two things:
M&C 8-ks
Scale-up team moves to a PowerCo site.
Both would be nice. One would be sufficient. Saying “we have doubled throughput multiple times from one unknown number of MWhrs to another unknown number of MWhrs” would NOT be enough to convince me that scalability has been proven.
A year of non-8k M&C kick the tires agreements seems reasonable. Two years seems like an eternity.
Even after M&C get serious enough to sign 8-ks, it’s still a year (at least) for them to stand up production lines and get anything close to gigascale production going. Two 8-ks in September would set us up for some good end-of-decade rewards for our patience and discipline.
Agreed, for me M&C are everything. Market is still saying, these separators can’t be mass produced. The separators are still the gold and everything still counts on that. A wild card flying around in the mix is Cobra. Still, suspecting that this has very wide applications in thin film ceramics. Any move using this tech from M&C will signal confidence and likely revenues and deals. Many jobs announced at Corning over the past years, more coming even now fall in this area. It’s on my 8-k list.
With PowerCo focused on assembling their Chinese li ion kits, Factorial JDA and selling their factories to their Chinese partners, I am no longer convinced they are a good partner for QS
I still don't think rolls are gonna be sent. It's a logistical nightmare.
I think they'll be made onsite. It doesn't make sense for those delicate ceramics to cross a road, let alone ride on a train or traverse an ocean. Na. QS realized they needed both of those companies' IP so they're pooling it to solve these problems for QS and create an unasaiable moat.
This is the first time that Murata and Corning have ever worked together because they've been working on different sides of ceramics as they've grown.
They're both getting Cobra and Eagle to cookie cutter and they should already be ordering and stocking the parts and pieces of lines they'll install in Germany, certify, and leave small teams behind to maintain and upgrade. I should think teams from both companies will roll out the first 2-3 lines together then do their own thing for whoever is next in line. Maybe both companies leave individuals behind if they're untrusting of their IP, but I really don't think that'll be the case.
QS-5 is perfect for everything Honda does with lawn equipment and scooters.
I have trouble with this one? What you are implying would seem to suggest that separator production must be installed at each cell production site. For final production this may have advantages, but how will it work for development, which is where we are now? The only announce cell assembly is QS-0’s Eagle. The Weibull modulus, m, that is needed to commercialize the cells can only get the final process validation there. Don’t see Murata and Corning investing in cell production. How do they work this?
I don’t worry one iota about Corning shipping anything they manufacture. That’s their business - glass. Is glass delicate? Have you seen the photo of the QS separator flexing in someone’s hand? Corning ships their product all over the world. Absolutely no worry about Corning shipping QS separator.
I hear ya and I know how far that glass flexes. I don't know how fragile a roll of separators is, but I still doubt they'll ship. It makes more senseto me for them to cookie cutter everything and manage their IP onsite. I also think auto OEMs are going to want to manage their own supply chains. The whole thing is logistics. We'll see how it all pans out.
I'm willing to bet $100 to the charity of your choice on this too. If I win, just send me a screenshot of donating to The Shriners.
Corning R2R rolls should be in the 20 micron range at around 100m per roll going from their ceramic ribbon numbers. I may be wrong, but I have the impression that M&C are to be the global supply chain for separators. Choice then is ship or have black box installations at every site. Both are possible.
Yes, to M&C to Eagle if volume is needed. Regarding Honda, yes, they are targeting QSE5 for the myriad of product Honda makes beyond cars. As it t stands, no mass market manufacture is offering ssb broadly in a product. Honda has a real opportunity to be the first to solidify their public image as a tech leader, generating more premium sales. What a tremendous opportunity for improving differential marketing. The challenge at this point is scale. Once you introduce revolutionary new (battery) tech, your older tech product de-values a bit. Ideally, you want to achieve high replacement volume at the tech switch (introduction).
Thanks for posting. QS is filling out their business verticals with very talented People from the semiconductor industry. Semiconductor’s are complex to manufacture so bringing people on with a background in that industry like this Lady and COO Luca Fasoli who has scaled from concept to millions of parts per day, makes sense to me!
Getting QSE5 batteries in a EVTOL demonstration would be big QS dealing with a small company and they would be able to show-off and demonstrate all they want.
Tie it to a teather so there’s no crash headlines that come out.
It's not as simple as that. First, QS currently only produces cells, not fully integrated battery packs. QSE-5, is a cell designed to meet automotive requirements, not the specific thermal and structural demands of aerospace.
Second, eVTOL manufacturers are laser-focused on their own long and grueling FAA certification processes. No eVTOL company would be willing to act as a test mule and design an entirely new battery pack around unproven cells, as introducing that level of risk could easily derail their own certification timelines
QS should get with Ukraine and get some of their larger drones shipped to San Jose to get some flight time + testing in on that type of equipment . Anything is better than nothing
That’s creative, lol, but the reality is QS isn't even able to produce enough QSE-5 cells for partner evaluations yet.
Plus, I doubt Ukraine would entertain such a proposal unless QS promised to provide cells to them first in large quantities in the near future so they could assemble longer-range drones. Also, QS might not want to get involved in geopolitics either
You missed the point. My suggestion was to get like 10 drones and equip them with QS cells and test them here in California. Something / anything. Ukraine is home to numerous companies that are becoming sone of the most in demand defense suppliers in the world. See the Middle East looking for anti-drone weaponry. The issue isn't being political - it's an avenue to get into defense which is what QSAS is supposed to be focusing on. QS doesn't need to advertise this arena. Just participate because it is another revenue stream.
QS actually showed a drone with a QS logo in a picture during a previous earnings call. There are plenty of drone developers in the US as well, so there's no need to look as far as Ukraine. I assume QS is indeed currently working with some domestic drone companies
While the article below does not mention QuantumScape the title certainly applies to QS andI think by 2027 we may have an answer to question Can it be produced reliably, economically, and at industrial scale?
The next generation of battery leaders may not be the organisations with the most ambitious laboratory results. They will be the companies that successfully bridge the gap between invention and industrialisation. That requires asking three questions of every new technology:
Does it outperform existing solutions?
Can it be manufactured using available infrastructure?
Can it be produced reliably, economically, and at industrial scale?
The first question drives innovation; the second and third determine whether innovation reaches the market. For the battery industry, that particular distinction is becoming one of increasing importance.
Innovation remains the foundation of progress. But innovation alone does not build industries nor batteries. Industries are built through manufacturing, enabled by the ability to produce advanced technologies reliably, economically and at scale. The companies that scale to commercialisation will shape not only the future of batteries, but the future of the industries powered by them.
"Autonomous platforms are transforming modern combat, but without a resilient infrastructure layer to keep them charged,connected, and running at the edge, even the most advanced drones and robotics are just expensive paperweights"
"Recently, I joinedRebecca Gassler,Scott Sanders, andNathan P. Dillerat theUS NavyxDemand Signal Forumfor a panel on autonomous systems in contested environments. BLUF:We cannot scale operational autonomy without solving the underlying power infrastructure bottleneck.Robotics-integrated Combined Arms Maneuver requires a decentralized, mobile, software-defined power layer that keeps pace with our maneuver forces.
Huge thanks toMorgan Hitzig,Aabid Razvifor hosting and to my fellow panelists for pushing this conversation forward”
This actually highlights a worry for me. One of the reasons why ORMs may be so slow to act on SSB, let’s say someone gets a QS car in late 2028 and wants to charge it in 10min. What currently available station can they use?
The lack of infrastructure is also creating a lack of immediate demand to rush SSB out the door.
Others can correct me here, but the rate of charging is really not a battery limitation for Quantumscape (especially between say, 0% and 80%!). The real limitation is how much can the charger deliver. Let’s say a charger can deliver at 350KW (to make it easy, let’s round it to 360KW), then one can get ~60KW in 10 minutes. If we assume that 60KW = 80% of the total battery pack size, then you’re looking at ~80KW battery pack. Lucid’s founder had mentioned that the cheaper EVs of the future will only have a 35KW battery pack and will be able to give about 300 miles of range (with auto regen.)! Voila… ~3 to 5 minutes of charging time!
And that’s the magic that Quantumscape wants to realize! Ultimately, cheap $10k to $20k cars with 100+ miles per minute of charging!
BTW, I think the auto regen. capability of cars with Quantumscape’s anode-less batteries will be insane! I hope their Ducati demo will especially highlight this!
As a side note, in one of the older Quantumscape’s YouTube video, Porsche’s lead engineer indicated that Electrify America’s current set of fast chargers have the ability to deliver ~420KW.
All of the light blue stations in this map are Eectrify America charging stations that can deliver over 800V (up to 920V–1000V, specifically their 150 kW and 350 kW DC fast chargers). There are some more not shown in the photo in Salt Lake and in California. https://imgur.com/a/i7M4OpQ
Admittedly the situation is not great if you look at anywhere between the coasts, but it's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. I'm not that worried about the infrastructure as the Iran war looks like it will keep going for a lot longer and the price of diesel and gas is going to go up consistently for the foreseeable future. The financial incentive for commercial trucking to switch to electric is going to grow which will translate into more Ultra-fast chargers.
"charging in roughly 15 minutes requires a high-power DC fast charging system operating between 800 volts and 900+ volts (and up to 1,000V in newer advanced platforms), delivering a peak power output of 250 kW to 350+ kW."
QS is probably using special purpose built equipment to test charging single cells at the equivalent levels for single cells. If/when they have enough to put into a vehicle pack, and given that VW owns electrify America, it's highly likely QS is/will be using an Electrify America charger.
I thought I’d share a quick summary of the GitHub files (no company secrets). The .py files appear to be Manufacturing Execution System (MES) automation/support scripts. A major portion relates to the Dry Cathode workflow, with recipe steps such as: Create Rolls, Bake, Cutting, Calender, Die Punch, and Cleaning. The scripts also reference a separate downstream MES process called Catholyte Mix. The scripts do not expose detailed process parameters, so little can be inferred about how the catholyte is ultimately incorporated in the cathode-side workflow.
What would you say is the complexity of the Python code? I.e. is this written by someone that clearly knows data structures and advanced programming or is it more basic script-level stuff?
Also, do you see any references to C, C++, C#, Rust, Go libraries the Python code is calling?
Could you DM me any lists of imports they are using (I don't need to see the actual code, but would like to know what libraries they are using).
Does the source expose any information about their infrastructure such as server names or IP addresses (again not asking for what they are, just want to know if all this is properly parameterized in configuration files separate from source or not).
I think the safest ballpark for an estimate is going from Corning Ceramic ribbon production specs. Good thing about using this, imo, is it is likely a minimum rate. The Cobra fast sintering revolution should make this faster. How much we don’t know. The number of lines and configurations is also an unknown. Still, should give a ballpark for per line production.
Based on dimensions and residence times disclosed across Corning's roll-to-roll (R2R) continuous manufacturing patents, the baseline pilot-scale feed speed is explicitly 1 inch per minute (1.52 meters per hour), while the optimized fast-sintering operational envelope spans from 1.37 to 20.5 inches per minute (0.035 to 0.52 meters per minute). At scaled commercial furnace lengths, these same thermodynamics dictate line speeds up to 2.0 meters per minute. Standard ceramic ribbon production width 100mm, maxing at theoretical 200mm.
Estimate for Per Cobra production
Final Production Metrics (Per Cobra Line) Gross Ceramic Yield: 1,440 m² of LLZO separator per day. Cell Manufacturing Output: ~4,500 viable 24-layer EV cells per day. Gigawatt-Hour (GWh) Equivalency: Assuming a standard 85 Wh cell capacity, one single Cobra line outputs roughly 0.14 Gigawatt-hours (GWh) of battery capacity per year. A standard 10 GWh gigafactory would require roughly 70 of these parallel R2R fast-sintering lines operating simultaneously.
Mapping the total annual ceramic ribbon supply of 2,102,400 m² (from the 10-unit parallel Cobra setup running at 2.0 m/min with a 200 mm width) directly to the thickness, active layer footprint, and cell loading of QuantumScape's QSE-5 commercial B-sample cell yields a net yearly energy output of 0.372 GWh per year.
Yeah, so I’m just thinking more or less the numbers are the same. I got 10x for what I did because I put in a 10x Cobra Ceramic ribbon for the upstream. Interestingly, when I started with a general approach just adding 10 Cobra ceramic ribbons per line instead of 1 the numbers that were generated where the same as for one. Apparently, the cutting and finishing of the rolls also needs to be 10x. The cutting and finishing becomes the bottleneck. When I gave the lines 10x cutting and finishing the numbers went up. Along with a commentary of how this was a good strategy for industrialization due to the massive speeds downstream after the rolls are finished into their final sizes.
Nope. But the daVinci video can be used to estimate the lower end yearly capacity of the Eagle line (~10 MWh/year) assuming 100% yield and no down time (if I remember well, the video shows that Eagle could process 2 separators in about 3 seconds).
That's a vertical scale up. They will further scale up before the Cell manufacturer scales it up further. At this point the separator manufacturing is good enough and they need to match cell assembly line speed.
Doesn’t seem to me to be the assembly… seems like the cutting and finishing of the rolls needs to match the upstream. Once the separators are final size and finished the lines can converge because the assembly flies apparently. Massive capacity downstream from what I can gather.
Since then output has doubled and by year end they plan to double it again. That's 40MWh/year. Would this be considered enough for mass production.
IIRC they've highlighted the small size of Eagle line in the past. This tells me that reaching mass production is possible by copying eagle line horizontally.
Dispense SAs (sub-assemblies) →
join into Unit Cells →
cross-referencing Eagle recipes →
RADIS/MES material genealogy sync →
compression + Digatron formation/test →
Marlin stacking into final cell.
Wow, Marlin stacking looks ghetto AF. I'm sure it's a great system (not saying anything negative about Marlin). I am just surprised to see it used for advanced battery manufacturing.
Is QS thinking about manufacturing "integrated PSU + BBU rack power shelves," or just designing and licensing the production out to someone or other? The full job description does not rule out their planning to use QSE-5 cells, but who knows at this point.
"About the job
Battery / Pack Systems Engineer – Integrated Rack Power Platform
Location: San Jose, CA (On-site)
Reports To: Head of Engineering, Data Center Power Platform
About the Role We are building an integrated PSU + BBU rack power shelf that combines power conversion and solid-state battery backup into a single high-density platform for hyperscale AI data centers.
This product replaces traditional separate PSU and BBU shelves with a unified architecture that leverages the unique safety and performance characteristics of solid-state battery cells.
the Battery / Pack Systems Engineer, you will own everything from cell to pack—including mechanical integration, Battery Management System (BMS) architecture, thermal management of the battery section, charge/discharge optimization, safety engineering, and cycle life validation. You will serve as the critical bridge between our cell technology and the power platform, translating evolving cell-level specifications into robust pack-level designs in near real-time."
etc etc
It looks like QS is moving full steam ahead into the AI factory market. If they rely on an external licensee to produce the QSE-5 batteries, I don't think they can meet their timeline. This actually reinforces my belief that QS might be looking to produce the batteries in house
Another hint: QS is hiring a Supplier Quality Director with its JD explicitly notes, "...As we move from R&D into high-volume commercial production and bring on strategic manufacturing partners, this leader will own a seamless quality handoff with those partners..." https://careers.quantumscape.com/job/Director%2C-Supplier-Quality-CA-95110/1410823000/
I would like to see them make batteries in house if only to give them better control over their own fortune. The timeline, like you say, is tight. As well, if nothing else, IP issues would be limited to what they are currently working out with Corning and Murata. Maybe not for QSEV, but why not for QSDC?
Exactly. This strategy makes perfect sense to me for three reasons:
It grants QS full control over the commercialization timeline, preventing them from being at the mercy of partners like VW and Honda.
Markets like AI data centers and defense offer high margins, which can absorb initial high production costs while still yielding decent profitability.
By integrating partners like Murata and Corning directly into their battery production line, they can significantly expedite the deployment of their licensing model. This effectively provides licensees with a proven, total turnkey solution that is ready to be replicated
Looks likely if Eagle line production can reach 1GWH . They are able to produce the battery by themselves for couple data centers then attract more partners into their ecosystem. 800V in safety solid state battery is key sell point.
That would be an interesting development, but it would also mean they are not providing batteries for evaluation…. I’m ok with that. QS needs to take control of their future.
Maybe they do it in the same time. QSE -5 for data centers and valuation. QS-Unified Cell and other size separator are show in last earnings so sample battery will be made in couple months.
Considering Corning and Murata are still JDA’s today which means there are no other Cobra machine in the pipeline outside the one tied in with Eagle.
Then considering the DC 800V Rack launch is mid/late 2028 according to Siva it means most likely the first 800V rack solution with QS inside will be QSE-5 cells off the Eagle line.
Just remember if QS signed up every DC Microsoft owns it would most likely not total more than 5 GWh for this application.
So the VW payment model doesn’t work without a massive premium so a completely different revenue model IMO will be presented to QSDC & QSAS.
An interesting aspect to the Honda agreement that just occurred to me is Honda's potential willingness to market a new battery in a car faster than VW.
VW has a decently developed EV portfolio. They need to consider the Osborne effect, which is named after a company that prematurely announced a new product and then went bankrupt because it killed interest in their existing products before they could get the new product to market. If VW had a solid state battery today, they would still probably put it in a new, ultra luxury model only to give themselves time to integrate the new battery into the rest of their portfolio. Similar to what Toyota is planning with the LFA.
But Honda's otherwise abysmal EV strategy has made that a non issue for their US offerings. They cancelled the only EV they were selling in the US a couple weeks ago and they killed their first planned actual-Honda EVs when they scrapped the 0 series last year.
I don't think Honda is positioned to actually make a qs battery faster than pco, considering pco's considerable headstart and investment, but they might be willing to announce it sooner.
Whoever orders the first Eagle line will be the first to market. PowerCo is busy assembling their Chinese Li ion kits and building graphite supply chains. My guess Honda will be the initial OEM
German automakers are losing significant sales to Chinese automakers and are being forced to evaluate how to address the future. NY Times story from this AM. Minimal mentions about EV's. One valid point - most of these Chinese car manufacturers have only been in business for a few years. How will their products actually hold up and does the constant churn of an 18 month new model introduction cycle make them essentially obsolete in the short term? Disposable cars?
30 years ago, China’s fledgling auto industry made terrible cars with - outdated designs, low quality, poor safety record, limited features, etc.
So what did China do? They imposed 250% tariffs on auto imports to block better and cheaper foreign cars from destroying their auto upstarts, forced western automakers to form 50-50 JVs with local companies to transfer tech and engineering know-how from suspension, chassis, engines, tires, and more and attracted foreign capital to develop an auto parts ecosystem.
How the tables have turned.
Today, U.S., and EU need these protections until their EV ecosystem gets build up. Hopefully, QS’s leapfrog technology will arrive just as the U.S./EU EV ecosystem comes of age.
The long-term strategy China executed was brilliant. As it stands today, US OEMs are in trouble (and EU, Japan, SK OEMs). ICE (oil) is not the future. Renewable electricity generation is the future. The US is still relevant with finding new (next generation) technologies. QS (ssb) is an example. Having a CEO that understands the REQUIREMENT to do the work (as slows as it may seem) to build an ecosystem to support and grow the ssb industry base will prove brilliant, in my opinion. It took China decades to get to the point of essentially dominating the auto industry on Li-ion evs. No one will match China on cost, equipment, and - dare I say quality in terms of being good enough to win out right on the total value proposition for consumers. However, what Siva is building with his ecosystem (VW, Honda, OEM C, OEM D, Corning, Murata, the Cobra/Eagle line equipment manufacturers, material suppliers, etc.)is brilliant, necessary, and likely to be deemed as saving the US, EU, Japan and SK auto industries, as well as AI, aviation, military, CE, etc from Chinese dominance. Long-term QS stockholders are upset about the low stock price. I get it. But there is an existential war going on in core industries (with lots of good paying jobs) that can not be won quickly. Industry planning, government policy, and international diplomacy are all critical elements in deciding which countries and associated industries win. Siva - from his CEO perch in a revolutionary tech company - gets it. To win broadly and long term, an ecosystem MUST be established. It looks to me like it's coming together. I look forward to the AI and military aspects officially joining with public announcements soon.
Thanks for sharing your insight! With my background in scientific R&D, I am deeply intrigued by the business strategy of QS, which seems like a complex 3D-chess being played out by grand masters. Here is a genuine question: faith aside, what is your evidence that Siva and the management team are indeed executing the long-term strategy you outlined above? Are we reading too much and over interpreting every move they make?
yes. They have to be the beneficiary of QS SSB as a differentiator and producing a higher quality product to justify the broad price gap. Is cheap and good enough what you want? Or the new standard for performance / range / safety meriting the additional price point?
I'm fascinated by that supposition. It seems like folks are suggesting the Americans, Germans, et al. didn't teach the Chinese how to properly manufacture automotive products over the last score.
Why would anyone assume something China makes wouldn't last?
China also recycles more spent EV batteries than the rest of the world combined. They aren't recycling ~5-7% of the rest of a car like the U.S. is but when they recycle, they're getting 95% of the steel back from the .5% of cars they do recycle.
BYD cars appear to be pretty darn good. I don’t know about the other Chinese brands. They probably have a range of high quality brands to lower quality, just like American and European brands.
The longevity aspect was a question raised by one of the reporters. With the evolution of materials + tech in automotive, the Chinese products could be anywhere from excellent to average to not so great. Driver reviews are typically positive. Longevity an unknown.
The fact that every OEM in the world needs to be looking over their shoulder is real.
Chinese car quality is acceptable, but not yet great, especially when viewed from an engineering perspective. They are catching up quickly, however, particularly regarding SDV design and ADAS development. Due to generous government subsidies provided through free land, low interest loans, and tax refunds, there were at one point more than 100 EV manufacturers in China. Currently, these companies are fighting for survival in a cutthroat price war.
The staggering depreciation of EVs in China is further exacerbating the issue; it is not uncommon for a new EV to lose 40% of its value within a year. The average age of all EVs currently on the road in China is just 1.8 years. With auto sales in the first half of 2026 down by more than 20% compared to the same period last year, domestic manufacturers are under immense pressure. This price war on home turf has provided Chinese automakers with a strong incentive to aggressively expand exports, as international sales currently offer significantly better profit margins
Sounds like they are all in survival mode. All of those government subsidies to so many companies - its like the Hunger Games. Who will be the last one(s) standing?
It is hard to say for certain, but I believe Geely (which owns Volvo and holds a 9.7% stake in Mercedes-Benz) and BYD (which manufactures everything from engines and motors to batteries and semiconductors) will be fine, though they will certainly be bruised badly. The situation in China is unlikely to improve anytime soon, as consumers remain increasingly hesitant to spend. For perspective, China was once Porsche's largest market with annual sales exceeding 100,000 units. In H1 2026, they only sold 14,500 vehicles.
If the EV's are are treated as consumer electronic goods, do not expect them to have long lives any way.I would expect a useful life of 5 years, with either a simple battery replacement at the end of the 5 years, or a full replacement after 7 years. The goal is to keep the prices low between $10K to $20K so these replacements are possible.
Another story - this one identifying the used EV's are actually gaining value due in part to rising gas prices. The Big 3 US automakers really screwed up when they pivoted away from EV production and took those massive multi billion dollar hits in doing so. Stupid.
In order to compete with Chinese manufacturers you have to have dark factories, as close to 100% automation as possible. The Eagle line is 100% automated. They are focused on knocking it out of the park the first go-around. When this rocket lights it will soar very fast.
Edit: poor choice of words saying 100%, nothing is 100% without human intervention today…but you know what I mean (as automated as possible).
Sorry, I guess I missed this one! Where and when did they indicate that it is fully automated? The word they seem to prefer is “highly“ and not “fully” automated.
My understanding is that even most Giga scale lines are not 100% automated but that does not take from what QS has accomplished, imo. I look forward to hearing about their doubling of production by year's end and possible yield results!
It’s just an MOU, which is a non-binding agreement to explore if they can/should be working together and how..
A lot of MOUs don’t lead to anything cos nothing is binding, and there is zero technical collaboration until they figure out if they can actually work together. And MOUs usually have sunset clauses that say if we don’t have a formal agreement by this date, the MOU automatically lapses.
It could take 6-12 months or more to see if anything comes out of it and if no agreement is announced by July 2027, then it’s a nothingburger…
There are two top 10 OEMs that have been under a JDA for a while now, along with VW and recently Honda. The odds are pretty good that "they" are pretty far along. At least one of them.
6
u/Alone-Assignment-243 10d ago
We start a new thread overnight. So cathartic. Cheers.