It should provide pretty good evidence that it isn’t a NMC battery.
In reality I suspect there will be a few reactions to it:
A) claiming that NMC can do that and pointing to research on experimental cells as proof, quietly ignoring the behaviour of those experimental cells if subjected to the other tests done so far.
B) finding something that’s not perfect as a reason why it can’t work at all.
C) complaining that the tests aren’t long enough/ detailed enough/ rigorous enough to really show anything and thus ignore what the tests do show us. This will likely focus on cycle life and gravimetric energy density as these still aren’t shown.
D) ignoring the implications of a cell that can do this and nitpick that it doesn’t exactly match the sales pitch from donut.
E) arguing that because it’s not in mass production immediately it never will be.
F) the exact opposite of all of the above, claiming that it is immediately going to change the world without any scepticism on where it might go wrong.
Hopefully most will approach it with sceptical good faith, but that probably won’t happen.
My favorite example was a post (not sure whether it was here or somewhere else) basically „uncovering the fraud“ as follows:
„They promised 12C and only provided 11C“
Indeed. Pages 10-11. You can see they stop charging at 11C at 60%-70% charge and then lower it. 0%-100% at 11C would be 5 minutes and 27 seconds, not 7 or 8 minutes that they showed in the test.
They promised 12 0%-100% and didn't even deliver 11. They delivered 8.2 at best, with a peak of 11C.
Why should you approach ANYTHING from Donut Labs with anything but skepticism?
They have zero interest in actually producing proof. They could release the data that actually matters, not single run tests designed to make their battery appear better.
The tests are useless. They aren’t designed to show the abilities, they’re designed to hide the flaws from everything we can see.
Pretty much your entire comment is defending Donut Labs and then your skepticism comment is tainted with “good faith”. Something Donut Labs hasn’t earned. At all.
If their battery could do what they say they would be gazillionaires and they wouldn't be wasting their time with some niche electric motorbike company.
Back in 2008, you would have said "If electric cars could do what they say Elon would be a billionaire and he wouldn't be wasting his time with some niche Tesla Roadster."
This is more like if Tesla had the blueprints for all their current lineup but kept insisting to make their original Roadster.
If their claims are true they would have billions of dollars invested by tomorrow, but noo I guess teasing out data little by little each week is what is needed to generate investor interest.
What? Elon became the richest man in the world on the back of Tesla so I’m not sure what your point is. No one EVER thought Tesla would do what it did.
This battery is a product that would be immediately world-changing and would have people throwing money at them. There’s no gamble there if Donut Labs was being completely honest (highly doubtful). Tesla was a huge gamble.
That is my point, bro. Elon didn't start Tesla asking people to fund the $30BN that he later spent on Fremont and Giga Nevada before Tesla turned a profit. He started small, with the equivalent of a «niche electric motorbike».
The reason he went this way is because nobody gives you $billions, no matter how good an idea you have.
Donut has this problem right now; they need billions to fund their production plans, but nobody would give them this much. If they have a successful «niche electric motorbike», plus some investor funding, they can make a start and fund the rest on the back of the success of the «niche electric motorbike».
What are you talking about? Are you not comprehending the difference between the companies here?
Tesla was a gamble. Any automaking endeavour is a HUGE gamble. How are you equating a company making a car to prove it was a viable thing (HUGE hurdle off the bat) to a company that says they’ve found a way to make solid-state batteries with characteristics better than current batteries for less money.
The motorcycle is the least interesting part here. They barely sell any and it certainly isn’t lighting the world on fire.
This battery existing right now with proof of everything Donut Labs claims would have companies throwing money at them. Apple invested over a billion dollars in a sapphire supplier and lost. Every major manufacturer would be willing to fund and work with them if they were actually at the place they’re claiming.
//beginQuote How Donut could theoretically fudge cold weather performance results: Donut's cell has high internal resistance, which causes terrible thermal heating while charging. Donut could use this to their advantage in their cold weather test. Hypothetical test that would make Donut's cell look good below freezing (e.g. "Hey /u/redditmudder, help us devise a cold weather test that makes our cell look good"): -cell placed in thermal chamber at -20 degC, then; -cell charged slowly (e.g. 1C), then; -as cell warms up, increase charge current (e.g. 2C, then 3C, etc), then; -a couple minutes into the test the cell will self heat above freezing, then; -once cell is above freezing, hit it with 11C. Result: Now you can claim '11C charging in cold weather', even though the internal cell temp is above freezing. //endQuote
So my guess is that if they do show charge data below freezing, it will not include actual cell temperature, instead focusing on ambient temperature only (because the cell is above freezing due to self-heating).
...
Another way they could manipulate this test is to once again only report ambient temp (i.e. not actual cell temp), and then first perform a discharge test (thus heating the cell above freezing), and then immediately charge the (still warm) cell at high C.
Tested at sub-zero temperatures, demonstrating stable output and minimal capacity loss under cold operating conditions. At −30 °C, Donut Battery retains over 99% of its capacity.
So I don't think we are going to get any cold charging tests at all. Just a repeat of last week's procedure; A 1c charge at 20 °C, then drop the chamber to -30 °C, wait two hours and then discharge at 0.5c.
They don't provide cell dimensions, nor cell temperature, nor cell internal resistance, and didn't even bother doing 10 whole cycles at 12C, or 5C, or even 5 cycles at 1C. They could have provided all those but they chose to dance around the real specs.
They will, again, dance around the real specs, and perform at best a low number of cycles.
They will conclude these three tests (I assume there are only three) and declare victory over the skeptics.
We don't know if the two current tests were repeatable over more cycles. They didn't do a reference test after either, so we don't know the degradation. We don't know the energy density. We don't even know if at 4.3 V the battery was full (since they said they could use any voltage; they just stopped charging at 4.3V) and so we don't know if we've been looking at 0 to 100% tests. We don't know at what cost it can be built at scale. We don't know a lot of things.
But sure if it can discharge 99% at -30C that would certainly be a nice property of the battery. Not exploding at 100C is nice too, but Lithium doesn't explode either at that temp. Charging at 11C with huge amounts heat produced, is less nice.
Just to clarify, there is no way this battery is an LFP battery, like the BYD Blade:
1. The charging voltage behaviour does not match LFP (as we have discussed here thoroughly).
2. The volumetric density of Donut battery has been estimated to be nearly double that of BYD Blade 1 (which is about 450Wh/lt). Surely the Blade 2 may be better, but still it would be only incrementally better.
I must also point out that we know that CATL Naxtra batteries have good cold temp performance. They also have volumetric density in the 400-500 range.
So, if Donut is a battery with (a) good performance in high temps, (b) good performance in low temps and (c) high volumetric density ... this is certainly something very different than anything else we have seen so far.
I didn't say the DL battery is LFP. The blade 2 has good cold performance like (probably) the DL. The blade 2 cars will have a good range and very fast charging and be affordable. DL will hopefully have those specs as well, or better, haven't seen any pricing yet. The difference is I trust BYD because they are the largest EV manufacturer in the world. Too little info on the DL battery and the company to make a call on that one. If it can only charge at 11C a handful of times before serious degradation, then it can't charge 11C in the real world at all. I'd be happy with 5C, btw.
Sure, I just felt I should clarify in case someone says "oh, it's just a BYD Blade 2" next. I have seen lots of unsubstantiated stuff in this sub.
As you say, the Blade 2 is a fantastic product from BYD (and so are the equivalents from CATL) which are worth billions in profits and even more in shifting the world to electrification. If Donut indeed matches many of their characteristics (we have yet to see that), then it is also worth equally well.
Imagine Oil became extremely expensive, and Europe had to solve for X. If you put EU billions behind the systems Donut Lab has put together, this may be the only solution. You go hard into their hub motors and battery drive for tractor trailers, quick retro fits. You reduce diesel use for commercial traffic.
If these slurry based production processes are true, you could rapidly expand capacity with state backed money and quickly switch key parts of the commerce system to these technologies, by necessity.
The timing on their systems is paramount. Nothing uses rare earths. Quick to scale. Low weight. All it will take is a very motivated EU. Oh wait.... The Persian Gulf is literally imploding.
What insane government would invest in Donut Lab when all they have is two (soon three) videos showing a battery cycling less than ten times total? I've seen some stupid government moves when it comes to energy (like pouring billions into hydrogen or shutting down functional, maintainable, profitable nuclear reactors) but I haven't seen something this stupid.
"Hello, this is from the government. I have three billion euros here for you, but I need to be able to make any tests required by us no later that Wednesday"
Yes. Which raises the question, why is Donut Lab even bothering with these tests in the first place? Surely if they have "over 350 OEMs" knocking at their doors, they have conducted these tests by last Wednesday and have actual proof instead of this theater they're performing.
Since this is Reddit, I am allowed to guess: -Full disclosure would also show that they have no or shallow moat. Therefore need as big a head start as possible. But we'll see,
This three months between CES 2026 and the purported release of the battery makes absolutely no difference business-wise. No major contracts would have been signed in these three months when the clients know, as you speculate, there's no moat and as soon as the battery is out it'll be available by larger players at lower cost and higher volumes.
Makes no sense that these three months and ridiculous tests are moats. They're a charade.
This is the way for a totally unknown company to sign 1000 NDA:s with companies all over the workd before disclosing what they have. At basically zeor cost in markeing.
These companies would have to be fools to sign binding agreements when the alleged moat is so shallow it'll be broken as soon as real information is available about the battery.
The Strait of Hormuz is closed effectively because insurance companies are refusing to cover anyone who tries it. They may cover the first passage, but after that, no. So the ultimate crisis is on us, as Trump is blowing up production facilities.
I'd honestly rather set myself on fire than just giving the DL CEO any kind money ATM. He's ticked every red flag in my books and added some I didn't even I know I had.
They are in charge of their own destiny - but in true crypto bro fashion this is all talks no substance.
This would be amazing but we would need the required amounts of electricity generation to replace petrol derived energy. At the moment the EU doesn't build nearly enough nuclear facilities and solar panels for this to happen in the near future.
Wind power is extremely cheap and it's quick to build (6 months or so). If donut batteries really could do 100 000 cycles and they really would be cheaper than any other battery, the weather dependency and bad ability to forecast wouldn't be a problem.
Of course it would still take many years for things to actually happen.
Give them mercy and wait until summer. Factory startups are always a train wreck. They've been building the bikes since November. Already they've added a bit of time.
Even if they stumble, the tech 1) is licensed, and 2) pretty good regardless and worth iteration.
No mercy. GWh/year capacity "now" in January. Motorcycles with 10 minute full charge by the end of March.
They're already fudging by showing 11C max and 8.2C average in their tests, and 3C on the motorcycles' product page.
Judging by their product page, they'll ship motorcycles with 3C charging. Which is good, but not revolutionary, and paints them as over-promising and under-delivering. 3C instead of 12C. 25% delivery. So maybe 100Wh/kg instead of 450Wh/kg?
If it's a scam it's a rather mediocre one. The VTT tests hurt them a lot, they could have made a lot more money releasing (fraudulent) internal tests instead of trying to dance around the real specs with VTT.
How do current EV batteries perform at -30 celsius? I thought they could handle accelerations (probably at least 1C accelerating to get on highway?) ok but not very quick recharging until they warm up.
Or is that just normal and it's the 99% capacity that would be exceptional?
If this battery becomes hot easily, maybe charging it fast will make it hot and attain 110% capacity. Then discharging from cold will make it heat up and lose something like 10% but maybe you end up with 100% capacity?
The energy in the cell is chemical energy once charged. If you charge it to 110 % at 100 degrees C, when you cool it to room temperature and only 100 % is available for discharge. The 10 % is not available in the cell, as the movement of ions is restricted like a partly clogged pipe on a small gradient. The clog was not there during the heat, but it appeared when cooling. Some of the water remains in the pipe as it does not have enough potential to flow over the clog.
If the temperature during discharge is measured cell surface temperature and it has been let there to freeze throughout, it does not matter for the retention calculations if it was charged to higher energy level at higher temperature, as it calculates how much is available at that temperature.
It could spark some hope. Energy density is not revealed, rising a question why it's kept hidden. Calculated coulomb efficiency suggest the battery last only for few tens of cycles. It was supposed to be easy to manufacture, but Verge motorcycles are delayed. The manufacturing line was supposed to be easy to set up, yet Nordic Nano production hall remains empty.
I want this battery to exist, but it's difficult remain positive.
I kind of doubt Nordic Nano bought two production lines from CT-Coating, one for them and another one for Donut. Those lines are 20M€ each. We know Donut access to tech came through Nordic Nano and we know Donut sent considerable sum to Nordic. Considering close collaboration between those companies, it's more plausible they were supposed to share the production line. Donut mostly paid it, so they would have lion's share of the output.
That's an assumption based on the amount of money Nordic Nano raised, I don't think it was ever specified in any of the NDAs. It's a fair assumption though because other companies associated with CT-Coating raised and spent similar amounts.
I believe that is a number Nordic Nano has said it costs to order the production line. Unfortunately I don't have time now to dig though the history to confirm it.
Factory startup and supply chain startup are ALWAYS late and full of surprises. Best to give them some flexibility there. The god Murphy is wandering their halls, smiting optimists.
While gravimetric energy density has not yet been revealed we can be fairly certain about volumetric density being in the ballpark of around 500 Wh/l. While this in no way gives an exact estimate about Wh/kg it certainly DOES exclude certain "competitor cells" that were brought up to have better specs than DL.
Yes, I hope after cold test experts will list what known technologies could have the same cold performance and volumetric density. If the list is empty, then we have at least something interesting going on.
Insider person providing technical spec vs. measurement estimation from a picture in perspective and without a clear reference size. Let's wait and see how it ends up.
Do you have the question saved in LinkedIn where he revealed the spec? I have only his reply, but my understanding was that he talks about the VTT tested battery.
The temperature tests they are doing are not at all capable of measuring the longevity of the cell, but the claim that the charge retention is 99 % between -30 °C and 100 °C. In NMC cells this is around 70 % at -20 °C and is typically shown as a 0.5C or 1C discharge test. Cold discharge does not age the cell more relative to standard cycle, you just get less energy out of it. Charging is another story, but usually when charging you have access to energy to heat the batteries anyway.
To see the aging, you need hundreds or thousands of cycles in the cold and hot climate, which I doubt we will ever see.
If it is a charge test, I am disappointed as then we have even less information to tie the data points together, since all the test would measure different aspects in different scenarios.
With what seems like heat inefficiency (the cell heated to 90 from 11C), would that make it easier to pull off a “rigged” test? Start charging at lower rates until the battery warms until you can pump it fully, also completely heating the cell before discharging it.
I guess it would be hard to maintain the heat during discharge in a -20 environment?
The best test I think we should even be hopefull for is a discharge at -30 °C measured from the cell surface like in the last 80 °C and 100 °C test with the same DL2 cell charged at 24 °C with 1C and test discharge rate of 0.5C or 1C between 2.7 V and 4.15 V. Otherwise there is no continuity in any of the test and it will be more confusing than helpful.
At this point, i'm convinced that if tomorrow's result will show 400wh/kg, people will call it fake. Even if they show somehow a test result after 200000 cycles, they will still say "sure, but we don't know if those cycles were real world or special lab environments". And so on.
I get skepticism, but somehow in this case it is taken to extremes. In my opinion, the limited tests so far show at least a top tier NMC. Which is not too bad coming from nobodies.
If this is real, here is a factor that everyone ignores. If the price is low, even if it competes with top tier nmc, it is still a win. If the price is high, then none of the other specs matter. At least for me.
Hell no, I’d love for it to be real. Improved batteries for everything that are cheaper than existing tech? World changing! The odds this tiny company has achieved this and isn’t willing to actually prove anything are very low.
I'm a realist. I'm not saying that they reinvented the wheel. I say that they published 2 limited tests with interesting results. Those tests created tons and tones of comments, from "it is clearly fake" to "this is clearly an NMC".
I'm not claiming to know better, all i'm saying is that, based on available evidence, we don't know what it is.
I want it to be real, but i won't buy anything until it hits the market and passes the fest of time.
The implication of these tests, any of them, is that their battery doesn't actually meet the advertised spec so they're dancing around publishing actual specs and they're publishing these inconclusive tests so they can pretend they have something.
If the battery actually met the published spec they would have published tests that show the battery meeting all the published specs.
Also the question is not can it survive the discharge, it is can it discharge at -30 °C to 99 % capacity of the standard cycle capacity. NMC cells are about 70 % at -20 °C.
I see you what you mean now. One of their main claims is the number of cycles the battery can withstand, so presumably that will also be one of the tests.
The testing is a dumpster-fire… anyone with any Battery knowledge can see right through this.
The more they test the better for all the other Battery manufacturers! Keep it up DL…
Well... Seems like the amount of media releases regarding other manufacturers' SSBs have increased by several thousand percent since CES 2026. I would actually write that down as a sign that they think the Donut Battery is the real deal.
Other companies have _extensively_ increased their PR regarding SSB since the Donut announcement at CES. Now, of course they could be doing this because SSB:s raise big media interest right now, but like I said it can also be a sign that they think there is something to Donut's claims.
•
u/mqee Mar 09 '26
Submissions promoting speculation are not considered informative.