Skip to content 
In this teardown by the engineering team at Munro, Model Y battery modules take center stage — and they reveal Tesla’s cost-down path from Model 3 to Model Y. Across potting, coolant headers, adhesives, and module electronics, the teardown shows one theme: remove parts, simplify joints, and commonize. As a result, automotive engineers, EV enthusiasts, and investors see how lean design converts complexity into real manufacturing savings while preserving performance and serviceability.
Potting compound strategy — simpler, cheaper, good enough
The first visible change sits in the potting compound. The Model Y uses a different color and a different application pattern, with intentional gaps between areas rather than a thick, continuous pour. The material still crumbles easily under finger pressure, so function appears unchanged; what changes is how much is used and where. Less compound, placed more strategically, lowers material cost and cycle time. The takeaway is straightforward: validate thermal and NVH objectives, then trim the excess. That is classic lean manufacturing.
Wrapping and foaming — delete parts to help operators
Around the cells, Tesla deletes a plastic tray and associated adhesive seen on Model 3. Model Y keeps a simpler top plastic piece and loses the perimeter tray used to contain foam in Model 3. That’s a two-for-one improvement: fewer parts and fewer steps for the operator; the process no longer needs the tray to “dam” the foam. The team even calls out a plastic or glue element present on Model 3 that disappears on Model Y — a likely running change after line learning. This is textbook continuous improvement: remove redundant features once real-world data proves they’re unnecessary.
Coolant header integration — from rigid to flexible
Thermal hardware tells the same story. Model 3 uses a rigid, machined aluminum header with an expansion-corrugated section, dual O-rings, and a heavy clamp. Model Y replaces that entire arrangement with a simpler plastic header, a single O-ring, and a snap-fit double-finger clamp. Push to assemble; rotate for alignment; seal with compliant elastomer. The joint installs faster and resists leaks because O-rings excel in dynamic misalignment — and the lighter plastic header removes machining cost. Eliminating the corrugation removes another special process. For production engineers, this is a trifecta: fewer parts, fewer specialized steps, and easier training.
Adhesive on the cooling fins — pay a little, save a lot
One subtle upgrade: adhesive coverage along the cooling fins. On Model 3, adhesive stopped short; on Model Y, coverage runs the full length between the header and the micro-channel fins. Adhesive adds pennies; leaks cost dollars and downtime. Extending the bead creates a double seal between header and fin stack, buying robustness in the field and less rework at end-of-line testing. When the cost of quality is higher than the cost of glue, the right answer is obvious.
No corrugations, no problem — expansion handled elsewhere
The team notes the lack of corrugations on the Model Y header versus the Model 3’s corrugated expansion joint. Removing the corrugation suggests Tesla managed compliance through part geometry, material choice, or assembly sequence — and reduced a potential leak path in the process. This again reflects a design-for-manufacture mindset: make the joint forgiving, not fussy.
Module electronics — commonization and fewer unique parts
Electronics on the modules reveal another cost lever: commonization. Both the Model 3 and Model Y module controllers carry “Model 3” markings, yet the Model Y board shows a different component population. That implies Tesla reduced unique part counts while keeping a common PCB or enclosure as a baseline. The team also references a familiar “Batman and Robin” pairing on the board — an internal nickname for complementary controller elements. Net effect: shared tooling and fixtures; fewer variants; simpler logistics; better economies of scale.
Cell-level parity — 2170s look the same
When the crew extracts individual cells, the Model Y’s 2170 lithium-ion cells look identical to those from the Model 3 — at least at first blush. That observation supports the idea that Tesla focused the redesign on module-level structure, cooling, and assembly, not on cell chemistry or format. If the cells remain constant, OEMs can push cost and reliability improvements into packaging and process, where validation cycles and capital paybacks are more controllable.
Safety and process discipline — discharge before you cut
A quick process note for practitioners: the team reminds readers the pack is fully discharged before cutting, sitting near 60 volts with very low available current. That reduces risk during destructive testing. Anyone planning lab work should adopt the same discipline — verify energy state; stage the cut order; use non-conductive tooling where possible. The fastest method isn’t always the safest; process beats improvisation.
Engineering implications — what this means for design teams
1) Prefer compliant, snap-fit fluid joints over rigid, machined couplers. You gain assembly speed, ergonomic freedom, and leak robustness. In high-volume EV modules, those minutes and escapes add up.
2) Extend adhesive where it buys quality. A longer bead along fin interfaces costs little; it prevents expensive rework and warranty claims.
3) Delete fixtures and containment parts once you validate process behavior. The missing tray and glue in Model Y show how early “training wheels” can be engineered out as the design and line mature.
4) Commonize boards and enclosures; vary only the population. You keep the BoM lean and your supply chain predictable.
5) Remove special-process features like corrugations if you can meet compliance targets through material and geometry. Every special feature carries tooling, inspection, and failure-mode overhead.
These practices align with lean manufacturing and design-for-assembly principles — reduce variation, simplify joints, and cut mass where it doesn’t serve a function.
Cost and manufacturability — reading the ledger
Each change may look small on its own; together they compound. Delete a tray and a glue bead; replace a machined header with a molded one; consolidate board variants; reduce adhesive rework by extending a bead; eliminate a corrugation that demanded special handling. The result is a lighter, cheaper, more repeatable module. In a market where battery modules dominate cost and critical-to-quality metrics, this is where competitive advantage is built. Tesla’s Model Y demonstrates how to evolve a mature design into a more manufacturable product without changing the core cell technology.
Actionable takeaways for OEMs and suppliers
-
Audit every joint for compliance and assembly ease. Replace rigid unions with O-ringed snap-fits when performance allows.
-
Use adhesive strategically. Map leak paths; extend beads where they seal interfaces that see vibration and thermal cycling.
-
Plan for deletion. Early builds might need containment features; schedule design reviews to remove them after process capability improves.
-
Standardize electronics platforms. Keep the PCB and housing common; tune firmware and population instead of creating new part numbers.
-
Balance cost and risk. A small materials increase (extra adhesive) can slash scrap, test time, and warranty exposure.
Final word — keep iterating, then share the learning
The Model Y battery modules show an organization committed to iteration. Tesla isn’t reinventing the cell; it’s refining the connections, potting, headers, and boards that turn cells into robust modules. That mindset — quick experiments, targeted changes, and aggressive deletion of waste — is the essence of lean design and manufacturing. For engineers and investors alike, the signal is clear: competitive EVs are born from relentless simplification.
Unlock More EV Teardown Insights From Munro
Want deeper teardown insights, cost breakdowns, and benchmarking across leading EV platforms? Explore more Munro expert analysis and subscribe to Munro Live for upcoming module and pack evaluations — including cooling strategies, BMS architectures, and manufacturing best practices.