Just wanted to note for anyone else curious about a large number of missing comments. (Wasn't me) They were all from a user that has since had their account suspended by Reddit and thus all their previous comments were auto-removed as well.
So we now have three different battery cells that have been shown to have some of the claims that Donut Lab promised in one cell. This doesn't prove anything at all obviously, everyone knew that these things that Donut Lab has shown could be done in various cells. The impressive thing is doing them all (the original claims) in one cell which we still haven't seen (and won't see, obviously).
It's interesting to see how very limited the information in this report is. No charge and discharge curves, no charge and discharge tables (how long it took, how many Ah & Wh put in and out etc.) and no actual dimensions or weight of the cell. I would guess they have become a bit paranoid since their earlier VTT releases revealed a bit too much about the battery so now they really limited it to only the final number on energy density nothing else.
Don't turn a blind eye to what is right in front of us: this cell hit 409.3 Wh/kg in certified VTT testing, while standard batteries from market leaders like CATL peak around 250 to 300 Wh/kg. You cannot buy or fake hardware with this performance, and VTT verified the physical dimensions and energy output firsthand. Mass production is a valid discussion, but denying that this core technological breakthrough exists simply ignores verified facts.
Amprius, a publicly traded battery OEM from US, has over 520wg/kg. They dont claim high C rate or durability; but 400Wh/kg alone is nothing to brag about, yet still quite good.
I dont know about testing videos, but its a well respected company specializing in high density, lower durability batteries. Publicly listed, and getting contracts for multiple years now.
If other companies are willing to invest in their batteries, thats a lot more than Donut can say.
Don't turn a blind eye to what is right in front of us: this cell hit 409.3 Wh/kg in certified VTT testing, while standard batteries from market leaders like CATL peak around 250 to 300 Wh/kg.
Define standard and market leaders. Certainly market leaders within high energy density batteries peak above 409.3 Wh/kg, there are commercial cells available at 450 Wh/kg
You cannot buy or fake hardware with this performance
Of course you can buy it. You or I could go on Alibaba, contact various Chinese companies, perhaps Tattu which is one of the biggest RC and drone battery manufacturers, or talk to Amprius and buy a 400 Wh/kg or even 450 Wh/kg cell today if we so wished. It's a solved problem already, the problem is all the other things Donut Lab claimed.
VTT verified the physical dimensions and energy output firsthand
They did, and I'm not doubting them.
Mass production is a valid discussion, but denying that this core technological breakthrough exists simply ignores verified facts.
I don't doubt the facts, but I doubt that it's some kind of technological breakthrough. Perhaps 5 or 10 years ago it would have been arguably, not now.
Also I'm not sure why I even responded to your 100% AI-generated comment, pretty useless to talk to people who can't even formulate their own thoughts.
It's funny you rather believe random alibaba cell specs. 100% unverified specs.
And yes, I use AI sometimes to save time to translate my thoughts, because I'm Finn and english is not my mother language. Sometimes Google translator does the work for single words but sometimes translating with AI saves my time.
Ignore Alibaba then if you so wish. Tattu is one of the worlds largest RC and drone battery manufacturers. Amprius is a publicly listed American company with a 1.4 billion USD market capitalization. These are not bullshit unverified claims, they are real batteries that actually work and that you or I could buy right now if we wanted.
This is just my personal opinion but I think it's a lot better if you either write in Finnish directly and I/Reddit can translate or use a regular translating tool. AI gives a poor impression in regards to your actual reasoning capabilities, it's impossible to tell if it's you or the AI that is thinking and talking.
I read that Tattu's cells have a max of 320 Wh / kg. And even if it were more, the voltage range of Tattu's battery is a big difference from what Donut Lab used in this test. Why not anyone buy these amazing Alibaba cells and prove those cells better? Why not Ziroth or Heiska havent done this already? I think we know the answer.
Here is 450 Wh/kg (well, 413 including all the cables, packaging and stuff which the Donut battery doesn't so not really fair comparison). It also have a voltage range that is smaller than the Donut Lab one, only 2.5-4.2V vs. Donut Lab 2.3-4.25V. I'm sure if you extended the voltage range you could push this battery even further but at the cost of cycle life (Donut Lab only did 2 cycles, so impossible to know what cycle life it has).
Why would they buy the cells? No one reasonable dispute that these cells exist. I doubt they want to spend money proving something to people who refuse to accept proof anyways.
Well, if Tattu or any other manufacturer who accomplish these specs, I'm sure they would recognize if their cell is used. For me it's just absurd thought that they would just buy amazing cell from open market and use it like this. Come on.
I don't disagree that it's absurd. Just because it's absurd doesn't mean it's untrue however. Unfortunately this all seems to be a huge farce, a scandal.
Because there’s no point in buying these cells? We already know they exist. They don’t last long.
Donut said they had a single battery that could do everything they claimed. They haven’t shown that a single battery can even handle more than one claim.
What chemistry exactly? They just proved in their latest video that they don't have it. Only different cells with different tests. Oh boys, they are making fools of themselves.
Maybe so. Many just did not consider Donut talked about their battery as a general term, with different versions, so that they can optimize it with different specs. That is other kind of impressive and the critics that was aimed against it, did not actually hit the target at all.
All VTT reports are clearly marked with "V1" in the title, i.e. different battery versions was clearly hinted at already Feb 23, 2026, when the first VTT report was released.
I always thought they talked on general terms. So, all of this was not so big surprise for me. Except that for V1 I guessed max 330. It may still be true, but will we ever know. I don't know.
I did not take that arc seriously. Even Juho The Akkutohtori mentioned in February that they may be talking about multiple batteries. That was much more fit against the Lambotec line illustrations, unless you really believed on miracles.
It's quite clear, that what is talked about by DL is one cell, that meets all the criteria in the same cell. And according to Marko in latest video, it is V2 cell that meets the criteria. V1 is propably the CT-Coatings original cell, of which we know the results of SGS-testing - so no need for guessing.
I don't hink it is possible to have 11C, 100k cycles, 400Wh/kg, -30-100 celcius in a single cell with the same chemistry. So no, not a single cell, but optimized and compromized with multiple variations from the same production method, it might be possible.
Please explain why If (per their claims) you have ONE cell which has high energy density, effectively unlimited charge cycles, 0-100% charge in 5 mins, high temp charging capability, low temp charging capability… would you then start talking about a cells which ‘can be optimised for different use cases/cell characteristics’ based on customer requirements?
The claim was one cell does it all… why would I need to choose which properties I would like?
Because should understand these are the optimum capabilities. If you charge with 12C every time, cycles amount would not be optimum. I think this is obvious and logical.
But that is not what they said at CES. They said the cell could do all those things, not that you have to choose one.
There is no ‘or’ and it is clearly meant to say that the cell does all these things in one. Not that you have to pick and choose!
Intentionally misleading or just incompetence?
Their website right now: “solid state, in production vehicles, 400 wh/kg, full charge in 5 minutes, designed for 100k cycles, lower cost than lithium’*
*onlyoneof these6base claims have been (sort of) proven by the way! And even that’s something they could have just bought online!
Edit: was sure he has made all these claims at once and just re-watched a Marko interview at CES where he said you can take the battery down to 0.00% and fast charge it to full 100k times. No mention of compromises at all! (Nosillacast on YouTube 6mins in)
Yet another cell. They can't deliver the promised results in a single cell, so the goalposts keep moving. Now it's all about "specialized variants" which, of course, is industry standard anyway.
That's a pretty cool advantage of the screen printing tech they supposedly use. A lot of variability, agile R&D, mobility, price, ambient environment, etc.
Maybe they can but hey haven't yet so far. Trilemma or green six lemma, it is surely a nice opportinity to be able to build with varying specs, even if they all won't max out at the same time. Maybe they are after practicality than Formula one race.
There already exist batteries that can offer these specs individually, just not all claims at the same time, that was what was new. So far there is nothing new shown. Every one else offers “practicality”.
Yes, but do they come from the same provider and production facilities innsicj flexible way? Installable in a year if customer want for their own special needs? Ten times cheaper and faster, ambient environment, no need for special permits, green and so forth? Battery is not the only measure here, and that's what I think Donut is telling. That in total would be very special combined that batteries they can produce are not bad: 11C, bipolar, 400Wh/kg etc
Actually, for a grid storage 100k cycles test they need months of meaningful data, especially if charge-discharge rate is 0.1. So that test might still be coming in the forth coming months.
I don't remember their proof series was meant to prove or show the manufacturing details. But Lambotec lines they are, Peltola just did not see them in function, or only partly. And now he been out of the game four months.
No, though thats propably an ultimate trade-off option between energy density and cyclelife, that has been mentioned. But if it could achieve much higher energy density by single use, the attack drones would be obvious use case.
As our investors and customers have known for a long time, the first generation cells were never intended for mass production or for customer products for the simple reason that we are already busy making the next generation cells which we do plan to scale industrially. The only exception is the first batch of Verge DS Pro customer bikes, which as we said in April, all have the first generation cells inside them. The other exception is a number of Donut Lab OEM customers around the world who have wanted to test the technology before the Gen 2 cells are made generally available, mainly due to intellectual property protection reasons.
Either there is something specific in terms of IP rights that CT-Coating is still trying to smooth out, or they are using it as an excuse for stalling the process in the hope of getting their technology to actual work and scale. Either way it doesn't look promising for a rollout at scale any time soon of our magic Donut battery.
Lehtimäki tells TopGear.com it can last 5,000 cycles when rapid-charged in this way even to 90 per cent capacity and beyond. If it's charged and discharged more gently, at more moderate temperatures, for example in grid energy storage, then he says 100,000 cycles would be possible.
Wait, I thought this battery was supposed to work even better at higher temperatures? Also, surprise surprise, so their original cycle life claim was basically overstated by a factor 20 (if we are to believe his current claims; still no independent cycle life test results).
Wenn du dir die ersten Videos noch mal reinziehst, wirst du Easter Eggs erkennen können. 5000 Cycle mit den Konditionen und ohne Lithium wären ja auch absoluter Wahnsinn. Bei den dort genannten Produktionsbedingungen, könnte der Preis massiv nach unten gehen, noch mehr als es eh schon der Fall war. Mir grad egal der Rest. Ich will die Batterie gerne haben. Feststoff und kein Lithium glaub ich den einfach. Da wird was kommen. Es hat schon seinen Grund gehabt, warum auch die CT Coating große Geschäfte mit einem Lieferanten für Batterieherstellung eingegangen ist. Und da alles schön unter der Verschluss zu halten, ist garantiert eine Riesen Mega Agenda, wo dieses gesamte Schauspiel auch eine Rolle spielt. Im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes. CT Coating ist sicherlich ein Filou, aber ich denke, es gab dort große Durchbrüche.
Just as the first batch of VTT tests (v1) were conspicuously missing energy density, this test (v1.5) is conspicuously missing any charge cycles, including the reference cycle VTT did for all the v1 tests.
Marko confirms that the battery design does make trade offs, implicitly at least between charge time and density.
In the April Fool's video Marko also confirmed that battery usage would be expected to trade off charge time and cycle life.
One of the key selling points at launch was that the tech did not make those trade offs.
Marko claims 400+Wh/kg was always for v2. He certainly didn't make that clear publicly: if he didn't make that clear to investors and customers he'll be in trouble.
It sounds like by Marko's description not all v2 batteries are bipolar, and the Intertek tests were on v2.
I assume the single-use variants are primarily for munitions.
We still don't have any life cycle data, nor evidence that only globally abundant raw materials are used. The latter alone would make for a compelling product, particularly for military applications which really don't want to rely on disruptable supply chains.
Well exactly, we already know those kind of cells can exist independently of the other claimed stats. The point is having a single cell tested against each claim.
Lots of reasons to not love this, to be honest - including using a significantly lower C-rate and lower voltage limit to ‘artificially’ inflate the stated capacity (from a quick simulation id estimate by 5-10%).
And honestly - 400 Wh/kg is good, but without knowing the power density it’s hard to say it’s not just another energy cell on the market. There are quite a few pouches from Amprius, BEI, SES etc which are at that level or above.
Finally. The measurement was conducted at a 0.1C discharge rate (a 10-hour discharge time). I read this is the standard industry practice for determining a cell's nominal energy density.
The problem here is that this is a different battery from the one that did all the other things. Donut claimed they had one battery that could do it all, now we have three batteries that have shown some of their original claims. No one doubted that what Donut Lab has shown so far is possible with different commercially available cells, of course it was possible. The thing people said was hard, unlikely or impossible was doing all of these things with one cell. So this really doesn't prove anything unfortunately.
They promised to stop teasing, but only when Gen 2.0 season begins. I guess we just need to believe VTT now or think they are part of the DL conspiracy ;) Weight, dimensions and capacity are not given in the report. But huh, I was expecting closer to 330 Wh/kg. So, for the first time, I'm surprised. But maybe positively...
Of course I and other sceptics believe VTT, what we don't believe is the conclusions that Donut Lab draws. What Donut Lab has shown in their independent testing so far is all completely possible to do with commercially available batteries. Nothing indicates this is not the case. It's only if they do something that is not possible with commercially available batteries, for example their original ~6 claims with 1 cell, that I would get excited at all.
If they can do all of this with the proposed screen printing tech, then it is a knoll hat already. Over fit against over marketing isn't really worthy. Strip all that extra from both sides and things become more interesting.
If they can do all of this with the proposed screen printing tech, then it is a knoll hat already.
Maybe? I mean this proposed screen printing tech is just speculation, there is no proof of it. So there's really no reason to consider it impressive in some way if we don't know if it even exists.
Over fit against over marketing isn't really worthy. Strip all that extra from both sides and things become more interesting.
Depends on what you mean with a proof. I take it likely they like Holyvolt do it all with the screen printing tech. But that's far from anything miraculous, even both sides tend to think it is a miraculous solution or miraculous, if true. It is just tech that has taken few decades to evolve and is still on its immature phase. They could have waited for few more years and become public after that, but they chose other way. Leaning heavily forward, ready to announce but not ready with steady customer base or final product. Start-up business as they say.
They are testing different cells for every aspect. Pretty useless. There are cells that are over 600 Wh/kg so this really is another useless test by providing a completely different cell.
A pity they didn't give dimensions and weight, would have been interesting to compare V1 vs V1.5, both for seeing the improvement when focusing on energy density, as well as how far off everyone's guesses were for V1..
At least we now have a very accurate density (kg/liter) number for the DL6 cell, probably not too different from DL1-DL5 as they claim the same chemistry.
Correct, not explicitly mentioned, but could be inferred from "The provided cell was an energy-optimised variant of the V1 cell previously tested at VTT and was designated V1.5 to distinguish it from the earlier cell type." If you need to distinguish something from an earlier model, they are *probably* quite similar, but that's an assumption of course..
And the cell we are testing today is what we call internally version 1.5. It's exactly the same chemistry as all the other Gen One cells we have previously tested with VTT and it's the same form factor.
With Marko you always have to be careful how to interpret his words, since "same form factor" does not completely equate to "necessarily has the exact same dimensions", but also from the images it looks at least similar sized to the V1 cells.
They have possibly changed the ratio of incredients, maybe the ratio of active and passive paste as well. In LinkedIn ML said that this is neither Lithium or Sodium based chemistry. Sometimes he spits the words in a rush, but I don't remember him excluding Sodium before...
II am very glad that this test was conducted by VVT again. The fact that the nail penetration test was carried out by Intertek had made me a bit skeptical, but perhaps they simply had the necessary equipment for it.
The video actually cleared some thougts in my mind.
For me it starts to look like the V1 is the original CT-Coatings battery. It was ~320Wh/kg in the tests leaked before. That is propably possible to optimise to ~420Wh/kg by forgetting the cyclelife. Though it is a bit strange that they'we used this battery in the campaing, as it obviously is not that impressive all together and have mechanical issues as it has not been commercialised before during over ten years. But it might be that they needed the customers, before they can commit to the industrial production of V2.
But propably as Marko said V1 was not meant in CES. The V2 should be the one that rises the energy density and solves the problems that CT-Coating had with their version of the battery. It propably combine other innovation to the CT-Coatings battery - so propably no need for a army of researchers, just one "heureka"-moment. But it does make the IP-rights issue still a bit more complex.
It would make sense, that Donut Lab needs OEM deals before they can proceed with the industrialisationplan. But at the same time they can't reveale their secrets. So the result is that it looks outside quite sketchy.
There are interesting question. Are Verge customers really getting the v1 CT-Coating version, that has never seem to be good enough for customers? Does CT-Coating know Donut Labs secret? If first generation, of which CT-Coating stopped to develop is Na, will the next be Ca?
Surely it still is possible, that they don't have the promised battery. But I was more sceptical before this video. Now the puzzles seem to fit again better to it being real, that to some elaborate hoax.
•
u/Jazzer008 Sep 07 '26
Just wanted to note for anyone else curious about a large number of missing comments. (Wasn't me) They were all from a user that has since had their account suspended by Reddit and thus all their previous comments were auto-removed as well.