I doubt they'd sell to endusers, but not having any partnerships with established brands with sales figures is a big red flag.
No mention of manufacturing capabilities either so I think it's just hype (or worse a rug pull for early investors)
Base price $35,000 with the good battery.
Solid state batteries have been working for a while now, but they're still far too expensive. Mercedes has one demo car. Ducati has one demo motorcycle. Maybe they just decided to accept the high cost and sell a high-end product.
If the product is on the market and you can buy one and walk out the door, I feel like claims can easily be validated or invalidated with a tear down.
I've had a brief test ride on a pre-production version of the Verge TS. All seemed OK but I thought the handling seemed weird - maybe due to the rear tyre size and geometry.
I hope this battery tech and the statements on the web page are true (370-mile range from an electric motorcycle!), but I'm not writing any checks just yet.
Robbie from SAE International, who is of the hosts, and an avid motorcyclist, is impressed with the bike and the promise of SSBs. I only ride bicycles, can’t comment on the bike itself, but thought to share and widen their audience. It was kind of a mini shallow yet “deep dive”. It doesn’t seem to be mentioned on their own site for this episode, but the chapter in Overcast is the last one, linking to https://sustainablecareers.sae.org/article/donut-lab-verge-s...
Whittingham worked for ExxonMobil. Akira Yoshino worked at a joint venture of Toshiba and Asahi Kasei. And Yoshio Nishi worked at Sony.
They were all giant well-established companies.
They were founded in 2011 as a spin-off from ATL, itself founded in 1999 by a Chinese billionaire (Robin Zeng). They definitely didn't pop up out of nowhere.
Totally legit.
You can't just pay $35,000 and ride it away, though. They're just taking pre-orders.
Still, at least you can go kick the tires and make sure it's not just a render on the web site. It's an overly clever design; the rear wheel is hubless.
I'd want to uninstall the battery, weigh it, and run a capacity test. I doubt that they will let me.
First, the bike is not new. It's been shipping since 2024, with a conventional battery pack.There are customers and reviews.[1] The "hubless" thing is less hubless than it looks. The rear wheel is the motor, with an outside moving rotor and an inside stator. The stator has a big hole in it. This gives you a large-diameter direct drive motor without dead weight in the center. It also opens up space in the frame to put the battery closer to the ground.
So this is really just an existing bike with a new battery. If they offered a test ride, you'd never know whether it was a solid state battery or not, since that's all about capacity and charging speed.
[1] https://www.wired.com/story/first-ride-verge-ts-pro-electric...
ps: Just ordered two new dog collar lights cause the relatively new ones we had fully discharged while the mutts were outside. Now they wont charge. Jesus I hate LiOn.
> It can be charged to full in just five minutes without limiting charging to 80%, and supports full discharge safely, repeatedly, and reliably.
> delivers up to 370 miles (600 km) of range and adds up to 186 miles (300 km) in under 10 minutes
https://insideevs.com/news/761403/byd-thousands-megawatt-cha...
Tesla 3MW charger uses 1250V DC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megawatt_Charging_System
Liquid-cooled charging cables are a thing. too; one of many: https://www.mouser.com/new/phoenix-contact/phoenix-contact-5...
Perhaps the problem is the size of the battery being limited in a motorcycle.
If might be for example that in the motorcycle the battery or the other components that have to handle the charge current cannot dissipate heat fast enough to allow charging with the maximum current the batter allows. In an EV the pack shape probably has a higher surface area to volume ratio making it cool better, and an EV might also be able to actively cool it.
No spec sheets though.
[1] https://thenextavenue.com/2025/07/23/how-byds-sodium-ion-bat...
The tech needs to go to another company that can produce something more people are able and willing to buy, and that's going to take a few years before it has a meaningful impact on the market.
https://www.donutlab.com/nordic-nano-investment/
Their chief scientist is working on solar-powered hydrogen production, which seems fairly unrelated to solid state batteries:
https://www.nordicnano.co/chief-scientist-bela-bhuskute-will...
Though TiO2 nanoparticles appear to be relevant to battery research in general:
It is nanoprinted and trivially scalable. Free of lithium, cadmium, lead, and cobalt. Uses abundant raw materials free from geopolitical constraints. https://yle.fi/a/74-20118784
Factory in Finland, started around Q3/2025. https://yle.fi/a/74-20180376
Verge Motorcycles bike with the new battery at CES, apparently at West Hall 5658. Video: https://youtu.be/vmsxYznW9Fs
Donut Lab booth here: https://www.ces.tech/events/ces-unveiled-las-vegas/exhibitor...
Well, maybe there's enough prototype production for motor cycles.
Nanoprinted snakeoil - infinitely scalable. Good enough to grab 3M€ public grants and some more from gullible private investors.
Honestly, if they had the tiniest proof of their claims (400Wh/kg, 5min 0-100%, operating temp -30°C to 100°C, no Li/Co/Mn and somebody looking at the production and taking the output to the test) they would be absolutely drowned in money to the point that sama would become jealous.
> Factory in Finland, started around Q3/2025. https://yle.fi/a/74-20180376
That is only a picture of a factory building. They are 100% greenwash grant grabbers with no real substance. There are plenty of these people in Europe. The motorcycle is likely in China designed and produced.
If grant grabbing is what you'd consider a fulfilling life, then come to Europe - it will be an El Dorado for you.
So much, yet so little.
City estimate 600km: "The city estimate calculated by Verge aims to provide a reasonable approximation of calm stop-and-go riding in an urban environment at low speeds. The estimate assumes a 75 kg rider and ideal riding conditions in terms of temperature, wind and tire pressure. Actual range varies based on exact riding conditions, riding style and other factors."
Highway estimate 315km: "The highway estimate calculated by Verge aims to provide a reasonable approximation of steady and consistent highway riding at a speed of 90 km/h. The estimate assumes a 75 kg rider and ideal riding conditions in terms of temperature, wind and tire pressure."
Now: "aims to provide a reasonable approximation" is legalese for "we pulled these numbers out of thin air - they are in no way legally binding".
For proper testing according to "EU Regulation 134/2014, Annex VII" the website says 'TBC'. This would be legally binding but -surprise, surprise- they haven't yet found time to do it.
For any practical purpose the range will be between 200km to 250km. Also the bike is not easy to handle due to the high mass distribution to the outside of the wheel.
Btw, the vendor from Verge motorcycles states in the video 80% charge in "about 10 minutes" instead of 100% in 5min. So which one is true? I stand by my claim that this is marketing for gullible buyers and investors.
https://x.com/VoltaWagen/status/2008620031450706132?s=20
https://x.com/VoltaWagen/status/2008620565704438239?s=20
But has anyone else had thoughts on how solid "solid state" batteries are?
IE could the frame of my next motorbike be made from solid state batteries?
Claiming that a technology is shipping imminently doesn't fit the normal definition of vapourware.
In the next moment some source of verification could appear, which is fine, then it wouldn't be vapourware. But as of commenting - as of the moment - this is the state of affairs.
If anything, this makes me more cynical that this is a marketing exercise on something that continues to be vapourware until independently verified.
If anyone wants to show/link to an independent verification, feel free!
Lets make up a bullshit scenario and see how plausible it is:
Step 1. Make substantial claims on battery technology in production use, in association with a product.
Result 1. Lot of eyes now see product. In this case, the motorcycle. Marketing success!
Step 2. Milk for as long as possible. Deny external validations of the tech where possible. Maybe a couple of days, maybe a couple of weeks. Bonus points for doing it with a smile and maintaining "positive PR".
Result 2. Maximise eyes on the product, take in orders/deposits - in this case for the motorcycle. Later when it is apparent to all that the battery tech was bullshit...
Step 3. Announce: "Sorry, we couldn't make this otherwise great battery technology work to our very high standards. But the rest of our motorcycle runs fine with exactly the same battery tech as our competitors so you're no worse off! We'll refund anyone who laid down money if they wish to cancel their order."
Result 3. Those who laid down money consider that they're not getting miracle battery tech. Some % (large percentage?) cancel their order. Some % (small percentage?) keep their order because they have the money to not care for what is ostensibly a luxury item that will still largely fulfill it's role. Or because they still like that cool hubless rear wheel.
---------
Overall results of bullshit scenario:
1. Marketing goal of many more people knowing about your motorcycle is achieved. Market penetration of mindshare.
2. Maybe some new orders directly based of the bullshit battery tech claim. But certainly more likely to get new orders from the increased public mindshare.
---------
Now this is a fabricated scenario. Is it what is happening here? I don't have the information to know. All I can do is take things at face value.
Right here, right now, all we have are significant claims on battery technology. Words - promises even! - but no matching product as yet verified. Hence Vapourware.
If the company can back these claims up with substance, then it is no longer vapourware. It is an awesome battery product!
I honestly wish/hope/would-love if this battery tech is real! A major step change in battery tech would be fantastic for the world at large!
But given that similar claims/promises in the past have proven to be false, I am not holding my breath. Merely, noting it exists as vapourware at this stage.
[x] it is impractical to manufacture at scale.
[?] it will be too expensive for users.
(Cost unknown, but it's part of a $35K motorcycle, which somewhat limits the possible range unless there's VC chum involved.)
[x] it suffers from too few recharge cycles.
[x] it is incapable of delivering current at sufficient levels.
(Motorcycle, again.)
[x] it lacks thermal stability at low or high temperatures.
[x] it lacks the energy density to make it sufficiently portable.
(400 Wh/kg is better than Li-Ion)
[x] it has too short of a lifetime.
[x] its charge rate is too slow.
[x] its materials are too toxic.
[x] it is too likely to catch fire or explode.
[x] it is too minimal of a step forward for anybody to care.
[x] this was already done 20 years ago and didn't work then.
[x] by this time it ships li-ion advances will match it.
(not directly addressed, but in combination with the rest, I'll give this a pass.)
[?] your claims are lies.
It kinda looks like they read through this exact list and addressed every item but the last. Where by "addressed", I mean simply that: they made a claim regarding the item.
100000 recharge cycles is "too few"?
Or are you using "x" to mean "this claim is rejected"? If so, on what grounds do you assert "[x] by this time it ships li-ion advances will match it"?
I am saying that the article addresses every reason for doubt that the checklist raises (save for the last, which it can't). Whether the technology actually addresses that shortcoming is another question, but the article does claim to have solved every single one of those common drawbacks.
As for the item about li-ion advances, I think the claimed capabilities are well beyond what li-ion could reasonably be expected to reach in the short remaining timeframe claimed.
tl;dr: the checklist is a cynical but normally accurate way of spotting fatal flaws in newly announced battery technology. Based on the announcement, this technology suffers from none of the flaws listed therein.
Please take a moment to read the guidelines and make an effort to observe them in future. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
This is damn impressive. I suppose all the makers of military drones are lining up at the factory already. I mean, electric bikes are fine, but who has the most burning need to increase range and payload?..
Overall - their page sounds like a revolution in battery industry as they hit all the points - durability, capacity/weight, fast charging, etc. It is like Musk should just close his GigaFactory. I mean, i would like such a revolutionary development as in particular it would mean we'll soon get personal VTOLs (where price aspect is less important than in the case of drones mentioned above) ...
I think until we have an independent lab verify the results, it's pretty much impossible to say if their (Donut Labs) claims are true or not. The only thing I'm particularly suspicious of is that they claim their battery was verified but didn't say by who or provide a whitepaper on it. Both of those seem to be the bare minimum for most battery manufacturers, and with their extraordinary claims I'd assume they'd have them front and center.
10 extra minutes may mean extra 5 kilometers of range, or of a patrol / recon route.
If the drone can fly 10 times it's probably good enough.
Ground teams usually have a bunch of batteries for quick replacement, because charging is slow. With these fast-charging batteries, they may need to lug fewer batteries, and larger generators.
- 45 flights per recon consumer quadcopter drone before it's lost
- 69 flights per heavy bomber drone before it's lost
They switch the batteries before each flight anyway, so even batteries that are rated for 10 cycles would be good enough if the price/performance is good enough.
Certainly batteries rated for 300 cycles are an overkill.
Source (from March 2025): https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2025/04/16/hidden...
Also I'm listening to Piotr Ryczek talking about his time with drone unit in Ukraine, and he says recovering drones is complicated (because you have to land far away from your position and the enemy drones wait for people trying to recover a drone that landed, so you have to wait for hours before going there and do it at night). Which drains the batteries to 0 after every flight and reduces the drone availability by half or more.
So there's tactical reasons not to focus on quality too much, too.
Clay-like design freedom
They're claiming this not only can fit custom geometries, but can be part of the structure itself. Would love to see what they're building this out of. I expect we'll see some people dissecting the verve cycle batteries soon enough.
> It can be produced in custom sizes, voltages, and geometries, enabling structural integration and non-traditional formats like serving as the body of a drone or a vehicle chassis.
Battery packs are part of the structure of basically all EVs. That’s not really something new or unique.
We've had "clay-like design freedom" since the early days of carbon-zinc batteries, but it turns out that it's far better (both for manufacturing, chemistry, and safety) to have a continuous volume of relative thermal and electrolytic quiescence that's, largely, isolated from physical strains.
That this is even being highlighted as a "feature" makes other claims even more dubious.
Suffice to say that any battery ("electrolytic cell") that's undergoing dynamic strains will have vastly different levels of conductivity (hence power output and contribution to thermal load) than one that is geometrically static.
Put another way, the performance gains from utilizing the motor as a "stressed member" (akin to F1 monocoque) in combustion vehicles was only possible circa 50+ years after the invention of the 4-stroke cycle. Talk to me in ~20 years.
FWIW, my degree is in electrical engineering and I worked on our college's solar car back when "solar car racing" was "a thing".
You do not want the stressed members of any structure being a salient contributor to its power-train. Not related, see mammalian, reptile, fish, and insect physiologies.
Not a fast vehicle, but tough.
How about a steam engine with the front axle bolted to the boiler?
A steam boiler is subject to considerable stresses already and adding dynamic forces to the shell can't be a good idea?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/Kemna_ro...
That's less frame than a Ducati has between the front and rear wheels.
Without speaking to the wisdom of stressing batteries mechanically, the idea of using drivetrain components as structural members of a vehicle is as old as self-propelled vehicles.
Hell, even a chariot sees the horse taking a part of the vehicle load.
1) China has gone all in on batteries. A competitor from Finland would be shocking. Scale is the real issue.
2) Luckily Finland hates Russia so this probably can't be used for Russian drones
Being able to scale out is far more important than the underlying tech ultimately. I'd expect that China would pretty quickly copy this if it proves out and would likely start outstripping them.
Saying this as a German, where the economy is the worst it’s been in decades and our federal government acts incapable at changing this so far.
Anyone who’s been to China, Israel or the US will be familiar with the pragmatism and, more importantly speed things happen in these places.
I do like Europes rules on civil liberty and privacy protections, but let’s not pretend the bureaucracy is on a unique scale across the board.
That's not true. Germany has a 200-points plan on reducing the bureaucracy. At first it sounds like a joke, but actual points would be transformative if all points were done... I don't see it happening.
As an example, automatic approvals if a response is done within a deadline would be huge. I don't see that happening.
Or possibly happening, then there will be a scandal, and it will be rolled back.
Another funny trick is a "We are looking at it" response, or "The EIA doesn't use standardized language in ground water section, rework it" (EIA was made by company that specializes in that).
As a Swede I can add Saab(aeronautics, not the defunct car manufacturer), Scania, and IKEA to the list.
Far from a exhaustive list, but proof positive that manufacturing can in fact happen under European regulations.
Mass manufacturing them is the big issue.
https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/D5622AQHRq_efww0ZsQ/feedsh...
regardless, batteries with 10% more wh/kg @ 500% the cost would be used for preciously few things, if any. after a few years of war, Russia had the presence of mind to revert to "quantity has a quality all its own" doctrine.
cz 100k cycles is impressive
Higher capacity and faster charging doesn't have to actually mean more capacity and faster charging. It can mean smaller and lighter for the same capacity and charging speed. If you have a technology with 10x the energy density, you can build a car that goes 3000 miles on a charge, or you can build a car that goes 300 miles on a charge and has a battery only 10% the size/weight. (In practice a even a bit less than that, since the reduced size/weight will reduce how much energy you use per mile.)
There's a great market out there willing to buy B-movie space ships, but if EVs are going to be the default (and I think they are) they're going to have to get over the toys and start shipping cars.
The 2026 Leaf, which is based on the same platform, is pretty good in this regard too.
A Mazda 3 has been my daily driver for the past decade and I really wanted to like the Mazda CX90 PHEV when I was buying a larger vehicle last year. It was pretty difficult to justify the CX90 PHEV, though. It gets 42 km of range on an 18 kWh battery (2.4 km/kWh). For comparison, the EV9 I ended up purchasing gets 450 km of range on a 100 kWh battery (4.5 km/kWh).
Don't get me wrong. The CX90 PHEV is still the most efficient CX90 by a wide margin. I had seriously considered buying one, but the efficiency was a deal-breaker. I don't love the giant touch screen on the EV9, but I can live with it. If I couldn't, I would have gone with the Ioniq 9 for more physical controls.
It didn't save the Lightning from being canceled, but at least they pumped out a hundred thousand of them or so before turning tail and giving the market to GM.
Now, prior to this, I lived in California for many years from 2011 until 2019, and I saw tons of EV charging stations there. I left with the impression of “wow, charging stations are everywhere”, and that was 7 years ago.
But now in my Midwest metro area, I can honestly say there are zero that I can think of within a 10 mile radius of my house. Not one. (They’re out there somewhere, but they gotta be tucked away because I never notice them enough to remember them.)
It’s no small wonder that all my friends from California drive electric cars, and all my friends from this area (near my childhood home, so I know lots of people) think EV owners are crazy. [0]
If EV charging stations were visibly everywhere and charged in 5 minutes I could say without a doubt that every one of them would be swayed. So I don’t think they’re being irrational at all.
- [0] It is common to go on long road trips here, since the weather sucks, and people really don’t want to rent a car to do it. Plus a ton of people tow shit. Half my friends have campers and the other half have boats.
There may be a real chicken-and-egg problem with building the charging stations, but if it were magically fixed and ultra fast charging stations were ubiquitous overnight, I think minds would change overnight as well. It’s just nobody has the motivation to take the financial hit to build them and jump-start things.
My point being that they’re not irrational, and it’s not EV hatred that is driving it.
But the way you daily an EV is totally different than a gas car, and even the way you travel is totally different. People have no concept of EV ownership, so they just go with the gas model that they know. But it is totally incorrect.
If you don’t live in a conventional house with access to overnight charging, this is exactly what EV’s are. But we keep talking down to people like this, as if every non-EV owner must just be stupid or something.
And I can confidently say I see rural pickup owners rolling coal about weekly, so no, they will not be loving EVs, because it hampers them destroying their surroundings.
It's not issues based at all, they really are playing hard core identity politics and they consider anyone who disagrees with them to be morally contemptible and inhuman.
Not everyone who dislikes EV’s is doing so irrationally. Not every one of them is a moronic anti-environmentalist. Most people are just trying to get by and they’re looking at what they think is best for them. Thinking everyone who disagrees with you must be a backwards coal-rolling moron is… not a great approach. You can do better.
Certainly uncharitable, but you should hear what those people say about everyone left of the far right.
Some men (and women!) like large and overpowered trucks. You don't have to like them, but you should praise the freedom that this country gives us to choose our own pursuits.
If nothing else, rolling coal with the intent of placing somebody within the plume should be considered assault. Diesel fumes/soot is some nasty stuff.
Some of us do enjoy large, overpowered trucks. Like me -- with my Lightning. Faster than a Hellcat (off the line, at least ;-)) and more efficient than a Prius. And waaaaaaay faster than nearly all of the coal-rolling morons. Best part is that I'm not intentionally polluting the air everyone around me is obligated to breathe. Go out, have fun, be civil about it.
That's just your particular bubble. I have met very few anti-EV folk who were not deeply political about it. They don't oppose EVs on rational grounds, they only have the talking points. Matters not at all to them that the talking points were proven false years ago.
I drove across the country and accounted for midwest charging. Generally the rocky mountain states are minimal, but I was not without a charger ever 30-40 minutes of travel time through the midwest. Most of them are either in Big Store parking lots or at gas stations like Casey's. You need far fewer of them than gas stations, so we should expect to see fewer of these vehicle refill stations in the future anyway
I haven't yet done a cross-country drive but would like to and have plotted out routes with ABRP, and yes, there's more in the midwest states than you'd think. Enough that just about any EV with EPA 250mi range or better can manage a long haul trip without too much trouble (just with a few more bathroom/snack/coffee stops).
Be warned, as you approach and cross the Rockies, there is a lot of uphill and wind. Didn't mention this, but I also did the trip in early March, temps were just above freezing most of the trip, range was terrible. There's a spot in NE, which I'll never forget. Only stop in the middle of a long gap in stations, steepest incline in NE, blew through most a charge in 90 miles. Then the charger is old and very low charge rate (like 5+ year old speeds). The saving graces are (1) public restroom (2) Awesome awesome coffee shop owner who made me a nice brew after hours when I asked him where I might find one as we passed on the sidewalk.
WY was worse on the charger infra, most unreliable and sketchy part of the trip (mostly because of snow in the mountains as temps dropped below freezing, but also the worst charging infra at any point)
I have a plug in hybrid, and close to zero expertise, but I only charge at home, now
I am doubtful that an EV is remotely economical if you cannot charge it at home
I personally do want an EV, but I have qualms about the smartphone-ification of such cars as well. More importantly, the place where I currently live doesn't have a parking spot with an EV charger (there's a limited number of such spots, you have to join a waitlist to get one). If electric cars really could be charged to be ready to drive 800 miles in 5 minutes, that wouldn't be a problem - but even if this press release is being more or less accurate about the battery claims, I can't buy an EV with this technology today, and as far as I'm aware it still takes significantly longer to charge an EV than to fill up with gas to an equivalent amount.
This battery and the 5min charging for it, I thought was for the motorcycle is it going in first.
Musk touts the CyberTruck as "the perfect armageddon vehicle" but if you have no cell phone service how do you charge the truck? What if Tesla disappears, or GCP is down, or WW3 actually happens and the datacenters go dark? Can you operate the vehicle? What if the power goes out because... Armageddon. How do you fuel the vehicle?
What if Musk sees what I said about him on social media and accuses me of violating the TOS? Will he disable my vehicle remotely? I've seen this in the real world when a machine shop missed it's payment to Haas.
In a real armageddon, my 1997 shitbox would still function. My 2013 F150 would function right up until the EMP hit. A 2025 EV probably would not make it to a fueling source within 24 hours after the power goes out.
A CyberTruck will charge just fine from anything that can generate the proper AC or DC, no phoning home needed. Many home solar installations can work off grid and charge your car.
Getting fuel out of underground tanks and paying for it are non trivial with no power.
I can charge an EV off my solar panels.
And even after that week of waiting I was only allowed to buy 20 litres max.
You'll be charging a 57kw model X for AT LEAST an entire day using solar panels that would barely fit in the trunk.
I can tell you’ve never actually lived this reality, you’re just making stuff up.
I had gas pumps not work due to lack of electricity (and lack of gas in the tanks) on half a dozens occasions in different countries.
Discharging in the cold and sitting in the cold are not bad for the batteries, but it does limit available power.
Believe it or not, Canada has a robust EV market.
That's why there is a big backlash against EVs, and I get it. Long term progress means short/medium term pain for some people. Think about all the stress facing software developers with AI progress.
Some empathy and plan to handle these changes would go a long way.
Some portion will be able to train and transition to working on EVs, too. EVs might need less maintenance generally, but things still go wrong sometimes plus people get into accidents and such. There’s also a nascent motor/battery retrofit industry that’s sprouting right now and will grow with time.
The list is endless
I would take solid state battery announcements with a large grain of salt.
Solid state if it works at scale at right price might give the killer blow as the no of excuses will shrink even further
Or maybe CES is already happening?? [0]
[0] https://www.cnet.com/home/electric-vehicles/donut-lab-produc...
https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/items/a9608639-3897-4878-979b-0d95...
If this guy has developed a revolutionary new battery cell then he has really learned a lot in ten years.
So we have no chemistry and no researchers but this startup claims to have blown everyone else out of the water. We'll see, I guess.
Wouldn’t there be a much bigger market and investor interest in putting it in a car initially?
What that means is a small vehicle like a motorcycle needs more energy and hp per lb than a car to have the same range.
So could see higher performance batteries being very useful for motorcycles. Have heard noises that electric motorcycles and bicycles are heavy feeling. So lighter probably would be considered better.
This niche motorcycle brand has already established business relationships with Donut Lab, they were using Donut Lab's electric motors. Probably the Donut people easily worked out a release pipeline together in a bar or something, which would have taken years with VW.
Yeah, they are the same company basically.
Because of this, now I am even a bit skeptical of their electric motor claims, which before I didn't really question much at all.
Either they are lying about something, or they are about to be the richest company on the planet out of nowhere.
They are not as safe, light or as good as advertised. Yet.
After delaminating, some caught fire.
Most wet chemistries (LFP) are safer than current dry chemistries.
Donut claim they have GWhr manufacturing capability. The way they claim that feels very third-person.
That being the case, chances are they just white-labelled someone else’s cell technology and packaged the cells in a box (this is super common, virtually every company in eMobility does this with CATL/LG/Sony cells).
Technically it’s a battery made by Donut, yes, but in that case Donut don’t have the valuable IP so don’t be so quick to jump to buy shares or whatever. Making a battery box is fairly easy.
To put in HN terms, if someone sold you a 20TB SDcard knowing your R/W speeds are limited to 100kbps, it's going to take you a while to confirm that the card is actually 20TB. Rough analogy, but there are similar ways you can hide true battery performance.
It's just extremely suspect that a company full of mechanical and electrical engineers, who made (supposed) blow out gains in electrical motors this year, also found the holy grail of (battery) chemical engineering too.
So then, elephant in the room, where is the catch? It’s it the cost? They haven’t left much else -
- made from geopolitically abundant resources
- unlikely to catch fire
- fully charges in 5 mins
- does not lose capacity over cycles
- retains 99% capacity at -30C and 100C
The press release also claims:
"and demonstrates a lower cost than lithium-ion."
!
I don't understand how it can be done though.
FWIW, they are basically the same company. It is good that there were other cameos from independent customers, though, to help add some possible credibility.
https://www.vergemotorcycles.com/ts-pro/
The webpage does mention the solid-state battery, and the starting price is 30'000$, so... holy shit?
Lithium-ion NMC/Lipo and even LFP are gradually becoming like whale oil lamps and wax candles, inherently unsafe tech to be replaced gradually by safer and more durable tech.
190 kcal | 2.32 kw | 1000 g
---------+-----------+------- = 6.68 kW-h/kg
33 g | 2000 kcal | kg
---
[0] https://www.jif.com/products/creamy/creamy-peanut-butter
I think light aircraft doing short flights might be pretty interested by the technology. I remember 400 Wh being a threshold above which flights become feasible.
NullHypothesist•1d ago
Seems like there's natural skepticism here (https://electrek.co/2026/01/05/verge-unveils-370-mile-electr...), but boy, if it works... Hopefully would be a bellwether for commercial solid-state truly emerging in the next few years.
Fingers crossed this is true.