The Xiaomi SU7 accident (which occurred on March 29, 2025) is still being followed by the whole network. The accident not only sparked widespread public doubts about the safety of electric vehicles, but also pushed the issue of the battery supplier of the Xiaomi SU7 to the forefront of public opinion. It is understood that the accident vehicle was a Xiaomi SU7 standard version, and there are two suppliers of this version. With CATL and BYD separating their relationship one after another, the safety of Xiaomi's self-assembled battery pack has become the focus of public attention. China Exportsemi will try to deeply analyze the deep-seated problems behind the accident from the three dimensions of technology, supply chain and public trust, and discuss the future development direction of the electric vehicle industry.
1. Finance Associated Press: On April 2, 2025, an investor asked whether the Xiaomi SU7 car that had an accident on March 29 used CATL batteries, and CATL replied that it was not their batteries.
2. Finance Associated Press: On April 2, 2025, BYD did not respond to relevant information, but the reporter of the Finance Associated Press learned when visiting the Beijing factory of Xiaomi Automobile in March last year that the lithium iron phosphate PACK production workshop carried by Xiaomi SU7 is located in the factory area, and BYD and CATL only provide battery cells, and the packaging is completed by Xiaomi.
Ⅰ The mystery of the battery supplier behind the accident
The 73.6kWh lithium iron phosphate battery equipped with the standard version of the Xiaomi SU7 will adopt the dual-supplier system of BYD and CATL from June 2024. However, after the accident, CATL quickly denied that its batteries were related to the accident, while BYD said that only battery cells were supplied, and the battery packs were assembled by Xiaomi itself. This statement of "dissociation" not only makes the public question the transparency of the supply chain, but also puts Xiaomi under great pressure in the traceability of accident responsibility.
From a technical point of view, although Xiaomi's self-assembled battery pack model reduces costs, it also means that it needs to be responsible for the final performance and safety of the battery pack. However, whether the accident vehicle adopts the key safety design of battery cell inversion technology has become the focus of public attention. The inverted battery cell technology can quickly release energy downward under extreme conditions, ensuring the safety of the passenger compartment to the greatest extent. Both the Xiaomi SU7 Pro and Max versions are equipped with this technology, while the standard version does not mention it, which has to call into question the security of the standard version.
Figure: Xiaomi SU7 accident vehicle (picture from the Internet)
Ⅱ The safety boundary of intelligent driving technology
According to the vehicle data released by Xiaomi, before the accident, the vehicle was in the NOA intelligent assisted driving state, driving at a speed of 116km/h. From the system warning to the collision in just 2 seconds, the driver's reaction time is compressed to the limit. In this process, the pure visual intelligent driving solution of the Xiaomi SU7 standard version has limited recognition ability at night, and the perception delay under high-speed working conditions has become one of the causes of the accident.
The safety of intelligent driving technology has always been the focus of public attention. Although Xiaomi's intelligent driving system provided multiple warnings before the accident, it still failed to avoid the tragedy in the end. This exposes the limitations of current intelligent driving technology in extreme situations. Industry experts point out that the safety boundaries of intelligent driving systems need to be further clarified, especially the emergency response capability under high-speed driving and complex road conditions. The Xiaomi SU7 accident is yet another reminder that technological advancements cannot come at the expense of safety.
Ⅲ The ambiguity of supply chain transparency and responsibility
The Xiaomi SU7 standard version adopts the dual supplier system of BYD and CATL, and the battery is installed randomly, which cannot be selected by the user. Although this model has certain advantages in cost control, it also hides huge hidden dangers. BYD made it clear that they only supply battery cells, while the battery pack is assembled by Xiaomi itself. This "decentralized" supply chain model reduces costs, but it also blurs the division of responsibilities. In the event of an accident, suppliers can quickly dissociate, while car companies need to face public and market skepticism on their own.
The lack of transparency in the supply chain not only reduces public trust in the supply chain, but also makes it extremely difficult to trace responsibility for accidents. Industry analysts point out that while the decentralization of the supply chain has reduced costs to some extent, it has increased the complexity of quality control and responsibility traceability. Whether this model can really bring long-term stability, or whether it just passes on the risk to car companies, is worth pondering for the entire industry.
Ⅳ The crisis of public trust and the challenges of the electric vehicle industry
The accident not only exposed technical problems, but also caused deep public anxiety about the safety of electric vehicles. According to China's Ministry of Public Security, the number of new energy vehicles in China has exceeded 15 million by the end of 2024, but battery fire accidents are frequent, and public trust in electric vehicles is declining. Xiaomi officials said that the accident was not "spontaneous combustion", but caused by damage to the vehicle system after the impact. However, this explanation did not quell the public's doubts.
What the public needs is not only technical security, but also transparency and a sense of responsibility for car companies. Was Xiaomi able to provide enough technical details in the survey? Is it possible to rebuild public trust through transparent communication? This is not only a challenge for Xiaomi, but also for the entire EV industry.
Ⅴ Transparency and responsibility: the future direction of the electric vehicle industry
The core problem of the Xiaomi SU7 accident is the lack of transparency and accountability. Transparency is not only the transparency of technology, but also the transparency of the supply chain; Responsibility is not only the responsibility of car companies, but also the responsibility of the entire industry. Xiaomi needs to do more on technology transparency and public communication, while the industry needs to establish clearer rules on supply chain management and responsibility segregation.
The crisis of public confidence in electric vehicles is a challenge that the entire industry must face together. It is only through transparency and responsible rebuilding that electric vehicles can truly win market acceptance. This accident is not only a test for Xiaomi, but also a warning to the entire electric vehicle industry.
VI. Conclusion
Behind the Xiaomi SU7 accident is a multiple game of technology, supply chain and public trust. The boundaries of technology, the transparency of supply chains, and the anxiety of the public are intertwined and deserve to be explored in depth. While the electric vehicle industry is developing rapidly, it must face these deep-seated contradictions in order to truly achieve sustainable development. This incident reminds us that technological advancement cannot come at the expense of safety and trust, and that transparency and accountability are the cornerstones of industry development.
Related:
Xiaomi SU7 Crash Investigation: 3 Fatalities Raise 11 Critical Questions for the EV Industry
Speed or Safety？CATL CTO Warns！
Xiaomi's Self-Developed Battery Pack Raises Safety Concerns: BYD, CATL Deny Involvement
