350 mile range Quad Motor rumored to be 1st trim launched

[HaulingAss]

if 350miles range, is towing capacity still important?

Of course, most heavy towing is local. It's very uneconomical, in most use cases, to tow big trailers long distances unless being pulled by a semi. But there is still a need to get excavators and tool trailers, building materials, concrete forms, etc. to jobsites, make last minute materials runs, etc. Towing is very important in construction and many trades and yet they rarely drive more than 100 miles per day because time is money.

Sponsored

 

[cvalue13]

So even with extremely conservative assumptions, an extra 150 miles is under $10,000 in battery pack costs (including margin).

going from 300+ miles to 500+ miles cost a lot more than the amount you calculated.

Am I understanding you correctly:

he said 150mi cost $10K, to which you respond 200mi costs more than that?

 

[cvalue13]

I've long held the belief, since a QM version was announced, that there will only be a QM version

can you see two motors in the underbody crash test video?

 

[Crissa]

You make a fair point and it is an excellent example. Where it becomes a "not a full-sized pickup" is...

...Not about the size of the truck, but the size of the charging network.

Why don't you just charge up for lunch in Castroville? There's CCS chargers there. Also, it's 25 miles. How many trips were you making there? You should be able to make like, four to six before charging.

-Crissa

 

[VR Driving]

How is the structural battery pack in the Y at all screwing anyone? Lol it doesn't change anything noticable.

All technology gets batterover time. it's not like the model S dual motors came out quickly. P85+ Was a sick little car.

Model 3 RWD was the one of the most efficient versions of that car.

The cybertruck Tesla promised? Like they didn't promise 3 versions?

i think it's safe to say there are more people looking forward to the cheaper ones than the more expensive ones.

It's not like Tesla to sell something for a crazy price and then lower it as production builds.

They might sell a more expensive spec and then put out new cheaper spec sas production ramps but never the same one.

There is no point in making the cheap ones when they are only producing a few thousand a month before ramping up. When they start producing 10k plus a month, that's when you will see mainstream models flood the market. I would expect the 500-mile trucks to come out when the ramp is smooth. Tesla just doesn't even have enough batteries to build a whole lot of these trucks yet.

 

[Crissa]

There is no point in making the cheap ones when they are only producing a few thousand a month before ramping up. When they start producing 10k plus a month, that's when you will see mainstream models flood the market. I would expect the 500-mile trucks to come out when the ramp is smooth. Tesla just doesn't even have enough batteries to build a whole lot of these trucks yet.

There's no point in limiting your production to the higher trim, either, as it needs more batteries and more tech development to be functional. The lower trim uses fewer batteries and a needs fewer software features and components... Which means it uses up less development time and ramp time.

There's reasons to do either. And in the past, Tesla has done this one way or the other:

With the Model S refresh, Plaid came out first as the line was constricted - even though not all the software and tech features were ready. Enough were.

With the Model 3, they came out with a long range single-motor version before the AWD or Performance or the Standard-range models. And the Standard range wasn't the last... It snuck out under the radar.

With the Model Y, they never got to the single motor variant at all, but the Performance model was delayed.

All we really can know is that they'll pick a model to be optimal for their ramp. It might be the long range. It might be the performance. It might be some model that'll disappear as they lines develop - see also the first 4680 Model Y from Austin.

-Crissa

 

[VR Driving]

There's no point in limiting your production to the higher trim, either, as it needs more batteries and more tech development to be functional. The lower trim uses fewer batteries and a needs fewer software features and components... Which means it uses up less development time and ramp time.

There's reasons to do either. And in the past, Tesla has done this one way or the other:

With the Model S refresh, Plaid came out first as the line was constricted - even though not all the software and tech features were ready. Enough were.

With the Model 3, they came out with a long range single-motor version before the AWD or Performance or the Standard-range models. And the Standard range wasn't the last... It snuck out under the radar.

With the Model Y, they never got to the single motor variant at all, but the Performance model was delayed.

All we really can know is that they'll pick a model to be optimal for their ramp. It might be the long range. It might be the performance. It might be some model that'll disappear as they lines develop - see also the first 4680 Model Y from Austin.

-Crissa

We are talking about the initial launch here, Tesla will be making the top trim initially and then move on to mainstream cars. At the current tech, the top trim will very likely be identical to the Plaid S/X in terms of the drivetrain. So for the moment, the top trim is most likely a 350m range tri-motor. We could probably see the standard range 350-mile dual motor coming out at the customer launch as well. That would be fitting as a base truck.

The 500 Mile Quad Motor is probably gonna come later down the road similar to when the Model S and Model 3 received the Dual Motor later in the production stage, and I'm guessing that it will replace the tri-motor when it appears.

 

[JBee]

can you see two motors in the underbody crash test video?

No but can you only see one, if the other is situated in front of it under the big red crossbeam? ;-)

Because of the long arm suspension setup, which is considerably larger than anything Tesla made, it wouldn't surprise me "if" they used smaller motors, that they opted for a two motor configuration, where one motor sits in front of the other longitudinally. This would give them more space in the width to configure the suspension however they like without the motor and driveshafts getting into the way.

From what I can tell from that photo above the motor is to the left under the red X frame, with black driveshafts coming out just below the front suspension arm. IF that is the extent of the motor, it is seriously small in comparison to the plaid layout below that takes up most of the width of the MS (which isn't that much less wide than a CT)

Now if you put them in front of eachother instead of side by side, and make them even smaller motors, because you now have 4 of them instead of three, and make the driveshaft to the wheels come out between the two motors, you end up with better packaging to accommodate the much larger suspension and mounting points.

Another thing to note here is that longer suspension arms normally give you a better ride, as they move less of an angle for the same height of bump, meaning the suspension can absorb more of the force, instead of the tyre and arm. It also means that a larger range of height adjustment is available without affecting the wheel geometry with the road, so the wheels can stay flat on the surface for more of the suspension stroke. Also noteworthy is that they are using a multilink pushrod suspension in the rear, which further improves the suspension stroke geometry, in comparison to say a Mcpherson strut or double wishbone setup in the front. In the front it is to hard to tell which version the production version has, but it has to be one of them because there they need to be able to steer sharper than the few degrees they are using on the CT 4WS rear, so a "affordable" multilink on the front is not an option.

One of the main design constraints for performance off-roaders is actually the CV joint angle, so if they want to have good suspension articulation, they essentially have to also have the driveshafts coming out of the middle of the vehicle, for the longest driveshafts possible, to keep the CV angles low. That is why you can even buy "hollow diff center" narrow differentials, that allow the arms to basically come out of the middle of the diff/vehicle.

This is especially important if you don't want to keep snapping CV joints because of the crazy torque electric motors have. The only other way around this is to have a a planetary hub gear in the axles, so you can run lighter but faster driveshaft RPMs, like the Unimog portal axles, that has the final drive in the wheel hubs of the live axle.

Anyways point is that I don't think the underbody crash test image is evidence of a single motor front, to the point that taken in context with the Plaid drivetrain as comparison, one could say that the proposed motor shown on the CT underbody is nearly "too small" to be an actual CF motor from the plaid at all, begging then the question if the front wouldn't require a second motor to make it perform adequately. Qm being the first model to be released adds to the argument further, that this needs to be a new layout. Well at least in my opinion.

 

[WHIZZARD OF OZ]

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Tesla...motor-AWD-model-releasing-first.734300.0.html

It makes logical sense as the Quad would be the flagship of the Cybertruck trims. The move would be similar to Rivian. They launched their Quad Motor first and followed up with a Dual Motor version at a later date.

If the rumor turns out to be true I predict Tesla targeted over 835 HP to one up the Quad Motor Rivian R1T.

If this prediction comes to fruition I expect the Quad Motor MSRP to be around 15% higher than the Tri Motor $69,990 reveal pricing announced in late 2019 (just under $80k).

Notebook says 350 miles of range with the QUAD motor. RIVIAN with their 180 kWh Pack gets ~400 miles
I still can't see why Tesla WON'T do better!
The numbers show 175 kWh (~163 kWh usable) in a QUAD set-up and using the tech based on the SEMI leading motor disengage clutches to run efficient at speed.
# 3.1 miles per kWh should give ~507 miles of range. (On a sunny day)
Let's see if Cd 0.33 or 0.30 is CYBRTRK.

 

[WHIZZARD OF OZ]

No, their charge time is having to stand at a pump for several minutes, plus the payment.

Charging an EV only has the payment part. You can actually walk away and go pee in the interim, unlike an ICE vehicle.

This whole thread is a loss.

-Crissa

I've NEVER peed in 'the interim'

 

[Greshnab]

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Tesla...motor-AWD-model-releasing-first.734300.0.html

It makes logical sense as the Quad would be the flagship of the Cybertruck trims. The move would be similar to Rivian. They launched their Quad Motor first and followed up with a Dual Motor version at a later date.

If the rumor turns out to be true I predict Tesla targeted over 835 HP to one up the Quad Motor Rivian R1T.

If this prediction comes to fruition I expect the Quad Motor MSRP to be around 15% higher than the Tri Motor $69,990 reveal pricing announced in late 2019 (just under $80k).

so Rivian is a Brand new car maker.. with troubling financial issues and low production volume that needs to prove to investors that it can scale it's production line up and make money.

Tesla is one of the best electric car companies in the world with the best selling model in the world and flush with cash...

Why would it make sense that tesla would follow any pattern set by Rivian .. that is like saying that since this junior high runner had a set strategy for a 50 yard dash.. you expect to see that in the olympics.

 

[Baldey]

i highly doubt tesla would launch a sub-par product. i mean, it is possible.. but 350 miles on a pickup would be a joke. They might have two variants, SR and LR . 350 might be the SR. And still pretty sure they will save quad for later, they don't need it to beat competition and they've developed a tri motor power train for the semi that would fit here quite well. I guess we will see soon, but i hope they have a higher range option available.. towing in colorado mountains could get interesting in the winter otherwise..

 

[Ratso]

I've waited 4 years for the truck to be in production, my space in line has me getting the truck i wait another 1.3 years (Nov 2024 ish), whats another year of waiting to get the one i want. I'll wait for the 500 mile version, i have no intention spending $70K, $80K, $100K on a truck that doesnt meet my needs. Now, (fingers crossed) if the 350 miles was a "typo" and they ment 450 miles i would take it as its close enough to what i need and because as i get older the bathroom breaks get closer together lol. But im not holding my breath anymore.

 

[VolklKatana]

It's only a rumor, but this surprised me since I was sure that this would be one of the items they would deliver on...

Sponsored