Videos: best look yet @ interior, folded-up backseat, tonneau cover, display screen UI, range meter

[cvalue13]

I've already laid out the evidence: (77kw * 55m) / 0.29% = 243 KWH total

yeah, and in response I said that your 'evidence' demonstrates your lack of understanding

which was the prior point

you can re-state your 'evidence' a third time, to the same result


I can understand when certain people haven't had the time or attention to follow all the discussions on this forum to be up to speed with whether to give deference to when others have wondered over a topic longer and with more attention.

but I *do* think a person could at least glimpse at my profile picture and pause for a moment to think whether they might be missing something

Sponsored

 

[scottf200]

I don't guess I fully understand your point?

The "Dual Motor - Plaid/Cyber-Beast" will be among if not the fastest and most powerful BEV truck on the market.

The remaining, and central, relevant question is what will the MSRP be compared to it's next-nearest competitor, eg., the Rivian, the Quad Motor starts at $87K

And in terms of capabilities, the Tesla version will be as fast or faster, have as much range (quad is rated at 328mi), have FAR more cargo room, and various other features that make for a reasonable argument that it's an all-around better offering.

So, I'm left confused regarding your intended point?

Curious. Thanks for the thoughts. I appreciate your well laid out posts. No big deal I just think your perspective may not be what the general truck EV market is. In general, I exclude Tesla super fans (not saying that is you). I think the forums hyper-focused discussions distort our perception.

Perception ... I think that unless Tesla realistically beats the competitors on range and performance then the general perception will be that they failed to deliver. [Well, admitted, I did forget about price which could be an overriding element.]

Perception audience: Again this is not the Sedan/CUV market. The truck market is a much more loyal bunch ... meaning alternatives have to be way better, IMO.

I don't think Dual Motor will be a Plaid/Cyber-beast. That will be the Tri Motor like the S/X.

The below is what I think the comparison will be to.

 

[PilotPete]

It’s been said countless times before, but if Tesla cannot deliver a model with over 350 miles of range at launch, they’ll be the range loser of the entire segment— a segment where max range is a crucial factor for customers that need to do actual truck stuff with their trucks

Yeah! Real trucks doing real truck stuff! Like this guy!

 

[cvalue13]

I don't think Dual Motor will be a Plaid/Cyber-beast. That will be the Tri Motor like the S/X.

I think you misunderstood my post

which is understandable because my post was about how people misunderstand exactly this point and distinction

and for the same reasons, Tesla is going to have a hard time communicating it effectively

The “Tri Motor” variant described in 2019 is not being released on Nov 30, if ever

The “Dual Motor” variant is what is being released on Nov 30 (with the confusing addition of what is a “Dual Motor” trim, in 2019 construct, that HAPPENS to have a third motor added to make it fast)


Not sure how else to put that, so we’ll see how Tesla decides to put it

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

It’s been said countless times before, but if Tesla cannot deliver a model with over 350 miles of range at launch, they’ll be the range loser of the entire segment— a segment where max range is a crucial factor for customers that need to do actual truck stuff with their trucks

That's not true at all. Any truck offering 400+ miles now or in the future is very expensive and thus impacts very few customers. You might as well be saying if Ford's new Mustang can't beat a Bugatti in 0-60 times, it's an epic failure.

Tesla's main goal here is to offer something that betters Ford's 320 mile lightning, at a similar or better price, while being a better overall vehicle. A longer range vehicle is desirable for many and necessary for some, but 70% of CT reservation holders clicked the single or dual, meaning they were happy with 300 miles of range or less.

 

[Baldey]

yeah, and in response I said that your 'evidence' demonstrates your lack of understanding

which was the prior point

you can re-state your 'evidence' a third time, to the same result


I can understand when certain people haven't had the time or attention to follow all the discussions on this forum to be up to speed with whether to give deference to when others have wondered over a topic longer and with more attention.

but I *do* think a person could at least glimpse at my profile picture and pause for a moment to think whether they might be missing something

You are referring to the differences of opinion on if Tesla factors in charging curves to the charge time remaining time readout. The truth is somewhere in between: they try to estimate the curve, but fail by about 50%.

i dont know what your profile picture has anything to do with anything? i wish i lived next to GFTX too, but alas.. There's been a few CT citing in Colorado, if i really cared for it i could produce a similar picture to your's. But it wouldn't mean my understanding was any less or more complete.

 

[scottf200]

The “Dual Motor” variant is what is being released on Nov 30 (with the confusing addition of what is a “Dual Motor” trim, in 2019 construct,
that HAPPENS to have a third motor added to make it fast)

I'll go and find your other explanations on this. No problem, I must be misunderstanding since this is how I think about Tesla's AWD dual vs Tri-Motor Plaid performance models to date (S/X).

• Dual: front has 1 motor driving both wheel; rear has 1 motor driving both wheels
• Tri: same as dual in front but rear has 2 motors with one for each wheel.
  [Tesla page just now: "...Tri-Motor All-Wheel Drive, featuring torque vectoring and three independent carbon-sleeved rotors."]

Digit 8: Motor/Drive Unit/Braking System

D = Dual Motor – Standard (Designated for Cybertruck)​

E = Triple Motor – Performance (Designated for Cybertruck)​

Off to do some searches...

 

[bwhntr78]

I think a lot of the confusion surrounding the 2019 trims vs what is now (presumably) being released comes from the fact that in 2019, Tesla named the variants by motor number, rather than range. It made sense at the time, assuming they had originally intended that each variant would have a unique pack. If they had instead named them by pack size/range, we could have had a short range, standard range, and long range, which in 2019 would have had 1, 2, and 3 motors respectively. Using those terms instead, what it looks like we are getting on Nov 30 would be a standard range (which will have 2 motors), and a standard range performance (which will have 3 motors).

I don't see the "short range" ever coming to fruition to be honest. I just don't see a market for a sub 300 mile truck. If tesla can keep the pricing of the base "standard range" version under 60k, I think it will probably outsell all of the other current BEV offerings by a good amount and will easily have enough buyers as they ramp. BUT.... If they want to compete with ICE trucks, they will need to offer the Long range version. And to eventually sell 200k/year, ICE trucks are the real competition.

 

[SolarWizard]

Man there are some serious mental gymnastics going on to justify rainbow road range here.
There are those of us on here (myself included) that really have a use case where the original holy grail 500 mile truck lived.
If JBree is correct and I have good reason to belive he is then even at 168kWh the truck is going to be in the high 300/low 400 range based on what some have deduced about the range of the 120 +- 5 kWh and resulting range that ALL TRUCKS for the foreseeable future will be sold with.

Its clear that this truck is much heavier and much less efficient than Tesla hoped for. Considering the 4 years they had to work on the truck i feel pretty confident that a 500 mile range version may not come to this platform, ever. Another version down the road? Maybe but as more and more charging pops up less people will demand it.


Personally I am really looking forward to the 12/1 fireworks if this debate is any indication.

 

[fritter63]

but I *do* think a person could at least glimpse at my profile picture and pause for a moment to think whether they might be missing something

Raises hand: Your house has arches on the front???

 

[cvalue13]

Raises hand: Your house has arches on the front???

that's the across-the-street neighbor's porch (wood columns, not arches)

 

[wanders]

I'm hoping the "Open" "Close" buttons are for the midgate

?

I am stunned that it took to the 6th page of this thread before anyone commented on that image!!?

It's a pretty sick view.

 

[wanders]

I'm hoping the "Open" "Close" buttons are for the midgate

?

There is no midgate, only zuul ...

Terrible attempt at interconnected humor that probably nobody will get ...

However, it's confirmed no midgate, take a look at the unfinished castings, there is structure where a midgate would be.

Who ya gonna call tho

 

[flowerlandfilms]

I’m going to say it is NOT from the cameras. In order to know if a route is uphill or downhill, the computer has to have access to the terrain database. We have those in the planes as well. We can recreate a “synthetic vision” to the flight crew to show what the surrounding terrain looks like in any weather. Unfortunately, I’m over Amarillo, TX right now and don’t have much terrain to show you. But if you look, you can see little lakes (in blue) and airports (white lines) near me. I’m betting this is the method they use to create the terrain. Imagine of the weather is bad, or it’s night, Of you’re parked near a large building, how is the camera going to help you? The databases and graphics libraries for a “synthetic” terrain display are very robust.

Interesting.
Wonder what the resolution is.

Sponsored