OFFICIAL 2024 Cybertruck Pricing, Specs, Mileage/Range, Dimensions, Weight, Info

[Bkb13]

Every single CT not rolled off the line and so not sold in the first year or two or even three brings in greater net loss. The sunk costs are already sunk. Isnt it better to sell 50% more product at 25% less revenue per unit than to either have unsold inventory or production capacity sitting idle or underused.

I believe that’s only partially correct. Right now they’re running a fairly inefficient production line. That means the OPEX per vehicle is fairly high. So even though as you pointed out, the CAPEX is already sunk cost, you still have a certain amount of opex that’s going to drive the costs up.

That means that the initial batches of cyber trucks should be more expensive, until all the efficiencies are figured out over time.

Sponsored

 

[Eye of Elon]

Not completely awful, I was scared when Elon didn't say anything about price and range.

When I wrote this, I was looking at the marketing speak/dealership slimy price, not the actual price. Now that I know the real price and the vault is not 6'5", I have to change my assessment.

Still not completely awful, it's a good value for a futuristic luxury vehicle. Unfortunately I didn't sign up for a better Hummer EV. Hopefully, they are selling for a profit when my opportunity comes up, so I can drive it for a month, maybe I'll fall in love.

 

[cvalue13]

You guys are over thinking this. They will thicken the existing battery. It’s only about 4”. Probably put it under the front row of seats. It’s not going in the vault

with respect, you’re under-thinking this

this is not how the CT is engineered.

yes, they could have designed a truck that works that way, but they didn’t.

 

[anionic1]

with respect, you’re under-thinking this

this is not how the CT is engineered.

yes, they could have designed a truck that works that way, but they didn’t.

I have degree in structural engineering so I may understand the design better than you think. What makes you think a double stacked pack wont work?

 

[cvalue13]

I have degree in structural engineering so I may understand the design better than you think. What makes you think a double stacked pack wont work?

lots of reasons, engineering/design-wise

but let’s keep it brief and just focus on the inferences from in-bed range extender being an option

 

[anionic1]

with respect, you’re under-thinking this

this is not how the CT is engineered.

yes, they could have designed a truck that works that way, but they didn’t.

I see that you were responding to my comment regarding putting them under the seat. I thought you were responding to my comment regarding doubling the pack. Either way, both would work and still allow tesla to have the diaphragm structural pack design. a 4" pack under the seats could sit on top of the steel plate making up the current pack. I dont know if you are aware that the current structural pack design is completely detached from the steel sheet under the battery pack. they put a sheet of micah that allows the pack to bend and twist while remaining isolated from the bottom plate. They could easily double stack the pack in trays like they are squirt all that bonding foam in there and still have a composite diaphragm.

 

[anionic1]

lots of reasons, engineering/design-wise

but let’s keep it brief and just focus on the inferences from in-bed range extender being an option

isnt that the point of the conversation that they could find another option so they dont have to put a 40 something kW pack in the bed of the truck. Its just odd. It seemed half-assed. My bet would be that they actually go away from that and actually integrate it into the pack under the truck somehow. Not many people need 17" of ride clearance.

 

[LexusCyber]

uch as any criminal, btw). Mayb

I would say the cybertruck project is currently a failure.

Not because the truck is bad or because they won't sell, but because it started as a goal to create a work truck that wasn't so expensive you were scared to scratch it. In part because of their celebrated manufacturing.

Instead it's priced like a Raptor and has pricey accessories for the hobbyist and city poser.

I still want one, I just hoped it stayed as a truck most think is ugly and had the pure intention of being a working class hero truck.

most people talk a lot but do not understand business and product management. A lot of things changed since 2019 goals were set… they were tentative goals… as no one can read into the future … then life happened, prices went up, people went crazy, billions of dollars were invested to build a manufacturing capability that is super COMPLEX To Build… then as they come close to laic they reassessed the reality of delivering a great product based on the client others and market conditions.
I think they did a fantastic job… if anyone knows how to do better please step up and show them you can deliver more for a better price … otherwise start saving.. no one owes us anything…

 

[cvalue13]

isnt that the point of the conversation that they could find another option so they dont have to put a 40 something kW pack in the bed of the truck. Its just odd. It seemed half-assed.

well, that’s the inference youmre making: ‘instead of doing this, they could do that’

I’m pointing out the correlate inference: ‘they couldn’t do that, so you get this’

My bet would be that they actually go away from that and actually integrate it into the pack under the truck somehow. Not many people need 17" of ride clearance.

I mean, maybe some day the redesign the truck, sure

but until then

btw, the truck doesn’t genuinely have 17” of ride clearance - that’s only in extract mode, which is a limited use case mode with special procedure and isn’t quick to accomplish

but regardless, the limiting factor isn’t only the highest setting, it’s also eg the lowest setting. Currently truck designed to wrap 35” tires in aero mode with ~8” clearance

>4” off that and you’re >25% lower than a BMW M3/Model S

What’s the proposition there, anyway? That the CT has a lot-belly hanging down between the wheel wells?

Meanwhile, I’ll leave it to you engineers to decide, but I’ve some pretty detailed/compelling explanations as to how/why *structural* packs can’t be double stacked and continue to perform their structural function

 

[RayzorBEV]

I paid nearly $70k for my F150 back in 2016, that was 8 years ago and Ford sells a lot of Platinum and Limited every year; top trims, not to mention boat loads of Raptors. I wouldn't underestimate what buyers are willing to pay for something as unique as a Cybertruck or a CyberBeast

 

[ED_SFO]

isnt that the point of the conversation that they could find another option so they dont have to put a 40 something kW pack in the bed of the truck. Its just odd. It seemed half-assed. My bet would be that they actually go away from that and actually integrate it into the pack under the truck somehow. Not many people need 17" of ride clearance.

im sure they made a pack with enough usual range for most people to save on cost. Building a add-on pack is smart because they don’t have to try to engineer and build two packs…I could see them making a smaller pack that adds 80-100 miles that only take up a foot of space making about 420 ? miles of range. Which would be worth $8k

 

[anionic1]

well, that’s the inference youmre making: ‘instead of doing this, they could do that’

I’m pointing out the correlate inference: ‘they couldn’t do that, so you get this’



I mean, maybe some day the redesign the truck, sure

but until then

btw, the truck doesn’t genuinely have 17” of ride clearance - that’s only in extract mode, which is a limited use case mode with special procedure and isn’t quick to accomplish

but regardless, the limiting factor isn’t only the highest setting, it’s also eg the lowest setting. Currently truck designed to wrap 35” tires in aero mode with ~8” clearance

>4” off that and you’re >25% lower than a BMW M3/Model S

What’s the proposition there, anyway? That the CT has a lot-belly hanging down between the wheel wells?

Meanwhile, I’ll leave it to you engineers to decide, but I’ve some pretty detailed/compelling explanations as to how/why *structural* packs can’t be double stacked and continue to perform their structural function

The truth is they can do it with a structural pack. The structural pack is only relying on the glued connection to the top sheet and the glue between the packs per the recent video by Munros team. Therefore a stacked design would not affect the packs structural ability. They could likely find a way to add strength with an additional layer. Generally thicker diaphragms only get stronger with thickness as the moment of inertia of the section improves. If there is glue holding everything together that is likely very doable.

The truth is that Tesla has very much changed its stance on range since the CT was revealed in 2019 and they are thinking why make a huge manufacturing effort to make a change to the production when we can just have service centers install the extender pack in the bed for the few willing to pay an additional $16k

Sponsored