Wh/mile efficiency reported on the highway (heat on, 30°F, 85 mph)

[scottf200]

No big surprises here based on estimates from tools out there.
My thread and tables.

Sponsored

 

[SolarWizard]

If you don't drive the tested speed limit or have a lead foot you won't get the published range ...

Fun fact: Gas cars don't either! Tow an Airstream with a gasoline F150? 8mpg. Funny how we never talk about that.

Then factor in temperatures ...

No way you're going to "baby" your new Tesla first drive. Heck, I've never even turned off Plaid mode.

The F150 has 1000 kWh of storage refills in 10 minutes and pulls into nearly every station easily. There’s no need to talk about it because it just works.

 

[BayouCityBob]

The F150 has 1000 kWh of storage refills in 10 minutes and pulls into nearly every station easily. There’s no need to talk about it because it just works.

It is just completely unsustainable.

 

[lowtek]

The F150 has 1000 kWh of storage refills in 10 minutes and pulls into nearly every station easily. There’s no need to talk about it because it just works.

Solid points.

I guess my point was that range loss isn’t just an EV thing.

 

[Rutrow]

The F150 has 1000 kWh of storage refills in 10 minutes and pulls into nearly every station easily. There’s no need to talk about it because it just works.

And uses ~2000 Wh/mile @ 85mph. ?

Unless the "pulls into nearly every station easily" you're referencing the problem of SuperCharging while towing a trailer, a F-150 would be using upwards of 3500 Wh/mile.

 

[cvalue13]

I agree with you that this is a huge deal for many of us (me included). I am expecting a 320 mile CT to deliver at least the same highway range as a 2020 316 mile Model Y LR (+/-) or about 280 miles at 70 mph decent weather. Which is same as the 320 mile rated F150 Lariat.

you seem agile with the physics of this, so please help me better understand your point here?

why would you expect a CT with 320mi of EPA conditions range to get ~the same range as a 320mi of EPA rated Model Y?

Compared to a MY, the Ct has both a larger frontal plane and a higher Cd

The CT will therefore necessarily not get the same range as a MY that has equivalent EPA range conditions.

but perhaps I’m missing something embedded in your assumptions, and am missing that key

 

[Gigahorse]

you seem agile with the physics of this, so please help me better understand your point here?

why would you expect a CT with 320mi of EPA conditions range to get ~the same range as a 320mi of EPA rated Model Y?

Compared to a MY, the Ct has both a larger frontal plane and a higher Cd

The CT will therefore necessarily not get the same range as a MY that has equivalent EPA range conditions.

but perhaps I’m missing something embedded in your assumptions, and am missing that key

Assumptions being made are that the CT has a MUCH bigger battery, and that it costs $120,000 currently. So it getting 180 miles of range instead of early 500+ or recent 340 is.....less than ideal.

 

[Gurule92]

Assumptions being made are that the CT has a MUCH bigger battery, and that it costs $120,000 currently. So it getting 180 miles of range instead of early 500+ or recent 340 is.....less than ideal.

You mean the truck plus a bunch of accessories is $120,000. Also, do we have a reported full range on the AT tires?

Also, you're cherrypicking data. The $120k truck only has a peak rated range of 320, likely on all seasons

 

[BayouCityBob]

The

you seem agile with the physics of this, so please help me better understand your point here?

why would you expect a CT with 320mi of EPA conditions range to get ~the same range as a 320mi of EPA rated Model Y?

Compared to a MY, the Ct has both a larger frontal plane and a higher Cd

The CT will therefore necessarily not get the same range as a MY that has equivalent EPA range conditions.

but perhaps I’m missing something embedded in your assumptions, and am missing that key

I have three relevant embedded assumptions (any or all of which may be incorrect but are all reasonable):
1) The HWY range on the MYLR and the CTAWD is the same since that is the relevant part of the EPA test for this. We do not have that data on the CT yet so it could be wrong. CT may pull proportionally big numbers on city and smaller numbers on highway than the Y. But I would be surprised if it did.
2) The EPA Dyno road load equation (which includes an aero Cd adjustment) is equally accurate (or inaccurate as it were) on the MYLR and the CT
3) Tesla is using the same correction factor methodology for the two vehicles

If those assumptions are correct, then the EPA hwy data for a Model Y running at 48 mph and the EPA for a CT running the same test, is already adjusted for the aerodynamic drag of the two vehicles. In that case the real world on the two vehicles should be the same and the increase in energy will change proportionally on the two vehicles as speed increases. What it also means is that - since the battery of the CT is 125 vs 82 for the MY, the wh/mi on the CT should be 1.52 more than MY. Assuming the assumptions are correct.

Or perhaps I have made an error somewhere? If so, I welcome correction.

 

[Bkb13]

No big surprises here based on estimates from tools out there.
My thread and tables.

This chart really spells it out. An AWD going 80 mph gets 201 miles of range. Add in losses for it being 30° and running your heater, and you get arrange of 150+.

I think all of those people who said 300 miles of range is all you need never considered the realities of driving over 65, in the cold, or with your AC/heater on…

I am glad to have ordered a range extender.

 

[scottf200]

I think all of those people who said 300 miles of range is all you need never considered the realities of driving over 65, in the cold, or with your AC/heater on…

_ As well think a couple of years down the road when there is 5-10% battery degradation. 10% is 30+ miles less.
_ Road tripping is usually between 10-15% and 75-80% charging so think of that in range miles.
[crudely: CTDual: 238 mile = 340*((80-10)/100) when new ]

Existing Tesla owners and a real-world perspective of the new-point-in-time Tesla ranges.

 

[SolarWizard]

And uses ~2000 Wh/mile @ 85mph. ?

Unless the "pulls into nearly every station easily" you're referencing the problem of SuperCharging while towing a trailer, a F-150 would be using upwards of 3500 Wh/mile.

The efficiency is obviously better in EVs
I own EV trucks im well versed in the differences

 

[cvalue13]

If those assumptions are correct, then the EPA hwy data for a Model Y running at 48 mph and the EPA for a CT running the same test, is already adjusted for the aerodynamic drag of the two vehicles. In that case the real world on the two vehicles should be the same and the increase in energy will change proportionally on the two vehicles as speed increases.

I think the underlined is possibly your error

As speed increases, the drag force on the vehicle will increase more steeply for the CT than for the MY.

Their parity in range at EPA conditions is basically an artifact of the relevant battery size as relates to their respective frontal plane/Cd.

Meanwhike, there are other factors at play, such as the power-torque curve of the engine and selected gear reduction, which can affect relevant range as well. And here, the CT’s ‘sweet spot’ is possibly ‘tuned’ different/worse ar upper highway speeds than a MY, since the CT is also ‘tuned’ for low end power/torque for off-road/towing/rock crawling.

 

[cvalue13]

Also, do we have a reported full range on the AT tires?

yes, under EPA conditions, and straight from the horse's mouth

so the AT's run a good 10% lower at EPA conditions/speeds

expect that % to increase significantly at say a sustained 75-80mp, as much as ~30%


sustained 75mph range testing on Rivian R1Ts show a nearly 30% range hit when the truck is outfitted with the Rivan ATs vs the Rivian streets


just based on the above alone, do the maths on a CT with a "301 mile range" at EPA conditions, and if at a sustained 75mph you're down to 210mi range

 

[cvalue13]

sustained 75mph range testing on Rivian R1Ts show a nearly 30% range hit when the truck is outfitted with the Rivan ATs vs the Rivian streets


just based on the above alone, do the maths on a CT with a "301 mile range" at EPA conditions, and if at a sustained 75mph you're down to 210mi range

which, @BayouCityBob , is among the other relevant distinctions between a CT's high speed performance and a MY's - merely the rolling resistance effects of the very different tires at speed

Sponsored