Cybertruck Highway Range Test (Dual-Motor AWD) -- Run Until Battery Empty (by Out Of Spec)

[rudedawg78]

So in other words, you are unhappy with rates that are amongst the cheapest in the country?

I'm in Georgia and pay $0.16 in the summer (But only $0.06 in the winter)

Might not be a great TOU rate, but the overall rate ain't bad.

Head to CA where the rates are similar, as long as you shift it one decimal point to the left.

I am unhappy with their customer service and power reliability. I lived in California for 5 years and don't miss the prices of anything there.

Sponsored

 

[HaulingAss]

Have to say as much as Iove the cybertruck and will definitely still be taking delivery his range is really poor when compared to standard ICE pickup trucks.

Range only matters if you don't have enough for your use case. Most people will find the 300-340 miles of EPA range more than enough for daily needs, without even leveraging the Supercharger Network. Those who drive a lot on some days might need to make a 15 minute stop to complete their day.

Long-distance driving on the Interstate will need to travel on routes with regular Supercharger Service (basically all all Interstates and many State Highways) and it will be somewhat less convenient than long-distance travel in an ICE truck. But you will still save money due to leveraging the low cost "full tank" at the beginning of each trip and the often complimentary destination charging at the end of each day (if staying in roadside hotels).

For an F150 ICE for example 23 gallon tank will get you 400-500 miles easily and if you get the 36 gallon tank you will get 770 miles or more.

I've owned a 2010 F-150 SuperCab with a 36-gallon tank since new. I bought the smallest V-8 offered (it was a gutless 4.6 liter V-8) and I've tried to get 600 miles on a tank by hypermiling on rural low-speed highways virtually non-stop at 45-50 mph under favorable conditions and no load in the bed (minimum speed to keep the 6-speed transmission in overdrive). I think one time I might have been able to get just over 600 miles (nowhere near 770 miles) but I filled up because I didn't want to risk running out of fuel in the middle of rural Montana. And this is using every hypermiling trick I had in my bag for the entire tank, including stuffing the tank as full as possible to begin with and babying the acellerator for the entire tank. I also had a tonneau cover for better aero and 4 extra psi in the tires. That was when the truck was 1-2 years old. After 2 or 3 years the MPG dropped about 9% for reasons no Ford dealer was able to figure out.

The latest Eco-Boost F-150 engines get slightly better mileage, but you're only going to reach 770 miles on a tank with a strong tailwind across the plains if travelling at 70 mph. And don't even think about 75-80 mph, or driving into a strong headwind, your fuel consumption will sky-rocket! Nobody gets 770 miles on a 36-gallon tank in an F-150! That's complete nonsense and I think you know it.

 

[Woodrick]

When I'm driving my MY from Utah to California or back reducing the MPH by just 1 usually gives me 1% of range which is 3 miles. So if you reduce the MPH by 4 then you just gained 15 miles of range. That's nothing to sneeze at. You could go even lower and maybe have better results. To be fair, that's me usually going from 82mph to like 77 mph since the speed limits there are 80 for most of the way.

The numbers that I use is the you drop about 10% range for every 5 mph increase over 60 mph.

This can be easily seen on the Energy graphs, drive one speed for about 10 minutes and then another speed.

BUT, when you are NOT in an area where range is a problem 70-75 is the speed at which you go the furthest, the fastest, including Supercharger stops. But ALWAYS make sure that you roll into a Supercharger near empty. If you charge from 20$ to 80% it will take about 15 minutes longer than 5% to 65%.

 

[Deleted member 8371]

Good news is you can easily put a gas or diesel generator in the vault and you'll never be totally stranded.

that is my plan for long travels.

 

[Cybertruck2024]

Ford, on their web site, indicates 320 miles range with the extender. Cybertruck is 320 on All Terrain tires and 340 on All weather.. And then you can add the Cybertrucks range extender.

That sounds like a lot better to me.

I own a 2022 Standard Range Lightning. It gets about 1.3 mi/kwh on average in below freezing temperatures at highway speed. It seems like CT is beating that, but overall these big trucks get beat up on range in sub optimal conditions.

 

[BayouCityBob]

And there are CCS stations in MsAlester.

Yes, you are correct. Maybe Rivian or GM... CT cannot use CCS.

 

[Mrp911]

Hopefully 10000’s will read this thread and drop out. ?
Sincerely,
RN11295xxxx

 

[BayouCityBob]

Silverado EV two work trucks big battery (24 module) = 450 miles, smaller battery (20 modules) = 393 miles. Consumer RST Launch version still unofficial at 400 miles.

 

[cyberhunter]

Kyle Conner (out of spec) just finished doing a podcast collaboration with the Batteries Included Podcast. I have watched enough of Kyle's videos to trust his statements, because he does try to just lay out the facts and present them on as even a playing field as possible. As of that podcast this morning, he had driven the CT over 1000 miles. I am paraphrasing, but his overall impression of the CT is that it is much like his Rivian R1T. Great around town and short towing trips, but it has less range (today) than many of the competitors trucks and won't change the game for him and his medium and long range towing needs. He also was quite disappointed in the charging curves he was getting. I think he said he had charged it 7 times so far. This could potentially all improve, but what he was able to test that is his experience. I will state it again, I want there to be a sweet offroad capable BEV truck that also can be your tow rig, etc. The early indications are that the CT will need some improvement to really be that vehicle. I did see on another youtube channel (Electified) that there is some 4680 chemistry changes being experimented with and considered. Conjecture is that those chemistry changes could increase the power density of cells. I think the numbers thrown around were 10% to 20%. That is all conjecture, but that would put future packs in the 135 to 145kWhr range. That would be a nice boost. If battery chemistry leads to better power density and charging curves, then this whole early disappointment with regards to range and charging could be turned around.

 

[HaulingAss]

The question I have is "Why?" This efficency is almost exactly the same as my Lightning. I thought the CT was supposed to be more slippery (drag co. of 0.34 CT vs 0.44 FL). With those numbers CT *should* get 2.5 mi/kWh. Tesla custom-engineered tires for the CT - hard to believe rolling resistance wasn't a key factor. So... Why isn't the CT more efficient?

I will guarantee the Ford F-150 Lighting is not nearly as efficient as the Dual Motor Cybertruck when run at 70 mph, under the same conditions, with All-Terrain tires. That's why Ford needs a bigger battery to go less distance at the same speeds.

 

[Broski]

Fair summary

However #1 for me and EM: 0-60
Promised 2.9
Delivered 2.6 ?

Sponsored