Range Extender in the bed - no capacity left 🤷‍♂️

[Bsimmer3000]

Where does the 5 150lbs passengers come from?

The local middle school based on them weights

Sponsored

 

[MiguelAznar]

Many years ago I read a critique of a Mercedes with ludicrously low recommended total weight to avoid exceeding a regulatory limit, suggesting very little cargo capacity. The reviewer described the car as ideal for a toothbrush-toting family of dwarves on their way to a nudist colony ?

 

[Fleetwood75]

I believe cvalue13 laid out in another thread why Tesla might have artificially understated the true payload capacity in order to avoid the truck being classified as a Class 3 truck (I.e. F350) for complicated tax and regulatory financial reasons

 

[Chris9702L]

I believe cvalue13 laid out in another thread why Tesla might have artificially understated the true payload capacity in order to avoid the truck being classified as a Class 3 truck (I.e. F350) for complicated tax and regulatory financial reasons

Any idea where that is?

 

[Fleetwood75]

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...-credits-the-extender-gvwr-and-payload.10318/

 

[scottf200]

So if this range extender is 750lbs and you have it in the bed. The manual then says the limit in the AWD bed is 1010lbs. So you only have 260lbs you can put in the rest of the bed? ?‍

The example above includes 5 150 LB passengers. It's written above the chart.

Re: 1010 lbs cargo bed limit Dual motor
-- 919 lbs Tri motor
-- around 700_to_750 lbs Range Extender

I found this section of the manual and went frame-by-frame trying to find a clear view of a larger section of it than the opening post.
-- as one scenario it shows an example of five (5) people weighing 150 lbs each.

 

[PastGas84]

Oh wow yea, you are 100% correct.
Which means, if you get a range extender you can put almost no weight in the vault............................
Which SUCKS

I'd imagine that if you are getting the range extender then you are towing and possibly that weight can be allocated to whatever you may be towing i.e. travel trailer or toy hauler. So hopefully it can provide at the min 100 miles of usable range.

 

[YDR37]

Where does the 5 150lbs passengers come from?

Five passengers because the Cybertruck has five seats. 150 lbs because that is an industry standard for passenger weight (probably established long ago). So 750 lbs is the assumed maximum passenger weight for a five-seat vehicle.

So the manual is saying that if you max out the passengers in a dual-motor Cybertruck with all-season tires, you will have 1,010 lbs of capacity left in the bed. If mom, dad, two kids, and the dog weigh a total of 500 lbs (which is 250 lbs less than the nominal max), then you will presumably have 1,260 lbs of capacity in the bed.

And I have seen calculations like this from other manufacturers. For example, the 2023 Ford RV & Towing Guide says the following about slide-in campers and the F-150:

Cargo Weight Rating shown in chart is maximum allowable, assuming weight of a base vehicle with required camper option content and a 150-lb. passenger at each available seating position.

 

[Chris9702L]

Re: 1010 lbs cargo bed limit Dual motor
-- 919 lbs Tri motor
-- around 700_to_750 lbs Range Extender

I found this section of the manual and went frame-by-frame trying to find a clear view of a larger section of it than the opening post.
-- shows five (5) people weighing 150 lbs each.

Ahh, so that chart is just a scenario. The 1010 is actually not a weight limit. Thanks

 

[YDR37]

I believe cvalue13 laid out in another thread why Tesla might have artificially understated the true payload capacity in order to avoid the truck being classified as a Class 3 truck (I.e. F350) for complicated tax and regulatory financial reasons

Any idea where that is?

It's true that Ford or Chevy will, on customer request, de-rate certain borderline trucks to something like 9,990 lbs, in order to keep the GVWR below the 10,000 pound threshold for Class 3. This is apparently a popular option in some states, depending on the Class 3 truck rules.

But Tesla has no need to do this. The GVWR of a dual-motor or tri-motor Cybertruck is 9,169 pounds, based on EPA documents. That's more than 800 pounds below the Class 3 threshold. It's not a borderline vehicle.

 

[CyberGus]

Where does the 5 150lbs passengers come from?

When two Cybertruck reservationists are in love, they share a special hug. Then, they get truck 4 years later

 

[SixZo]

Well said
It basically just creates a rhetoric loop, mission accomplished.

I'm quite fond of the idea of a range extender add-on as on options meant for those who truly have edge-case usage needs, and make the standard package CT itself best-suited for most people.

I think it's very likely that the majority of CT drivers will have their daily needs satisfied with the standard HV pack.

Adding a significantly bigger main HV pack has several implications, including impacts on efficiency and aerodynamics, handling, weight, dimension, etc.

 

[scottf200]

But Tesla has no need to do this. The GVWR of a dual-motor or tri-motor Cybertruck is 9,169 pounds, based on EPA documents. That's more than 800 pounds below the Class 3 threshold. It's not a borderline vehicle.

I think the question has been how did Tesla come up with the number to give to the EPA
Elon has said (with pride or similar emotion) that it will haul more in interviews.

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...-credits-the-extender-gvwr-and-payload.10318/

 

[YDR37]

I think the question has been how did Tesla come up with the number to give to the EPA

The math is simple. GVWR = Curb Weight + Payload.

The curb weight of a Cybertruck (assuming dual motor, AT tires) is 6,669 lbs. That number is in the Owner's Manual, as well as the EPA Certification.

The rated payload of a Cybertruck in that configuration is 2,500 lbs (again, it's the Owner's Manual). So add 6,669 lbs and 2,500 lbs, and the GVWR should be 9,169 lbs. And sure enough, that is exactly the GVWR that appears in the EPA Certification. So it's no mystery how the GVWR was calculated.

For the sake of argument, let's suppose that the payload of a Cybertruck is "really" 3,000 lbs (not 2,500 lbs). OK, 6,669 lbs plus 3,000 lbs is 9,669 lbs. That's still not a Class 3 truck. So why not simply use the "real" number?

Heck, suppose the payload of a Cybertruck is "really" 3,300 lbs. OK, 6,669 lbs plus 3,300 lbs is 9,969 lbs. Getting close, but still not a Class 3 truck. So again, why not simply use the "real" number?

In 2019, Elon projected a Cybertruck payload of 3,500 lbs. Tesla delivered only 2,500 lbs (max), so this was a large and unmistakeable miss. If the payload was "really" 3,000 lbs, or even 3,300 lbs, the miss would have been less embarrassing -- and those payloads would still not have turned the Cybertruck into a Class 3 vehicle, so there would have been no penalty for using them.

 

[YDR37]

In 2019, Elon projected a Cybertruck payload of 3,500 lbs. Tesla delivered only 2,500 lbs (max), so this was a large and unmistakeable miss. If the payload was "really" 3,000 lbs, or even 3,300 lbs, the miss would have been less embarrassing -- and those payloads would still not have turned the Cybertruck into a Class 3 vehicle, so there would have been no penalty for using them.

And adding a range extender wouldn't affect the GVWR either. It would chew up a significant chunk of the available payload, but even so, the Cybertruck would be competitive with most F-150s and other half-ton trucks.

Let's say you have a Cybertruck (dual motor, AT tires) with GVWR of 9,169 lbs and payload of 2,500 lbs. You install a 700-pound range extender. The GVWR doesn't change, but now you have only 1,800 lbs of payload left for other stuff. OK, but 1,800 lbs is still a respectable number by F-150 standards, probably higher than average.

If the "real" payload is 3,000 lbs, or even 3,300 lbs, the remaining payload after installing the 700 lb range extender would be 2,300 or 2,600 lbs. Those would be great numbers by half-ton truck standards. So why not use those "real" payload numbers?

Sponsored