Range for AWD Cybertruck 200-250 miles after many real world tests

[Gigahorse]

As a couple of real-world data points, the first actual owner on this forum, @susu2142 has posted their data from a couple of drives. 440 Wh/m and 419 Wh/m. Will be amusing to watch this data get absorbed into this thread, (or ignored). ?

Stoked that someone on this forum has given some data, efficiency is encouraging at 440 and 419. I am sure people will either claim victory or cry that it is a small sample depending which tribe they are on, but sub 500 wh/mile is encouraging.
susu2142 also pointed out the slow charge time of over 40mins to add about 50% charge to the battery which is a bummer at a 250kW supercharger.

Not sure how "amusing" that was for you but it is nice to be getting additional data points.
I am primarily focusing on larger sample sizes of range when I can get them to add to the thread but this info from susu2142 is nice to see.

Sponsored

 

[WormtownKris]

I am primarily focusing on larger sample sizes of range when I can get them to add to the thread but this info from susu2142 is nice to see.

One of those two runs was 174 miles at 440 Wh/m. According to the title of this very thread, that should have pretty much used the entire battery, so I would think this was quite relevant to your data compilation.

 

[Gigahorse]

One of those two runs was 174 miles at 440 Wh/m. According to the title of this very thread, that should have pretty much used the entire battery, so I would think this was quite relevant to your data compilation.

Super relevant as all real world data we are getting now is a bounty compared to the 4 years of nothing.
Previous posts under 1,000 miles of range have been met with a lot of "not enough data to be relevant!" cries, so treading carefully on how I phrase things.
But that data was include din the posts and I personally am grateful for the real world data that is coming in considering we have not had full EPA #s etc. I am sure others are also glad to be getting in some real world data.

 

[cvalue13]

One of those two runs was 174 miles at 440 Wh/m. According to the title of this very thread, that should have pretty much used the entire battery, so I would think this was quite relevant to your data compilation.

interested, link?

 

[CyberGus]

interested, link?

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.com/forum/threads/my-cybertruck-is-delivered-today-january-11-non-employee-?-first-impressions-photos-?.11364/post-228968


p.s. congratulations on your shortest post ever

 

[cvalue13]

p.s. congratulations on your shortest post ever

 

[Woodrick]

As a couple of real-world data points, the first actual owner on this forum, @susu2142 has posted their data from a couple of drives. 440 Wh/m and 419 Wh/m. Will be amusing to watch this data get absorbed into this thread, (or ignored). ?

That's putting it above the Model Y and Model 3 by about 100 Wh/m. That's pretty much on par with other Tesla numbers for range.

 

[cvalue13]

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.com/forum/threads/my-cybertruck-is-delivered-today-january-11-non-employee-?-first-impressions-photos-?.11364/post-228968


p.s. congratulations on your shortest post ever

One of those two runs was 174 miles at 440 Wh/m. According to the title of this very thread, that should have pretty much used the entire battery, so I would think this was quite relevant to your data compilation.

Seeing the thread now, just to put those results into perspective of the zeitgeist of this thread:

The first leg shows he did “70% highway, 30% county roads with some twisties. 440 Wh/mi,” and from his map you can derive he did an average of 48mph.

That’s not spot on to but closer to EPA combined conditions as one might get compared to other examples in this thread, on average (given the location of the drive in California, I’d guess temps are about right, too).

His figures give an approx combined range of 277mi.

Since one-way and traversing this part of California, worth noting the elevation changes on this route - a bit of up and down and a decent little tail drop into Sacramento at the end - noting too notable, except that this 277 isn’t on flat conditions, for better or worse.

The second leg he says “All highway, tried to keep the speed around 75-80mph, but got caught in some light traffic. 419 Wh/mi.” From his map you can derive he averaged 66mph.

One might wonder how he got 419 Wh/mi at avg 66mph, vs 440 wh/mi at avg 48mph

likely answer: the last 1/3rd of the route he took drops 1200ft in elevation

basically the 419 Wh/hr a regen score

all-in-all, these results are more informative to me than some of the others discussed in this thread, sustained hwy at cool temps, etc.

These here are, for better and worse, a bit more telling.

At what seems to be pretty near (not close, but nearer other examples to date) EPA combined conditions, 277mi with some terrain isn’t bad. I wouldn’t expect 320mi, nor would I quite expect 277, at an avg 48mph - but who knows what else was going on.

The return leg? At 66mph average and 419 Wh/mi? I’m not putting much to that given the last third dropped 1200ft

 

[Gigahorse]

Seeing the thread now, just to put those results into perspective of the zeitgeist of this thread:

The first leg shows he did “70% highway, 30% county roads with some twisties. 440 Wh/mi,” and from his map you can derive he did an average of 48mph.

That’s not spot on to but closer to EPA combined conditions as one might get compared to other examples in this thread, on average (given the location of the drive in California, I’d guess temps are about right, too).

His figures give an approx combined range of 277mi.

Since one-way and traversing this part of California, worth noting the elevation changes on this route - a bit of up and down and a decent little tail drop into Sacramento at the end - noting too notable, except that this 277 isn’t on flat conditions, for better or worse.

The second leg he says “All highway, tried to keep the speed around 75-80mph, but got caught in some light traffic. 419 Wh/mi.” From his map you can derive he averaged 66mph.

One might wonder how he got 419 Wh/mi at avg 66mph, vs 440 wh/mi at avg 48mph

likely answer: the last 1/3rd of the route he took drops 1200ft in elevation

basically the 419 Wh/hr a regen score

all-in-all, these results are more informative to me than some of the others discussed in this thread, sustained hwy at cool temps, etc.

These here are, for better and worse, a bit more telling.

At what seems to be pretty near (not close, but nearer other examples to date) EPA combined conditions, 277mi with some terrain isn’t bad. I wouldn’t expect 320mi, nor would I quite expect 277, at an avg 48mph - but who knows what else was going on.

The return leg? At 66mph average and 419 Wh/mi? I’m not putting much to that given the last third dropped 1200ft

Yea none of the numbers sets perfectly account or report weather, elevation, etc, but the more data points the closer we can come to a reasonable estimate of real world range.

For the most part the anti-tesla crowd will scream downhill driving and slow speeds while the pro-tesla folks will cry about sub 70 degree weather and a 400lb payload. Both are correct factually but a little zealous when it comes to the big picture in my opinion.
Until EPA and other highly scientific#s come out these real world reports are helpful when taken at face value and as a set of a larger group for those of us looking at the truck.

 

[CyberGus]

TL;DR: YMMV

 

[Gigahorse]

TL;DR: YMMV

Pretty much, pull a big trailer fast and you might get under 60 miles of usable range, drive downhill at 45MPH and you might get 320.
Everyone's use case and therefore mileage will differ which is nothing new for vehicles, EVs are just a bit extra sensitive to driving conditions and these multiple use cases should help people make some rough estimates.

 

[Woodrick]

Pretty much, pull a big trailer fast and you might get under 60 miles of usable range, drive downhill at 45MPH and you might get 320.
Everyone's use case and therefore mileage will differ which is nothing new for vehicles, EVs are just a bit extra sensitive to driving conditions and these multiple use cases should help people make some rough estimates.

You really thought that " TL;DR: YMMV " needed a response?

 

[Gigahorse]

With more deliveries starting to trickle out and more real range reports coming in the range is much less of a mystery than it was in December.
Likely the last update to this post is the 10,000 mile average range report from an AWD CT that recently came in.
With a Wh/mile of 599 over 10k miles the owners of this CT are averaging about 205 miles of real world range 100%-0% or for a more realistic 80% of battery usage 165 miles of real world range.

Post got a lot of updates over the last few weeks but this one is certainly the one with the highest miles for an average and it is within the worst/best range of the others so this is likely to be the last update to this post as after 4years of waiting we are getting in a good amount of real world range reports which will only increase.

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...-hate-list-after-10k-miles.11494/#post-229919 <-- thread with 10k mile report

 

[Crissa]

Using the current wh/mile rates in one of the most widely used EV route planners may seem like gibberish if you are unfamiliar.
With an EV there are some routes that require planning unlike jumping in an ICE vehicle and just looking for the next gas station when your gas light comes on.

That's not what you did.

You just posted partial screenshots of output from a website without showing the inputs, while not considering the output may be in error due to your assumptions.

-Crissa

 

[Gigahorse]

That's not what you did.

You just posted partial screenshots of output from a website without showing the inputs, while not considering the output may be in error due to your assumptions.

-Crissa

ABRP is considered to be one of the better EV mapping apps, many Tesla owners prefer it to the built in Tesla mapping due to higher accuracy and more options.

Sponsored