10,000+ Miles Driving a Cybertruck – Things learned: range, great sound and full love/hate list after 10k miles

[Woodrick]

Doesn't seem to be what's happening. I've seen some comments that the # invites are decreasing right now. So that suggest that there is a max. And we only a day or two into the queue. If your hypothesis was correct, they'd just offer to everyone.

Sponsored

 

[cvalue13]

Yes, WT4 and WT3 are being delivered.

But that’s the work truck

it’s relevant only if you’re a fleet buyer, and don’t mind a spartan work truck interior

the retail model, the RST, is delayed “at least” until 2025

and to get the long range in the retail RST, they’ve a year ago flashed a starting price or $105K … who knows what it will be “at least” a year from now


Chevy has done a good job of fooling people into thinking they’re currently selling a long range truck to normal buyers at a reasonable price. They aint.

 

[500 EPA miles]

Doesn't seem to be what's happening. I've seen some comments that the # invites are decreasing right now. So that suggest that there is a max. And we only a day or two into the queue. If your hypothesis was correct, they'd just offer to everyone.

Because the production rate is not high enough yet. Will be quite a while before the 100k/120k price points are saturated. Remember how many S/X they were selling at this price point.

 

[cvalue13]

Because the production rate is not high enough yet. Will be quite a while before the 100k/120k price points are saturated. Remember how many S/X they were selling at this price point.

on one hand, it’s true that if Tesla does not want orders too far outstripping their expect d delivery dates they may slow order invites to catch up

on the other hand, that does not appear applicable here in that Tesla appears comfortable telling Beast orders they’ll be waiting u til the end of 2024, but AWD orders are only getting EDDs to April - seems Tesla would be fine opening the floodgates to more AWDs until the EDD reaches at least end of 2024, but they’re not.



Meanwhile, never say never as time moves forward, but as of all moments up to right now, Tesla does not plan to continue selling FSs through all (or even half of) 2024. They could always change their mind, but it’s not currently the plan.

stating that based on known info from within Tesla

Now, a separate matter is when first retail price deliveries would occur (depending on how many FS AWDs are ordered before Tesla stops offering them, as relates to the ramp output). Clearly the first retail price Beast deliveries won’t be seen until at best tail end of 2024, if not well into 2025 (depending on if/when bottleneck relieves).

 

[Crissa]

... towing 6500 lbs

It's not the weight, it's the aero.

Really need to hammer this in.

-Crissa

 

[500 EPA miles]

It's not the weight, it's the aero.

Really need to hammer this in.

-Crissa

Even the hummer towing test - just moving the hummer slightly on the trailer will change the drag coefficient. Unless somebody pulls the exact same trailer we're not getting accurate comparisons. Even then, there's an issue of the interaction of the wake of a particular truck with it's trailer.

 

[Crissa]

Even the hummer towing test - just moving the hummer slightly on the trailer will change the drag coefficient. Unless somebody pulls the exact same trailer we're not getting accurate comparisons. Even then, there's an issue of the interaction of the wake of a particular truck with it's trailer.

Yep. But the biggest note will be that height and width of the load.

-Crissa

 

[Gigahorse]

Because the production rate is not high enough yet. Will be quite a while before the 100k/120k price points are saturated. Remember how many S/X they were selling at this price point.

Yea with a list of 2.5million of prospective people there is a good chance the pricepoint is going to be there for a while.

 

[Coltpete]

on one hand, it’s true that if Tesla does not want orders too far outstripping their expect d delivery dates they may slow order invites to catch up

on the other hand, that does not appear applicable here in that Tesla appears comfortable telling Beast orders they’ll be waiting u til the end of 2024, but AWD orders are only getting EDDs to April - seems Tesla would be fine opening the floodgates to more AWDs until the EDD reaches at least end of 2024, but they’re not.



Meanwhile, never say never as time moves forward, but as of all moments up to right now, Tesla does not plan to continue selling FSs through all (or even half of) 2024. They could always change their mind, but it’s not currently the plan.

stating that based on known info from within Tesla

Now, a separate matter is when first retail price deliveries would occur (depending on how many FS AWDs are ordered before Tesla stops offering them, as relates to the ramp output). Clearly the first retail price Beast deliveries won’t be seen until at best tail end of 2024, if not well into 2025 (depending on if/when bottleneck relieves).

Care to expound on the information known from within Tesla? Any indication of a hard number of Foundations? I would think 5000 would be about right given this trajectory.

 

[cvalue13]

Care to expound on the information known from within Tesla?

not exactly, if only because it's obviously not a hardened plan. Before and for a long time after the delivery event, the official internal plan was for 1,000 units - but subject to change.

it does appear to have changed since then, if only to a timeline trigger rather than total units cap. in other words, along the lines of "we'll produce as many FS as are ordered before Q2 '24, then begin configuration of retail units."

but, even if there were an as-of-today plan, it'll remain subject to change.





instead and meanwhile I do feel comfortable disputing assertions that there *is* a current, hardened plan *and* that it involves eg "continuing to sell FS trim through all of 2024," and the like.

 

[Coltpete]

not exactly, if only because it's obviously not a hardened plan. Before and for a long time after the delivery event, the official internal plan was for 1,000 units - but subject to change.

it does appear to have changed since then, if only to a timeline trigger rather than total units cap. in other words, along the lines of "we'll produce as many FS as are ordered before Q2 '24, then begin configuration of retail units."

but, even if there were an as-of-today plan, it'll remain subject to change.





instead and meanwhile I do feel comfortable disputing assertions that there *is* a current, hardened plan *and* that it involves eg "continuing to sell FS trim through all of 2024," and the like.

Thank you and understood completely. I think it's going to be a moving target, Tesla is still figuring out how things are going too on a weekly basis - how strong demand is for the invites they send out for the FS and how quickly production ramping is going.

I know an insider on the service side of things and he was telling me they are having all sorts of issues with these early ones breaking (probably the ones that have gone out to employees over the past few months) and are struggling to figure out how to handle it. Something like that would potentially suppress production until everyone felt more comfortable. I think the FS will likely stay under or around 5000 practically speaking - unless something drastic changes and corporate decides they want to just keep going down the list. I am surprised Beast orders have not been given more of a priority though, they must be having some sort of production hesitancy with that new motor.

I only say 5000 because it looks like the AWD vins are now in the low 1000s and given that we know there are at least a few more months of production for FS (up until April at this point) they will almost certainly be able to get to 5000 by then. A q2 cutoff for FS manufacturing would make sense to me.

 

[cyberme207]

I anticipate that even after Founders Series production run is done, they will continue to price the truck according to demand.

So maybe they won't make you pay an extra $20k above vehicle price for a package like founders services, but they will raise the base-price of the truck. It's VERY possible the foundation series will seem like a bargain after they are finished with this run.

They will only lower the price of the truck if they are struggling to meet demand. And this is going to be a SLOW ramp. They are dealing with 80% new technology that all has to work perfectly together. They are dealing with new 48v supply chains, new chips, new everything. They won't be producing enough to meet demand this year or next.

I doubt they will produce more than 50k cybertrucks this year, and most of them will be out-the-door for over $90k imo. That would have it priced similar to Rivian and Hummer.

Lightning and Chevy are a different "type" of truck IMO. They are not showpieces or lifestyle vehicles. They are great trucks IMO, but driving a lightning not the same as a hummer / rivian / or CT.

 

[jberry216]

Ok guys and gals, I have a real world math problem for y'all:
If a man lives in Texas and regularly needs to drive 359 Miles from his house to his hunting location (home chargers at both ends).
There are 2 Supercharger locations along the most efficient route between the house/ranch.
Per Google Maps, Supercharger 1 is located 125 mi from the house (234 miles from the ranch).
Supercharger 2 is located 248 miles from the house (111 Miles from the ranch)
The man drives mainly interstate (Speed Limit 75MPH) or State Highway (Speed Limit 75MPH) between the locations. The man typically drives at speed limit to SL+5MPH.
Biology requires at least 1 comfort stop between the locations. Sometimes 2.
Will the man be required to recharge his AWD CT once or twice to get from the house to the ranch? I'd really like to hear from folks who have time behind the wheel of their CT.

I am anxiously awaiting my configuration email, but the threads and a recent EV rental experiment have made me really wonder if this is the right vehicle to fit my needs.

Thanks all,

 

[Woodrick]

Ok guys and gals, I have a real world math problem for y'all:
If a man lives in Texas and regularly needs to drive 359 Miles from his house to his hunting location (home chargers at both ends).
There are 2 Supercharger locations along the most efficient route between the house/ranch.
Per Google Maps, Supercharger 1 is located 125 mi from the house (234 miles from the ranch).
Supercharger 2 is located 248 miles from the house (111 Miles from the ranch)
The man drives mainly interstate (Speed Limit 75MPH) or State Highway (Speed Limit 75MPH) between the locations. The man typically drives at speed limit to SL+5MPH.
Biology requires at least 1 comfort stop between the locations. Sometimes 2.
Will the man be required to recharge his AWD CT once or twice to get from the house to the ranch? I'd really like to hear from folks who have time behind the wheel of their CT.

I am anxiously awaiting my configuration email, but the threads and a recent EV rental experiment have made me really wonder if this is the right vehicle to fit my needs.

Thanks all,

It totally depends on driving style. But in general, fastest trip would be to stop at both Superchargers and only take on enough to make it to the next destination. So first stop may only be a few minutes and second stop just a few more.

Hints:

• Battery charges fastest when empty.
• It may be possible to charge to 100% at house and drive to second charger, let the nav system figure it out for him. The nav system is conservative and with experience, you will learn that you can stretch it out more.
• Try not to charge when battery is over 50% and don't charge at Supercharger to over 100%

In other words, piece of cake trip for the truck, even if he doesn't start with a full battery.

 

[evazquezcu]

All of the above tells me there is a critical failure warning light flashing at Tesla. I am a long-time Tesla shareholder, owner of three Teslas, huge advocate of the company and all around fan. (I recently and reluctantly cancelled the CT FS because the range would not meet my needs.) But I am calling it: something is deeply broken.

We now have enough data to definitively say that Tesla blew it on the Cybertruck range (not least this post which is consistent with previous data). There is no way - with all of the very public testing done by Tesla - that the engineering team did not know (long ago) that the real-world range would suck. They knew. And Tesla has an incredible engineering and manufacturing team so they could have fixed this. No question. So it seems to me that we can conclude:
1) Range sucks
2) Team knew long before release that range sucks
3) It is a big deal for customers
4) They could have fixed it but didn't

With these facts on the table (I think they are facts at this point) one has to ask why did Tesla get this so wrong? We have seen this before. It is a symptom of an organization where everyone is afraid to tell the emperor that he is not wearing clothes. It is a symptom of a company where bad news is hidden and bad data is reformulated until it fits a pre-ordained internal narrative. If that diagnosis is correct, Tesla is in serious trouble. For all of its accomplishments and incredibly talented staff, it will collapse in on itself unless this gets fixed. I hope it is a wake-up call to the board and the leadership. Warning light flashing IMO.

I hope this is just a first adopter tax and future versions will get improved range and software updates.

Tesla is known for optimistic range estimates but this is stretching the rubber band to its limit.

I wouldn't call this stretching the band at this point, people are getting 190-210 miles out of something that is advertising 320. That's minimum about 35% less range. Something is legitimate broken here. Bigger battery, shelf off 400-500 lbs or both

Sponsored