Reviving the possibilities of onboard battery extender

[TomCyber]

Most of us are aware that the Cyber truck possibilities of getting a hundred mile or so extender battery from the factory ended quite a while ago. But with all these people making accessories is there a chance that someone might make such a thing since apparently the trucks were built with the ability to accept something like that. I know it's based on how many they might sell but I'd love to hear responses. If not how about lobbying Tesla to reconsider doing such a thing.

Sponsored

 

[EWELON]

Would be nice if it was modular and in enough pieces so that it could be taken in and out of the tailgate, just like Jerry Cans in the ICE overlandint rigs.

 

[TomCyber]

I don't care how they do it I just need more mileage for when I'm telling something. For day to day use 234 miles is fine which is 80% of the Beast.

 

[CT_AZ_4x4]

I don't care how they do it I just need more mileage for when I'm telling something. For day to day use 234 miles is fine which is 80% of the Beast.

“towing…”

Me, too.

 

[Cybergirl]

The only range extension that I'm aware of, and it's only marginally practical, is to take along a 3000 to 9000W generator with a 30A 120V or 240V outlet that accepts the Tesla Mobile Connector. When range anxiety is a possibility, I load up my Westinghouse iGen4500DF and a 30lb bottle of propane that will provide an extra 60 miles of range running the generator overnight. People have suggested taking along a ECOFlow Delta Pro with a 3.6 kWh battery, but that will only provide about 8 miles of additional range and only a small increase in charging rate. If you have the cash, parallel two Delta Pros to double the range and charging speed.

 

[YDR37]

But with all these people making accessories is there a chance that someone might make such a thing since apparently the trucks were built with the ability to accept something like that.

Nope. The Range Extender, as originally envisioned by Tesla, is dead.

The original RE was supposed to seamlessly integrate with the main battery. No third party will be able to seamlessly integrate an aftermarket battery into Tesla's hardware and software systems. This would only be possible with Tesla's full consent and cooperation, and there is no sign that this is forthcoming.

Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that someone did manage to find enough hacks to make the hardware and software work without Tesla's approval. Now imagine pulling up to a Service Center hauling a huge unapproved non-Tesla high-voltage battery connected to the main battery by some kind of unapproved non-Tesla hardware. No way will Tesla even touch that vehicle again. They will just void the warranty and tell you to get it off their lot before it explodes.

 

[HaulingAss]

Nope. The Range Extender, as originally envisioned by Tesla, is dead..

True, because so few people needed it. I rarely use more than half of the current battery, even when I'm on long trips. More battery wouldn't give me any functionality that I need or want.

It would be a mistake for Tesla (or anyone else) to invest further in a product that has so little demand.

 

[YDR37]

People have suggested taking along a ECOFlow Delta Pro with a 3.6 kWh battery, but that will only provide about 8 miles of additional range and only a small increase in charging rate. If you have the cash, parallel two Delta Pros to double the range and charging speed.

Could you maybe do something with Tesla Powerwall 3 units? Cost for one unit plus expansion pack is $15,231 (with tax credit), comparable to estimated RE cost. Should be nominal 27 kWh, assuming 2.5 miles/kWh, that would add 67.5 miles.

Would still not be able to charge while driving, but could charge from a Powerwall unit overnight and should be a lot quieter than a generator. A bit more expensive though.

 

[Cybergirl]

Could you maybe do something with Tesla Powerwall 3 units? Cost for one unit plus expansion pack is $15,231 (with tax credit), comparable to estimated RE cost. Should be nominal 27 kWh, assuming 2.5 miles/kWh, that would add 67.5 miles.

Would still not be able to charge while driving, but could charge from a Powerwall unit overnight and should be a lot quieter than a generator. A bit more expensive though.

A Powerwall 3 can't be installed horizontally according to Tesla. Even if you could, you're still limited to L2 AC charging speeds.

 

[Oden's Beast]

True, because so few people needed it. I rarely use more than half of the current battery, even when I'm on long trips. More battery wouldn't give me any functionality that I need or want.

It would be a mistake for Tesla (or anyone else) to invest further in a product that has so little demand.

I get you point, but as someone in that minority, who actually would like to tow his trailer further than 120 miles, or actually go off grid camping for multiple days at time (and not have to hyper calculate or always be within 100-120 miles of a supercharger). Someone who also literally bought his $120K vehicle with the promise (directly from the manufacture) that a range extender would eventually be available (a manufacturer who by the way, actually literally, manufactures its own batteries). I can only say, put yourself in my shoes. If it was never promised at purchase, that is one thing, but the fact that it was, and then reneged, is completely another. I'm tired of the Tesla apologists also telling me "What did you expect, Tesla always does stuff like this". To that I say, I didn't buy a Tesla, to join an apologist cult.

By doing this, canceling the ER option, Tesla literally abandoned all buyers who would actually use a truck, as a truck. You know, people who actually tow their boats, horse, or work equipment trailers to other states, for recreation or for work.

This segment is dead; this vehicle will never compete head-to-head with ICE tow vehicles for longer range towing (or for that matter, even with the other currently available EV's, that are now, in my opinion, actual trucks). Do they have the same tech, no. Can they tow the distances needed, yes. For some, the distance needed met, trumps the cool tech.

For daily driving, or long road trips with the kids on interstates saturated with charging infrastructure, I think we both can whole heartily agree, this is not an issue with the CT as is, and it is in fact, a near perfect vehicle for this use case. But is this honestly, what a true truck should excel at?

Please, stop dismissing this group of minority owners who thought they bought an actual truck, that thought it would eventually be able to tow their required longer distances, as it's becoming an insult. I'm glad this is not you, but it really sucks to be me.

Again, if I was never promised longer range, and therefore it was never used or entered into my calculation for purchase, great. This is not what happened to me. It will forever be a black eye given to me, from Tesla.

Look at the RAM REV, available now with 500 miles of range, the Chevrolet Silverado, available now with up to 492 miles of range, the GMC Siera EV, available now with 440 miles of range. All EV trucks, being offered now, with options of significantly more range than what was even promised with the reneged Tesla RE. Maybe CT truck sales are slowing now, because true truck options like this do actually exist, and maybe these types of truck buyers are seeing the CT, not as a real truck, but a glorified SUV.

Tesla hyped the towing capacity in pounds that can be pulled by the CT (very heavy at launch, and they still even do). But for me, just being brutally honest, if it cannot even tow this same advertised capacity a reasonable distance for the truck's owner, is it really a true towing platform, for them? To me, the answer is a hard NO!

With that, I still love my CT and will likely never give it up, it's literally the coolest vehicle I've ever owned (just look at my posts), but it is not the tuck that I thought I bought. Fact.

 

[YDR37]

Could you maybe do something with Tesla Powerwall 3 units? Cost for one unit plus expansion pack is $15,231 (with tax credit), comparable to estimated RE cost. Should be nominal 27 kWh, assuming 2.5 miles/kWh, that would add 67.5 miles.

A Powerwall 3 can't be installed horizontally according to Tesla.

That's true, but you could transport it horizontally in the bed, then just stand it upright in a vertical position when you wanted to charge. After all, a Powerwall 3 unit and an expansion pack together only weigh, let's see, 503.7 lbs ...

... ok, never mind.

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

I fully expect a modest bump in range in future years, like other Tesla models. The 4680s will get more efficient, maybe fit a few more in or whatever. This will likely happen before the install base is big enough to justify a cumbersome extender option. I think we'll see an AWD CT pushing 400 miles within two years, especially if trucks like the Silverado are stealing interest with superior towing range. They won't get all the way to the massive Chevy 200kwh battery and 450 mile range, but they'll get it close enough that the difference is a moo point given the CT's other advantages.

 

[TomCyber]

I get you point, but as someone in that minority, who actually would like to tow his trailer further than 120 miles, or actually go off grid camping for multiple days at time (and not have to hyper calculate or always be within 100-120 miles of a supercharger). Someone who also literally bought his $120K vehicle with the promise (directly from the manufacture) that a range extender would eventually be available (a manufacturer who by the way, actually literally, manufactures its own batteries). I can only say, put yourself in my shoes. If it was never promised at purchase, that is one thing, but the fact that it was, and then reneged, is completely another. I'm tired of the Tesla apologists also telling me "What did you expect, Tesla always does stuff like this". To that I say, I didn't buy a Tesla, to join an apologist cult.

By doing this, canceling the ER option, Tesla literally abandoned all buyers who would actually use a truck, as a truck. You know, people who actually tow their boats, horse, or work equipment trailers to other states, for recreation or for work.

This segment is dead; this vehicle will never compete head-to-head with ICE tow vehicles for longer range towing (or for that matter, even with the other currently available EV's, that are now, in my opinion, actual trucks). Do they have the same tech, no. Can they tow the distances needed, yes. For some, the distance needed met, trumps the cool tech.

For daily driving, or long road trips with the kids on interstates saturated with charging infrastructure, I think we both can whole heartily agree, this is not an issue with the CT as is, and it is in fact, a near perfect vehicle for this use case. But is this honestly, what a true truck should excel at?

Please, stop dismissing this group of minority owners who thought they bought an actual truck, that thought it would eventually be able to tow their required longer distances, as it's becoming an insult. I'm glad this is not you, but it really sucks to be me.

Again, if I was never promised longer range, and therefore it was never used or entered into my calculation for purchase, great. This is not what happened to me. It will forever be a black eye given to me, from Tesla.

Look at the RAM REV, available now with 500 miles of range, the Chevrolet Silverado, available now with up to 492 miles of range, the GMC Siera EV, available now with 440 miles of range. All EV trucks, being offered now, with options of significantly more range than what was even promised with the reneged Tesla RE. Maybe CT truck sales are slowing now, because true truck options like this do actually exist, and maybe these types of truck buyers are seeing the CT, not as a real truck, but a glorified SUV.

Tesla hyped the towing capacity in pounds that can be pulled by the CT (very heavy at launch, and they still even do). But for me, just being brutally honest, if it cannot even tow this same advertised capacity a reasonable distance for the truck's owner, is it really a true towing platform, for them? To me, the answer is a hard NO!

With that, I still love my CT and will likely never give it up, it's literally the coolest vehicle I've ever owned (just look at my posts), but it is not the tuck that I thought I bought. Fact.

My point exactly!

 

[jeffrey2z]

True, because so few people needed it. I rarely use more than half of the current battery, even when I'm on long trips. More battery wouldn't give me any functionality that I need or want.

It would be a mistake for Tesla (or anyone else) to invest further in a product that has so little demand.

I’m not so sure the demand isn’t there. Demamd is both in numbers and amount of desire. I’d be willing to pay through the nose for another hundred miles. People keep saying that the 300 mile range is all they need “most of the time“ I need 400 mile range at least once or twice a month to get back-and-forth between our vacation house. It would be huge for me to have the extra range. I think there’s more people out there like me than you think.

 

[YDR37]

The Range Extender, as originally envisioned by Tesla, is dead.

The original RE was supposed to seamlessly integrate with the main battery. No third party will be able to seamlessly integrate an aftermarket battery into Tesla's hardware and software systems. This would only be possible with Tesla's full consent and cooperation, and there is no sign that this is forthcoming.

The seamless Range Extender is dead. However, it might still be theoretically possible to produce a "non-seamless" RE.

Suppose you have a gasoline F-150 with a 23-gallon tank, and you need more range. You could install a 36-gallon tank, which seems simple enough. But for a truly seamless upgrade, you would also have to adjust the fuel tank sensor and truck computer, so that the truck could accurately gauge the fuel level in the new, larger tank and estimate "miles to empty" correctly. That could get tricky.

But let's say you can settle for a "non-seamless" solution. OK, then just throw a couple of 5-gallon jerry cans in the bed, and refill the tank from those when you are stopped. That's not seamless, because the truck won't know that the cans are there, won't use them for range estimation, and won't fill from them automatically. But as long as you can keep track of the cans and their status, it should work.

In the same way, you could theoretically put a huge extra battery in the bed of a Cybertruck, completely unconnected to the truck's systems, and then charge from it when stopped. That's not seamless, because the truck wouldn't know that the extra battery was there, or use it for range estimation, or connect to it automatically. But as long as you kept track of the extra battery's status, it should work.

So in theory, it seems like someone -- not necessarily Tesla -- could offer a "non-seamless" RE: a huge extra battery, specifically shaped to fit in a Cybertruck bed under the tonneau cover, but completely unconnected to the truck except while charging. It would be very expensive (probably more than the $16,000 that Tesla estimated for the RE), very heavy (like 500-1,000 lbs), would eat up much of your bed volume and payload, and would only be able to charge when the truck was stopped. But it seems theoretically possible.

This highlights the difference in energy density between gasoline and today's batteries. A 5-gallon jerry can filled with gas is cheap, compact, weighs maybe 40 lbs, and provides 100 miles of extra range. The battery equivalent is waaaay more expensive, bulky, and heavy.

Sponsored