Why are Tesla's range estimates between Cybertruck trim levels so close?

[Wile]

I am getting a better range swapping out my core wheels AS with KO3s. I will run this all year

Wow, that's crazy and unexpected. I look forward to seeing more longterm data about this.

Sponsored

 

[kofitoshie]

Wow, that's crazy and unexpected. I look forward to seeing more longterm data about this.

Non-foundation series AWD

 

[Wile]

Note the dual runs primarily RWD and has two lockers. Beast runs FWD and has one locker.

Lockers was the other main consideration for me. I think the software based "virtual" locker in combination to the front locker will more than me my needs in the offroad.

I've seen Kyle's (Out of Spec) comments on the need for tuning the CB's motor balance to address some vibrate/harshness in certain situations he associates with its FWD primary motor. What are the other considerations?

 

[scottf200]

Note the dual runs primarily RWD and has two lockers. Beast runs FWD and has one locker.

You are leaving out an important point.
The Tri-Beast does have a rear locker but it is electronic vs mechanical. Just like traction controls the electronic locker can react in milliseconds.

Dual Motor Variants: are equipped with mechanical front and rear locking differentials.

Tri-Motor (Cyberbeast) Variants: are equipped with a mechanical front locking differential, and a virtual rear locking differential to provide sufficient torque in each rear wheel. The rear locking differential automatically engages in certain drive modes and speeds, and cannot be manually engaged or disengaged.

via: https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/cybertruck/en_us/GUID-074D2CB3-D2D2-4AC9-91CE-710D55C4680F.html

 

[Wile]

Non-foundation series AWD

 

[carsly]

You are leaving out an important point.
The Tri-Beast does have a rear locker but it is electronic vs mechanical. Just like traction controls the electronic locker can react in milliseconds.

Thanks for clarifying, I should have noted the AWD has two mechancial lockers vs. one mechanical and one electronic on the Beast. If you have experience with offroading/severe weather conditions and electronic lockers, you'll quickly realize an electronic locker = no locker.

Because when you really need both wheels on an axle to turn together you really want them physically locked to one another. Software is great, but sometimes there is no replacement for mechanical leverage. See how the quad motor Rivian does in adverse conditions with its software lockers.

As an aside, I didn't care about locking/severe weather on my Model S so was running a Plaid. When it came CT time, I went against my normal inclination to get the highest power output available and went more functional with the preference for RWD for daily driving a larger, heavier vehicle with quick acceleration and two physical lockers. I also average close to 3 mi/kwh for 350+ miles of real-world range on all-terrains which isn't terrible either.

 

[scottf200]

Because when you really need both wheels on an axle to turn together you really want them physically locked to one another. Software is great, but sometimes there is no replacement for mechanical leverage. See how the quad motor Rivian does in adverse conditions with its software lockers.

I don't think I've seen any videos of the CT-Tri with good demonstrations of the rear virtual lockers. Do you know of any?

I've seen a couple Rivian Quad motors (older motors - Kyle Out of Spec) and it appeared in the ones I saw the single motor on a given wheel was just not powerful enough to move the vehicle. Is there a different problem than that? The millisecond responds time to software sync virtual lockers seem like it would work as well as mechanical. ... but I haven't seen empirical examples.

 

[L3it3R]

You will never regret getting the CyberBeast, you can always put it in old man mode, and putt around(You won't). But you probably will think to yourself, "I love the AWD, but I kinda wish I had gotten the CB". I did the same thing with my Model S, Always regret not getting the Plaid. Loved it, but always thought, ...but if I had the plaid.

I've put 13k miles on my AWD, and not once have I said 'damn, I wish this thing was even quicker' - my M3P is plenty quick enough, and a pickup that already can't stop worth a damn being quicker than that seems pretty irresponsible IMO.

 

[Wile]

Thanks for clarifying, I should have noted the AWD has two mechancial lockers vs. one mechanical and one electronic on the Beast. If you have experience with offroading/severe weather conditions and electronic lockers, you'll quickly realize an electronic locker = no locker.

Because when you really need both wheels on an axle to turn together you really want them physically locked to one another. Software is great, but sometimes there is no replacement for mechanical leverage. See how the quad motor Rivian does in adverse conditions with its software lockers.

As an aside, I didn't care about locking/severe weather on my Model S so was running a Plaid. When it came CT time, I went against my normal inclination to get the highest power output available and went more functional with the preference for RWD for daily driving a larger, heavier vehicle with quick acceleration and two physical lockers. I also average close to 3 mi/kwh for 350+ miles of real-world range on all-terrains which isn't terrible either.

I do offroad a lot. I have an 08 Tacoma TRD Offroad with an open diffs and a e-locker in the rear. I think there is a fair argument for dual lockers over a software locker in the rear and a mechanical in front. That said, If you consider the Cybertruck's trail limitations due to it's extreme size and wheel base, I believe it the software "locker" in the rear and the true front locker in the front would be able to navigate anything the dual locker AWD could, abeit slower and with a bit more wheel slip.

My Taco below:

 

[Gaximus]

I've put 13k miles on my AWD, and not once have I said 'damn, I wish this thing was even quicker' - my M3P is plenty quick enough, and a pickup that already can't stop worth a damn being quicker than that seems pretty irresponsible IMO.

70mph is 70mph, doesn’t matter how quick you get there, stopping will still be just as irresponsible in a AWD.

 

[Deleted member 17810]

The tire weight difference on a truck this heavy isn't gonna change range.

tesla has outfitted them, like all their cars with the grippiest tires they can for efficiency numbers. Which is why changing to a different brand can bring up range numbers.

 

[L3it3R]

70mph is 70mph, doesn’t matter how quick you get there, stopping will still be just as irresponsible in a AWD.

Yeah, but even quicker acceleration to 70 or faster speeds without being able to stop? That's where it counts.

Quick vs Fast - a pair of sports cars with the same top speed but different power levels will have different brakes because the quick one needs to be able to stop better. The CB doesn't. And that's a problem. Same reason the Plaid shouldn't be sold w/out track pack brakes IMO.

 

[Gaximus]

The rear motors in the CT are induction so they can basically spin freely when not needed. It’s really the front, permanent magnet motor that pulls the vehicle so, the real difference comes from the weight of the extra motor in the beast. I can’t remember but it’s like 5-600 lbs heavier (the Cyberbeast) and such, a little less efficient going down the highway being pulled only by the same front motor, all else being equal.

When Tesla first added dual motors to the Model S they said they noticed it gave better efficiency having all the motors engaged, I would assume the same would be true for a tri motor(maybe not to the same extent) but I’m betting they are all engaged while on the highway.
I’d like to see a comparison on the AWD and CB with it set to standard, and not letting the driver know which is which and see which one gets better range.

 

[scottf200]

For Non-FS Cybertruck Dual and Tri motor variants, both equipped with AT Tires, the range difference is only 4.3% (314 vs 301 miles). With the lighter core tires, the difference is a paltry 1.5% (325 vs 320 miles). It might be too early for this question, but are people getting a sense that they can get these kinds of ranges from their Cybertrucks?

Anecdotal ... These are averages from TeslaFI-COM for the DM and Tri on their range leader board.
I was mainly paying attention to Wh/Mile.

 

[scottf200]

When Tesla first added dual motors to the Model S they said they noticed it gave better efficiency having all the motors engaged, I would assume the same would be true for a tri motor(maybe not to the same extent) but I’m betting they are all engaged while on the highway.
I’d like to see a comparison on the AWD and CB with it set to standard, and not letting the driver know which is which and see which one gets better range.

My '17 TMX has a 'Range Mode' that shuts off the rear motor and I can see that in ScanMyTesla (post).

This past post of mine seemed relevant to your comments above. ala perm vs induction
>>>>>
To follow up with more clarity. Kyle talks about the AWD Dual rear permanent being used for highway crusing and the front induction motor being shut off. The reason is the permanent motors are not able to be 'shut off' and still use some energy.

So in this chart, wherever you see the permanent for the single, dual, or tri-beast that is the highway cruiser. [Re: My TMX with both Ind. motors uses rear for "Range Mode" link]

17:00 into this video

<<<<<<

Sponsored