Search results

$$$

Up. They fell victim to cost cutting, on the Beta trucks they appeared to be on rails so that they could move out of the way, which itself was a less elegant solution than that found on the Model X.

There’s a confluence of factors, no doubt. Weight not being the only one, just that it could have forced their hand to a greater degree than previously assumed.

Agreed, given the recently leaked curb weight it does appear the size reduction came about as a necessity more than a deliberate choice.

Good point about usable capacity, the 2x 8 cell wide and 2x 6 cell wide module arrangement might have to be 85" long instead of 83.3” for the minimum viable option, 47/46 cells per column would be 1302 cells (124kWh nominal, 117kWh usable). Otherwise 8 across all four modules it is.

Yeah, shouldn't have been lazy and just extrapolated from there. A ~92" module length would result in 50/51 cells per column, in a 6 cell wide arrangement with 4 modules that is about 1212 cells. That yields ~115kWh, which is consistent with expectations. However for the module to be 92" long...

Adding a separate compressor for that sole purpose would indeed be silly but I don't think anyone was suggesting that, rather tapping off the one that's already present. Could put a cycle limit on offboard use to avoid running into excessive warranty claims.

I don't know if it's enough for a 360 view but CT's bumper cam should solve the front blindspot issue on current USS-less cars.

@JBee using @cvalue13's estimated pack measurements of 92x62 in, what capacity would that yield?

With the way the design of the truck has evolved, structural pack and reduction in dimensions (read: rear headroom), I don't see a double stack being likely. Which is why I previously mentioned that if pack volume is fully utilized on the ~300mi variants, it would mean a long wait before we see...

Originally they probably were, now they're vestigial.

All good now. The flat cooling plate strategy was what most people were predicting, however they ended up keeping the tried and true ribbons:

Don't recall if it was explicitly stated by Tesla back then but this MotorTrend article made mention of it. They had access to the Cybertruck team so I doubt the author just pulled it out of thin air: https://www.motortrend.com/news/tesla-cybertruck-features-missed-details/

Why are we pretending we don't know the weight? Both EM and this leak confirm it's a bit heavier than a Lightning. It follows that the stainless steel panels aren't doing much, for the most part they're being carried as dead weight.

Is it just a problem on my end or are several images not showing up? Anyway thank you for taking the time and drawing it up with CAD, been wondering about the available volume. Cooling strategy on the MY 4680 pack is still between the cells with ribbons like on 2170 and 1850 packs, that hasn't...

He's referring to a 2170 non structural double stack pack, that was the intention back in 2019.

While not conclusive there is evidence that suggests that may have been the case:

The 4680 pack on the short lived Model Y SR AWD would suggest a partially full structural pack to be possible. Unless those 'bolsters' running down the sides are there for side impact protection. In which case it's going to be many years before we see a 500mi range Cybertruck given a ~40%...

Wondering why they need two 911s? :unsure:

That is quite the surprise indeed, good call. Even after EM said sub-19ft I thought it would be no less than 227-226".