I follow and align with you here but I think we are ultimately discussing different things. My original and intended line of commentary surrounds the claim made by the ādecompile leakā stating āBeast Mode is expected to feature a more powerful batteryā. Iām erring on the side of this being...
With that same logic though, a larger kWh pack for the Beast/Tri would equate to both a higher discharge rate and more power (capacity). More importantly does the language come from the app or is that language someoneās āeducated guessā? If itās the latter then itās just more speculation and...
Where does the text come from? Is it also decompiled directly from the app or is this the decompilerās (authorās) inference/ad lib? If the former, do we suspect that this indicates at deviation in pack size (larger) or just a more powerful discharge rate to support āBeast Modeā acceleration?
I was just using the numbers the poster you were referring to was using. Unfortunately if you want actuals, those arenāt as readily available though we do have some inclinations.
Shortly after launch in 2019, Elon said ā146k Cybertruck orders so far, with 42% choosing dual, 41% tri & 17% single...
70% includes the original "Single" and "Dual" trims as they were both ~300Mi or less. (Dual rated for 300+ and Single rated for 250+).
Note: "Short" is an opinion but I believe they were including ~300 in the discussion as "Short" relative to the originally proposed Tri/"Long" range version.
I think you are misinterpreting what they are trying to convey. Theyāre saying to eschew the dual v tri of 2019 and expect something like Cybertruck (Dual Motor) and Cyberbeast/Cybertruck Performance (Tri-Motor). Trucks with largely the same specs (aligned closer to the dual motor presented in...
Any thoughts as to other (potential) variances between the performance and standard? If itās purely acceleration (as in most other models LR v Performance) then to me itās a no brainer for my needs but if their are feature differences (a la S v S Plaid) such as improved off-road capabilities...
We (most likely) have the interior dimensions and they are in between a full-size and a midsize pickup. You can see how they compare in the thread discussing them.
Good call, I totally spaced on the wheel covers not being present.
Ultimately I think all signs point to what we essentially already know. 120kWh+/- pack and a top-end range at or just north of 300mi. At this point, outside of an official EPA/Tesla leak Iām not sure weāll get anything more...
7.2kWh used with a 6% depletion would yield a 120kWh pack. Reversing this again yields 267mi. If we use 2.5mi/kWh then that should be 300mi even. Switch out the ATs for street tires and the range should definitely be north of the 300 mark, possibly approaching 350.
@cvalue13, am I seeing the Goodyears (off-road) and white trim (Tri-Motor) in this video. Iām pretty confident on the tires but uncertain on the trim color. If so, we already suspect the Tri to have reduced range off the bat and tack on the all-terrain tire penalty, 267mi might not be far off ...
Any confirmation/insight on my reverse math? 71% current charge - 65% destination charge = 6% of usage to go the trip distance of 16mi. Now I l know it can introduce a bit of variance when extrapolating from small numbers but Iām getting 267mi of total range . . . šš¤
If I am reading that right it shows 71% on the dash with a trip remaining of 16mi and an ending charge of 65%. So . . . 267mi of range?
PS: If you look up the video on TikTok the quality is significantly better.
That is a "Pre-Order" agreement. When you actually place the order/make the purchase you will have to sign the Order/Purchase Agreement which according to Tesla's website has the updated terms shared on this post.