📡 EXCLUSIVE: Cybertruck specs update including dimensions, seating, displays, tires / wheels, accessories & more! [from video aired 3/10/23]

[cvalue13]

If there were a choice between a tri motor with 1,500 HP and a quad motor with 1,000 HP, I think a fair number of people would take the quad motor truck because it delivers that HP 0.5% better under certain circumstances.

I don’t give a shit about that extra performance, just want to get people so they are on the same page.

Sponsored

 

[JBee]

The Master Plan3 preso was talking about next-gen motors.
I interpreted it as they were lowering the cost to manufacture, which does not translate into what they sell it for. I have a friend that sells something he patented for $69 plus shipping, and his cost to manufacture is $8/unit. It doesn't mean that he can sell it for $8.

As far as the ad hominem, I don't really measure internet dicks but I am an engineer and have a friend who is a powertrain engineer for Tesla, here in Austin.

Dude chill a bit. This is our first interaction.

Let me ask you a engineering question then.

1. At what speed is it possible for the CT to put down 1500HP of performance through the traction of those tyres it has?

2. Secondly how long can those motors produce 1500HP for? Seconds, minutes of hours?

3. Third, are all electric motors on other Teslas the same performance and same design? How much HP do they produce and how efficient are they at what RPM?

4. If driveline efficiency is already above 90% (it's up to 94% already on Teslas apparently) and technically it can't exceed 97-98%, how much efficiency gain is justified pursuing if the cost of 4680 cells is projected to be $80kWh when in full production? Wouldn't it be easier to add a couple of kWH of batteries for the 1-2% driveline efficiency gain instead, to have the same range, and pay for it by installing much smaller, lighter and cheaper and streamlined QM setup that improves overall vehicle traction, dynamics and safety, especially for high loads, offroad and towing?

5. Is Tesla company's mission sustainability or profit? They design accordingly, best value performance for least permanent environmental impact. Longevity, reuse and recycling is key. For example: a million mile battery will last and drive for longer, than you will likely live to drive it. That's 71 years of driving the USA average of 14,000 miles a year.

The reasoning that "1500HP in a TM setup is enough" doesn't factor in what type of motor they use (PM, induction etc), nor the physical size of each, nor actual performance through the vehicle velocity, range or traction profiles, let alone reconcile with Teslas, or EMs mantra to innovate up to the limit of what physics allows. Like Cold thrusters on Roadster for sub second acceleration, because it doesn't have enough traction, even if it had 42 motors, to actually put the power it has down to the ground with tyres alone.

 

[JBee]

It’s not about horsepower. I think the only one talking about horsepower is you. It’s about the ability to deliver specific amounts of power to a specific patch of ground.

As I said above, I don’t think any of us will be able to tell the difference between quad motor and tri motor. But if we’re going to bang about an idea, it’s always best we’re all talking about the same thing.

If there were a choice between a tri motor with 1,500 HP and a quad motor with 1,000 HP, I think a fair number of people would take the quad motor truck because it delivers that HP 0.5% better under certain circumstances.

I don’t give a shit about that extra performance, just want to get people so they are on the same page.

Just one point here. It's not about customer satisfaction as such, or if you like it, or if you notice better driving dynamics. In fact the opposite will be true, in that even over the limit, the vehicle will remain more controllable and safe, probably without you noticing at all. For example: When was the last time you used ABS on your car? Was it comfortable, did you enjoy it? What about those airbags? I'm sure you are grateful if they are there, and you'd pay a premium to have them though right? ?

The same goes for torque vectoring, which is only possible with QM, because driving with it will stop you from getting in trouble in the first place.

Just one example: you are driving down a road where your right wheel track is dry and has good traction, whilst the left is driving on compacted snow and ice with little traction (or wet or gravel etc). You drive around a corner carrying a little to much speed. A normal DM with open differentials and traction control would react like this: left side wheel breaks spins from too much power being applied and not enough traction, motor derates, traction control activates by slowing down spinning wheel. In the time the traction control has responded, and corrected the unwanted behaviour, the right rear wheel with traction has also lost grip, through the delayed interaction of motor derate and momentum carried through the differential from the left spinning wheel (they are both mechanically coupled together). This makes the car overseer you lose control and crash.

With torque vectoring none of this would happen, (unless you exceed the traction of all four tyres at the same time), because each motor will only apply as much torque to each wheel as it can measure how much traction is available per wheel. That means the slippery left side doesn't have as much torque to begin with when entering the corner, in comparison to the above. It can do this a quite a few times per second (at least 10's of Hz), and can adapt to every patch of traction the road offers and it is driving over, all in relation with what traction is available at each other wheel.

Further the RPM "differential", which can be controlled independently of the torque in a motor per wheel QM setup, is fixed according to the steering angle input, meaning each wheel is being driven at the right RPM in comparison to every other wheel, if going straight or around a corner. Wheel rpm is locked in to the velocity at every corner, so when it turns in a corner, it turns using the RPM differential between each wheel (like a tank), and every nuance of traction loss or gain because of the surface condition can be compensated for individually on the fly. With 4WS having the orientation of the tyre in the correct angle to yaw around a more middle, forward center axis, is a added bonus that will result in more traction and yaw control.

It is commonly believed that a vehicle yaws about its axis by way of steering angle alone, whereas its actually possible for ESP to use the brakes to steer the opposite direction. This is because the traction and rpm of the trye contact patch yaw forces trump the steering angle induced yaw forces. Simply tank turn yaws better than steering angle yaw.

This means that with QM torque vectoring your vehicle will steer and remain controllable as if you were a superhuman driver, not just a professional one, and many accidents from loss of control of the vehicle will be avoided entirely, saving the use of those pesky airbags for another rainy day. ?

 

[BayouCityBob]

Good post. Sorta true. I like in the big city in truck country (Houston). Trucks dominate. The guy across the street drives a Raptor. Obvious poser. IT guy. Not a real truck guy. Neighbor two doors down drives a ten year old F150. Old guy, Trump signs in his front yard, not a real truck guy either but thinks he is. Loves the CyberTruck.

Most people who drive trucks are not real truck guys in the sense that they need a truck for work. But most of these guys will only drive a truck that is driven by real truck guys. Why are both Ford and GM literally giving away their EV trucks to fleets at $35k? Because the fleet truck gives them street cred. The fleet business makes little money, but it pumps the sales volumes and gives credibility.

And just to be clear, the number of trucks in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, and Austin, dwarf the rest of Texas. They are urban commuter vehicles. But it is the rural and fleet vehicles that set the tone for what the urban cowboys want to drive.

 

[SparkChaser]

I will be using a heads up display, Phone based or other. I am very disappointed with a single screen for all info. We have a min Cooper and the huge speedometer in the center is just silly. I use the tach behind the wheel.

Maybe this???

AUXOAUDIOTEK Tesla Head Up Display for Model Y/3 Tesla Carplay Android Auto HUD with Power Speed Split Screen Display ,10.26 inch IPS Touch Screen | Google Shopping

 

[GlockandRoll]

Dude chill a bit. This is our first interaction.

Let me ask you a engineering question then.

1. At what speed is it possible for the CT to put down 1500HP of performance through the traction of those tyres it has?

2. Secondly how long can those motors produce 1500HP for? Seconds, minutes of hours?

3. Third, are all electric motors on other Teslas the same performance and same design? How much HP do they produce and how efficient are they at what RPM?

4. If driveline efficiency is already above 90% (it's up to 94% already on Teslas apparently) and technically it can't exceed 97-98%, how much efficiency gain is justified pursuing if the cost of 4680 cells is projected to be $80kWh when in full production? Wouldn't it be easier to add a couple of kWH of batteries for the 1-2% driveline efficiency gain instead, to have the same range, and pay for it by installing much smaller, lighter and cheaper and streamlined QM setup that improves overall vehicle traction, dynamics and safety, especially for high loads, offroad and towing?

5. Is Tesla company's mission sustainability or profit? They design accordingly, best value performance for least permanent environmental impact. Longevity, reuse and recycling is key. For example: a million mile battery will last and drive for longer, than you will likely live to drive it. That's 71 years of driving the USA average of 14,000 miles a year.

The reasoning that "1500HP in a TM setup is enough" doesn't factor in what type of motor they use (PM, induction etc), nor the physical size of each, nor actual performance through the vehicle velocity, range or traction profiles, let alone reconcile with Teslas, or EMs mantra to innovate up to the limit of what physics allows. Like Cold thrusters on Roadster for sub second acceleration, because it doesn't have enough traction, even if it had 42 motors, to actually put the power it has down to the ground with tyres alone.

Dude, you chill a bit, this will be our last.

 

[GlockandRoll]

It’s not about horsepower. I think the only one talking about horsepower is you. It’s about the ability to deliver specific amounts of power to a specific patch of ground.

As I said above, I don’t think any of us will be able to tell the difference between quad motor and tri motor. But if we’re going to bang about an idea, it’s always best we’re all talking about the same thing.

If there were a choice between a tri motor with 1,500 HP and a quad motor with 1,000 HP, I think a fair number of people would take the quad motor truck because it delivers that HP 0.5% better under certain circumstances.

I don’t give a shit about that extra performance, just want to get people so they are on the same page.

Do you work for CNN?
It doesn't appear you captured my entire quote.

 

[JBee]

Dude, you chill a bit, this will be our last.

Lol. Obviously you have nothing much of substance to add to a conversation, so its your loss not mine mate! Enjoy your hyperbolic trajectory to nowhere. ?

 

[flowerlandfilms]

Good post. Sorta true. I like in the big city in truck country (Houston). Trucks dominate. The guy across the street drives a Raptor. Obvious poser. IT guy. Not a real truck guy. Neighbor two doors down drives a ten year old F150. Old guy, Trump signs in his front yard, not a real truck guy either but thinks he is. Loves the CyberTruck.

Most people who drive trucks are not real truck guys in the sense that they need a truck for work. But most of these guys will only drive a truck that is driven by real truck guys. Why are both Ford and GM literally giving away their EV trucks to fleets at $35k? Because the fleet truck gives them street cred. The fleet business makes little money, but it pumps the sales volumes and gives credibility.

And just to be clear, the number of trucks in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, and Austin, dwarf the rest of Texas. They are urban commuter vehicles. But it is the rural and fleet vehicles that set the tone for what the urban cowboys want to drive.

 

[CyberBC]

They have more lemon lawsuits pending than any other manufacturer, a trait inherited from their shitty ford parent. Google it.

As far as the quad motor, everyone is hung up on it because of an Elon tweet. He also tweeted they should put cocaine back in coca cola. Will they put a quad motor in? Maybe, but I'll never understand why you guys are so hung up on quad motors. It's not needed. The tri-motor is for efficiency, to get the 500-mile range, and it STILL makes 1500hp, achieving sub 3 sec 0-60.

A fourth motor adds complexity, cost, and size, and hurts range.
It doesn't make any sense.

This looks like fun. I'll side with Glock. I took a Lightning out for a test drive on slightly snowy but also sandy streets. Having massively better weight distribution plus the full time awd is a mind-blowing improvement on ICE pick-ups. I suggest everyone go for a test drive. I think dual motor will be all anyone needs unless you want to climb Mount Rushmore.

 

[Bill W.]

Is it possible that the only reason Elon talked about a quad-motor was because the Rivian had recently come out? Remember that when the R1T first debuted, it was supposed to have tank-turn capability. They must have problems with it, since they never enabled it for the public.

 

[GlockandRoll]

Is it possible that the only reason Elon talked about a quad-motor was because the Rivian had recently come out? Remember that when the R1T first debuted, it was supposed to have tank-turn capability. They must have problems with it, since they never enabled it for the public.

That's what I suspect.

 

[RVAC]

Is it possible that the only reason Elon talked about a quad-motor was because the Rivian had recently come out? Remember that when the R1T first debuted, it was supposed to have tank-turn capability. They must have problems with it, since they never enabled it for the public.

Probably, 4WS/crab walk was due to the Hummer and the Plaid+ Model S due to Lucid. I do agree tri-motor is a lot more likely than quad motor.

 

[SolarWizard]

It’s not about horsepower. I think the only one talking about horsepower is you. It’s about the ability to deliver specific amounts of power to a specific patch of ground.

As I said above, I don’t think any of us will be able to tell the difference between quad motor and tri motor. But if we’re going to bang about an idea, it’s always best we’re all talking about the same thing.

If there were a choice between a tri motor with 1,500 HP and a quad motor with 1,000 HP, I think a fair number of people would take the quad motor truck because it delivers that HP 0.5% better under certain circumstances.

I don’t give a shit about that extra performance, just want to get people so they are on the same page.

100% me.

Sponsored