172 KWH / 500 miles range based on forbidden video

[Alan]

Over 30000 miles our S averaged 342 w per mile on the original street tires. It was horrible in snow. We switched to all weather tires. after 20000 miles average 353 w per mile. The car is great in snow. I don’t need an all terrain tire but I do hope an all weather tire is an option.

Sponsored

 

[Mini2nut]

A 257 kWH would be a monstrous Hummer EV sized battery pack.

The Hummer uses a 246 kWh battery pack with 212 kWh of usable range. The Hummer EV gets a measly 1.48 miles per kWh.

 

[cvalue13]

I poked the numbers and here is what I get.

75 miles per hour at a rate of 77kw gives 1.027kwh/mile double the anticipated, more like it was towing.

16 miles was estimated to take 6% for a total of 16.432kwh

converting to 100% of the battery gives 257kwh total battery pack. Under normal driving 450-500wh/mile comes out to about 515 miles of range.

you've miss-poked

 

[cvalue13]

Over 30000 miles our S averaged 342 w per mile on the original street tires. It was horrible in snow. We switched to all weather tires. after 20000 miles average 353 w per mile.

does you S weigh 7,000 pounds, and ride 35"x11" tires?

 

[Zabhawkin]

you've miss-poked

Were?

 

[cvalue13]

Were?

unclear, but appears likely you've miss-understood something in this portion (which I don't entirely follow in the first): "75 miles per hour at a rate of 77kw gives 1.027kwh/mile double the anticipated, more like it was towing."

while I'm not going to think too hard on it, first blush it seems you've confused what the truck was charging at in that instant with the entirety of the charge curve, and so made an incorrect 1-for-1 to what the underlying pack is

the results from which i not only know to be incorrect, but are also incorrect on the face of the data available in the UI 0-- if traveling 16 miles is estimated to take 6% of total battery %, it straightforwardly equates to the total pack being roughly 267mi total range

put conversely, if the total range of the pack were 515mi as you conclude, 16 miles would be ~3% of total pack range

 

[anionic1]

I think Electrek just did an arrival in this that seemed very reliable. It looks like the actual range is around 270 miles. This would put the EPA range right around 300 miles which is what Tesla proposed for the dual so it should be no surprise or disappointment. If you look at the size of the floor area of tgd model X 100 kWh pack and compare it to the floor area of the CT you get about 20% more space or about a 120 kWh pack which adds up almost perfectly for that range. The 500 mile CT will have to have a double layer pack and will be just over 200 kWh. With the CTs height and design there should be no issue for them to get a double thick pack so I am sure we will see a 500 mi version. Tesla doesn’t seem to like to prioritize high mileage so I would expect that option to be less favorably priced.

 

[Zabhawkin]

unclear, but appears likely you've miss-understood something in this portion (which I don't entirely follow in the first): "75 miles per hour at a rate of 77kw gives 1.027kwh/mile double the anticipated, more like it was towing."

while I'm not going to think too hard on it, first blush it seems you've confused what the truck was charging at in that instant with the entirety of the charge curve, and so made an incorrect 1-for-1 to what the underlying pack is

the results from which i not only know to be incorrect, but are also incorrect on the face of the data available in the UI 0-- if traveling 16 miles is estimated to take 6% of total battery %, it straightforwardly equates to the total pack being roughly 267mi total range

put conversely, if the total range of the pack were 515mi as you conclude, 16 miles would be ~3% of total pack range

From one of the pictures from another thread it displayed the charge rate at 77kw, and that it was getting 75miles per hour which gives an estimated energy consumption of 1027wh/mile both of those displayed values continually update so is independent of the charge curve. The F-150 lightning and other trucks aside from the hummer consume half of that. From other videos on Youtube while towing they typically had a consumption in the 1000wh/mile range which makes me believe it was doing something other than normal driving.

Since it is using the 1027wh/mile to calculate the miles per hour it was receiving I figured it was also using that figure to calculate the finish charge at the destination. This gave me the pack size in kwh.

The estimated consumption with normal driving is 450-500wh/mile as it is with the Lightning, or 2 miles/kwh which gives me the 500+ mile range. So yes 16 miles under normal driving would be 3%.

 

[HaulingAss]

Or, you can believe in Santa Claus and that Tesla promised a 500 mile range so you are sticking with "Tesla promised 500 miles, and that is what I think they deliver".

I would say it's pretty much a certainty Tesla will deliver a 500+ mile version, the only question is whether it will be one of the first release versions.

I really doubt it will be.

 

[intimidator]

I would say it's pretty much a certainty Tesla will deliver a 500+ mile version, the only question is whether it will be one of the first release versions.

I really doubt it will be.

Two possibly ways to have a 500+ mile version.
A) have a massive, massive battery. Rivian's 400 mile version has a battery size of 149.0 kWh
If you want to get to 500 miles, maybe you have to go up to 175/180 kWh? For comparison, the Model X has a 100 kWh battery.
B) wait for a step change in battery tech. Which maybe 5+ years away?

A massive battery would probably be pretty dang expensive, so the price would have to go up.

 

[cvalue13]

So yes 16 miles under normal driving would be 3%.

let me make sure I understand:

you think the UI is presently assuming the truck will be towing something significant those 16 miles?

 

[Zabhawkin]

let me make sure I understand:

you think the UI is presently assuming the truck will be towing something significant those 16 miles?

I think it thinks it will be continuing to be doing whatever it was doing before it stopped to charge.

 

[cvalue13]

I think it thinks it will be continuing to be doing whatever it was doing before it stopped to charge.

I’ll let folks like @JBee weigh in on the details of your calcs

I’ll just do my part of saying your calcs or the assumptions underlying are off somewhere

 

[Zabhawkin]

I’ll let folks like @JBee weigh in on the details of your calcs

I’ll just do my part of saying your calcs or the assumptions underlying are off somewhere

That is entirely possible.

 

[HaulingAss]

Two possibly ways to have a 500+ mile version.
A) have a massive, massive battery. Rivian's 400 mile version has a battery size of 149.0 kWh
If you want to get to 500 miles, maybe you have to go up to 175/180 kWh? For comparison, the Model X has a 100 kWh battery.
B) wait for a step change in battery tech. Which maybe 5+ years away?

A massive battery would probably be pretty dang expensive, so the price would have to go up.

That depends upon your definition of "massive battery". Even using technology that Tesla has at their disposal today, a 500 mile Cybertruck battery would be much less massive than the Hummer battery. The Hummer is a low volume vehicle because people don't want to pay that much for a truck, if you can even call it a truck with that little baby bed.

The real question is, when can Tesla offer an affordable 500+ mile Cybertruck? I'm guessing within two years. That's the great thing about electric vehicles, the cost to produce EV's are still on a long decline overall while the cost to produce gas vehicles keeps rising. This is why people who think EV's will not quickly hit 80% of sales are not very bright. It's going to take less than 10 years.

Sponsored