350 mile range Quad Motor rumored to be 1st trim launched

[cvalue13]

and trucks are not meant to be daily drivers

you keep talking a lot about what trucks are/aren't for someone who has never owned one

you appear to think modern trucks are like trucks of the 1960s

Sponsored

 

[cvalue13]

ost people think "better to have a truck and not need it, than need a truck and not have it" ..sorry again, but this is more baboon logic.

it was sarcasm, reflecting your otherwise ridiculous aspersions that didn't require a serious response

 

[Baldey]

you keep talking a lot about what trucks are/aren't for someone who has never owned one

you appear to think modern trucks are like trucks of the 1960s

i just think they are big, heavy, inefficient and sluggish, harder to park and see out of. its a lot more practical driving a small car around town, on roads meant for small cars. Again, right tool for every job. I've never owned one, but i have driven plenty..

 

[PilotPete]

i don't need a guest bedroom 360 days of the year

i don't need 0-60 in 2.9 seconds 360 days of the year

etc., etc.

no such thing as ethical consumption

in any event, i'm not critiquing aside from pointing out that the "truck stuff" critiques about a ~1/2 ton truck are not very self-aware... not really directed at you at all, as it's a widespread trope around here

I need a guest bedroom all year. For 5 days a year, I have guests. for 360 days a year, I hide crap in there!

I need 0-60 in 2.9 not just 365 days a year, every time I drive. Get on the freeway, see a slot, drop the hammer for .5 seconds and you are there at matched speed. Had a bad day at work? hit the freeway onramp give it the beans, and poof! instant smile on your face. I need that.

It's harder to be ethical when you're just plain pissed off at the world. When I drive any fun car, I smile more.

 

[Baldey]

it was sarcasm, reflecting your otherwise ridiculous aspersions that didn't require a serious response

? sorry i do not speak sarcasm. I guess I wouldn't expect someone who says they don't like facts, and don't need 0-60 to understand.

 

[CyberGus]

trucks are not meant to be daily drivers

Yes they are. Have you been to Texas?

But an 80k truck is cheaper! And will make me more money

Tools used for commercial purposes will always have higher utilization than for consumer use.

 

[Baldey]

Yes they are. Have you been to Texas?

Tools used for commercial purposes will always have higher utilization than for consumer use.

A lot of people DO use trucks for truck things, just not most. A lot of those people live in Texas. I've been there once, almost got murdered in my M3, while casually interrupting a drug deal. Not looking forward to going back, you people don't think the same way i do .

Normally that is a good thing, but you guys got guns, and like to use your vehicles as weapons. Soooo..

 

[cvalue13]

you people don't think the same way i do

my "you people" antennae had been tingling for a little while now

next time, just start and finish your tirade with "ive never owned and dont understand trucks"

it's faster!

 

[cvalue13]

I need 0-60 in 2.9 not just 365 days a year, every time I drive.

tons of fun to finally have both a truck and be able to do 0-60 in 3.9

no reason an icecream truck like the lightning should be that fast, but i ain't givin' it back

 

[CyberGus]

i just think they are big, heavy, inefficient and sluggish

The Cybertruck will be faster than many 2-seater luxury cars. Probably more efficient too.

harder to park and see out of

You should check out the abysmal visibility of a DeLorean. Very hard to park also, with a terrible turning radius and manual steering rack.

its a lot more practical driving a small car around town, on roads meant for small cars

Practicality depends on the use case. You do you, don't judge me for doing me.

The roads in 'Merica are the biggest in the world. Where the hell are you driving that trucks won't fit lol

 

[Baldey]

my "you people" antennae had been tingling for a little while now

next time, just start and finish your tirade with "ive never owned and dont understand trucks"

it's faster!

Mine's been going off the whole time lol. Were all different people, thats fine. It is just a little sad though when we both refuse to learn from each-other. I've tried to provide good arguments to my points, maybe i just fail to see yours. Communication is a two way street, and maybe i've failed to speak to my audience, or insulted them too much. Meh, it's been fun. The last four pages really hit my post to likes ratio though, so im goin bak to lurkin. Have a good weekend everyone!

Practicality depends on the use case. You do you, don't judge me for doing me.
...
The roads in 'Merica are the biggest in the world. Where the hell are you driving that trucks won't fit lol

I'm not judging, again just stating facts.Trucks have had many decades to power creep to obscene sizes.. Americans like to buy big cars. So they keep making bigger ones, but the roads are still the same. And doesn't mater how big the roads are, a smaller vehicle will always fit better. Not saying it won't fit at all, just better. Less likely to hit a curb, sign, vehicle, or person. Even Elon fucked up a road cone on his first drive.. Saying smaller car is not better for daily driving assuming all else is equal, is just arguing for argument's sake.

 

[FutureBoy]

i don't need 0-60 in 2.9 seconds 360 days of the year

WAT! I need 0-60 at least two dozzen times a day: every time i make a stop or slow down!

Has anyone else been noticing that ICE vehicle ads these days seem to weirdly try to flex on the 0-60 time? I keep hearing ads lately for cheap and under-powered ICE vehicles bragging things like 0-60 in like 6 seconds. After seeing EV times so much faster, it's just funny to hear these ads.

Am I just noticing these kinds of stats now that I've been watching for Tesla details? Have ICE ads always been dick measuring on 0-60 times?

 

[cvalue13]

WAT! I need 0-60 at least two dozzen times a day: every time i make a stop or slow down!

i don't need 0-60 in 2.9 seconds 360 days of the year

It is just a little sad though when we both refuse to learn from each-other.

i'd overlooked you trying to learn anything. - not a single question asked, as I remember it. which is strange since the topic is the utility of trucks, which you admit to having no experience or prior interest in.

but since you [didn't] ask

• modern trucks aren't unsafe
• on balance, you can see out of them as well as any sedan (each have their visibility strengths/weaknesses)
• modern 1/2 ton trucks are better family vehicles than any SUV, and are nearly as spacious/accessible as any minivan
• 1/2 ton trucks are almost by definition meant for weekend warriors and/or businesses that need to fit large people more than large stuff
• for other "truck stuff," 3/4 ton+ trucks exist

I've driven 1/2 ton trucks for 30 years, and for various reasons I've "needed" one as much as anyone "needs" any other vehicle selection.

no car can be eaten, breathed, or drank, and as such double-click far enough and nobody's vehicle decisions can satisfy every imposed definition of "need."

 

[JBee]

There is no reason to tie motor numbers to range and batteries.

It's highly likely that the CT will have the latest version of the CF wrapped motors, probably even the next gen platform setup, especially given that they have had more than enough time to develop these for the CT since the Plaid release 2 years ago now.

Also not every motor Tesla uses the same motor configuration or has the same power output, nor the same torque curve, or the operates in the same band of a efficiency heat map. That means that a motor built for a lighter Model S or M3 means the exact same one can be used throughout the range without modification, at least of the gear ratio.

I've mentioned this a few times already, but if the new next-gen drivetrain motors are "rare-earth material free" this would also imply they are no longer brushless permanent magnet motors, but rather magnetless AC induction motors. The induction motors used in the rear of M3/MY dual motor versions are not used in cruise because you can turn induction motors completely off to save energy. You can't completely turn off permanent magnet motors though.

So because of this, and many other factors I've listed in a dedicated thread somewhere, there is an argument to be made that all CT's will be quad motor, but using smaller higher rpm CF wrapped motors. That way they get all the torque vectoring features and the ability to do so efficiently, and cost effectively, with the nextgen drivetrain assembly costing less than $1000.

The other thing that is a possibility as well, and this has also been discussed a while ago already, is that 2170 can also be used to make structural packs. In fact a 2170 pack would be "more structural" in that the higher cell wall density using the smaller diameter cells would create more webbing in the battery sandwich pack. I'd be a bit surprised if they do use the 2170 simply because they have not done so yet for the MY, but that doesn't mean they can't if they need too.

I'm hoping they reveal that they have the cell production sorted soon.

 

[Baldey]

i'd overlooked you trying to learn anything. - not a single question asked, as I remember it. which is strange since the topic is the utility of trucks, which you admit to having no experience or prior interest in.

I certainly asked more questions than you...

Why do you think this?

Why would they try to make a butload of cells, before perfecting the design?

I think your weight peredictions are spont on, but I am really surprised to see so many people with this view about trim. Is it because this is the trim you want? I admit that is probably why i am bias towards the tri..

Why! Why/how would that happen? Why would they want CT to outpace cell production, when they know cell production is the limiting factor [its going to happen by default], and they already have uses for extra cells?

? sorry i do not speak sarcasm.

Sponsored