40,000 Production this year prediction

firsttruck

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2020
Threads
187
Messages
2,612
Reaction score
4,189
Location
mx
Vehicles
none
Country flag
....
in this vid, TFL test the following ICE F150s, same loop/day, both at ~70mph, with an 8,000lb horse trails

V8: EPA 22mpg HWY, but towing tested at 9.8mpg or 55% range reduction

Eco Boost: EPA 24mpg HWY, but towing tested at 8.7mpg or 64% range reduction

I’d bet a Lightning on that same loop/conditions is spitting distance from the EcoBoost, or could beat it in “slow-and-go” hwy traffic (due to regen, and other towing advantages of BEV not previously introduced)
......
tell the same coal roller that an ICE truck with a 24 gallon tank will tow further than a BEV tank with a 13gal equiv tank and …
Hmm, a way to win bets against some ICE pickup truck owners???

Find some ICE pickup owners that have trucks with V6 EcoBoost engine, only a 24 gallon tank (make sure they don't have extra tanks), supercrew 4-dr cab, 4x4, 6.5ft bed, and live in a hilly/or mountainous area where test road will have large hill/mountain in early part of the course with first a significant uphill and then significant downhill.

Bet the ICE owner that their truck pulling a big trailer ( trailer higher than cab of ICE) can not beat towing range of your 500mi Cybertruck (make sure Cybertruck has all-season tires) with the same trailer ( trailer higher than cab of ICE).

* Before race ensure both will have same speeds, weather, temps, winds, road surface conditions, trailers, traffic , etc
Sponsored

 
Last edited:

uscbucsfan

Banned
Well-known member
Banned
Joined
Mar 31, 2023
Threads
0
Messages
157
Reaction score
222
Location
South Carolina
Vehicles
2021 Tesla Model Y, 2022 Tesla Model S LR
Country flag
thought I’d double-click on that:

Model X Cd = 0.24
Model S Cd = 0.24 (also)

Model X frontal area = 2.59 m2
Model S frontal area = 2.34 m2 (~10% less)

Model X Drag area = CdA = 0.24 * 2.59 m2 = 0.622 m2
Model S Drag area = CdA = 0.24 * 2.34 m2 = 0.562 m2

Model S and Model X have equal Cd, but because Model X has a larger frontal area, air drag is 10.5% higher in Model X

Now imagine that the CT has not only 10% greater frontal area than the Model X (CT’s A = 2.85 m2) but also the increased Cd of 0.30:

CT Drag area = CdA = 0.30 * 2.85 m2 = 0.857 m2

So while the Model X has a 10.5% higher air drag than a Model S, the CT has air drag that at any speed is always 27.5% higher than a Model X

Add on top of that the increased rolling resistance of the CT, and there will be material difference from a Model X
Model S refresh is .208, you are using an older drag. It had the record until the EQS was released with .2
 

TyPope

Well-known member
First Name
Ty
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Threads
21
Messages
1,744
Reaction score
2,893
Location
Chesapeake Beach, MD
Vehicles
'23 MYLR, '23 Mavrick Hybrid, Cyberbeast 113344xxx
Occupation
Current Operations for... an organization
Country flag
This all says ICE is more efficient under load than EV when using no-load as a baseline.


Using your numbers:
--------------------------
Baseline EV: 100% efficient
Baseline ICE: 100% efficient

Loaded EV: 31.4% efficient
Loaded ICE: 60% efficient
Not quite. What it says is the ICE wastes less energy under load by percentage than it did not towing.

I didn't check your math but it makes sense. Look at it this way:

Unloaded, the ICE uses 1 gallon of gas to go 20 miles. That's 1.685 KwH to go 1 mile.
Then, loaded, it will only go 12 miles per 33.7 KwH. That's 2.80 KwH to go 1 mile.

The EV uses 6.6 KwH to go 20 miles unloaded. That's 0.300 KwH to go 1 mile.
Then, loaded, it uses 20.93 KwH. That's 1.046 KwH to go 1 mile.

The EV is still more efficient. It just doesn't carry around as much energy as the ICE does.

The EV is 83% more efficient without towing, but only 73% more efficient while towing.

Neat fact:
A 23-gallon gas tank is the energy equivalent of a fully charged, 775.1 KwH battery pack.

4.45 gallons of gas = 150 KwH.

My poor F-150 could only tow my camper at the most 276 miles but usually, I only could get 207 miles between stops. It varied between 12 and 9 mpg and was just generally miserable to do. I only had the camper when in graduate school and sold it when I came home... After that towing experience.
 

TyPope

Well-known member
First Name
Ty
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Threads
21
Messages
1,744
Reaction score
2,893
Location
Chesapeake Beach, MD
Vehicles
'23 MYLR, '23 Mavrick Hybrid, Cyberbeast 113344xxx
Occupation
Current Operations for... an organization
Country flag
300 Wh/mile? That would be good (Model 3 is 260 and Model X is 330). Does this assumption come with some rationale? Did someone say (I have forgotten all the battery pack discussions - sorry) they thought 300 might be possible for the Cybertruck, maybe given the new batteries or great drag coefficient?
I read that somewhere that it was potentially going to be the most efficient of the Teslas surprisingly. If I'm wrong, I hope they upsize the battery a bit to make it a true 500 mile range. Plus, if I'm wrong, that would skew the results of the math in favor of a longer towing capability because the loss between 300 Watts per mile and towing at 1,046 watts per mile is greater than the difference would be if the CT went from 450 to 1,046 watts per mile at which point, the battery would have to be 225 KwH to go 500 miles and the 7,000# tow range moves to 215 miles.
 

TyPope

Well-known member
First Name
Ty
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Threads
21
Messages
1,744
Reaction score
2,893
Location
Chesapeake Beach, MD
Vehicles
'23 MYLR, '23 Mavrick Hybrid, Cyberbeast 113344xxx
Occupation
Current Operations for... an organization
Country flag
Don't forget the loss of energy due to heat loss in the ICE truck.
I didn't. I used my experience towing instead of calculating the efficiency of the ICE truck. With each gallon of gas having 33.7 KwH of energy, we can easily calculate how much is wasted due to the combined resistances... aero, heat loss, powertrain, etc. The MPG, when used as MPKwH lets us see how much energy the ICE truck uses to move, heat, waste it's way to each mile.

In my truck, it uses 1 gallon to go 20 miles unloaded, so that's 1/20 of 1 gallon, .05 gallons. And then, .05 x 33.7 KwH per gallon = 1,685 KwH of energy to go 1 mile. Holy ineffiency, Batman!
 


uscbucsfan

Banned
Well-known member
Banned
Joined
Mar 31, 2023
Threads
0
Messages
157
Reaction score
222
Location
South Carolina
Vehicles
2021 Tesla Model Y, 2022 Tesla Model S LR
Country flag
I read that somewhere that it was potentially going to be the most efficient of the Teslas surprisingly. If I'm wrong, I hope they upsize the battery a bit to make it a true 500 mile range. Plus, if I'm wrong, that would skew the results of the math in favor of a longer towing capability because the loss between 300 Watts per mile and towing at 1,046 watts per mile is greater than the difference would be if the CT went from 450 to 1,046 watts per mile at which point, the battery would have to be 225 KwH to go 500 miles and the 7,000# tow range moves to 215 miles.
0 chance it's the most efficient at highway speeds. Math can show you that.


It will take a bigger range loss going fast than the X/Y, which take a much larger range hit than the 3/S.
 

Qball

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
245
Reaction score
415
Location
CA
Vehicles
Model 3
Country flag
I certainly hope they can ramp up to 40k in first 12 calendar year, let's hope the reduced complexity will mean ramp up will be quicker. The MY ramp has been interesting to watch and with 4860 ramp making good progress there is a glimmer of hope I can get mine within next 12 months. Obviously I can't hold my breath that long.
 

TyPope

Well-known member
First Name
Ty
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Threads
21
Messages
1,744
Reaction score
2,893
Location
Chesapeake Beach, MD
Vehicles
'23 MYLR, '23 Mavrick Hybrid, Cyberbeast 113344xxx
Occupation
Current Operations for... an organization
Country flag
go find an example of this that controls for the variables of importance to range

you take an ICE F150 towing under exact same conditions as a Lightning, and the % range reduction I’d bet to be within single-digit % points

happy to be proved wrong

but having lived in the Lightning forum for over a year, I’ve never seen a single instance of this - if controlling for the relevant variables

The only exception to this rule has nothing to do with the nature of towing- it’s the separate matter of any BEV taking a range hit due to ambient temperatures on the battery

so if someone wants to say “the thing about BEVs vs ICE is, the fuel tank shrinks in materially cold weather” - I agree 100%

and if someone wants to say, “the thing about towing with a BEV truck is, they have such small fuel tanks” - I agree 100%

but what is BS FUD is anyone saying, in effect, “the thing with BEV trucks is that due to having a battery instead of gasoline, BEV magically have a more drastic % reduction in range as an ICE truck towing under identical conditions”
It might not be that it's more drastic of a drop so much that it's a much more obvious drop.

I go from 460 miles a tank to as low as 207 in my F-150 (And that sucks)
In the CT, I'll go from 500 miles a "tank" to 231 miles.

Wow, I didn't realize until right now that my personal example and the physics example for the Cybertruck show almost the same drop in mileage when towing. Seriously, that's neat.

ICE = drop of 55.0%
CT= drop of 53.8%

Okay, revelation to little old me... Other than it taking a lot longer to "refuel" every 3 hours and 10 minutes, the CT will be right on par with my F-150 2.7L EcoBoost.(Which I bought to carry gear to school and move the camper maybe 100 yards from a storage space to camper space on base... and then the camper didn't sell before I graduated so I had to bring it back to Nebraska from Alabama and it was NOT happy about it...) Now, I'm just hanging out with my truck waiting on the Cybertruck. LOL.
 

uscbucsfan

Banned
Well-known member
Banned
Joined
Mar 31, 2023
Threads
0
Messages
157
Reaction score
222
Location
South Carolina
Vehicles
2021 Tesla Model Y, 2022 Tesla Model S LR
Country flag
I certainly hope they can ramp up to 40k in first 12 calendar year, let's hope the reduced complexity will mean ramp up will be quicker. The MY ramp has been interesting to watch and with 4860 ramp making good progress there is a glimmer of hope I can get mine within next 12 months. Obviously I can't hold my breath that long.
If you believe Elon, the ramp will be slower maybe 100 times here.
 
Last edited:

cvalue13

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2022
Threads
74
Messages
7,147
Reaction score
13,759
Location
Austin, TX
Vehicles
F150L
Occupation
Fun-employed
Country flag
It might not be that it's more drastic of a drop so much that it's a much more obvious drop.
absolutely.

this is precisely why a “500 mile” CT would be revolutionary in the truck segment: despite the drag penalty for size, it would place the *theoretical* EPA range and the *real world* range right on par many ICE truck configurations on the market

The remaining delta compared to ICE would be that there are fewer (non-home) refueling stations for CT than ICE, and that creates a friction for some buyers (right or wrong).

personally, given my driving needs, I happily trade my daily refueling at home and having not been to a gas station for 10 months for the very occasional “cost” of needing to think about non-home charging on long distance trips

and conversely, it demonstrates the true Achilles heel of the Lightning, which in effect has 60% of the fuel tank and even less (non-home) chargers compared to a 500mi CT

Ford (and others) needs bigger batteries (and/or less drag) and more refueling stations, to be viable for all but the most patient of owners that regularly drive long distances (or tow heavy).

If the CT instead has only 350mi range (esp given Tesla’s notorious range optimism), it’s leg up (in these range topics) will reduce to charging infrastructure

back to Nebraska
I miss the sandhills with all my heart:love:
 
Last edited:


SSonnentag

Well-known member
First Name
Shawn
Joined
Feb 24, 2020
Threads
6
Messages
407
Reaction score
886
Location
Arizona
Vehicles
2018 MX and 2023 MYP
Occupation
IT Specialist
Country flag
the conclusion is that a truck that starts with 480mi of unladen range can tow further than a truck that starts with 320mi of unladen range. Both trucks experience more or less 65% reduction in range towing

that difference of 69% reduction (lightning) vs 63% (GMC) is within expected differences of even two identical aero trucks with different ICE motors: see above compare of ICE F150 V8 vs EcoBoost, 55% vs 68% towing range reduction

I don’t see anything unique or magical about the Lightning % range reduction vs ICE, other than the comparatively small fuel tank
Good info, thanks! :D
 

cvalue13

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2022
Threads
74
Messages
7,147
Reaction score
13,759
Location
Austin, TX
Vehicles
F150L
Occupation
Fun-employed
Country flag
Today, top of line Platinum is $98K and with every option tops out at $100K

In no universe was that truck ever promised at $69K

Original, early ‘22, pricing had ER XLTs and ST Lariats around $69K - but that was several MSRP raises ago

Anyone who today is saying a Lightning is $115K is, at best, being taken for a ride
 

Sirfun

Well-known member
First Name
Joe
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Threads
55
Messages
2,396
Reaction score
4,889
Location
Oxnard, California
Vehicles
Toyota Avalon, Chrysler Pacifica PHEV, Ford E-250
Occupation
Retired Sheet Metal Worker
Country flag
I don't mean to harass you guys, but the 500 miles will be mixed driving, not highway.

-Crissa
That was part of what was really impressive to me about the Semi video showing 500 miles of range fully loaded. They were basically all Freeway miles, which is way harder in EVs. Of course the Semi was driving around 55mph.
Sponsored

 
 




Top