Any 500mi range updates?

[slomo]

I am not talking about EPA range and am not sure I care what they say. What I ‘am’ saying is that Tesla quoted a 500 mile range for the Semi and then showed that it could get more than 500 miles, pulling a full load, and going up an extreme incline part of the way. So why not dream of them doing the same with the CT?

Tesla ran the semi test in California due to the low 55 mph Class 8 speed limit. The Semi won't do 500 at normal national interstate speeds. Also, Tesla's in general have less highway range than other brands with a similar rating due to the EPA being calculated as a blend of city and highway.

In simplest terms the Mach E has to use a bigger battery than a Model Y to get a 300 mile EPA rating. But energy use between the two cars is about the same at 70mph. So the Mach E has better real range at 70 mph due to a larger battery.

Sponsored

 

[datechboss101]

Who needs a long range battery when a rapid charge battery is a better solution? It would be smaller and lighter.

Me. Whole reason I reserved the Cybertruck. Technically the CT isn't necessary for me, but my MDX can sure as hell push a range of 640 miles at max. So why settle for less range when gasoline can push more range out of a single fill up. Hope you get the point.

 

[Rutrow]

?Road-trip are not very popular on a small island like Hawaii. Heck, driving just five miles in Hawaii seems like a enternity. You people are blessed with the massive amount of land in the continental USA.

I've been wanting to take a Tesla (or any EV) up Mauna Kea to see how much regen I'd get coming back down. My wife and I drove up in a rented Ford Focus (don't tell Avis ?). I reset the trip computer at the top, just intending to check the mileage back to the beach. The computer told me at the bottom that I had averaged 999 mpg during the descent! ? I'll bet it was actually greater but the readout only had three digits.

I wouldn't take my personal Model 3 up that road (teeth chatteringly rough) but I would do it in a CyberTruck

 

[Knucklehead]

If the CT gets 2 mi/kWh, it will need a 250 kWh battery to go 500 miles. My Mach-e GT gets about 2.4 mi/kWh at 79 mph on the highway, and I cannot imagine the CT doing better than that. In fact, 2 mi/kWh at 79 mph is also not likely.

To me, highway range is most important. I really want to know what the CT will do at highway speeds. Around town I am charging at home and range is irrelevant.

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

I see. I didn’t realize that you know everything. My apologies. It just seemed to me that Tesla, of all companies, might take the notion of a work truck more seriously. I do not see why they couldn’t employ the same strategy with motors to achieve the same range efficiency, but I defer to your expertise.

 

[Ogre]

I see. I didn’t realize that you know everything. My apologies. It just seemed to me that Tesla, of all companies, might take the notion of a work truck more seriously. I do not see why they couldn’t employ the same strategy with motors to achieve the same range efficiency, but I defer to your expertise.

Someone in your cheerios this morning?

Range numbers are determined via EPA testing criteria and manufacturers are going to supply numbers based on those guidelines. Tesla can’t post range for your personal situation and your specific trailer.

 

[Crissa]

Me too.
My trip to the mountains is only 85 miles, but straight up a hill with no charging infrastructure, and im doubtful it will ever have fast charging enroute..
500 miles is minimum for towing.
My Rivian barely makes it with 5% battery when I arrive under ideal conditions and taking "Slow".
Below is my best guess for the Cybertruck

I see lots of places. Heck, there's a Destination charger near your cabin.

Tesla ran the semi test in California due to the low 55 mph Class 8 speed limit. The Semi won't do 500 at normal national interstate speeds.

55 is normal freeway speed along the west coast and most secondary highways.

It's not our fault you accept higher road deaths on your long-haul links (which are a minority of truck miles).

Also, Tesla's in general have less highway range than other brands with a similar rating due to the EPA being calculated as a blend of city and highway.

...and this is flat out incorrect.

-Crissa

 

[Ogre]

If the CT gets 2 mi/kWh, it will need a 250 kWh battery to go 500 miles. My Mach-e GT gets about 2.4 mi/kWh at 79 mph on the highway, and I cannot imagine the CT doing better than that. In fact, 2 mi/kWh at 79 mph is also not likely.

To me, highway range is most important. I really want to know what the CT will do at highway speeds. Around town I am charging at home and range is irrelevant.

You are conflating a few things. Your Mach E GT might get 2.4 miles/ kWh actual, but it is rated at 2.85 miles/ kWh. It’s also not a particularly efficient EV (though not bad for Ford’s “gen 1”). Tesla’s Model X has a rated range of 3.33 miles/ kWh.

I think the Cybertruck will be exceptionally efficient. Maybe 2.5 miles / kWh (rated). Tesla is good at making efficient vehicles and they are going to push the limits so they don’t have to ship huge packs.

 

[WHIZZARD OF OZ]

Both are important, but having lost a fair amount of range for our Model Y on last month's winter drive to Denver and back, I would not want to lose any range on the CT, especially if towing something. Also, most will recall from the unveiling that the range figures all had '+' sign by them, meaning that, for the tri-motor trim, the range would be 'at least' 500 miles.

The + sign has since been removed
I remain positive +

 

[WHIZZARD OF OZ]

Both are important, but having lost a fair amount of range for our Model Y on last month's winter drive to Denver and back, I would not want to lose any range on the CT, especially if towing something. Also, most will recall from the unveiling that the range figures all had '+' sign by them, meaning that, for the tri-motor trim, the range would be 'at least' 500 miles.

The + sign has since been removed
I remain positive +

 

[WHIZZARD OF OZ]

You are conflating a few things. Your Mach E GT might get 2.4 miles/ kWh actual, but it is rated at 2.85 miles/ kWh. It’s also not a particularly efficient EV (though not bad for Ford’s “gen 1”). Tesla’s Model X has a rated range of 3.33 miles/ kWh.

I think the Cybertruck will be exceptionally efficient. Maybe 2.5 miles / kWh (rated). Tesla is good at making efficient vehicles and they are going to push the limits so they don’t have to ship huge packs.

You're right, with keeping pack size 'small' as practical
I have consumption at 3.1 miles per kWh with the 175 kWh pack, with a usable ~163.3 kWh gets you to a range of ~507miles

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

The + sign has since been removed
I remain positive +

When 'I' reserved it said '+' and Tesla historically under promises and over delivers. I will still be expecting at least 500 miles for my CT tri-motor.

 

[Knucklehead]

You are conflating a few things. Your Mach E GT might get 2.4 miles/ kWh actual, but it is rated at 2.85 miles/ kWh. It’s also not a particularly efficient EV (though not bad for Ford’s “gen 1”). Tesla’s Model X has a rated range of 3.33 miles/ kWh.

I think the Cybertruck will be exceptionally efficient. Maybe 2.5 miles / kWh (rated). Tesla is good at making efficient vehicles and they are going to push the limits so they don’t have to ship huge packs.

If you are right and I am wrong, I will come back here and admit it. I just have a hard time believing that something as large as the CT can be more efficient at highway speeds than my MME. I agree, my car is not as efficient as many other BEVs, especially Tesla models. But the CT is huge, and I doubt it will be more aerodynamic than the MME.

We are both guessing, and I hope your guess is correct. Because a 500 mile highway range truck would be more than a breakthrough. It would be amazing.

BTW - EPA range is not what I am referring to. I am referring to highway range at the speed I drive, which is around 80 mph. I am sure "up to" 500 mile estimate is not highway range, but EPA range. Big difference.

Sponsored