Cybertruck range while towing is HORRIBLE!

[themuleman]

How much did the Ramps eat into my efficiency? 10% maybe?

and @chris90702L said he drove “into the mountains” I was doing mainly freeway driving in flat Houston!

Sounds like I have a defective battery! ??

I don't know. Your numbers do sound low, even for an EV towing. Surprising to me at least.

Sponsored

 

[cyber_moonlight]

Yeah, 14k gross and includes winch with battery. A bit overkill for garage doors other than the length, but what can you do?

I wouldn’t call 14x12’ commercial roll up doors exactly a garage door. ?

 

[themuleman]

I think it is less of a fan boy thing with many of the people’s replies. More of a this is just how it is for now. We simply are not at a tech state that allows us to match ICE ability to tow and have the same level of low stress about range. I think you have been super fair and honest with your thoughts and that most people would agree with you that it is a little nerve racking to tow with any EV. We have dreams of towing a small Airstream some day but I plan to rent a couple first to see if it is doable to some of our favorite camping locations.

Personally I’m hoping for 10 years from now that EV tech/battery tech, pull through chargers, and RVs with EV tech (eStream) will make it all more realistic for us explore and camp.

You think 10 years will do it? I'm hoping 5.

 

[Darthamerica]

Inherently less efficient vehicles aren't impacted as much by towing as more efficient ones.

?? this!!! ICE vehicles start at 20-30% efficiency, but each gallon of gas is like having a 30-40kWh battery. Now consider they are filled up with 25-35 gallons! That’s showing that fossil fuels are many times more energy dense than any commercially available battery technology.

By contrast an EV battery is like 3 to 5 gallons of fuel but it’s 80-90% + efficient! Now attach a trailer to the EV and your efficiency gets reduced to 50% or less due to weight and drag. That’s all this is.

No matter what any EV manufacturer says about range, just Google the energy density of their batteries. If you see a number in the low hundreds of Wh/kg, it will not tow very far or as far as a comparable ICE vehicle.

 

[BlueLightning]

If you want to go 0-60 in 3 seconds and look good doing it, get an EV truck.

If you want to tow, and get the job done, get a 6.5L truck!

 

[mongo]

I wouldn’t call 14x12’ commercial roll up doors exactly a garage door. ?

True, plus you called out the load as 1,500 pounds and I mistook the trailer size as the door size.

That's an interesting truss spacing, do the doors go on the wall we can't see?

 

[cyber_moonlight]

True, plus you called out the load as 1,500 pounds and I mistook the trailer size as the door size.

That's an interesting truss spacing, do the doors go on the wall we can't see?

Yeah, I've built a 80x40 building where the first half will be a guest house and the other half is a workshop where you see the 3 x 14'x12' doors. The building is about 27' at it's highest peak.

The odd spacing for the first few trusses is to accommodate for the roll up doors.

 

[oisiaa]

This is what I am starting to learn...I went from a 2500 diesel to the Cybertruck. I pull a pop-up camper and a wakeboat locally. I anticipated the camper having more range than the boat since it is approximately 2k pounds lighter. The opposite was true...with the boat covered my numbers were better (unfortunately I didn't save any info from what I have pulled so far).

I could see an aftermarket for fairings that improve airflow on whatever you are pulling. In some instances that could have a bigger positive effect that more battery density.

When dealing with aerodynamic drag (draggy trailers) the KEY is to SLOW DOWN. Dropping from 65 to 55mph has a massive benefit.

 

[oisiaa]

You need the right tool for the job. For someone who tows >200 miles more than a few times per year, an ICE truck is probably the best bet and will continue to be for many years.

For 99% of us though, an EV truck is far superior. I'll likely never tow except for when I move house in about 3 years and for that, I'm prepared for a cross country towing adventure....sounds FUN to me as a one-off experience.

 

[AlmostHuman]

You think 10 years will do it? I'm hoping 5.

I don’t want to be disappointed when it doesn’t happen in 5 lol

 

[OMFG]

Mostly freeway driving. I’m towing a 20 foot trailer with about 1500lbs of load on it. I’m in Texas so it’s as flat as you can get over here..

Texas here as well. I got almost the exact same results towing my JD tractor (8k lbs) on a tandem axle Road King (2k lbs) and with about 1k in payload of tools, coolers, etc. My first attempt at the 300 round trip turned into real shit show (my misguided assumptions of non-telsa chargers) but the 2nd, 3rd and beyond trips went perfectly fine since I knew what to expect with common results each time with same load. I get about 150-160miles range from starting at 100%. Point of my reply is that it is interesting you only had about 1500lbs and I had about 10k lbs and we are both driving in flat texas (mine is mostly I-45 between Houston/Waco but some hills up around Centerville) yet we both are seeing about same result. I did turn my trailer gain all the way down to force more regen when taking foot off pedal, but not really sure that did much of anything to be honest. Any time I tow now I simply just cut my projected range in 1/2 and don't even look at that stupid energy page lol. Coming from a Raptor and Superduty, I don't give crap about efficiency since I am used to 10mpg. I wouldn't use it as a daily tow rig if that is what I needed, but only doing the trip 2-3 times a month, I am happy to stop for a quick beer & beaver nuggets at Buc-ee's on the way while I add some more evil pixies into her batteries from the 30-40 super chargers they have out back.

 

[mongo]

Point of my reply is that it is interesting you only had about 1500lbs and I had about 10k lbs and we are both driving in flat texas (mine is mostly I-45 between Houston/Waco but some hills up around Centerville) yet we both are seeing about same result.

They had ~4,500 pounds (1.5k cargo, 3k trailer).
Aero drag is the bigger issue vs rolling resistance at highway speeds and your tractor is apparently more aerodynamic than the ramps (speed flaps).

Windspeed/ direction can have a huge impact also.

 

[CyberTW]

If you want to go 0-60 in 3 seconds and look good doing it, get an EV truck.

If you want to tow, and get the job done, get a 6.5L truck!

And both are fine! Nothing wrong with either! I need a truck, but not for towing (short of little in town things). CT is perfect for me

 

[fgaryamy]

I think you've hit on something here. The drastic inefficiency of pulling a trailer is not its weight (though, of course, weight does have it's negative effect. The drag of this open trailer with many different paths for airflow, hence turbulance is your number one enemy. Aerodynamics, in other words.We need an engineer who designs airplanes to help us. Also, look at the 18 wheeler rigs on the road, all with aerodynamic shrouds on the cabs, trying to overcome this with diesel rigs! Someone should test with an airstream, first empty, then loading it to the maximum weight spec. First compare your results to a light open trailer with some lightweight objects of different size, then compare light airstream load to heavy.

 

[firsttruck]

How much did the Ramps eat into my efficiency? 10% maybe?
....

Those ramps in vertical position make a huge difference. Way more than 10% and every 1 mph speed increase significantly increases the drag effect.

Those ramps in vertical position are acting like large drag creation devices, aircraft speed brakes which significantly increase drag.

Even some aircraft dive bombers/fighters had deploy-able perforated speed brakes they called dive brakes.

--------------------------------------------

How it Works: Speed brakes
How to stop on a dime, or at least a dollar
October 1, 2016
By Alton K. Marsh
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...t-training-magazine/how-it-works-speed-brakes


Precise Flight - SpeedBrakes for the Aviation Industry - Double parasitic drag on the aircraft.
for Cessna 210
for Piper PA24, PA28, PA30, PA32, PA39 , PA46
for Beech 33 / 35 /36
for Mooney
for Lancair Legacy
https://preciseflight.com/general-aviation/speedbrakes/

--------------------------------------------

Speed holes on airplane control surfaces? What are these things for?
2017 Dec 18
By Robbie
https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/f...lane-control-surfaces-what-are-/135381/page1/

--------------------------------------------

QB-36
1940–1944 Douglas SBD Dauntless
Orders were placed by the US Marine Corps and US Navy for the SBD Dauntless in April of 1939 to satisfy the need for a new dive bomber. ....
This Dauntless is an SBD-5 that is owned and operated by the Planes of Fame museum in Chino (CA USA).
https://www.vg-photo.com/airshow/qb36/sbd.html


---------------


Flightdeck Friday: Smoke and the Battle of Midway
By SteelJaw | September 26, 2009
https://blog.usni.org/posts/2023/12/21/annoucement

.....
Even pilots of other services have a minimal understanding of dive bombing. All military pilots have put aircraft in vertical dives, and many have dropped bombs from a diving plane, but our Navy’s dive bombing was different from the diving attacks of conventional aircraft.

The unique features engineered into the 1940–1944 Douglas Aircraft Company (now Boeing) Dauntless SBD enabled the pilot to fly a controlled vertical flight from 10,000 feet or more to sea level, tracking a moving target ship as small as 40 feet wide which was taking evasive action. Of these features most important were the split wing trailing edge perforated dive flaps or “brakes” to retard diving speed and allow more abrupt pullouts. Wings were strengthened to withstand the high G forces at pull out. A yoke was designed to throw the bomb clear of the aircraft’s propeller when the bomb was dropped in a vertical dive.

Ideally the dive bombing aircraft, in a vertical 90 degree attitude, plunged at a 70 degree flight path because of the remaining lift on the wings. The target, at 24 knots would travel 1,214 feet while a plane dived from a two mile altitude. Wind was also a factor. The aircraft was literally flown down the dive path at constant speed, using ailerons and elevators to continually adjust the point of impact until bomb release and pull out. Neither the Stuka nor the Val was designed for bombing with extremely high dive paths.(5) Instead of trailing edge split wing dive flaps their device was a flap that dropped vertically from the center of the wing spar. This also affected lift and the trim of the aircraft. As a result they were not as accurate as our Navy’s dive bombers without descending to lower altitudes.

--------------------------------------------

Sponsored