VolklKatana

Well-known member
First Name
Aaron
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Messages
425
Reaction score
787
Location
Madison, WI
Website
ts.la
Vehicles
2013 Tesla Model S 85, '06 BMW Z4 Roadster 3.0si, Soon: Tri-Motor Cybertruck FSD
Occupation
Database Administrator
Country flag
i agree with you, though its all going to depend on the pack sizes used. It seems to be the common conclusion that the CT3 may use 2 packs where the CT1 and CT2 may only use 1. the question is, what is the size of that pack?!





Advertisement

 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
2,703
Reaction score
2,895
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
I know youre good with the numbers ajdelange, what are you thinking the size of the pack is going to be?
That depends on the realized consumption. My X is rated at 282 Wh/mi. Thus its battery size must be
351*.282 = 98.982 kWh and that's about right.

Were the CT able to run at 282 Wh/mi it's battery size would be
500*.282 = 141 kWh

I don't think anyone supposes that the CT will take only 282 Wh/mi. ABRP uses 485. That gives
500*.485 = 242.5 kWh.

That's a lot of battery (over twice what's in the X) so I tend to think consumption is going to be around 400 Wh/mi for
500*.400 = 200 kWh.

My gut feel is that the last set of numbers is about where things will fall - that consumption will be about 400 Wh/mi or a bit less and that battery pack size will, consequntly be between 180 and 220 kWh. But it is only gut feel.
 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
2,703
Reaction score
2,895
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
If the trimotor range is really 110 more miles than first announced there is no reason that the dual motor version could not have a 360 mile range
Well don't count on that but as my first post in this thread points out the range depends on how much battery Tesla wants to put in. There is no reason the dual couldn't have as much range as the Trimotor if they put the same size battery in both.
 

VolklKatana

Well-known member
First Name
Aaron
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Messages
425
Reaction score
787
Location
Madison, WI
Website
ts.la
Vehicles
2013 Tesla Model S 85, '06 BMW Z4 Roadster 3.0si, Soon: Tri-Motor Cybertruck FSD
Occupation
Database Administrator
Country flag
That depends on the realized consumption. My X is rated at 282 Wh/mi. Thus its battery size must be
351*.282 = 98.982 kWh and that's about right.

Were the CT able to run at 282 Wh/mi it's battery size would be
500*.282 = 141 kWh

I don't think anyone supposes that the CT will take only 282 Wh/mi. ABRP uses 485. That gives
500*.485 = 242.5 kWh.

That's a lot of battery (over twice what's in the X) so I tend to think consumption is going to be around 400 Wh/mi for
500*.400 = 200 kWh.

My gut feel is that the last set of numbers is about where things will fall - that consumption will be about 400 Wh/mi or a bit less and that battery pack size will, consequntly be between 180 and 220 kWh. But it is only gut feel.
thanks for the rundown...i suppose the new cells do throw a wildcard variable in there as well since we comparing the pack size and output of your X when the cell, size and output of the 4680 is unknown.

always enjoy reading your take on these sorts of things...thanks ajdelange!
 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
2,703
Reaction score
2,895
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
Maybe it is as simple as some programmer assumed 45 mph on the flats no wind. That might turn 500 miles to 610. That said I would love to see a 22% increase over the early spec.
The "rated" range is based on variable speed profiles promulgated by EPA. The average speed of one of the profiles (intended to simulate in town driving) is, I think, around 45 mph but there is also a higher speed profile. Conditions are flat and 0 head or tail wind.

People are, as the so often do, trying to read much more into this than they should.
 

OneLapper

Well-known member
First Name
Mark
Joined
Dec 3, 2019
Messages
367
Reaction score
716
Location
NE Conn
Vehicles
BMW 328d Sportswagon
Country flag
Additional CT UI patent application observations:

Autonomous trailer disconnect/connect
UI to open close tonneau cover
Power tailgate



[0037}.......graphical depiction, such that an end-user can open a trunk, open/close windows, disconnect or connect a trailer, and so on.

[0136] The user interface 800 further includes attachment points 806A-806B for the vehicle and trailer. In some embodiments, the user of the user interface 800 may back up and line up these attachment points 806A-806B. In some embodiments, the vehicle may be self-driving and may automatically back up. As illustrated, the trailer may be automatically detected (e.g., ‘TRAILER DETECTED’) and also indicate a distance between the vehicle and trailer (e.g., ‘4 FT AWAY’). The distance may be determined via radar, ultrasound, and/or an image sensor. In some embodiments, a user of the user interface may select the ‘ATTACH’ selectable object to initiate, or otherwise cause, attachment.

[0051] This graphical depiction may include interactive options associated with control of the vehicle. For example, the vehicle may be an electric truck, and the options may include adjustment of suspension, opening / closing of a charging port, opening / closing of a tonneau cover, opening / closing of a tail gate, and so on. If the user selects adjustment of suspension, the unified user interface may update to reflect different suspension levels which may be selected.
 
Last edited:

Outlaw1

Member
First Name
RS
Joined
Jun 20, 2020
Messages
7
Reaction score
13
Location
Missouri
Vehicles
2018 Chevy Colorado
Country flag
This is a long one...

I like the math from @ajdelange. And have been thinking about this in context of the recent Ford announcement and the Rivian. Although Rivian is still not announcing their actual range, it's still 300+. Now that Ford has pretty much put their cards on the table and yet they still aren't totally clear regarding the options and costs, it gives Tesla some room to announce numbers that can beat the competition. Ford is at the 300 mile range as well with the extender in the mid and low level options (price isn't low level at that point though). The announcement of the specs of the CT was likely to give competitors a bar to try and reach. And you can see Ford and others tried as much as they could regarding range. Even getting creative with the range extender. Now we will see the range of the CT definitely beat them out. It's probably safe to say the range numbers of the CT will be better than what was mentioned at the reveal. But how much better?

I like the below video calculating the battery pack size at the reveal range,
9:52 mark

but I also like the estimation of range without the off road tires.
19:06 mark

I do believe that tires will be an option during ordering just like the other models. I also think it makes sense to quote range without those tires as it may be higher. Perhaps that is what we are seeing in the patent images.... and we may see this eluded to in the next update. Think about ordering, why would they default to offroad tires if that would make the range lower? They will probably default to road tires with an aero wheel cover and make off road a selectable option. And it doesn't look like the competition is defaulting to off road. A road tire default would make the range gap even better from a marketing stand point and would be comparable to the competition while also keeping the bad ass look and functionality of off road tires if you want it. The off road tire numbers was a Trojan horse for the competition in my opinion.

In the video he calculates the efficiency of the CT to be about 400 wh/mi too. But the road oriented tires may be a little more efficient. The interesting thing is that when you take the numbers from the video with the road tires he gets a 168 kwh pack for 500 miles but if you calculate what the pack size is for 610 miles with road tires it comes out to be about 205 kwh pack ( I think). That could be 2 - 100 kwh packs double stacked as the single motor was calculated to have 100 kwh pack. It may make manufacturing easy. The DM is obviously somewhere between and this is where the decisions get interesting of how much over a 100 kwh pack does Tesla want to do to beat out Ford and Rivian. I think it will be more than 300 but by how much is the question.

Do they leave the SM at around 260 miles like the SR+ model 3? And make the DM around 340 - 360 miles like the model 3 LR and model x?

This would essentially double the mileage jump from a DM to Tri at 610 miles. Going "higher" to 420 would split the difference, but my feeling is that Tesla is determining how much they want to be out Rivian by and it doesn't mean that the DM range can't increase over time with software updates if the battery size allows it.

Half jokingly....
A DM @ 360 miles could get a purchasable performance upgrade to 420 miles for $7-$10k on a special April 20 promotion. Why? Because it's profit for Tesla if the numbers make sense and there is no need for it right now with the current competition. But being battery constrained may prevent this.

Just my thoughts
 

OneLapper

Well-known member
First Name
Mark
Joined
Dec 3, 2019
Messages
367
Reaction score
716
Location
NE Conn
Vehicles
BMW 328d Sportswagon
Country flag
Drone control for photogrammerty... !!

[0119] As described above, the representation 504 may include information determined using cameras or sensors positioned about the vehicle. For example, pedestrians, other cars, cones, animals, lights, stop signs, and so on, may be determined by a system included in the vehicle. These may be rendered in the user interface 500. Similarly, the representation 504 may include rocks, dips, inclines, and so on, of an off-road area surrounding the vehicle. In some embodiments, a drone may be stored in the vehicle. The drone may fly from the vehicle and perform a mapping operation of surrounding terrain. For example, photogrammetry techniques may be used. This information may be provided to the vehicle, and used to render the representation 504. In some embodiments, the vehicle may render the representation 504 using, at least in part, simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) techniques.
 
Last edited:

OneLapper

Well-known member
First Name
Mark
Joined
Dec 3, 2019
Messages
367
Reaction score
716
Location
NE Conn
Vehicles
BMW 328d Sportswagon
Country flag
Wireless trailer communication.....!!

[0134] Figure 8A illustrates an example user interface 800 for a truck trailer. A vehicle, as described herein, may be a truck. Advantageously, the unified user interface may present information relevant to towing a truck trailer. For example, the information may be presented based on a user selecting a tow mode via the user interface 800. The information may also be presented based on cameras or sensors in the truck detecting that a truck trailer is proximate (e.g., behind the truck). The information may also be presented based on a truck trailer providing wireless communications to the vehicle. Thus, contextual information may indicate that the truck is going to tow, or otherwise connect with, the trailer.
 

OneLapper

Well-known member
First Name
Mark
Joined
Dec 3, 2019
Messages
367
Reaction score
716
Location
NE Conn
Vehicles
BMW 328d Sportswagon
Country flag
"Invisible" trailer via trailer sensors and camera... !!

804. This depiction may be adjusted in real-time. For example, cameras and/or sensors in the vehicle may monitor the trailer. Thus, any rolling, jostling, sliding, and so on, may be presented in the user interface 800. In some embodiments, the trailer may include sensors and/or cameras usable to monitor its state. This may be received and used to inform rendering of the trailer 804 and/or an environment. For example, an image sensor at a rear of the trailer may be used to identify vehicles and/or objects which are behind the trailer.
 

VolklKatana

Well-known member
First Name
Aaron
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Messages
425
Reaction score
787
Location
Madison, WI
Website
ts.la
Vehicles
2013 Tesla Model S 85, '06 BMW Z4 Roadster 3.0si, Soon: Tri-Motor Cybertruck FSD
Occupation
Database Administrator
Country flag

Ge’Rron

New member
First Name
Gerron
Joined
Jun 1, 2020
Messages
4
Reaction score
2
Location
Brooklyn,NY
Vehicles
Cybertruck
Occupation
Accountant
Country flag
So 610 miles , re gen ,and solar ? OMG ! This will actually kill anything else on the road . We are really talking about not even charging for a month to 4 month out of the year .
 

Faffle

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2020
Messages
54
Reaction score
120
Location
Portland Oregon
Vehicles
Kia Soul ev
Country flag
One of the really old videos (I think it was a video) of Elon driving the truck to some CA restaurant had pics of him leaving at night and i am pretty sure the range said 612. I never gave it much importance because it was just a prototype vehicle but showed more of what they could do if they wanted to.
 

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top