Oaktree

New member
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
2
Reaction score
3
Location
Portland
Vehicles
2014 Subaru Forester XT
Country flag
If up to 600 range, it will be hard not upgrading from 2 engine to 3. The extra weight and range goes to waste with my needs but... maybe enough justification to upgrade. 2.9 seconds is not the real reason.
I couldn't agree more. If the Truck was confirmed at 610 mile range, it's just too good to pass up upgrading to the Tri-motor. I'm on hold for a Dual motor now and as soon as I see true confirmation, it's going to be a "shut up and take my money" situation.





Advertisement

 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
2,845
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
If up to 600 range, it will be hard not upgrading from 2 engine to 3. The extra weight and range goes to waste with my needs but... maybe enough justification to upgrade. 2.9 seconds is not the real reason.
It will show 600 miles range sometimes. Even my X shows 999 sometimes (though rarely) but that's not what caught my eye. It's the remark about the range being wasted. Range is never wasted. It's money in the bank whether you use it or not. It's there if you need it.

Extra battery is also helpful in that charging takes place at around 1 C. A 200 kWh battery thus charges faster than a 100 kWh battery but both sizes of truck will have about the same consumption. If you only need to add 100 miles in a charge you can do it twice as fast with a 200 kWh battery as you can with a 100. In addition to this 100 miles is only 20% of the 200 kWh battery but about 40% of a 199 kWh battery. Thus you can charge from 40% to 60% in the former but would have to charge from 40% to 80% in the latter. Being able to stay at lower SoCs means longer battery life.

There just isn't any reason, except limited financial resources, not to buy the biggest battery you can.
 

Friday

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2020
Messages
118
Reaction score
225
Location
Grover's Mill, NJ
Vehicles
Chrysler Pacifica, Trimotor Cybertruck
Did any of the patent snoopers find any indication of 4 wheel steering for the CT?
 

happy intruder

Well-known member
First Name
O. K.
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
237
Reaction score
163
Location
Irvine
Vehicles
Model 3 Jun 2019..... Model S Jan 2020
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
does anyone really believe there is a chance of a 200kW and 600mile range in the first 50k trucks off the line?
 

John K

Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
698
Reaction score
968
Location
Los Angeles
Vehicles
Volt, CT reserve day 2
Country flag
It will show 600 miles range sometimes. Even my X shows 999 sometimes (though rarely) but that's not what caught my eye. It's the remark about the range being wasted. Range is never wasted. It's money in the bank whether you use it or not. It's there if you need it.

Extra battery is also helpful in that charging takes place at around 1 C. A 200 kWh battery thus charges faster than a 100 kWh battery but both sizes of truck will have about the same consumption. If you only need to add 100 miles in a charge you can do it twice as fast with a 200 kWh battery as you can with a 100. In addition to this 100 miles is only 20% of the 200 kWh battery but about 40% of a 199 kWh battery. Thus you can charge from 40% to 60% in the former but would have to charge from 40% to 80% in the latter. Being able to stay at lower SoCs means longer battery life.

There just isn't any reason, except limited financial resources, not to buy the biggest battery you can.
For my use, the extra motor and larger battery is just hauling more weight around. It will increase operating costs without me utilizing the benefits. I know my uses, single motor fits my needs but could not resist dual for a 10k increase and prefer awd when I go day skiing.

An additional 20k to the tri is a want expenditure and not a need for me.

I am not interested in maximizing my battery life nor maximizing my range on a charge. Why, I do not derive pleasure in doing so. The truck will adapt to my needs and style and more than meet the needs of a commuter, mobile office and sometimes haul that chair my wife cannot live without. Weekends, haul my dive gear as I dive up and down the coast.

None of my planned use justifies tri motor, heavier battery and 20k more.

To understand me, I will not pay $10 for an item if it will not be used but will not blink at $1,000 if the item will be utilized. Your needs are different and thus another perspective to mine.

After saying this, when time to fulfill the order, I do plan on asking if I can switch to a tri for the speed and not delay my production significantly, if they allow the change, my want versus need will fight it out.
 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
2,845
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
does anyone really believe there is a chance of a 200kW and 600mile range in the first 50k trucks off the line?
Sure. If my X with its 100 kWh battery can show 999 then I'm sure the CT with its 200 kWh battery can estimate the same.

There is no chance, however, of the EPA rated range being much over 500.
 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
2,845
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
For my use, the extra motor and larger battery is just hauling more weight around. It will increase operating costs without me utilizing the benefits.
As the principles involved are what I am trying to emphsize I'll point out that the TriMotor is probably more efficient that the dual. If you have 2 motor half the current goes to each resulting in (1/4) the I^2R losses but there are 2 motors so total I^2R is 2*(1/4) = 1/2. If you have three motors 1/3 the current goes to each so each dissipates 1/9 unit of I^2R but there are 3 of them for a total of 3/9 = 1/3 unit. (1/3)/(1/2) = 0.666 meaning you save 33% on I^2R.

Extra weight does not increase energy consumption appreciably. Thus the energy costs for the TriMotor will be the same or perhaps a little less than the dual.


I am not interested in maximizing my battery life nor maximizing my range on a charge.
Nor, apparently, in cutting charging time in half.
 

John K

Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
698
Reaction score
968
Location
Los Angeles
Vehicles
Volt, CT reserve day 2
Country flag
As the principles involved are what I am trying to emphsize I'll point out that the TriMotor is probably more efficient that the dual. If you have 2 motor half the current goes to each resulting in (1/4) the I^2R losses but there are 2 motors so total I^2R is 2*(1/4) = 1/2. If you have three motors 1/3 the current goes to each so each dissipates 1/9 unit of I^2R but there are 3 of them for a total of 3/9 = 1/3 unit. (1/3)/(1/2) = 0.666 meaning you save 33% on I^2R.

Extra weight does not increase energy consumption appreciably. Thus the energy costs for the TriMotor will be the same or perhaps a little less than the dual.


Nor, apparently, in cutting charging time in half.
I will be driving 60 miles per day commuting 5 days per week on the 405 freeway while setting battery to charge up to 80% while charging at home while sleeping. (Master of the run on sentence)

Weekend, between a dozen or one hundred miles with trip exceptions. If considerable distance, I fly.

Justify the return and break even point on the extra $20k.

What can I invest the 20k into if I do not do the tri? Let’s keep investing simple, invest in TSLA stock. Between the two, what benefits me more?
 

John K

Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Messages
698
Reaction score
968
Location
Los Angeles
Vehicles
Volt, CT reserve day 2
Country flag
I could buy a brand-new motorcycle for that.

-Crissa
Street or dirt? I hung up my riding days, favorite street bike for me me was a Yamaha R1.

Now that my son is grown, thoughts of getting a bike is worming it’s way back in. I am nice sure which riding style I want to return and purchase.
 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
2,845
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
As I said I'm interested in the principles. Not the fact that you don't value your time or battery longevity.

Whether you derive more benefit from the lost opportunity cost of the fancier truck or an investment of the $20k in Tesla depends on whether Dan Ives or Gordon Johnson has the better crystal ball.
 

CyberMoose

Well-known member
First Name
Jacob
Joined
Aug 19, 2020
Messages
696
Reaction score
982
Location
Canada
Vehicles
Cybertruck
Country flag
I really like the piece of mind of having a much larger range. I wouldn't have to charge more often than I would usually get gas in my car, the Cybertrucks range will be far better than my Cadillac.

While it's unlikely that it would make too much of a difference most of the time. it's just nice to know that I have that range. I typically keep my cars tank above 50% and I would do the same with the Cybertruck.

I'm sure that if i'm going on a roadtrip up in northern Canada, while there will probably be a much better charging network up there when I get my Cybertruck in a year or two, It would be really nice if my range can get me from one convenient charger to the next. I remember a youtube video when someone was driving through the desert on a scorching hot day and due to the reduced range, they took a very long detour because the distance between two chargers was a sure thing, instead of risking the direct drive which estimated they would be at less than 10% battery when the get to the charger.
 

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top