Cybertruck Vs. New Bronco

[CostcoSamples]

While you’re right, I don’t have definitive proof, indeed I don’t have a Cybertruck I have scientifically rigorously tested.

However, its not idle speculation, its based on solid experience and well established quantified increases in wh/mile from minor differences in conditions. like sealed flat dry roads versus wet.

TFL tested a model X going very slowly up a rough steep hill in Colorado,
and the energy consumption was off the chart at 1546 wh/mile.
Noting it was like the time they were towing 4500 Ibs.

I don’t consider it a brilliant deduction on my part, its really easy to determine range reduction will be severe off road.

But hey, feel free to ignore the warning, like I said, I fully expect to see online, many examples of Cybertruck’s being towed out of play grounds, because people don’t quite grasp how the energy consumption shoots through the roof when a load is applied that even momentarily, and inperceptively, the electric motors work hard to overcome.

Smart people have already acknowledged this in this thread, and even planned for a solution, like carrying a generator.

But you know what would be funny, if two guys with Cybertruck's were out in the forest and one guys battery died and the other tried to tow the first guy out !

TFLs video proves my point. The X lost massive energy to torque vectoring trying to off road. We’re hoping CT does it differently. also the off-roading range is not necessarily the right way to measure it. Might make more sense to measure driving hours than range.

Battery Capacity is king, and even 500 miles isn’t enough for everyone. Off-roading guys will want way more, same with towing.

Anyway, I’m sure bronco will sell. I won’t be buying one.

Sponsored

 

[5UBV3T]

https://youtu.be/YtqlAXndsqY

I think these comparisons are fun but not very practical. If I had a bazillion dollars I'd have one of each. One would be my hardcore rock-crawler and the other would be my badass stuff hauler.

And we all know which is which.

Don't get me wrong. I think the CT will be formidable off-road. It's just not specifically designed for that (that we know of for sure anyway).

EDIT: If I had a bazillion dollars I'd have one of each... of everything... and Jay Leno would be a special guest on my show.

 

[Sirfun]

So, when those guys at TFL were driving the X off-road in their video it looked like they were having to crawl over obstacles uphill. When I go to a fast food, drive-thru line for 30 mins. my fuel mileage is crazy bad too. So in addition to MPG you have to FACTOR in way fewer miles driven over a longer period of time. BTW I agree with Todd, the Ford people did an awesome job doing a retro styling job. So many times people buy on emotions, I think Ford did well and there will be a demand for those vehicles. Me personally, the Cybertruck checks off WAY more boxes for what I want in a vehicle.

 

[Deleted member 3316]

I’d have to take a hard look at an electric Bronco with decent range. But as cool as this Bronco is, an overtaxed tiny turbo is a big turn off for me. I had a 2013 Ford Flex with an EcoBoost V6. It performed great, but I was really worried about the turbos going out outside of warranty. I believe it was a $10k repair bill. And the turbos had a fairly short expected life span.

But my wife wrecked that car so I didn’t have to mess with the turbos.?

Anyway, it looks like the electric version of this (4 door model) will be made by Rivian.

Besides the price I think the Bollinger B1 would be much better than anything Ford can come up with in the next year or so.

 

[cyberhunter]

I think Ford knocked it out of the park appealing to a crowd that likes the idea of a Jeep but wants something different. The Bronco is basically a Jeep under a different name but with more power and more modern conveniences inside from what I could tell. It's styling, besides being reminiscent of old Broncos, reminds me of a Yota FJ if you could make it open air. I mean a Jeep will be more of a rock crawling specialist while a Bronco looks to do decent at that but more "baja light" and trail style driving. To trick it out is all "available" options, though, so it will be expensive to get a 4 door tricked out Bronco for offroad. If that open air feel wins people over for the Bronco like it does for Jeeps, then I'm curious what the offroad enthusiast reception will be for the electric hummer. Based on what little I've seen, the electric hummer is basically the electric version of this new Bronco...assuming GM specs it out for offroad like they should and we've already seen they plan on having at least removable roof and not sure yet on the doors.

One other thing about open air...it's great for nice weather driving around town, rock crawling, and even slow driving on the beach...but if you are on a dry dirt road or dusty desert terrain and are not the only one out there, be ready to eat dust when your doors and roof are off. Having said that, I do think it is nice to have the option, though. The window in the lower part of the door so you can still spot somewhat while all the doors are on is a pretty neat parlor trick that I think acknowledges the desire to have a little more comfort at times.

The one thing I keyed in on about the Bronco... They said the doors were stowable, but I didn't hear any specific mention of the roof being stowable. I'd venture a guess there is not enough cargo capacity for both roof and doors stowed on the vehicle. That means if you want to drive somewhere in an enclosed cabin, then go open air...you might have to make a choice or leave one or the other on the ground.

 

[Munk3y]

So how does everyone think CyberTruck will handle slippage of the front wheels (as mentioned before, torque vectoring isn't the way) electric locker? some sort of alien tech? Also more old tech... What about central tire inflation like the H1 Hummer???

From my experience lockers are the way to go, the dual motors in the rear could work as a limited slip or synch them to act as a locker.

 

[A.E.Stratton]

As a beach guy and casual off-roader, the main attraction for me is the open air experience and the nostalgia. I really think (at least initially) that the new Bronco is a hit.

That said, (and I hope I'm not reading too much into this), I can see all my fantasies being realized when i'm driving the CT around with the mid-gate down and the windows open and my dog walking back and fourth between the cab and the bed while I'm cruising the beach. For me, that mid-gate idea solves everything. Thanks to whoever suggested it!

 

[Jetdriver]

I'll keep my 93 Eddie Bauer for times i want to drive disconnected

 

[Dids]

And we have a winner, AJ will be the one to tow out a fellow Cybertrucker, cos if you can make back so much energy through braking, think of how much more he'll get when he's towing

A.J. I can picture you, chopping down trees and loading 'em on board, thinking of all that free energy you will be recovering. Hitchikers, and road kill too.

P.S. I wonder if Woody Allen should update his moose story

I'm going to agree with AJ for the second time in my life but not for the reasons he used. I don't think it is reasonable to expect that a vehicle like the X which is optimized for range on hardball will be anywhere near what the cybertruck will experience. An electric motor is most efficient when it is fully loaded, which means Tesla used a motor for the X that was mostly fully loaded at vehicle weight / passengers at 75 mph. Using a bigger than needed motor so that the X could tow heavy would mean inefficient normal use. Driving slower then the optimized speed also means the motor is less efficient ( please notice that efficiency and energy used are not the same thing).
The CT will certainly not be using the motors that X used, indeed it is almost certain that they will be PMSR motors. The whole point of using PMSRM is that they have a much wider band of maximized efficiency. The switching of the reluctance can be timed such that the rpm is reduced and if the same amount of energy is used the torque must increase. Or the timing of the switching can be advanced or retarded (not sure which) and rpm is increased and torque is reduced. This type of motor set up will not experience as great a range change from increasing it's load, it responds by decreasing top speed and increasing it's torque.

 

[Geo]

I'm going to agree with AJ for the second time in my life but not for the reasons he used. I don't think it is reasonable to expect that a vehicle like the X which is optimized for range on hardball will be anywhere near what the cybertruck will experience. . . . . .

I think I found where you went wrong

Well Dids I find your posts to show you are a reasonable, genuine, and sometimes amusing person, who I often agree with.

But in this instance my friend, while you explain a technical reason why you believe the Cybertruck will be better than the Model X, you still don’t seem to want to accept, that it will not be 6 times better. I.e the 1546 Wh/mile consumption that was the documented reality for the Model X will categorically not go down to the approx. 270 wh/mile base line in the Cybertruck.

That energy consumption is not a fault of the Model X and it won’t be a fault of the Cybertruck either.

And even if improved, it won’t be improved to miraculously overcome what is the nature of traversing the terrain and the pace shown in the Bronco video. Which is why I also included the point about when flat out racing, actual distance covered for a fully charged 300 mile battery will go down to about 40 miles. 1/7 th the range. This is fact. ( And that’s on a smooth, solid and non slipping surface )

(And by the way, for others who know better, but think they’ll try to deceive people by suggesting, hey, if I’m recovering energy when breaking for a corner at 40 m/hr, imagine how much more I’ll recover at 160 m/hr. This point in isolation is true, but completely false in the overall context that still shows when racing flat out, the range will drop exponentially, from 300 miles down to around 40 miles)

So my point about off road terrain, rock crawling, and traversing very slowly going up a steep rocky hill (but nothing really special if a Model X with its unsuited suspension can do it), and having fun running around the playground will severely reduce range by over 50%, ie a factor of 2, (let alone any where near a factor of 7 ) is most definetely a reality.

I’m perplexed at the denial. Its really just plain documented reality.


I can’t help but draw a parallel to the Florida Governor who in May was absurdly and blindly stating on camera, that Florida in essence had nothing to worry about, nothing to prepare for, nothing to take action to address !

And like Trump who in Feb and March said the virus count would go down to zero by the end of April

And then again in May said it would go down to zero by July. “It would just go away on its own”. WOW, Simply WOW !

Which reminds me of my new favourite line out of the White House,
“We should not let science get in the way of opening schools”

The most hysterically funny and scary line I think I may have ever heard !

 

[Dids]

I think I found where you went wrong

Well Dids I find your posts to show you are a reasonable, genuine, and sometimes amusing person, who I often agree with.

But in this instance my friend, while you explain a technical reason why you believe the Cybertruck will be better than the Model X, you still don’t seem to want to accept, that it will not be 6 times better. I.e the 1546 Wh/mile consumption that was the documented reality for the Model X will categorically not go down to the approx. 270 wh/mile base line in the Cybertruck.

That energy consumption is not a fault of the Model X and it won’t be a fault of the Cybertruck either.

And even if improved, it won’t be improved to miraculously overcome what is the nature of traversing the terrain and the pace shown in the Bronco video. Which is why I also included the point about when flat out racing, actual distance covered for a fully charged 300 mile battery will go down to about 40 miles. 1/7 th the range. This is fact. ( And that’s on a smooth, solid and non slipping surface )

(And by the way, for others who know better, but think they’ll try to deceive people by suggesting, hey, if I’m recovering energy when breaking for a corner at 40 m/hr, imagine how much more I’ll recover at 160 m/hr. This point in isolation is true, but completely false in the overall context that still shows when racing flat out, the range will drop exponentially, from 300 miles down to around 40 miles)

So my point about off road terrain, rock crawling, and traversing very slowly going up a steep rocky hill (but nothing really special if a Model X with its unsuited suspension can do it), and having fun running around the playground will severely reduce range by over 50%, ie a factor of 2, (let alone any where near a factor of 7 ) is most definetely a reality.

I’m perplexed at the denial. Its really just plain documented reality.


I can’t help but draw a parallel to the Florida Governor who in May was absurdly and blindly stating on camera, that Florida in essence had nothing to worry about, nothing to prepare for, nothing to take action to address !

And like Trump who in Feb and March said the virus count would go down to zero by the end of April

And then again in May said it would go down to zero by July. “It would just go away on its own”. WOW, Simply WOW !

Which reminds me of my new favourite line out of the White House,
“We should not let science get in the way of opening schools”

The most hysterically funny and scary line I think I may have ever heard !

Isn't the Model X comparable vehicle closer to a Lincoln Navigator than the bronco? I am not at all suggesting that I know what the energy consumption is for the CT nor am I disagreeing that it will increase for terrain. Indeed energy consumption goes up for the Bronco also and it suffers range reduction.
I think my beef is using the model X and extrapolating with such certainty. AJ uses the model X and comes up with towing will have horrible range reduction, when an electric vehicle set up for towing, the Tesla Semi has actual published numbers that show an electric vehicle optimized for towing can experience less range reduction loaded than it's comparable diesel.

 

[Geo]

All things being equal, The Tesla Semi won’t have any range reduction because the range figure is calculated taking into account the maximum load (80,000 lbs) first . . .
and then gives the range figure.
So the figure is set to improve with anything less than maximum carrying load.

And the battery is sized accordingly to get the 500mile EPA range with the worst case load of 80,000 lbs.
( Which is estimated to be around 1000 kw/hr )

But hypothetically speaking, if they ran the Semi where the Bronco was going, or where Model X was, once again expect a very severe drop in range.

Did’s, Why do I get the feeling you’re going to become famous in the future !
Mission Impossible Did’s, Hypermiles the Baja, with shallow breathing, light meals, diligently evacuated bowels and tyres inflated to 20,000 psi

 

[Dids]

All things being equal, The Tesla Semi won’t have any range reduction because the range figure is calculated taking into account the maximum load (80,000 lbs) first . . .
and then gives the range figure.
So the figure is set to improve with anything less than maximum carrying load.

And the battery is sized accordingly to get the 500mile EPA range with the worst case load of 80,000 lbs.
( Which is estimated to be around 1000 kw/hr )

But hypothetically speaking, if they ran the Semi where the Bronco was going, or where Model X was, once again expect a very severe drop in range.

Did’s, Why do I get the feeling you’re going to become famous in the future !
Mission Impossible Did’s, Hypermiles the Baja, with shallow breathing, light meals, diligently evacuated bowels and tyres inflated to 20,000 psi

Yes that's exactly my point. The semi numbers are fudged toward the fully loaded side, what we don't know is where are the CT numbers. The + might mean they are stated loaded.
And I want to add an additional point. City vs highway consumption.

 

[Geo]

Did’s, I think you’re already letting the fame go to your head

P.S. It safe to say the Cybertruck range is not calculated while taking in account the 3500 lbs carrying capacity and or the 14000 lbs towing capacity.
The battery would be unneccassily HUUUGE and the Cybertruck unnecessarily HEAVY.

I think I found how you can traverse lightly over rough terrain, and conserve energy.

 

[Cybr on]

I just want to say, I truly enjoy this forum and all the members. Speak up! Enjoy engaging in some meaningful and sometimes not so meaningful conversations about this amazing truck of the future, but it’s the respect I truly enjoy when reading with fellow members. ? DIDS AND GEO! Good stuff guys. Im in limbo ?‍. We will get the answer you guys are talking about and what I have been thinking for months. Keep up the good reads members! September can’t get here fast enough right? .

Sponsored