The most interesting part is that if I recall correctly Elon was against the swappable battery. I really think. They should make one that bolts onto the bottom of the truck under the battery. It’s about 4” thick. It would be like the hummer battery. Tesla doesn’t seem to get the purpose of a truck. It needs to haul and it needs to pull the distance. They should have made a double thick battery option with less ground clearance. That should get close to 640 miles. It would have blown people out of the park. Honestly, this all is just evidence to me that Elon was too distracted with Twitter. He let the IT guys design a truck.
The power connection it the simple part. I wonder about the coolant part.
They are battery constrained.
You have no proof they are battery constrained. Or tgst they won’t be able to match the battery supply with the ramp. The truck is coming out next year. The two largest battery producers in the world are building plants to produce the 4680 next year.They are battery constrained.
Have you missed the endless threads on this before the event?
The range is not by choice, and the DM is better than expected range, and you can get a extension pack for towing even further down the line.
No point in making up stuff, you'll just confuse the audience.
But seriously show me another car made by the IT department that is this good?
You have no proof the IT department made design choices, or that EM was distracted with purchasing twitter, as these engineering choices could of been made years before it was even on the table.
I wonder if they made it cuboid for heat conservation and insulation?I agree. Battery density will evolve. Hacking the connection would definitely void the warranty but Tesla could later develop a 50kw with half the size (maybe flat?) or a 100kw pack with same size bumping range to 600mi. I think with just the fact that battery extension with 48v architecture is possible on this vehicle it sets it apart from the rest in terms of longevity.
Mostly for weight distribution I think. Which according to one of the videos is nearly a perfect 50/50 without a payload in the bed.
Here us a hack for you. Make a huge 48 VDC battery pack with a 120/240 DC/AC converter. Then use the onboard charger to charge the traction battery while you are driving. This would require a separate charger for the auxilary charger and would be about 80% efficient.
Is there a chance in hell Tesla will open source the connection? Sure some things will void the warranty but maybe it has some good fusing.I agree. Battery density will evolve. Hacking the connection would definitely void the warranty but Tesla could later develop a 50kw with half the size (maybe flat?) or a 100kw pack with same size bumping range to 600mi. I think with just the fact that battery extension with 48v architecture is possible on this vehicle it sets it apart from the rest in terms of longevity.
In the plastic bucket itself, yeah too small. I'm talking about removing the underbed storage bucket entirely and utilizing all the available space behind the axle, plus a 1 layer thick sheet of structural battery throughout the rest of the bed too. That gives a consistent bed floor height, and if designed right also a structural place for a goose neck connection that might get high enough/ far enough back to keep a 5th wheel from hitting the sail panels.
True open source? Doubt it highly.
