Jason Camissa's Cybertruck Review Video & Podcast -- A MUST WATCH

[scottf200]

This seems like it should be its own thread. -Crissa

Looks like it was just earlier.

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.com/forum/threads/farley-thanks-musk-for-48v-arch-doc.10349/

Sponsored

 

[Crissa]

Looks like it was just earlier.

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.com/forum/threads/farley-thanks-musk-for-48v-arch-doc.10349/

Oh, it's a thread I'm blocked from.

-Crissa

 

[tidmutt]

Thanks for doing this! Hot damn that's so rage-inducing to look at . Do the batteries suck that bad? I get the price and having to do that, maximize profit/cost. What doesn't make sense is how do you not meet the range estimate without a stupid box in the bed? 4680's must be a huge fail, they were lying or they were going to double stack. At this point, it's all moot. Guess I'll check back yearly and see where they're at.

I'm wondering if there is actually space, but the range extender enabled them to keep the builds more consistent without having to price it too high. This enabled them to keep the price of the AWD under the tax rebate threshold as well.

It's a little bit un-Tesla-like I suppose.

Has anyone done a more intelligent assessment of whether the cells would fit in the base of the truck to hit 470 miles? Maybe we have to wait for Munro?

I imagine they were too optimistic with how the cells would evolve, but it's not entirely surprising because what they are doing is incredibly hard.

 

[scottf200]

I'm wondering if there is actually space, but the range extender enabled them to keep the builds more consistent without having to price it too high. This enabled them to keep the price of the AWD under the tax rebate threshold as well.

It's a little bit un-Tesla-like I suppose.

Has anyone done a more intelligent assessment of whether the cells would fit in the base of the truck to hit 470 miles? Maybe we have to wait for Munro?

I imagine they were too optimistic with how the cells would evolve, but it's not entirely surprising because what they are doing is incredibly hard.

Ponder the reasoning below.
https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...-credits-the-extender-gvwr-and-payload.10318/

The numbers are in, and with time to think/drink about it, here's the TLDR:

• the current Cybertruck payload of 2,500lb is possibly sandbagged to keep the GVWR below 10K lb / Class 3 designation
• the range extender is possibly a $16,000 option in order to ensure that not too many are sold, avoiding a required homologation of that configuration as a Class 3 truck
• for the same reasons, the range extender is an accessory because a Cybertruck with that additional pack incorporated natively would be a Class 3 truck
• there are a lot of reasons to avoid having the Cybertruck be a Class 3 truck, but possibly a main reason is that it would materially impact Tesla's carbon credit trading revenue stream, and Tesla's business model depends heavily on that revenue stream
• all of the above effects likely are the result of Tesla being unable or unwilling to build the 2019 vision of a 3,500lb/500mi truck that had a GVWR below Class 3

 

[PilotPete]

Thanks for doing this! Hot damn that's so rage-inducing to look at . Do the batteries suck that bad? I get the price and having to do that, maximize profit/cost. What doesn't make sense is how do you not meet the range estimate without a stupid box in the bed? 4680's must be a huge fail, they were lying or they were going to double stack. At this point, it's all moot. Guess I'll check back yearly and see where they're at.

Go look at the thread on carbon credits and artificially limiting the max gross vehicle weight to keep it below 10K. There may be a reason there.

But for the 4680s, there is no fail there. They're already hold 2nd place for Wh/kg, and they're likely to take the lead in the not too distant future. I said this on the other thread...

Based on the EPA data, the CT has a 122.4 kWh battery pack that weighs 1,587lb (720kg). This gives then a 170 Wh/kg density. So where does this rate? There was a post on X (the app firmly known as twitter) that gave the following list;

Pack level energy density (Higher number is more bueno)
-187Wh/kg - Model S/X 18650 cells
-170Wh/kg - CyberTruck with 4680 Cybercells
-169Wh/kg Rivian R1T Large Pack 2170 cells
-165Wh/kg Model 3/Y LR 2170 cells
-126Wh/kg Model 3 SR LFP cells

Another 10% increase and they tie the top of the heap. That would still only bring the CT to 374 miles. To get to 500 miles in the dual, you would need 179kWh in the pack. Assuming they can't add more cells, you'd need almost 250Wh/kg density to make that range.

And, based on the pack weight per mile, the range extender batteries would weigh 317 lbs for the power. The structure to house it and case and cables are extra.

 

[ninja6r]

Go look at the thread on carbon credits and artificially limiting the max gross vehicle weight to keep it below 10K. There may be a reason there.

But for the 4680s, there is no fail there. They're already hold 2nd place for Wh/kg, and they're likely to take the lead in the not too distant future. I said this on the other thread...

Thanks for pointing me there. If that's the case, seems more than likely they could've had a 450+ range version without having the range extender. I'm still confused on the weight limit after reading that thread. All I got was $$$$$. Tesla put out an inferior product(range-wise) to maximize profit from both customers and regulators. I absolutely don't disagree with the strategy, it just pisses me off because I thought the whole goal of this truck and Tesla in general, was to make affordable EVs to speed up the EV transition. Maybe the $25k model will do that, but I have a strong feeling it'll be $35k when it releases,

 

[SparkChaser]

Tesla has been trying to make the budget car for decades. They need to build scale to do that. They are investing in that direction but until the infrastructure is built and paid for in profitable vehicles ( making more than break even so they can pay off that investment). then they will be able to build the buget EV. The plans for Mexico are currently on that path. We will see how it happens.
I don't like the huge price increase and feel it is way too much compared to what was offered in 2019. I may not be able to afford the Truck in the end. Tesla has been pretty good about moving toward affordability. Hopefully the price will come down a bit and the stock price will continue to grow and make it possible.
The Cybertruck is a huge step forward in tech and construction. Building the machine that builds the machine is what is happening. The savings in this process will bear fruit but not right away.

 

[cvalue13]

I'm still confused on the weight limit after reading that thread. All I got was $$$$$.

basically, if you want to advertise an impressive payload, and impressive towing, and impressive range, and impressive safety results, AND stay below Class 3 GVWR of 10K pounds: the truck itself (absent pack) would have to be MUCH lighter than it is.

otherwise, something has to give.

and my pet theory in that thread, is that to get the truck weight lighter you can’t put all the pack in natively (along with the structural weight to support it), AND you have to sandbag your payload a good bit, to stay below Class 3 while still advertising impressive payload, towing, etc.

But you can squirrel through some of those downsides RE range etc., by making the extended an accessory (so long as you don’t sell too many of them)

Sponsored