More 500-mile range rumors!

[SparkChaser]

You ‘do’ realize that I said “much under”, right, and it was Elon that said Tesla was now targeting 300 miles as its baseline (albeit before they started focusing on LFP batteries). The industry has been catching up, so whereas 5 years ago Tesla pretty much owned the LR BEV market it doesn’t anymore. The same is true for trucks.

i didn’t say that Tesla is planning to ignore tri-motor reservation holders. How would I know? I was responding to this proposal, aggressively adhered to, that the maximum range Cybertruck will have an approximately 300-mile range, whether dual or tri motor (which we have been told will both be offered at launch), which would, at least for now, effectively abandon tri-motor LR reservation holders. All I need to hear is that the LR tri-motor will begin deliveries in the future and I am fine.

there was no tri motor long range order. it was Single 300, Dual, 350 and Tri 500. No performance or plaid and only later did the 4-motor come along, but never shown on the pre order page.

Probably many would be interested in a Dual long range 500, or a single 400. I know I would. All of this is conjecture until we see the configurations offered at time of actual order.

Sponsored

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

Also, you do not lose 50% in bad weather, the Norway winter challenge the Model s lost 16% this year. Expect same from CT. Charging to 90% on a road trip is no big deal if you need it (you won't) which will give you an extra 38 miles (your assumptions) which would boost you to 306 miles between charges. You should not see 10% degradation until you hit 100,000 miles or so.

You don't always, but you can. This past winter my wife drove 70km. She left with the vehicle pre-heated, charged to 80%. Coldest day of the year, with a headwind. She made one stop which allowed the vehicle to fully cool in the very cold temps. By the time she got to her destination the battery was nearly depleted, she chose between going a bit further to the Supercharger or stopping at the closer 3rd party. She chose the 3rd party and the charger went offline when she got there. Needed a tow to the Supercharger. Miserable day.

She has a Standard Range Model 3. 70/290km = 24%. She literally lost 76% (!)of the range of the vehicle on a brutal day.

On most winter days it's not nearly that bad. Strong headwinds were a factor, so was her stop en route. Garage-kept, pre-heated cars have only a small loss of range. But these extreme conditions are why I want one vehicle with 500 mile range and the ability to handle the worst scenarios.

 

[Crissa]

Probably many would be interested in a Dual long range 500, or a single 400. I know I would. All of this is conjecture until we see the configurations offered at time of actual order.

Yeah, but they wouldn't make sense for Tesla to make. The batteries are where the majority of the cost is, so why make them more expensive with variants? The extra motors need extra batteries to perform best anyhow.

-Crissa

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

there was no tri motor long range order. it was Single 300, Dual, 350 and Tri 500. No performance or plaid and only later did the 4-motor come along, but never shown on the pre order page.

Probably many would be interested in a Dual long range 500, or a single 400. I know I would. All of this is conjecture until we see the configurations offered at time of actual order.

there was no tri motor long range order. it was Single 300, Dual, 350 and Tri 500. No performance or plaid and only later did the 4-motor come along, but never shown on the pre order page.

Probably many would be interested in a Dual long range 500, or a single 400. I know I would. All of this is conjecture until we see the configurations offered at time of actual order.

One can argue that the 3 trims amount to a Standard, an AWD, and an AWD LR model. So no, the tri-motor was not advertised as an LR but it was advertised with a 500+ mile range, while the dual-motor was advertised with a 300+ mile range. If they come out with a tri-motor with a 300+ mile range it will be an unadvertised (new) trim. Tesla does that kind of thing from time to time, and they also eliminate trims from time to time; I just want them to eventually produce the tri-motor with 500-mile range (or even a dual-motor with 500-mile range).

 

[anionic1]

Yeah, but they wouldn't make sense for Tesla to make. The batteries are where the majority of the cost is, so why make them more expensive with variants? The extra motors need extra batteries to perform best anyhow.

-Crissa

A long range dual motor makes a lot of sense and would probably be the best seller. The tri motors only advantage is 14k in towing vs 10k and a sub 3 second 0-60. very few people actually need that. 10k in towing is very sufficient and on par with an F150. Only a couple F150 trims can tow more than this. What many people and most EV owners complain about is range. So a dual motor LR makes a lot of sense. I dont quite see a significant use case for a single motor LR

 

[SparkChaser]

As is the quad.
I misquoted the range specs I see. 1 motor 250
dual 300, tri 500.
Argue all you like. Other than the 3 listed trims, only time will tell. Even the quad is only a guess at this point. Changing the label to a Standard, LR, plaid or performance is all conjecture.

 

[cvalue13]

As is the quad.
I misquoted the range specs I see. 1 motor 250
dual 300, tri 500.
Argue all you like. Other than the 3 listed trims, only time will tell. Even the quad is only a guess at this point. Changing the label to a Standard, LR, plaid or performance is all conjecture.

I half anticipate:

Initial launch consists of:

(1) “The CyberTruck” (which happens to be a dual motor)

(2) “The CyberTruck - Performance” (which happens to be tri motor), and

(3) a statement that a “long range” model will be coming in [X] (which model may happen be a dual or a tri motor, depending)



The difference being that the unveil made us think of the CT (for the past 4 years), as three model/trims defined on number of motors - single, dual, tri. We’re unable to shake that framing.

But where at unveil the number of motors seemed definitional to different trims, we’re possibly now instead in a place where motor number is more incidental to the resulting model specs

And for now, the model being released is “just CyberTruck”, and there’s a “performance” version

 

[MEDICALJMP]

Yeah, but they wouldn't make sense for Tesla to make. The batteries are where the majority of the cost is, so why make them more expensive with variants? The extra motors need extra batteries to perform best anyhow.

-Crissa

Then why did Tesla announce that very thing on November 19, 2019 at the reveal? It is TESLA, and they know better than any other vehicle manufacturer the aspects of batteries, weight, etc. You can retroactively rationalize why they now say otherwise. My guess is 4680 hasn’t lived up to their projections.

I ordered a Trimotor CT based on the totality of the specifications, and mostly the 500 mile plus announced range for my specific situation. We can — and have — argued about charging needs. In another 15 years the charger situation will be way different. East coast, West coast, Tesla charging stations seem to you a dime a dozen. In Flyover Country they are sparse to nonexistent.
Different people, different needs.

‘Merica!

 

[Crissa]

Then why did Tesla announce that very thing on November 19, 2019 at the reveal?

You're making some assumptions so that I cannot follow your logic.

On reveal night, the tri-motor had the biggest battery, just as I explained why.

-Crissa

 

[MonkeyDeLuffy]

After going through all my leads, there is no evidence of the existence of a 500-mile battery pack yet. I blame my sources. Please prove me wrong. I want(or need) a 500-mile version.

 

[Crissa]

After going through all my leads, there is no evidence of the existence of a 500-mile battery pack yet. I blame my sources. Please prove me wrong. I want(or need) a 500-mile version.

There's no evidence of any specific mileage battery pack. Just speculation and geometry.

-Crissa

 

[ricinro]

lol, no. Wh/kg is not a measurement of density.

Energy Density = Energy stored / volume.
However in automotive applications volume matters as does weight plus cost of materials. Tesla would certainly target greater energy density as it lowers cost and size.

 

[CyberGus]

Energy Density = Energy stored / volume.
However in automotive applications volume matters as does weight plus cost of materials. Tesla would certainly target greater energy density as it lowers cost and size.

There are two energy-density measurements:

• volumetric energy density
• gravimetric energy density

They are often used interchangeably, causing ambiguity.

In EVs, the latter term is far more relevant, and usually what is meant, even if inaccurate.

 

[Crissa]

Volumetric is pretty important, tho.

-Crissa

 

[dempster]

Also, you do not lose 50% in bad weather

That's a bold statement.

There's a lot of nonsense being posted in this forum recently, and this is definitely nonsense.

Existing Teslas can absolutely lose more than 50% of their battery due to cold temperatures and snow on the roads.

I agree that it's ususally not the case, if you have the car pre-heated in a garage.

However, if your car is sitting in -40 weather, dead cold. and you need to go on a long drive? Map out your charging route appropriately.

*shakes head*

Sponsored