Non-Foundation Series has less range than Foundation Series

[Crissa]

The EPA doesn't actually do the tests themselves, aside from random selection to keep automakers honest. It's mostly just a formula the automakers follow (and Tesla follows the more rigorous and therefore optimistic version). More testing would result in a different revised range.

-Crissa

Sponsored

 

[HaulingAss]

To my knowledge, the Cybertruck has not been EPA range tested.

EPA doesn't range test most cars with EPA efficiency numbers on their Monroney stickers either. The manufacturers do the testing or hire it to an independent lab. My belief is that the ranges Tesla publishes for the Cybertruck are based upon the same EPA drive cycles that are used by most other vehicles. That's the only thing that would make them meaningful, and why I call them "EPA ranges".

 

[CT_AZ_4x4]

My experience with FS AWD and AT tires is range of 300 miles at 80 mph highway and 390 miles with city-ish driving (1/2 65 mph and 1/2 30 mph). It is getting much better range than originally advertised for me.

You mean 300 and 290, right? 390 would be AWESOME!

 

[mongo]

You mean 300 and 290, right? 390 would be AWESOME!

Probably meant 390. Speed is the range killer, at 30 MPH you can go a looooonng way.
This drive in a beast averaged 350 miles of range and 35 MPH.

300 miles at 80 MPH seems way too good though (without major tailwind) ...

 

[Facedown]

You mean 300 and 290, right? 390 would be AWESOME!

To clarify what I’ve been trying to say (screenshot posted near the end of page 3 of this thread):

1) my daily commute (24 miles round trip) with 10 miles of highway (6th Ave) @70 mph and 14 miles of surface streets averages 390 mile range or 315 Wh/mile.
2) my last 2100 miles of driving which includes my daily commute, trips up and down the front range (speeds 60-80 mph), and trips into the mountains (Vail, Breck, etc) averages 368 mile range or 334 Wh/mile.
3) my lifetime average is currently 325 mile range or 378 Wh/mile and getting better. This includes the 2100 miles from 1 & 2 above plus an additional 4500 miles. Of those 4500 miles, 2000 were driven at highway speeds through Wyoming, New Mexico, Colorado, and Texas. The other 2500 were mixed use. During highway driving I typically drove 80 mph. However, there is no way my average speed was 80 mph for all of those miles. I should have said that on my long roadtrips with 80 mph highway driving I averaged 402 Wh/mile. That would have been more correct and not confusing nor misleading. It may very well be the case that when I was driving 80 mph I was getting 420 Wh/mile on average but my overall highway average was 402 Wh/mile. The next time I do a round trip, I will attempt to measure a long stretch of road both ways where I go 80 mph to determine my usage. I’m curious what the numbers will show.

In summary, as it stands today, my lifetime of 325 mile range is better than advertised. If I were to remove the long summer roadtrips from the equation, my lifetime range would be 368 miles with AT tires. If I were just to drive back and forth from work my lifetime range would be 390 miles.

 

[AlmostHuman]

Chill rides higher than standard. I wonder if the difference could be the different ride height.

Good point! I think it would not matter much in my case with most of my driving above 55 mph which the truck then sets the ride height automatically without a way to set it manually. At least that is my understanding

 

[TyPope]

Good point! I think it would not matter much in my case with most of my driving above 55 mph which the truck then sets the ride height automatically without a way to set it manually. At least that is my understanding

I think Standard runs in the low position but Chill runs in Higher mode. I typically use Custom where I can set those parameters separately.

 

[agordon117]

Tesla could be removing 56 (4x2x7) cells from each pack
Tesla is hedging against energy density of upcoming cell chemistries
Tesla is hedging against cells from Panasonic

This had always been my assumption. Everyone was making cope posts about waiting for non-FS and how the range would magically be 20% greater with some new battery chemistry. And I would always explain that it was significantly more likely that tesla would reduce the number of cells in a pack to save costs rather than give extra range for free.


Look at it however you want:

-This allows them to build 20% more trucks from the same number of cells
-This allows the trucks to use 20% less batteries and therefore be cheaper to produce
-This allows them to shrink the size (and therefore cost) of the battery pack
-Even if the pack size must remain the same to fit the castings, the cooling loop is less complicated with less cells
-This allows them to reduce the overall weight of the vehicle even further

 

[ARMANDO PADILLA]

Does anyone know the reason why the non foundation has less range? Less battery cells?

I think they are just showing that the highlighted wheel is for the model that has this range that is displayed the cyberbeast has less range and comes with the better-looking wheel covers the core model wheels are not as nice looking, but you have more range.

Sponsored