Real world range

[carpedatum]

This topic is killing me right now. Tesla's just put this in front of me:

I've been invited today to order a Foundation-series and those figures are for an AWD to be delivered in the February-to-April time frame.

I've been itching to buy it for years. I thought I was about 88-thousandth in line, so this would not be a question for quite a long time. If I'm honest, I could probably afford it, even though it is a crap-ton more money than I was led to expect. I should be jumping with joy!

Yet, I've retired a little early, and have an F-150 Powerboost that can honestly run over 600 miles on a tank when it isn't on its travel-trailer leash, and did well over 200 miles on one tank recently towing about 7,000 lbs of Winnebago. Putting gas in that rig with the trailer hooked up is enough of a PITA - I can't imagine trying to charge a Cybertruck with the trailer hooked up at any Supercharger I've ever visited.

I'm too old, too invested, and too full of newly-retired wanderlust to give up the Winnebago. I could not be more sad about the ridiculous delta between what Tesla's claiming about range and what folks are saying it really is. I hate gasoline, but I feel stuck.

So I guess that everybody who doesn't have my use-case and is a little further down the reservation list can cheer a bit - I'm letting mine go, specifically over this range problem. Still hoping, though, that I get to buy one at some point! Better travel trailers are on the horizon, and maybe with another turn of the engineering wheel, so is a better Cybertruck.

I guess when someone says something like that, they're also saying that they're probably not going to be a part of the Cybertruck Owners Club, at least for now. Thanks to anyone reading this for a wonderful four years of excited speculation.

TTFN - Dave Wilson (formerly, Sr. Program Manager, Tesla Vehicle Firmware)

Sponsored

 

[Woodrick]

Ok, let me please ask about your SuperCharger comment. I understand what you are saying about a busy SC location. But I’ve stopped at SC locations at “off hours” where for every Tesla that was charging, there were 8-15 open stalls. If you were making a long trek, and decided to have dinner/breakfast/lunch while it charged, why would that be frowned upon?

It is a little different when there are mostly open pedestals, but you know as well as I do, that people will take that to abuse.

The much bigger thing is that there is no need to. There are VERY FEW exceptions to that statement. I met one car back before Christmas on a road trip, it was a newborn's trip to Grandma's for first Christmas. It was a relatively new car, but I heard them mention that they were at 97%. I had to step in and explain why it wasn't in their best interest to charge to that level. And it just so happened that they were going where we just came from.
The gentleman's statement was that they wanted to arrive at Grandma's with some running around charge. I'm fine with that. But then I had to inform him that there were TWO more chargers between that location and Grandma's and that if he had only put 15 minutes on the car here and 15 minutes at the furthest station, they would arrive at Grandma's with MORE charge and 30 minutes faster.

Now charging a little longer during a meal would be fine, assuming that you can see the Supercharger and are willing to move if it gets full. I have seen stations go from empty to full in the duration of my session.
And of course, remember if you hit that max charge level, idle fees start kicking in at most locations.

 

[Woodrick]

This topic is killing me right now. Tesla's just put this in front of me:



I've been invited today to order a Foundation-series and those figures are for an AWD to be delivered in the February-to-April time frame.

I've been itching to buy it for years. I thought I was about 88-thousandth in line, so this would not be a question for quite a long time. If I'm honest, I could probably afford it, even though it is a crap-ton more money than I was led to expect. I should be jumping with joy!


I guess when someone says something like that, they're also saying that they're probably not going to be a part of the Cybertruck Owners Club, at least for now. Thanks to anyone reading this for a wonderful four years of excited speculation.

TTFN - Dave Wilson (formerly, Sr. Program Manager, Tesla Vehicle Firmware)

If that's the right choice for you, then no one can argue with it. So you can just do nothing and you'll get another invite to order the standard truck and you can review your decision then.

 

[Gigahorse]

This topic is killing me right now. Tesla's just put this in front of me:

I've been invited today to order a Foundation-series and those figures are for an AWD to be delivered in the February-to-April time frame.

I've been itching to buy it for years. I thought I was about 88-thousandth in line, so this would not be a question for quite a long time. If I'm honest, I could probably afford it, even though it is a crap-ton more money than I was led to expect. I should be jumping with joy!

Yet, I've retired a little early, and have an F-150 Powerboost that can honestly run over 600 miles on a tank when it isn't on its travel-trailer leash, and did well over 200 miles on one tank recently towing about 7,000 lbs of Winnebago. Putting gas in that rig with the trailer hooked up is enough of a PITA - I can't imagine trying to charge a Cybertruck with the trailer hooked up at any Supercharger I've ever visited.

I'm too old, too invested, and too full of newly-retired wanderlust to give up the Winnebago. I could not be more sad about the ridiculous delta between what Tesla's claiming about range and what folks are saying it really is. I hate gasoline, but I feel stuck.

So I guess that everybody who doesn't have my use-case and is a little further down the reservation list can cheer a bit - I'm letting mine go, specifically over this range problem. Still hoping, though, that I get to buy one at some point! Better travel trailers are on the horizon, and maybe with another turn of the engineering wheel, so is a better Cybertruck.

I guess when someone says something like that, they're also saying that they're probably not going to be a part of the Cybertruck Owners Club, at least for now. Thanks to anyone reading this for a wonderful four years of excited speculation.

TTFN - Dave Wilson (formerly, Sr. Program Manager, Tesla Vehicle Firmware)

Enjoy traveling with the Winnebago, CT unfortunately is not a "hauler" due to the battery pack size being well under what it needs to be to get the original 500.
Everyone's use case will be different, sorry it does not work for yours.

 

[intimidator]

Not those exact conditions but close.


First warm weather real world posted test, maybe?. Mix of city and highway, round trip so elevation was a wash, 77 degrees F average speed of 31MPH, only drivers cooled seat used. This puts the mixed range of this AWD FS CT at about 279 of real world range, granted at a low avg speed but keeping the speed low seems to have added 100ish miles of real world range helping support a lot of theories that the high speed (60MPH+ ) is what is delivering those sub 200 mile ranges

That was done at a lot slower than 65mph.
The ones with 65mph+ are showing closer to 215 miles of range with the average real world range in a variety of conditions and real world drivers being depending on pack % used about 208 miles of range (AWD with AS Tires)

Kyle with out of spec got 250 running it to dead and needing a tow.

Linked thread below has about 10 real world range reports added to the first post, some good, some bad.
https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...cybertruck-after-many-real-world-tests.10983/

Who drives at 31 mph?

My assumption from the various folks doing tests, like Kyle, is that REAL WORLD is less than 250 miles because who leaves the house at 100% and then runs it to 0.0%? No one.

So, usable is gotta be about 225 miles? Maybe 200 miles depending on where the next DCFC is located. Personally I don't feel comfortable rolling up to a charger at below 10%. Heck, I am nervous if I pull up and I am under 20%.

 

[Gigahorse]

Who drives at 31 mph?

My assumption from the various folks doing tests, like Kyle, is that REAL WORLD is less than 250 miles because who leaves the house at 100% and then runs it to 0.0%? No one.

So, usable is gotta be about 225 miles? Maybe 200 miles depending on where the next DCFC is located. Personally I don't feel comfortable rolling up to a charger at below 10%. Heck, I am nervous if I pull up and I am under 20%.

If you are doing city driving you might average 31mph, that is kinda the best case.
If you look at people doing a good chunk of highway driving etc it is sometimes sub 200

You are correct and not many people are going to do what kyle did and drive until you need a tow, if you are looking at 250 miles of range and want to come in to charge at 20% that will give you 200 miles.

The thread linked below has summaries from a bunch of range reports and some pics of trip screens etc. The average report shows 200 or less without towing, but hoping these numbers improve with better batteries in the years to come.

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...cybertruck-after-many-real-world-tests.10983/

 

[Woodrick]

Who drives at 31 mph?

My assumption from the various folks doing tests, like Kyle, is that REAL WORLD is less than 250 miles because who leaves the house at 100% and then runs it to 0.0%? No one.

So, usable is gotta be about 225 miles? Maybe 200 miles depending on where the next DCFC is located. Personally I don't feel comfortable rolling up to a charger at below 10%. Heck, I am nervous if I pull up and I am under 20%.

At 225 miles range, that means that you can probably skip every other charger on the least covered Interstates. If you aren't in the middle of the country, 225 miles means that you can skip 3 chargers in most areas.
If you are in the Northeast or California, that means that you can skip maybe 10 chargers.

The worse coverage of Superchargers on Interstates is about 100 miles, Tesla is currently filling in at about 50 miles and busy sections of the country can be less than 10 miles.

The Tesla network is NOT like the CCS network. Tesla reliability is probably over 99% and the car's nav will indicate if any of the pedestals are offline (as well as how many are currently in use).

If you want to shorten your trip length, the lower you go on the battery, the faster it will charge.
But getting used to going low on the battery is something that you will have to make the decision on.
The move from the Lightning charging network to Tesla is a big one. That's why Ford CEO did it. The last thing in the world that Ford wanted to do was to infer that "Tesla won" That's how much better the Tesla network is above the CCS network

I drove a Leaf for many years and I also periodically charge my Model Y off of CCS, so I do have a pretty good familiarity with the CCS/CHAdeMO networks out there.

 

[intimidator]

If you are doing city driving you might average 31mph, that is kinda the best case.
If you look at people doing a good chunk of highway driving etc it is sometimes sub 200

You are correct and not many people are going to do what kyle did and drive until you need a tow, if you are looking at 250 miles of range and want to come in to charge at 20% that will give you 200 miles.

The thread linked below has summaries from a bunch of range reports and some pics of trip screens etc. The average report shows 200 or less without towing, but hoping these numbers improve with better batteries in the years to come.

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...cybertruck-after-many-real-world-tests.10983/

I have to say when I reserved my 500 mile range Tri-Motor back in Nov 2019, I did so because of the range (I already had a reservation in for a 400 mile Rivian R1T March 2019).

That was the big draw. Tesla was offering 500 miles of range. More than the Rivian. Now, 4+ years later if usable range is ~200 miles (and it doesn't matter why it is only 200 miles) that is one helluva a difference.

I am keeping my reservation and will make a decision when my # comes up, but it is not a slam dunk like it was when I placed the reservation.

 

[Gigahorse]

I have to say when I reserved my 500 mile range Tri-Motor back in Nov 2019, I did so because of the range (I already had a reservation in for a 400 mile Rivian R1T March 2019).

That was the big draw. Tesla was offering 500 miles of range. More than the Rivian. Now, 4+ years later if usable range is ~200 miles (and it doesn't matter why it is only 200 miles) that is one helluva a difference.

I am keeping my reservation and will make a decision when my # comes up, but it is not a slam dunk like it was when I placed the reservation.

Yup, was a no brainer for $80k truck and 500 miles of range.
Now with it being a $120k truck with 200 it is a completely different decision.

Some nice additions like steer by wire, rear wheel steering, etc. But the big two being range and price are a lot different.

 

[agordon117]

I mean, let's at least compare the same numbers together.

400 mile rivian = 320 mile cybertruck (awd with AT tires)
400 mile rivian =/= real world range
320 mile cybertruck =/= real world range
500 mile tri motor =/= real world range.

You can't compare 500 to 200 (or 400 to 200). 500 (for 2019 tri motor spec) and 400 (rivian max pack) mile ranges are dashboard ranges only, not real world. Those numbers would never have been real world.

Comparing 500 miles of dashboard range with 200 miles of real world range (from 320 mile dashboard range) isn't a real comparison. It would have been more like 312 miles of real world range (for 500 miles dashboard range) vs 200 miles (using the same multiplier for dashboard vs real world range)

I am among the people disappointed that the 500 mile version never materialized, but let's not be disingenuous with our comparisons.

 

[Cybergirl]

"Real-world" driving range depends on what real-world you are driving in. Every range experience will vary accordingly. Range driving to and from the market will be different than a road trip to Disney World, will be different than an off-road adventure in Moab. If the choice is between a CT and Lightning, one can only compare one truck with the other when both traverse the same route, at the same time, at the same speed, with the same load... EPA ratings are for gross efficiency comparisons of vehicles. All these anecdotal range experience posts are, for the most part, meaningless unless done at least somewhat scientifically. If range is the most important factor in choosing a pickup, buy an F-150 diesel.

 

[CyberTW]

This topic is killing me right now. Tesla's just put this in front of me:

I've been invited today to order a Foundation-series and those figures are for an AWD to be delivered in the February-to-April time frame.

I've been itching to buy it for years. I thought I was about 88-thousandth in line, so this would not be a question for quite a long time. If I'm honest, I could probably afford it, even though it is a crap-ton more money than I was led to expect. I should be jumping with joy!

Yet, I've retired a little early, and have an F-150 Powerboost that can honestly run over 600 miles on a tank when it isn't on its travel-trailer leash, and did well over 200 miles on one tank recently towing about 7,000 lbs of Winnebago. Putting gas in that rig with the trailer hooked up is enough of a PITA - I can't imagine trying to charge a Cybertruck with the trailer hooked up at any Supercharger I've ever visited.

I'm too old, too invested, and too full of newly-retired wanderlust to give up the Winnebago. I could not be more sad about the ridiculous delta between what Tesla's claiming about range and what folks are saying it really is. I hate gasoline, but I feel stuck.

So I guess that everybody who doesn't have my use-case and is a little further down the reservation list can cheer a bit - I'm letting mine go, specifically over this range problem. Still hoping, though, that I get to buy one at some point! Better travel trailers are on the horizon, and maybe with another turn of the engineering wheel, so is a better Cybertruck.

I guess when someone says something like that, they're also saying that they're probably not going to be a part of the Cybertruck Owners Club, at least for now. Thanks to anyone reading this for a wonderful four years of excited speculation.

TTFN - Dave Wilson (formerly, Sr. Program Manager, Tesla Vehicle Firmware)

Well written. It is a bummer that the range wasn’t what many thought. I think the worse part is that the range extender isn’t ready. If it was ready and available to add and test, we might all be having a different convo. But it feels like they rushed the final bit out without getting the extra range people are wanting. I am still gonna get mine (in 2 years probably when my number is up). Hopefully by then, they have figured a lot out

 

[powderpoika]

How do these numbers compare to Rivian R1T and Ford Lightning under similar conditions?

 

[Woodrick]

Yup, was a no brainer for $80k truck and 500 miles of range.
Now with it being a $120k truck with 200 it is a completely different decision.

Some nice additions like steer by wire, rear wheel steering, etc. But the big two being range and price are a lot different.

Except that it isn't a $120k truck

 

[MountainRatMatt]

Gravity, like inertia, is 100% efficient at storing energy potential, unlike using your battery and regen, which loses energy every time you use it.

So if the road and traffic allows for it, coasting will get you much further than regen braking ever will.

Regen should only be used to reduce speed for corners, traffic, or to reduce top speed downhill.

Use ABRP and look at the difference in going to Pikes Peak from CS. Going to the top of Pikes Peak one way uses 6% more battery than going up and down, which is twice the distance.

This is because the hill becomes your "energy storage" when you drive down it.
No batteries required.

Seriously though, this should be common knowledge, when was the last time you guys rode a bike up and down a hill?

This is not true. You have to add all losses and wind is a MASSIVE loss especially in the Cybertruck. You will be more efficient using regen to keep the truck at 35mph down a hill than you will coasting down a hill at 70mph because there will be so much loss to wind.

I can guarantee you will have more charge in the battery at the bottom of a 5 mile long descent going 35mph using regen and no mechanical brakes than you will letting the truck coast at high speeds using no regen or acceleration.

Sponsored