Wh/mile efficiency reported on the highway (heat on, 30°F, 85 mph)

[WHIZZARD OF OZ]

I don't have a problem believing your numbers for the MX.

As you pointed out your conditions weren't favourable, and I said we would need to know what his conditions were as well, how long the trip was etc, so we knew why they are that high. Hence my examples.

Making predictions based on faulty or incomplete assumptions is not my forte.

Best to 'DIGEST' what's put in front of you with forte and knife. Can't wait for Sandy, or someone with a reputable background to give actual REAL WORLD byte-size bits!

Sponsored

 

[SlegMD]

Basically the conclusion from this thread so far we are experiencing the extinction, in real time, of the “truck bros” utilizing the CT, with there bigger tires and lift kits. What a time to be alive.

more seriously my interest is peaked at optimization, such as all-seasons etc

 

[Rutrow]

If I'm reading this correctly at total power? Trying to reconcile this against the EPA formula of 1 gallon of gasoline equivalent of 33.7 kilowatt hours.

Gasoline has 33,700 Wh of thermal energy per gallon, but only 12-30% of that is available as motive energy. So trucks and SUVs only reap ~ 4 kWh/gallon and highly efficient small hybrids manage 10 kWh/gallon. The rest is wasted as heat and pollution.

 

[CyberTW]

Or based on what we are seeing the EPA rating of 340 and in the real world it is down to 180, expected a drop but not that big across a 3 CT and different driver sample of over 3,000 miles.

Correct me if I am wrong, but a lot of your arguement is that the truck is 180 real world range instead of 340. But the people driving aren’t on all season tires correct? And MOST driving will be done in town with a mix of highway with mostly street. At least that will be for me. So the truck will consistently get me 260+. Road trips like you are talking about at 180 is not great and I hope it gets higher or we get more info. Again correct me if I am wrong, but a lot of your negativity is that this is a 180 mile range truck… is it?

 

[Gigahorse]

Correct me if I am wrong, but a lot of your arguement is that the truck is 180 real world range instead of 340. But the people driving aren’t on all season tires correct? And MOST driving will be done in town with a mix of highway with mostly street. At least that will be for me. So the truck will consistently get me 260+. Road trips like you are talking about at 180 is not great and I hope it gets higher or we get more info. Again correct me if I am wrong, but a lot of your negativity is that this is a 180 mile range truck… is it?

Not sure if it is negativity unless you read it that way, pretty much just reposting new stats and images that are coming out.
Personally I am disappointed that the 500+mile range 80k truck is now a 180 mile range 120k truck.
Really hopping for more/better range and charging info to come out but what we have gotten so far has been bad.
Especially the recent charging info.

 

[VDR]

And MOST driving will be done in town with a mix of highway with mostly street. At least that will be for me. So the truck will consistently get me 260+. Road trips like you are talking about at 180 is not great and I hope it gets higher or we get more info.

I would say that the local in town driving range is virtually irrelevant, the EPA could be 150 miles if you can charge at the end of the day who cares. It's the road trips where the range matters.

Personally I am disappointed that the 500+mile range 80k truck is now a 180 mile range 120k truck.
Really hopping for more/better range and charging info to come out but what we have gotten so far has been bad.

This realistic 200-240 mile range truck is truly a joke in relation to what was promoted on day 1.
30-60% less truck for 40% more money, definitely not worth the wait. The charging is icing on the cake.

 

[Crissa]

Personally I am disappointed that the 500+mile range 80k truck is now a 180 mile range 120k truck.

This realistic 200-240 mile range truck is truly a joke in relation to what was promoted on day 1.

These are basically lies, though. No one ever offered a truck with 500 mile range up a hill at 85 mph with the heater blasting in sub-freezing temps.

-Crissa

 

[Keeney]

EPA range is going to be somewhat useless for extrapolating range at highway speeds. Even the highway portion of the EPA standard course averages only like 48 MPH and peaks at only 60.

Using a bigger battery to drive faster doesn't necessarily help you complete your long highway trip any faster. Say the battery WAS double at 260 kWh. And you could drive 85 MPH for 300 miles between charging. But now you need to charge twice as long. Erasing the time gains from driving faster.

Those with experience road tripping in Tesla sedans are going to have to recalibrate their planning process for a truck with more drag and a 50% larger battery.

AT vs AS tires make a big difference in aero efficiency. Big difference x Velocity squared.

Note that cabin and battery heat lost to cold air flow at road speeds will also be proportional to the square of the velocity. The vehicle will use more energy per mile to keep warm at 85 than at 70. The heat loss being squared more than makes up for the shorter duration.

 

[Gurule92]

Hmmm... I wonder what gets you to the destination faster. Hypermiling on granny mode or high speed with lots of charging.

Maybe the same?

 

[Keeney]

Hmmm... I wonder what gets you to the destination faster. Hypermiling on granny mode or high speed with lots of charging.

Maybe the same?

Each charging stop incurs overhead where you are not on the highway and not charging for like 10 or 15 minutes depending on traffic lights.. So its probably some speed that is just slow enough to make the minimum number of stops yet stay in the sweet range of the charging curve.

 

[VDR]

These are basically lies, though. No one ever offered a truck with 500 mile range up a hill at 85 mph with the heater blasting in sub-freezing temps.

-Crissa

500+ miles is a state away from 250 miles.
At 100% of usable (approx. 115kwh) battery assuming 2.2mi/kwh you get 253 miles. No one is going to drive 100% to 0%.
This is why people are disappointed. They are delivering an EPA of 2/3 of what was marketed & the hwy reality is only 2/3 of stated EPA.
It is much better to underpromise & over deliver than what happened here.

 

[Gigahorse]

These are basically lies, though. No one ever offered a truck with 500 mile range up a hill at 85 mph with the heater blasting in sub-freezing temps.

-Crissa

6,000 miles, mix of city and highway, not breaking the speed limit.
208 mile range, not 500, not 340, not 320, not 312......208

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...k-after-20-mile-range-test.10983/#post-218880

 

[Gigahorse]

I would say that the local in town driving range is virtually irrelevant, the EPA could be 150 miles if you can charge at the end of the day who cares. It's the road trips where the range matters.

This realistic 200-240 mile range truck is truly a joke in relation to what was promoted on day 1.
30-60% less truck for 40% more money, definitely not worth the wait. The charging is icing on the cake.

218

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...k-after-20-mile-range-test.10983/#post-218880

 

[Rutrow]

Hmmm... I wonder what gets you to the destination faster. Hypermiling on granny mode or high speed with lots of charging.

Maybe the same?

Bjørn Nyland tested a Model X a few years ago and found that driving between 93-106 mph (150-170 kph) was the quickest way to cover the greatest distance, taking into account charging stops. He thought 93 was the best speed because Tesla's cruise control will still work at that speed.

 

[cvalue13]

Bjørn Nyland tested a Model X a few years ago and found that driving between 93-106 mph (150-170 kph) was the quickest way to cover the greatest distance, taking into account charging stops.

would be interesting to see that test in a CT

I wish this chart’s X-axis went way higher

someone please run this chart out to an Y-axis of the CT top speed and scale the X-axis as high as needs to go to view it?

I’m feeling lazy (and not great with graphs)

hell for that matter it would be cool to see this chart with all Teslas, the Rivian, and Lightning

Sponsored