What about us who just want the single motor?

JoeRod97

Well-known member
First Name
Joe
Joined
Sep 28, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
70
Reaction score
58
Location
Folsom
Vehicles
Camaro SS.Impala.BMW335i.HD Road King.Fatboy
Occupation
UPS driver..retired
Country flag
So now they say 4 motors? What about us who just want the single motor? I dont need to tow a house and dont want a plaid speedster.just want the cool truck and quad..looks like ill be way down the list even though i orderdd first!
Sponsored

 

Cybertruck Hawaii

Banned
Well-known member
Banned
First Name
Michael
Joined
Apr 24, 2021
Threads
0
Messages
590
Reaction score
419
Location
Honolulu
Vehicles
Sienna
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
I preordered a single motor CT. Iā€™m willing to get the four motor version if the tailgate has a n emblem that reads, ā€œQUAD MOTORā€, for the kids to envy me in the driverā€™s seat. This message is from a Happy Boomer to Elon!
 

John K

Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Jan 2, 2020
Threads
41
Messages
2,803
Reaction score
5,768
Location
Los Angeles
Vehicles
Volt, CT reserve day 2
Country flag
I am hoping you are contacted based on reservation order placement, asked if you wish to purchase an available trim but unfortunately get told you are in a new reservation line awaiting the preferred trim to start.

I only need the one but reserved the dual.
 

Ogre

Well-known member
First Name
Dennis
Joined
Jul 3, 2021
Threads
164
Messages
10,719
Reaction score
26,998
Location
Ogregon
Vehicles
Model Y
Country flag
Since it seems like changes to the lineup will be substantial, I think itā€™s likely they will just work their way through the pre-orders regardless of configuration.

If the only change is adding the quad motor config, maybe not?? We just donā€™t really know.
 

Deleted member 12457

Guest
So now they say 4 motors? What about us who just want the single motor? I dont need to tow a house and dont want a plaid speedster.just want the cool truck and quad..looks like ill be way down the list even though i orderdd first!
I have to wonder if a single motor would be powerful enough to push the heavy CT. You're in Folsom, CA, correct? The snow line going up both 50 and 80 used to be much lower than it is now but I presume you head into the mountains at all times of the year so having the extra power will help you up the hill as well as having AWD will help in the snow.
 


android04

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 28, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
310
Reaction score
608
Location
Crete, NE
Vehicles
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR RWD, Tesla Cybertruck Tri-motor (reserved)
Country flag
I have to wonder if a single motor would be powerful enough to push the heavy CT. You're in Folsom, CA, correct? The snow line going up both 50 and 80 used to be much lower than it is now but I presume you head into the mountains at all times of the year so having the extra power will help you up the hill as well as having AWD will help in the snow.
A single motor would be no problem for the Cybertruck, even going up the mountains. Even if they put the single rear motor like the one in my Model 3 LR RWD, it has close to 300 HP and over 300 pound-feet of torque. Not an issue at all, especially since the Cybertruck will likely have lower gearing than Model 3 (indicated by the lower top speeds and high torque at the wheels that Elon Musk mentioned in the unveiling).
 

Deleted member 12457

Guest
A single motor would be no problem for the Cybertruck, even going up the mountains. Even if they put the single rear motor like the one in my Model 3 LR RWD, it has close to 300 HP and over 300 pound-feet of torque. Not an issue at all, especially since the Cybertruck will likely have lower gearing than Model 3 (indicated by the lower top speeds and high torque at the wheels that Elon Musk mentioned in the unveiling).
Ok but the CT is guessed to weigh in the 5-6K range when using it's larger size and payload. A single motor Model 3 is at least 1000 lbs less. Try driving your Model 3 with five passengers and several bags of cement/rock in the trunks to get in the same weight area as an empty CT then try driving up to Cheyenne and see how it does. I know the Model 3 motors are really good but the extra weight of the CT could be an issue. Gearing might help but battery usage will go up dramatically with the extra load.
 

Throwcomputer

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2021
Threads
26
Messages
1,168
Reaction score
2,958
Location
Staten Island, NY
Vehicles
07 Ridgeline, Vintage Vespas, 02 Harley Sportster
Occupation
TV & Film
Country flag
Ok but the CT is guessed to weigh in the 5-6K range when using it's larger size and payload. A single motor Model 3 is at least 1000 lbs less. Try driving your Model 3 with five passengers and several bags of cement/rock in the trunks to get in the same weight area as an empty CT then try driving up to Cheyenne and see how it does. I know the Model 3 motors are really good but the extra weight of the CT could be an issue. Gearing might help but battery usage will go up dramatically with the extra load.
5-6k is highly optimistic weight for the CT. Model y comes in at 5.3-5.6k gvw. SS weighs more than aluminum panels. Larger battery weighs more. Larger castings weigh more. Huge windshield weighs more. I'd be surprised if the ct comes in under 7.5k gvw and more like 8.5k gvw, and I think most people are overly optimistic about the ct weight based on generic statements from years ago. I mean a rivian r1t comes in at 8.5k gvw. It's not complicated to use basic comparisons of similar vehicles to understand the CT is not going to be as light a vehicle as people want to believe it to be.

I bet that windshield by itself weighs 800-1200 lbs! ? Ok that may be over exaggerating but it's still way larger than a model y windshield.
 
Last edited:

Bill906

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2020
Threads
4
Messages
1,386
Reaction score
3,229
Location
Wisconsin
Vehicles
Jeep
Country flag
5-6k is highly optimistic weight for the CT. Model y comes in at 5.3-5.6k gvw. SS weighs more than aluminum panels. Larger battery weighs more. Larger castings weigh more. Huge windshield weighs more. I'd be surprised if the ct comes in under 7.5k gvw and more like 8.5k gvw, and I think most people are overly optimistic about the ct weight based on generic statements from years ago. I mean a rivian r1t comes in at 8.5k gvw. It's not complicated to use basic comparisons of similar vehicles to understand the CT is not going to be as light a vehicle as people want to believe it to be.

I bet that windshield by itself weighs 800-1200 lbs! ? Ok that may be over exaggerating but it's still way larger than a model y windshield.
Is the Rivian body on frame? Iā€™m assuming it is but as I started writing this I realized I donā€™t know this for sure.
I believe a main reason for going with exoskeleton was so it could weigh less. I would guess the weight savings to be significant to justify the radical change from the norm. With these assumptions I expect many of us will be surprised when we learn the actual weight.
 

Klaxon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2020
Threads
7
Messages
397
Reaction score
732
Location
Canada
Vehicles
CT
Country flag
You still can consider a quad as a single motor with three spare ā˜¹
 


Throwcomputer

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2021
Threads
26
Messages
1,168
Reaction score
2,958
Location
Staten Island, NY
Vehicles
07 Ridgeline, Vintage Vespas, 02 Harley Sportster
Occupation
TV & Film
Country flag
Is the Rivian body on frame? Iā€™m assuming it is but as I started writing this I realized I donā€™t know this for sure.
I believe a main reason for going with exoskeleton was so it could weigh less. I would guess the weight savings to be significant to justify the radical change from the norm. With these assumptions I expect many of us will be surprised when we learn the actual weight.
Body on frame weight shifted to heavier SS exoskeleton. Can't see it being a huge weight saver.. Especially when you add on the larger battery, windshield and motors. Weight savings to get it to stay approximately the same weight and not be 1.5x heavier than the body on frame version, not to be 1.5x lighter than the body on frame version.
 

Mini2nut

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2020
Threads
87
Messages
2,188
Reaction score
4,119
Location
CA
Vehicles
2019 Tacoma TRD Pro
Country flag
I predict that the Single Motor trim level will be manufactured but itā€™s 3+ years away from initial production. Supply will need to catch up to demand first. By that time I predict the $40k price point revealed in 2019 will be $50k+ by the time it hits the market in 2025 or so.
 

android04

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 28, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
310
Reaction score
608
Location
Crete, NE
Vehicles
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR RWD, Tesla Cybertruck Tri-motor (reserved)
Country flag
Ok but the CT is guessed to weigh in the 5-6K range when using it's larger size and payload. A single motor Model 3 is at least 1000 lbs less. Try driving your Model 3 with five passengers and several bags of cement/rock in the trunks to get in the same weight area as an empty CT then try driving up to Cheyenne and see how it does. I know the Model 3 motors are really good but the extra weight of the CT could be an issue. Gearing might help but battery usage will go up dramatically with the extra load.
Warning: I wrote a LONG post to show how a single drive unit taken directly from a Model 3 would affect the performance of a Cybertruck single motor (aka CT-1) going up a mountain highway under various scenarios and loads. It's really long and you might not want to read it, but that's fine. The TL;DR is that it's not a problem, and even less so with the improvements Tesla has made to the Model 3 motor (as seen right now in the Model Y). I omitted all the physics calculations to avoid overloading more than I have. If anybody finds any errors or calculates differently, let me know.

I've driven my Model 3 LR RWD pulling a trailer with a lawn tractor and other equipment (additional weight of about 1200 lbs, for a total combined weight of 5200 lbs). Now I didn't drive up a mountain because there are none around me, but can't feel a thing going up hills.

Have you ever driven an EV? Of course your energy consumption will go up driving uphill no matter what, but the torque and power is mostly available at will no matter the speed. No gears to shift, no sweet spot RPM ranges to target. If you are trying to do a launch uphill, your 0-60 will suffer. But for normal driving it won't affect you. The Model 3 has a gear reduction in its differential of 9:1, so the torque won't be a problem at all. If Tesla were to use the same exact rear motor that's in my Model 3 LR RWD in a Cybertruck Single motor (hereby abbreviated CT-1) and designed it for a top speed of 110 MPH (as speculated) versus the 140 MPH on my car, then the gear ratio could be 11.45:1.

I used a bunch of calculations (I'll spare you the details unless you want to see them) and here is what I came up with.

10% is the maximum uphill grade that is used on highways in the USA (there are short sections of roads in cities that are a bit steeper). Apparently, going steeper than that makes it hard to see what is ahead of you on the road. 10% grade is a 5.71 degree angle.

Mountain Pass Performance put their Model 3 LR RWD on a dyno years ago and based on their data, it has about 300 HP and 215 lbf-ft at 60 MPH (has higher peaks at lower speeds).

I calculated how much horsepower the single motor in my Model 3 would need to put out to maintain a 60 MPH speed up the 10% grade (or 5.71 degree slope). I used 60 MPH because I have actual data on how much power my motor consumes driving on a flat road at that speed (this will cover the friction and wind drag portions of the total power needed. Then I calculated the vertical portion of the total power needed, which is what is overcoming the force of gravity and pushing the vehicle uphill. Here a 3 different scenarios:

1. My Model 3 LR RWD, with me in it (total curb weight of 3860lbs + my 170lbs, which is 4030 lbs. To go 60 MPH on a 10% grade requires 91.3 HP.

2. A CT-1 with an estimated curb + driver weight of 6000 lbs. To go 60 MPH on a 10% grade requires 122.8 HP.

3. A CT-1 at 6000 lbs with it's max towing weight of 7,500 lbs (total of 13,500 lbs). To go 60 MPH on a 10% grade requires 242.7 HP.

4. A CT-1 at 6000 lbs with it's max towing weight of 7,500 lbs and payload of 2,500 lbs (tongue weight of trailer subtracts from the max payload capacity of 3,500 lbs) for a total of 17,000 lbs. To go 60 MPH on a 10% grade requires 298.7 HP. This is where we could have an issue, as that is almost at the limit of the single Model 3 drive unit.

The horsepower numbers don't have to be huge to be able to maintain speed on hills. There are 3/4 ton pickup trucks out there with diesel engines that have about the same or slightly less horsepower than the single Model 3 rear motor, and even semi trucks could have 400-500 HP engines.

Torque will be a more important thing for going up slopes with added weight if accelerating from a stop or slower speeds. Torque is a force, and F=ma. The torque will be somewhat constant, therefore the acceleration will be directly proportionally to the added mass from cargo, towing, or going up an incline. Once again, here are the results of my calculations based on the Model 3 LR RWD being able to accelerate from 0-60 MPH in 4.8 seconds on a level surface. A direct carryover of the drive unit from my Model 3 to a 6000 lb CT-1 would result in a 0-60 MPH time of 7.2 seconds on a flat surface. A 13,500 lb CT-1 plus max trailer weight would result in a 0-60 MPH time of 16.1 seconds on a flat surface. On a 10% grade, this would likely end up being:

1. Model 3 plus me going up a 10% grade would do 0-60 MPH in 5.1 seconds

2. CT-1 plus me at 6000 lbs going up a 10% grade would do 0-60 MPH in 7.6 seconds (with Model 3 motor)

3. CT-1 plus 7,500 lb trailer going up a 10% grade would do 0-60 MPH in 16.9 seconds (with Model 3 motor)

4. CT-1 plus 7,500 lb trailer plus 2,500 payload (subtract trailer tongue weight from max payload capacity) going up a 10% grade would do 0-60 MPH in 18.4 seconds (with Model 3 motor)

As I mentioned above, the CT-1 was originally presented as having a top speed of 110 MPH and would likely have better gear reduction than Model 3 (11.45:1 for CT-1 vs. 9:1 for Model 3). This is shown by calculations based on directly transplanting a Model 3 drive unit into CT-1 and getting a 0-60 MPH time of 7.2 seconds. Whereas in the unveiling of Cybertruck the CT-1 was listed an expected 0-60 MPH time of 6.5 seconds. The ratios are close to those of the gearing. Therefore, the 0-60 times would be better than what I calculated above based on an unmodified Model 3 rear drive unit being put in the CT-1. This probably shows that the drive unit that Tesla will use in Cybertruck will not be a direct carry-over from Model 3, but will have some modifications to get more power, torque, or RPMs out of it. I know that the Model Y already has some improvements to the same drive unit that is used in Model 3 even though they are practically the same. It has higher horsepower ratings than Model 3. My calculations show that the single motor CT-1 drive unit would output about 345 HP vs the Model 3 LR RWD drive unit at a peak of 325 HP. Therefore the above 0-60 times would likely be:

2a. CT-1 plus me at 6000 lbs driving on flat road would do 0-60 MPH in 6.5 seconds (based on CT unveiling)
2b. CT-1 plus me at 6000 lbs going up a 10% grade would do 0-60 MPH in 7.1 seconds (based on CT unveiling)

3a. CT-1 plus 7,500 lb trailer driving on flat ground would do 0-60 MPH in 14.6 seconds (based on CT unveiling)
3b. CT-1 plus 7,500 lb trailer going up a 10% grade would do 0-60 MPH in 16.0 seconds (based on CT unveiling)

4a. CT-1 plus 7,500 lb trailer plus 2,500 payload (subtract trailer tongue weight from max payload capacity) driving on flat road would do 0-60 MPH in 18.3 seconds (based on CT unveiling)
4b. CT-1 plus 7,500 lb trailer plus 2,500 payload (subtract trailer tongue weight from max payload capacity) going up a 10% grade would do 0-60 MPH in 20.2 seconds (based on CT unveiling)

Traction for steering or pulling could be an issue with a single motor, RWD Cybertruck if driving through very uneven or soft terrain. There will also be a slight reduction in motor horsepower and torque at lower battery SOCs (as can be seen from the Mountain Pass Performance dyno tests that I linked above). Go look up Ford F150 specs (Ford has nice PDFs on their website that list all the specs) as far as engine HP, torque, curb weight, GVWR, towing capacities and see how those compare. I did, and do not see any problems with using a single Model 3 drive unit on a CT-1, except that the top speed going up a 10% grade would be limited to 60 MPH at the absolute maximum GCWR (Gross Combined Weight Rating), which would likely be around 17,000 lbs for the CT-1. With some enhancement to the drive unit (like what is already on the Model Y drive units), Tesla would add a bit more horsepower to the single motor (likely to around 345 HP) and that would add a little more top end speed to the CT-1 while under the maximum loads.
 
Last edited:

Ogre

Well-known member
First Name
Dennis
Joined
Jul 3, 2021
Threads
164
Messages
10,719
Reaction score
26,998
Location
Ogregon
Vehicles
Model Y
Country flag
Is the Rivian body on frame? Iā€™m assuming it is but as I started writing this I realized I donā€™t know this for sure.
I believe a main reason for going with exoskeleton was so it could weigh less. I would guess the weight savings to be significant to justify the radical change from the norm. With these assumptions I expect many of us will be surprised when we learn the actual weight.
Rivianā€˜s design most closely resembles a body on frame design with the batteries between the widened rails.

Tesla Cybertruck What about us who just want the single motor? 1639260781780
 

android04

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 28, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
310
Reaction score
608
Location
Crete, NE
Vehicles
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR RWD, Tesla Cybertruck Tri-motor (reserved)
Country flag
I updated my long post above with some more info and a TL;DR at the beginning of the post. Also wanted to say that in the past I calculated a possible weight for the SS Cybertruck skin based on the surface area of pictures (measured and calculated based on wheelbase dimensions from the unveiling) and assuming that the exoskeleton would be a single layer of SS only on the outside. I based the calculation on square piece of 6"x6" 304 stainless steel that I have, and came up with an exoskeleton weight of 800 lbs. Keep in mind that this exoskeleton along with the multiple castings and structural battery pack would be replacing a traditional truck frame. I'm not sure what those usually weight, but probably a lot based on this article that talks about a 350 lb weight improvement to the then-newer-generation Ford Super Duty pickups based largely on an improvement to the frame material.
Sponsored

 
 




Top