Quote:
Originally Posted by Hersbird
I think Rivian has delivered something like 60 trucks.
The problem with the Cybertruck as shown is it was running 35" mud tires more aggressive than the Raptor wears and that's what takes it down to it's terrible MPG, a 20% penalty over a standard 3.5 F150 4x4. The 37" tire Rapor loses 2 more mpg highway over the 35" Raptor. If the Cybertruck try's to play that game it's going to never get the 500 mile range they were spinning.
These guys got .48 cd for the Cybertruck. Still without mirrors or wipers which it will have. https://airshaper.com/cases/tesla-cy...k-aerodynamics |
I'm highly suspect of the airshaper numbers. And I don't know where the data cloud that they used for Cybertruck came from.
There are multi-view factory photos of Cybertruck, and it has very subtle body camber, both in elevation, and plan-view, which you can't discern without magnification and a straightedge comparison.
Bertone photographed a tufted 1970s concept in the wind tunnel, which bore the hard angularity of Cybertruck, with exceptionally good flow attachment.
Cybertruck's forebody, all the way to the center door gap, is in a favorable pressure gradient. Separation is virtually impossible.
Cybertruck's aft-body roof slope may be found to be at the drag and vortex minimum, at its 9-degree final slope.
Cybertruck's tires 'are' wide, and are MUD + SNOW, but they're totally shielded within the wheel-houses, except for the 8-inch ground clearance, and the wheels appear to be of low porosity and low windage.
And Cybertruck's air suspension may be calibrated for a degree of body inclination, nose down, tail up, which is favored for drag optimization.
The Dassault Exa Powerflow CFD that Tesla uses is commercial-grade, and Tesla's data is right from the AUTO CAD-CAM cloud which created the truck. For the time being, I'll defer to Tesla. If they say Cd 0.30, I'll go with that.
Closer to year's end we may find that Tesla has undersold and overdelivered on aerodynamics.