Blade Runner Redux - Tesla Cybertruck!

[TheEnemy]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

Not a test of towing power, a test of dead weight and traction. A towing test would be to hook a max rated trailer up with a big frontal aera and go up a mountain pass to check power, down the other side to check braking, or down a flat piece of interstate to check economy. TFLtruck on u-tube does these tests very fair and consistently for most trucks, I look forward to their test of the Cybertruck in 3 years.

They did so with the Model X, performance wise it did real well. It was a worst case scenario, the trailer empty weighed as much as the tow rating so it wound up being the highest aero drag possible. It climbed faster than most were capable of, and the regenerative braking meant they rarely had to hit the brakes. They did find that they got about 1/3 of the range, they were not driving conservatively. Engineering Explained did a good episode on why the range is so short.

I am expecting the Cybertruck to loose about 50% of its range pulling my trailer, which is why I want the option to get the larger battery pack for the dual motor.

[Xist]

Just buy two Tesla trucks and use one to tow the other.

[freebeard]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laD70nlARTU

Every kid that had the Lamborghini poster on their wall in the 1980s will want one without really knowing why.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JSH

Not really. The US average Tesla Supercharger price is $0.28 per kWh. For a Model 3 Long range that would be about $0.075 cents per mile assuming 10% charging loss. That is equal to about 34 mpg at current gasoline prices. (The national average for unleaded in $2.56 per gallon)

Using public chargers kills a huge cost benefit of EVs.

Sorting out cost per mile for BEVs has been a challenge for me.
A 'typical' employed American works 50-weeks each year,with 2-weeks that they could do any serious travel.
The average national domestic cost for electricity is 12-cents/kWh.
With home charging,a Tesla 3,long-range owner would pay $12 /'tank,' @ $4.45-gallon equivalent.With an actual 301 miles highway range,that's 3.976-cents/mile.
Some Model 3 owners I visit with don't pay for Superchargers.It's free as long as they own the car.
Otherwise,for the 2-weeks a year,holiday travel,@ $0.28/kWh,they'd be paying $10.39/gallon on the open road.And at 112-mpg,it works out at $0.0933/mile.
On a national level,it's been calculated that the Tesla owner will pay $1,000 less a year than the typical vehicle owner.
Elon Musk's premise for Tesla was,to provide for zero-carbon travel.
Each gallon of gas,according to Argonne National Labs, has a hidden $0.51/gallon subsidy built in,which is pulled from the general fund,underwritten by some whom are non-drivers.And it takes 290,513 Btus to create a gallon of gas which possesses 111,736 Btus of heat value,which will deliver 39,107 Btus to the road surface for actual traction power.The rest of the energy is lost out the tailpipe and radiator.
Tesla as well as all BEVs are basically 'adiabatic engine' vehicles.The Model 3 has the equivalent of a BSFC of 0.137 lb/bhp-hr.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cybertruck will be going up against competition like the 2019 Motor Trend Truck of the Year,the Ram 2500 HD Power Wagon 6.4-L Hemi Crew Cab,with 1.0354 MWh 'battery',474.3-mile range,@ 2,183 Wh/mi,unladen.

[redpoint5]

I find it easier to calculate "fuel" cost of EVs by using the miles per kWh (or watt/hrs per mile) and multiplying by the utility rate.

A Model 3 might have a 4 mile per kWh efficiency (more or less depending on season), with a 10% loss in charging/conditioning. Lets call it 285 watt/hr per mile when everything is said and done.

At my utility rate of 11 cents per kWh, that would be 3 cents per mile. Compare that to my Acura at 30 MPG and assuming 3/gallon gas, my fuel cost is 10 cents per mile, or roughly 3x the cost of electricity. That correlates pretty nicely with the efficiency of electric propulsion compared to internal combustion.

12,000 miles a year in my Acura would cost $1200, and $360 in a Model 3.

Of course, all this is easy to calculate using the Calculator linked in my signature.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

Saves 1000 pounds really? And thick steel panels and bullet proof glass probably saves more compared to the aluminum modern F150. This is the fairy stuff I'm talking about, along with suddenly a 200% improvement in battery weight. There is no way the Cybertruck is going to weight less than a long Range Model X and it's lightweight unibody aluminum construction while it's going to need twice the battery to get 500 miles of range. So you have a Model X with twice the battery, steel instead of aluminum, big LT mud tires instead of highway radials, bullet proof glass, worse Cd, more frontal aera, things like sliding ramps strong enough to hold an atv and rider, have the ability to carry 3500 pounds, but weigh about 5200 pounds? Oh and BTW its 1/2 the price. If all that is possible they are raping people on the Model X.
It will start at 6200 pounds for the standard range 2wd and be over 7000 pounds for the 3 motor 4wd. Mark my words.

Volvo research discovered distinct performance differences between BEVs and ICE vehicles,as a function of mass.There is a sweet-spot at which more mass is an advantage with respect to regen.There's simply more kinetic energy to harvest on deceleration with the heavier vehicle.Downhill can be harvested.
The constant BSFC of an electric motor doesn't suffer the transient 'map-dancing' of an ICE,so they don't suffer the same inefficiencies during acceleration.
On the open road,aerodynamic forces dominate power consumption.I can double the weight of a trailer and still get better mpg if the trailer aerodynamics are right.My trailer doesn't use any power at all!
I don't believe that it really matters what Cybertruck weighs.It's physics and thermodynamics are in a different realm.
I am convinced that Cybertruck would benefit with an air deflector when trailer pulling,depending on the rig.That goes for all rigs as well.Simply angling up a tonneau cover on a 2007 Tundra increased mpg,from 9 mpg,to 11.5 mpg average, when pulling a Layton,Skyline,196 LT tandem axle RV travel trailer.
Cybertruck is around 38.5 sq-ft frontal area,and drag factor,potentially as low as CdA 10.827 sq-ft.Some are saying 69.595 mpg-e HWY.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Cybertruck is around 38.5 sq-ft frontal area,and drag factor,potentially as low as CdA 10.827 sq-ft.Some are saying 69.595 mpg-e HWY.

EV cars are roughly 3x more efficient than ICE equivalent, so I expect the CT to be no better than 60 MPGe. That's 3x the efficiency of a 20 MPG truck (which is a bit generous).

I wouldn't care (much) if it was as poor as 50 MPGe, as that's like getting the efficiency of a Prius in a 6-passenger truck.

I'll go with 55 MPGe as my final guestimate, or about half what the cars are getting now.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

As far as I know, an AWD Tesla still has an open differential, so basically 2 wheel drive (1 front, 1 rear). Perhaps they can individually brake a slipping wheel to provide traction to the one with most grip?

I believe that they have complete torque-vectoring designed in.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by TheEnemy

They did so with the Model X, performance wise it did real well. It was a worst case scenario, the trailer empty weighed as much as the tow rating so it wound up being the highest aero drag possible. It climbed faster than most were capable of, and the regenerative braking meant they rarely had to hit the brakes. They did find that they got about 1/3 of the range, they were not driving conservatively. Engineering Explained did a good episode on why the range is so short.

I am expecting the Cybertruck to loose about 50% of its range pulling my trailer, which is why I want the option to get the larger battery pack for the dual motor.

It wasn't the worst aerodynamics possible, it was a nice v nosed cargo trailer if I remember right. There are plenty of 8' wide, 10' high campers with an awning on the side and a A/c on the roof that are within the tow rating, and would be a more common usage for a $100k family car. Not many painters or carpet cleaners are going to use the model X to tow their cargo trailer. When they lost 2/3 of the range they were towing a teardrop sized micro camper. The range dropping to just 1/3 is going to be a best case scenario towing a real camper behind the Cybertruck. Next problem will be with twice the battery, it's going to take twice as long to recharge.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by aerohead

I believe that they have complete torque-vectoring designed in.

But it has an open diffs and with just one motor front and one rear it can only apply braking to the wheels without traction to try and force the ones with traction to be used. That's very different than applying power equally to all 4 wheels when they all have pretty much the same traction available to them and therefore climbing, pulling, or accelerating at the fastest rate possible.