Tesla delays Cybertruck's range extender, reduces its range
electrek.co
electrek.co
> But when it comes to specs, Tesla has generally delivered on its promises.
That's an easy cop-out. If in good-faith, it just means that Tesla knows how to build the spec but has no idea what it means to scale it. In bad-faith, it's a calculated unfettered media-hype.
I would expect a company which reached the stage of presenting a product to have at least a prototype as well as some grasp on its BOM and how this product could be mass-produced. If the company also announces a price, I expect it to have done its homework before involving the public.
Letting this expectation continuously slide to allow yet-another media-spectacle of "Tesla announcing a sub-30.000 <whatever>" is quite a weakness in critical journalism (and thinking).
> Not with the Cybertruck.
The fact that Tesla generally delivered on spec but not on price is exactly what I was commenting on. It's not a quality, it's still bad management.
Especially if you consider that they may have silently reduced spec in other areas to somehow meet their announced price, i.e. reducing material-quality, mounting components with adhesive, etc.
The fact that they didn't deliver on price and spec on the Cybertruck is actually proving the assumption that their product-announcements are not sufficiently grounded in reality.
I've had some small teething problems with the truck but it has been the best vehicle I've ever driven. It works perfectly as a regular daily driver but I can load my SCUBA gear and tanks into the back, and go off-road, get a bunch of dives in, and be back to my truck that I've outfitted with fresh water for a shower, a fridge in the frunk for snacks and drinks, and a gear tunnel with dry and warm clothes.
Now that I can charge on the Supercharger network, the truck has just gotten even better since I no longer have to plan out my charging as carefully. The Rivian is built like a tank, it's handled everything I've thrown at it in stride, and the Rivian software folks have been making progress month after month.
I'm so glad that I bought a Rivian but really, I'm even more glad that I didn't buy a Cybertruck given the absolutely disastrous launch that its had. Just off the top of my head, I've heard of wheels falling off, trim falling off, tonneau cover nonfunctional and non removable, 20% less range than marketed, accelerator pedal falling off and sticking, PRNDL falling off, seats that creak and wiggle, poor offroading capabilities, red screen of death, FSD driving the truck into the wrong lanes, and I'm sure there are many other issues that I've not even heard about.
As a long time Tesla owner (I was an early adopter of the first gen Model S), I expected the overpromise and underdelivery of their products, but I'm pretty sure I'm never going back to Tesla if Rivian and other auto companies deliver better value and quality EVs.
The windshield wiper committing suicide is a common one.
Which is a very sober and reasonable statement. If other companies deliver better value and quality, the only reason to buy a Tesla would be brand-loyalty (which is not a good reason to compromise on value/quality)
In my area, I can lease an entry-level Mercedes EV (I forget what they're called) something like 20-30% cheaper than I can get a Model 3. The entry-level Mercedes is decidedly worse than the Model 3, but you can't beat the pricing for what is still a very solid car (with more space and better sound quality to boot).
Congrats on coming to a conclusion based on facts rather than brand-image.
Rivian seems to have produced a good car, especially considering the young age of the company.
That was true before the software update that enabled the lockers. YouTube channels like TFL did a before/after video and it’s actually pretty good now.
It has lockers and huge ground clearance after all. Of course it is hindered by its huge length compared to a wrangler, but of course it’s not in the same class. It does better than an f150 for example.
Also the stock tires are crap for real off-roading, and hardly anyone knows you need to air down.
(Disclaimer: never owned a Tesla, but I off road 4x4s around the world for a living)
The reality of the situation for the Cybertruck is that it's a pretty heavy vehicle (with as you mention) not great stock tires -- but everyone knows that. The absolute biggest issue with it though is that the tie rods for all 4 wheels don't seem to be adequate -- especially if you're coming down pretty hard on a single corner. There are countless videos out there where you see Cybertrucks with floppy wheels -- especially out offroading.
Secondly, the Cybertruck has sub-par departure angles where the hitch just gets dragged along the ground. Combined with the realization that the hitch is only rated for 160lbs of vertical load (and it's structurally attached to the frame with aluminum -- which cracks, not bends). I'm not sure if I'd be comfortable doing much beyond just bumpy roads with the truck.
Finally, the breakover angle is just not good at all either. Ground clearance doesn't mean much when the wheelbase is so long. The Rivian sits at about 15 inches of clearance with stock wheels and the Cybertruck comes in about 5% shorter at 14.4 inches. Not only that, but the Cybertruck also has a 5% longer wheelbase than the Rivian and its suspension does not articulate as much -- especially at full lift.
Real world, this means that the Rivian's departure angle in the truck is 30 degrees (plus a little more). The Cybertruck sits at 24.7 degrees in its drivable mode (it goes up to ~27 degrees if you have it in the crawl "extract" mode). There's also a 3.5ish difference in breakover angle as well.
Relative to other "standard" offroading 4x4s like the Rubicon/Wrangler or Land Cruisers, the Rivian is at best average and the Cybertruck is decidedly worse. Couple that with the R1T being able to independently power each wheel, the Cybertruck is IMO more recreational than proper off-road.
I'm not here to gatekeep so I will point out the obvious and say that the Cybertruck is for sure, a better offroading vehicle compared to most recreational/luxury vehicles out there. I'm just not sure that I'd qualify it as anything better than "okay?".
> Relative to other "standard" offroading 4x4s like the Rubicon/Wrangler or Land Cruisers, the Rivian is at best average and the Cybertruck is decidedly worse
But it's pointless to compare the Cybertruck to a Wrangler or Land Cruiser. It can tow more than 3x as much, payload is more than double, it can seat five people and still have a hug amount of cargo and of course it's way, way, way longer (and wider).
It only makes sense to compare it to an F-150, Ram 1500, Rivian, etc.
In which case it is really not bad off road at all.
Gotta give kudos to Elon for dragging Tesla through the same hurdles and coming out on top with a profitable vehicle.
Indeed, I own several Teslas and cancelled my Cybertruck reservation after seeing how bad the product was up close (and absolutely not worth what they were asking for it). I ordered an F150 Lightning instead.
The F150 and the Cybertruck is so far apart in terms of the type of vehicle they are that I can't really understand how they are used in the same conversation. It makes 0 sense to me to say "I'm going with the F150 instead", because it's not the same class of vehicles.
I'm keen to understand what you were hoping to get out the Cybertruck, that you are now instead going to get from a hybrid F150, and why you did not consider the F150 in the first place.
And in a purely cosmetic take: even panel gaps and a finish that doesn't require hand-cleaning after it rains.
EDIT: Fixed 150 to 160 lbs to match manual.
manual says 1100 pounds
> A full sized bed.
Cybertruck's is bigger than the Lightning's
> Better visibility.
No clear win for either truck. Both have bad blind spots.
> Go offroad.
Clear win for Cybertruck after the locking diff software update.
"The hitch assembly is designed to support vertical loads up to 160 lb (72 kg). Exceeding this maximum weight can cause damage."
The CT bed is 6' by 4', the F150 has options at 5'5" (short bed), 6'5" (standard bed), and 8' (long bed). It's also universally wider than the CT's bed (albeit by only 2"), and the depth is greater at the tailgate, and consistent throughout.
As for blind spots, trucks suck, period. But the complete loss of the back window when the tonneau cover is closed is a major visibility issue. Yes, even with the rear view camera (which all vehicles have now). The A pillar in the front is also a larger issue for the CT vs the F150.
I have yet to see a single instance of a CT doing offroading that a Subaru Legacy couldn't do - I've seen more ford pickups towing CTs out of trouble to be honest. The weight and lack of articulation put the Cybertruck at an immediate disadvantage that no amount of power control can overcome.
But who knows, really. I'd say "not Tesla", but they did add that warning to the owner's manual...
A soccer mom doesn't need a truck in the same way a roofer needs a truck.
There are very obective criterias that you can use to determine if you need a city car, a sedan, a truck, a van, or a supersport car. It really isn't rocket science
I do find it weird how many people feel the need to justify a truck purchase as a necessity when it's clearly a luxury purchase, no different from buying a Lexus or Mercedes sedan because you want to.
It doesn’t make much sense to compare a hybrid with a “no gas” range of almost nothing [1] and a 1.5kwh battery to a fully electric vehicle
[1] https://www.f150gen14.com/forum/threads/powerboosts-poll-how...
If I lived in an area where gas cost $20/gallon instead of $4/gallon, then it would change the math a little - it would be a net of more like $1300/yr, and I might actually spend less on an EV in the long run (7 years to break even, assuming 0 opportunity cost on the $9k).
If I spent $20/gallon on gas and also drove 12k miles / yr instead of 3k miles / yr, then it becomes a much better proposition.
Are they not both trucks? What am I missing in that they are not the same class of vehicle?
Now, if aesthetic is the primary factor here, the CB probably trumps the F150, by a huge margin, and one would not even consider something like the F150 as a suitable replacement or equivalent.
The GP in my thread decided to replace their designer high heels fashion statement for some boring hiking boots, because the heels did not fare well when walking long distances.
there is no accounting for taste, and IMO all teslas are ugly as sin
it's an ugly, overweight, overpriced meme car hyped by tech bros and internet bots. it can't truck, in any meaningful sense, and can't even handle carwashes. like a 2017 Mazda 3 is more rugged and reliable.
I am sorry, but you start with flawed premise and the rest doesn't make sense to me, actually. They both are vehicles with crew cab and bed, that are capable of hauling and towing stuff. They shape or the fuel type are not really relevant to me, like I don't care of the fuel type (diesel/gas) of a semi that I see on the road.
Let's compare 2023 F150 powerboost supercrew 6.5 bed with characteristics that I wanted and cybertruck tri motor (announced, https://static.wixstatic.com/media/3d2aca_ce63bacb1ff240228e...)
1. payload - f150: 2,120lbs, cybertruck: 3500 lbs 2. range - f150: 450+ cybertruck: 500+ 3. towing - f150: 12,700 cybertruck: 14000 4. bed - I wanted something longer than 6'1", so I can lay down in bed. That ruled out F150 short bed and rivian, but cybertruck was very close
Judging by numbers, that indicate real truck usage, cybertruck was close or exceeding F150, that is taken as baseline. If you want to draw some arbitrary classes and say that they are different, it's your right, but actually to me you make 0 sense saying "far apart in terms of the type of vehicle they are that I can't really understand how they are used in the same conversation. " or "not the same class of vehicles".
Explain to me where they are different classes, actually. Fuel type to me is an implementation detail.
I am getting larger range and longer bed. If Ford had F150 lightning with 450+ range and 6.5 bed, I'd strongly consider it too.
But yeah, this thing ranks right up there with the worst.
I kind of liked the first-gen.
> But when it comes to specs, Tesla has generally delivered on its promises. Not with the Cybertruck.
Agree. The miss on range with the Cybertruck is too big to ignore. I can understand the price increases due to inflation or whatever. But the enticing thing was getting 500+ miles on the tri motor version, which would have made it unlike anything else - a magical mix of power, utility, and range to put it to use (or just help with range anxiety). The drop from “500+” to 320 is HUGE.
I don’t know if this range extender really makes sense either. Will people really pay 16K more to get 120 miles more while losing 1/3rd of their bed space? To me that seems like a bad deal. Why not just get a Model X at that point?
As an alternative I would prefer a PHEV truck that provides 50 miles of range so most trips are fully electric, but with a gas engine available for longer trips. The 2025 Ram 1500 Ramcharger will provide that, with an engine that works as a generator (to power electric motors).
> The 2025 Ram 1500 Ramcharger will provide that, with an engine that works as a generator (to power electric motors).
I’ve heard so little about this since the announcement I’m really worried it’s going to be killed or pushed out 4 years with the rest of the industry walking back their EV promises.
The first 8000 W generator I found [1] is 200 lbs.
Here's a 24000 W generator [2] that weighs 455 lbs. The weight of its fuel (propane) would be a little under 17 lbs for each hour's worth.
[1] https://www.generac.com/residential-products/portable-genera...
[2] https://www.generac.com/globalassets/products/residential/st...
I wonder if you could get a useful system without using up the entire bed. In order to get "infinite" range while towing, you'd probably want at least a 100kW ICE in the back. A 100kW diesel generator is a beefy boy, those usually come on a two axle trailer. But maybe you could build something more compact with a performance motorcycle engine...
Also, can the cybertruck charge its main battery from the range extender? Or can it drive while the charging port is supplied with current? The entire idea kind of dies if the ICE can't charge the main battery, you really want that to buffer demand.
Supposing that's not a problem, if the GP is right about the Ramcharger using an ICE to run the electric motors, then in principle we pretty much already know it's possible from a power density perspective.
I suppose one could start running the generator at the beginning of the trip instead of waiting for the main battery to drain significantly. Perhaps you couldn't get "infinite" range, but you could stretch your main battery's range out far enough that for all practical purposes you wouldn't care—you could either get to a charger or find some diesel and wait an hour or two after a 10+ hour trip for the generator to recharge the main battery.
They have the advantage building the powerplant (and all its periphery) into the chassis. That saves a lot of material on engine mounts and covers, you can skip the cabin heater heat pump, ect.
A big difference is also if you design it for towing or not. You can probably get functionally infinite highway range with a 20kW ICE if you don't want to tow. And those you can build real tiny. You can probably do with a 125cc with the cutest little turbo the world has every seen.
While the range drop is disappointing, it's still plenty of range. More than enough for normal drivers that aren't anxiety ridden about range. Most people only drive about 12000 miles per year. And rarely over 300 in a single day. And when you do go on a long trip: relax, have a break (you'll need it) and charge up the car and yourself. It's not healthy to be on the road non stop regularly. You can charge the car up plenty over a nice lunch break. If you need a second stop after nine hours of driving or so, you need a break as well. And no, you aren't super human.
The product itself seems popular. Tesla now is starting to dominate the truck market. And they only barely started ramping up production. It's going to be interesting to see how they'll do when they reach their production volume targets. It's of course a divisive product with its styling and features. But it's arguably performing well in sales. Despite the currently high price.
Do you mean “dominate” in some sort of philosophical way unrelated to numbers?
No, as in it's the #3 EV in the US after the other two Teslas and in front of all other EV trucks combined. Based on the numbers.
As for my other "false" claims? Which are you referring to? You used the plural here. And since we're being pedantic ...
This makes sense. Similarly, General Mills now is starting to dominate the bacon* market with their Cinnamon Toast Crunch Bacon.
https://www.kare11.com/article/life/food/2-minnesota-compani...
*cinnamon sugar encrusted bacon market
I think it likely there will be a much higher range version later, but they’re cell constrained for now so they’re only putting one layer of cells into the pack
Btw, can you believe it's been 5 years since the Cybertruck was first unvealed?
In the time it took them to do that, cheaper batteries in a standard truck became feasible.
Btw, does anyone have hands-on experience with such a truck like, say, an F150 lightning?
BlueCruise doesn't cover all freeways, but is such a game changer for commuting. It's not full self driving or Waymo but it's solid where it needs to be for a freeway heavy commute. Also it can now charge on the Tesla Supercharger network so charging is fine, esp on top of a home charger.
One problem I'll mention is it's got an electrically limited top speed, so while it accelerates great, it tops out low.
Ex. Mary, eats a pie.
Your example is not the same construction, "Mary turns off the oven, eats a pie" is a more similar type of phrasal construction.