raymond
Member
If the weight is 35% less, it needs 35% less energy to drive it.
As richkae said: No. The rolling resistance may be around 35% less, but that only makes up a small portion of the energy required to drive the car. A 35% lighter car will accelerate around 35% faster (given the same energy to accelerate) and in stop-and-go traffic less energy will be wasted (although with regen the advantages of a lighter car are less than with an ICE).
What reasons (pro and con) would Tesla have to build Gen III using aluminium vs. steel? It basically seems a cost trade-off towards acceleration. And for a mass-market car that trade-off may be different than for a premium sedan. But perhaps Tesla being "used" to aluminium the once-off costs will be higher for steel?