This is not earth shattering. What I said from the beginning is that its my suggestion.
I want to keep my bed flat.
I wouldn't mind sacrificing that space to keep my bed flat.
I don't understand why that's a problem.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Range Extension Stupidity
- Thread starter arnyswart
- Start date
This is not earth shattering. What I said from the beginning is that its my suggestion.
I want to keep my bed flat.
I wouldn't mind sacrificing that space to keep my bed flat.
I don't understand why that's a problem.
It's not possible with the extender size.
Maybe with a smaller one, but I listed the other reasons Tesla wouldn't put it there....regardless, it's not going there as of now.
It’s not enough room.
Source: stripped tesla track car.
Look to the roadster wheelbase vs the Lotus, space vs energy density.
I suspect it's more to do with weight distribution and keeping that extra weight within the wheelbase. The underbed trunk looks like it's sitting right on top of the rear wheels, if not a little beyond towards the rear. They could certainly have taken that space if it was farther forward, but then it would be difficult to access from outside the truck. As we've noted, it's a moot point for probably 90% of CT buyers.
LiamPope
Member
It's right at the back. It's behind the back axle. And it's half the size or less of that extender. No way it can go in there. Or it would be!
Atomadam
Member
Please note, I’m not saying that the engineers are idiots. Sometimes we can all get stuck in one type of thinking that it is hard to think outside the box.
An aluminum battery is not as sustainable in terms of Teslas main goal. But you have to weigh up the use case of lugging around all the extra weight for the bigger battery compared to a single use battery that can be exchanged and doesn’t need coolant or huge weight/volume.
When I bought my standard range model Y everyone asked me how I would cope with having such a limited range. My response is that I rarely do more than 400km in a day.
I would love a range extension in any of our cars as sometimes the long distance journeys are a pain to those that don’t want to compromise.
How many times have I used a supercharger in my ownership? 2-3 times a year.
An aluminum battery is not as sustainable in terms of Teslas main goal. But you have to weigh up the use case of lugging around all the extra weight for the bigger battery compared to a single use battery that can be exchanged and doesn’t need coolant or huge weight/volume.
When I bought my standard range model Y everyone asked me how I would cope with having such a limited range. My response is that I rarely do more than 400km in a day.
I would love a range extension in any of our cars as sometimes the long distance journeys are a pain to those that don’t want to compromise.
How many times have I used a supercharger in my ownership? 2-3 times a year.
It's one larger pack, in the same place as the smaller ones, not an add-on.
Exactly - this is one of the advantages of Rivian - you want the larger main pack? Just click the option when ordering and that is what is delivered directly from the factory - without having to lose a third of your pickup bed in the process - and really more than that when we consider the fact that you also get an standard underbed spare tire with Rivian - which you don't get with the CT. This is especially disappointing on some level when we consider the fact that the Rivian R1T is a smaller platform and a smaller truck than the CT. IMHO it would have been better for Tesla to go with this approach - and offer the ability to order a larger main pack - for the subset of customers who need more range. The reason Tesla didn't do this is because they care more about cost savings than they do customer service/meeting customer needs.
Well, like most corporations, regardless of Elon's head-in-the-clouds proclamations, Tesla is in business to make money. Rivian is still losing money on every car they make, something like $30k per vehicle. Tesla is not.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Here's a solution...
cleantechnica.com
At 3 miles per kWh, that means a day’s worth of Southwest winter sun can give me approximately 24 miles of range added. For a comparable small crossover, we’re looking at pretty close to the equivalent of a gallon of gasoline. That might not sound a lot, but keep in mind that we’re not talking about normal times in this fictional scenario that people think proves how horrible EVs are. 24 miles of ranged added per day is enough for most people to do their daily commute, but nobody wants to set up solar panels and move them around all day to get a charge. But, if there’s no gas or grid available, an ICE vehicle will be permanently out of range once the gas tank’s empty. There’s no free gallon of gas a day coming from the Great Thermonuclear Fusion Reactor In The Sky.
Only EVs Can Make Fuel Off-Grid, Keep Working During Long Power Outages - CleanTechnica
Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News! There’s a lot of ... [continued]
cleantechnica.com
At 3 miles per kWh, that means a day’s worth of Southwest winter sun can give me approximately 24 miles of range added. For a comparable small crossover, we’re looking at pretty close to the equivalent of a gallon of gasoline. That might not sound a lot, but keep in mind that we’re not talking about normal times in this fictional scenario that people think proves how horrible EVs are. 24 miles of ranged added per day is enough for most people to do their daily commute, but nobody wants to set up solar panels and move them around all day to get a charge. But, if there’s no gas or grid available, an ICE vehicle will be permanently out of range once the gas tank’s empty. There’s no free gallon of gas a day coming from the Great Thermonuclear Fusion Reactor In The Sky.
Well, like most corporations, regardless of Elon's head-in-the-clouds proclamations, Tesla is in business to make money. Rivian is still losing money on every car they make, something like $30k per vehicle. Tesla is not.
You need to say that louder. LOL.
This is simply a matter of timing and trajectory. Rivian delivered it's first car in Sept 2021 - and is actually on a faster trajectory to profitability than Tesla was - who delivered it's first mass market vehicle in 2012 - and took until 2019 to become profitable - 2020 was the first full year when Tesla was profitable - and that's including carbon credit revenue that Rivian doesn't have in comparison. Rivian is projected to become profitable by mid-late 2024 (i.e. next year). So let's say Sept 2024 - or three years from it's first vehicle delivery. Tesla took 6-7 years. Rivian is looking at 3-4 years. That's actually pretty admirable all things considered.Well, like most corporations, regardless of Elon's head-in-the-clouds proclamations, Tesla is in business to make money. Rivian is still losing money on every car they make, something like $30k per vehicle. Tesla is not.
There is a user on the Cybertruck forum that has posted a theory about the lack of 500 standard miles of range, and the slightly reduced payload from 2019. His theory is that it with the larger battery and the larger payload being part of the standard truck offering, the CT could reach 10,000 lbs and then could be classified as a Class 3 truck and everything that goes along with that (which we're assuming that Tesla would want to avoid). It makes sense to me, and the range extender also makes sense to me in that it is an accessory and not part of the main truck weight/requirements having to do with Class 3 vehicles...Check it out...
Last edited:
The frame on the r1t had a void with launch pack. Large enough for the max to fit.
the r1t is a unibody on frame with battery shove in design. It’s inefficient, as an owner of an r1s… there’s nothing I will miss from this thing. I cannot wait for my ct to come and we can sell this thing cheap!
Mrbrock
Active Member
And the cybertruck isnt unibody on frame with a battery in the middle?
The CT doesn't appear to be a unibody vehicle. Unibody simply means that the body of the car is one piece.
In the case of the Rivian. If you damage your rear quarter panel, you have to replace part of the roof and the other rear quarter panel. As its all one piece. That might not be considered a total unibody, but its close.
Lastly, the CT doesn't really have a frame. It has castings. 3 castings. Front - battery/middle - rear. Below are a few front single piece castings sitting on crates. Not really a typical frame, however everything attaches to it.
The red line below outlines edge of the casting with some stuff attached to it.
So what you end up with is body on casting.
Last edited:
No, a rivian is a unibody, like a Honda Ridgeline. Glued on top of (like a) dodge ram frame. With a battery and drive units and subframes shoved to it.
And we wonder why it weighs dodge ram 2500 amounts
Similar threads
- Locked
