Leeclanual
Member
Screw the cyber truck… I want a Tesla Semi.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tam
Well-Known Member
Currently, the MegaWatt charging port and plug are big and rectangular, not rounded.
In the meantime, the current Cybertruck charge port and plug are the same as the rest of Tesla cars S 3 X Y.
Semi prototype was 4 sets of HV pins (likely to 4 packs feeding the 4 Model 3 motors).
Cybertruck prototype was standard connector (again reusing parts).
Tesla is on standards group for Megawatt charging connector, and have patent on a smaller squarer connector.
Tesla Semi Truck Megacharger Gets Improvements, Shows 'Charging System with Cooling System' Patent
Check New Photos Of Tesla Semi's Megachargers: The Plug Is Big
Cybertruck may get dual ports to handle home charging on existing EVSE along with system compatibility (NACS, CCS(1) to NACS).
Packs may stay in use until a critical fault makes them unusable at which point it comes down to their modularity.
If the pack is still usable with 75% SOC, the Semi is a functional standard range version and would not be decommissioned.
Sub 50% capacity is still great for a local or yard truck.
Yes, that makes sense.
The statement was ambiguous. It was said in the context of the immersive cooling tech and a graph showing V4 Supercharging. I suspect what is happening is that Cybertruck is being optimized for V4 wiich will also do up to 1,000V. I don’t think they will put a Megacharger inlet on the Cybertruck.
Why? It was already shown that one Megacharger install used the rectangular prototype MCS connector. So I would guess that they have switched to the official standard triangular one now. But I expect the Semi to have both a MCS and NACS inlet.
Exterior width is 8.5 feet, that extra 6.75 sqft is offset by subtraction for ground clearance between wheels gap, need to also include mirrors.
I came up with 0.8 kWh/ mile for aero years ago.
Gigapress
Trying to be less wrong
Do you think to 0.36 drag coefficient included the trailer as well as the tractor?
Doubful, but I think a box trailer of similar crossection may have minimal impact on it (more side area, but longer combined object)
A V4 Supercharger at “1,000V” with immersive cooling should allow even a Cybertruck with a 200 kWh pack to charge at peak. Adding an additional relatively low-volume, higher-cost Megacharger inlet would just be for bling and would add cost. We see Tesla optimizing and reducing cost all of the time so that seems contradictory.
Is the entire battery pack under the cab, or is some of it stored vertically behind it too? ~10 Model S packs is a lot of space
Under cab. There are two steps up after running board.
FWIW, original 1865 Model S battery modules were 3.1 inches high.
Not mentioned is the small plaid carbon wrapped motor weight compared with heavy diesel engine along with the seamless gears creating insane efficiency.
Power expended and regaining is continuous.
News media is ignoring this semi.
Great for me. HODL and will continue dollar cost averaging.
Power expended and regaining is continuous.
News media is ignoring this semi.
Great for me. HODL and will continue dollar cost averaging.
Prototypes were likely 4 off the shelf packs.
Production is likely some number of custom size single cell height modules layered together. Model 3 modules are 3.5 inches thick so could stack six in a 2 foot high box. At 11.5x73 inches, they could fit sideways and get eight in 8 ft of vehicle length. 48 modules is more than 12 cars worth and over 1 MWh.
Our old Blazer had a cable actuated front axle disconnect system for efficency.
This system is a little fancier since the motors synchronize their speed to the axle before engaging.
Having no net torque demand and no speed difference when engaging is a big differentiator from the two speed gearbox issues of the past.
It's a bit amusing to look back at old post and see where we're at. Here I was arguing that the efficiency of the Semi could be in range 1.2 to 1.5 kWh/mile. Now Musk is clear that they are getting 1.7 kWh/mile.
One thing that has always been confusing about this discussion is the distinction between fully loaded efficiency and avg efficiency. A huge portion of driven miles is an unloaded return trip. So average efficiency is an average of loaded and unloaded trips.
When Musk says 1.7 kWh/mile, I suspect he is just talking about fully loaded. If so, the average efficiency could still be in range of 1.2 to 1.5.
Cheers!
Watts_Up
Well-Known Member
Does Semi with a trailer have a length limitation?
So I was wondering if adding a folding rear cover (a litle like the shape or an egg, or so)
could improve the aero-efficiency of the Semi for long distance?
I noticed that in some states, semi trucks can have two or even three trailers.
Does thoses elongated trucks have also the same 80k Lbs weight limitation?
So I was wondering if adding a folding rear cover (a litle like the shape or an egg, or so)
could improve the aero-efficiency of the Semi for long distance?
I noticed that in some states, semi trucks can have two or even three trailers.
Does thoses elongated trucks have also the same 80k Lbs weight limitation?
Watts_Up
Well-Known Member
Yes - they can definitely add aerodynamic trailer tails as you may have seen on existing highway trucks. During the presentation, they mentioned that they decided not to add aerodynamic enhancements for the 500-mile test run.
Similar threads
