Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla Takes Tug-of-War With Ford to Twitter

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.


Tesla showed a video during the Cybertruck unveiling event of the all electric pickup dragging a Ford F-150 in a tug-of-war. Ford has called the video absurd.






Some challenged the fairness of the video. In fact, scientist Neil deGrasse Tyson chimed in with a suggestion, saying it would be more fair to have the trucks compete while loaded. 











Ford VP Sunny Madra also tweeted to suggest that Tesla give Ford a Cybertruck for an “apples to apples” comparison. Musk replied, “Bring it on.”






Unfortunately, Ford’s press office quickly shut down the possibility of a towing match between the Cybertruck and F-150 with a statement:

Sunny’s tweet was tongue in cheek to point out the absurdity of Tesla’s video, nothing more.With America’s best-selling truck for 42 years, we’ve always focused on serving our truck customers regardless of what others say or do. We look forward to our all-new F-150 hybrid coming next year and all-electric F-150 in a few years.

Seems like the best way for Ford to show the absurdity of the video is to line up with their best rig and prove it can defeat the Tesla. If they won’t do it, it will be interesting to see if Musk organizes another tug-off to show the Cybertruck’s toughness.

Because, as he said during the unveiling, “You want a truck that’s really tough, not fake tough.”

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No matter how they want do it the electric will always win (despite what that video says). They are probably regretting the challenge now. It does not matter. Elon will redo it anyway.
They will decline until they have their full electric platform ready to show to the world. Then it won't be an easy win for Tesla. Think about if the trucks had exactly the same weight over each tire, tires being the same type, pressure and ultimately patch area, the same amount of distribution of torque available to each tire (evenly match), then it would be more fair test. To give the f150 the greatest advantage, throw it into 4 low with same parameters, and 'friction', it would basically come down to the vehicle that breaks traction, even just one tire, that will have moved from static to dynamic friction and lose. To predict that outcome of either vehicle spinning, it comes down to who has the best traction control. The Tesla has the best advantage here because it can quickly release the torque to get back to static friction (edge) on tire that broke loose first. With braking being equal in stopping power, the ICE setup, even in such an advantaged high torque ratio in 4 low, would have to manage the engine/transmission moment of inertias to reduce power quickly enough to get back to static faster than the Tesla. This is unlikely and one of the main selling points of the electric powertrain and ultimately would easily hand the win to Tesla (Think ludicrous launch mode holding car back at ultimate static friction).
 
"With America’s best-selling truck for 42 years, we’ve always focused on serving our truck customers regardless of what others say or do. We look forward to our all-new F-150 hybrid coming next year and all-electric F-150 in a few years."

Interesting info in Ford's response.

Hybrid F-150 coming next year
- Why are the spending money to design, develop, and support a hybrid with a EV hot on it's heels.

all-electric F-150 in a few years - wasn't it coming in 2 years? Have the timetables moved? Maybe it is not as easy as they thought. Or ....

;)
 
... Think about if the trucks had exactly the same weight over each tire, tires being the same type, pressure and ultimately patch area, the same amount of distribution of torque available to each tire (evenly match), then it would be more fair test. ...

That is not the choice consumer can make. The consumer can pick the CyberTruck or the F-150 as designed. And they are designed differently, have different weight distributions, torque distributions are different, and so on. This is Truck A versus truck B. Same choice a consumer must make.
 
That is not the choice consumer can make. The consumer can pick the CyberTruck or the F-150 as designed. And they are designed differently, have different weight distributions, torque distributions are different, and so on. This is Truck A versus truck B. Same choice a consumer must make.
That wasn't at all the point, but yes, the consumer is not setting up the test in the video (which I believe it to be a pathetic attempt to win over the uninformed). To win over the average truck consumer (i.e. that may have performed in tug-o-wars, towed heavy trailers or driven light in the rear-slides easily), what I'm suggesting will remove the most obvious discrepancies between the two platforms. To be fair, to do exactly what I'm saying outside a lab setting, would prove difficult by the average consumer, but a responsible attempt by an unbiased test between the two trucks (loaded up to the max payload) and fitting each vehicle with the same tires, could show the Tesla superior in a much stronger light. I see the fast lane doing a proper test on these two vehicles at some point in 2023 when Tesla finally releases it :)
 
Last edited:
They will decline until they have their full electric platform ready to show to the world. Then it won't be an easy win for Tesla. Think about if the trucks had exactly the same weight over each tire, tires being the same type, pressure and ultimately patch area, the same amount of distribution of torque available to each tire (evenly match), then it would be more fair test. To give the f150 the greatest advantage, throw it into 4 low with same parameters, and 'friction', it would basically come down to the vehicle that breaks traction, even just one tire, that will have moved from static to dynamic friction and lose. To predict that outcome of either vehicle spinning, it comes down to who has the best traction control. The Tesla has the best advantage here because it can quickly release the torque to get back to static friction (edge) on tire that broke loose first. With braking being equal in stopping power, the ICE setup, even in such an advantaged high torque ratio in 4 low, would have to manage the engine/transmission moment of inertias to reduce power quickly enough to get back to static faster than the Tesla. This is unlikely and one of the main selling points of the electric powertrain and ultimately would easily hand the win to Tesla (Think ludicrous launch mode holding car back at ultimate static friction).
It's slightly worse than that an IC engine takes at least one revolution to change torque - an EV needs one controller cycle
The EV can change torque about 100 times faster - BEFORE you add the effects of the moments of inertia
 
  • Like
Reactions: trak0r
That wasn't at all the point, but yes, the consumer is not setting up the test in the video (which I believe it to be a pathetic attempt to win over the uninformed). To win over the average truck consumer (i.e. that may have performed in tug-o-wars, towed heavy trailers or driven light in the rear-slides easily), what I'm suggesting will remove the most obvious discrepancies between the two platforms. To be fair, to do exactly what I'm saying outside a lab setting, would prove difficult by the average consumer, but a responsible attempt by an unbiased test between the two trucks (loaded up to the max payload) and fitting each vehicle with the same tires, could show the Tesla superior in a much stronger light. I see the fast lane doing a proper test on these two vehicles at some point in 2023 when Tesla finally releases it :)
That "loaded up to the max payload" would seem to be conflicting with your suggestion of "exactly the same weight over each tire" from your initial post. You gotta decide one or the other. Can't have it both ways. And what if the two vehicles don't support "the same tires" (note that even the same model tire is sometimes designed differently for different tire sizes). I think a fair comparison, in a commercial sense, is to get two trucks with mostly equivalent features (both AWD, same bed sizes, OEM tires) at a similar price point. That's the comparison between two vehicles someone can actually buy, and not a hypothetical vehicle with parts replaced and no longer the OEM price.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: trak0r
That "loaded up to the max payload" would seem to be conflicting with your suggestion of "exactly the same weight over each tire" from your initial post. You gotta decide one or the other. Can't have it both ways. And what if the two vehicles don't support "the same tires" (note that even the same model tire is sometimes designed differently for different tire sizes). I think a fair comparison, in a commercial sense, is to get two trucks with mostly equivalent features (both AWD, same bed sizes, OEM tires) at a similar price point. That's the comparison between two vehicles someone can actually buy, and not a hypothetical vehicle with parts replaced and no longer the OEM price.
Original post was focusing on a lab setting, my second post ("To be fair, to do exactly what I'm saying outside a lab setting, would prove difficult by the average consumer, but a responsible attempt by an unbiased test between the two trucks") really meant to address that a real world test would need to be close to be fair. Maybe not to their respective max load ratings, but a load that effectively made the rear axle loaded the same is a better way to say it. I guess we could test it both ways to see which would be more capable depending on if max load or whether equivalent axle loading is more appropriate.
I agree that price point is typically the way vehicles are compared, but I'm not sure that will be enough here due to radically different way the vehicles are designed and will operate.
 
Original post was focusing on a lab setting, my second post ("To be fair, to do exactly what I'm saying outside a lab setting, would prove difficult by the average consumer, but a responsible attempt by an unbiased test between the two trucks") really meant to address that a real world test would need to be close to be fair. Maybe not to their respective max load ratings, but a load that effectively made the rear axle loaded the same is a better way to say it. I guess we could test it both ways to see which would be more capable depending on if max load or whether equivalent axle loading is more appropriate.
I agree that price point is typically the way vehicles are compared, but I'm not sure that will be enough here due to radically different way the vehicles are designed and will operate.
 
It's slightly worse than that an IC engine takes at least one revolution to change torque - an EV needs one controller cycle
The EV can change torque about 100 times faster - BEFORE you add the effects of the moments of inertia
Well... not one rev if more than a single cylinder engine. firings = #cyl/2 for 4 stroke, so a 6 cylinder would've fire 3 times per rev. I would be interested in the lag times of commanded torque vs actual. In addition, the controller can retard cylinders very quickly, but no where near as effective as the inverter controllers fpga's running at 20 khz or whatever.
 
Hi trak0r: Yeah. Understand your point. To your point, there's a difference between testing to see which vehicle implements traction control better (for example), vs testing in a commercial sense (my language: perhaps someone else has a better phrase). Note that testing in a commercial sense doesn't try to equalize the vehicles, or equalize the conditions, but seeks to establish which vehicle gives the better performance/value for the money at rated conditions. If one vehicle enjoys an "unfair advantage" because it's designed radically differently, so be it. Tough nuts to the loser...he can always improve his design to improve value.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JBee