thesmokingman
Active Member
Don't let Ross Gerber see that. His head might explode.
Also, this should clearly illustrate why adding Tesla for no other reason than just cuz it's Tesla into whatever article, brings clicks.
Last edited:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
Also, this should clearly illustrate why adding Tesla for no other reason than just cuz it's Tesla into whatever article, brings clicks.
I'm not sure we're ever going to see EV's that tow without seeing a 50+% reduction in range. Why? because EV's are so efficient, that rather than energy lost to heat, sound and vibration being the dominant factors in the 80% if energy lost in a traditional autos, ir's aero, rolling resistance and current losses contributing to something on the order of less than 10% loss for an EV.
And at highway speed, aero is the dominant contributor to loss... and it just so happens that towing a big ol' trailer can make your aerodynamic drag 2-3X worse. That means on an EV doubling your Cd your loss goes up by nearly 2x. On an ICE doubling your Cd means your efficiency is 17% rather than 20%... it's a much smaller factor when you are so inefficient to begin with. Then there's the additional weight, rolling resistance, friction, etc... Those seemingly small factors can be big when a full charge only contains the equivalent energy of 3 gallons of gasoline...
It's ironic that the relative inefficiency of ICE vehicles is what makes them less susceptible to range hit for such things.
So, to get 200+ miles towing a trailer, I suspect an EV may need 500+ miles range solo. Not sure how many of those are going to be sold unless they are special purpose.
I do wonder if trailers with their own battery packs/motors will get popular...
Or trailers with APUs (auxiliary power) charging a small battery linked to the main battery.
Olle
Active Member
Good video. I don't believe that Tesla's price drop is meant to blow all other EVs out of the water though. Remember the mission is to accelerate the transition...
It's much simpler IMO:
- Enable the tax credit for the most efficient EVs (Tesla) now. Instead of pissing it away on 22 mpg hybrids while pursuing a long painful series of price reductions.
- Do rare and big price drops. If there were a series of small price drops, many of us buyers would just sit on the sidelines waiting for the next drop, and the next. Just one more week
... Volume ramp up compounded by interest rate hikes and recession is the perfect storm for price reductions.
Even this guy thinks Tesla is oversold..lol
Indeed, millinery isn't a segment I previously considered for Tesla, but now I think about it, the OEMs are nowhere, so there's a clear opportunity to steal a ton of market share before the other manufacturers realise what's happening. Once again, Ford, GM, BMW, MB and VW won't know what hit them!
Last edited:
I guess this is proof that not everyone at Tesla is an engineer. Must be some marketing person who put this particular slide together.
Or perhaps an engineer that never works with household current which is more or less universally 120/240 in the US (Which is the truck’s initial launch market).Nice shot, I hadn’t seen that one. I’m a little concerned about this, but most of the stuff I’d put in the front of the bed like that is small and likely better suited to dropping in the frunk or the sail pillar storage (which will hopefully make it to the final!)
Can’t see the Lightning or the Rivian being better at off-roading, but we’ll have to see. The Rivian’s sides seem very thin and prone to caving for the sort of adventures I do. Likewise the lack of paint is ideal for the sort of forest roads I travel.
Funny how as soon as electric trucks became a thing suddenly everyone tows 10,000 pounds 500 miles in sub zero temperatures on a weekly basis. Prior to that most trucks only towed things about once a year… but apparently now that electric trucks are a thing, they are required to do this thing which few people ever did.
Last edited:
now that's vertical integration!!
There must be a break-even analysis on when to have separate castings. I can't imagine a few extra moulds and some extra inventory would have so much additional costs that it would lead to a redesign of two vehicles. Maybe I'm wrong but it feels like it should be a relatively low volume number of vehicles where bespoke castings would outweigh the trade-offs of designing multiple vehicles around a casting constraint.
If one Gigapress can handle ~250k vehicles a year then anything above that should warrant its own optimised casting?
I view the IRA act as a strong invitation to ramp 4680 production.
In fact the coincidental timing is perfect, the IRA rewards North American made cells at a time when Tesla is getting 4680 production up and running.
There may be a lag and some US made cars and energy storage batteries with Chinese cells might be exported. Canada is one suitable market.
People say stuff like this all the time - If the widget can't do this specific thing I'll never get it. Then the CT comes out at a great price, has super low running costs, allows them to get rid of the 3rd car to cart the family around, makes camping amazing, has better acceleration, can turn on the cabin heating while still in bed on a cold winter's morning, yada yada - then they see that an extra half hour once in a blue moon when they need to do long distance towing is not a big deal.
Did Tesla need additional incentive to ramp up 4680? I thought they were pushing on that as hard as humanly possible already.
My impression was that Tesla would be converting as much of their new production to 4680 as possible. But they will still also be receiving the existing supply of 18650 and 2170 cells and will need to get those into vehicles as well.
thesmokingman
Active Member
They said the same thing about the Semi. MB even said it would break the laws of physics roflmao.
Just weight doesn't reduce range by much, and virtually not at all on the highway. Towing does because of the additional aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance of the trailer tires.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
The mainstream driver never tows anything so that doesn't really make sense. EV's will be mainstream long before every niche case is covered.
Better yet, charge at night at home or at the shop. Why charge during the work day.
There will be a small percentage of those with trucks that are better to stay with an ICE truck. But the vast majority of half ton owners would be fine and probably benefit from an electric half ton.
3/4 and 1 ton trucks are a different story. But trucks with those GVWR ratings are not affected by any of the incoming 2035 restrictions on ICE vehicles.
Look I agree, I’m just relaying what I hear all the time from people who complain about EVs range/towing and carrying capacity, but let’s get real here, is there a current EV on the market that could beat trucks like say a Ford F-150 or Ranger? a Toyota Tundra, Hi-Lux, Tacoma? I know people that drive trucks like these, and they tell me they won’t switch until EVs performance gets closer, I don’t drive these so I couldn’t care less, but here in Oz and in the US trucks are king, so it’s a pretty big deal..
I’d like to introduce the people concerned about how long range towing is mandatory for mainstream adoption to the 10 remaining people who believe “phones must have physical keyboard to be taken seriously”.
We don’t need to worry about these people. Tesla can sell Cybertrucks to everyone who doesn’t give a damn about towing first then if there is anyone left address those guys. Most likely, much like the BlackBerry holdouts of the world, there won’t be any left at the end.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
