-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Trimotor vs dual motor?
- Thread starter coolmanfever
- Start date
The range is the reason I changed my reservation to the tri-motor version.
I don't really care about the extra power. But I plan to tow an RV with my CT, the extra range means that the CT will do everything can imagine doing with a personal vehicle for the next 20 years or so.
Between the rumored million mile battery and the stainless steel body, I can easily see driving this for 20 or 30 years. It's ugly AF, but it should age like a stainless steel Jeep.
With those assumptions, paying extra for the long range seems reasonable.
I don't really care about the extra power. But I plan to tow an RV with my CT, the extra range means that the CT will do everything can imagine doing with a personal vehicle for the next 20 years or so.
Between the rumored million mile battery and the stainless steel body, I can easily see driving this for 20 or 30 years. It's ugly AF, but it should age like a stainless steel Jeep.
With those assumptions, paying extra for the long range seems reasonable.
Hank42
Legacy Supporter
I'm torn on this myself. My commute for CT is 350 miles - Just out of reach of the 300 mile range of the dual motor. I need the CT for the payload capacity, and the ability to drive on dirt roads - and un-plowed snow roads in the winter, but I don't need the extra speed/towing capacity of the tri-motor CT.
The time spent at the Supercharger each way to make up the 100 miles of added range is going to wear on me, I 'm sure.
I'm in the "wait and see" category - there may be other features for added cost that are "must have" that would put the price of the tri-motor way out of the ballpark for me, enough so that it's worth the wait at the supercharger to make up the difference.
I'm currently using NOA (not full FSD) and it makes that drive a breeze. Who knows, maybe paying the extra $$ for FSD with the dual motor will make up the difference - I think FSD+tri-motor would price me out.
The time spent at the Supercharger each way to make up the 100 miles of added range is going to wear on me, I 'm sure.
I'm in the "wait and see" category - there may be other features for added cost that are "must have" that would put the price of the tri-motor way out of the ballpark for me, enough so that it's worth the wait at the supercharger to make up the difference.
I'm currently using NOA (not full FSD) and it makes that drive a breeze. Who knows, maybe paying the extra $$ for FSD with the dual motor will make up the difference - I think FSD+tri-motor would price me out.
dazedNconfuzed
Member
yup.
Just did TCO on my basic 2006 Explorer after it burned up at 240,000 miles (and I’d have driven it to ½M if possible). ~$87,000 including gas. Makes the CT look cheap at max configuration.
“M’lady, I want a vehicle so ugly and hard/annoying to drive you’ll never want to use it.” And there it is, right down to the marital discord refund promise.
By the time the CT comes out i believe it will be in upper 300 mile range.
Base model is 250 miles
Dual model is 300+ miles
Tri model is 500+ miles
Per Elon at the unveil
wizznick
Member
Just recently switched from dual to tri this week. 500+ mile range is a game changer for me, given distance away from common vacation spots or where family is located.
I think you’ve mostly captured it. The other advantage it will have is the ability to do torque vectoring for advanced traction/stability control, but we don’t know how much Tesla will implement that or how much difference it will make.
But your “other than” list is pretty much all the things most folks want in a truck...
You’ll have to decide what is worth the money for you.
Lasttoy
Active Member
I cant find any other reason than mileage. My S was 250 miles new. So I'm happy with 250. I dont "need" more motors, I'm very happy with my S. I'm replacing my S, SUV, and PU with the CT.
But my question is. Do all 3 models have the same electronic gadgetry?. FIRST. AP, AND AIR SUSPENSION.. standard
But, what are the options list? I cant find the option list?
Also, I hope Elon delivers by our order date and not the 3 motor first, then 2 then 1 motor. This will be really bad Karma.
But my question is. Do all 3 models have the same electronic gadgetry?. FIRST. AP, AND AIR SUSPENSION.. standard
But, what are the options list? I cant find the option list?
Also, I hope Elon delivers by our order date and not the 3 motor first, then 2 then 1 motor. This will be really bad Karma.
There are no definitive answers, and won’t be for another year probably.
I’ll be shocked if they ship any vehicles without the full current suite of AP hardware, but the rest is up in the air.
Tesla has always delivered the higher specification cars first, and I’ll be surprised if they change that now. It’s a lot easier to iron out issues on the production line if they only build one configuration at first, and that one gives them the most profit while they are sorting things out.
dazedNconfuzed
Member
️Dual motor
Lasttoy
Active Member
Ranger told me all battery packs will be the same. Range is software programmed. He thinks we will able to upgrade for $$$$, as the 60 folks did.
Tesla certainly could do that, and who knows how they’ll set up something we won’t see until next year, but I’d be shocked if they did.
While Tesla has been doing a good job of driving costs down, the battery pack is undoubtedly still the most expensive part of an EV, and those 500 mile packs are going to be huge, probably around 150 kWh.
The difference between that and the base pack is likely an entire Model Y battery pack. That’s an awful lot of cost to throw in to the base trucks for the minimal advantage of reduced unit count and design time.
Hank42
Legacy Supporter
Yeah, the added weight and inherent lower efficiency of the CT makes hitting those range targets needing larger packs.
On the other hand, They might be able to write off the extra capacity as "potential income" on the books and do some financial trickery to get a write down or favorable press on wall street. I'd believe that more if batter production capacity weren't so strained.
SuperDragon
Member
I'm hoping to see more out of the box thinking by Tesla here - like maybe rechargeable wireless camera modules you can quickly and easily attach to the sides of the trailer itself looking aft that quickly calibrate and integrate into the AP processing and screen views.
SuperDragon
Member
Similar threads
