The new batteries are capable of higher charge rates. The V4 Supercharger has the capablility of 615A at 1,000V. It will take awhile for these to become common. They aren't building very many Cybrertrucks or semis, so the current low volume of batteries is not really an issue. I would have bought an EV pickup with 500 mile range instead of my MS with 402 mile range.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
When will Tesla offer a vehicle with a listed range of 500+ miles?
- Thread starter MXing
- Start date
Also, age degradation. I wouldn't consider any EV with a NEW range of under 300 miles. In 4 years during winter, a 300 mile range battery might, on a good day get 150 mles range. More range is better.
CTruck_BMW
23’ MS
EV DOES NOT NEED MORE RANGE.... a good EV need FASTER CHARGING SPEED.
400 MILES IS MORE THAN ENOUGH, if charging speed gets better and better. R&D MUST FOCUSED ON FASTER CHARGING, than just adding more batteries or enhanced energy density.
400 MILES IS MORE THAN ENOUGH, if charging speed gets better and better. R&D MUST FOCUSED ON FASTER CHARGING, than just adding more batteries or enhanced energy density.
The cost is one thing, but the weight might be another issue - adding even more load on a vehicle that already, what, 8000-10000 lbs? I saw a recent tweet on a RC vehicle that had a badly bent upper control arm while likely doing off-road testing in Mexico, too much for the cheap pressed steel component Tesla opted for.
So perhaps the suspension components are OK for a purely urban vehicle, ,not for off-road, as-is - but now add another 30-50% more batteries for greater range, maybe the suspension design no longer beefy enough for even urban driving? Or just enough for urban driving, as long as you carry no passengers or cargo?
Saying it in all caps doesn’t change anything. If they actually could get 400 miles in the real world, perhaps you’d have a point.
Larger batteries also allow for faster charging.
CTruck_BMW
23’ MS
Thank you SMART.. BOY.
"Saying it in all caps doesn’t change anything" ... Forgot about everything and felt the need to comment on the all caps. I love my Tesla more than my BMWs and Mbenz.. but the pool of Telsa owners (some* of them) on forums compared to Benz and BMW owners seem to be not as great and so naive (the only downside of my Tesla experience).
Last edited:
The range issue is a matter of opinion, and can change from owner to owner. You are incorrect in stating your opinion as a fact, being rude, and not allowing others to talk. Calm down....
ucmndd
Well-Known Member
The reality of battery energy density in 2023 means this just isn't likely in the near term. It's not feasible/practical for any mass-market vehicle. For those in a niche, there are already choices to be had.
I labeled the thread as the "listed" (epa) range of 500 miles, because I see that equating to around 350 to 400 miles of real world highway miles and around 150 to 200 miles of towing. The assumption being, you're going to want to have a little more than 1% or 2% when you eventually stop to charge.
So from a road trip standpoint, that ends up being 4 to 5 hours of continuous driving and 2 to 3 hours of continuous towing. I know some prefer to stop more often, but those timeframes align with my past ICE road trips.
To answer my own question - I'm guessing we are still 3 to 4 years away from seeing half a half dozen options (at reasonable prices) on the market providing the 500 epa miles / 400 real world miles.
So from a road trip standpoint, that ends up being 4 to 5 hours of continuous driving and 2 to 3 hours of continuous towing. I know some prefer to stop more often, but those timeframes align with my past ICE road trips.
To answer my own question - I'm guessing we are still 3 to 4 years away from seeing half a half dozen options (at reasonable prices) on the market providing the 500 epa miles / 400 real world miles.
coder
Member
We all have different needs. For many people the current available range is fine. For others, me included, having more range would make road trips more pleasant. I've taken many road trips in our 85D over the 8 years we've owned it and definitely would have enjoyed more range (and more than the current LR). I think 500+ miles would be great. Last time we drove back from LA to the Bay Area, the chargers were busy. Tesla are adding them fast, but they also sell many cars. Having the option to skip a SC stop would be great and possible with a bit more range.
There's no need to get angry with each other, we all have different needs/wants.
There's no need to get angry with each other, we all have different needs/wants.
Couple points (important ones, IMO) that haven't been brought up in this spicy debate yet:
First, towing. Towing sucks with an EV. Towing can cut efficiency, roughly, in half; a 500 mile unladen Cybertruck is a 250 mile range truck when towing.
But you're not going to charge 0-100% at every charging stop, so if you do ~10-70% charges you're down to 150 miles between stops.
Speaking of charging: for a given vehicle the bigger the battery the shorter your charge stops are (due to the higher charge rate, purely from having a larger battery). See Model 3 RWD small pack vs long range charge curves.
Half the point of an enormous truck battery is not the range you can get from 100% - 0%. Instead, it's about how much energy can you dump into the battery in ~15-20 minutes. That's the metric that really counts for towing.
I agree, we don't need to drive 500 miles without stopping. That's a side effect of optimizing for the metric I just mentioned (at least with current battery tech).
Second, the density of DC fast chargers is critical to reducing charge times and range anxiety (even putting aside any other technology advancements).
Consider an ideal charge stop in a Model 3 - pull in at 5-10% and charge to 50-60%. Average charge speed is around 200kW. But if there's a big gap between chargers, then you might end up with a painful 40 - 80% charge. Average speed is around 100kW. That's literally half the charging speed, just because of geography. Having chargers available every 20 miles or so makes a huge difference.
First, towing. Towing sucks with an EV. Towing can cut efficiency, roughly, in half; a 500 mile unladen Cybertruck is a 250 mile range truck when towing.
But you're not going to charge 0-100% at every charging stop, so if you do ~10-70% charges you're down to 150 miles between stops.
Speaking of charging: for a given vehicle the bigger the battery the shorter your charge stops are (due to the higher charge rate, purely from having a larger battery). See Model 3 RWD small pack vs long range charge curves.
Half the point of an enormous truck battery is not the range you can get from 100% - 0%. Instead, it's about how much energy can you dump into the battery in ~15-20 minutes. That's the metric that really counts for towing.
I agree, we don't need to drive 500 miles without stopping. That's a side effect of optimizing for the metric I just mentioned (at least with current battery tech).
Second, the density of DC fast chargers is critical to reducing charge times and range anxiety (even putting aside any other technology advancements).
Consider an ideal charge stop in a Model 3 - pull in at 5-10% and charge to 50-60%. Average charge speed is around 200kW. But if there's a big gap between chargers, then you might end up with a painful 40 - 80% charge. Average speed is around 100kW. That's literally half the charging speed, just because of geography. Having chargers available every 20 miles or so makes a huge difference.
Towing is one place where EV range falls short. Please excuse my ignorance, I've never towed anything... does towing with an ICE also require significantly more refueling stops? Is it just that filling a gas tank is quite a bit faster?
Since many people buy trucks and SUVs and never tow anything with them, I'd still say that the current range of EVs is sufficient - it's the towing piece that needs engineering help. So instead of more range for the EV, we need self-propelling and aerodynamic trailers. These already exist, but not mass market. This would allow you to keep your vehicle lean for daily use, but still have the capability when you need to tow.
Since many people buy trucks and SUVs and never tow anything with them, I'd still say that the current range of EVs is sufficient - it's the towing piece that needs engineering help. So instead of more range for the EV, we need self-propelling and aerodynamic trailers. These already exist, but not mass market. This would allow you to keep your vehicle lean for daily use, but still have the capability when you need to tow.
Definitely mpg drops dramatically for ICE, but some trucks have options for larger tanks. Example F150 has 23 and 36 gallon options, so you still have decent milage at ~10 MPG. Plus you can easily add a few extra tanks if you're camping away from a gas station.
All Teslas are beasts for towing on the power/torque side. Just need the right hitch installed to balance the extra weight. Putting the extra battery on the trailer is definitely an option we’ll see in the future.
About three years ago, James Klafehn built a tear drop travel trailer on top of a 85KWH tesla battery that he then directly wired to his Model X to nearly double the size of his battery. Not something I'd ever try, but it was a cool proof of concept.
Yep, this is just purely based on the physics of towing. Way more air drag, more mass to accelerate or pull up hill, more rolling resistance, etc.
It affects ICE and EVs the same in terms of how much work the vehicle has to do. ICE trucks just power through it with large fuel tanks and fast refueling.
Similar threads
