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

Will The CT Beat Dual Motor Rivian

Will the dual motor CT beat the equivalent version from Rivian to market?


  • Total voters
    32
This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Wow, who pissed in your cereal? I have a CT reservation, because I plan on using it to tow an RV for the family. So towing range was my main priority. As for the model 3, I have that too (2018), and although I like the Y better, the seats have a bad reputation for being hard, which I do NOT find, even after 2000+ mile road-trips.

Anyway, this thread is about the poll, and I give Rivian the edge, because they're already in production and making a dual-motor truck is all about cost-reduction for them, not overcoming any technical challenges.

If towing range is your priority then stop playing around and get an ICE PB F-150. The CT isn’t going to tow very far..
 
Agree 100%!!! I would love if Rivian offered even 18” 0r 19” with 35s.
I think it is the biggest mistake they made. I have no idea who decided to Market it as an off road and overland worthy truck then put huge brakes that can’t fit <20” rim, begging for pinch flats and cracked rims on even mild forest service roads.

They would have been better off if they wanted 20’s+ to build a ridgeline/Santa Cruz/Baja urban crossover truck. It was the deciding factor for me canceling my reservation. I’m waiting on someone to pull the rotors/calipers and fit some proper wheels. Probably won’t happen until some come off warranty.
 
I’m here to snap you back into reality as a current EV truck owner. Keep your Tacoma.
I'm well aware that towing will drop my actual range. That's why the CyberTruck's 500-mile range seemed like the only viable option. I've already done 2,000 mile road-trips with my 3, what makes you think your experience with an R1T or Lightning would be better than my experience with my 3 as a proxy for the CT?

Edit: Yes, I've towed a trailer with a model Y and tried supercharging with that before. It's not ideal, but not a huge hassle either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eric9610
I'm well aware that towing will drop my actual range. That's why the CyberTruck's 500-mile range seemed like the only viable option. I've already done 2,000 mile road-trips with my 3, what makes you think your experience with an R1T or Lightning would be better than my experience with my 3 as a proxy for the CT?

Edit: Yes, I've towed a trailer with a model Y and tried supercharging with that before. It's not ideal, but not a huge hassle either.

Who said my experience was better? I am telling to keep your Tacoma or get an ICE for towing, these EV trucks are more street trucks than towing monsters.

Why are you towing in your Model Y when you have a Tacoma, it’s like drag racing your Tacoma instead of your Y 🤣

Has anyone seen any “spotted” videos of the CT towing anything? Or actually going 500 miles?
 
Who said my experience was better? I am telling to keep your Tacoma or get an ICE for towing, these EV trucks are more street trucks than towing monsters.

Why are you towing in your Model Y when you have a Tacoma, it’s like drag racing your Tacoma instead of your Y 🤣

Has anyone seen any “spotted” videos of the CT towing anything? Or actually going 500 miles?

Because it costs LESS to tow with the Y? I can't tow the RV for long distances (more than 300 miles) with the Y, because the charging becomes a hassle at that point, but within 200 miles, it's perfectly fine.

The CT's target range is 500, even if reality brings it down at 400 miles, factoring aero-dynamic losses, that's still a towing range of at least 200 miles, which means (at worst) I only need to supercharge every 150 miles or so (~2hrs of driving between stops). There have been more than enough towing efficiency tests with other EV's (trucks and SUV's) to know that this is more than a conservative assumption. Considering that aero-dynamic drag is the biggest factor in towing, simply slowing down to 55mph (the CA limit for towing) would yield more range.

Not to mention that towing with the Y is significantly easier (lots of torque available) and more stable (it has AWD and is heavier) than with the Taco.

Other than faster and fewer refueling stops, what advantage does an ICE truck have over an EV?
 
  • Like
Reactions: android04
I think it is the biggest mistake they made. I have no idea who decided to Market it as an off road and overland worthy truck then put huge brakes that can’t fit <20” rim, begging for pinch flats and cracked rims on even mild forest service roads.

They would have been better off if they wanted 20’s+ to build a ridgeline/Santa Cruz/Baja urban crossover truck. It was the deciding factor for me canceling my reservation. I’m waiting on someone to pull the rotors/calipers and fit some proper wheels. Probably won’t happen until some come off warranty.
I don't know if you looked at the range penalty for the 20" offroad tire spec... It's 15% that is 45miles... I think in the end it was a strategic decision not to offer larger tires with more rolling resistance. I just wish you could have the option to add after if you intend to offroad.
 
I don't know if you looked at the range penalty for the 20" offroad tire spec... It's 15% that is 45miles... I think in the end it was a strategic decision not to offer larger tires with more rolling resistance. I just wish you could have the option to add after if you intend to offroad.
There would have been no range penalty for 17” rims (vs the 21 or 22) and low rolling resistance all season highway tires. If anything a 17” would be more efficient due to less rotational mass and more sidewall which is more aerodynamic.

I guess what I’m saying is the range hit on the 20 vs 21/22 is due to the AT tires vs street tires and has nothing to do with rim size.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TessP100D
Does the weight difference between a larger sidewall vs the weight of a larger rim play into this discussion?
yes. Look at tire and wheel weight.

The tire area with sidewall is mostly air. Most of the weight of a wheel is in the outer rim. Larger rims with the same outer diameter tire have more rotational mass then smaller rims with the same tire. Also tires need flex to grip, otherwise we would all be rolling on large skateboard wheels. Larger rims have more Rotational mass which increases breaking distance, decreases acceleration, decreases cornering grip.

For tires almost all the weight is in the outer tread which is the same for all tires OD. I looked up a few LT tires on tire rack that made both a 17” and 22”. For all of them the tires were within 2 lbs most it was 1 lb. For example toyo AT3 in a ~33” OD same speed and load rate: 285/70-17 is 54 lbs, 285/50-22 is 53 lbs.

Now rims. I couldn’t find a rim that is made in both a 17 and 22. But ball park similar quality 22’s are about 19-21 lbs heavier than a comparable 17. Most of that That extra ~20 lbs per wheel is 2.5” further from the center.

Doing some rough math and estimating. The 22” rims have around double to triple the rotational mass. That is take up to 3x more energy to change velocity (both accelerate and decelerate). Another way to look at it is that that extra ~75 lbs of wheels+tires has the effect of at least an extra ~150 lbs detriment on acceleration, braking, cornering dynamics. Does that matter on a 7k lb 800 hp truck? Somewhat, will you notice it? Possibly?

I raced track cars for years. For endurance and rim size The thinking was always run the smallest rims that would fit over the brakes, as overheating and fade was a concern. For autocross, downsize the brakes and run the smallest possible wheel and even downsize the OD tire for better acceleration, grip, cornering since races were not long enough to overheat brakes. All that said, The Rivian is not a track car.

I’ve said it before but when F1 switched from 13” to 18” rims (with the same OD tire) to make them look “more modern”. The cars got slower across the board. There is no performance advantage (only disadvantages) to larger wheels.


Another thing to consider with trucks is protection from impacts, rocks, logs, pot holes,…. The more tire the more space to not impact the rim. Also tires work as part of the suspension. More air volume decreases strain on other things like wheel bearings, CV joints, control arms, bushings, frame,… when I travel north on the Dalton which is notorious for washboard I air down 15-20% so the tires can absorb much of the vibration and taking much strain off everything above the tires (including me).
 
Last edited:
yes. Look at tire and wheel weight.

The tire area with sidewall is mostly air. Most of the weight of a wheel is in the outer rim. Larger rims with the same outer diameter tire have more rotational mass then smaller rims with the same tire. Also tires need flex to grip, otherwise we would all be rolling on large skateboard wheels. Larger rims have more Rotational mass which increases breaking distance, decreases acceleration, decreases cornering grip.

For tires almost all the weight is in the outer tread which is the same for all tires OD. I looked up a few LT tires on tire rack that made both a 17” and 22”. For all of them the tires were within 2 lbs most it was 1 lb. For example toyo AT3 in a ~33” OD same speed and load rate: 285/70-17 is 54 lbs, 285/50-22 is 53 lbs.

Now rims. I couldn’t find a rim that is made in both a 17 and 22. But ball park similar quality 22’s are about 19-21 lbs heavier than a comparable 17. Most of that That extra ~20 lbs per wheel is 2.5” further from the center.

Doing some rough math and estimating. The 22” rims have around double to triple the rotational mass. That is take up to 3x more energy to change velocity (both accelerate and decelerate). Another way to look at it is that that extra ~75 lbs of wheels+tires has the effect of at least an extra ~150 lbs detriment on acceleration, braking, cornering dynamics. Does that matter on a 7k lb 800 hp truck? Somewhat, will you notice it? Possibly?

I raced track cars for years. For endurance and rim size The thinking was always run the smallest rims that would fit over the brakes, as overheating and fade was a concern. For autocross, downsize the brakes and run the smallest possible wheel and even downsize the OD tire for better acceleration, grip, cornering since races were not long enough to overheat brakes. All that said, The Rivian is not a track car.

I’ve said it before but when F1 switched from 13” to 18” rims (with the same OD tire) to make them look “more modern”. The cars got slower across the board. There is no performance advantage (only disadvantages) to larger wheels.


Another thing to consider with trucks is protection from impacts, rocks, logs, pot holes,…. The more tire the more space to not impact the rim. Also tires work as part of the suspension. More air volume decreases strain on other things like wheel bearings, CV joints, control arms, bushings, frame,… when I travel north on the Dalton which is notorious for washboard I air down 15-20% so the tires can absorb much of the vibration and taking much strain off everything above the tires (including me).
Spoken like a pro….I run the 285/70 16’s on my Supercharged FJ, and when I tow, I can barely get 200 miles from the 19 gallon tank (doing 75 to 80). If I slow down to 55 to 60 i can get 250 miles, but that is pushing it. On my P85+ I dumped the HEAVY 21 inch rims and got the lightest fully forged wheels I could find (about 19 lbs each) and saw a significant increase in range…
 
  • Like
Reactions: coleAK
Rivian exist, the CT is still a prototype

The CT will only be successful because a bunch of first time Truck Tesla fanbois on You Tube will claim it’s the greatest Truck to ever be built….. yet they never driven a truck I their lifetime. Like what happened with the Model 3, a bunch of Prius drivers all of a sudden had a fast car 0-60 and claimed it was the best ever without looking at all the short comings.

Basically, if you want to live with a nice interior and purpose built truck get the Rivian. If you want a plain interior with rock like seats, half a steering wheel, with a useless bed get the CT.
I'm not a Tesla "fanbois" but a Tesla fangirl, I've had a Dodge Ram2500HD to pull my 14 hole Jones dog trailer across US for sheepdog trials! I'm on the line for my CT even though I also own my husband's 2021 Jeep Gladiator which I bought it for him. I've seen the Rivian truck while charging at SC in Florida , one was parked behind on an EV charger. It had nice color, moss green I believe yet it looked like any other trucks running around except the headlights and the EV charger. I will not say, oh why would you buy something like a Rivian truck since I'm not asking you to pay for mine nor do I pay for yours!