Cybertruck Boys are finding out about true range now

[F150ROD]

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...wd-cybertruck-after-20-mile-range-test.10983/

Sponsored

 

[ctuan13]

"20 mile test drive (ended up being 21)
Average speed of 63 MPH
Mostly highway driving
689 Wh/mi
Giving the AWD Cybertruck a range of 178.5 miles"

689Wh/mile is 1.45Mi/kWh

 

[Grumpy2]

That was some interesting reading.

But I don't understand how it can be so inefficient ....

Pretty sad. Perhaps their only real designer is now building the Lucid Gravity.

 

[bmwhitetx]

Wait, I thought we all agreed that efficiency would be reported in mi/kWh (except our Canadian friends).

Does adopting NACS also mean we need to switch to Wh/mi?

 

[ctuan13]

That was some interesting reading.

But I don't understand how it can be so inefficient ....

Pretty sad. Perhaps their only real designer is now building the Lucid Gravity.

You don't? Its angular, boxy shape is a literal aerodynamic nightmare that leads to vortex shedding and turbulence. Elon Musk has even said as much on an interview with Joe Rogan.

 

[Maxx]

I doubt given similar conditions it's efficiency is worse than Lightning. It's heating system is more efficient and it's cross sectional area is slightly smaller. There must have been elevation change, going against wind or short commute with initial energy going to heating the cabin, off road tires or something like that. It definitely won't have a model 3 efficiency but I don't believe it would be worse than Lightning in a side by side long distance Test. I still wouldn't buy one for many other reasons but once dust settles, I doubt efficiency would be that bad for a truck.

 

[Effonefiddy Lightning]

Better wait till more CT owners post.

 

[Yellow Buddy]

https://www.cybertruckownersclub.co...wd-cybertruck-after-20-mile-range-test.10983/

20 miles is a horrible range test. If I leave my truck out in the cold, jump straight on the highway for 20 miles I can get as low as 1.3mi/kW, but my truck averages 2.1mi/kW over 20,000 miles.

I would hold off any conclusions until a real full test can be conducted. EPA wise it’s rated to be about 10-15% more efficient than the Lightning. I would say they also have a tendency to inflate their numbers…but I mean I have never gotten 320 miles out of the Ford either.

 

[Toby57]

Exactly. Twenty miles says nothing except that twenty miles. Run it 5,000 miles, keep accurate records then you got a test.

 

[Pioneer74]

I tried looking up this Wh/mi stuff and I still don't understand how it's calculated. Can somebody that understands it please post the calculations they use to achieve it using the Lightning as an example?

I drove into work this morning. ER Lightning. Went from 88% to 65%. I believe my mi/kWh was 1.6 or 1.7. What is my Wh/mi?

 

[ryun]

I tried looking up this Wh/mi stuff and I still don't understand how it's calculated. Can somebody that understands it please post the calculations they use to achieve it using the Lightning as an example?

I drove into work this morning. ER Lightning. Went from 88% to 65%. I believe my mi/kWh was 1.6 or 1.7. What is my Wh/mi?

If you wanted to calculate it you would take 1 and divide it by 1.7 (in your case because you said you got 1.7 mi/kWh) to get kWh/mi. Then you take that number and multiply it by 1000 to get Wh/mi. The number is really just the reciprocal of mi/KWh. Unlike mi/kWh lower numbers mean better efficiency because you're describing how much energy you use per mile rather than how many miles you traveled per unit of energy.

 

[TomB985]

I don't think that "range test" means anything; 20 miles is far too short. I think Cybertruck will be more efficient than it's boxy shape would suggest, particularly because of its smaller size than our Lightnings. It has an impressive coefficient of gravity, but those wide tires can't help for rolling resistance.

More concerning is their charge rate, though. That's the real "oof" in my view, and it lines up with the short-lived 4680 Model Y that was arguably the worst-charging Tesla in recent history.

 

[dww]

It’s got 35” AT tires. I’d swap those out for something much smaller and AS.

 

[Maquis]

I tried looking up this Wh/mi stuff and I still don't understand how it's calculated. Can somebody that understands it please post the calculations they use to achieve it using the Lightning as an example?

I drove into work this morning. ER Lightning. Went from 88% to 65%. I believe my mi/kWh was 1.6 or 1.7. What is my Wh/mi?

1/MPK x 1000.

1/1.6 x 1000 = 625 wh/mi.

 

[Pioneer74]

If you wanted to calculate it you would take 1 and divide it by 1.7 (in your case because you said you got 1.7 mi/kWh) to get kWh/mi. Then you take that number and multiply it by 1000 to get Wh/mi. The number is really just the reciprocal of mi/KWh. Unlike mi/kWh lower numbers mean better efficiency because you're describing how much energy you use per mile rather than how many miles you traveled per unit of energy.

1/MPK x 1000.

1/1.6 x 1000 = 625 wh/mi.

Thanks, guys. Maybe it's because I've never owned a Tesla, but I like mi/kWh better.

Sponsored