Tesla Cybertruck Owners Who Drove 10,000 Miles Say Range Is 164 To 206 Miles

Comments

• farcaster@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Sigh. Not this again. Look, I personally really don’t like the Cybertruck. I think it’s ugly and pointless. But as someone who likes EVs in general I have to call out the usual “the range is so bad lol” BS.

  The two drivers who are using the EV said that the maximum range with a full battery was 206 miles and 164 miles with an 80% state of charge.

  The range you get when not fully charging the battery is meaningless. It’s like partially fueling an ICE and complaining it doesn’t deliver the maximum range. Good for a clickbait headline though.

  That test was done at a relatively constant speed of 70 miles per hour while the outside temperature was about 45 degrees. The truck was driven fairly aggressively most of the time

  Driving aggressively, at high speed, in relatively cold weather is the perfect trifecta to make any EV underdeliver in range. Those are real downsides of EV, but it’s nothing new or specific to this vehicle. And it is not the scenario the EPA uses to come up with range numbers. Perhaps they should, but they don’t.

  source

  • Wrench@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    80% is a full standard charge. You only actually full charge immediately before a road trip, because it wears the battery faster to charge to 100%, and wears even more of you hold the charge before using it.

    Do for someone charging their car over night for normal operations, 80% is a functionally full charge.

    source

    • Balex@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      While that is true, it’s not fair to say “see they lied! In completely different circumstances you only get a fraction of the range!” Even for ICE vehicles they use ideal conditions to measure their MPG/range even though most people aren’t driving in ideal conditions.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • helenslunch@feddit.nl ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      You only actually full charge immediately before a road trip

      So…probably the only time a consumer might actually legitimately be concerned about maximum range?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • SpeedLimit55@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    According to my Tesla driving neighbor most people do not charge their Tesla to 100% in order to extend the battery lifespan. I don’t understand it but apparently Tesla recommends it.

    source

    • farcaster@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Yeah Lithium batteries stay healthy for much longer if you keep them roughly between 20%-80% charge. Many laptops and phones now use similar management strategies to avoid wearing out the battery.

      source
    • XeroxCool@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      That’s common for lots of batteries. My laptop has a setting to not charge between 50-70% because it lives on a dock and doesn’t need max life in travel. Batteries are stored between 40 and 80% usually. So it makes sense that a car with the same battery chemistry recommends the same thing. It’s only different in regards to a car being important in an emergency, but realistically, an emergency is unlikely to be both sudden and require long distance driving. So 100 miles of range is probably as good as 400 in common usage.

      source
    • Redonkulation@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Your phone does the same thing just without communicating it. Samsung phones let you change the percentage of the battery is “100%” charged.

      source
    • spongebue@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      As mentioned, lithium batteries are happiest charged around 20-80%. No shame in going higher if you need it, but typical day to day I drive less than 50 miles in a day. If I’m using 20% of my battery capacity, I don’t care if that means I go from 100% down to 80% or 80% down to 60%. I’ll plug it in at the end of the day and charge back up to whatever I want by the next morning.

      source
  • Enk1@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    It’s a truck that’s meant to tow and haul loads. Using it for that purpose is a much larger drain on the battery and significantly reduces its useful range. If it’s getting these numbers just being driven, you can expect a sub-100 mile range per charge when towing. Imagine having to stop to recharge for 30+ minutes for every hour and half of towing you do. Woof.

    source

    • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      t’s a truck that’s meant to tow and haul loads.

      A pickup truck towing and hauling loads? What a bizarre idea. I’m pretty sure it’s only meant to go to the office, and maybe to the maul on weekends, once in a while.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • farcaster@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Now that is a good point. It’s been repeatedly shown how towing drains EV batteries. Then again I’m not sure most buyers of EV trucks plan actually use it as a useful truck… Another reason why I don’t like this whole segment.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • iforgotmyinstance@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    70 is aggressive? In California ppl will be passing you on both sides at that speed.

    source

    • farcaster@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      The word aggressive is from the article, so I don’t know. Anyways driving 70mph consistently is going to deliver you less than the advertised range with EVs, which I believe is not a constant highway speed. Consider while ICE cars have awful efficiency in city driving (stop/start) so highway driving is preferred, with EVs it’s actually the other way around thanks to fewer mechanical losses and battery regen breaking.

      source
    • Balex@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I read aggressive as in accelerating aggressively. Possibly to get around people?

      source
    • viking@infosec.pub ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      It’s below the recommended average on German roads (stands at 130kph / ~81mph).

      source
    • AA5B@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Aggressive doesn’t mean fast. It means more abrupt changes, more acceleration/deceleration

      source
  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Didn’t they just get obligated to report a lower range for many models because they were over reporting them?

    source

    • rsuri@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      My understanding of this article is that Tesla’s range estimates were based on assuming they were being driven in it’s range-maximizing, low-performance “chill mode”, while the new EPA rules require reporting the range in the car’s default mode.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • farcaster@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      They probably did. However it doesn’t make these articles less annoying. Someone posting on a forum isn’t a newsworthy testing result. Did everyone suddenly forget “Your Mileage May Vary” was always true even for ICE cars?

      source
  • Filthmontane@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Tesla apologist

    source
• Jackthelad@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Why does it look like a car from a PS1 game?

  source

  • aeronmelon@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    StarFox on the SNES has more polygons than that.

    source
  • the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Probably the same reason everything he has named sounds like a 12yo came up with it

    source
  • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Because Musk wanted to make a vehicle out of stainless steel and straight panels are the easiest/cheapest to form.

    source

    • tyler@programming.dev ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Straight panels are much harder to make as every bend and minor imperfection show up. cnbc.com/…/why-the-cybertruck-is-so-hard-to-manuf…

      Why do you think cars are never made with straight panels?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Because we live in the version of reality where the worst idea is the best idea and we don’t actually care about anyone’s wellbeing and safety. The car is shaped the way it is to inflict the most fatalities on pedestrians.

    source

    • ThePantser@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      And the us traffic safety board is refusing to test it’s crash rating because they don’t have to. It’s so fishy that this is a new stupid design and they don’t want to test it. Either Elon paid them off or they refuse to give it sell one to test. I have a feeling it would get a 2 out of 5 stars.

      source
  • Steve@communick.news ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Are you genuinely asking? Because I thought all these jokes were made when it was first unveiled 5 years ago?

    source

    • otp@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      And it still looks stupid today

      source
    • nonailsleft@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Lemmy is 99% karmabots at this point

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • tyrefyre@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Hey Elon stole my plans where I drew this exact thing the very first time I ever tried to draw a car. I think I was 4.

    source
  • XeroxCool@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I mostly see the N64 Rush 2049 car called Venom I think. It was mostly a Lamborghini Diablo. Maybe it just stood out in the sea of rounded futuristic cars.

    Side note, I think the one called Euro LX was really just the BMW 6-series concept from the Bengal era. Funny how it landed in a mix of futurism that included a rocket car

    source
  • LillyPip@lemmy.ca ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    And why, after we ridiculed this thing 20 years ago for being a low-poly abomination and then it disappeared from view for two decades did they suddenly decide to release the thing with apparently zero changes in 2023?

    This is a terrible, ridiculed 20 year old abomination. How is it being taken seriously? I feel like I’m on crazy pills.

    source

    • spongebue@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I don’t disagree, except it was 4 years ago that they unveiled the abomination.

      source
  • indigomirage@lemmy.ca ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    It is.

    source
• originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  i had a geo metro that had greater range.

  so confusing why this exists.

  source

  • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Could you convey that you were both rich AND stupid just by driving your metro?

    source

    • smokin_shinobi@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Just the one.

      source
  • helenslunch@feddit.nl ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    This is a frankly baffling comparison. I don’t think I could think 2 more different vehicles if I tried. Believe it or not, range is not the only thing people consider when purchasing a vehicle.

    source

    • Enk1@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      It’s a truck, meant to tow and haul loads. If this is its range unladen then it’s hauling range is 50% or less of this range. Meaning a full charge gets you 82-103 miles, which makes it nearly useless as the thing it’s supposed to be: a truck.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • joemo@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Ok, now try to do the things that trucks are typically used for in your geo metro. Towing, transporting construction tools and materials, etc.

    I’m not defending Elon because I think the truck looks dumb and is over priced, but you gotta compare apples to apples.

    source

    • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      i had a hitch on my 96 metro. so, yeah. and a geo metro totin a tiny trailer looks a hell of a lot less silly than that silver monstrosity

      i do see your point. but i think it misses main the issue here; that this isnt a good vehicle let a lone truck.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • tyrefyre@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Yeah, but how long did it take you to refuel your metro? Surely it wasn’t faster than a few hours.

    source

    • SinningStromgald@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Or never if it gets to cold for a while.

      source
  • gregorum@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Ego

    source
  • the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Feels like gas mileage peaked in the early 90s. Geo metro was only 3 cyl and sipped gas. my lil 92 eclipse for over 45mpg highway, i don’t even think it was rated that high.

    source

    • Sovereign_13@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      The early 90s was mostly a perfect storm for fuel economy.

      You had the computing power available to make use of CAD and develop more aerodynamic designs with less significant overhead (i.e., doing it by hand).

      EFI technology had matured and carburetors were broadly defunct, allowing more efficient operation in a broader range of environments.

      The US had updated its archaic lighting regulations to allow for more aerodynamic headlight shapes.

      A lot of the safety technology that adds weight to modern cars either hadn’t been developed yet or hadn’t trickled down to the average vehicle.

      So you had a confluence of more efficient engines, more aerodynamic vehicles, and cars that were still small and relatively lightweight.

      source
    • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      well, i actually had both a '92 3ycl (suzuki engine) and then later had a 4cyl monster metro. i think that was like a 96?

      just dont turn on the ac

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • thejml@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I regularly get 43-46mpg highway with my 4 cylinder TLX, drops off like crazy atoms town though.

      I agree that economy peaked In the 80’s-early 90’s, but if you take into account how much bigger, and heavier cars are today, we’re not that bad. Also, a lot of weight and size goes towards the superior crash safety in modern cars.

      source
    • helenslunch@feddit.nl ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Feels like gas mileage peaked in the early 90s.

      Probably in the early '00s but I mean that’s completely unsurprising considering the strides we’ve made in safety, comfort, and most importantly emissions since then.

      source
• someguy3@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  What’s the advertised range?

  source

  • overat8@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    On Tesla website they said about 340 miles*. Tesla cybertruck

    source
• reddig33@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  That’s about the range of the current fiat 500e to Chevy Bolt. Both of which cost half of what this does.

  source

  • legion02@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    This is irrelevant if you need a truck. Neither one of those is picking up plywood from home depot for example.

    source

    • argarath@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Neither is the cybertruck

      source
    • ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Okay. The F150 Lighting has a range of 240-300 miles per charge, and an MSRP starting at $50k, compared to the cyber truck starting at $81k.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Gonkulator@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Give me a break. Aint no roofing contractor or excavating company using these things as a work vehicle. If you want to see one visit the parking lot outside 21forever

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • reddig33@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      It’s not irrelevant. The two cars I compared it to are smaller, yet they go further at much less cost. To me that sounds like the Cybertruck is way too heavy.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Poiar@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  How long is this in world units?

  source

  • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Image

    source
  • tourist@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    263km to 331km

    about the same distance from the bed to the light switch

    source
• Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  My Chevy Bolt gets more range at a fraction of the cost and I love it. I charge it at work for free and it has been an extremely reliable car for a couple years now.

  source

  • JustUseMint@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I mean yes but not really comparable to what’s supposed to be a pick up truck. It’s no different than saying your Prius is more efficient than an F150 lol

    source
• EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I’m gay

  source
• Jarix@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  My 2008 city golf has gotten 600kms on 55L(typical fill for me is about 52 litres)

  Thats all highway driving and not being an idiot.

  Im lucky to get 400 kms on a tank in the middle of winter just driving to work and back. Think the worst i got is 385 kms.

  I dont understand why people are so upset at not getting the listed mileage when literally every car is only as good as the driver.

  Ive delivered auto parts in a 2014/2015 prius V hybrid (not plugin) doing about 1500 kms a week.

  Depending entirely on how i drove i could get 735 kms to a 35 litre tank or about 490 kms. Same route. Just how you drive. Idling and acceleration are the most important factors in real world driving that effect your fuel efficiency aside from how much extra weight is being hauled around

  source
• saltesc@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I want an EV offroader so bad, but I currently live in Australia. Some of my trips I’m packing 130L of fuel and this is after getting to the last planned station before hitting the wild. That can get consumed over as little as 200km depending on conditions the car has to tackle.

  <200 miles of aggressive highway driving is a death sentence for a 4×4 in Australia. Outside of recreational trips near cities or big towns, mileage like this would put you at high risk.

  source

  • fat_stig@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    65 l/100km… Holy shit, a Bugatti Veyron running at top speed over 400km/h is consuming 122 l/100km.

    That’s insane

    source
• helenslunch@feddit.nl ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Do people know there is more than 1 cybertruck?

  source
• Slovene@feddit.nl ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  getyarn.io/…/392ea5d2-2919-4aa7-a57d-498e70aac87f

  source