11 ms·
Unlike any other previous Tesla, or for that matter any other previous electric car, this is a reasonable value proposition. Everyone is so busy panning the loo
by ogre_codes 7y ago
Unlike any other previous Tesla, or for that matter any other previous electric car, this is a reasonable value proposition. Everyone is so busy panning the looks they are overlooking the utility of this truck. Even the Model 3 is expensive compared to its peers at $35k. This this is priced competitive with non-electric trucks, heck, it's priced extremely well versus electric trucks. A 6 seat truck with a 6.5 foot truck bed and a 3500 pound capacity for $40k is genuinely competitive with GM/ Ford, likewise $50k for a 4WD truck which tows 14k pounds is absolutely reasonable. Unless you are regularly driving more than 250 miles per day, being able to charge at home is way better than filling up at gas stations.
- xwdv 7y agoWhen I’m hauling around a 10,000 pound airstream trailer on highways that 500 miles becomes 250 and 250 becomes 125 on flat land. Now consider going uphill on mountains and the range drops even more. There’s a real possibility of being stranded with no place left to charge in the middle of nowhere where I could be easily killed without anyone even knowing.
- tossAfterUsing 7y ago> I could be easily killed without anyone even knowing. Well, that escalated quickly.
- jxramos 7y agohaha, thought the same thing.
- dpkonofa 7y agoI don't think it's as extreme as you're making it seem. Going uphill on mountains means you're going downhill which not only doesn't use power but regenerates power to the battery. It's obviously not insignificant of a cost but adding a trailer doesn't immediately halve the usable range.
- pitaj 7y ago> It's obviously not insignificant of a cost but adding a trailer doesn't immediately halve the usable range. It probably would through aerodynamic drag at the same speed but if you're planning on towing you can just drive slower (65 instead of 80) to make up for it.
- giarc 7y ago>Going uphill on mountains means you're going downhill which not only doesn't use power but regenerates power to the battery. If you are pulling a trailer (let's say a camping trailer) you are likely going to stay a few days at a place before returning home and going down those hills you went up.
- bdamm 7y agoThat's OK. It's not like the potential energy goes away just because you stay overnight. Plus there's a solar panel for all that power you are going to use while making hot toddies in the camper.
- xwdv 7y agoYou vastly overestimate solar power. There’s no way you’ll get an appreciable charge on your Tesla battery using solar panels. It’s enough to run things in your trailer, but no way will you charge a Tesla in any reasonable time. I suppose if you are stranded with no way to charge you could get enough to go somewhere after a few days of constant charging, but that’s an emergency situation.
- jsight 7y agoI guess, but I've never driven 100 miles up a mountain to stay for a few days.
- giarc 7y agoFrom Vancouver (sea level) to Whistler is 7000 ft but only 80 miles. I wonder if you could pull a trailer up that height and over that distance.
- ogre_codes 7y agoTowing puts a toll on any vehicle's gas mileage, and you can run out of gas in a normal truck too. Tesla's have range indicators built in and let you know how far you are from the nearest charging station. Turns out people who are traveling pay at least a little attention to vehicle range, particularly when hauling a load. This isn't unique to electric vehicles, regular trucks fuel economy goes way down with a load as well and gas stations are often few and far between in the mountains.
- kllrnohj 7y ago> Unless you are regularly driving more than 250 miles per day, being able to charge at home is way better than filling up at gas stations. There's no way the Tesla truck gets 250 miles when loaded up with 3500 pounds or hauling a trailer. It's very unclear if the range is sufficient if you use this truck like an actual truck where you need those things. Similarly if you are using this as a work truck there's some poor design choices involved here, too. Like the inability to access the bed from the sides of the vehicle. Or the non-flat roof complicating roof racks or additional lighting. This appears to be more of a "lifestyle" truck than a "work" truck, and in that market how important are the extra cargo pounds or trailer capacity?
- giarc 7y agoLet's be honest, this truck won't replace Chevy/Ram/Ford trucks on work sites. This truck will primarily be used to haul mountain bikes, soccer equipment and the occasional run to Home Depot.
- elihu 7y agoNot everyone who buys trucks uses them as work trucks, but for the people who are looking for work trucks, why wouldn't they use this truck?
- MuffinFlavored 7y ago> Even the Model 3 is expensive compared to its peers at $35k. I thought I read around a track, the Model 3 gives a BMW M3 (which is $60k-$80k) a run for its money.
- seabrookmx 7y agoThe $35k model 3 does not. The model 3 performance holds it's own.. for two laps until it reduces power for being too hot. Still super impressive but if you're a track die-hard and have the money, it looks like the new Porsche EV will have a leg up there.
- rootusrootus 7y agoThe P3D doesn't have the same heat problems the Model S has. And you could buy two for the price of that Porsche.
- core-questions 7y agoNot if you have to do a number of laps, though. Heat issues, etc. - the M3 is nearly track ready off the lot, the Tesla is really just a luxury car that happens to go fast from time to time.
- ogre_codes 7y agoIs the base Model 3 giving the BMW M3 a run for its money, or a higher end Model 3? Regardless, the M3 isn't exactly the pinnacle of bang-for-your-buck speed. You are paying a big premium on the BMW for fit & finish which is miles ahead of the Model 3. But when I wrote about the pricing on the Model 3 I was thinking more in terms of utility, not pure performance. If the job to be done is driving to work, the M3 isn't the car I'm looking at. It's the Honda Civic.
- dangerboysteve 7y agoThe towing capacity is as follows for the Tesla truck, 2WD $39K=7K lbs, 2Motor AWD $49K = 10K lbs and 3Motor AWD $69K = 14K lbs
- leesec 7y agoBTW, you're ignoring potentially huge cost savings with gas. Trucks are notoriously gas guzzling, many people spending 2-500 a month in gas. Cost would drop dramatically if you could plugin every night and wake up with a full 'tank'.
- core-questions 7y agoEh, doesn't have to be this way. What we need are smaller, lighter trucks; this message seems to have been missed by Ford who have released a new Ranger that's bigger than the F150 used to be.
- ComputerGuru 7y agoNo, because that’s just going to bring you unibody junk like the Ridgeline.
- romwell 7y agoWhat? No, a smaller truck is something like a Suzuki Carry[1] Full 2 meters shorter overall than Ford F-150, but with truck bed almost as long. Just less oomph, but enough for most city uses. [1]https://ph.priceprice.com/Suzuki-Multicab-Carry-9656/ https://ph.priceprice.com/Suzuki-Multicab-Carry-9656/
- ComputerGuru 7y agoI would definitely be behind that. Saw plenty of them when I wasn’t living in the States. Very reliable, affordable, and practical. However, I would not expect that to be what corporate America of today would produce.
- ComputerGuru 7y agoTrucks are gas guzzlers as compared to gas sedans. There’s no reason an electric truck of similar utility wouldn’t be similarly an electricity guzzler without making some sacrifices. The only benefit is that all-electric brings significant torque improvements even at low horsepower, but with modern turbochargers low-rpm torque has long been solved (my 2.0T sedan can tow!) and people won’t stop “horsepower shopping” just because the torque numbers are high as it’s mainly for bragging rights anyway.
- randcraw 7y agoSeveral of Musk's numbers don't add up. No pickup has a bed capacity of 3500 pounds. That's 1.75 tons. Even full sized US pickups top out at 3/4 ton, unless they're super duty which adds greatly to weight and lowers MPG painfully. A 1.75 ton load, especially raised as high up as shown in this prototype, would flip the truck in the slightest of turns. 3500 is surely a fake number. Second, this is going to be a very heavy truck, 6000 pounds or more. No truck with thick stainless steel body panels can weigh less than 5500 pounds. How that much weight can deliver 250 to 500 miles of range... sounds like fantasy #2. Apparently Musk is imagining that battery technology will advance a lot before this thing ships. Or he's just making stuff up. Finally, the claim that the bed will extend to the ground to form a useful ramp. Nah. These folks have never lived with a pickup. No object heavier than a bicycle is going to make it up that 45 degree incline and into the bed without crashing into the cab before it can stop, especially given the polished floor of the demo truck. That's fantasy #3. No telling how much more reality distortion lies beneath that funky exterior.
- bufferoverflow 7y agoI think you got confused. These weight numbers are for towing, not to be put into the truck bed.
- randcraw 7y ago"With up to 3,500 pounds of payload capacity and adjustable air suspension, Cybertruck is the most powerful tool we have ever built, ..." https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck https://www.tesla.com/cybertruck Payload is bed capacity not tow capacity.
- bufferoverflow 7y agoAh, yes, you're correct, I am wrong.
- randcraw 7y agoI was wrong too in thinking that no mainstream pickup has a 3000+ pound payload. It turns out the F150 does (in its maxed out config), so the Cybertruck's 3500 payload isn't necessarily that implausible.
- eloff 7y agoI didn't like the looks of this thing when I saw it, probably because it looks so different. But after appreciating all the awesome engineering that went into it, I find myself loving the scifi look. Finally a vehicle designed for geeks like me. I had always thought it sad that stainless steel vehicles never caught on. Here's my chance, and built from the same material as a space ship, that's icing on the cake. This is for sure my next vehicle.