4 ms·

The Mercedes got 5 MPG while towing the Tesla at freeway speeds. [1] 1: https://youtu.be/nILM_DEdBqM?t=336 https://youtu.be/nILM_DEdBqM?t=336

throwaheyy 5y ago
Makes sense. A MB C200 has 135 kW max from the engine, the Tesla’s battery is taking half of that, and losses in the energy transfer would be extra.
- economusty 5y ago
  I don't think you have much losses in the transfer, the strap is probably efficient. Although they would be extra so you are correct.
  - SomeHacker44 5y ago
    GP almost certainly meant losses in the transfer from mechanical energy to chemical energy by way of the cars motors being used as generators, then charging the batteries.
    - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
      Don't forget the double loss from sending the rotational energy to the ground and back.
      - uncoder0 5y ago
        Unsprung mass always surprises.
rootusrootus 5y ago
I'm surprised it was that good. I get 8 MPG from my F250 when towing a travel trailer that doesn't have the brakes engaged.
- iancmceachern 5y ago
  I too exist where the vent diagrams of HN reader and F250/travel trailer owners intersect.
  - canadianfella 5y ago
    Vent?
  - iancmceachern 5y ago
    Why the down votes?
    - kbelder 5y ago
      Strangely, the intersection of HN and F250 owners is a smaller set than the intersection of HN and F250 haters.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Your travel trailer makes up for it by punching a very big hole in the air.
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    Yeah, I liken it to what it would be like towing an open parachute behind you. I'm disappointed at the terrible efficiency we're getting from this rig, to be honest. Based on experience I was expecting more like 10mpg. It doesn't make a big difference in cost, but Ford only gave the 6.2L F250 a 30 gallon tank. For something that gets such abysmal gas mileage, that is a really questionable decision. Our last truck, an F150, had a bigger tank even with a shorter bed. I have no idea what Ford was thinking here.

throwaheyy 5y ago

Makes sense. A MB C200 has 135 kW max from the engine, the Tesla’s battery is taking half of that, and losses in the energy transfer would be extra.

economusty 5y ago
I don't think you have much losses in the transfer, the strap is probably efficient. Although they would be extra so you are correct.
- SomeHacker44 5y ago
  GP almost certainly meant losses in the transfer from mechanical energy to chemical energy by way of the cars motors being used as generators, then charging the batteries.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    Don't forget the double loss from sending the rotational energy to the ground and back.
    - uncoder0 5y ago
      Unsprung mass always surprises.

rootusrootus 5y ago

I'm surprised it was that good. I get 8 MPG from my F250 when towing a travel trailer that doesn't have the brakes engaged.

iancmceachern 5y ago
I too exist where the vent diagrams of HN reader and F250/travel trailer owners intersect.
- canadianfella 5y ago
  Vent?
- iancmceachern 5y ago
  Why the down votes?
  - kbelder 5y ago
    Strangely, the intersection of HN and F250 owners is a smaller set than the intersection of HN and F250 haters.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
Your travel trailer makes up for it by punching a very big hole in the air.
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  Yeah, I liken it to what it would be like towing an open parachute behind you. I'm disappointed at the terrible efficiency we're getting from this rig, to be honest. Based on experience I was expecting more like 10mpg. It doesn't make a big difference in cost, but Ford only gave the 6.2L F250 a 30 gallon tank. For something that gets such abysmal gas mileage, that is a really questionable decision. Our last truck, an F150, had a bigger tank even with a shorter bed. I have no idea what Ford was thinking here.