this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2024

398 points (93.1% liked)

Technology

59631 readers

2688 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

398

Tesla Cybertruck Owners Who Drove 10,000 Miles Say Range Is 164 To 206 Miles (insideevs.com)

submitted 10 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

206 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Tesla Cybertruck Owners Who Drove 10,000 Miles Say Range Is 164 To 206 Miles::Also, the charging speeds are below par, but on the flip side, the sound system is awesome and the car is “a dream to drive.”

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] farcaster@lemmy.world 93 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (12 children)

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 EVs (and weather and speed are factors with ICE cars, just more so for EVs) 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.

[–] Wrench@lemmy.world 48 points 10 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 21 points 10 months ago (8 children)

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?

load more comments (8 replies)

[–] Balex@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago (4 children)

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.

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] Enk1@lemmy.world 46 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (7 children)

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 than aggressive driving, 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.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 31 points 10 months ago (4 children)

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.

[–] Enk1@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

If they marketed it as such, but they heavily marketed it as capable as, if not better, at doing truck things than other trucks. And to be fair, most of us knew it was bullshit, but it's impressive how absolutely wrong they were. I mean, Elon said it'd tow a Porsche 911 faster in the quarter than the 911 could run the 1/4 mile itself, and they released a video to prove it...except keen eyed folks quickly noticed that the "finish line" they show is actually the 1/8th mile marker on that drag strip, and the 911 is clearly about to pass the CT at that point. Engineering Explained on YT made a great video detailing how it couldn't beat even the slowest modern 911.

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (6 replies)

[–] SpeedLimit55@lemmy.world 22 points 10 months ago (6 children)

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.

[–] farcaster@lemmy.world 30 points 10 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.

[–] XeroxCool@lemmy.world 14 points 10 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.

[–] Redonkulation@lemmy.world 12 points 10 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.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] iforgotmyinstance@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (4 children)

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

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (8 replies)

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world 79 points 10 months ago (25 children)

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

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 29 points 10 months ago

StarFox on the SNES has more polygons than that.

[–] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 22 points 10 months ago

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

[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 13 points 10 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] ThePantser@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 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 or sell one to test. I have a feeling it would get a 2 out of 5 stars.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (22 replies)

[–] familyfriendly@lemm.ee 65 points 10 months ago (38 children)

263 - 331 kilometers for the rest of the world

[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 10 months ago

Fun fact: the conversion factor from mi to km is ≈ ln(5).

load more comments (37 replies)

[–] Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone 45 points 10 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] JustUseMint@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (4 children)

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

[–] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works 32 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Calling the cybertruck a Pickup is hularious, you cant fit jack shit in there. So it is more comparable to the bolt than a f150 IMO

[–] Meowoem@sh.itjust.works 12 points 10 months ago (3 children)

There are a lot of pictures on Facebook of people carrying decent sized loads - I saw a stack of drywall, a significant pile of lumber, and some motorbikes. I think it's smallness is exaggerated

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 10 months ago

You can't even fit a bicycle in a cyber truck. You're not gonna be hauling anything.

[–] spongebue@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago

F150s and the like often have a bigger tank to counteract the lower efficiency. The headline at least is about range, which is made of a combination of battery capacity and efficiency.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago

Yeah, but an F150 is useful. The Tesla Truck isn't.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 38 points 10 months ago (20 children)

i had a geo metro that had greater range.

so confusing why this exists.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 49 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] smokin_shinobi@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago

Just the one.

load more comments (19 replies)

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 31 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What's the advertised range?

[–] overat8@sh.itjust.works 50 points 10 months ago

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

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I’m gay

[–] Wogi@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Hi gay I'm here

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] InTheEnd2021@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago (3 children)

And then the article says homeboy basically floored it everywhere... okay

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] Poiar@sh.itjust.works 17 points 10 months ago (2 children)

How long is this in world units?

[–] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 50 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (8 children)

Here, try this.

[–] riodoro1@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago

Fuck yes, finally I can apply my knowledge of first 10” numbers of the fibonacci series

load more comments (7 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago (3 children)

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.

[–] macrocephalic@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I also live in Australia and I think you're forgetting what 99% of vehicles are used for. I can't even remember the last time I was more than 50km from a fuel station.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] fat_stig@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago (5 children)

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

That's insane

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments