I Ran The Tesla Cybertruck To Dead In Our 70-MPH Highway Range Test!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 มิ.ย. 2024
- Kyle takes the Tesla Cybertruck Foundation Series AWD 20" AT for a typical Out of Spec 70-MPH Highway Range Test in the Austin, TX area. Enjoy!
Shoutout to Ben for letting us use his truck! @VoyageATXBen on X (Twitter)
Shoutout to our sponsors for more information find their links below:
- Star Charge:
www.starcharge.com/charging?i...
- Kempower:
kempower.com/america/charging...
We would really appreciate it if you subscribe to our channel! The more subscribers we have, the more awesome opportunities we will be able to bring to you!
Find all of our Amazon must-haves here:
www.amazon.com/shop/influence...
Kyle on Twitter: @itskyleconner
Kyle on Instagram: @Virtualkyle
For more behind the scenes content:
Twitter: @Out_of_Spec
Facebook: / outofspecreviews
Instagram: @OutofSpecReviews
Inquiries: info@outofspecstudios.com
Tesla Referral Code: www.tesla.com/referral/kyle92049
TeslaFI Referral: www.teslafi.com/signup.php?re...
If you liked this video, we recommend checking out some of our other channels!
Out of Spec Motoring: / outofspecmotoring
Out of Spec Reviews: / outofspecreviews
#Tesla #cybertruck #range - ยานยนต์และพาหนะ
As usual in depth and consistent but I wish other outlets didn't publish your results before you posted the video.
Agreed - I should be more careful for the livestreams I guess
I agree. I was reading about this before I could watch it. Good job Kyle
@@KyleConner The exposure is good your core audience will watch the video and those that are less informed with learn you exist from these outside outlets
Yep, New York Post did that article before this video went up. You're too popular Kyle!
Well journalism these days have resorted to viewing livestreams to produce clickbait articles with twisted narratives, instead of acquiring special access, doing extensive testing and writing 3rd party reviewed content that is curated and exclusive. Gone are the days of professional journalism.
Thank you Kyle! Some version of the 70mph test should eventually become the _advertised range_ for EVs.
Except in most places around the world running at a constant 70mph requires a middle of the night run.
@@PJWey Yes most non-US places. Well except for maybe Japan. I average about 70 there as well. Nobody really cares about around town mileage as they don't drive 300 miles in circles or back roads very often. Range really only matters on the highway.
It's the only range number that matters. Around town EVs now easily have enough range that it doesn't matter. Road trips is the only issue with EVs
Why? That's not how ice vehicles are. That's not how any vehicles are measured. It should be combined city/highway if there is to be one data point for range, ya dingus. Ideally, they'd give us lots of data tho, ie 400 city, 250 hwy, 310 combined, 150 hwy max towing etc etc
@@dyeace I don't care how they do it but it has to reflect REAL WORLD driving and highway speeds kill EV range much worse than ICE. Obviously Tesla's range figures have been _Pulitzer Prize_ material all along.
Test finally starts at 15:45
Yep, so much filler at the beginning of all the oos videos.
@@mev202the filler is the nerdy stuff that makes these videos better than a straight up test. I want details, not fluff.
Did you see how they towed by looping the strap around the ball hitch? And then the 7,000lbs truck put itself in park. They are lucky no one died.
@@0mydramatic much?
@@mannyman4103 just watch the videos on the topic and you will be too
Theoretical range: 510 km. Actual range under specific test conditions: 410 km. With A/C on, set at 20 degrees Celsius on a highway, doing 110 km/h.
Thank's.
Great test. But the results of 70mph range test should stop when the vehicle can no longer maintain 70 mph. I believe that is how State of Charge does it. It is good to know how much buffer the vehicle has and how it behaves at the very bottom, but the distance from driving around a mall at low speed shouldn't factor into the 70mph range test.
Only a 5 mile difference anyways. 249 instead of 254.
@@GraysonCarr Nevertheless, Scott is right. But good to know there are 5 extra miles to move.
I appreciate the 70mh loop tests. For me most of my long range driving is on a highway so it's always good to have some re-assurance it doesn't have a better milage at 35mph. since those trips are usually pretty short for me.
I understand what you’re saying Scott but keep in mind this is 70mph constantly, this isn’t realistic, in a real life situation you have regenerative braking to recharge your battery cause driving around the city constantly driving and stopping recharging your battery you might actually be able to get more mileage
@@amardnoo But then you can doubt any scenario. Let's see it like this: Constant 70 mph is "very demanding" ... and aerodynamics and rolling resistance are stressed to the max. They play a big part in efficiancy. The "real life situation" makes unefficiant electric cars a little less negative.
Thank you Kyle for another solid review. I don't know if there is another channel that is as thorough as yours.
The Cybertruck running out of power and going into RED ALERT was actually exciting.
I've only run out of gas ONCE.
In my Jeep SRT - I stupidly - bypassed every gas station trying to get to one specific station. I was 5 BLOCKS AWAY.
I had to walk to the gas station, buy a gas can and buy gas and then run it back to my Jeep. Police Officer saw me so he waited with me till I got some fuel in it and then I was able to drive to the station.
Another amazing video, thanks Kyle!
Literally one of the hardest working TH-camrs in this space. Much respect Kyle.
At least you were "At Home" when it died. 😂. Because you stopped in front of the "At Home" store. 😶
The high beam thing is common in most cars. When you out flash/hold both the low and high beams are on. So it’s really bright. When you fully engage high beams the lows turn off. Same here, you can see the bottom of the screen (lows) dims.
The reason for this is because the human eye doesn’t have infinite contrast, so having a bright light “nearby” actually means you can’t see as far down the road. By keeping it dim near you, you see further.
Thanks, came here to comment that👍
For a car guy you’d think that he would have known that.
You Should never put a tow strap over the tow ball like that. You should pull the pin out, and take out the tow bar and place the pin though the tow strap.
He's towing with little to no resistance. It's not like the truck is being yanked out of a mud pit. Calm down.
@@silverstake88 38:00 the CT put itself into park while moving. That’s full resistance. Worse than a mud pit. You never know…. 😅
Superb as ever. Love the channel ❤️
BTW, towing mode is not meant to actually strap tow the vehicle, its meant to allow the vehicle to be creeped on a wrecker.
If he towed it in normal driving mode he could have regenerated.
@douggolde7582
He's done that before. I guess aside from myself the manufacturer informed him that wss a very bad idea.
That’s what Neutral “gear” for. I believe it has that option. But he was so excited that he probably forgot about it😃
New video, yes! This was fun to watch live!
Thanks so much for the in depth testing.
I'd call the range done when it can no longer maintain highway speeds. So, around 249 mi at 43F near sea level. The F-150 Lightning is around 270 miles at 73F near sea level according to Tom's State of Charge range test. So, probably almost exactly the same range under ideal conditions.
That's a good point, but it's hard to test and not a real-world scenario. They will need another truck with v2l to help charge it once the car dies in the highway, which doesn't sound too safe. In the real world, you still need enough charge to make it to a charger 🤷♂️
Im in the market for a lightning and this video convinced me to wait for the Cybertruck. The Ford F-150 Lightning is one of the more inefficient BEVs out there. I see why the Cybertruck looks the way it does.
Tesla's in the process of changing their 4680 chemistry from NMC 811 to NMC 955, according to Dillon Loomis at Electrified. That should give a range increase of 10-20%. Apparently the 4680's still a work in progress.
@@skellington2000 BUT, the Cybertruck is shaped like a bolt of lightening....I'm disappointed with the Cybertruck from the initial release numbers all the way around.
Plus the Cybertruck's all terrain tires used in this test.
Thank you for doing all this hard work for the community
About 200 miles with 15% remaining. I doubt too many folks would go below that.....
Looks like EVs are trash to me
Thanks for another fair educational video. Well done Sir!
A very fair and objective review as usual.
I can do a 200 mile roundtrip in a f150 extended range from the Socal Mountains to Orange County a 4000-5000ft climb. I cant do that in the cyber truck with a 124 battery. I use 120kwh to make that trip and I arrive with 30-40 miles to spare. 124kwh is only 25% better then a Model X. If this was the battery capacity on the standard truck it would be sufficient. The cyber truck seems to be less efficient then the converted f150 lighting and the worse product out of the 4.
And how do you know this have you tested it.,!?
CT won against F150. 2.5Wh/m-46F against 2.2Wh/m-73F. At 73F it would have been 2.8Wh/m or even more. And pls keep comparisons alike, do not talk about altitude change right now.
@@I_Drank_What Cybertruck 122.4 kWh, F150-L 131kWh.
Equal to or better than the CyberFlop. FYI: Rust Never Sleeps!
@@I_Drank_What F150-L has less than 9 more KWH of storage capacity and beats the CyberFlop in range.
Great Video Kyle. After watching so many of your range tests, now every time I charge my Q8 e-tron, it is a race to 10% and extrapolate.
AWESOME video Kyle - Thanks for creating this one for us all. 😎✌
I’m with you -I really wanted at least 400 miles EPA range 😢
Buy and ice car problem solved - my Camry goes 600 miles and 3 minutes to fill
@@matthewm7867and its not as ugly as the teslas
242mi at 0mi indicated should be the result IMO. That is how you ran the 290mi result with R1T with all terrains.
And for reference F-150 lightning did 254mi at 0mi indicated. Running any of these under 0mi indicated is just not something anyone would do when road tripping at 70mph.
And the 290 miles on R1T was with the quad motor. This dual motor cybertruck should be compared to a dual motor R1T for apples to apples.
i have driven 300 miles on 1 charge in my r1t with 21’s
@@ozo1010 Much smaller truck.
Nah, he drove much further, that's the point of the buffer.
Great video Kyle thanks for doing this at 1am!
NGL had anxiety has you were getting to zero. But was awesome to see this! Thanks for doing it. The more info we have the better.
What a great video. No way I'm keeping my reservation. The range is trash on this truck and its a real disappointment. Thanks a lot for doing this test so thoroughly.
Great video! Please in the future, never attach your tow strap to the hitch ball. It can shear the hitch ball. It's a rare occurrence, but it does happen, and when it does, you now have a potentially lethal missile coming at you. Find a tow point on the lead vehicle, or if you must, remove the hitch and loop the strap on the hitch pin through the receiver.
(we don't need another steel ball vs. Tesla glass incident. ;) )
My thoughts exactly. Youngsters don't have the knowledge of years of experience like you and I. I have seen people wrap it around the axle housing.
Wouldn’t it depend on the hitch ball
@fr5229 It's just generally a bad practice. You might get away with it a dozen or a hundred times. But it's incredibly dangerous when it fails, and its really easy to avoid by attaching the tow line properly.
I don't mean to detract from this great video- it's really interesting to see the true range of the CT on the highway-- but I winced when I saw that hookup on the hitch ball as it's been hammered into me for years "never do this".
In this case, admittedly it's a fairly low risk as he's not snatching a stuck vehicle, and the CT was rolling (until it went into park), but it's an easily avoidable risk.
Absolutely never do that to recover a vehicle. However what they were doing was the same as towing a 6600lb trailer. If you have ever checked trailer brakes by rolling forward and applying full trailer brake but not truck brake it is the same force. Now when you are recovering a stuck vehicle you can exceede the design limits of a ball and hitch setup. Remember he was actually pushing the CT around while hooking up the strap. If he can push on the ball and break it well then…
Just as I was thinking about tire pressure, you mention it. Very thorough sir. Because that rear driver side tire looks low in the video. But maybe it’s just the optics of the heptagon wheel cover.
Thank you! Can’t wait for the 3 truck video
I am a reservation holder, but I don't think I will go through with it. Just too many compromises. I currently own a Tacoma (in addition to Model 3) and I think I will just keep things the way they are. CT can't really replace my Tacoma -- I need to be able to tow without having to stop to charge every 80-100 miles (based on the original specs, I was hoping to tow 5k LB for a minimum of 200 miles). And total cost of ownership will be at least double when compared to Model 3. Plus I am not sold on the looks of it.
What do you tow?
I have a small camper, about 4k LB empty weight (and probably 5k with a typical load). Our typical trip is 150 to 300 miles (each way), 3-4 times per year. Sometimes we have power at our destination (an RV park), and sometimes we don't. So it could make the CT work. But a lot higher cost (compared with initial $50k) and somewhat lower range make this a lot less desirable combination for me. @@ed1pk
Just wait a few years the range will for sure increase, as the 4680 will get an energy density boost with every next iteration.
Crazy that anyone ever thought this thing or a f-150 lightning would ever replace an actual truck.
Nice of you to give Elon an interest free loan - he really needed that money to buy twitter
Gasoline cars list mileage for highway, and for city. This would be good for EVs as well, for the opposite reason...slower stop and go driving tends to be markedly higher efficiency than 70mph highway driving, due to drag, as well as regenerative braking. I've gotten 221 Wh/mile average with my Model 3 RWD, but 250 or even 275 Wh/mile highway, depending on speed. I think that listing a "mileage" for highway and a "mileage" for city would help.
They do. But the premise here is that range is only important at highway speeds. Efficiency is important for daily use.
EPA requires City, Highway, and Combined.. but yes... everything marque is the combined.... take 2023 Tesla Model Y AWD, Marquee combined is 123 mpge, Hwy is 116 and city is 129 ... and again that is mostly because tesla chooses the most optisimic numbers it can.. (123 mpge is about 280 wh/mile, 3.6 mi/KWh). My EV has EPA ratings of 103 MPGe combined (330wh/mi, 3.1 kWh/mi) , 110 city (3.2 kWh/mi), 96 highway (2.8 kWh). And real world? ... my bumper-to-bumper stop-and-go 27 mile commute is regularly right at 5 mi/kWh (168 MPGe) and the same commute in the evening with more free flowing traffic is 3.3 kWh/mi (111 MPGe), and most of my 2000 mile trips have come out just under 3.0 mi/kWh .... so yeah... pretty bang on ... but yeah... the only thing I hate about EPA (fueleconomy.gov) is the use of MPGe and kWh/100 mi. I even hate teslas wh/mi. It should be miles per kwh... it makes the math much more simple. Just like Miles per Gallon, you buy fuel in gallons, miles per kwh, you buy fuel in kwh. Usable battery pack (kwh) times mi/kwh gives you estimated miles, and largely its simple math... 2,3,4 times. I don't know why tesla went with wh/mi. There you have to divide your usable battery pack by wh/mi then times by a thousand. Its stupid.
Definitely
With no climate control, yes. But the time it takes to do 250 city miles would get less range than highway due to climate control running all day
@@austina4189
That depends on just how hot/cold it actually is outside and whether or not the car has a heat pump.
This video demonstrates the overcomplexity of dealing with a just released EV. Still basic ICE fully fuel in 15 minutes, turn on, set trans to Drive, and go for easy relaxed 300+ miles.
If you want gobs of range, buy any hybrid or PHEV, not an EV.
Kyle is king 👑 you’re killin it with this CT content
Great video Kyle. Amazing test.
Kyle has earned the nap 💤 he is going to earn after all of this testing is done.
Thank you for your dedication to your viewers!😃😃😃
In case anyone missed it...
254 miles traveled at an efficiency of 488wh per mile. Total energy used was 124kwh.
A 2 miles per kw,that equals my Lightning SR for day to day. Sometimes I get as much as 2.3kw with 18” wheels and 31’ tires.
That road (183 toll), is like a f1 track. It's a really great road to drive > 100mph safely (very rarely there's traffic on it).
That's why the company that built it went bankrupt. It is a great road though.
Great video! Looking for a later day repeat test. Thanks for sharing your knowledge on the epa testing wish journalists would do a deeper dive on newer technology. Even though the epa testing isn’t new at all
Great review! You passed close by where I live man!
I'm glad to see a Finnish company as your sponsor.
Nice truck to go to a nearby Starbucks in the morning!
Or a Gelsons
Thank you for the outro info!!
Excellent information….thanks!
My Lightning towing a 16’ enclosed trailer in similar conditions gets about 1-1.2 miles per kW. Average after 18,000 miles is 2.2
I got 10,600 on mine and averaging 2.1 mi/kWh but I'm also in northern Wisconsin so expect that to quickly decrease over the winter. Between all the available electric trucks seems like efficiency is fairly similar so have to pick you favorite aesthetic. We need better energy density. For those who need to tow long distance.... electric probably needs a couple more decades of progress to make sense.
15k on mine in Massachusetts. Average total is 2 miles per kWh. Not bad
@@Jim-jt9tbI’m in Oklahoma so it’s a tad warmer. Last summer I was up around 2.3-2.4
@Jim-jt9tb ... It is 1-1/2 miles per KW. NOT KWH. Time is not part of this equation. KW and KWH are two different things.
@@The_DuMont_Network It is kWh when talking about energy consumption per mile. Power (kW)*Time (Hours)=Energy (kWh) or E=∫Pdt which is the area under the power curve
Kyle, I have a 3-motor reservation with 500+ range due to needing to tow 6 months out of the year (retiring soon). I will be holding my reservation (which I'm ~250,000 in line) until the actual range that I can buy is about 500 miles. All other aspects of the CT looks great. 👍
I doubt there will be a 500mi real-world range Cybertruck anytime soon.
They are supposed to make a battery extension that sits in the bed of the truck, but I think it’s a maximum of 40kwh, giving maybe an extra 70 miles of range. Until someone comes out with a mod for these packs, or a third party makes a connection that allows owners to make their own battery extension, there’s no way CT is getting over 500 miles to a charge. Don’t even get it me started about charging both packs efficiently.
Towing is like 90 miles 9f range with the standard battery
I love the test,thank you!
Volta chargers in my area typically turn-off from around midnight to 6am, so was surprised to see they work past that time in Austin area... Nice.
$2.63/gallon for gas? Man you guys have it good in the U.S.
Heavily subsidized by the government
No taxes in Texas.
Not all of the US is like this. In Los Angeles, we're paying nearly $5.00/gallon.
@@AkioWasRight
Still cheap
Equivalent to $7.06 / US gallon in London this week.
(And that's the cheapest)
@@rogerstarkey5390 I guess so, but California is looking to be exactly like you. During the summer, Downtown Los Angeles is closer to $7.00/gallon due to special blends of fuel in California.
Keep in mind, we drive big, inefficient vehicles in the US. We aren't used to high gas prices. To fill up something like an F150 costs about $180 during the summer. To fill a dually pickup costs about $350.
It's one of the reasons so many people are abandoning LA for places like Austin.
Would love to see a three way charging test between the Lighting, the Rivian, and the Cybertruck all at the same time. Would need a Supercharger site next to EA (we have it where I live). See which one gets to 80% first and then to a 100%.
I’d like Out of Specs to do a “Race to Vegas” style video like they have in the past. But this time with the Cybertruck, Rivian, F150 lightning, Hummer, any other electric truck
would also need all road tires vs mud tires on the cybertruck but that’s not coming until later 2024. But that would be more of a fair comparison.
Super in-depth as always
First time I ever watched one of your range tests. I would recommend documenting humidity levels since that can impact range just like elevation.
I am disappointed, I was expecting more range.. this video will make me reconsider buying CT
Buy ice vehicle it won’t disappoint
You are the only channel i follow anything about the Cybertruck because of your unbiased opinions and only deal with facts for anything EV. I not a fan of the Cybertruck but I appreciate facts over fanboyism.
Great job as usual. Thx...
Great job, love your videos
Range test stops when it no longer responds to pressed gas pedal just before you get off highway. Nobody would drain an EV’s power to that level before charging it. So, the real range in this test was around 243 miles. Most ordinary driver would have stopped long before it reaches 1%. So, realistic range is probably around 230 miles.
Agreed. This is similar to what my “315 mile range” Model 3 does in winter driving. I get maybe 230 miles out of it driving from the Bay Area to Tahoe for skiing.
Even less than that. More likely around 200 miles. But here's the thing, most people stop to pee long before that. Most Superchargers are spread in fewer miles than that as well. You're going to make a stop within 200 miles regardless. That's when dc fast charging speeds start to matter. If you're just driving it around town, it will do better and only need a charge once a week at most, getting similar range for an 80% charge overnight.
This is how OOS does all their 70 MPH highway range tests.
He does what most won't just to see how big the buffer is. That's important info. If you *know* how big the reserve is, it makes that "once in a blue moon" situation less stressful.
@@Xetairex Well... going up to Tahoe, around 13 kWh or 17% (if it is a LR or Performance model) of the battery will go into just gaining elevation. Next, if you regularly go skiing, you surely have winter tires, that will penalize your range about 5%. Then, if you go skiing, temperature is surely significantly below normal, which penalize you another 3-4%. So, all in all, your Model 3 range is bloody close to the 315 mile EPA number! How many miles do you have on that car? You may have 3-4% battery degradation?
I see that $2.63 gas price am drooling over it
I'm at 2.61 in the upper midwest. Gas is abnormally cheap due to low demand in the US.
Basically gen z don’t drive cars or work - they just live in parents basement
@@matthewm7867 agree but no idea how that is related to the CT topic
Love this channel. His talking puts me to sleep at nighttime. Sorta like white noise
North Dakota doesn’t have very many charging stations and is currently below zero. It would be interesting to see the same test and if there are enough charging stations to get across the state in the extreme cold weather.
Great vid Kyle. You drove hours in the middle of the night to test this thing for us. Don’t mind the whiners. 😂
He did the test to make money. not for you. 🤦♂️
@@nsrvtqc I guess you don't have a car because seller/dealership they cannot make money from you.
So what bout in the middle of a snow storm oh wait we already know what happens, pity nobody buying an EV , and nobody getting rid of the gas and diesel engine vehicles, i guess the left will have to go full communism on us , good luck with that
Americans: 254 miles
Rest of the world: 408 kms
America is all that matters
Great test, thanks!
really great video, very helpful to know more about cybertruck. thank you.
22:40 I think the highbeam thing is that when you hold the button, the high and low beam are both on, then when you get off the button, just the high beams stay on.
Ya I had the same thing on my multiple Ford Taurus 1997,- 2007 lots of cars are like that.
Exactly this ^
Good catch
Our '79 VW did this.
That makes absolutely no sense, as that's not how LED headlamps work. The majority of LED headlamps either activate a separate bank of LEDs that shine further out, or boost a few of them that are on. If they low beams didn't stay on nothing would be lit up up front.
Agree with your range-extender criticisms, at least as currently described by Tesla. I love the idea, but I think they should be smaller and cheaper and more modular with the ability to add more than one. It should also be possible to either stack them or secure them side-to-side in the bed, and it should also be possible to locate them in the under-bed storage. Preferably all as a DIY update by the owner. 🙂
That would be nice. But it will probably complicate things... The real issue is the 4680 performance, IMO. They missed their original targets, so hopefully, they can figure out how to improve the energy density... With limited 4680 production, it doesn't make sense to throw a 200kwh pack like the Hummer.
As it has an interface for the range extender, it should be possible to use 3rd party products instead. Maybe even a diesel range extender. Tesla probably can be persuaded to make it an open standard.
@@andrasbiro3007 I love the idea of standardizing it. Their competition would probably adopt that standard, much like they have with NACS. Especially if the interface supported multiple packs and different capacities.
The design of the extender seems stupid. They should have made the extender fit into the bed storage compartment or they should have designed it to be flat rather than a block so that when it's in place in the bed it only takes up height from the bed rather than length. That way you could for instance still put sheets of plywood in there or skis and gear that is long but not tall. And that way you could add another one making the whole system more modular based on what your range needs. It would also lower the center of gravity to make the truck handle better. So much design genius on this vehicle and then a huge fail in that department.
@@tweedledee4922I assume weight distribution has something to do with where it is placed. I can see where the drop off is someone will make those drawers that go in pickup truck beds for slide out storage and still be able to use the bed to haul flat stuff like plywood.
33:42 Flashing red screen WARNING!!! 😂 It might as well say as a signal message :
" MUST ABONDON SHIP"😂
Great work Kyle
Don't forget the Hummer EV in your group comparison test!
Wow, 250? Not great really.
Another great video! Thanks man!
$4.39 today for 87 octane in Silicon Valley CA today. Chevron, Shell and other big brands are closer to or over $5.00 a gallon.
Gouging
Love to see the same test at 55mph. Not that that’s a realistic real-life scenario - who drives 55? - but it would be illustrative of how much air resistance affects efficiency.
Great idea
When you're towing you should never exceed 55mph. In the EU that's generally the max speed for trucks with a load regardless of the posted speed limit. Regardless of the law, it's just not safe to be going that fast when towing.
The entire state of Connecticut does 55 on I-95. It’s infuriating
@@tsh4kYes because the EU is a stupid nanny state
@@kalasmournrex1470 I always avoided that when traveling the east coast from South Florida to Nashua, NH.
Let's call it what it is. As it is now, the cybertruck is a glorified grocery truck that will look cool in parking lots within town limits. Definitely not a road tripping car at all. Nice job Tesla, there will be a lot of grocery kings in those parking lots.
Was really looking forward to the 500 mile range originally announced and sliding rear ramp for the cyberquad, whatever happened to that?
The frunk is too small , only 2 carry ons fit. What’s the point of four wheel steering
If the truck is smaller
Than an f150. They should at least include a 6 passenger option.
If anybody ever tries a roadside rescue with a tow strap, dial 91 and then standby.
Thank you for the info!
It's hilarious how many disclaimers he had to put out to preempt the triggered Tesla fanboys.
Seriously, though thanks as always for the in-depth testing!
This!
Casual reminder Elon Musk said Tesla could achieve a 500+ range for the Cybertruck with "battery technology we have today!" 4 years ago...
Along with self-driving taxis that would pay for themselves back in 2017 "we can do this now"🙄
Back on Earth the NHTSA just forced Tesla to make self-driving a pain to use because it was causing so many accidents.. $10,000 for a glorified cruise control that doesn't pay for itself. Welcome to the future
Elon is one of the reasons (bad interior quality, bad service experience, and more are others) I won’t be buying a Tesla again. I have two Teslas right now, but considering the BMW I5 electric for replacing my Model S soon.
And you can, but if you think you're going to get 500 miles doing 70 MPH at low altitude with a drag coefficient around 0.34 and on all-terrain tires, all from a 120 kWh battery, I need to tell you something.
@@Infinion Tell us what? That Tesla overpromised and underdelivered as usual?
@@XetairexUnderdelivered? They promised "300+" miles of range and delivered 340 miles (EPA combined). How is that underdelivered?
24:00 Bolt. only 55KW But battery is only 60Kw/hr so it only takes about an hour.
Nobody should be trying to cross country in it. But for 22k after tax credit. Its worthwhile limitation.
Incorrect. A bolt with the improved battery will take nearly 2 and a half hours to get to 100 on DC charging, as it will not stay at 60kw for that long.
When you press for high beam and hold, that's the flash position that has both high and low beams on together.
Here is a review idea: give the truck to a lawn mowing crew for a day. How easy to get to equipment in and out all day. Would they leave the back of the truck open all day? Probably would unless taking a break or concerned about stuff getting stolen.
Such crew might not even find it feasible to use a cybertruck if they are part of a larger operation. The existing docking bays are sized for F-150, and the shape of the trailer bed of this truck wouldn’t work for that. Cybertruck is not meant to replace f-150 for work fleets. It is meant to sell to high end consumer users who want pickup trucks.
@@rambrasil I'm not looking for someone else's opinion which is why I'd like to see an actual real case review. I've got 6 work trucks and never once ever used a "docking bay." Thanks for the reply, but it's not remotely helpful here. I spend over 10k per year on maintenance and repair on average. This truck appears to be designed as the perfect contractor truck. If you want a grocery getter, get the Rivian. I'm looking for a work tool, I'd like to see it in use for that purpose.
@@rambrasil
Since this truck is narrower outside than the F150, with a longer, wider bed and more suspension adjustment to account for loading, shouldn't be a problem?
.
As for items in the bed, better tie downs if required, plus the ability to take tall items in exactly the same way and great security for any smaller tools under the *locked* cover when the big stuff is being used?
@@MH-Tesla
Have you considered a Slide-out bed tray?
That would overcome any mythical "access issues"?
.
As you say, you want a truck that's "working".
Much better to call service, arrange a day and have THEM come to you on YOUR site (IF you need a repair) than having to waste time at the dealer dropping off, explaining the problem, collecting a loaner, swapping tools, etc, getting to your site late, only to get the "after lunch call" telling you it needs a part they don't have, can you come back in 3 days?" OR saying they're closing early, "can you return the loaner by 1600?"
(Yes, I've been there!)
@@rogerstarkey5390 Good point about the slide out. I thought of that too. 👍 Or drop the tail gate and leave it down with an after market extender so it's an 8 foot bed. (Not sure if that works with towing a trailer.) As for repairs and maintenance, I've never gone to a dealership. I've got my "truck guy" to fix most stuff and a local repair shop to handle more routine stuff. If I had a dealer do everything it would double my costs. And of course we can do some things in house. If I did get a cyber truck for work, it'd be the rwd version after the prices drop below 50k. So not likely for 2-3 years. But my contention is that cybertruck will be the truck of choice for contractors like me once they get through the order backlog and business men who make decisions based off the utility and costs can start to get them.
Not sure what such tests are meant to show really. In every day life you would never go to zero. Besides the car tells you not to. So what is the reason for the test. There are some things not worth knowing.
Outstanding content, Kyle. Did we see you go through several stop signs at the end?
instead of a retractable bed cover, they could add a solar/carbon fiber solid panel that opens with regular old shocks
They could have done a lot of things to make this usable and cool, as a starter they should have taken the crayons away from the 5 year old who designed this vehicle. They could have also made it more efficient, made it charge better, achieve more range and offered it at a better price. The thing is, they didn't. They probably weren't even capable to produce anything better. The Cybertruck is trash.
I live in Ontario Canada and our speed limit,on major highways for the most part is 100 km/h (62 m.p.h.) and most people drive probably closer to 120 km/h (75 m.p.h.) without Police getting upset. I was wondering how many more miles of range would have been available by dropping the speed by 5 m.p.h. during the whole test? 46F isn’t cold at all in winter. How much more energy does it take to warm up the batteries when the temperatures do drop to well below the freezing mark? I like watching your videos but they’re usually a whole lot of info over my head but I’m sure the nerd people appreciate all of this info. I’ll keep watching.👍👍🇨🇦
Going down 5 mph should get you about 3/4 the way to the EPA highway rating.
~8-9% more range if you drop speed by 5mph from 70-65. Thats pretty much the rule for all vehicles.
I travel from Utah to CA regularly. I’ve traveled in winter months in the 30’s. It takes about 11 hours going 70-80 mph. Mostly 80 mph. The range is very disappointing. I’m hoping that by the time my reservation comes up (late 2027), because I’m about 750k on the wait list, that Tesla will be on the Gen 4 battery by then, with much improved battery density. 🤞
Where I live 80 MPH would be much more realistic. If Tesla can boost the range enough by the time my reservation comes up, I will go ahead with the CT, otherwise I may get the Ramcharger if it can meet most of its targeted specs.
Your driving is much like mine, I live in CA, and most of my driving is to UT, ID, WY, TX, and WA. I had high hopes with the initial announcement. This vehicle is totally useless to us. And given the specs of other Li-ion BEVs, I think that I'm going to have to wait for a practical technology. With ICE vehicles, including hybrids, it is easy to find 4-500 mile range for these trips. BEVs still have garbage range and horrid recharge times, because face it, only the first section will be starting at 100%, all the other legs will be 80% down to 10 or 20%. So length of charge will be the killer. On a round trip to Pocatello, charging added over 7 hours to a usually 13 our trip. But no one seems to be looking at solutions. Gas & diesel are the only practical solutions for us.
I've done the trip from Portland Maine to Orlando or Kissimmee Florida in two days (with one overnight stop) multiple times. It's about 70 for most of the I-95 corridor, with a few billboards to entertain you in the Carolinas (Pedro's Fireworks, does yours? It's a smash hit! etc.) When I look at 1420 miles with sub-250 miles of range, I'd have to add between 5 and 45 hours of charging time to my plan. The Cyber Truck would eat up another 2-4 days of vacation just getting there and home ... no thank you.
OMG are you telling me the South of the border billboards are still there? I used to take that drive constantly back in the late 80s early 90s and they were entertaining as all get out@@AcmeRacing
Or you can just, buy the Silverado EV with 450 miles of range....or just forget about using an inefficient truck LOL
Thank You that was very informative. I own a Tesla Model 3 and I have been waiting for the real numbers on the Cyber Truck before ordering one. I'm a little disappointed with the range I wish it were just a little better.
We got the deepest dashboard in the business.Nobody even comes close.
2 miles/kwh is terrible. I don't think anyone who buys a cybertruck is getting it for efficiency though
You've all been killing it with the CT content. Exactly the stuff I wanted to know delivered ASAP. I thought I'd have to wait months for what the last 3 vids showed.
I'm generally not a big fan of this channel, BUT you and I 100% agree here. I firmly believe they under batteried the Cybertruck. As useful as the rear "under the bed" trunk is, I Believe they should've filled that with battery! Great review!
Better cells coming soon.
They launched because the rest of the truck was ready and the FUDmuppets were unbearable.
I thought the range extender battery option should go into that rear trunk, but I suspect that would do bad things to weight and balance so they put it near the existing CG.
"We don't buy into hype; we don't buy into future promise" - marry me
When you do the comparison please measure on the interior, the distance between the drivers and passenger door panels. I’m trying to see which is wider on the interior between cybertruck and lightning.
The Lightning, you don’t need to measure. The pictures tell the whole story
There are interior dimension floating around the web. It’s much smaller than the f150. Closer to rivian/mid size truck
@@ZPdrumer got a link?
Great video Kyle. Going to write an article on our website about this. So the 70 mph range is at 408 km, not an impressive number. If you translated that to European conditions, where mostly the highway speed limit is 81 mph / 130 kph and most people actually drive 10 kph over the limit ( 87 mph / 140 kph ), I dont know. Tesla should improve the 4680 cells pack asap.
Yup. This is a lot less than what it was promised in 2019.
It will be interesting to see if they are able to improve the energy density of their batteries, or fit a bigger pack in the existing truck. Hopefully they do this before Toyota’s solid state batteries arrive to take over the market.
@@rameusunlimited1561 This battery technology is already at its limit, the 4680 is the new more powerful battery. It's quite doubtful that they will improve this technology enough to make a difference, unfortunately. Toyota's SS batteries will take another decade to hit the market, in my guesstimates.
@@Adreno23421 they have been constantly tinkering with their batteries, but you are right they probably won’t have a substantial improvement at least near term. The only real answer is a larger battery pack. If Tesla wasn’t so against it having a range extending generator instead of another battery pack would probably make this a much better towing vehicle.
@@rameusunlimited1561 Yup!!
Great to see it go flat out to 0! Thanks for taking all the time to test for us.
Good point! an add talking about a future product has no effect on the range of the vehicle you currently have at this time.