Range under tow load will undermine ICE truck makers

[interestedinEV]

@101101 I admire the way you shrug of any questions, criticism, suggestions and continue on your own merry way, oblivious to what others are saying or doing. I am not trying to pick on you but many of your statements seem to be a combination of wishful thinking, a re-writing of the laws of physics, an blind adoration for Elon and Tesla, and contempt for every other company. Here are some specific statements not corroborated or supported by facts.

I also don't buy this business where a couple brothers use a F250 against a X and have the F250 prevailing 2x out of 3 tug attempts.

The original experiment of cybertruck vs F-150 was unfair (a scientist of the repute of Neil Degrasse Tyson has explained why the laws of physics, were used to the advantage of Tesla). The brothers have tried to level the field but it is possible that they gave Ford a slight advantage. However at the end of the day, the Cybertruck vs F-150, the F 150 electric pulling a train, the brothers experiment etc. are meaningless, as they prove nothing.

We know the Semi drops from 620 miles unloaded to 500 loaded range. That is a 20% drop. That is not the 66% drop that the Model X experiences (it wasn' designed for hauling) and not the 50% ICE experiences. There isn't going to be any drop in the cold- that would be utter nonsense for a commercial vehicle, we have to assume that's been totally solved and transferred to Cybertruck.

So you have independently corroborated evidence for any of this? Seriously that there is going to be no drop in cold weather? Just because it is a commercial truck does not mean laws of physics do not apply.? How can we just assume it has been solved?

You know another way of looking at assume? Make an A** of you and me

The future of haul transport in the semi space may just be PV covered aero-ed self driving EV trailers without tractors. They would have batteries. maybe 16 wheels, front 8 steering, would be able to auto convoy. Might be able to jump onto train tracks and back off seamlessly.

Hmm that is an idea!!! We have now flying cars (cars that fly at least experimentally), seaplanes etc. Why have engineers in the 120 years that trains and cars have co-existed not come up with a solution where a car uses the railroad tracks and then magically transforms into a regular road vehicle? Beats me. Is it something to do with the type of wheels?

The differences is a higher capacity inverter (and some wiring persumably) and pre-selection of individual motors that test better for the greater load.

And I always thought that any vehicle manufacturer today used pre-selected parts i.e. thoroughly tested, standardized. That only one-off manufacturers who make one off cars, test match a part to an individual car. Manufacturers today do not wait for the last moment and then decide that this piece of wire makes sense for today but not for tomorrow. Tesla cannot manufacture in volumes if that do that. That was how cars were manufactured in the first decade of 1900, till a guy called Henry Ford came along and pushed standardization and mass production.

. Being able to accelerate the native load of has some real overlap with raw haul capacity. Other pieces on just forward movement are series parallel battery wiring and better cooling and less heat loss under load.

You lost me. I have no idea what this statement means, or even if it means anything?

But we already know that batteries utterly destroy diesel generators and electric motors utterly destroy mechanical transmissions as part of a tractive motor set up and together they even add a recuperative aspect and even a local PV aspects.

A very strong statement. Any corroboration?

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

...many of your statements seem to be a combination of wishful thinking, a re-writing of the laws of physics, an blind adoration for Elon and Tesla, and contempt for every other company.

You left out his deep devotion to endless inventions of conspiracy theories. Very deep and very wide conspiracies, according to him!

I'm quite glad I don't live in his world.

...a solution where a car uses the railroad tracks and then magically transforms into a regular road vehicle? Beats me. Is it something to do with the type of wheels?

You might want to check out Wikipedia's "Road-rail vehicle" article, about road vehicles (mostly pickups and medium trucks) equipped with add-on railroad wheels.

Apparently, from the article, safety is a big issue when driving such vehicles, both on tracks and on roads. Anyway, such vehicles are rarely used for anything other than maintenance of the tracks and switches.

They are also used only on lines that are closed for maintenance, so there's no danger of colliding with a moving train. That concern is one of the reasons why we're probably never going to see many trucks jumping onto railroad tracks for freight hauling.

 

[interestedinEV]

You left out his deep devotion to endless inventions of conspiracy theories. Very deep and very wide conspiracies, according to him!

You might want to check out Wikipedia's "Road-rail vehicle" article, about road vehicles (mostly pickups and medium trucks) equipped with add-on railroad wheels.

Apparently, from the article, safety is a big issue when driving such vehicles, both on tracks and on roads. Anyway, such vehicles are rarely used for anything other than maintenance of the tracks and switches.

Yes I can see why they would be a danger to themselves. You are right, there will be no mass usage of this, contrary to what OP says

 

[101101]

Degrass Tyson- well Degrass Tyson ran his mouth as he sometimes does before he had enough data. He ***-umed the Cybertruck was heavier than the F150. Tesla said it wasn't. The physics demonstrations done by the likely short sponsored sites seemed stupid- tons of dumb assumptions. Tesla demonstrated against the average F150 what a Cybertruck would do and that is likely very accurate. For marketing purposes it is spot on and accurate.

There is no great physics mystery here. The pistons firing against the rods in an ICE engine are like legs on the peddles of a bicycle. No more than 1 fires at a time. Take a 5.7 liter standard 4 cycle V8- dead center mass of what has ended up in the stream of consumer ICE trucks forever. Imagine a syringe 3.5 inches across sucking in 2.25 or so inches of fuel air mixture- imagine the plunger in the syringe (piston head) experiencing the force of an explosion from that fuel air mixture ( the volume of a can of coke) and traveling under that pressure another 2.25 inches before having to reverse directions. That is it, that is all there is too it!. That is the full force of that engine subject to losses from having to reverse the reciprocating mass of piston heads and and rods and to losses from friction and heat loss and losses from having to run all the fuel and ignition systems to keep it going. Figure it will piss away about %66 of that in heat loss alone. For short periods it can try to harness accumulated mechanical energy dumped into the fly wheel mass of its reciprocating parts but it will never produce more thrust than a fully saturated volume of fuel air mixture equal to the displacement of a can of coke (standard V8- that is all is power comes down to) - its is just like a bicycle with that amount of force applied to one pedal at a time translated through the gearing. That is it! That is nothing compared to what electromagnetism can apply in a similar amount of space in terms of rotational force. Nothing!!!!!!!!!

Imagine this another way to really put it into perspective. If you take a balloon and heat the air in it, it will expand the balloon. If you replace the balloon with something made of inelastic material that heated volume of air won't expand be able to expand or the container will rupture. You could easily take the volume of that coke can of fuel air mixture and combust it in a bomb calorimeter and get nothing just heat- maybe not even hear noise if you were standing next to it. You should start to see that a V8 engine is just little cap gun... pop, pop, pop. It never gets any better with ICE. It runs along on 1 cylinder at a time, 4 ignitions per revolution, but never more than one little cap gun pop, pop, pop at a time. Despite all that heavy metal mass underneath the hood (Led Zeppelin literally) it is basically a 1 cylinder pop gun. All the rest of it is like having extra barrels on a Gatling gun so the barrels don't over heat, it just duplicated heavy junk that has to be carried around to keep the mechanics of that little heat engine from overheating, it is a pile of bloat. Its steam engine level gross pollution junk- with gas that now has cobalt instead of lead in it now poisoning everyone's brains! And its tuned to make stupid little sounds that people have been habituated into thinking they like, like a bunch of cobalt huffers.

There is no mystery in solving the battery in cold issue. You just properly insulate the battery and warm to optimal operating temperatures. Going toward solid state helps with that, but is not needed. It is no like needing a block heater to start and liquid sodium channels to start and all than in the ICE systems where they can't even get started in the cold. Its just common sense that Tesla wouldn't have a viable commercial truck if it suffered range lose in the cold given a 500 mile range. Just as a battery that isn't solid state can be cooled to keep it at optimal temperatures it can be warmed to keep it at optimal temperatures. Presumably that involves less flow through radiators and possible using some of that energy that would go to circulate coolant to warm coolant.

And once again there is no strong statement on the essentially solid state battery and motors at 90% or better physical efficiency utterly destroying ICE for power. Look at the electric motors in trains, and dump trucks and tanks- hydraulic pneumatic transmissions simply cannot compete nor can the similar pneumatic properties and wasteful inefficiencies of ICE engines. Look at the little gear tooth electric motors that pull super tankers up into locks. Think some little cap gun ICE trucks would be doing that. Not if anyone cared about efficiency and reliability and the goal wasn't just keep a useless class of rent seekers in a position to lord it over other people.

I think it is frankly stupid to question the physics of electric power trains as radically superior and more capable in hauling over ICE. I became aware of this in the 90s when one of the big American Automags was interviewing Jaguar legend Jim Randle. The topic of electric cars came up and why it hadn't been done yet likely in the context of GM's latest attempt at electric subterfuge. Randle said roughly that the amount of power that could be channeled through a given cross sectional area was orders of magnitude higher with electrics than gas pneumatic. He ought to know he was among other things (if memory serves) the suspensions engineer for Jag. He was all for the transition to electrics as utterly obvious.

Sure Howitzers are cool so are gas pressure tubes that we pop in labs in succession to build up hyper sonic speed projectiles but these things aren't rail guns or particle accelerators. These things are from the era of hot air balloons. So there are no strong statements. There is no unsettled theory at play. Its obvious to people from the science side how this ends up. There is nothing controversial about Tesla utterly destroying obsolete ICE crap that should have been removed from the market 70 years ago and would have if it weren't for tech suppression and world destabilizing toxic politics. Tesla had a car apparently that had a wire on it and it was drawing from the Casmir effect and running and he apparently showed it to J.P. Morgan and Morgan was like we're not interested if we can't put a meter on it because his group of oppressors were only interested in what could be bent to support idiot rent seeking. This is where Buckminster Fuller said that nuclear should have been too cheap to meter but (in hind sight utter wretched fools of the highest order) would as Fuller pointed out even meter the wind.

 

[interestedinEV]

My better sense tells me that I should stop responding as none of us (including @craze1cars, @Pushmi-Pullyu , @bwilson4web @Thomas Mitchell etc.) seem to be making any progress. So I will ask a very straightforward question and would appreciate a succinct cogent answer.

What is it that you or Elon are trying to prove with this test?

Is it to show that an EV has faster acceleration and ability to reach desired torque levels quicker than a comparable ICE? If yes, I will concede that as generally correct. We do not need this test.

Or do you believe this one test proves Cybertruck is superior in every way to any and every other truck?

 

[bwilson4web]

What is it that you or Elon are trying to prove with this test?

Shows this is not a 'compliance', gutless pickup.

Is it to show that an EV has faster acceleration and ability to reach desired torque levels quicker than a comparable ICE? If yes, I will concede that as generally correct. We do not need this test.

Seeing is believing as we've seen a lot of 'PowerPoint' claims by the honorable competition.

Or do you believe this one test proves Cybertruck is superior in every way to any and every other truck?

When the first private owners get theirs, we'll know. Until then it is the usual, "Klang und Wut bedeuten nichts."

Bob Wilson

 

[interestedinEV]

Shows this is not a 'compliance', gutless pickup.

I think the general consensus is that Elon is far to invested in EVs to make something for compliance purposes. He is already selling green credits. Tesla of all companies does not need to do anything for compliance, they have shown time and again they are the real deal.

He wants to show that it is not gutless i.e. it is powerful.? I understand and appreciate that. In that case he could have at least shown the test to be fairer. The way it was done makes it appear that chips were stacked against the Ford. From the video, the tow rope had a slack and the Cybertruck had already started moving before the ignition was turned on in the F-150. So the momentum was with the cybertruck. In the brothers test, when the Ford was already primed up and both vehicles started moving at the same time, the Ford won (it was against the X not the cybertruck). Again, this is not to say that Cybertruck would not have won in a fair match (I think it would), but the appearance of unfairness has lead to a lot of unnecessary chatter.

Again honestly, we do not need this test to show that it has "guts". On paper it has great specs and the guts will shown with it hauls a large load over a distance.

It has been long time since my Shakespeare reading days, so I will say I agree with you with a more mundane phrase "The proof of the pudding is in the eating". We really need to see how it behaves in real operating conditions, not meaningless tests.

 

[101101]

Not if anyone cared about efficiency and reliability and the goal wasn't just keep a useless class of rent seekers in a position to lord it over other people.

I think it is frankly stupid to question the physics of electric power trains as radically superior and more capable in hauling over ICE. I became aware of this in the 90s when one of the big American Automags was interviewing Jaguar legend Jim Randle. The topic of electric cars came up and why it hadn't been done yet likely in the context of GM's latest attempt at electric subterfuge. Randle said roughly that the amount of power that could be channeled through a given cross sectional area was orders of magnitude higher with electrics than gas pneumatics. He ought to know he was among other things (if memory serves) the suspensions engineer for Jag. He was all for the transition to electrics as utterly obvious.

Sure Howitzers are cool so are gas pressure tubes that we pop in labs in succession to build up hyper sonic projectiles but these things aren't rail guns or particle accelerators. These things are from the era of hot air balloons. So there are no strong statements. There is no unsettled theory at play. Its obvious to people from the science side how this ends up.


Look at the FUD being put out. I saw a brand new article in Forbes saying the Tesla Semi could capture 5% of the US truck market by 2025. Same article tried to assert that there are range and weight questions remaining. There are no weight or range questions remaining. Tesla Semi truck has been in testing under NDA's for 2 years but there are a lot of people out there that know the stats, there is a lot of industry experience with these products now. It is clear that unloaded a Tesla Semi goes 620 miles and under a full load 500 miles. Also my sense is they could get the weight of the tractor under 20,000lbs. and I think that gives them 13,000lbs to play with for additional battery in the Tractor and I think that gets them to something like 1222 miles if they want- a bit to precise there but just a guess of course.... Tesla has even talked of a sleep over sku. A small caveat may be the mega charger. 30 min with a mega charger only gets you 400 miles of fully loaded range, so they might need plug in 3x mega chargers to get 997 miles in about 30 minutes. But as I've mentioned there is plenty of power for two trailers hitched up or a double trailer and if less than 1/4 of a 2nd trailer were used for battery then a whole 2444 round trip might need no additional charging beyond about 3hrs+ charge at the starting point with a single mega charger- obviously quicker with more mega chargers.

That Forbes article says Freightliner is the dominant US Semi maker. It produces about 100k semis in the US per year or 15 billion dollars worth. The authors tried to project that Tesla would be limited to 10% of that. That is simply not a realistic projection of Tesla's eminent impact here. The head of the Tesla Semi project after Elon is the designer or the Freightliner Cascadia the most popular Semi in the world. Tesla can take he bulk of Freightliners customers in US in that time and also hit the world. 100K units made from commodity model 3 parts and batteries isn't that big of a deal. Tesla's initial marketing stats for the Semi were likely based around hitting 80% market penetration with what it thought it might be able to scale up in batteries for optimal impact. But now with increasing capacity Musk is talking tera watt per year production from Tesla itself and you also might have noticed that 100kwh will now fit in a model 3 for presumably about 1000lbs weight and 422 miles of range- now multiply that by what will fit in Semi in weight- space is not a constraint either in the tractor or auxiliary in the trailer. And if solar is going on the Cybertruck you can be sure its going on the Semi- I believe that alone could add 1/3 to the range. But I also believe Musk will at some point not too far out surely by 2025 simply shift the tractor components to the trailers so that trailer axels are recuperative and charging their own batteries and also self-powering. It seems obvious Tesla will introduce self powered self driving aero-ed PV covered trailers that are capable of convoy and linking together. That will come soon. Tesla has already announced it is doing trailers for Cyber. Musk doesn't leave low hanging fruit on the ground, it is no his MO. All this will get the cost per mile under 1kwh a mile.

None of these steps do anything but improve he economics when you chain the trucks or convoy them the economics only improve, the get even better than the sub 2kwh per mile rate.

What drives the economics here is just comparative number of Model Ys or Model 3 or Cybers (that could be deployed vs a semi) and the emissions difference. I think Tesla will prioritize the Semis trucks for the bigger emissions punch. They won't be battery constrained anymore. I don 't think motors are any constraint at all. Is just batteries. A 500 mile Semi truck has the batteries of something like 8 long range Model 3s or 6 with the 100kwh packs (yeah I think the semi is way below 2 kwh a mile already) Tesla will apply its same robo taxy economics to itself as the buyer of the trucks to become a freight power- can even duplicate the lease catalyst as with Model 3- it can buy and operate the trucks itself and make more. I see it destroying Freightliner and successfully navigating the bar of being a supplier and a competitor to logistics companies because it will now drive the economics of the ground freight industry. It will have to look at loading and unloading tech. Notice it already put an electric hauler in the Cyber bed in a demo.

These self hauling trailers are probably better as side loaders its more efficient. They also don't need to turn around, there is no forward or reverse no u-turns. Might be able to pivot tractive trucks to just go side ways as well. Toyota and Amazon seem to be exploring this type of stuff in a short bus type format.
Suspect Tesla will apply that to full tractors and I see their assault on commercial freight being at least as aggressive as the rest. Amazon is a better competitor in that area- the Freightliners of the world will get run over. What is coming next is using quantum computers to optimize LIFO- its all these flow problems.

These considerations are part of why Tesla's at $422 a share today and just exceeded VW's lower valuation market cap for the year- which also occurred when Tesla was at about its lowest. That little $90 million in hidden revenue on the Tesla balance sheet that the SEC is allowing Tesla to explain next year is pretty likely a payment from Ford- the first of many to come (to protect Ford from embarrassment.) Ford left Class 8 a long time ago and its leaving cars in the US and with some tiny exceptions Ford can't sell its pick up abroad (because they are noncompetitive vehicles on their own merits- the result of the chicken tax and trying to pimp fossil fuels with a EPA policy fails to penalize loss lead upward shifted weight.) Ford simply licensed Model Y and Pick-up tech from Tesla- trying to supplement with its own experience, and a partnership with VW and buying into Rivian. But Tesla is already a bigger more influential force in trucking than Ford going forward ad is about about to push out Daimler Freightliner. Suspect Tesla is about to overtake VW market cap- going to happen in 2020.

 

[101101]

What (?) where is this trip about fairness coming from?


Its like saying the iPhone had to do a fair test against a Blackberry. The F150 is categorically obsolete. Tesla showed a Cybertruck prototype dragging a center market most prevelant F150 up a hill backwards because that is what Musk said the Tesla Semi could do to the most powerful Class 8 diesel- which is sure as hell true no test needed!!! Again there was no clear weight advantage for the Cybertruck. And again they showed the same Truck out accelerate a 2020 $127 Porsche ICE 911. It is clear the power train is radically superior. We've seen a non tow rated Model X drag a 2020 Ford Raptor backwards in a tug. The point has been made! It is fair and it is only the beginning. It retrospect after electric spank trucks harder than they spanked hyper cars and ICE motorcycles it may be seen as too fair!

As for the Model X against the F250- correction the X beat the F250 in the only fair test the first one. In the second one I think these guys were just paid off to simply lie (no proof) but the its stupid to allow the F250 to start early by depressing the gas peddle in neutral and then throwing it into drive and claiming that is a realistic test and then repeating that BS 2x. Where was the comparative X test (throw it from full peddle out of neutral - does it even make sense? More over that F250 could weight 2000lbs more stock and empty than the X and it still got dragged backwards in the fair test by a non-hauling soccer mom SUV. The only honest thing to try to improve credibility of the fraud was they showed the F250 lose up front in the first test- to a likely lighter vehicle the Model X!!!

This is like the stupid crap in the hyper car arena where there is chatter that that they (obsolete now non hyper car makers) can remain in non performing ICE- because of sounds or some other bs. What is that nonsense, they think in the future an electric competing against their comparatively crippled wares will be like a cross dresser competing in the women's but they will be what hyper women? This reminds me of the C8. Doug Demuro after discrediting himself on the Cybertruck now did a 45 minute 2 part narcissistic rant about how he can't get access to the C8 from GM. Well GM saw he made a likely paid-for fool of himself on Cybertruck so he is on much deserved shun. But lets think about what the C8 is. By Vette standards it is the best since the 65 Stingray. But if someone purchases a 65 Stingray it won't be like saying wearing a sign that says you're a clueless fool and a mark when a Model 3 Performance can beat that thing at the track (curvy and straight line) it appears plus it saves a bunch money from day one in every way. Its hilarious to watch GM do a truck on a mid-engine because they know this. This stuff is over!!!!! But also notice on the C8 too much chintz clad and recycled Camero rear.

 

[interestedinEV]

I give up

out of this thread

 

[DaleL]

Tesla Semi truck has been in testing under NDA's for 2 years but there are a lot of people out there that know the stats, there is a lot of industry experience with these products now. It is clear that unloaded a Tesla Semi goes 620 miles and under a full load 500 miles

Since the testing has been under NDAs, the actual test results are not actually available. Elon has been known to put very positive spins on his future products. Remember the $35,000 Model 3 before a $7,500 Federal tax credit? (Until 2020, in fact $39,990 before a $1,875 credit)

An ICE truck typically has 300 gallons of fuel and at 7 mpg has a range of 2,100 miles. Interstate truckers are allowed to drive up to 11 hours. At interstate speeds that is 660 to 770 miles for one driver. The practical range for the Tesla Semi could be as low as 200 to 300 miles in adverse weather (cold) and traffic. The big impact of electric semi trucks will be in short haul urban delivery. I think an electric box truck would make more sense than an electric freightliner (semi).

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Remember the $35,000 Model 3 before a $7,500 Federal tax credit? (Until 2020, in fact $39,990 before a $1,875 credit)

Don't need to "remember" that. If you live in the USA, you can order the Standard Range Tesla Model 3 for $35,400 right now by calling Tesla directly, or calling one of their stores. (You can't order it thru Tesla's website.) That trim level was originally $35,000, but the price was bumped up after several months. It's still "$35k" if you do what people normally do when quoting car prices, which is to round the amount off to the nearest thousand dollars.

It's simply amazing how Tesla detractors and Tesla bashers ignore facts and write as if the $35k Tesla Model 3 was a promise that Tesla never delivered on.

Interstate truckers are allowed to drive up to 11 hours. At interstate speeds that is 660 to 770 miles for one driver.

They're allowed to drive up to 14 hours in a day, altho if they drive that long they're not allowed to drive the next day. A single day's driving by a single trucker rarely exceeds 700 miles, but it's easy to find reports of 800 miles or even more posted to trucking forums. Shockingly, not every trucker sticks strictly to the speed limits. Also, some western States have higher Interstate speed limits than most do.

 

[DaleL]

A truck driver can work (be on duty) for up to 14 hours. However, they cannot drive more than 11 hours during the duty period. After driving for 8 hours, the driver must take a break of at least 30 minutes. Breaks of any kind count against the 14 hours duty period time.

In any case, electric trucks will be very welcome in an urban environment where air pollution is a major problem.

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

A truck driver can work (be on duty) for up to 14 hours. However, they cannot drive more than 11 hours during the duty period. After driving for 8 hours, the driver must take a break of at least 30 minutes. Breaks of any kind count against the 14 hours duty period time.

I see. Thank you for clarifying. I learned something today!