vs. CyberTruck - A fair shake

[HammaMan]

Pasted from the PB v 5.0 thread tangent here, a worthy continuation without clogging the thread, so if it's not a full list of immediate thoughts, forgive me.....

The PB can scoot 600 miles on a tank of gas without much fuss, especially at 70mph. Some will get them closer to 700 miles. That's true of most of the F150s with a 30 gallon tank. To go from that to a 250 mile range vehicle that needs 30 minutes of charge to get back 125 miles of range --- we're not even in the same league here in terms of utility, ESPECIALLY when you've got a brick wall in tow.

With EV truck of that efficiency, realistically it's hitting a charger every 100 miles for 45 minutes towing (you have to go where the chargers are so YMMV even up to the point of not being able to complete some journeys entirely, also thermal management is insufficient for CT batt resulting in thermal throttling on charge). Compare that with a gas stop every 250 miles where the pump is faster than the occupants who wander around, hit the pisser, snack bar, etc... all while being able to pull the truck and rig up to the pump. EV towing? Forget about it. That's just torture with today's (and the foreseeable future's) infrastructure. Makes a great filler point for a youtube vlogger dropping the trailer to charge, but the average person isn't going to want to do that more than once -- let alone charging every 100 miles!?!?! Even at 66 mph, you're driving 90 minutes and charging for 45? That shit is pure torture.

I've created just about every CT related thread here on the forum except for maybe 1. I was excited to see it raise the bar (per initial marketing fluff), but it did it in all the wrong ways (340 mile advertised range is actually 250 at 70mph = huge disappointment especially since most of us will run 80+ MPH). I really want the bar to be raised for electrified platforms be it BEV or PHEV, as well as technology in general. However interior build quality is also important. CT has too many cheap chincy parts in it including most of the interior plastic (long-running issue of tesla, they may figure out interiors one day).

48v, cool, but it didn't really do anything from a truck usability standpoint -- saved 14lbs of copper (irrelevant). Does nothing for truck utility like a winch? Nuhuh. You need to carry ~50lbs worth of 12v battery and trickle charge them due to limited 12v generation.
4 wheel steering? Not new or novel, been on trucks before, also on hummer EV. It'd be a nice potential option, especially on 157s, but we're not exactly unable to handle our trucks with ease now, especially w/ 360 cams.
The bed size was/is lied about -- at the tailgate / rail height (20" from floor), it's only 5.5', not 6' as advertised. 6' area is angled area to handle some 4x8 sheets and not a true 6' bed.
No spare tire or place to store it without taking up bed space (this was just dumb IMO) -- another tesla "Less is More? ™" feature trucks need. Not cool when cars do it, but a truck!??
'PPOB ac power' doesn't work while charging -- I like its specs (40a 240v plug, or 48a via NACS connector w/ 110a surge), lack of a frunk 120v outlet was a seriously poor choice. Not being able to use the 120v sockets (or any AC power for that matter) when performing any charging including DC fast charging -- that's just a shot to the balls (though USB-C power delivery at 60w works, still a niche category) and no 12v 'lighter' socket for dash cams / radar detectors

Early driving tests = harsh ride despite rigid body on full air suspension with back to back driving reports of the lightning being "like a Cadillac" vs the harshness of the CT (CT running LT285/65/20 D rated tires, 50psi from factory) with CT having more noise as well (LT tire = more noise and vibration). Lightning has same front suspension of the 14th gens which are arguably great riding trucks. Rear is IRS vs our live axles, but sway bar is adequate to bring it in line. Not sure about tire size adjustments in tesla's software, but I think giving the CT a 275-65-20 P tire like a recon grappler would do wonders to improve ride quality while giving it another 12 miles of range or so.

Okay, this wall of text is sufficient for now. One of the CT threads is better suited for this. But as mentioned, the AWD (aka dual motor) CT is no competition for the powerboost when it comes to ride quality / distance / towing / recharging / or just a whole package if your needs are anything other than soccer mom duties. Even home backup powering, the fully fueled PB is going to give you greater than 200kWh worth of juice -- ignoring the new possibilities that even a small aux tank can bring.

I'm just a realist in its capabilities / performance, which is what truly matters to the truck crowd. Did I mention it's ugly? Oh, its headlights suck too likely due to unusually low height with no fog lights either.

Sponsored

 

[HammaMan]

Reserved for additional info coming in the next few days

 

[MJG44]

EV trucks are light-years behind in terms of realistic usage based upon range, environmental factors, initial cost and infrastructure to support them. If there's people out there who think otherwise, they are just plain ignorant.

That said, there's a place for the consumer who lives in an urbanized population with no plans of going anywhere of distance or one who wants a wicked fast truck.

I'm no fan of the 3.5 PB either, but I do like the idea of a hybrid truck.

If a 5.0 PB were available and I could still lower the suspension to my liking, I would be all over that.

 

[JExpedition07]

The angled bedsides heading up flush to the roofline are a fail. Sorry, but gearing up to build my own house, and helping my cousins that are my age at the same time build/remodel their houses as well means I have a tool box in the bed. Meaning I am constantly stepping on the tire or my running board to open it and retrieve tools. I would not currently consider the CT simply for the fact I need to physically get into the bed and I cannot have a box that doesn’t severely hamper width of bed. Great for a trophy or novelty car I suppose.

I like the Rivian R1T to be honest with you, if we get a conventional body pickup with solid state batteries it’s over, EV wins with that because charging times will then vastly improve. Not something we can do with current old tech electrolyte batteries. Right now we aren’t there, and my 5.0L V8 remains king for towing range out of all the powertrain options in the F-150 being naturally aspirated. My 20’ Four Winns doesn’t even bother the average MPG on longer tows.

Elon all ready stated himself the gen 2 CT will have conventional bedsides and a more conventional body architecture. He said the gen 1 CT is more a one off novelty truck. Let’s see what the gen 2 Lightning brings, but my hopes aren’t high until solid state is cracked. We are getting closer. It’s not an impossible feat.

With Elon all ready stating the next gen will be a conventional BOF architecture, I see no merit for the current CT as it’s all ready planned to be terminated for something else.

 

[HammaMan]

EV trucks are light-years behind in terms of realistic usage based upon range, environmental factors, initial cost and infrastructure to support them. If there's people out there who think otherwise, they are just plain ignorant.

That said, there's a place for the consumer who lives in an urbanized population with no plans of going anywhere of distance or one who wants a wicked fast truck.

I'm no fan of the 3.5 PB either, but I do like the idea of a hybrid truck.

If a 5.0 PB were available and I could still lower the suspension to my liking, I would be all over that.

Ford has said they're shifting their EV ambitions into bringing more hybrids into play. Something they should have been looking at MUCH earlier. I'd love to see a PHEV retrofit of the PB to add an electric motor into the propeller shaft area with a battery taking place of the muffler area. It'd eat into the GVWR which is easily rectified with the lightning's knuckles and heavier springs to the point where it wouldn't receive a payload hit. There's potential for GAWRs of 4150lbs front and 4800lbs rear resulting in a 7900lb GVWR resulting in a 87% GVWR/CGAWR.

Another battery, motor, and a charge port would be needed -- I think modifying the DCACA into a bidirectional device like the CT has is a realistic approach. It's not a good factory release, but a worthy upgrade path. I'd pay $10k for such a package. It wouldn't need ICE charging as it could scavenge all braking energy.

I don't think it's unreasonable to demand more of Ford, especially seeing as how a PHEV would really allow quite a bit more capability to the platform.

 

[HammaMan]

The angled bedsides heading up flush to the roofline are a fail. Sorry, but gearing up to build my own house, and helping my cousins that are my age at the same time build/remodel their houses as well means I have a tool box in the bed. Meaning I am constantly stepping on the tire or my running board to open it and retrieve tools. I would not currently consider the CT simply for the fact I need to physically get into the bed and I cannot have a box that doesn’t severely hamper width of bed. Great for a trophy or novelty car I suppose.

I like the Rivian R1T to be honest with you, if we get a conventional body pickup with solid state batteries it’s over, EV wins with that because charging times will then vastly improve. Not something we can do with current old tech electrolyte batteries. Right now we aren’t there, and my 5.0L V8 remains king for towing range out of all the powertrain options in the F-150 being naturally aspirated. My 20’ Four Winns doesn’t even bother the average MPG on longer tows.

Elon all ready stated himself the gen 2 CT will have conventional bedsides and a more conventional body architecture. He said the gen 1 CT is more a one off novelty truck. Let’s see what the gen 2 Lightning brings, but my hopes aren’t high until solid state is cracked. We are getting closer. It’s not an impossible feat.

With Elon all ready stating the next gen will be a conventional BOF architecture, I see no merit for the current CT as it’s all ready planned to be terminated for something else.

If you watch the delivery event, which by many accounts was just bad, Elon almost seems disappointed with the CT's specs (even the tesla fanbois defense was "but it was just a delivery event"). He promised the original design abomination and though while failing at most of the specs, did keep the design. I think it's hideous and misses some real key points of a pickup truck, particularly with the sloped sides intruding into bed usability.

Big kudos on the design of a shared input/output AC PPOB approach via the EVSE (aka ev 'charger'). I stated about a year ago that's the way to do it, and they did. It can back-feed its EVSE much easier than ford's approach requiring only the tesla gateway (essentially a generator / mains disconnect) and a simple auto transformer (works to convert 2 pole 240v AC into split phase 120/240v w/ neutral). Just makes sense. It can back feed a home with 48 amps of 240v AC power (11.5kW) with a 110 amp (26kW) surge rating to start older style ACs and other motors.

 

[GregBC]

I think it’s more useful to view the CT not as a ”truck” but as a “medium-range EV with large capacity”. (ie payload/towing). Doesn’t mean it’ll tow your RV across country or handle ALL payload needs, but compared to other EV’s, it has a lot of capacity. I see it as similar to the EV Hummer: big, bold, divisive, capable of some stuff but definitely not capable of ALL things.

Personally I’ll never get one and likely will never get a Lightning or Rivian either, but I’ll definitely look to get an EV commuter car someday soon. Why not a Lightning or Rivian for commuting/local errands? Because commuting means tight parking spaces, which my F150and I both hate, lol! Maybe if I lived in Whitefish, MT where I swear every parking spot was 10x20, I’d reconsider, lol!

I don’t see the CT making a dent in Fleet truck sales. Some local towns have some Lightning’s but the benefit of Ford’s design decision is the bed attachments are the same, so the town can take their ladder rack or backrack off an ICE and put it on their Lightning. If the got a CT, they couldn’t do that.

 

[Snakebitten]

I'm still glad Tesla built it.

As easy as it is to poke holes in any competitors product, they often raise the bar in one or more areas. And for some consumers, that area of the bar raise is WHY they buy in.

I live in an RV.
I also experienced The Texas Freeze.
So why do I own a Powerboost?

I am the bullseye for an area or two that the Powerboost is the bar setter.

The CyberTruck is audacious!
I want so bad to mistreat one in the funnest ways possible.

 

[zacko11288]

I'm still glad Tesla built it.

As easy as it is to poke holes in any competitors product, they often raise the bar in one or more areas. And for some consumers, that area of the bar raise is WHY they buy in.

I live in an RV.
I also experienced The Texas Freeze.
So why do I own a Powerboost?

I am the bullseye for an area or two that the Powerboost is the bar setter.

The CyberTruck is audacious!
I want so bad to mistreat one in the funnest ways possible.

I value companies that still innovate and take risks. It seems like everything else is becoming so cookie cutter or everyone wants to play it safe.

 

[Buyer2021]

I'm still glad Tesla built it.

As easy as it is to poke holes in any competitors product, they often raise the bar in one or more areas. And for some consumers, that area of the bar raise is WHY they buy in.

....

The CyberTruck is audacious!

Though far from an Elon fan, and very PO'd about some of the things his Boring Company is doing in my county east of Austin, I have to agree with all of the above.

I'd really like to see one in the flesh - though I fairly regularly drive the tollway past the Gigafactory that hasn't happened yet.

 

[HammaMan]

It's great they built it without a doubt. Steer by wire, 48v architecture, kinda mixed on rear steer, it doesn't hold up well in collision tests in a manner that has me questioning the lifespan of that thing after someone like me makes it their beater. The amount of force put into those steering tie rods, especially towing --- well I suspect it to be a point of weakness.

The real test though is how many can they sell at the price point they're marketing it at. The inside plastics remind me of the bolt's, which to be clear is bargain basement quality stuff. It's the little corners that get cut that really add up for me. We've got nice plug covers for our 120v outlets but the CT's just some cheap rubber floppy plug thing shoved in it that's more disposable than anything, with the prong slits molded directly into the large cheap plastic. Tesla's goal is to make things as cheaply as possible. It's unfortunate they just couldn't do a cost to benefit analysis and toss another $100 into making a much more attractive product. It makes complete sense at their original 39k price point, but that level of cheapness has no business in vehicles they're selling at 100 and 120k currently.

The screen and the computer behind it are 11 out of 10, seats 7.5 out of 10, factory audio 10/10. No HUD, no IPC, No lane centering, minimal buttons, no turn stalks. Less will always be less. Rivian's interior easily bests the lightnings, but it's not a big margin. CT is in like 12th place on interior overall quality, despite there only be 3 trucks in this segment. The 25 RAM is going to raise the bar substantially. Based on sync 5's specs, I suspect ford won't be far behind with their first 25 new model if they don't just bump it to early 26s. Farley's leadership has thus far been rather unremarkable. The koreans have really been making fools of Ford in the EV realm. Competition is good, but man this last few years is just embarrassing. PHEV PB was such an easy given for a 23 release but isn't even showing up in 24.

Maybe they'll get serious and have 4 or 5 PHEVs including a limited release 250/350 5.0 PHEV w/ HVDC powered "PTO" type config. 15kW AC for welders and such, HVDC powered hydraulics, etc... The motor's inverter could be tapped for 3 phase power. So many possibilities and they just seem to be asleep at the wheel. /rant

 

[Samson16]

I value companies that still innovate and take risks. It seems like everything else is becoming so cookie cutter or everyone wants to play it safe.

I love the innovation and risk taking as well. As I am reading these well thought out posts, I keep thinking Tesla makes the best EVs. I would purchase a 3,Y,X, or S before choosing any of competitors and the same goes for the CT.

 

[HammaMan]

I love the innovation and risk taking as well. As I am reading these well thought out posts, I keep thinking Tesla makes the best EVs. I would purchase a 3,Y,X, or S before choosing any of competitors and the same goes for the CT.

They should get into the skateboard business for companies like ford to drop a cheap chassis on. Keep tesla's brains, ford's body design / interior, w/ the ability to add radar/s and lidars into the system.

Had they put a 170kWh batt into the CT and optioned a 34" tire, they could have had a 400 mile 70mph truck with super fast charging and be much closer to a justified price. It would have been an entirely different vehicle.

 

[Samson16]

They should get into the skateboard business for companies like ford to drop a cheap chassis on. Keep tesla's brains, ford's body design / interior, w/ the ability to add radar/s and lidars into the system.

Had they put a 170kWh batt into the CT and optioned a 34" tire, they could have had a 400 mile 70mph truck with super fast charging and be much closer to a justified price. It would have been an entirely different vehicle.

The CT does feel different in that Tesla got out ahead with ideas that proved very difficult to deliver. I think some have mentioned, perhaps this “Foundation” model is more of a concept still, but they just couldn’t delay any longer.

 

[Snakebitten]

I bet Tesla learns more about what Version 2 of anything they make should be, compared to about anyone else.

That doesn't mean that they are building products targeted at ME, because they aren't.
I'm waiting for them (or anyone) to build an EV aimed at someone like me. A V2 model 3 platform (already released elsewhere), technologically speaking, but with FAR more traditional interior and exterior trappings.

Sponsored