Quote from: Gregg on July 01, 2024, 20:42:18I see people posting here saying things like "you can't include charging costs from fast chargers when towing because charging at home is so much cheaper", or that EV's require very little more energy to build than an ICE car, or claims that an ICE car will also use 60% more energy to haul a trailer just like an EV, etc...
My 5 year old truck goes from roughly 23 mpg down to 19 mpg with 2 horses in their trailer, which is nowhere near 60% more energy, and If you are traveling anywhere beyond 50 miles from home you cannot just charge at home, requiring you to pay those high fees at charging stations, because you simply cannot bring any extra power from your home charger with you, and how many people take a trailer on holiday that dont travel beyond 50 miles from home?

The mistake you are making is you aren't comparing a 1 to 1 comparison. Any test has to be done with same route, with same driving habits and towing same thing

Also, you would still get some of your energy while towing from home, even if it isn't all of it. And Charging stations generally cost less than gas too

QuoteMy guess is very few, making that argument for EV's simply moronic. As for the claim that ICE cars require very nearly the same amount of energy to make as an EV is also incorrect. Aside from the diesel powered equipment used in mining, EV's require much more strip mining for the materials to make their batteries, which causes a lot more environmental damage from those mines(tho as long as they are in places like africa so they arent so visible to the public, and pay only pennies for the child labor used in the mining process, the EV lovers can just ignore these costs, so they won't count them(that mining also creates tonnes and tonnes more toxic waste to be dealt with during that mining and refining processes, and leaves tonnes and tonnes of extremely toxic materials in the form of those batteries that will have to be dealt with at the end of the cars useful life cycle.

I think you are confused about something. EVs aren't ICE cars with a large battery. Motors are smaller than engines, you don't need a complex transmission, nor all those pipes and all those stuff preventing an engine from impaling you in a crash. EVs actually allow for smaller exteriors than ICE cars while having bigger interiors due to simplicity of a skateboard platform

And as EVs move away from their ICE car legacies, they become more efficient and of course supply chains also improve

The so called cobalt that is mined in Africa with child labor that you speak of has been mined for decades to refine oil. That never seemed to have never bugged you at all, why now?

On top of that, with the IRA most battery material production is moving locally. Meanwhile cobalt for oil refining will continue to use child labor in Africa. And at that point you'll stop caring like you never did

Lastly, battery materials are recycled. Unlike the oil you burn

QuoteWhat about the particulate pollution from EV's wearing out tires at a rate 2 to 3 times of an ICE car, tires that also cost a lot more, or the extra wear on roads themselves due to EV's being a couple thousand pounds heavier, which also extends stopping distances, and makes an EV more difficult to be able to be controlled in emergency situations, especially in colder climates where winter driving involves snow and ice...

As long as you don't accelerate like crazy and use chill mode, the tires will last as much as an ICE car. And you have far less pollution from use of breaks and tires due to regenerative braking.

Many EVs already weigh similar to their ICE counterparts. And as EVs move more and more away from ICE platforms to optimized EV platforms, their weight will go down even more

As for cold areas, since EVs do not leak water like ICE cars, it would significantly reduce black ICE on the roads. And digital awd does much better at handling snow and ice. Regenerative braking also acts as backup when you can't get grip of the road

QuoteOh yeah, I really laugh at those that show their excitement while announcing that their EV can preheat the cab of their car before being driven in winter, as they ignore the fact they lose 30% or so of range to heat the cabin, and apparently have never heard of remote starters that have been preheating the cab of vehicles for a couple decades, in vehicles that do not lose any range at all to keep its occupants warm, nor do they lose 30-50% of range just due to the cold winter temperatures like an EV does due to its batteries.

Talk about ignorance. You preheat the cabin precisely because you don't want to lose range. Maintaining temperature in a cabin uses little energy. Most of your losses are changing temperature and loss of regenerative braking on cold start. By preheating the interior, your losses after that is similar to an ICE car

As for your remote starter, try that in a garage and see what happens. On top of that an EV can warm the interior much faster as you don't have to wait for the engine to warm up to circulate the heat

Quote...but then again, they don't seem to mind paying 50% more for essentially the exact same car but with only half the range, and requiring hours to charge rather than minutes, so what do I know...

Like all new technology, cost will always be high until it is mass produced at scale. At same production level as ICE cars, they will be cheaper.

As for charging, most people spend 0 minutes of their time charging, they just wake up every morning with full range. You don't need to stand in a blizzard or heatwave to fill up cause you are low, you just go straight home and wake up with full charged

I see people posting here saying things like "you can't include charging costs from fast chargers when towing because charging at home is so much cheaper", or that EV's require very little more energy to build than an ICE car, or claims that an ICE car will also use 60% more energy to haul a trailer just like an EV, etc...
My 5 year old truck goes from roughly 23 mpg down to 19 mpg with 2 horses in their trailer, which is nowhere near 60% more energy, and If you are traveling anywhere beyond 50 miles from home you cannot just charge at home, requiring you to pay those high fees at charging stations, because you simply cannot bring any extra power from your home charger with you, and how many people take a trailer on holiday that dont travel
eyond 50 miles from home? My guess is very few, making that argument for EV's simply moronic. As for the claim that ICE cars require very nearly the same amount of energy to make as an EV is also incorrect. Aside from the diesel powered equipment used in mining, EV's require much more strip mining for the materials to make their batteries, which causes a lot more environmental damage from those mines(tho as long as they are in places like africa so they arent so visible to the public, and pay only pennies for the child labor used in the mining process, the EV lovers can just ignore these costs, so they won't count them(that mining also creates tonnes and tonnes more toxic waste to be dealt with during that mining and refining processes, and leaves tonnes and tonnes of extremely toxic materials in the form of those batteries that will have to be dealt with at the end of the cars useful life cycle. What about the particulate pollution from EV's wearing out tires at a rate 2 to 3 times of an ICE car, tires that also cost a lot more, or the extra wear on roads themselves due to EV's being a couple thousand pounds heavier, which also extends stopping distances, and makes an EV more difficult to be able to be controlled in emergency situations, especially in colder climates where winter driving involves snow and ice...
There is so much devotion towards EV's for some, that they intentionally and willfully ignore the disadvantages, and I wonder, is this because misery loves company, or do they just not care that their claims can cause big issues for others that get convinced that using an EV for a holiday involving hauling a trailer is no more inconvenient than using an ICE vehicle?
Oh yeah, I really laugh at those that show their excitement while announcing that their EV can preheat the cab of their car before being driven in winter, as they ignore the fact they lose 30% or so of range to heat the cabin, and apparently have never heard of remote starters that have been preheating the cab of vehicles for a couple decades, in vehicles that do not lose any range at all to keep its occupants warm, nor do they lose 30-50% of range just due to the cold winter temperatures like an EV does due to its batteries.
Imagine how mad you would be to find half of every tank of gas you paid good money for, gone because it's chilly outside, as if siphoned off over night every night... I'd be pissed at losing that money every day it's slightly cold out... I guess EV drivers don't mind having half their fuel vanish, and half the money they  spent fueling up on every fill...
...but then again, they don't seem to mind paying 50% more for essentially the exact same car but with only half the range, and requiring hours to charge rather than minutes, so what do I know...

Quote from: Sambit Saha on June 27, 2024, 02:09:58Update: A previous version of this article incorrectly mentioned the total towing load as 11,000 pounds. Based on the title of the video and the shockingly poor overall efficiency, I assumed that number to be correct. Last winter, a different YouTuber tested the Cybertruck's towing range with an 11,000-pound load, and his results were largely the same as these (less than a mile/kWh). The fact that the boat and trailer weigh approximately 4,000 pounds makes the overall range performance (while towing) of the Cybertruck even poorer than I previously thought. I apologise for the oversight.

It is due to the poor aerodynamics. Bjorn back in the day did testing on towing with Model X. Towing a 4950lb  car resulted in more range than towing a 1550lb empty horse trailer. That is what difference of aerodynamics make at higher speeds

Quote from: paoljjx on June 27, 2024, 18:15:07think about leaving your lights on in the kitchen overnight.  you might not but the car uses that much electric because on one hill en-route.

LED lighting these days doesn't use that much electricity really

That said, an EV will recover most of the energy climbing a hill with regenerative braking when it goes back down hill

Quote from: George on June 28, 2024, 18:30:07Itll be really funny to see all the electric vehicles burning in a pile when folks realize the impact it takes to produce them, and the lack of resources to outfit a planet in evs. It was never going to be possible. Short sighted thinking that is making the situation worse already. Just so we can have a ton of uneducated folks driving around planet crushing vehicles, while that listen to yacht rock. Hydrogen is and always will be the answer. The infrastructure is attainable, and the fuel is basically clean as it gets. Lets stop talking about how "awsome" our stupid evs are, and put some effort into cleaner more sustainable fuel now, instead of just acting like we've solved the problem. Sorry you folks wasted your money lining someone else's pocket for a very costly weaker alternative.

The impact it takes to produce an EV isn't that much more than an ICE car, and less than a hydrogen car. There is no shortage of resources to outfit everyone with an EV, but you make a funny statement considering hydrogen cars require more resources than EVs. Hydrogen is a scam for the st*pid people who don't understand how the technology actually works, all people are told that "hydrogen will be just like gas" or that "look how light hydrogen is" but don't realize it is nothing like gas. And there is more to a car's drivetrain than simply the fuel, they require far far more parts

Quote from: Mage AmenRa on June 29, 2024, 09:26:49At the moment the best way to carry a quantity of energy is compression of the lightest metal. Perhaps creation of a pure proton metal would exceed the density of compression of the vapor. One can be sure our energy needs are coming from the proton. ExxonMobil is creating a decarbonizion device to produce 1 billion gallons a day in equivalent hydrogen. Sourced from natural gas our most abundant energy source. Agriculture can easily be involved in composting to source methane. The resulting CO² from the process should be feed to organic life, as a more efficient with a lower impact environmentally. Greenhouse grown hemp can produce many profitable products, even eventually replacing alcohol as a social libation putting the stars in Starbucks. Hemp fiber, and feed for cattle. All of this would move a lot of agriculture indoors, perhaps in long tunnels under ground. Summing up that studies show HEMP is an excellent absorption candidate for CO² while requiring less water than cotton. All of this puts H² in a bottle which has an energy density attractive for aircraft fuel. That 90 bar bottle of hydrogen will tow your boat around the world while also powering the boat in the water. The future in very different as we discover how to increase compression, and how to make generators that fit the palm of your hand so that your power tools run on the blue gas. I long ago invented a better wind machine back in 1980. Investors told me it had no future, I love to live long enough to see this proven wrong. Energy is the ultimate currency, Elon is learning how true that is.

H2 has poor energy density by volume and needs heavy expensive containers, you are better off making biojet fuel which can reuse same airplanes. There is not enough land area to produce enough hemp to power cars, even more so since biofuel is more useful in planes and trucks

For cars, EVs is the superior choice. Same for semi trucks. For the short term, in light trucks probably the best option is plugin hybrids like the 2025 ram charger. In long term as battery prices continue to drop, the best option would be trailers that have batteries in them with the trailers also doing regenerative braking.

Stop complaining about the 11,000 pounds thing, it literally says that it's 4000! Reading comprehension skills are lacking.



"A Tesla Cybertruck owner, through a YouTube video, shared his real-life experience of using the contentious pickup truck to tow his boat on a 40-foot trailer, with a total weight of an estimated 4,000 pounds - which happens to be significantly lower than the dual-motor version's maximum towing capacity of 11,000 pounds."

where did the electric come from? Fossil fuel. I saw a video the other day of a Tesla charging station being powered by a diesel generator.

At the moment the best way to carry a quantity of energy is compression of the lightest metal. Perhaps creation of a pure proton metal would exceed the density of compression of the vapor. One can be sure our energy needs are coming from the proton. ExxonMobil is creating a decarbonizion device to produce 1 billion gallons a day in equivalent hydrogen. Sourced from natural gas our most abundant energy source. Agriculture can easily be involved in composting to source methane. The resulting CO² from the process should be feed to organic life, as a more efficient with a lower impact environmentally. Greenhouse grown hemp can produce many profitable products, even eventually replacing alcohol as a social libation putting the stars in Starbucks. Hemp fiber, and feed for cattle. All of this would move a lot of agriculture indoors, perhaps in long tunnels under ground. Summing up that studies show HEMP is an excellent absorption candidate for CO² while requiring less water than cotton. All of this puts H² in a bottle which has an energy density attractive for aircraft fuel. That 90 bar bottle of hydrogen will tow your boat around the world while also powering the boat in the water. The future in very different as we discover how to increase compression, and how to make generators that fit the palm of your hand so that your power tools run on the blue gas. I long ago invented a better wind machine back in 1980. Investors told me it had no future, I love to live long enough to see this proven wrong. Energy is the ultimate currency, Elon is learning how true that is.

This is amazing. To have a zero carbon footprint vehicle, MAKE A HYBRID. Combine Tesla's Truck with the WATER ENGINE, that Musk just invented. Should extend the range d bit,sybe double or triple the range.x10 the range. Also, need a motor transmission that shifts number of windings of copper on the armature. I mean seriously? There are design issues not being addressed. This is easy enough to solve. But I doubt just anyone could. I saw the Enron hybrid energy exhibit 8n Chicago in the 1980's and frankly, for some reason people don't think like that.

Well if someone needs help, call me.

Itll be really funny to see all the electric vehicles burning in a pile when folks realize the impact it takes to produce them, and the lack of resources to outfit a planet in evs. It was never going to be possible. Short sighted thinking that is making the situation worse already. Just so we can have a ton of uneducated folks driving around planet crushing vehicles, while that listen to yacht rock. Hydrogen is and always will be the answer. The infrastructure is attainable, and the fuel is basically clean as it gets. Lets stop talking about how "awsome" our stupid evs are, and put some effort into cleaner more sustainable fuel now, instead of just acting like we've solved the problem. Sorry you folks wasted your money lining someone else's pocket for a very costly weaker alternative.

The Cybertruck has power, great.  Power to do what?  It most certainly doesn't have the power to tow.  Does the cybertruck have ample bed room like similar ICE trucks of the same size?  Those who can afford cybertrucks have jobs that aren't physical, like construction.  The "truck" is a status symbol for the white collar employee.  The cybertruck just isn't practical.  It's an oversized Tesla sedan.

Quote from: RC II on June 26, 2024, 23:49:52rent an IC vehicle when needing to tow long distances, save lots of money and maintenance.  Not difficult.

Finding a vehicle to rent for towing is actually extremely difficult.

It's not useful for towing or hauling. It is meant to be sold as a status symbol. The only problem with that is it looks completely ridiculous.

This doesn't have much to do with the cybertruck, it is any EV pickup ever. Sure, it's an issue, but it's non-exclusive.

I don't understand why people write articles about how bad the Cybertruck towing efficiency is when towing with any vehicle drops the efficiency to 30%-60%. There is nothing special going on here.

I towed a Mini Countryman with a Model X. The cost of towing and only charging at superchargers from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean was $4 less, than had I used a gas vehicle that was not towing.

The savings are 100% there!

224 miles of range?
What?
Weird. I keep getting WAY more than that in my Cybertruck.

The fact that this comes as a surprise to some people only serves to highlight the lack of intelligence among Tesla Cybertruck owners and, to some extent, the broader community.