Towing Range Numbers?

[Keeney]

I do not tow

All in all, since you seem interested to press on how anyone paying close attention could arrive at crazy ideas abut eg Lightning towing performance, here’s just some bread crumbs.

main advice: go look to actual, knowledgeable, BEV truck towers - not you-tubers like TFL that either don’t know or don’t care about anything other than clicks.

I tow with a EV Truck (Lightning), but not often long distances.

Bummed you left out my one example of highway towing a wake boat in colder weather measured at 1.2 mi/kWh posted earlier in this very thread (and the Lightning forum somewhere back).
https://www.cybertruckownersclub.com/forum/threads/towing-range-numbers.10595/post-212652

 

[Gigahorse]

Based on other EVs towing, if your doing standard towing you will be looking at 70-100 miles of range, based off the real world non-towing numbers coming out.

 

[HaulingAss]

Based on other EVs towing, if your doing standard towing you will be looking at 70-100 miles of range, based off the real world non-towing numbers coming out.

Try to avoid setting yourself up to be the laughing stock of anyone in the towing industry.

Those who set up tow rigs for a living know there is no such thing as "standard towing" because consumption varies greatly with weather conditions, mass and, the two big ones, aerodynamics and towing speed.

Trying to state a mythical "standard" that puts the the low efficiency number within 30% of the high efficiency number is laughable, even if the only variable was the difference in frontal area of the trailers. But there is also the Cd of the load, the air temperature and density, the wind speed and direction, the weight of the trailer, and the cruising speed, etc. Towed loads alone have such a huge difference in aero, size and weight that trying to state a "standard" that doesn't exist is silly.

 

[Gigahorse]

Try to avoid setting yourself up to be the laughing stock of anyone in the towing industry.

Those who set up tow rigs for a living know there is no such thing as "standard towing" because consumption varies greatly with weather conditions, mass and, the two big ones, aerodynamics and towing speed.

Trying to state a mythical "standard" that puts the the low efficiency number within 30% of the high efficiency number is laughable, even if the only variable was the difference in frontal area of the trailers. But there is also the Cd of the load, the air temperature and density, the wind speed and direction, the weight of the trailer, and the cruising speed, etc. Towed loads alone have such a huge difference in aero, size and weight that trying to state a "standard" that doesn't exist is silly.

As far as laughing stock goes, if you think that the current cybertrucks are going to be able to do any real world towing over 100 miles on the highway I have some news for you.
Couple guys have done some short/mid range towing tests and videos coming out this week are rough for people looking at using the CyberTRUCK as a truck to tow things.

 

[Woodrick]

I could hit Stevens Point and Wausau but that's just another 40-50 miles out of the way. A perfect spot would be in Antigo. A lot of vacation people head up Hwy 45 to Eagle River. I'm sure it will happen sooner or later.

Not sure if you realized it, but the map that @scottf200 posted is planned Superchargers, not CCS.

CCS has some different locations. I'd paste it, but something has happened and when I try to paste the site, it get all messed up, not sure if it my recently updated video driver or the site.

Check out PlugShare - EV Charging Station Map - Find a place to charge your car!
Make sure that you have the correct connectors enabled.

And don't forget. What you see today is just for today, new chargers are being added daily. So there will probably be a lot more by next year.

And don't forget that a 120V plug will charge the truck, slowly, but if you are chillin' for a few days, who cares!

 

[Crissa]

As far as laughing stock goes, if you think that the current cybertrucks are going to be able to do any real world towing over 100 miles on the highway I have some news for you.

If the truck is getting over 200 miles over 70 mph, then halving that would still be over 100.

Starting to doubt your math skills or sincerity.

-Crissa

 

[HaulingAss]

As far as laughing stock goes, if you think that the current cybertrucks are going to be able to do any real world towing over 100 miles on the highway I have some news for you.
Couple guys have done some short/mid range towing tests and videos coming out this week are rough for people looking at using the CyberTRUCK as a truck to tow things.

I've used gas and diesel trucks to tow a multitude of things my entire life. What is becoming apparent is that many who have never towed in their lives have this funny idea that most towing trips are long-haul, over-the-road type towing situations. However, most business and pleasure towing is done locally, mostly at speeds well below 70 mph. Boats to the local river, lake or boat launch on the bay, snowmobiles to the mountains, golf carts to the course, motorcycles to the trails, lawnmowers to the job, construction materials from the nearest building supply, sewer pipes, septic tanks, hot tubs, outhouses, etc. to the housesite, and the list goes on and on.

The range will not be a problem for the vast majority of towing. So, it is only towing neophytes who are making silly claims that the Cybertruck is impractical to use for most towing needs. In fact, the Cybertruck will have superior tow dynamics, tow efficiency and tow safety than any 1/2-ton pickup out there while returning big savings on fuel costs for the vast majority of towing needs. Simply by plugging in each night.

If the use case is for towing a huge retirement travel trailer all over the country, then I suggest a diesel truck, preferably bigger than a 1/2 ton class. It won't be cheap but towing big things long distances has ALWAYS been very energy intensive. Cybertruck was not made to tow huge travel trailers long distances at high speed even if it handles the weight admirably for a local trip.

So what? The truck market is huge and most truck owners don't want to do that. Cybertruck, even one with an EPA 500-mile range that doesn't exist yet, is not for those who want to do that unless they are willing to live with some pretty meaningful compromises. I feel sorry for those who think most towing is long-distance or that everyone with real towing needs, for work and for pleasure, wants to go galivanting around the country towing big RVs.

 

[charliemagpie]

We could throw a dart and land on a correct answer. Wind, weight, topography, the driver, air resistance etc

A professional benchmark will be helpful, but will not be absolute.

I plan a max 4-hour daily RV tow, say 55mph. A 50% range loss, charge halfway to reach my next caravan park refreshed. Easy drive, one rest.

It is a pain in the ass to try an 8-12 hr trip, if it was regular, I'd go diesel.

Plan and enjoy... fark range.


BTW.. 100 miles max? I call BS.

 

[cvalue13]

As far as laughing stock goes, if you think that the current cybertrucks are going to be able to do any real world towing over 100 miles on the highway I have some news for you.
Couple guys have done some short/mid range towing tests and videos coming out this week are rough for people looking at using the CyberTRUCK as a truck to tow things.

GIga, feels like you’re a little stuck in a negative feedback loop

TL;DR: what started as some fair concerns has spiraled into overly broad and unsubstantiated claims that, with respect to the CT/BEV trucks, are similar in kind to 2010’s FUD about electric cars generally - there are relatively few people with use cases where the CT range is a problem, and of those even fewer for whom towing will be a problem.

NEGATIVE FEEDBACK LOOP:

you started with understandably disappointed. then some people pushed back on your disappointment unjustifiably

understandably frustrated at that, you then doubled down on the communication of your disappointment and concerns. This time around, being arguably but forgivably a bit over overstated, not only did the original people back again, but also this time a couple other new people pushed back they only to the extent of the slight overstatement.

cut to now, and the negative feedback loop seems to have you really digging this point of your disappointment - but to a seemingly repetitive and largely overstated degree.

OVERLY BROAD CRITIQUE RE CT RANGE

it’s clear you think the CT range is trash. At some point, though, the intellectually honest version of that view has to take account for the limits of that fair critique: with 320mi of EPA combined range, long-distance, sustained, high speed, driving means range will get materially shorter as the normal range-killing factors increase (eg higher speeds, lower temps, etc.

Accordingly, if a person is buying for frequent, long-distance, sustained, high speed, driving, an EPA combined range of 320mi may be an important downside for them - depending on their “must haves” regarding driving style.

All the more so if with those same preferences they are buying for frequent, long-distance, sustained, high speed, driving, while towing.

That’s an intellectually honest critique. And one that should have been largely obvious to just about anyone the moment the screen flashed “320mi” - but perhaps the uninitiated still need some hand-holding.

FOR MOST, THE CT RANGE IS SUFFICIENT TO IRRELEVANT

But beyond that intellectually honest critique and the limited extend of that specific hand-holding are each of (a) people for whom these things are relevant but they already ‘get’ it, and (b) the vast majority of drivers - those who do not frequently do long-distance, sustained, high speed, driving, much less while towing.

That, after all, is why the EPA constructs its tests the way it does: the vast majority of drivers do not do frequent, long-distance, sustained, high speed, driving. And far fewer do so while towing.

Meanwhile, even amongst people who do frequent long distance/towing, a good number of them nonetheless do or will come to understand and still adopt BEV trucks as their preferred tool of choice, despite the downsides - because for them they’re still outweighed by the upsides.

HERE’S THE ACTUAL, AND LIMITED, CRITIQUE OF CT RANGE:

Which all comes together to mean, to the extent there’s any sensible version of the critique that the CT’s range (towing or not) is trash, it applies all and only to the limited subset of:

folks who are unwilling to accept the downsides (despite the benefits) of using the CT for frequent, long-distance, sustained, high speed, driving (while towing).

Otherwise, for the vast majority of use cases, plus for many people for whom do lots of sustained long distance driving/towing, the CT range is perfectly fine - for many to the point of being irrelevant.

That is, after all, not only why the EPA positions its testing in this way, but also why Tesla felt it prudent to bring the CT to market.

BEV TRUCKS ARENT BEV SEDANS:

That’s not how ICE trucks work, and it’s not how BEV trucks work. The only difference between ICE and BEV in these ways is that (a) BEV trucks have smaller “tanks”, and (b) fewer “refueling” stations.

If you’re a person that’s not prepared for that reality, and whose use case is highly dependent on experiencing no changes in how you approach sustained, long-distance, high speed driving (or towing) in a truck, then no, the CT may not be for you.

WELCOME TO OWNNG A BEV TRUCK:

, we don’t actually have good data on exactly the how and in what ways people’s use cases may be effected.

Take it from a month-one Lightning owner who watched all the confusion swell up then die away: contrary to posts just like yours I’m responding to here, turns out a LOT of people do PLENTY of “real world towing over 100 miles” with Lightnings.

The people who aren’t, fall largely into two buckets:

(a) those that probably shouldn’t have been looking at 1/2 ton class trucks in the first place (much less BEV 1/2 tons) - after all, if you actually tow that large, that often, and simply must have a 36+ gal range without compromise, then even an ICE alternative is a sort of weird choice, or

(b) those who would have with some education been just fine, but came across frankly misleading posts such as yours and threw up their hands

IN THE END:

A “500mi” truck was never going to be a 500mi truck in these edge cases. Nor is a “320mi” truck ever going to be a 320mi truck in these edge cases. But they’re edge cases, and for many for whom even the edge case scenarios apply, the edge case challenges are perfectly addressable.

For the few who it is not, they shouldn’t confuse their edge case, or their lack of willingness to compromise, with some unsupported sweeping critique that many people would or should care about.

This discussion being had/critiques levels at the CT, and the Lightning before it - is identical to the discussion and critiques that were had about/against BEV sedans 10 years ago.

Turns out, electric sedans do work for most if they understand them and the compromises. And electric trucks will work for most, too.

The reason the EPA tests the way they do isn’t because these use cases is predominant and the EPA don’t get it. The reason the EPA tests the way they do is because these use cases arent predominant, and folks speaking here don’t get that.

And the same goes for Tesla’s rationale for releasing this truck they way they have. These squawking uses cases aren’t predominant - and for those few who don’t jive, the CT for them is $16K more expensive, adding the range extender, and has a smaller bed in trade.

Past that, people probably shouldn’t be looking at BEV trucks - or maybe even any 1/2 ton truck - if they refuse to compromise in their constant need for sustained, long-distance, high speed, driving (or towing). Fair enough.

But letting people determine if they’re willing to compromise isn’t helped by letting a negative feedback loop with overly broad and unsupported claims throw them of the scene of the legit vs imagined issues to consider.

 

[Woodrick]

T

thanks. thats good info, kinda what I figured. Hopefully TFL will get a video of the CT soon and we can see how it stacks up.

I do it all the time in my cars. I go over the Smokies. On the way, usage goes up to way above 999 watts/kW and range drops, on the way down, it starts to charge at well over 999 watts/kW and the range starts going back up. The net difference ends up being the flat range of the trip.
Cybertruck will do the same.

Generally, regen creates about 30% of your range.

 

[Woodrick]

All,

The one thing that I can definitely tell you is that there is NO WAY to predict at this point and that the aerodynamics of the trailer makes a huge difference and that the aerodynamics of the truck with the trailer.

And even if you have the details of the trailer behind a Lightning, it will be different behind the Cybertruck. I expect that the airstreams will be very different.

 

[HitchHiker71]

Good video of a CT towing another off-road electric vehicle (3k lbs) with a flat towing attachment, so not a great test since there is no tongue weight - but I'll take it since it's slim pickings at present:



This is a tri-motor Cyberbeast model with AT tires - so only 301 miles rated range. From what I heard, they were consuming an average of about 800wh/mile when towing this vehicle. So since we know that the CT battery is 123kw from prior testing - that's 123000wh. 123000/800=153.75 miles using the entire pack if my math is right. If we assume you use 80% of the pack - for example going from 90% to 10% towing over a longer range using SC stations - that'd be 123 miles per charge towing under this load. This was only 3k lbs with zero tongue weight - I'd surmise moving up to 8-10k lbs would require much higher wh/mile consumption - but we'll have to wait and see.

 

[Gigahorse]

Have one video out ^ and another is releasing later today.
It is looking like about 80-120 miles of towing range for small loads (under 3,500lbs and not a lot of drag).

 

[CyberTruckeeTheOne]

I am interested on towing range as rhis is my use-case for Cybertruck.

All the scare-mongering is way past me as I already pulled the trigger and ordered CT-FS.

And I will soon find out the real world range as I would definitely be humping the brutal Donner Pass. Likely in freezing weather if I'll get it this winter.

 

[Keeney]

In fact, the Cybertruck will have superior tow dynamics, tow efficiency and tow safety than any 1/2-ton pickup out there

A: The Cybertruck is a class 2B light truck - more of a 3/4 ton by its GVWR.
B: Excluding of course other EV 1/2 ton pickup trucks like the Ford Lightning which is also a superior vehicle for local towing.