Unlike any other previous Tesla, or for that matter any other previous electric car, this is a reasonable value proposition. Everyone is so busy panning the looks they are overlooking the utility of this truck. Even the Model 3 is expensive compared to its peers at $35k. This this is priced competitive with non-electric trucks, heck, it's priced extremely well versus electric trucks. A 6 seat truck with a 6.5 foot truck bed and a 3500 pound capacity for $40k is genuinely competitive with GM/ Ford, likewise $50k for a 4WD truck which tows 14k pounds is absolutely reasonable. Unless you are regularly driving more than 250 miles per day, being able to charge at home is way better than filling up at gas stations.
> Unless you are regularly driving more than 250 miles per day, being able to charge at home is way better than filling up at gas stations.
There's no way the Tesla truck gets 250 miles when loaded up with 3500 pounds or hauling a trailer. It's very unclear if the range is sufficient if you use this truck like an actual truck where you need those things. Similarly if you are using this as a work truck there's some poor design choices involved here, too. Like the inability to access the bed from the sides of the vehicle. Or the non-flat roof complicating roof racks or additional lighting.
This appears to be more of a "lifestyle" truck than a "work" truck, and in that market how important are the extra cargo pounds or trailer capacity?
Work trucks are those plain white base model trucks with steel wheels and plastic interiors. You get them cheap and they will basically approve anyone for cheap financing of a few trucks through their business. Nobody is catering to those buyers when they design a truck. You look at those things on the lot and they look like one of the nicer trucks except only partially assembled.
The $50k trucks are basically for suburban dads. They used to drive luxury sedans while their wives drove minivans. Now the dads drive trucks that have replaced the minivan and the moms drive luxury SUVs. Trucks need to fit 6+ people, have nice interiors and enough space for hauling kids' sports gear and Home Depot stuff on the weekends. The Cybertruck is perfect for this segment. Fits 6 people, has plenty of hauling capacity and will take down a Ferrari in the 1/4 mile.
> They used to drive luxury sedans while their wives drove minivans. Now the dads drive trucks that have replaced the minivan and the moms drive luxury SUVs.
I've been thinking for a while now that luxury trucks (like the F-150 Platinum, Silverado High Country, etc.) are basically the modern-day versions of giant land-yacht sedans like the Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight, Cadillac DeVille, Mercury Grand Marquis, Lincoln Town Car, etc.
You can thank CAFE focusing more on car fuel economy than truck fuel economy, plus a culture that's come to increasingly value high ride height and a rugged image.
Let's be honest, this truck won't replace Chevy/Ram/Ford trucks on work sites. This truck will primarily be used to haul mountain bikes, soccer equipment and the occasional run to Home Depot.
those are literally the three things that are a major pain in the neck for me [sedan], and when I saw that tesla was developing a truck, I was like "oh sweet! Now I can hit the trails and haul garden supplies with a greater level of convenience, and without smuggering up the earth as much!"
>those are literally the three things that are a major pain in the neck for me [sedan]
Never been a problem for me with a Honda Fit, at it's a subcompact with a footprint of a VW beetle. The seats fold down almost into the floor, giving me plenty of cargo space.
My friend had a minivan with folding seats, he used to carry his enduro motorcycle in it.
I have a hard time believing anyone living in a city needs a truck for anything except work.
You'd need charging stations - an added cost/inconvenience to the ordeal. I don't know if you've been around many job sites and/or locations where they might store the trucks - charging infrastructure isn't there. It's going to vary a lot on the company though - tbh. Work trucks have so many varied uses that it's hard to say. Some people take their trucks home - but then they're not gonna wanna charge at home because then that costs them $$$ and tracking that expenditure might be annoying every night. (Versus filling up whenever you need and saving the receipt or using the company card) This is presuming they can charge at home - which some workers won't be able to.
The other part is that work trucks need good integration with tools and tool storage. You need to be able to add tool storage/access on the sides of the truck. If you can't do that - it's going to eliminate a lot of the market for a work truck. But - of course - that's just ONE type of work truck. (One where a person is getting out and doing manual labor with tools - electricians, plumbers, general handymen, etc.)
Other types of work trucks are basically completely different and require an entirely different bed. And the Tesla here definitely won't work with those. (Think flat bed trucks used for hauling)
I think the idea of this being a work truck is a silly idea. I don't know why anyone is thinking this would even be a remotely good idea considering you can't mount anything to it.
A lot of work trucks drive less than 200 miles per day. Being able to keep them plugged in at night and start every day at 100% charge is likely more convenient than having to stop at a gas station and fuel up for most plumbers/ electricians/ framers.
> The other part is that work trucks need good integration with tools and tool storage.
This is a much bigger issue and it fully depends on use. There are bed sliders which would help a bunch.
Also, lifting things out through the side of the truck bed is very much a thing and it's basically impossible with this design.
> I think the idea of this being a work truck is a silly idea.
For some jobs it would work fine, but for a large chunk of professionals the design is too out there to be useful.
Tools can be put in either the cab or the bed, and presumably both can be locked. I can see where some people might not like the high side-walls on the bed where you can only really get stuff in and out through the back.
I suppose Tesla could possibly add a tool storage frunk in the front if they thought it was worthwhile and they can spare the room in their design.
Pickup trucks in general are sometimes criticized as not being great work trucks [1], and I generally agree -- I think it's an awkward form factor and would probably rather use a large van for most of the things people use pickups for, but clearly people still buy them and many of them are used as work trucks. Many people also buy them and don't use them as work trucks. Making a pickup truck that people could use for work or for non-work is consistent with Tesla's goal of getting as many electric cars on the road as they can.
> I think it's an awkward form factor and would probably rather use a large van for most of the things people use pickups for
Hell, I've gotten away with using a minivan for things most people would use a pickup for for decades. My dad's 87 Aerostar growing up allowed for the back bench and both middle seats to be entirely removed, and we did that a lot.
I've had a few friends throughout the years that expressed interest in getting a small/medium pickup so they had something to haul stuff "when they needed". Every time I mentioned how a mini-van would probably fit their needs better, they eventually agreed on the merits, but admitted they wouldn't buy one.
The truth is, very few people are entirely rational about their vehicles, and most of us are nowhere near rational. This truck may or may not be useful and used at work sites, where the business may act in a more rational manner, but I think that has little to do with whether individuals buying their own work truck (e.g. professional carpenters, electricians, plumbers, etc that work for companies too small to provide a fleet of trucks so use their own) will make their decisions on a more personal level, at least after their basic needs are met.
I think the point I'm making is that a work truck is more about efficiency and ease of use. Having to open a door and sift through a bunch of tool bags or whatever isn't going to be fun, fast, or easy. Same with the bed - I would not want to get into the bed of a truck and go to the very back to get my tools every time. And if I had loaded the bed with something - I'm really gonna be feeling the crunch.
A van can be a good work vehicle as well but I think for a lot of tasks - it's not the right one. Getting in and out of the van is an issue. And if you make it to where you're not getting in and out of the van then you're ultimately not utilizing the space fully. (Unless it opens from all sides I guess - but then you're dealing with doors again unless they fold onto the body all the way)
The article is mostly condemning conspicuous consumption - not really relevant to the points here.
Unless you're hauling bulk building material (plywood, sheetrock, soil, rock, brick, etc) I think a van is likely to be superior on all counts (and if may be superior for non-loose material like plywood and sheetrock still). Anything you can go to the back of a truck for, you can go to the back of a van for, but you can actually have multiple levels of items there if you set it up that way. Anything you would acess over the side of a truck bed should be easily accessed through a side door. A van can also support a small workspace within it, if that benefits your job. Since there's no wind or elements, you can store stuff in open topped containers inside, making access easier while still being secure and secured. You can also get a much larger cargo area in a van that in a work truck of the same size, being it easier to maneuver.
Unless you are top-loading something, there's very few things I can think of that a truck does better than a van. It's certainly possible you have more real world experience than me and can think of some things I'm glossing over though.
It's already quite awkward getting in and out of trucks so this is something of a solved problem. For tools and gear there are already solutions for getting things deep in the bed of the truck.
This looks more like an SUV alternative than a truck alternative, for either the legitimately eco-conscious (but not eco-conscious enough to buy used) or those looking for certain social signaling.
> in that market how important are the extra cargo pounds or trailer capacity?
Not really important. What's important is that it _look_ like it can haul stuff. Like most Ford F-1-2-whatevers, Rams and other pickups, most of the time they're empty and car-wash clean.
I actually like the looks of the Tesla pickup. It's about time they went more avant-garde with their designs. This is supposed to be the future, dammit, Mr Musk's other company makes spaceships. Why NOT futuristic cars instead of Lexus look-alikes?
Sure, embrace the future. But it looks like something out of Mad Max, attenuated with the macho looking guys piling out of it. It has a very "me against the dangerous world" tone, something Musk has expressed before (in denigrating public transportation). It's a very aggressive introduction, highlighting the worst aspects of private vehicles, and a very poor direction to set.
The top-end model also nearly doubles the price and puts it in an entirely different class of competition. The $50k Cybertruck, comparable in price to something like the F-150 Raptor or Tacoma TRD Pro, is "only" 300 mile range. At the top-end model's $70k you're deep into Ford Super Duty territory
That's not true. I watched the whole video and their charging practices were a joke. They knew they were driving too fast, they knew they didn't charge enough before they left.
In any case, from 500 miles with 10% degradation, 10% reservation, and 50% inefficiency due to towing you're still going to get 200 miles. Most superchargers are within 50-100 miles of each other. Ezpz.
At 250 miles with those same metrics, you're at 100 miles of range. Sure you don't want to go cross country but you can make the haul if you want to.
The biggest problem is going to be trucks with trailers hogging the whole bank of chargers so they don't have to detach their trailer.
TFL is a joke. They don't even know that you can open a Model 3 charge port by tapping at it. That is after owning the car for weeks. AFTER they were shown how to do so, when they took delivery.
They were bitching that it's so inconvenient because they thought you have to use the app. That's seems disingenuous t me.
You don't get anywhere near rated milage/ range on a normal truck when hauling loads either. The truth is even for work trucks, most trucks spend 80+% of the time lightly loaded or empty.
The issue with lumber racks and the apparent inability to haul larger items is a much bigger concern for "Work Trucks".
I see this as something which I can haul 3-4 friends and their bikes up to the trailhead in (or skiing/ camping/ fishing) and it seems pretty reasonably set up for that.
BTW, you're ignoring potentially huge cost savings with gas. Trucks are notoriously gas guzzling, many people spending 2-500 a month in gas. Cost would drop dramatically if you could plugin every night and wake up with a full 'tank'.
Trucks are gas guzzlers as compared to gas sedans. There’s no reason an electric truck of similar utility wouldn’t be similarly an electricity guzzler without making some sacrifices. The only benefit is that all-electric brings significant torque improvements even at low horsepower, but with modern turbochargers low-rpm torque has long been solved (my 2.0T sedan can tow!) and people won’t stop “horsepower shopping” just because the torque numbers are high as it’s mainly for bragging rights anyway.
Sure, it will guzzle electricity, which is still way cheaper than guzzling gas. The more energy being consumed the better the electric vehicle equation looks. This is why Tesla's semitrailer tractor is exciting.
Horsepower is just a proxy for 0-60 anyway. People shop for the experience, not the numbers, even if they end up at the numbers.
Eh, doesn't have to be this way. What we need are smaller, lighter trucks; this message seems to have been missed by Ford who have released a new Ranger that's bigger than the F150 used to be.
This isn't something I'm ignoring, not having to deal with fuel ups and maintenance is one of the big reasons I've wanted to buy an electric car for several years. But every time I've priced a Tesla in the past, the premium for electric has been too high for me. That's what really caught my eye about this.
If this had been available 3 years ago when I bought my truck it would have been an instant purchase. As it is, I'm likely to sell my current truck and buy this when it comes out.
12000 miles a year at 13mpg and 2.5$ gas is $2308 per year. With a 5 year ownership time you are saving only [$11500-charging electricity costs]. So mid range $57000 AWD becomes $45500. Still pricey for most people.
I'd rather them come out with totally utilitarian bare bones truck but with the range and basic capabilities for $25K or so. THAT would be a game changer in the SUV/Truck space.
There are additional TCO for internal combustion vehicles that EVs do not have, such as maintenance on a vastly more complex set of components. If you amortize the costs of the EV over ten years you would likely see double the savings you cite.
Look at that interior of the Tesla, and tell me that there's not a huge set of complex components. Imagine the repair costs on the stainless steel structure. No body shop is set up for this.
If you want simple, low maintenance, a 2WD Silverado with a small block is as simple as it gets. You do what? Change the oil and coolant every now and then? Flush the transmission a couple times through it's life? If you stick with what's actually practical, ICEs are extremely reliable and have very little maintenance these days. People get hundreds of thousands of miles without so much as an over the air update...
Also, I can do all this maintenance myself on a Silverado. Pop the drain plug, and then refill with fluid. Can you even do your own flush on the cooling system in a Tesla without voiding your warranty?
Last time I heard, insuring a Tesla is more expensive. And wait times for repairs can be ridiculously long (and expensive). For a work truck, unpredictable down-time is a serious problem. Might have changed though.
I didn't like the looks of this thing when I saw it, probably because it looks so different.
But after appreciating all the awesome engineering that went into it, I find myself loving the scifi look. Finally a vehicle designed for geeks like me. I had always thought it sad that stainless steel vehicles never caught on. Here's my chance, and built from the same material as a space ship, that's icing on the cake. This is for sure my next vehicle.
Not if you have to do a number of laps, though. Heat issues, etc. - the M3 is nearly track ready off the lot, the Tesla is really just a luxury car that happens to go fast from time to time.
Is the base Model 3 giving the BMW M3 a run for its money, or a higher end Model 3?
Regardless, the M3 isn't exactly the pinnacle of bang-for-your-buck speed. You are paying a big premium on the BMW for fit & finish which is miles ahead of the Model 3.
But when I wrote about the pricing on the Model 3 I was thinking more in terms of utility, not pure performance. If the job to be done is driving to work, the M3 isn't the car I'm looking at. It's the Honda Civic.
When I’m hauling around a 10,000 pound airstream trailer on highways that 500 miles becomes 250 and 250 becomes 125 on flat land. Now consider going uphill on mountains and the range drops even more. There’s a real possibility of being stranded with no place left to charge in the middle of nowhere where I could be easily killed without anyone even knowing.
I don't think it's as extreme as you're making it seem. Going uphill on mountains means you're going downhill which not only doesn't use power but regenerates power to the battery. It's obviously not insignificant of a cost but adding a trailer doesn't immediately halve the usable range.
>Going uphill on mountains means you're going downhill which not only doesn't use power but regenerates power to the battery.
If you are pulling a trailer (let's say a camping trailer) you are likely going to stay a few days at a place before returning home and going down those hills you went up.
That's OK. It's not like the potential energy goes away just because you stay overnight. Plus there's a solar panel for all that power you are going to use while making hot toddies in the camper.
You vastly overestimate solar power. There’s no way you’ll get an appreciable charge on your Tesla battery using solar panels. It’s enough to run things in your trailer, but no way will you charge a Tesla in any reasonable time. I suppose if you are stranded with no way to charge you could get enough to go somewhere after a few days of constant charging, but that’s an emergency situation.
> It's obviously not insignificant of a cost but adding a trailer doesn't immediately halve the usable range.
It probably would through aerodynamic drag at the same speed but if you're planning on towing you can just drive slower (65 instead of 80) to make up for it.
Barring something like a city decimating earthquake - for every foot you ascend, you must also descend. There is just as much uphill as downhill. This is true for any trip with any two destinations on the planet (a round trip between a beginning and a destination). This is equivalent to conservation of potential energy in physics.
There are a lot of mountains in the US where you're going to spend hours driving up steep inclines. I used to live on the wrong end of a 2 hour uphill drive with one gas station in the middle. That road was steep enough that even a gasoline car couldn't make the trip without a full tank of gas.
I drive through mountains all the time, and have to fill up my car all the time. GP didn't say anything about multiple stops; what I inferred (because it's literally what he said) was that you can have unequal ascending and descending on a round trip - which is geometrically impossible! And even if we are talking about having to stop and get gas, you still get the same benefit of regenerative braking when you are descending, whether it be the first half or the second half of the trip.
Have you never been up a mountain? You can go up one very steep portion at 45 degree incline and then come out the other side going on a very long down hill at like 5 degree decline, basically flat.
It doesn't matter. The battery is still regenerating on the way down until you're back at the start point. A less steep angle might even be better because there's no potential to lose energy since the battery can only regen so much at a given time.
My truck goes from 22 mpg to 10 mpg when I hook up my RV. Utility trailers aren't nearly so bad, but an RV trailer is like an open parachute behind you.
Towing puts a toll on any vehicle's gas mileage, and you can run out of gas in a normal truck too. Tesla's have range indicators built in and let you know how far you are from the nearest charging station. Turns out people who are traveling pay at least a little attention to vehicle range, particularly when hauling a load. This isn't unique to electric vehicles, regular trucks fuel economy goes way down with a load as well and gas stations are often few and far between in the mountains.
Several of Musk's numbers don't add up. No pickup has a bed capacity of 3500 pounds. That's 1.75 tons. Even full sized US pickups top out at 3/4 ton, unless they're super duty which adds greatly to weight and lowers MPG painfully. A 1.75 ton load, especially raised as high up as shown in this prototype, would flip the truck in the slightest of turns. 3500 is surely a fake number.
Second, this is going to be a very heavy truck, 6000 pounds or more. No truck with thick stainless steel body panels can weigh less than 5500 pounds. How that much weight can deliver 250 to 500 miles of range... sounds like fantasy #2. Apparently Musk is imagining that battery technology will advance a lot before this thing ships. Or he's just making stuff up.
Finally, the claim that the bed will extend to the ground to form a useful ramp. Nah. These folks have never lived with a pickup. No object heavier than a bicycle is going to make it up that 45 degree incline and into the bed without crashing into the cab before it can stop, especially given the polished floor of the demo truck. That's fantasy #3. No telling how much more reality distortion lies beneath that funky exterior.
> How that much weight can deliver 250 to 500 miles of range... sounds like fantasy #2.
This falls into the category of put up or shut up. Tesla has bad track record of hitting deadlines, but a really good track record of hitting their range estimates. If they don't hit 250 miles on the base model, we're sure to hear about it when it's launched.
> Finally, the claim that the bed will extend to the ground to form a useful ramp. Nah. These folks have never lived with a pickup.
If you don't see the value in being able to tilt the truck bed then you've clearly never used a pickup to it's capacity.
I've bought 4 major appliances lately and hauled several tons of lumber, concrete, & gravel. Even without the ramps, Being able to tilt the bed down to unload the truck sounds like a fucking godsend to me. Particularly for loose loads and lumber where it would act a bit like a dump truck.
> A 1.75 ton load, especially raised as high up as shown in this prototype, would flip the truck in the slightest of turns.
The battery in this truck is probably incredibly heavy, which really moves the center of mass down. The suspension is also computer controlled, and at high loads you could lower the vehicle to be closer to the ground. Carrying 3500 pounds off road isn't a good idea even if the vehicle can corner so you don't need the clearance.
Actually I think your overestimating the total weight, but it goes to the above point when you say
> Second, this is going to be a very heavy truck, 6000 pounds or more.
> Musk is imagining that battery technology will advance a lot before this thing ships
Unlikely, more likely he is just planning on putting a lot of battery in it. Unlike you, Musk has lots of engineers working on this and has a pretty damn good idea of what is possible.
Pickup trucks are ideal for packing a lot of battery, lots of space along the bottom to do so.
> Finally, the claim that the bed will extend to the ground to form a useful ramp. Nah. These folks have never lived with a pickup. No object heavier than a bicycle is going to make it up that 45 degree incline and into the bed without crashing into the cab before it can stop, especially given the polished floor of the demo truck. That's fantasy #3. No telling how much more reality distortion lies beneath that funky exterior.
ROFL - you realized they literally live demoed doing so on a ATV right?
Moreover, the main use of ramps, at least in my mind having unloaded and loaded a pickup truck, is making it easier to move heavy objects in and out by hand.
I'm pretty sure the only person fantasizing here is you.
I was wrong too in thinking that no mainstream pickup has a 3000+ pound payload. It turns out the F150 does (in its maxed out config), so the Cybertruck's 3500 payload isn't necessarily that implausible.
