BATTERY PREFERENCE

What is your battery choice and why?

  • I want the 135 kWh battery. I'm not comfortable paying more. I do own/have owned a BEV

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    113
OP
A

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
940
Reaction score
435
Location
Virginia/Quebec
First Name
A. J.
Vehicles
Tesla X Extended Range Plus 2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, SR5
Occupation
EE Retired
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #46
A fair summary is that most everyone wants the 400+ mile version, but various tradeoffs will cause many to order the 300+ mile version.
That's probably generally true but there is at least one guy out there who does not want the 180 kWh becuase it is heavier and he thinks more weight leads to less traction! Bean counters whose businesses don't really need the improved range may discard it as they are looking at it from a business perspective and "nice to have" doesn't add anything to the bottom line.

What are you willing to give up to get the longer range?
A year of my life which at my age isn't the same as it is for you younger blokes.


Right now to order the 400+ mile version the list of what you have to give up includes:
  • $10,000
  • Delivery in 2021
  • R1T only (no option for the Max pack on the R1S)
  • Launch Edition (Free wheel upgrade, etc.)
  • Lighter weight, higher performance and some efficiency

If I were to vote in your poll, I would need this choice (or something similar):
I want the 400 mile version, but I am ordering the 300 mile version for a variety reasons. I do/have owned a BEV.​
You could put that under option 1 or 2 without impacting the usefulness of the poll.
 
OP
A

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
940
Reaction score
435
Location
Virginia/Quebec
First Name
A. J.
Vehicles
Tesla X Extended Range Plus 2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, SR5
Occupation
EE Retired
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #48
OK then. There is at least one guy who thinks that rolling resistance goes up faster than thrust with increased weight.
 

skyote

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2019
Messages
1,151
Reaction score
1,232
Location
Austin, TX
Vehicles
Jeeps, 2500HD Duramax, will be ordering R1S
OK then. There is at least one guy who thinks that rolling resistance goes up faster than thrust with increased weight.
It has nothing to do with rolling resistance, it has to do with reduced traction & soft or loose surfaces where vehicles sink or dig in. I have firsthand, practical knowledge & experience on this one.

When it comes to off road, maybe you should temper your theoretical knowledge.
 
OP
A

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
940
Reaction score
435
Location
Virginia/Quebec
First Name
A. J.
Vehicles
Tesla X Extended Range Plus 2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, SR5
Occupation
EE Retired
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #50
Well where I come from if you don't have enough traction the first thing you do is throw sand bags (or something) in the back. If more weight gives more traction you will move forward more readily unless the greater weight introduces rolling resistance in excess of the extra traction so indeed it does have to do with rolling resistance. That's been my practical experience. Guess yours has been different.
 

electruck

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2019
Messages
676
Reaction score
775
Location
Dallas, TX
Vehicles
2018 Volvo XC60
Well where I come from if you don't have enough traction the first thing you do is throw sand bags (or something) in the back. If more weight gives more traction you will move forward more readily unless the greater weight introduces rolling resistance in excess of the extra traction so indeed it does have to do with rolling resistance. That's been my practical experience. Guess yours has been different.
You're thinking in terms of a rigid surface with low coefficient of friction. Skyote is talking about situations where the surface acts more like a liquid than a solid. Makes a huge difference.
 
OP
A

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
940
Reaction score
435
Location
Virginia/Quebec
First Name
A. J.
Vehicles
Tesla X Extended Range Plus 2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, SR5
Occupation
EE Retired
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #52
I was thinking about snow, sand, mud, slush etc all of which have a high coefficient of friction relative to kimchee or yoghurt but a low one relative to a dry surface. The thrust is T = coeff_fric*slip*weight. If he is operating on/in some substrate with 0 coefficient of friction i.e. where the only upward force is buoyancy then yes, the heavier the vehicle the more liquid it will displace and the lower it will sink. I've never driven in anything like that but if he does.....
 
OP
A

ajdelange

Well-Known Member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Aug 1, 2019
Messages
940
Reaction score
435
Location
Virginia/Quebec
First Name
A. J.
Vehicles
Tesla X Extended Range Plus 2019, Lexus, Landcruiser, SR5
Occupation
EE Retired
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #53
Getting stuck in the mud aside the poll seems to have stabilized

From last summary
88 people have responded so 1 vote swings 1.1%. Keep that in mind
33.0% ± 5.0% of respondents are/were BEV owners
59.1% ± 2.6% of respondents prefer the 180 kWh pack
58.6% ± 9.1% of responding owners want the 180 kWh pack
59.3% ± 6.4% of responding non owners want the 180 kWh pack

Most recent summary:
109 people have responded so 1 vote swings 0.9%. Keep that in mind
33.9% ± 4.5% of respondents are/were BEV owners
58.7% ± 2.3% of respondents prefer the 180 kWh pack
56.8% ± 8.1% of responding owners want the 180 kWh pack
59.7% ± 5.8% of responding non owners want the 180 kWh pack

General conclusions are the same and, of course, the extra votes tighten the confidence a bit.
 

Advertisement












 


Advertisement


Top