Cybertruck Highway Range Test by Out Of Spec

[Zorg]

Battery is similar size as Rivian and no one is complaining about the R1T battery size.
Remember Kyle is starting with a very WARM battery at 100 percent. If I do the same I know I can get close to 300 miles on R1T/21"/Conserve on a long trip at close to freezing temps.

Something is not right with CT; It's lighter and more aerodynamic...maybe tires are too aggressive.

Actually battery is smaller on CT by 12 KWh. It's less aerodynamic and bigger. Tires are bigger (35" vs 34").

It's frankly fairly efficient considering the above. It just needs a bigger battery.

Sponsored

 

[fbitz777]

Actually battery is smaller on CT by 12 KWh. It's less aerodynamic and bigger. Tires are bigger (35" vs 34").

It's frankly fairly efficient considering the above. It just needs a bigger battery.

Battery use he got out of R1T is 128kWh vs 124kWh on CT.... this is after running past zero in both cases.

I'll stick with Rivian for now.

 

[RWerksman]

Kyle/OOS posted another video:

Is she taller than Steve Wozniak? Marques Brownlee?

I'm not sure if she could reach into the bed.

 

[scottf200]

Cybertruck to Rivian comparison. Rivian currently better.

Road trip from 10%-70% is common. NACS will help non-Tesla EVs this year.
https://outofspecstudios.com/charging

 

[aAlpine]

Rivian currently better.

Not quite so simple. Here's the second graph which shows the user experience, taking into account efficiency*

* of course there are STILL more caveats and variables, like test conditions, and that this data is derived from a theoretical max charging curve if there was no thermal derating, which is a common issue with Rivian.

Admittedly this graph does have the issue of what your SOC is when you start charging. I don't have the risk tolerance to arrive with 0%

 

[scottf200]

Not quite so simple. Here's the second graph which shows the user experience, taking into account efficiency*

* of course there are STILL more caveats and variables, like test conditions, and that this data is derived from a theoretical max charging curve if there was no thermal derating, which is a common issue with Rivian.

Admittedly this graph does have the issue of what your SOC is when you start charging. I don't have the risk tolerance to arrive with 0%

That is a very strange label '70 Mph Range Added'

It is interesting that you can click on the label and see all the data for each test. It shows the tires, temp, etc.

Range testing is VERY hard. It is like you need the same sets of tires & drive the trucks at the same time on the same route. Overall competition is good for US.

 

[aAlpine]

That is a very strange label '70 Mph Range Added'

The classic 1 hour long video from Out of Spec explains (and adds other context), but tldw: it's result from their own test, which they decided to use as their own "standard":

Range testing is VERY hard. It is like you need the same sets of tires & drive the trucks at the same time on the same route. Overall competition is good for US.

I'm glad to see at least some of the test variables included in the graph mouse-over info (software version notably missing), so you can interpret and try to apply to your own situation. I can see an argument that looking at charge profile removes some of those variables.

 

[scottf200]

Not quite so simple. Here's the second graph which shows the user experience, taking into account efficiency*

* of course there are STILL more caveats and variables, like test conditions, and that this data is derived from a theoretical max charging curve if there was no thermal derating, which is a common issue with Rivian.

Admittedly this graph does have the issue of what your SOC is when you start charging. I don't have the risk tolerance to arrive with 0%

So this chart is saying that on a road trip doing 70 mph given your vehicle efficiency (Wh/mile) and charging speed (kW) this is the comparison? Can that be reworded better/more_correctly?

 

[aAlpine]

So this chart is saying that on a road trip doing 70 mph given your vehicle efficiency (Wh/mile) and charging speed (kW) this is the comparison? Can that be reworded better/more_correctly?

I think the biggest caveat worth adding is the starting SOC. Thinking more about this, I bet the Rivian vs Cybertruck range-added/time graph would look wildly different if you plugged at 20%.

 

[scottf200]

I think the biggest caveat worth adding is the starting SOC. Thinking more about this, I bet the Rivian vs Cybertruck range-added/time graph would look wildly different if you plugged at 20%.

That is why I was highlighting the road tripping example of charging in my chart example with the yellow. That is very typical for many peoples needs. (10% is actually ~30 miles so not that scary ... you just don't want to miss your exit!! - oh heck your in a truck so turn around anywhere :-} )

 

[Zorg]

Battery use he got out of R1T is 128kWh vs 124kWh on CT.... this is after running past zero in both cases.

I'll stick with Rivian for now.

Ditto. Rivian fits my use case better as I don't need a huge bed, I like the gear tunnel, my PTC works, and I like the smaller size better. With the impending access to Tesla SC, my R1T will be perfect. Now, if 2 years from now Tesla increases the battery on the CT, I will revisit the issue.

 

[usofrob]

I think the biggest caveat worth adding is the starting SOC. Thinking more about this, I bet the Rivian vs Cybertruck range-added/time graph would look wildly different if you plugged at 20%.

Agreed.

Maybe @OutofSpecKyle can add an adjustment to choose the starting percentage and/or starting range (at 70mph). It's a very stressful trip for most people to arrive at a charger with 0%. 10-20% seems a lot more reasonable. (Hence the 10% challenge, not the 0% challenge)

 

[vandy1981]

* of course there are STILL more caveats and variables, like test conditions, and that this data is derived from a theoretical max charging curve if there was no thermal derating, which is a common issue with Rivian.

Also, the Rivian efficiency data is with 20" wheels.

 

[scottf200]

Also, the Rivian efficiency data is with 20" wheels.

Left label in OutOfSpec chart lets you see all the data. I think both CT and Rivian were 20"
ATs -- The data is in that chart (click label or over over lines)
1) 2024 Tesla Cybertruck - Goodyear Wrangler Territory RT All Terrain tires
2) 2022 Rivian R1T - Pirelli Scorpion All Terrain Plus tires
3) 2022 Ford F150 Lightning Platinum - General Grabber HTS tires
https://outofspecstudios.com/charging

 

[manitou202]

So the Cybertruck and Rivian have pretty similar charging curves and efficiencies. Not surprising.

Rivian is still relatively slow at charging compared to the best in the business (Hyundai, Kia, Porsche, Lucid), but Tesla isn't any better. So for all the hype around the 4680 cells, Tesla hasn't made any real technological break throughs.

Sponsored