Comments by "geemy" (@geemy9675) on "Munro Live" channel.

@David-zl3bi hydrogen production plant + hydrogen tank + fuel cell is a very poor performing battery, can only be shaped like a cylinder, not powerful, leaks hydrogen if you're using liquid hydrogen, needs to hold 10000psi, wastes half of the energy compared to batteries Mira is 10% heavier than a model 3 performance, with not even 1/3 of the power, hardly more range, only 50 pumps in the whole US, 5k more expensive....I mean hydrogen is finished before it even started. Toyota should focus on hybrids (short/mid term) and EVs (long term)
6
that's the problem trucks are useless for most people, including 80% of truck buyers. but if you need one but don't tow often heavy trailers over long distances, the dual motor has good specs as long as you forget the initial specs at 2019 reveal, plus a lot of trick features my biggest complaint is it's hasn't demonstrated any real world advantage for the stainless steel "exoskeleton" body and "structural" battery pack. for all it seems the structure is the aluminum unibody and gigacastings. it's not significantly lighter or cheaper than a Rivian. it could have rust resistant lighter aluminum body with much better drag coefficient
2
it would be nice to see the same level of technology in ebikes...I'm wondering how light a 750W motor could get. with very high gear reduction through harmonic drive or two stage planetary gear reduction you could have a tiny motor that would generate high torque and the motor would be able to deliver 750W from a very low speed up to 28mph. a 27in bicycle rotates only ~350rpm at 28mph. if you have 7*7 gear reduction you have a motor than an spin 17krpm and a torque multiplied by x49 or even 5x5 and 8750rpm no need for multiple speeds, just a flat 750W power band from a few mph to 28mph. a lightweight rear hub motor and you can delete the freewheel to save weight and have Regen.
1
modern battery and electric motor technology have removed most of the inefficiencies in powertrains (gears/clitches/transmission tunnels/transfer cases) and optimized almost evrey aspect. when you look at a model s plaid powertrain seems to have been tuned to provide exactly the maximum torque that can be transfered to the wheels when accelerating, with 33% front/66% back maximising grip during the strong weight transfer happenning from 0-60mph. past 60mph its pretty much flat power curve that maximises the power that can be delivered by the batttery, and handled by the motors/controllers. rpm/gearing optimized to achieves fastest top speed that can be safely handled by tires considering the weight, with a comfortable safety margin. Even if you tried to improve it , you would hardly be able to do better. in drag racing, more torque/power and very sticky tires would help, but on a track, more power would get very minimal gains by overheating the battery, and tires, on the road under speed limits more power would be cut by traction controls. Now almost who's ready to spend a bit more for performance can have access to a family car with massive amount of power in a reliable and cheap to operate daily driver car (model 3/Y performance, ioniq N, EV6 GT, Mach E GT, upcoming volvo EX30...) We are slowly getting to point (or already at the point) where most people can have way more power that they can/want to use. I think the next big thing in cars will be (active) suspension technology..."active" suspensions with different presets for damping and ride height is just beginning and 1/10 of the equation. truly active/predictive suspensions with cameras/radars that soak up every imperfection, corner perfectly flat or even lean into the corners( think bose suspension), maintain perfect wheel geometry and tire contact patch throughout corners (new 992 GT2 RS active camber), and gives you better grip and better comfort over any road and at any speed, its potentially the ride comfort superior to luxury car, and handling/cornering similar to the best sports cars. Even if theres a weight penalty, the potential real life benefits way overcome the weight penalty I would happily trade 10% acceleration for a suspensions that would completely cancel potholes and speed bumps, corner/accelerate/brake flat like a go kart. There's a problem though, it could lead to people losing sensation of speed and speeding in residential areas/cities, not slowing down for speed bumps, and progressively going faster and faster over speed bumps, potentially reaching a point where they go passed the limits of the system and losing control at very high speeds.
1
amazing tech but they could go one step further and make even smaller motors and put one on each wheel no more differential and torque vectoring
1
double the number of 4680 in a model Y is not gonna cut it for the 500miles cybertruck. the 67kWh 4680 Model Y has 828 cells double the cells would be only so about 81Wh per cell. If the Cybertruck was as efficient as a model X Plaid on 22in wheels, it would need 160kWh to drive 500miles. It doesnt take a genius to know that a CT with a drag coeff somewhere beetween 0.3 and 0.4 at best vs 0.24 , one more motor, at least 60kWh more, 4 wheeel steering, 35 in off road tires, 3x the tow rating, 3.5x the payload, powered tailgat, ramp and tonneau cover, armored glass etc will be way heavier and way less efficient than the model X. I think 200kWh is a pretty conservative estimate of the battery capcacity the will need to achieve 500 miles epa range. So actually more like 3x the model Y 4680 capacity or about 2500 cells. Of course they might not make ONLY 500miles versions at launch, but its still very likely that they will first try to deliver the highest trims.. ~140kWh / 1600+ 4680 cells seems more reasonable for the 350 miles dual motor version The RWD '250miles version...who knows if they will ever make one. I don't see any manufacturer making 2WD electric trucks, so...
1
5GWh is quite mass production , its like 100k medium range EV batteries. although I would expect it to be way more expensive, for the simple (economics 101) reason that it would be very high demand/ supply limited . And manufacturers would rather use it to fit either a massive capacity battery in an expensive/very high power/very long range EV. But honestly the best use for it would be enabling kind of EV's that cant exist with current batteries, like for instance an ev miata-like lightweight sports car. Although its more likely for expensive super/hypercars to grab those cells IIt seems like their silicon anode cells are reaching very high densities, or a combination of high density and high charge rate (0-80% in 15 min) but at the expense of longevity. They are only talking about 100 cycles, so even if the car has 400-500miles range, thats still a battery replacement after 40-50k This is fine for high maintenance sports cars but not mainstream EVs
1
how are they getting rid of a pump to circulate the coolant?
1
@glennpuckeridge6244 yeah hydrogen combustion engine is the worst...even worse than efuel. you'd have tow a trailer to get usable range
1
@rogerstarkey5390 more efficient, yes, Id put my money on it. lightning has the worst electric truck dag coefficient, and model Y more efficient than mach E. much lighter no, at least not in the 500 miles version because even if its it will require a battery close to 200kWh and will be heavier than the R1T. based on the most efficient electric truck on the marker , 43kWh/100miles means 215kWh/500miles considering it will have to lug a giant battery around and a less than stellar drag coefficient (way higher than R1T), 200kWh 40kWh/100 miles 84 mpge would actually be an excellent result. hummer EV only does 300miles on same battery size 170kWh would be the same efficiency as the Model X plaid, which absoluely CAN NOT happen with more weight, ground clearance, MUCH higher aero drag, way bigger truck tires The hopes for cybertruck relatively light weight were based on structural 4680 battery pack which turns out much heavier /kWh than LR 21700 battery in the model Y And revolutionary Exoskeleton which will be actually on top of a traditional unibody castings, plus all the heavy equipments (4 motors, 4 wheel steering, heavy glass and panels)
1
@officialyasir My prediction is the launch edition will be the longest range, most towing/payload capacity, most powerful, fastest charging one. they want to wipe the floor of criticism and controversial design. price will be way over the initial announced prices anyway. the truck will immediatly be compared to other electric and gas/diesel trucks for towing heavy loads. if the CT can crush the electric competition and get as close as possible to gas on long distance towing regarding charging stops, thanks to v4 superchargers and very fast charging 200kWh battery, they win the argument. then lower version will come out. I would expect some hardware revision 2 to fix some reliability issues because of all the new tech crammed in this truck, that will start with the dual motor entering production
1
@WestCoastWheelman battery will be around 2400lbs
1
@capnzilog stil l doesnt explain the 6000lbs rule. its a way to help US car manufacturing economy. with a combination of protective 25% Chicken Tax tariff on light trucks imported to the U.S and tax credits for large trucks/SUVS even if they are used for both work and personnal use. I really doubt self employed/small business owners report accurately the personnal use. As a result pickup trucks are everywhere even for applications where vans make more sense. Vans do only deliveries
1
seems like all of their silicon anode batteries are rated for 100 cycles. not for automotive appplication or only high performance/high maintenance EVs
1
@chrisheath2637 batteries need to be 1/reconditioned 2/recycled if you recycle a whole battery pack because only a heandful of cells have gone bad, its very energy inefficient , Same for the price, if you have the choice between whole new battery for 20k or fixing it be replacing a few cells. Even if it doesnt last quite as long, its about Also, when tela charges you 20k for a battery replacement, they are selling you reconditionned batteries anyway. Tesla is very optimistic with their batteries, but the warranty is still 8 years/100k miles ? you shouldn't reasonably expect much more than that except if you take special care about your battery, always stay between 20/80, always store for extended periods at 50%, few fast charging sessions, and always between 20/80. You will prolongate battery life but also have only used only 60% of the battery. I think the best strategy is stay within 20/80 as long as you can do it with no impact and fast charge -80% on long trips BTW Tesla didn't deliver anything at all on 4680 battery density improvements. I would take the "million mile battery" with a grain of salt. battery will degrade over time on top of the wear from the cycles. 15 years /200kmiles sounds more like it
1
I can foresee lowered quad motor cybertruck drag racing go kart with SS panels & "bullet proof" glass windows/roof removed, no bed/tailgate/tonneau cover, that would remove thousands of pounds of weight and make it accelerate on the 1/8 mile like nothing else ? the trucks'geared so much lower than the plaid, it should make double the torque and 1400+hp from 40mph upwards. gearing would be too low for the track though
1
the funny thing is all this reinventing the wheel sounds both smart and very difficult to achieve but all to bring features that no one asked on an electric truck? like bullet proof body that's more durable but cant be fixed Tesla could have made an aluminum unibody truck with mix of aluminum gigacastings, steel and even stainless steel, with similar or better weight and strength, lightweight and replacable stamped aluminum body panels, with a much better drag coefficient, freedom to design the truck, all at a cheaper cost and with better range/efficiency. Rivian reached 0.3 with a blocky long hood truck, even a ford ranger has longer more sloped windshields and a softer transition beetween hood and windshield. tesla could probably have gotten close to 0.25, and made the roof a bit lower, without the stainless steel. But I guess its a bet on the future if they ever manage to improve the processes, lower cost and enable more complex shapes with also thinner SS for cheap lightweight vehicles? The cybertruck itself is clearly not worth all the development that has gone into it.
1
some critics about the CT came from the cybertruck leaked reports that showed evidence of very bad braking/handling issues. we''ll have to judge on the final production version though
1