Tesla Cybertruck

[Ronbrink]

17 hours ago, jd1923 said:

Me too. Sales low due to being ugly and it’s just not a pickup! Where do you load 20 sheets of drywall? 🤣

“Beauty (or ugly) is in the eyes of the beholder”! 

[FloraFauna]

When I think of mpg difference between my Duramax diesel empty vs pulling the Oli, it is easy to understand how a comparable range drop (or worse) occurs with an EV truck.  I don't see EV trucks replacing my diesel for a long time unless they significantly increase the size of the batteries for towing.  That said, I am suspecting my next car will be an EV but I think I will lease as the technology is still changing. 

[Galileo]

On 3/13/2025 at 7:05 PM, Snackchaser said:

Our Tesla has never registered an increase of charge even on the longest downhill grades.  

I’m surprised that it didn’t show an increase…

My Prius would definitely show significant increases in SOC even with relatively short regeneration runs. I would guess it’s because the size of the battery is a lot smaller than a full EV battery. Probably like a gallon jug will be noticeably fuller if you add a quart to it - but a 55 gallon drum won’t look much different with a quart more in it. 

I rented a Fiat hybrid in Sicily a couple of years back. (I think Fiat just did that to qualify for a subsidy or to prove they could do a hybrid.) The battery in that toy car was so small that you could discharge and regen charge it back to “full” in a city block or two.

Still, the hybrid powertrain has a ton of advantages that pure ICE can’t enjoy: The ability to use regeneration to “put gas back in the tank”, use regen to control your speed going downhill, reduce or eliminate brake fade, and brake pads that last 100,000 miles. 

I guess the proof of the pudding will be the mileage estimates the Ramcharger EREV turns in. I’ve gotta believe it will top those of V8 and even V6 ICE 1500 trucks, and likely even better than my 3.0 diesel 1500.

I think the design is gonna hit a sweet spot that a full hybrid like a Prius misses: the ability to drive short trips without starting the ICE - since it will have a considerable bigger battery.

[jd1923]

1 hour ago, Galileo said:

My Prius would definitely show significant increases…

The following example took place 10 years ago, and perhaps hybrids are better today.

At a job in Austin, 4 of us big guys 800+ LBS total, went out to lunch together a few times a week.

One guy had a Prius and he bragged about MPG when commuting! When the 4 of us, packed in like sardines, went out to lunch in the Prius, the onboard trip computer showed an insulting 12 MPG, equal to an old 80s carbureted pickup truck! 🤣

On lunch days when I drove our 2014 VW Passat TDI, getting 38 MPG commuting daily with no measurable difference with 4 big guys onboard, seated comfortably!

When we moved from TX to S Fl, Chris drove the Passat alone while I pulled a cargo trailer with the Ram Cummins. We packed every cu ft of the Passat, passenger side, back seats and trunk full. We got 45 MPG highway the whole trip one way! I’ve had 2500 series diesel trucks for 22 years now and will continue to do so.

Edited Monday at 04:44 PM by jd1923

[Galileo]

5 minutes ago, jd1923 said:

The following example took place 10 years ago, and perhaps hybrids are better today.

At a job in Austin, 4 of us big guys 800+ LBS total, went out to lunch together a few times a week.

One guy had a Prius and he bragged about MPG when commuting! When the 4 of us, packed in like sardines, went out to lunch in the Prius, the onboard trip computer showed an insulting 12 MPG, equal to an old 80s carbureted pickup truck! 🤣

On lunch days when I drove our 2014 VW Passat TDI, getting 38 MPG commuting daily with no measurable difference with 4 big guys onboard!

When we moved from TX to S Fl, Chris drove the Passat alone while I pulled a cargo trailer with the Ram Cummins. We packed every cu ft of the Passat, passenger side, back seats and trunk full. We got 45 MPG highway the whole trip one way! I’ve had 2500 series diesel trucks for 22 years now and will continue to do so.

Probably why we have that phrase “Your Mileage May Vary.”

We travel pretty much all the time and have rented cars in several European and British Isles countries. Unlike the US, they’re always small - and always incredibly fuel-efficient. 50 or 60 mpg is pretty standard. Then again, most Americans wouldn’t be caught dead in a 3 cylinder, 2.2 liter engine vehicle. 

Dunno why a Prius - even with 4 pro footballers would only show 12 mpg. Keep in mind that “average” mpg is the goal, not the mileage displayed during some short-trip, 100F day with the A/C cranked to 58F. 

My Prius would often show “99 mpg” on my 8-1/2 mile rural trip from my farm to the local hardware store. It was cool for bragging rights, but I realized it was the perfect storm of a fully-charged battery and hardly running the ICE at all that made that display possible. I’m sure it made up for it at other times. 

HOW one drives is - and will remain - a factor in what mileage you get - regardless of the technology or fuel source of your vehicle. Hard acceleration, high speeds, high accessory loads, “tankering”, and failing to coast when it’s advantageous will earn you poor fuel efficiency. I drive with the fuel efficiency display primary on my TV and did the same with the Prius and any time I drive a vehicle that has the tech. I do my best to keep the instantaneous MPG number high, or the display on the “economy” range. Pretty much the opposite of a Paris cabbie. 

I always have to smile at the type-A guy who has to pass me up at extra-legal speeds, only to have to brake hard and end up with me smirking at him when we stop at the next light together. Hey - if he wants to get 12 mpg while I’m getting 28 - that’s his prerogative. 

I’m still looking for the most efficient speed to drive the TV/Ollie combo. It looks to be about 62 mph. Of course, smooth, level, dry pavement gives a huge advantage. If the speed limit is 70 or even 75 - I’m still puttering along at 62. Maybe 65 if I feel like it or going downhill. I just have to pad the ETA my GPS gives me. 

I’m at a place in life where I don’t “need” to sweat burning an extra gallon of dead dinosaur juice - or feel obligated to find the cheapest gallon of motion lotion - but I do it anyway because it’s a feeling of accomplishment that gives me pleasure. 

I picked the diesel drivetrains for my last two vehicles because they are head and shoulders more efficient than the gas engine offerings in the same models. Yeah, I paid more for the engines - but I got back more in trade because they had more life left in them as well as the same fuel efficiency offerings. 

Likewise, I picked a 1500 Sierra because it will capably handle a gross weight Ollie - both speeding up and slowing down. The exhaust braking of the diesel even gives me a little more capability going down long grades than a gasser can provide. 

Previous TV was a “mid range” GMC Canyon - also diesel (2.8l) that had the specs that said it could handle the Ollie as well. Three years and half a dozen 90 day trips backed up what the specs promised - including several crossing of the continental divide - up to about 9,000 feet if I recall. (Turbos are nice!)

If anything, I prefer the Canyon over the Sierra. Though I’ve been driving for darn near 50 years - 20 years of that full sized van and pickups - I find the Sierra too damn high. Even the lowest-slung standard suspensions make for a nipple-high hood that’s impossible to see obstructions over. Even though the footprint is only slightly bigger than the Canyon, the height makes it a chore to park and makes driving through narrow areas an “exciting” experience. 

Anyway, you pays your money and you makes your choice. I like the “less is more” approach. Those who prefer “bigger is matter” can do as they like. Unless I’m gonna start hauling intermodal containers, I don’t need the Souper Doody TV.

[jd1923]

35 minutes ago, Galileo said:

Dunno why a Prius - even with 4 pro footballers would only show 12 mpg.

What the trip computer reported in Austin traffic carrying that weight for that short period of time. Yes, the average would be better. The Prius carries 1-2 people to work efficiently but far less efficient carrying much extra weight.

37 minutes ago, Galileo said:

I find the Sierra too damn high.

That's why I prefer a 2WD long-bed full size pickup. On identical models the 2WD truck will sit lower and the steering and suspension by design are more stable (though it's difficult to source high-end aftermarket parts). The long bed provides a longer wheelbase which also provides for more stable towing.

We climb a lot of sketchy dirt roads out here, with only 2WD towing our Oliver. Some Oliver owners who have visited here recently could vouch for that! Just keep your rear wheels over good dirt and you be fine! 🤣

[FloraFauna]

3 hours ago, Galileo said:

still looking for the most efficient speed to drive the TV/Ollie combo. It looks to be about 62 mph. Of course, smooth, level, dry pavement gives a huge advantage. If the speed limit is 70 or even 75 - I’m still puttering along at 62. Maybe 65 if I feel like it or going downhill. I just have to pad the ETA my GPS gives me. 

I think this is about right by my informal data and 62 is way better on the suspension than 70 mph.  I don't have the patience for 62 so I will be more in the 65 to 67 mph range but keeping it under 70 dramatically improves the mpg and it just is a safer and less jarring drive.  This is another reason to get off the interstate as well where the speed limits are lower.  It may be only a few miles per hour difference in the end, but fuel consumption/drag and the dynamics of hitting bumps are not linear with speed.

[Galileo]

On 7/21/2025 at 1:03 PM, jd1923 said:

What the trip computer reported in Austin traffic carrying that weight for that short period of time. Yes, the average would be better. The Prius carries 1-2 people to work efficiently but far less efficient carrying much extra weight.

That's why I prefer a 2WD long-bed full size pickup. On identical models the 2WD truck will sit lower and the steering and suspension by design are more stable (though it's difficult to source high-end aftermarket parts). The long bed provides a longer wheelbase which also provides for more stable towing.

We climb a lot of sketchy dirt roads out here, with only 2WD towing our Oliver. Some Oliver owners who have visited here recently could vouch for that! Just keep your rear wheels over good dirt and you be fine! 🤣

I think I’ve only engaged the 4wd on the previous TV once with the Ollie attached - when I fumbled into the wrong park road and had to turn around and go uphill in sand. No problem, just kept speed up.

Used 4wd -once- in snow in Chicago. I try to avoid that since I enjoyed that kind of fun for 60 years before I moved to Texas. That, and I try to keep road salt off my nice vehicles.

Haven’t kicked the 4wd on our new TV yet.

I did want 2wd for lower drag/better mpg, and fewer parts to wear out. But I got 4wd on first TV because that’s what the immediately post COVID marketplace had available. Got it the second time for better resale value. 

Edited 23 hours ago by Galileo
Fat fingers

[Galileo]

23 hours ago, FloraFauna said:

It may be only a few miles per hour difference in the end, but fuel consumption/drag and the dynamics of hitting bumps are not linear with speed.

I was surprised to find how much a smooth bs bunny road can effect MPG. Interstates are generally pretty smooth, but I49 in Louisiana between Shreveport and Lafayette is pretty bouncy. That, and 75 is considered “pokey” on that stretch. 

More obviously, hilly stretches can knock a couple of mpg off as well. Strong head or crosswinds also take a toll. 
 

Not sure I get the point about 62-65 being much easier on the suspension than 70.