Forums

Cyrbertruck as fast as 2020 Corvette!

Cyrbertruck as fast as 2020 Corvette!

Today a big headline on how the new 2020 Corvette has 0-60 of 2.9 seconds. Same as the Cybertruck. GM spends years on a small two-seater, and it can't compete with the Cybertruck that seats 6 and costs $5K less. This comparison is the 2020 Corvette with the Z51 performance package that is due out in March. Now they do look a tiny bit different :)

jimglas | 23/11/2019

yes, the cybertruck is sexier

exPGAhacker | 23/11/2019

A Corvette is a Chevrolet. Enough said already.

zybane | 23/11/2019

C8 corvette does 1/4 mile in 11.1, the CyverTruck in 10.8. CyberTruck is actually overall quicker.

Ross1 | 24/11/2019

Imagine being eaten alive from the rear as the big silver personnel carrier lands from the future

TeslaTap.com | 24/11/2019

At a stoplight, the Cybertruck will always take off before the Corvette. And that 2.9 second time for the Corvette is likely only with an expert driver. In the Cybertruck, your grandmother can outperform most Corvette drivers. Just have to push the accelerator. Really simple!

nukequazar | 24/11/2019

I wish Tesla--and all of us--would stop with this disingenuous assertion that drag racing stats equate with sports car performance. I know it's great press but it's just not very honest.

jimglas | 24/11/2019

"Tesla" never "asserted that drag racing stats equate with sports car performance"
that was you spinnig FUD.
What they stated was absolutely honest
The 0-60 time
Deal with it

RedShift | 24/11/2019

Yeah, when did we ‘assert’ that? :-)

nukequazar | 24/11/2019

@jimglas, nonsense. EM said it's "faster then a Porsche 911." That's really not true. It may accelerate faster in a drag race. Certainly top speed doesn't come close, any race longer than 1/4 mile it isn't true, any race that involves a curve it isn't true. So at best it's disingenuous, at worst it's an outright lie. Speed is speed, acceleration is acceleration. A Porsche 911 is faster.

@RedShift, like 1,000 times/day in these forums.

nukequazar | 24/11/2019

If he cared about honesty, he would simply say, "It accelerates faster than a Porsche 911." And that's cool!

Ross1 | 24/11/2019

Quicker, would do.

Uncle Paul | 24/11/2019

Also, Porsche 911 burns gasoline that poisons people, making them sick and die earlier.

nukequazar | 24/11/2019

@Ross1, sure but maybe only quicker 0-60. Why not be honest and say, "Quicker 0-60 than a 911?" Call me old fashioned but I prefer honesty.

nukequazar | 24/11/2019

@Uncle Paul, most of the electricity that will charge the huge Cybertruck will be generated by burning fossil fuels for the reasonable future. And not the point. End game of BEV's is good but let's be real.

TeslaTap.com | 25/11/2019

@nuke - not true even in coal generation states. Electric generation getting cleaner every year. Now 100% renewables in many areas including where I live. Then many EV owners have or will add home solar, also being 100% renewable.

For those in love with gas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nn__9hLJKAk

Darthamerica | 25/11/2019

This is another marketing gimmick claim. All EVs apply torque different from ICEVs and their 0-60 acceleration is a fun byproduct of that. But beyond that, the Corvette or any other purpose built performance car will utterly smoke an EV with the exception of Taycan which is the first purpose built EV sports car. Cybertrucks are not sports cars. What would be more relevant is to know how payload and towing affect range and performance. Also how does range get affected on dirt, snow, mud and gravel? What size is the battery pack and how long does it take to charge? Charge times directly affect how much work you can get done in a day. I also think talking about the solar panel charging. That is a big deal if this truck has the ability to recharge off of the grid. 0-60 is only relevant here in the context of getting up to highway speeds while towing.

SO | 25/11/2019

@nuke - even when generated by coal, EV still comes out way ahead.

When was the last time you smelled a coal plant near you?

What about the last time you smelled diesel/gas exhaust?

People have got to figure out that a long tailpipe is a heck of a lot better than a short one. It’s the difference of taking a dump in your house and it stays there vs being flushed down a toilet and taken care of at the treatment plant.

jimglas | 25/11/2019

i see the two porsche troll are here fluffing each other again

TeslaTap.com | 25/11/2019

Performance is not a marketing gimmick. Fast acceleration from a stop is the most fun for normal driving. I doubt the Cybertruck will compete with Corvette on the track, but it's also not expected to and no one has said it would.

Still, a track shoot-off between the two would be fun to see. Perhaps it would make for a good Top Gear episode. Tesla is always made to looses in the faked Top Gear comparisons but still can be entertaining.

Darthamerica | 25/11/2019

TeslaTap I say gimmick because there's no context and people don't generally time 0-60 runs on the street in empty pickup trucks. Knowing 0-60 with payload and/or a trailer would be interesting however and is relevant. I can't wait until we see more details.

TeslaTap.com | 25/11/2019

While people don't time 0-60, pickups in the past have had very poor 0-60 times. The Cybertruck put it in the performance car category, which is cool. It should outperform anything sold today with a similar payload or trailer, although towing 0-60 is not legal in CA (55 mph max when towing).

Ehninger1212 | 25/11/2019

@TeslaTap.com

Come to Texas, here you can tow in Maximum Plaid. lol

Darthamerica | 25/11/2019

TeslaTap that depends on towing range which we don't know yet. I don't think it will be bad, but how competitive vs an F-150 or Ram would be interesting to know.

TeslaTap.com | 25/11/2019

Yep, I'd expect a 30-50% range reduction with heavy towing loads, but I expect a similar reduction in range on traditional pickups. It will be a while before we know. I know some pickups have aux tanks for extended range but it seems scary to carry that much gas around.

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

@TT, again, 0-60 may be the bees knees for high school boys and yahoos but not for anyone serious about driving. The most fun is great connection with the road and feel at speed in the curves.

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

@TT, I don’t know what you’re talking about with renewable generation. It’s just not true. Don’t get me wrong, I bought a Tesla to be a part of the movement towards energy flexibility and independence but be real and honest about what’s going on now. We are still driving on FF except for the small segment of people who are off the grid. So we should be more conscious of our energy usage than wasting it all on promoting drag racing and wasteful acceleration while driving every day.

Walk the walk if you’re going to talk the talk.

https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3

What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source?
In 2018, about 4,171 billion kilowatthours (kWh) (or 4.17 trillion kWh) of electricity were generated at utility-scale electricity generation facilities in the United States.1 About 64% of this electricity generation was from fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, petroleum, and other gases). About 19% was from nuclear energy, and about 17% was from renewable energy sources. The U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates that an additional 30 billion kWh of electricity generation was from small-scale solar photovoltaic systems in 2018.

U.S. electricity generation by source, amount, and share of total in 2018

Energy source Billion kWh Share of total
Total - all sources 4,171
Fossil fuels (total) 2,653 63.6%
Natural gas 1,469 35.2%
Coal 1,146 27.5%
Petroleum (total) 25 0.6%
Petroleum liquids 16 0.4%
Petroleum coke 9 0.2%
Other gases 13 0.3%
Nuclear 807 19.4%
Renewables (total) 703 16.9%
Hydropower 293
7.0%
Wind 273 6.5%
Biomass (total) 58
1.4%
Wood 41 1.0%
Landfill gas 11 0.3%
Municipal solid waste (biogenic) 7 0.2%
Other biomass waste -1 <0.1%
Solar (total) 64
1.5%
Photovoltaic 60
1.4%
Solar thermal 4
0.1%
Geothermal 16 0.4%
Pumped storage hydropower3 -6 -0.1%
Other sources 13 0.3%

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

@SO, it’s the ultimate NIMBY argument. The generating plants are in poor areas.

Darthamerica | 25/11/2019

TeslaTap ICEVs have range in the neighborhood of 900 miles so a 50% reduction at max payload is still well over 400 miles just to put the difference into context.

SamO | 25/11/2019

ha ha ha

TeslaTap.com | 25/11/2019

I disagree - it can't be much fun to take off in a truck that has slow 0-60 times. It would be scary getting onto the freeway. I'm not saying the Cybertruck is a sports car, but a sports truck would be fitting. Still, many truck drivers put up with slow 0-60 since they have never had any other choice.

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

BEV's as work vehicles is going to be challenging for the foreseeable future. It will be interesting to see how heavy loads and torque use (in dirt, on hills, etc.) affect range. Today most work sites are a few minutes' drive from a gas station, and it takes <10 minutes to drive in, fill the tank, pay, and leave. So <30 minutes from realizing you need fuel to finding a station, fueling, and getting back to work. With a BEV, OTOH, it can be well over an hour, maybe two hours, to get to a fast charger, charge, and get back to work. Or a full day off (or overnight), if there's no fast charger available. It will be years before there are 250KW chargers 10 minutes from any job site.

I wonder why nobody's talking about modular battery packs that can drop out of the bottom of a vehicle and be swapped for a fully charged module in 5 minutes. Pay for the electricity and charging service, and never worry about battery maintenance.

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

@TT, your logic... You disagree with what?

You said, "Fast acceleration from a stop is the most fun for normal driving.

I disagreed, and said that road connection and feel in the curves is the most fun.

You then said, "I disagree - it can't be much fun to take off in a truck that has slow 0-60 times. It would be scary getting onto the freeway."

This isn't a free association exercise.

TeslaTap.com | 25/11/2019

Don't know what an ICEV is. I guess if you need to travel 900 miles in one sitting, the Cybertruck is the wrong choice. Never expected Tesla to be the right choice for every truck driver - but it does seem to work well for a vast number of drivers.

Must be really expensive for all the gas needed on such as trip vs the low Cybertruck operational costs.

Darthamerica | 25/11/2019

TeslaTap 0-60 is fun, no doubt better in an EV truck, but not an issue with modern pickups. Remember that even more important will be breaking distance and overall range with the payload. This last metric is one where the EV will struggle to be comparable due to the batteries we have now.

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

ICEV = Internal Combustion Engine Vehicle

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

@jimglas, if you actually read and took part rather than trolling, you'd see that @Darth and I have some similar opinions (you know, the logical one that can't be objectively refuted) but also have different perspectives on cars, driving, etc.

Darthamerica | 25/11/2019

TeslaTap it only takes ~30 gal to get that range. If that means more route options and a quicker turn around time because you aren't losing time with charging then the math isnt a simple fuel economy comparison. Also the purchase price of the ICE pickup is less further offsetting EV savings.

TeslaTap.com | 25/11/2019

Lots of scenarios work great/bad for any choice.

You pick up your EV truck, which is fully charged, go to the worksite, use the power from the car to power tools and return at the end of the day. You spend zero time at the gas station.

With that ICE truck, every few days, you drive many miles out of your way to a gas station, waste another 15 minutes fueling and filling a separate gas tank for your on-site generator, and then go to the job site. In some situations, it could waste an hour or more. Very poor use of time and expense for the employer. Costs for extra wages, project delays, extra wear and tear on the truck and fueling that costs 3x what the EV does.

Modular battery packs have totally failed (as a solution) and is a dead end. Others did exactly what you suggest. Huge capital costs, and it is far easier to just charge overnight and leave every morning with a full charge.

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

@TT, as usual, you are creating a best case scenario for the Tesla. In the real world, there may be several runs to the lumberyard during a workday, there may be heavy use with the power tools, and the construction worker may not have a level 2 charger or rooftop solar at home. And gas stations are not "many miles out of your way" in most urban, suburban, or areas under development in this country.

It's just not interesting conversation to constantly discuss what would be Tesla marketing POV. We are discussing real world performance, challenges, costs and benefits of BEV's.

andy.connor.e | 25/11/2019

"With that ICE truck, every few days, you drive many miles out of your way to a gas station, waste another 15 minutes fueling and filling a separate gas tank for your on-site generator, and then go to the job site. In some situations, it could waste an hour or more. Very poor use of time and expense for the employer. Costs for extra wages, project delays, extra wear and tear on the truck and fueling that costs 3x what the EV does."

You're assuming every part of gasoline cars is inconvenient. Heres another scenario. Every few days you stop at the gas station directly off the main road you drive to work, and fill you tank at a rate of 10 gallons per minute, so for a truck would still take you less than 5. You also fill your 5 gallon tank secured inside your bed which takes 30 seconds to fill. You're totaling 5 minutes now.

By the way, gasoline is not what causes delays on a job site.

Where is there to charge your vehicle on a job site? At least one person could take a 10 minute trip out to the gas station and fill that 5 gallon jug and bring it back.

Its not as bad as you think, but i am one to be in agreeance that the EV would be a superior choice here. But if everything on your job site is running of gas generators, that doesnt work. A contractor is not going to buy 10 Tesla trucks in place of buying ten 3500W generators.

Darthamerica | 25/11/2019

Guys let's stay grounded in reality. It is much more convenient and flexible to use a gas powered truck 99% of the time. Even if an EV could charge up instantly, charging infrastructure isn't yet anywhere near the same as getting gas. Also, work trucks had options for power outlets. This is almost a non comparison.

TeslaTap.com | 25/11/2019

I was just countering nuke's best-case scenario for ICE. I'm sure there are many cases where ICE may work better, and just as many cases where EVs work better. Any buyer should evaluate there own needs and make an appropriate choice.

I also think we may be looking at different areas. In a city or suburban area, truck driving distances for the day are often quite short, rarely over 100 miles for the entire day. When you get out to rural areas, and sites way off the beaten path, having an ICE with extended range gas tanks may be more appropriate.

The key is to fit the vehicle to the need. Presuming the Cybertruck can't be used as a work vehicle in many situations is foolish, and it's foolish to think the Cyvertruck will work in every single scenario too. Nothing wrong with that.

TeslaTap.com | 25/11/2019

Yikes, 99% of the time? Now that sounds like pie in the sky.

I'd guess more like 20% of workers would need an ICE over the 500-mile range Cybertruck. Why would any business want to waste money and time fueling when many applications are suitable to just charge overnight requiring zero effort? I guess it really doesn't matter. If zero Cybertrucks are used for work, Tesla still has a huge backlog. I expect there is no way to know until Cybertrucks are delivered to buyers.

andy.connor.e | 25/11/2019

Which contracting company uses electric trucks that we can make a comparison to? (crickets?)

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

@Darth, there's no such thing as logic or reality in the Tesla fanboy alternate universe. If we accept that driving a BEV in 2019 is a tradeoff of giving up certain conveniences, performance, handling, options, and luxury at a given price (the ICE car I could have had for the price of this Model S is something I try not to think about because I think it's important to support BEV now), for gaining a seat at the table of the future, and some fun things like quick acceleration and quasi-self-driving, then we can have an intelligent, interesting conversation. Otherwise it's a childish waste of time.

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

@andy.connor.e, it may work well for construction in urban/suburban environments where the Home Depot and a Supercharger are within a few miles of every job site.

***Did I just say Home Depot and Supercharger in the same sentence?***

andy.connor.e | 25/11/2019

Available power from the trucks outlets would first need to be known.

Supercharger close to the job site is suggesting you're going to run out of battery during the day. The point here is that the truck would replace the need for a generator for temp power. What are you going to the supercharger for?

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

That's what I'm saying. On a day of heavy usage and trips to the lumberyard with the truck at full capacity, you may need a charge. Or maybe somebody doesn't have level 2 at home so a 5 AM stop at Home Depot to pick up supplies and charge...

nukequazar | 25/11/2019

Also I'm guessing the DM with 300 mile range for $50k will be the most popular.

andy.connor.e | 25/11/2019

Alright well the maximum power out of the trucks outlet will answer that for you. We dont know so lets try to keep the speculating to a minimum so that opinions dont dominate in here like they are truth.

Distance from job site, available home/work charging, maximum power out of the trucks outlets for an 8 hour day. We have yet to find out the capacity of the battery, but it will surely be a minimum of 100kWh for the 300 mile version.

Pages