EDIT: December 2022 update We still don' t know shit about the Tesla semi despite the first one having already been delivered to Pepsi. No information whatsoever. Hey folks, You've brought up some good points in the comments, mostly regarding the Tesla Semi's range and weight, to which I'd like to respond. *1) The Tesla Semi will be much lighter than a regular truck since it's electric.* I chose the 16 ton figure arbitrarily, but that seems to be very much the upper limit as far as I can see. I've seen figures for regular trucks (that's truck and trailer) like 8 tons or less, depending on the type. Keep in mind that this varies very heavily (no pun intended). As far as the Tesla Semi's weight, we don't know. Tesla won't publish it, which should be cause for alarm. Real Engineering guessed it at 7 tons without batteries, which, he says, is the same as a regular truck without an engine. An average truck combustion engine should be around 1.5 tons, add a ton of fuel for good measure, and in this case you have a regular truck that's 9.5 tons. Bookmark this for later. *2) The battery range is a quarter that of a regular semi, so the batteries don't need to be that big.* This is correct. The point I was trying to make in the video was how bad current batteries are if we want outcomes that are similar to regular trucks. I've used Real Engineering's Battery Calculator to check: battery.real.engineering/ At a 500-mile range (804 km) and maxed-out weight, the battery clocks in at around 8 tons. Meaning that using Real Engineering's estimates, we'd have a 15-ton Tesla Semi versus a 9.5-ton regular semi. 5.5 tons less capacity, and a fourth of the range. Also, keep in mind that the Tesla website doesn't tell us whether the range is when empty, or when fully loaded. Also, I doubt they factored in things such as ambient temperature or surface gradient. All this means that you'd most likely need a bigger battery. Our numbers will fluctuate heavily, since the trucking industry is very diverse with lots of different weights, capacities, etc. In order for us to get a more accurate estimate, we'd need Tesla to actually publish their numbers, which they refuse to do. You'd think if the numbers were great, they'd be plastered all over the Semi website, but they aren't. Makes you think.
So what you're saying is that you don't really know the exact numbers either and are simply assuming the worst. "Makes you think" is the same kind of argument conspiracy nuts come up with if they can't come to a conclusive answer. The first generation of Tesla Semi will of course not be the be-all and end-all solution to trucking. It will not be a replacement for all diesel trucks. I am however very certain that there will be many applications where it will excel and many trucking companies will flock to it due to the significantly lower total costs of operation that cheap electricity and low maintenance will bring. Of course, either of us can be very wrong, but I suggest we contain the urge to point and laugh until the Tesla Semi actually hits the road and either flops or turns out to be a success.
Czechia being a screwed up failure and what do you do? Criticize other more successful ventures for not being perfect. Come to America, you'll fit in with the asinine -Trump- zombies.
@@cowboybob7093 SImilar to the Musk Zombies that think he is the smartest person on the planet. Instead of conforming to what the Trucking industries needs, Musk is trying to tell the Trucking industry you really need this.
The weigh guesses are not very well thought out. Does a Tesla Model 3 weigh the same as a comparable car minus an engine ~150kg plus a 480kg battery pack? No it weighs between 0-150kg more than a compact exec car of comparable performance. For a class 8 semi we lose, the engine, the transmission, the differentials/axles, the fuel tank and fuel system, 3/4 of the cooling system, the exhaust system. ~4500kg. Now from what Elon has said the battery is 700-800kwh, the 500 mile range is achievable in that calculator if you move rolling friction down to 0.0045 which is feasible with the most efficient tyres (which it will have). The next issue with the calculator default settings is that the packing factor is set at a crazy value. To achieve the same energy density as a Model 3 battery it needs to be set to 0.68 (if keeping batteries at 250wh/kg) which now results in a battery weighing ~4600kg. Which is the same as the amount of kit we removed.... Obviously we have to add the electric motors back in but as they are just 4 X Model 3 motors that will be around 500kg. But wait there's more, firstly battery specific energy will be going up by 50% in the next 5 years, secondly the battery is structural which means we can reduce the rest of the vehicle by ~7% finally we are assuming that a regular semi is perfectly optimised for weight I doubt it is! - At the last earnings call Elon Musk was on record as stating that the Tesla Semi will weigh no more than an equivalent class 8 semi, I see no reason to doubt that statement.
Your second point assumes that the goal is to provide the same range as a diesel, but that's not really necessary. Truckers can't drive 1500 miles at a time due to numerous labor laws and sleep requirements and even 500 miles is closer to the upper limit of a duty cycle and certainly well within the range of a mandatory break where a driver could charge while having lunch or whatever.
The very first point in the semi's specs is the 0-60 acceleration. Which is invaluable info for all the approximately zero trucking/drag racing hybrid companies.
actually there is truck drag racing, they preferred diesel or jet engine, also there is british truck racing, still electric truck would be heavier and wouldn't help the brakes and cornering at all
Honestly... I've never understood the obsession with 0-60 times. There is a reason the Toyota Corolla is the most famous car in the world, people just want a comfortable car to travel from A-B
Getting up to highway speeds in minutes can pose a safety hazard. More interesting to the semi-buying community: - Speed up a grade. - Safety down a grade. - Downtime (maintainence). - Total cost of operation. On all four of these metrics, the BEV semis are way ahead. As a bonus, they are simpler to drive and impossible (more or less) to jackknife.
@@jerrylove865 Uh? How do you get they are impossible to jackknife? Are you saying that because the drive axles are on the trailer that the truck will magically never jackknife? _Someone_ doesn't understand physics, lol. In fact, I would surmise a guess that these trucks are _more_ likely to jackknife when I think about it (the trailer will be pushing the cab forward, which is very bad when the whole vehicle is segmented). And also, since the drive axles are on the trailer, how the frick does dropping trailers work with these things? The whole point of a semi is that you can take the cab, grab a trailer, take it somewhere, drop the trailer off, grab another trailer and take it somewhere, etc. That simply won't be possible with one of these things because, I don't know, _the cab has no drive axles._ Also, rear-wheel drive cars are infamously terrible with traction in inclement weather (which also wreaks havoc on the effectiveness of EVs already when it comes to cold temperatures). Why on God's Green Earth would you want the drive axles to be at the back of the trailer? What you've basically done is made an even more terrible RWD vehicle. RWD is only good on the racetrack. EDIT: At least I think that's saying they put it on the trailer? Not sure. It says "Rear Axles" so I assume that's what that meant.
@@Dhalin I cant recall which group did it but there is a video out there that they took a Tesla Model X and ran some tests with driving without pulling a load and with pulling a load to see how pulling a load effected the range. From their tests the range dropped dramatically under heavy load and they summarized that if both the truck and the trailer had batteries and motors, that might solve some of the performance issues a BEV might have when pulling heavy loads.
If Elon can increase the battery density by 50%, he might as well close down Tesla and open a battery company because that'll literally revolutionize the industry... Battery tech has been the limiting factor for not just EVs, but IoT, phones, laptops, etc. for a long time already.
At this point I'm suspecting that the things preventing us from having batteries with extremely high energy densities are the laws of physics themselves, i.e. natural thermodynamic limits on how much energy you can realistically (and SAFELY) get out of a reversible chemical reaction, regardless of the chemistry.
@@electric7487Michio Kaku said in one of his books (spanish speaker here, don't know the title, but should be something like "the physics of the future") that batteries have an intrinsic limit because they only work on the surface of the electrodes, and you need to remove the first layer to get to the second one, all the while, you need some form of the first layer to stay close to be able to recharge it.
New idea: we have one truck pulling multiple trailers. It can pull them along special steel rails to dramatically reduce rolling resistance and improve efficiency!!
Well, asking why might be an appropriate question. If your 0-60 is 15sec vs 20sec. Who cares both very slow, and rightly so, getting through a million gears takes time. Perhaps an actions per drive might be a good metric to compare. Now if its fast enough that you can drive it like a car when not loaded, that makes a difference. If it has enough torque when loaded, it removes the feeling of weight and accelerating upto to useful speeds in a timely manner without gear changes also allows smooth constant acceleration which makes the payload more happy even though your getting upto speed far quicker.
We haul 160,000 lbs. Power is a huge concern for our trucking fleet. We specifically buy ultra light weight trucks with the highest spec output. Power makes a big difference.
Ironically, this is how hybrids actually work. The idea being that running a diesel generator to electric motors is more efficient than using a diesel motor.
What Tesla actually did to reduce battery weight is have 12-25% the range of comparable trucks and greatly reduce drag. The result is a totally reasonable 1-2 t battery.
A train sort of powertrain would unironically be pretty good. And if it had electric only capability for short distances then that could cut down on emissions signficantly too.
@@__-fm5qv The problem isn't alternative "hybrid" solutions, there's a reason why it's typically one or the other. That reason is weight for transport, in our cars we can throw both in and call it a day but due to the nature of trucks you have to choose, reduced battery range for fuel and engine (plus all the extra stuff needed). So lets be lazy and assume you'd have to remove 50% of the battery for everything a diesel engine and fuel needs to increase the range to 500 miles and ease of refueling anywhere. This gives at least the Volvo VNR (only one displaying weight of truck) 130 Miles before the backup needs to kick in. At which point you'd be better off at owning a diesel only truck with it's reduced weight, UNLESS you drive inside a heavily urbanized situation where there are tons of red lights and assholes where acceleration truly matters... FYI the Volvo VNC EV weights about 24,500LB about 8,500 more than the normal VNC, however what a lot of outlets including Adam have failed to include is the governments allowance of 2,000 pounds extra for EVs, this means it can haul 6500 less. Or to put it in simple terms a 52 ft trailer can hold 26 "standard" skids so each skid can still hold 1635 pounds of goods vs the 1885 for diesel. Note: numbers based on Motor 1 numbers which include 15,000 trailer. No idea how accurate the trailer number is, or if the 16,000 diesel includes full fuel or not. Also these numbers are meaningless unless the government actively checks trucks weight everywhere every time, just saying.
"the quickest acceleration-from 0-60 in 20 seconds" last time i checked a truck is supossed to transfer enourmous weigths from point A to point B not drag race..
You fail to realize that greater acceleration means greater torque, so by this logic a semi-truck will easily be able to outperform a diesel semi transferring cargo from one place over another. Edit: I meant a tesla semi-truck not just a semi-truck
@@kappakgames580 Not the best unit to represent torque. Truckers ain't stupid and they know what torque number means, and they can handily compare it to the torque of available diesel trucks.
@@kappakgames580 Not really. Even if they're in downtown stop and go traffic it isn't going to help them get anywhere any faster. If you're talking about going up hills... semi's already do that.
@@paulaldo9413 Electric motors are the reason why Teslas accelerate really fast, but it also does create more torque than an internal combustion engine because they are far more efficient.
you know things are bunk when you use a statistic no-one in the industry gives a shit about.... literally no one in trucking - how fast does it go 0-60
Ikr, when a BEV got crashed they just abandoned it. why not re use that battery to idk, maybe to store energy from a solar panel or to make another BEV (ofc if the battery isnt damaged)
@@randombrit13 Hydrogen combusts completely in an instant, there's no putting out a hydrogen fire. But I wasn't thinking of fire: it's been said that a gas car carries people while a hydrogen car carries hydrogen. Need a huge gas tank.
And one more thing, spare parts. Cargo companies cares a lot about the repairability of their fleet, this being a Tesla would automatically get crossed out...
"So your Tesla door fell off? That'll be $4700 and a month in the shop." "Why is it so expensive and take so long?" "Well ma'am, we have to disconnect and reconnect all the wires.' "Why so many wires?" "The factory kept adding sensors to tell if the door is falling off."
@@kik1rik1 not if you have hundreds more electrical parts. This has been a big problem with John Deere tractors and i think it's gonna be worse with Teslas. I'd honestly love to have an electrical car that's not trying to be futuristic and is just a normal car..
He’s already working on it. The first (and probably only) iteration replaces the rail with a horizontal tarmac surface. The pods are initially Tesla model Y’s being driven by humans, but it’s totally not a road bridge.
Personally I’m okay with all the crazy whatnot. Succeed or fail, all this money being pumped into improving battery tech might one day at least make my phone last longer.
I think, it is happening in the other way. I think the only reason why we see electric cars is because of the research to make your phone to last longer.
or the bottom falls out of it when the hype fizzles out and there's nothing left to conceal its unviability, effectively poisoning public opinion and fostering doubt among potential industrial-scale adopters. it's almost like marketing niche luxury products to capitalise on the good faith behind renewable energy concerns, without making any effort to focus on the affordability and efficacy required to be adopted en masse, is a completely impotent and disingenuous solution to the problem.
@@BabyFawnLegs The whole auto industry must be going crazy as they are all following Tesla's lead. Cars, trucks, vans, you name it, they are all committing to transition to electric! And Tesla's latest earnings report shows that they are taking in profits hand over fist while building new factories, what is the world coming to?
Conciousnes over a climate crisis. If you have half a brain you cna see effect already. Speciay costal towns, i live in oneso can confirm. Tho most likly would kill us anyways as this messures are slow, not enough and those more pressing would still be ignore. US just mega sold Golf of mexico territory forr drilling. Big petro has the goverment buyd, until people get a REAL president and goverment we are all fuckd.
was expecting him to invent the train again since the effeciency problem could be solved by removing the battery and adding a constant stream of electrical energy via a cable.
Hey, I love your other videos and I'm certainly no fan of Elon, but by 4:01 I found myself facepalming. Lets do the math properly. First of all, battery packs are around 250 Wh/kg, currently. We'll take the figure of 2kW per mile and a 500 mile range. That's 1MW of battery capacity or 4 tonnes (tons is pretty much the same unit). Take a conventional truck, strip out the existing mechanicals (motor, gearbox etc) and add electric motors. You save around 2 to 3 tons. Meaning most of your battery mass is free. Battery packs will improve to beyond 300 Wh/kg and possibly 350 Wh/kg later this decade. That's another ton saved. I've no idea where you got the "20 to 1" but I'm guessing that you're talking about total theoretical energy density. Diesel is about 12 KWhr/kg. However the typical tank to wheel efficiency of a truck is 23%. Diesel engines might have a peak efficiency of 43%, but that's only at optimal load and speed. Energy is also lost in the drivetrain. Now the actual work being done is equivalent to 3 kWhr/kg. Add to this the fact that electric vehicles also have regeneration capability and diesels do not. www.mdpi.com/2571-8797/3/2/28/pdf So in the real world the figure you're looking for is actually more like 6 to 1. Obviously, the claimed 2KWhr/mile figure is optimal (on the flat). However regeneration (particularly in a truck) is your friend here, since you have a high efficiency drivetrain. Tesla is not alone in developing battery powered trucks. They are absolutely going to happen. Btw maintenance and fuel are a huge part of the cost of trucking. Electric trucks are far less maintenance and the "fuel" cost is lower per mile. Btw I'm an Engineer, currently involved in grid storage projects and electric (yes battery) powered trains.
I calculated the battery mass to be 16 t with my rudimentary calculations, which allows for 7 t of cargo. For the 300 mile range, 9,5 t of battery should be enough, and capacity is almost twice as much, 13 t, compared to 20 t of a diesel truck
I am also an engineer and I agree with your analysis. His 20:1 number is like an amateur who thinks theoretical numbers by themselves represent reality. He is simply an Elon hater. I came here to be entertained but I guess my brain is too big for that. Elon haters would not even question his analysis because it would certainly be entertaining for them.
Engine weight 3000 pounds, sure, but you seem to think electric motors don't weigh anything since you subtracted the engine and claimed that means the battery is free.
if you want to help the environment, get a £500 second hand Ford Fiesta and donate/invest the rest of that 86k in land to preserve as a nature reserve or better yet a cleanup effort.
True lol. Teslas are mostly expensive virtue signals/flexmobiles. But nobody wants to drive a car made for the poors. Its not glamorous or instagramable enough.
Why do i have a feeling that the engineers warned the sales and marketing department multiple times about its shortcomings and were just ignored and had to do it anyway...
The amount if times I had to tell our marketing depart, no we can't claim that, we can't do that, and my favorite is when you have to tell them nobody can do it. "Why not, just make something!?" And you have to explain to them you can't invent something that violates one of newtons laws no matter how the flashy the bullet point was. Marketing is a sham.
@@jacobdesutter8354 mate, you just described my job on the daily. “Why can’t you just make it work? You’re an engineer!” Yes, I am an engineer, not a magician. FFS.
Electric cars have much higher torque then regular ICE engines so it wouldn’t be that crazy that it could actually be able to pull more in weight but that’s depends on the wheels
Tesla semi won t need to charge before the completion of most trips and will be the fastest truck ever built. For the trips it needs to charge for, just spend half an hour every 5 or 6 like truckers should anyways and it s done. This is of course untill the trucks will drive themselves, which you can t tell of any other truck, can you?! P.S. Toyota will be bunkropt or close to it within 10 years
@@lucadellasciucca967 you're right they're building a truck that defies the laws of physics and conservation of energy. It'll just float around freely without ever needing to charge. towing 80,000lbs with a lithium battery pack that'll need to be recharged every 20 years.
My favourite part about the hyperloop is the way he changed the design 3 times and now it gets traffic jams , except unlike a regular underground tunnel is as tight as the London metro so there's no escape, unlike being in a highway, pulling over and walking the hell away.
@@UnknownGamer40464 People die and Elon Musk cries crocodile tears at the wake before explaining how this either was entirely the victim's fault or otherwise scapegoats his engineering team before firing someone to show his "solidarity" with his victims.
Thats not the hyperloop you're talking about. Thats a totally different thing. What you're talking about is the... car tunnel (??) he "invented" (???) some time ago.
it matters for ubran areas and traffic. A truck that can take smaller gaps when turning onto the freeway or intersection consistently will reduce its transit times and thus save more money. A truck, like the Hyundai's Xcient Hydrogen truck, which cant eve reach freeway speeds (max unloaded is 52mph or 85km/h) will increase transit times and increase costs.
I mean 60 up a 5% grade with a full wagon ain't bad but I knew a guy who could run his kitty CAT up a 10% grade in the PA mountains doing 107 with 80,000 lbs.
of all the things to dunk on, the fixation on acceleration being a "useless" metric is weird. have y'all never been stuck behind a tuck that's taking a dangerously long time merging onto a highway? or forced to slow down or change lanes because a truck couldn't accelerate fast enough on an incline to keep pace with the rest of traffic?
The semi is being built by engineers and marketed by redditors, I just hope the engineers can make something good before the whole idea crashes and burns
Adam’s video is complete BS. You can find the battery weight on Teslas website. He gives you the energy density and the energy used per mile. Simple math will tell you that the batteries will weigh less than 4 tons (3.33T) Adam didn’t take any time whatsoever to actually understand any of this.
@@ChristopherGuilday that was one of my concerns but another was if they somehow actually manage to make solid state batteries by that time, the weight would drop a lot and the energy density would increase as well as solve the issues for fire, though I doubt it'll be anytime soon but one can only hope.
@@NobbGamingOfficial I'm not sure if what he's saying is true but there's no reason to be condescending, he may have a good point. Why not do some research and see if you can find something that disproves what he's saying?
Why does nobody talk about the origin of batteries? There's a certain, aggressive, globally dominant state in Asia can dominate the battery/tech business, has a manufacturing army, and would really love it if the world, but especially hungry states like the US, gave up oil and went crazy for electric cars. And all sorts of business and political leaders have deep, often corrupt ties to it, and a desire to invest in it, including Elon Musk.
It's fine, you just need to have 20 times the number of semis on the road. Totally fine. Just pass the costs onto the consumer, and replace the human drivers with autonomous driving.
You accidentally got really close to identifying a couple problems. #1) You can't put double the trucks on the road because there aren't the drivers. Even if you could, now your driver is worth less because he's providing less value (moving less weight). Driver pay has been a problem for years already. #2) Trucks are expensive, so local companies often run 2 shifts per day with one truck. Trucking company yard space is frequently just adequate for their current fleet. There's no room to have double the fleet with half the trucks charging.
I want to see an updated video on this after Tesla's recent announcement Edit: just to be clear, I didn’t say this because I thought the Tesla announcement proved Adam wrong. But after seeing a bunch of people saying he’s wrong, I’m just genuinely curious to how he would respond to the Elon fanboys lol
@@indarvishnoi2389 Adam admitted he only makes those videos to generate views for his profile, mindlessly pandering toward haters. And it shows; his arguments really suck compared to his other videos.
The Tesla semi will be a amazing yard mule. Having working on the docks at UPS and FedEx. The diesel smoke can be choking at times. Maybe used for really short local deliveries.
That's exactly what they plan to use it for. The whole calculation in the video is based on the assumption that Tesla expects to have the same Energy capacity as a diesel semi, but they don't, not even close. Instead, they'll be able to maintain a reasonable payload capacity by having a much more limited range. But, ~90% of truck routes are below a realistic maximum range estimate for the Tesla semi. So, it's still definitely competitive, just not for EVERY route.
Volvo has already long range and mid range electric trucks, the Tesla semi is irrelevant already. And ıt's a real existing vehicle unlike the Tesla semi. And Volvo is in talks with local governments and large truck companies to establish a charging network and more.
@@evil7011 and also Volvo makes real vehicles with real safety and productivity oriented design. Tesla in the name of "cool sci-fi points" has robbed cars of freaking windshield wipers stalks...
honestly I feel like the induction motors Elon insists on using is actually just as big of a problem as the batteries, like seriously those motors are extremely inefficient and waste incredible amounts of energy, I bet he could get the same range with half the batteries if he switches to high efficiency solid state motors, or double the range, hell if he gave up on the semi truck drag racing pipe dream and gave them a more conservative power output and went to 2 motors (one per rear axle) he could make a product that competes with conventional combustion engine semi-trucks. But no it has to have a 0-60 of 2 seconds and use cheap ass induction motors with tons of batteries to compensate cause Elon.
@@didjterminator808 AC Induction motors are very efficient in a vacuum. The losses are incurred when conversion happens. I'm not sure solid state motors exisist unless you mean something like a wax motor. If you meant PM DC motor, I hope you like changing brushes. Teslas already use PM DC motors, but in the interests of reducing maintenance (brushes), the magnets are on the rotor and the stator is wound. This requires a "rotating" magnetic field to be generated hence incurring losses. The current choice is to either make it efficient but unreliable or make it slightly less efficient but much more reliable. The real problem is with batteries.
I remember when learning for my drivers license over 20 years ago, that such a big truck causes 40 times the damage to roads a normal passenger car does (due to weight). This was accepted for the transport capacity. With the electric truck causing as much road damage for a fraction of the transported goods, looks like another big reason to see it as failure to me.
@@richardlamm4826 Are you serious? First of all as the guy below you said. They are called normal roads. But if you used a bit of common sense. Every material will eventually break or crack of thousands of tons of metal drove over it every day, every night, for weeks, months years and decades. So unless you invent a better and cheaper material, good luck.
Also: Your trucking company will have to either hire entirely new mechanics or train the existing ones for months because repairing these is probably a lot more complicated than diesel trucks.
Yes, aaaand no. You'd have to hire interely new mechanics or train current new skills, because of EVs, but electric power have MUCH, MUCH less parts to wear down. No really a transmission, no valves and pistons rubbing each other, less fluids (no engine oil, often not even cooling installation), etc. So maintenance-wise electric cars actually have a large upper hand over internal combustion.
@@juliuszkocinski7478 not necessarily true either, while they have less parts to break, when tgey do break its really bad because these are specialized parts that cant be reliably stocked, meaning repair times go up drastically as they're put on indefinet backorder, as well as incredible safty liability. Many techs would need to undergo massive retraining in order to learn how to deal with the massive batteries, as well as needing special purpose built repair bays for the trucks. I've worked in the trucking industry for years now, there's not a single company I know that wants electric trucks (outside of corporate heads that dont understand how much it'll cost them) or even a truck repair shop willing to fork over the costs to update the facility to meet the safty requirements.
@@CreeperSandwich Yeah, but that's a parts issue. The actual matter is just training new mechanics (this is the assumption that you can, as we aren't even sure if you can considering most of it is probably OEM by Tesla).
@@CreeperSandwich and DC high voltage is quite a different beast than AC high voltage, so, no, your experience fixing your microwave oven won't be helpful with the huge a**ed battery
@@CreeperSandwich diesel truck parts were once specialized too until they were standardized and widely available due to adoption. Most of your argument are things that would have stopped diesel trucks in their tracks if corporate heads didn't put investment dollars into adoption.
Not only that but time. I’m sure shipping companies are very conscious of how long trips take, I cannot imagine how long it would take to charge an 11 ton battery, let alone a 17 ton one
On the other hand companies like Walmart that move their inventories around on their own time would love the fuel savings and the carbon foot print reduction. Probably why Walmart preordered so many. If they wanted to they could relay loads with these trucks. Even at a much reduced range Walmart would be able to get fantastic use out of it. A lot of trucking is within the range of these. It could go from distribution hubs to surrounding stores. Plenty of range for that even with a much lighter battery.
500 miles at 2kwh/mile means a 1000kwh battery. At a v3 charger that outputs 250kw it would take about 4-5 hours to charge from ~10% to 100%. You’ll likely be able to use at least two chargers which would effectively cut the charge time in half. The battery would be able to handle way more than that thought so it’s only a matter of time before truck chargers will be available to charge the trucks in the same amount of time it takes on a model 3 or y
@@ryanchad8384 Electrify America or, in Europe, Ionity or Allego now go up to 350kW specifically for trucks (or the rare luxury car that supports it), probably using 2 chargers for semis as you said. So, with a 500 miles/1MWh battery, you can drive 350 miles twice (for a daily 700 miles route that's about all you can achieve during the legal 11 driving hours per day), with a single 43 minutes lunch break, charging from 30% to 50% of battery capacity and still have 10% of spare before slow-charging overnight. I am sorry to say you'll need to pee in a bottle outside of this break, or you will have way more electricity than needed... 😁 This is where the video goes wrong: Because of superfast charging, you actually don't need a 500 miles battery, a 400 miles battery would perform almost as well, with one 48 minutes lunch break after 360 miles to charge from 10% to 80% of battery capacity, and one small 13 minutes coffee break after 280 miles and before the last 60 miles, if you really drive the full 700 miles route. Actually, for the same cargo load, the smaller and lighter battery pack should make for a truck more efficient than 0.5 miles per kWh, or at least, more efficient than a truck with a 500 miles battery pack, because it's not clear if the 0.5 miles/kWh efficiency applies to fully loaded 500 miles battery pack truck or empty 300 miles battery pack truck. I guess we'll have EPA ratings some time within the next 12 months, and real life numbers from customers shortly after.
Even worse... you have to haul the batteries around even if you don't have a load. So, if you drop off a load and need to drive back 100km without any return cargo (which many city deliveries don't have), you now have to haul that 17t on batteries (effectively twice your normal empty weight) back.
Exactly, that's why I'm not convinced that electric cars have a smaller carbon foortprint in the end. They always have to carry those heavy batteries around.
You added the battery weight on top of the 16 ton weight of a diesel semi, as if the electric semi is still carrying all the weight of the diesel engine, power train, fuel tanks, etc. You need to subtract those from the 16 ton starting weight and *then* add the battery weight.
Then Adam probably took some long range diesel semi and proved with it that long range Tesla semi is impossible. Yeah, we know that. That's why proposed Tesla semi is rather short to middle range. In diesel you can double the range by just doubling relatively light fuel tank. So it's done already to practical maximum, no big deal. In battery truck you have to compromise between range and truck weight. So Musk did. Hence, truck with low range.
As much as I enjoy your videos man, there are a lot of omissions in this one. Tesla's stated range is 300-500 miles, whereas that tank capacity (at 6.5 miles / gallon) is nearly 2,000 miles. The battery, in your scenario, would only need to be 25% or less of that capacity, meaning that we're looking at a 4-5 ton battery at most with that range. I assume that the selling point here from Tesla is for lower-tier trucks, not cross-country hauls. Already, that means we're looking at a load capacity of 13 tons with your most unforgiving calculation there. With potential battery weight improvements you mentioned (which I personally think are possible considering that local air travel may start using electric planes soon, cool video from Wendover Productions on that), that would mean the battery would only need to weigh roughly 3 tons. That's 17 tons of load capacity. Then, subtracting the weight of a semi truck engine, which is about 3000lbs or 1.5 tons, you're looking at a load capacity of 18.5 tons, plus any other weight you're able to shave off as a result of not having an internal combustion engine. Lastly, considering that each truck is looking at an apparent $200,000 savings in diesel expenses per unit, that could understandably start to look attractive to companies, especially those who are looking at more local routes. This, in addition to the other features that Tesla has admittedly become pretty famous for such as self driving and safety add-ons, could be pretty enticing. I think this video would have been a lot cooler if you'd attacked the Tesla semi truck concept from a range and long-haul viability perspective. This approach however feels kinda silly.
The topic could and should have been explored more. There are two things I'd like to say about your comment, however. 1 - you can subtract the 3k pounds because of the engine, but at the same time don't forget to add the weight of 4 heavy duty electric motors back in. They aren't weightless you know. 2 - do improvements in battery density reduce their weight? Or only volume?
@@guardian6975 Not in weight, but it's cheaper and more environmentally friendly with the same capacities for "short" travels. That sounds like innovation if you ask me.
@@jorgeabrahamaguilerareynos9264 Where is the enviromental friendliness, if majority of electric energy in the grid comes from coal power plants? also, how do you recycle bateries? how eco friendly is the production of the batteries?
The only place I see this having any use is as a depot yard shifter. At my UPS job, we have a number of small, lightweight tractors that move trailers both full and empty around the yard of the building. Moving them in and out of loading bays, but never on the actual haul to the next station. Electric ones can charge overnight off the building (which has solar) instead of consuming mass amounts of diesel just to shift trailers around.
Thought exactly the same. I work in an industrial area and I see the electric ones and gas ones quite a lot, since some countries forbid running petrol/diesel carts / forklifts indoors. So, electric forklifts (or tractors) but shittier then. Tesla would have to compete with every existing Toyota, Manitou, CAT , etc. Good luck XD
@@jjcc8379 An electric work lift would be great, we have a diesel Genie model that they use to repair conveyor belt drive motors and it really stinks up the place.
I laughed when I first heard they had a range of 300 miles. What's the point when it's undoubtedly going to cost more than a standard truck and take 4x as long to ship?
I do feel like tesla is shooting for the wrong market too early. I think this would make a great yard shifter/switcher. But also, correct me if I'm wrong as I don't follow what Tesla is doing, but why haven't they designed box trucks or vans? The market is still early (although the biggest contract, the USPS, was won by Oshkosh. Yeah, the MRAP people).
Plus it doesn't even have a sleeping cabin, it just is built to give the illusion of having one, and since it doesn't seem like it's going to be good for anything other than short trip deliveries, it seems extra pointless to even waste the weight faking that look.
Imagine a balancing scale ⚖️. On one side is rolling resistance; on the other side is wind resistance. The Tesla semi is about 26,000 lbs, far too heavy to be profitable for weight-constrained loads (floor tiles/grain/gasoline), so it will always haul lightweight cube-constrained dry van loads (like potato chips). This tips the balancing scale to where wind imparts more resistance than the tires, which means aerodynamic drag is the bigger factor in fuel economy. This is why the Tesla semi looks the way it is, and it's also why they chose California's 55mph truck speed limit to claim it has a 500 fully loaded range.
@@yourex-wife4259 Heh! Exactly, cuz I often regret flooring the accelerator later on, when I open the trunk to find that all my carefully arranged junk has randomly rearranged itself. The more Musk talks, the less credible I find him to be.
I work in logistics. we already have a fleet of electric vans/street scooter to deliver light loads over short distances (sub 70 miles), they're great but a pain to repair when the battery goes (pushing a street scooter carrying 1/4 ton of goods up a hill aint fun). The entire point of that fleet is that the load and the vehicles are light meaning lower battery requirements, lower long term costs, etc. scaling up to the highest possible loads over the longest possible distances is such a stupid move, apart from it being the least cost effective and least reliable way to to run an electric fleet there are clear opportunities in the logistics market for small to mid range distribution.
honestly for long range Rail would be the soloution. Problem is its neglected in favour of road in most countries... i live in germany where cargo was actually moved from rail to road because the rail system was simply negelected for the past years.... when you have trucks ship stuff over half the continent theres something wrong... that should be a job for rail.
From what I understand, some FedEx stations are already rolling out electric step-vans. Since most vans travel less than 100 miles from the station, it should be great for short-range, especially considering that the diesels they use get like 10 miles to the gallon and are even worse if the drivers idle
I think it is literally illegal for trucks to convoy. So he is just a rich arsehole trying to sell the manure he pulled straight out of the orfice he is talking out of to pseudo science junkies.
If they ever get PEM fuel cells working efficiently I think that'd be a better option than lithium batteries for trucks. Oh and fix that whole kaboom thing.
Thinkin kinda the same thing, also trucks run more regular paths and refueling stations that produce their own hydrogen can therefor be placed where needed
Well you have store it under 700 bar pressure. And you need twice the amount of liters to get same range. Plus the whole setup makes the truck weight more heavy then a ICE setup. So less load capacity. And fuel cells dosen’t work in the cold either. So your driving a fuel air bomb, that dosen’t work in the cold can carry less. And hydrogen production in its current form is neither CO2 neutral or if produced by Wind and solar so expensive that its economical unfieable. Also no industrial scale production exists to produce hydrogen in quentity currently to support the transportation sector.
You make some incorrect assumptions here. 1) You assume the Tesla semi weighs 16t when it is much smaller and lighter than a typical ICE semi truck. 2) When applying the 1 20 rule you assume the trucks will have the same range when an ICE can have a range of 3000 mi. A battery which can last 500mi will probably be more like 20/6 ≈ 3 times heavier. The tesla semi also seems to be focused on shorter hauls. No one is arguing that the tesla semi will take over the entire logistics transportation market but may have it's niche and I can't ignore the environmental impact of an ICE semi vs electric. Elon is way over hyped for everything he does but let's still be objective here.
yeah exactly- the reason a semi is so heavy is bc of the engine, at least in part. without an engine the Tesla semi base excluding the battery would weigh less than an ICE truck. but yeah adding a battery would still be heavy and decrease load capacity compared to a traditional truck, but the video exaggerated it a lot.
@@TrueFilter he's talking about the dry weight- without fuel or batteries. If the electric one without batteries is gonna be significantly lighter than the ICE ones without fuel, that's gonna offset the weight difference of the fuels a bit.
I commented on the first upload and am not going to try to rehash everything I said, BUT... I feel like this video makes dunking on Musk a priority at the expense of disparaging a developing technology that lots of companies are pursuing, not just Tesla. A developing technology that 1) nobody is saying is ready to entirely supplant the world's fleet of diesel tractor trailers overnight 2) are surely going to be necessary in the face of net zero targets being adopted the world over, and 3) come with a host of other benefits such as reduced fuel and maintenance costs, plus the ability to act as stationary energy storage when they're parked, which fleet operators can leverage into another source of income. Not to mention 4) there are VERY CLEARLY externalized costs to diesel trucks that we are all paying for. Remember climate change? Air pollution? Basically, while I generally support calling out Elon Musk's BS, I think we need to be careful about shitting on developing technologies. Just because it's not immediately ready to replace its predecessor in every conceivable use case, does not mean its a scam. The world has enough problems with the fossil fuel industry creating FUD about electrification without well-meaning commentators jumping on the dog pile.
(Warning wall of text!!) Thing is arguably (and this applies to electrics and fossil fuels) first how much of the electricity is supplied by fossil fuels VS Renewables second How is that energy transmitted generated and stored third the time it takes to wait for Either method to be used and fourth the Equivalent costs of either method to my knowledge Most energy is made by fossil fuels (a bit here and there of renewables and a bit of Nuclear energy there but most of it is supplied by fossil fuels and then we come to the second point how is it transmitted is or it generated on site? Or merely stored on site we obviously do not have perfect power transmission capabilities yet and a good deal of that power is lost as heat if its generated on site then most likely its made using Fossil fuels in some way (Like a diesel generator) and we don't have perfect batteries yet so basically the same issue as the first point and for the time taken for either method well to quote a favorite children's book of mine with a diesel its simply "A fill of oil a touch on the starter and we're off" my phone takes I believe an Hour to fully charge and even if you were to use the faster charging stations it would probably take the same amount of time as my phone if it was run down fully whereas with most internal combustion engines if you run out of fuel you can fill it up for about a minute or two (assuming its a car on both sides of the spectrum) and then your off to what you were doing in the first place so its more efficient in regards to time and for the last one behind curtain 4 arguably it costs more to charge an electric vehicle than it does to fuel an internal combustion vehicle because it comes all at once if you do a full charge at your home base if you will with an internal combustion vehicle you can at least sparingly fill it up at smaller stops(An internal combustion vehicle produces the same amount of torque even if its almost empty to my knowledge not too sure about electric vehicles though)
@@sockshandle a couple points. First on generation of electricity. The "bit here and there". Of renewables and nuclear is about 40% and that's in the US. Other countries that figure is higher. And renewables are growing all the time. Beyond that, numerous studies have confirmed that even if your electricity source is fossil fuel based, it is still more efficient and less polluting to burn those fuels at a power plant that can run at max efficiency and then power vehicles with electricity, rather than burning them in many millions of inefficient internal combustion engines. Second, I'm not sure why people think that you need to wait until one sector (electricity generation) is carbon free before you would start transitioning another sector (transport) away from carbon? That makes no sense. You can do both at the same time. As to charge times, yes that's a disadvantage. But again, no one is suggesting that EV trucks are going to be replacing the entire fleet over night, using only the currently available technology. But even still, I don't think truck drivers are currently driving the full range of their deisel truck, and then stopping only just long enough fill the tank(s) and then getting back on the road. In fact, that would very much go against labour and safety laws. They have to take breaks anyway.
@@adamlytle2615 the biggest lie people like to perpetuate is that coal burning power fueling an electric car is any worse that dumping fossil fuels into it. Cause what people don't realize is that oil refiners, the ones that make that gas, are usually contracting directly with a coal power plant to supply all the electricity to refine their fuel. Cause it takes a LOT of electricity to power an oil refinery... So much so that even just powering a car off 100% coal power is STILL less carbon than the amount of carbon from the whole process of drilling and refining the oil.
A few years ago at the winery I worked at, there was an fair type thing going on across the road so people were parking on the freshly mowed hay field beside the winery. A Tesla spontaneously combusted and it burnt down the field and something like 31 other cars I think
Semi trucks can go about 2,100 miles on a 300 gallons (roughly 800kg) of diesel fuel. 800kg x 20 = 16t ("1-to-20 rule") but the Tesla Semi has 300-500 miles of range so in the worst case scenario the battery can't weight more then 4 t. Tractors weight at most 11t, not 16t. The engine alone is at least 1t (which tesla doesn't have) There is no way the Tesla tractor weighs more then 10t. 36-(4+10)=22t of cargo assuming the absolute worst scenario. Adam Something claimed 3t of cargo. That is a faulty computation by an order of magnitude. Nice way to spin the numbers when you have the agenda.
@@Ascalonir the current tunnels are not the best to say the least imo, but Vegas is happy with them, and that makes Musk n CO. money to reinvest into tesla and spacex. And remember, in the land of 5MPH stop and go traffic, 30 MPH travel through a tunnel is king
@@colejosephalexanderkashay683 vegas isnt happy with them, they are a tourist attraction but nothing else, they are supposed to transport over 4000 people per hour and they are currently doing 800? Or so
So I have a few things to say about your vid: 1. About the weight calculation: with the normal diesel Truck the main weight factor is the engine and not the fuel. But with the semi the battery is the main weight factor, NOT the electric motor that are pretty light. So adding the weight of the battery to the 16t of the diesel Truck even though the semi hasn't got an diesel engine is just wrong and unrealistic. I would say the semi without the battery weighs maybe 5t but definitely not more. 2. To those who say "oh well but we already got trains". Yeah, you're right. And trains are, especially over a longer distance, way more efficient and environmentally friendly. But you can't leigh tracks to every grocery store so having a better alternative to diesel Trucks is definitely something good
What about charge time? It isn't uncommon in trucking for a team to work together so they can get 16 hours of time spent transporting each day. The fuel pumps for semis are larger and capable of more volume, which means their charge time isn't all that different from how long you'd spend filling the tank in your sedan.
I thought the same thing but the fact that this info wasn't provided by Tesla itself, I still think the conclusion of "It's just a shittier version of a truck" is still accurate. And like, I'd be willing to forgo some efficiency in the name of burning less fuels, but will electric trucks even do that?
Oh also it's not "We can't lay track" it's "We won't lay track", trucks don't just go from warehouse to grocery store, they cross state lines along routes where train tracks used to exist
And what about the fact that Semi trucks can go about 2,100 miles on a 300 gallons (roughly 800kg) of diesel fuel. 800kg x 20 = 16t ("1-to-20 rule") but the Tesla Semi has 300-500 miles range so in the worst case scenario the battery can't weight more then 4 t. If your 5t for a tractor is correct (I was assuming 10t to be on a safe side) then 36-(4+5) = 27t left for the cargo. This dude claims 3t left for the cargo, that is incorrect by a factor of magnitude. There is always a way to spin the numbers if you have an agenda.
So you think a semi engine, just the engine, weighs 11 tons? You for real? Here's a quote you might find insightful: "The engine in a semi-tractor weighs more than six times as much as the average car engine, according to The Truckers Report. Some of these truck engines weigh as much as 3,000 pounds." Also the 16t used in a video included the trailer don't forget. And the electric drivetrain also weighs something - and considering the power it must deliver it'll weigh a lot. I agree it'd probably be lighter, without batteries, than a regular semi with its engine and gearbox but the difference will be quite small. Same as for cars. Removing the engine does not remove enough weight to offset all of the electric components.
How is the electric truck estimated to weigh 16t without any batteries? Furthermore I don't think the range for the electric truck would be the same as the range of the ICE truck, so the calculations do not seem very meaningful imo. Different use cases for both of these trucks. A quick google search estimates about 2000 miles of range for the ICE truck, and Tesla states 500 miles on theirs. So that would amount to 4x less battery weight according to your calculations, meaning 4.25t of battery. Assuming that the bare vehicle without batteries is also lighter than a conventional truck, we come to 36t - (14t + 4.25t) = 17.75t load capacity over a 4x shorter range. IF (very big if in the US) the infrastructure allows it, that would probably a cheap alternative to fuel trucks if you don't need that much range and IF there is a single driver resting at charging stations. Not as bad as you paint the picture imo
You are right! This is the comment I was looking for. The one who made this video is just plain stupid, absolutely no one would drive 2000 miles in a day. He just hates Musk and all his companies
Oh! And DOT gave Tesla an extra 2,000 lbs. to play with! Centered cab? Instead of a good view on the left, a poor view on both sides. There's a reason one seat yard tractors have the cab all the way to the left. I really think the answer for long distance trucks will be hydrogen fuel cells. For cars fuel cells won't be worth it, but for trucks it's the only thing that will come close to a diesel engine.
2 comments from somebody who owns both a Tesla car and a semi truck: 1: a large portion of the trucks's weight is its engine and associated equipment. An electric motor is a lot lighter than a big diesel engine. You should have accounted for that in your calculations by subtracting at least a couple of tons from the Tesla truck. 2: The truck's fuel capacity is good for a thousand miles. You are trying to match that with battery capacity. For the stated battery range of 500 miles you should cut the battery weight in half. Tesla truck is not ready to replace my semi yet, but your calculations are disingenuous and make it seem worse than it is
I believe the weight difference engine was would be around 1T, yea the range should have been around 500 miles but the truck is still a flop and the industry needs a couple of years to start using them. I believe there going to be used mainly on site to move things around
@@azargelin on my Cascadia the engine itself is 1.5 tons. Then there's the transmission, the radiator, starter... removing at least two tons would be fair. Otherwise, yeah - this truck would be useful for dedicated runs of under 200 miles round-trip with lighter loads, and stuff like local store deliveries. But definitely not the random-route long haul trucking that I do.
This was a hit piece, blames Tesla for omitting key data, then cherry picks data to make their own point. Tesla semi can't compete on coast to coast runs, but there are dedicated short runs (100-250 miles) where the tesla would shine. Also, on range, the tesla does not need to idle. Drivers are required to take breaks, If breaks could be taken at charging point, range becomes a moot point.
@@richardcunningham9699 Yes. Most car lovers and even worse truckers are hyper conservative. They don't understand the market is huge and Tesla just needs to be good in some niches to sell lots of trucks. And they don't understand that you can change your behaviour. Battery swapping with battery rental never took off for consumers because we like to own. But companies don't like to buy depreciating assets. I'm pretty sure Tesla will eventually include highway battery swapping stations and sell trucks without batteries. Just like many comments speak of overpriced Tesla maintenance shops. As if the truck servicing business was the same as the consumer car one.
@@tugahenrik1 Of course, but I am talking about Germany, a country that already has a very well established rail network. You can't transport everything with trains. It just isn't viable. However, trucks running on overhead power seems like a very logical option to me. Warehouse to warehouse transport for example, or warehouse to supermarket. You can't use trains for that. And using trucks on overhead power is a lot better then using trucks with enormous batteries, or with combustion engine.
@@tugahenrik1 because trains cant turn into someones driveway? If hes talking about what I think it is then the trucks will still carry medium range batteries for regular deliveries in cities.
Well, actually, there are these so called 'volume cargoes' (i.e. low density goods that take up all the space available in a vehicle while in terms of weight being nowhere near the load capacity). But then again, only a large logistics/haulage company can afford having in its fleet electric trucks particularly designated to that kind of cargo. Most of private carriers should be prepared to accept for transportation whatever their clients throw at them.
Yeah but 300-500 mile range? The average hauler truck can go halfway across the country on a single tank of diesel. Electrics have a long way to go before semi trucks are even going to be considered as an alternative
@@fryloc359, freight rates for volume cargoes would usually be calculated per cubic meter/feet and not per mt. Otherwise it may well appear as a deadhead voyage, like you mention.
@@GlebRysanov i just meant that load was so light, that while hauling it it felt like deadheading. The bonus was that the load was rejected, so I got to take it back to the shipper.
When he mentioned about how even if a motor failed the semi would still continue I started laughing. Sure the semi could still keep going even if a motor fails, but now the other motors have to work harder to make up for the loss. That will increase the chance of failure for the motors the more each of them get knocked out until you're stuck at the side of the road and need to replace all of the motors
Does a Boeing 737 engine failure on takeoff cause the other engines to exceed their rated specs? No, it just reduces the climb rate. A failed motor here would reduce acceleration, climb speed, and regen braking. Semi-trucks do not require nearly as much energy to maintain speed in flats or rolling hills. It's still stupidly heavy at what I believe is 26,000 lbs, but the electric drivetrain on it's own is a solid concept. Hybrid trucks are the answer to the question Elon isn't willing to ask.
@@randgrithr7387 you do know that both drive trains are completely different from each other right? jet engines rely on producing thrust to move the plane. Trucks on the other hand need huge amounts of torque to get moving with all of their weight. You can easily replicate this with Lego motors, set up a car with four motors while they are dragging weight and slowly remove disconnect notes and see how they struggle to move until they can't move anymore
Edit: i did the maths properly later and the tesla semi makes zero sense lol. Good points but you made a few big omissions that affect the final weight: 16 tonnes for the normal truck includes the engine and its ancillaries, cluthch, gearbox, differential etc. With electric setups that weight is lower. You wont need the energy in the batteries to be identical as the motors as much more efficient that ICE and the drag coefficient is lower as it doesnt need intakes. So the final cargo weight it could carry would be higher. But I still think it wont be that much higher.
But isnt he underestimation the ratio between diesel and battery. According to a simple Google Search, so the numbers should be taken as an approximate, the energy densities of diesel an batteries rank like this: Diesel 11000-12000 Wh/kg Battery 100-150 Wh/kg Lets take the lowest estimate of the diesel an the highest of the battery and add an efficiency of 40% to the diesel engine (Average should be around 45 so also the low end) The ratio from diesel to battery should stand at (11000*0,4)/150 = 29,33. So the ratio of 1 to 20 is pretty favourable to the battery at the moment. The calculation in the video would look more like 0,874 * 29,33 = 25,63 t So the rest of the Truck would be allowed to weigh exactly 10,37 t which is impossible i guess?
@@vnmfxfreemontages9430 i think your energy density number for the lithium ion batt was inccorrect though. The most energy dense ones clock in at 260 Wh/kg. That brings the ration to 17 when using the most batttery-favourable figures.
@@Hello_there_obi Oh okay thats possible, like i said this were the first numbers google came up with. But still the resluts stay in favour for the conventional semi instead of the Tesla Semi :)
@@robinrussell7965 social imperialist countries have had better trains tho esp modern china. Even building one across Africa (for a small promise of cheap labour and resource extraction)
@Dominator yes they make their money back there are hundreds of Chinese corporations (exploiting workers and land) operating in Africa that the B&RI is meant to support lmao
@3N19MA yep, china is just another capitalist country looking to exploit. Has been since the 1980s dengite reforms. Sucks because of how much revolutionary potential there was in Africa that china could have been supporting at the time but they just stopped after Mao's death.
As a former truck driver, one thing to keep in mind is that many loads are bulky but not heavy and fill the truck without even approaching the 40T weight limit. The range seems like a bigger issue to me.
The range is very bad. Add in an environment with a real winter and the range cuts by another 20-40%, which really doesn't leave a lot to play with. Stuck in the middle of nowhere during winter in an electric truck with empty batteries.. no thanks.
I work in grocery delivery in Texas and that range is hilariously bad for us. We have several deliveries breaking the 6-700 mile range. A 300 mile limit (and then having to charge instead of going right back out) is just laughable.
I live in a city where air quality is considered to be important enough to start phasing out diesel trucks for delivery. Electric last mile delivery is a very real thing here.
there's no need for recalculation, adam assumed that an electric truck needs the same range as a diesel truck (about 4x more), which is nonsense. nobody has ever asked for that and tesla has only ever advertised the 500 mile range.
Seriously, how does someone do the math and conclude anything except “I’ve missed something here”. The dude concludes, “the company investing billions is wrong, not me” and releases the video. Brain dead.
Ah yes Adam something with a couple months(or less) research thought he had it all figured out and that thousands of R&D people(who had years of experience in the industry) at Tesla were wrong. 😂😂
It will probably be even less as the weight of the battery doesn't scale linearly. For example the casing gets proportionally smaller, when the volume goes up. The author of the video has literally no clue what he's talking about and the fact that so many people just blindly believe him is quite amusing...
@@dev_among_men And he says that the author of the vid doesn't have a clue. The batteries in EVs are just huge amounts of small 18650 batteries lined up together. An average 18650 has about 12 Wh. You want a 12 kWh EV accumulator, you take 1000 of that boys. You want a 120 kWh accumulator, you take 10 000 etc. The weight of encasing is negligible. EV batteries weight is definitely proportional to their capacity.
Semi uses 4680 type batteries which Tesla is manufacturing themselves. Watch „Battery Day“ presentation for more details. They explained everything around cost and weight saving.
As a truck driver I approve of this message! I drive a 16/17 ton DAF garbage truck that can carry 12/13 ton, It runs on Diesel and can work for 4/5 days on a full tank. We had a electric truck last year for a test from a different brand. It's weight was over 20 ton and it's carry capacity was 6 ton. The thing broke down the second day. I'm all for saving the environment but that same Diesel truck use to last only for a day with a full tank several models ago, so that's more progress than what the electric version has to offer.
Like you said though, things make progress. I hope that we can eventually make a good electric truck for the sole purpose of Musk having one of his ideas at the very least evolve into something not dogshit
Even IF the battery/weight were OK, I don't want to imagine the infrastructure needed to charge all trucks that stopped overnight at a parking lot. You'd need a local substation at each of them (probably)
The infrastructure for this to be viable is massive, there would need to be charging stations in abundance, including at shippers/receivers. It would likely end up with a restructuring of the Hours Of Service for workers as well due to the recharge time required to top off. A quick Google search suggests that current electric cars can take up to 10h to top off, I can't imagine the time for a Truck.
@@JVLY I guess you don't have experience driving an electric car, so it's understandable. You can top up an electric car in 45 minutes, to 90% charge. The idea is a truck driver takes an hour long lunch break or dinner break or whatever while their vehicle charges. While a forced break is not ideal, it's already a requirement by law, at least in the US, so it's more about making sure there are charging stations in route. Or just do the calculations in the video and have enough battery to go long haul without charging.
@@Danielle_1234 Guess my Google search must have resulted in something else and I didn't pay attention. Regardless, I can't imagine the Semis would be using the same batteries as a car so I have to assume their charge time would still be significantly higher given the power requirement to push the weight. Now, current HOS is 14h On Duty, 11 of which can be driven and a required break. The Charge time can't be taken from the 10h Off Duty time as, unless you're an Owner Operator, the truck is not your concern in that time. Charge time would need to be taken from the 14h On Duty clock which heavily cuts into a typical Day To Day. Not only would that truck haul a portion of the weight as a current rig, it would also have less hours of operation. Now, if these trucks operated like Drones, that would be an entirely different story. Going between docking stations without needing to follow HOS guidelines. That feels like it's still a bit further out though.
That actually sounds horrific. The only upside that might actually bring is that theyed probably build new lots all together for that which at least would make Shure the additional 5x trucks would find parking spots to rest in
@@JVLY First of all, Cargo drones are already in use, the CTA in Hamburg is using electric platforms to move the containers around. Yes those are not public roads but it’s already possible. In Europe you have to do a 45min brake after 4.5h. Max driving hours are 9 (there are special rules to do 10 but i don’t really wanna explain that) per day and there have to be at least 11h between shifts. So yeah you could load in those 11h if some crazy company would start to build charging stations and also enough parking spots. Or if you are lucky and unload at Amazon, then you can charge for 5h while waiting for a gate. Let’s pretend we can charge those batteries in 11h. What about the range? The website states 300 or 500 miles. Wtf they don’t even know their own specs? Let’s use 400miles ~ 640km. We usually calculate 60km/h to give clients a very safe time window, it’s more like 70-80km per h. That would mean the truck could barely make 1 shift. But sometimes you have 2 drivers on 1 truck. That wouldn’t be possible with a T semi. Also how long will those batteries survive when you charge them every day from, let’s be nice, 10% to 90%? A diesel only has to refuel every other day and can be used for at least a decade Now to my own thoughts and questions (which are not directed to you july Jaziel) Weight is a Faktor yes, but I also would like to know how much space they have. 80% of the loads we ship are way below the European weight limit. Do they have stupid 40ft dimensions or could you fit some EUR-Pallets in there? About the 0-60, that are about 12miles above the German speed limit for trucks… Yes they do 59 here but still it’s above the legal speed limit and I can’t really believe that 60mph in a truck are legal in USA. Also for those that think 0-60 sprint times matter, no they don’t, it’s about Nm. And acceleration doesn’t equals Nm or torque for the freedom unit user. You also have to keep stuff like air density, air temps, cw of the vehicle, weight distribution… in mind. You also have to add a few sec anyways since those 20s are most likely optimised conditions. And please name me 1 real Szenario where you have to go from 0-60 in a truck on public roads. Even during onramps you don’t go full pedal to the metal and lose 10miles of your range every second with a stupid sprint like that. And please compare the semi numbers with a proper truck, like the 5th gen Actros and not your 40 years old Peterbilt with a 16 gear Manuel gear box. Trust me the 650hp and 3000Nm are enough for the public roads and they don’t need 40s to get to 60. Will an Actros do the sprint in 20? Maybe not but does it really matter if he needs 25? A modern truck will still go up an 6 incline. Elon should first try to build more superchargers before he starts to tackle an industry he might not understand. At least that’s what it looks like. But then again even politicians don’t understand the transport sector…
One huge thing you didn’t include is that states that in the European Union, electric semi trucks are allowed to be 2 tonnes (4,400 lbs) heavier than diesel equivalents, while in the US the allowance is 0.9 tonnes (2,000 lbs). So if the Tesla semi is over 1 ton heavier then a diesel truck, it can’t even hit the roads. When the Tesla semi’s hit the roads, it has to be the equivalent of a diesel truck (in load capacity).
Note that load capacity is not everything through. You are often limited by volume beforehand. I guess the price (in terms of invest, upkeep and energy costs) will be the key factor. Even if it could load 5t less, if its 30% cheaper than diesel it will get quite a part of the market. Let's calculate the battery wight for real through. In the EU, you are allowed to drive 4:30h, then you need to do a 45min mandatory break. Given the speed limit of 80km/h (so ~85-90 real) this results in 400km of required range between stops. Now you want to charge 10%==>80% because that's faster (and you have some reserve). So your target range is 400km*0,7=570km. That is the range a truck needs to have if you don't want slowdown. And therefore the requirement for most trucking companies. So you are going to need a ~750kWh battery. And you need to recharge ~750kW constantly to be done in the 45 min. That's feasible from battery POV, charging 1kW/kWh (also called 1C). Assuming 200Wh/kg, we land at 3750kg of batteries. Maybe if you want some more buffer a little heavier. Pulling equal with Diesel is going to be hard, but its not that much over as the video suggests
3:56 Electric vehicles do not have internal combustion engines, so the 16 ton figure doesn't make sense. Additionally, the Tesla semi has clearly less range than ICE semis (it is expected to require a recharge halfway through the workday) so the battery weight figure also doesn't make sense. In addition: the Tesla semi is expected to be used in more niche contexts until the technology improves. These niche contexts include areas such as dockyards where the truck is involved in short trips with frequent loading/unloading "idling" periods.
It's also going to be used for delivering supermarket or food. Less dense cargo like these are volume constrained, making the lower weight capacity a non-issue.
@@spidermain As someone who works in specifically in grocery logistics you really underestimate how heavy groceries are. Just a carton of ketchup is difficult to lift up by a human, chocolate cartons are 50-60lbs each and not even that big. Not even going to try with the canned food. Unless you mean loading a truck with just crisps like use in a fritolay factory, it would still makes a product like this redundant for such a niche use case. If it's loading regular groceries then it would still end up getting round about the same laden weight as average cargo.
@@spidermain only for things like bread or mail.. things that Cube out and weight doesn't mean much ... But general grocery trucks do not cube out they weigh out
Also missing an important key question. You only need a few minutes to load hundreds of liters of diesel fue in a semi truck. ¿How does supercharge work for a truck with a gazillion of KWh battery?
Idk abour regulations in America, but here in Europe if you drive a Semi you have to take regular breaks. Since the charging speed mostly depends on the battery size with a bigger battery you can charge faster too, thus you would probably charge it just as fast from 10-80% as you do with a any other EV, likel 20-25 minutes. In Germany you for example have to take a 45 minute break after 4 1/2 hours of driving. It's unlikely that you will actually drive 300 miles in 4 1/2 hours in a semi.
@@LunnarisLP I don't know about how they do it in US or EU. But here in South East Asia, we put 2 drivers on each truck so they can swap seats when they need to take a break and the truck will still moving on the road.
@@keihazuki22 I somewhat doubt that Tesla is targeting south east asia as their market for the Tesla Semi, while they most certainly are targeting European countries who have strong targets to decarbonize their transportation sektor :D In the long run tesla will obviously try to get their semis to be allowed to drive fully autonomous anyway but thats a whole different story and will likely take at least another 4 years lol..
It won't be long, Tesla is rolling out semi truck specific charging stations that will be able to get the batteries juiced in similar time as one of their cars.
Ermm.. am I missing something? If we assume the efficiency stated is more or less correct (2 kWh/mi), which is believeable since Tesla's Model S uses around (0.25 to 0.3) kWh/mi, and we assume that the range is on the higher end of 500 miles then we can calculate a value for the required mass of the battery. Doing a bit of googling, it seems energy densities for current high-end lithium ion batteries are approximately 0.25 kWh/kg - with the very real prospect of that increasing in the future. Using the efficiency, the energy required to move the truck 500 miles is E = 2 kWh/mi X 500 mi = 1000 kWh. Using the expected energy density of Tesla's battery packs (today's tech), and including a realistic battery pack packing factor of 0.64, the mass of the battery, m = 1000 kWh / (0.25 kWh/kg * 0.64) = ~6250 kg. This is far lower than 17 t you estimated in your video (by a factor of ~x2.7..). I do see that you've commented a correction to this which is good, but even with the underlying estimates, the packing factor used is 0.47 which is way below current packs and Tesla's future structural pack design will strive to increase that factor close to 1, bringing the required pack mass down to ~4t. This, with the correction you made to the 16t mass of Tesla Semi without the pack, gives it plenty of load capacity for the use case of short to medium haulage. Remember, the cost per unit mile to actually run the Semi will be lower than that of a Diesel truck. This will aim to counteract any financial inefficiencies caused by a slightly reduced load capacity. But the SINGLE most important aspect of all this has been completely forgotten. The Tesla Semi is NOT competing against diesel trucks in the long run, it's competing against hydrogen fuel cell trucks with equally clean emissions (i.e. H2 sourced renewably) because we CANNOT continue to burn fossil fuels for ANYTHING. This should be reflected in a huge rise in the price of diesel if the world was just but this rise is unavoidable in the future anyway.
There are 10k comments on this video so I'm sure you aren't the first one to make this observation, but you're the first I've seen. That stat shouted at me for the whole video, and it completely undermines his argument -- especially paired with the other criticisms.
Omg you are so right, he even said: ‚1L of fuel is equal to 20kg of battery and this shows how unefficient the ENGINE is‘. like wtf it’s the efficiency of the batterie 😂 (sry for bad English)
@@Narcan885 they have continually been a driving force in battery tech and electric cars that is not snake oil. If you wanted to call it snake oil a decade ago that might have been fair but it is beyond ridiculous to say so now.
ya just imagine drag racing that when you got a load of glassware in the back! its a start though. batteries need to come down in weight, price & not catch fire. then electric is more viable. also the old 7.5 tonner would be better to electrify as they are inner city delivery vehicles.
The problem is, we already at the practical limits of how many energy you can pack in single cell, a little bit more, and we are on the some of the explosives territory.
That was my first thought, too. In my opinion, the weight of the battery is also much too high. Daimler has just started series production of the eActros, which has a capacity of 420 kWh and a payload of around 500kg to 1000kg less than a comparable diesel truck.
@IKSDE XD he didn't calculate anything he basically did a thunderfoot or a engineering explained and just made up some basic working math that dosnt make logic sense oh yes 17ton battery
@@RandomGuyOnRUclips601 they aren't they pander to anything anti Elon for views despite before they were huge supporters because the needed the RUclips money
@@RandomGuyOnRUclips601 its stuff that says bad stuff about eletric but dosnt share any all of the bad areas of gas its sorta like tiktok it may seem true but it really isnt its biased info
Probably already said, but if not: another point is that the weight restrictions apply to the amount of weight per axles, so, adding more axles would up the load capacity.
@WarriorCrimson so for the Tesla truck to be useable in a country where there are no battery charges outside of a city with city's thousands of kilometers apart you'd need like 20 axels and pray there no bush fires because of the harsh terrain some of these trucks cross
"It's coming soon in 2020" I had to check the date of this video to make sure, damn hilarious. Glad I found this channel, it goes well with other channels like Not Just Bikes, CGP, Wendover Productions, Technology Connections and ofc Kurzgezal... that one. Subscribed!
I saw the title of the video and immediately thought Musk had designed some electrical device to aid chaps who can't quite "get it up"... Then I realised it was Semi as in "Semi Truck"... Damn...
3:26 what? This is not a constant and it improving a lot in recent years. This is completely misleading. Why do hate Elon so much. What's wrong with you?
He is actually right about that, it's just that diesel Semi trucks have over 2'000 miles of range which is why they carry so much fuel. So for 500 miles they only need 4 tons of batteries.
Some of your range calculation assumptions are hard for me to buy into on this video: -the assumption that the weight of "the rest of the truck that isn't fuel or load" is equal between ICE and electric -the 1-to-20 rule (and later 1-to-13 rule) is a hand-wavy way of calculating the weight of required energy to match diesel fuel. It would probably serve your purposes better to look into the energy density differences between diesel fuel and Tesla batteries for the sake of these calculations -the assumption that electric trucks need to have a range equal to the full-tank range of diesel trucks. Validating this assumption would require some market research that may have been too time-consuming for the video that you wanted to make. And you also delve into the price and risk that a customer has to consider for this truck, and I see some assumptions there as well that require a second look: -the assumption that automotive battery fires are as common as ICE automotive fires -the assumption that the initial cost of the vehicle is the biggest cost factor to a customer (instead of something like fuel costs or maintenance costs). Again this requires you to do market research Those were just some of the assumptions that I noticed in the video. I think if these assumptions were turned into calculations or hard numbers that customers care about, it would give better grounds upon which to make a strong conclusion at the end of the video. I am not sure which way the conclusion would go, but I see too many outlying variables for this to be a helpful video on which to base my own conclusion.
" I think if these assumptions were turned into calculations or hard numbers that customers care about, it would give better grounds upon which to make a strong conclusion at the end of the video." Ah, so just like Tesla should've done?
@@alreadyblack3341 It's very likely that they have internal calculations showing the cost effectiveness of their machine - it's not like Tesla is hemmorhaging money, regardless of what anyone says about their gaffes. Not to mention that this is a more proprietary/business oriented business endeavor as the average person is not going to be buying semi-trucks, so there's also a very strong likelihood that Tesla has preemptively asked companies that ship and haul things what their interest in a new vehicle like this may be. Or, as Matthew Hull suggested, they could've just done market research to see what the trucker industry was like in recent years, how far the trucks go, how much they spend on fuel and maintenance, etc. etc. Trucking is a fairly diverse practice, with a wide range of needs across different industries and product transportations so I'd be surprised if no companies were intrigued by these new electrically powered trucks at all, but it all depends on whatever Tesla has internally learned or assumed about things. Much more importantly than i think most people realize though is that this is very obviously a Tesla move towards making trucking an automated industry, since they'll now have their own proprietary electric semitrucks available when laws about self driving vehicles get more updated. And that *would* be an impressive change in the business, since they'll have trucks with no drivers that can be a pretty major paradigm shift.
@@alreadyblack3341 Well actually having the numbers would mean the conclusions would be much more valid - as stated, Adam Something actually posted a comment about how his assumption of diesel to battery tonnages is potentially half of what he used for the video (a rather large margin of error in this case I'd say). This video is a bald faced shot in the dark about what may or may not be true about the Tesla semitruck and also preemptively assumes that any lack of information about it must definitively be some kind of malice, when the reality of these projects is that major changes to designs can be made late into the project quite commonly. I won't say that this video is entirely useless, but it's total speculation and poses as some kind of analysis and exposure video, which is patently irresponsible to say about a truck which we know so little about. It'd be different if the video used very accurate assumption methodology, but the man himself told us the range of precision for the crux of the argument, that being the battery weight, spans more than double the minimum value. The main value of the whole video is literally just one guy talking about how much he hates Elon Musk and Tesla without actually just stating that in plain English, since it's obviously not going to get us any closer to deducing what the result of this Tesla semitruck endeavor will be.
Yeah there's even a ton of assumptions on random business desires too. Like...there's actually plenty of companies that don't give two shits about total range, and are more concerned about cost per mile. Not every truck is doing cross-country long hauls. Likewise that means you don't have to put enough batteries in to match the range of a long-haul truck, and so all the stuff about the truck using up all the max weight and not being able to carry much load is all based on bullshit anyway.
I think you're missing something here, you didn't account for the fact that electric trucks won't need a lot of internal components to do with fuel management. You seem to have assumed that we have a conventional fuel truck, and add a lot of batteries on TOP of that. In reality, the electric truck would be lighter to begin with, since instead of a heavy engine/fuel systems/etc, it would just have an electric engine and some wires 🤔
That engine only weighs 1 ton. Combine that with the entirety of the conventional power train, and you *might* save up to 2 tons. Most of a rig's weight is in the rolling frame.
You are right. Assume that weighs 5t (or even 10t, which is ridiculously high), still Tesla Semi Truck can only do 8t (13t) compared to 19t for the already existing semi trucks.
@@AaronCMounts Yeah, that is because most American trucks seem to be constructed on very aged concepts. Most European manufacturers produce fully equipped trucks with a weight of under 9 tons, reaching as low as 6 tons.
@@kaffeetasse9455 European trucks typically use shorter frames, Cab-Over configs and have only small sleepers or no sleeper at all. Further, they're built for shorter range driving, thus have smaller fuel tanks. This accounts for the difference in weight. American trucks are about 12 - 13 tons. The 17 tons he calculated was the combined weight of the truck and trailer together.
Indeed. You take out the engine, transmission, associated components (mounting systems, ancillaries), fuel tanks, etc. Then put in electric motors and you save several tons.
Though I'm doubtful of the claim, he says these trucks are said to have "convoy mode" too, which is basically just trains with extra step... that take up a lane on the highway.
@@joeyfatonefrombackstreetboys Has literally nothing to do with my comment or his. He is referring to trucks in convoy mode being a train with extra steps. They are not. They serve different functions. Convoys also serve a specific function. It appears from the string of comments below that people seem to think correcting a definition means I am a fan of Elon's design.
I was always disappointed that we went down the battery powered vehicle rabbit hole. I always thought fuel cell hydrogen was the better alternative and someone just needed to engineer a solution to more cheaply extract hydrogen molecules.... I don't know how its energy profile compares to diesel though.
Right now I'd say hydrogen is the least developed and least capable technology out of diesel, petrol or electric. that is probably because diesel and petrol engines have had about a century of constant development and improvement and batteries have been in use in a lot of electronics with car batteries sometimes literally using the same cells found in laptops or flashlights. I'd say right now hydrogen is probably where petrol/diesel engines were in 1910 in terms of widespread availability and development and batteries are where combustion engines were in 1940. But I also believe if given the appropriate attention hydrogen has the potential to surpass all three of the other technologies by far.
Hydrogen is used in some German areas where it's too difficult to electrify diesel trains. Also, Daimler (Mercedes) is building some hydrogen powered truck prototypes
@@gkulaitis I didn't know about the trains, I do know however that several car manufacturers are working on hydrogen vehicles, that doesn't change the fact hydrogen still needs a lot of work/innovation before large scale use is likely
Hydrogen needed to be pushed in the 1970's. Now that we have halfway decent electric vehicles hydrogen power doesnt stand a chance of taking over. Its far too inefficient compared to BEV. Like 60% loss during its whole cycle from extraction/generation to compression then transport or storage, then expansion and finally combustion. Its far better than gas or diesel however.
@@klassensj2 efficiency is meaning less . It's cost.. total cost of ownership that matters most.. and hydrogen is around the range of 120,000 dollar a.t.moment
@@tomfriesecke4420 "You know how Teslas sometimes spontaneously combust" This is where he lost all credibility. This argument is so ridiculous as statistics show, that Teslas catch fire every 207million miles compared to ICE vehicles every 19million miles.
I think you miscalculated the weight of the vehicle. The vehicle doesnt have an engine and thus it doesnt weigh 16t but it may weigh 20-25t with the battery included
Why not? The fuel weighs X amount for a gas powered truck, the fuel weighs Y amounts for an electric powered truck. The weight of the fuel is compared in the video… and basic logic shows that its important when it comes to load capacity given there is a limit on how much these vehicles can carry (carry weight + the weight of the truck itself)
@@antibull4869 Because the weight of a diesel truck needs to include the massive engine block, transmission, power train, etc, all things an electric truck doesn't have. Then you're taking that weight, and adding on the weight of the battery to it!?.... Nonsense. Without the battery an electric truck is basically just a frame, probably weighing no more than like 6 tonnes. Imagine applying the same ridiculous logic in reverse: "A tesla truck weighs 20 tonnes (for example), but a tesla truck doesn't have an engine, so for a regular truck let's add on the engine and transmission weight look now it's 30 tonnes! See diesel trucks are impactical!" Ridiculous, of course you would first subtract the weight of the battery.
@@Twas-RightHere In both instances, he assumes (and says) that the engines are included in the base 16 ton truck weight...which is fine, sure. In the comparison, he then assumes the same "base" weight for the Tesla truck...which is fine enough, but it's wrong in that electric engines - even big semi truck ones - weigh significantly less: where a diesel semi engine would weight about 1.5ton, an equivalent power electric engine (or 4 in this case) would weight in at about 0.5ton (because such things aren't as weightless as you're assuming). So if the base weight for the diesel truck is 16 tons (which isn't far off if you also include the trailer), you can assume the base weight for the same-body truck using an electric engine to be 15 tons, which is about right if accounting for just the engines. There's further weight savings to be gained with the removal of shafts etc, but most of that gets added back in with the new axles and mechanicals. Add back the fuel and battery, and you get 17.5 tons for a diesel truck that goes about 1,800 miles in a fill-up, and our hypothetical equivalent electric truck-trailer combination would weight 32.1 tons to go the same distance on a single charge. All that to say that the math of his argument is pretty honest. Now in his Tesla-hate, he may have overlooked the fact that Tesla did helpfully announce back in 2018 the theoretical weight numbers that they hoped to achieve when designing these trucks...even if they are now suspiciously silent on the final result. By the numbers Tesla released, these trucks aren't designed to compete with long-haul trucks - they are much more like Volvo's VNR mid-range electric trucks - and so I'd probably ding him on comparing a 1 ton fuel-carrying sleeper cab long-haul truck to whatever Tesla's trying to do...if Tesla hadn't done that themselves, as highlighted on "Inside EVs." insideevs.com/news/336273/the-tesla-semi-weighs-in-part-3/ According to Tesla, they compared their 500-mile range truck plan to a 9.5tn diesel sleeper cab. Compared to that 9.5tn diesel truck (full of 200 gallons of fuel and an 1,800-mile range), their 500-mile range electric truck would weigh 11.9tn for a truck with less than one third the range as their comparison... and without Tesla's "lightweighting" plan included because I'm interested in comparing apples to apples and not apples to kumquats, since the trucking industry is also moving towards "lightweighting" and including that without also doing the math for the base diesel cab was ultimately pretty dishonest of Tesla, but what else is new. Compare that their 300-mile range smaller truck would be about 9.8tn. Pretty close to the diesel truck, but keep in mind it has one sixth (17% of) the range...which is fine, because it's still a fine enough 40tn GVW truck that's not meant as a competitor for long-haul trucking, and this is why I've supported hydrogen vehicles for the last 12 years. Anyway, that was a fun and pointless bit of research.
@@lylestavast7652 I don't think that's gonna be that easy, there roads that have weight capacity because they can't hold the pressure of a 45 tons truck, just because, Tesla needs to be allow to sell trucks. They for sure are gonna limit they load amount and less load is less money, I don't think people are gonna love that.
@Jonny It's not, 17 tons of batteries is for 2'000 miles of range, which is what a diesel Semi does on a full tank. Tesla has only promised 500 miles so 3.2 tons of cells or 5 tons for the whole pack.
It goes way beyond that. He not only included the weight of the ICE components, but the frame as well. Electric trucks are built on an entirely different frame optimized for the drivetrain. He also neglects aerodynamic improvements due to the different design (since the engine isn't in the front taking up a bunch of space. Once you subtract all the ICE components and add in the battery/motors, its probably only a couple thousand pounds heavier than a diesel. I also see people slamming on them mentioning the 0-60 time as if trucks never merge onto freeways going uphill or just go up hills in general.
@@berto1014 Still useless for long-haul trucking. But, only 2 innovations away from dominating long-haul trucking. 1. Self-driving remote-operated trucks. The biggest bottleneck is not fuel, it's drivers. Take out the driver, let it be self-driving with a remote operator, boom. 2. Quick-swappable batteries or fleet caravans. If you can swap the battery out suddenly the limited range is meaningless. Or, if a semi truck can merge with a caravan of other battery-powered semis to increase its range (road train) suddenly the comparison is completely different.
A promised battery capacity jump ? Like his last battery "capacity" jump where in something like 4 years he managed to nearly DOUBLE the battery "capacity"... by DOUBLING the SIZE of the battery. Such brilliance... the man is a genius...
You're allowed to drive 4 hours, then a mandatory 30 minute break, then another 4 hours. So, assuming an adequate charger at every truck stop, only requires 250 miles of range, since trucks generally don't exceed 60 MPH. An average diesel car uses 5L/60 miles, average loaded truck needs 30L/60 miles. Using the same ratio on a Tesla Model 3, which needs some 12 kWh/60 miles, we get just over 70 kWh/60 miles. That means, the Semi only needs a 300 kWh battery. At current energy density of Tesla cells, that's 300 kWh : 0.25Wh/kg = 1200 kg! That's about as much as a diesel truck's engine weighs. The math checks out - Semi can absolutely be viable. Assuming there's a bunch of 600 kW chargers at every truck stop... Otherwise we need 600 kWh of batteries, that's 2.5 tonnes, to do the whole day. Since we now have 16 hours of break, we only need chargers with 40 kW - that can even be supplied by 3-phase AC stalls, or the very cheapest DC stations. The only situation where that's insufficient is tandem driving - in Europe it's rare, but I know it's common in the US, so in these cases we'll need something more. Either double the battery - but now we're running into weight constraints - or build Megawatt charging stations - but that's expensive. Tandem driving needs something more to work, it's not the time yet. However, the Tesla Semi is absolutely viable in all single driver scenarios. There's no reason not to switch to electric - and even better, it's perfectly reasonable cost-wise. Let's assume a 700 kWh battery, so a full day's charge, plus a bit of surplus for winter heating. At the current battery production cost of 142$, that Tesla currently achieves, the cost of such a battery pack is 700 * 142, or almost exactly 100.000$. A Mack truck sells for 150.00$. About 50.000$ of that is the diesel powertrain, so the truck body is about 100.000$. So, a Tesla Semi would probably be marketed at around 200.000$, maybe a bit more. That's 50.000$ more than a Mack. Now, 70 kWh of electricity needed for 60 miles costs as little as 7$ on night tariff. 30L of diesel needed for that is 30$ (a bit more in the EU, a bit less in the US). Assuming the truck always drives the full allowed distance, that's almost 200$ saved every single day! If it works every weekday, no weekends, that's 250 days a year, it'll recoup the extra costs after just one year of operation. This thing will sell like hotcakes!
Agree, finally someone who truly used his brain, first red flag was when he started adding the weight of the batteries to the weight of a diesel truck. Anyway good job
Thanks for this. While it's good to take the Musk hype with a grain of salt, don't make a video calling his ideas shit based on some assumptions instead of actual numbers.
none of these are going over the road >> frito/walmart/ups/amazon will glug glug glug these up and charge at their warehouses on private commercial power chargers. stupid truckers or broke fleets arent getting these for a decade
Hours of service in the states are capped. US drivers can drive up to 11 hours unless they have been on duty for 14, at least when I was driving before my disability. Stopping every 4 hours for a charge top off is not productive with current industry standards if on a long haul. It's a matter of pull the door closed and don't stop too often to get the road miles in the hours of service limits.
It is so funny to me how some people are ignoring that for this to be viable, you need to store massive amounts of energy in something very small. In other words, an easily accessible bomb.
Semi trucks can go about 2,100 miles on a 300 gallons (roughly 800kg) of diesel fuel. 800kg x 20 = 16t ("1-to-20 rule") but the Tesla Semi has 300-500 miles of range so in the worst case scenario the battery can't weight more then 4 t. Tractors weight at most 11t, not 16t. The engine alone is at least 1t (which tesla doesn't have) There is no way the Tesla tractor weighs more then 10t. 36-(4+10)=22t of cargo assuming the absolute worst scenario. Adam Something claimed 3t of cargo. That is a faulty computation by an order of magnitude. Nice way to spin the numbers when you have the agenda.
@@RandomGuyOnRUclips601 Look at the examples of electric trucks (that you can buy NOW) from Volvo, MAN, Scania, DAF etc. Many have ranges as low as 200 miles, which is in fact fine for a lot of urban trucking, logistics like warehouse to sales outlet traffic etc. Longer distances will need hydrogen fuel cells.
@@archangel4597 In a communist version of 'utopia' maybe. We remember how that finally worked out for the USSR! I'm happy with the German version of 'workplace democracy' with 'workers' on the board etc.
You have a mistake in your calculations there. The vehicle weight for a electric vehicle without the battery's is not nearly the same as a vehicle with a massive diesel engine. The electric motors and inverters is A LOT lighter.
This is the obvious, blatant overlooking that makes me think oil companies sponsor these sorts of videos. Though that might be a little too much of a conspiracy theory.
The whole video is bull... Too much made-up numbers, while we still don't know anything that would help us say if it's good or not. I believe these trucks will be good for next to nothing, but the stats here are just empty hate-numbers...
Uhm.. A Mercedes Actros' engine (OM 471) weighs 1150 kg. Even asuming that the four electric motors and inverters are a lot lighter (taking Tesla Model S motor & inverter weight of 140 kg as a reference and multiplying it by 4 required for Tesla Semi, which is well underestimating the weight for similar components to drive a truck) you would just save ~500 kg. Next proposal?
@@PressurenFlames One way or the other gas powered vehicles are out of the way so it has to be renewable energy, the technology is still new, it's amazing how quickly many people want to dismiss it without realizing how important it is just because it cannot replace gas entirely right away, it's just getting started.
An electric cars weight is mostly the batteries themselves. So calculating the weight of a regular truck and adding the weight of the batteries is unfair. The batteries are part of the powertrain and should be considered in the 16 tons weight of the truck itself. Electric anything means no transmission, no drive shaft, smaller motors, no starter motor, no need for massive bushings underneath a massive motor reducing engine vibration , etc etc that reduce the weight. To think that an electric semi would weigh 16 tons (truck) + 17 tons (batteries) is wrong in my opinion. Not a Tesla fanboy. But an advocate of electric transport.
Recognize that the battery comes out to be heavier than the whole diesel truck, still. 17 > 16, even if we're using 17 and not 33. Then toss on a nice even 3 tons for all the ancillary stuff (a chassis, windows, steering wheel, the stuff that isn't batteries that an electric truck will need to have to be a truck) which would put it at 20 tons. This is not such a severe handicap, but it is still less capacity than current diesel trucks- ~16t electric truck capacity versus ~20t diesel truck capacity.
@@pabrodi also remember that the 4680 batteries are higher capacity because they atr bigger and heavier (x5) not due to increased density. In fact the larger cylinder should lead to greater space between each cell. Therefore the same capacity battery would likely be larger not smaller. Though this won't cause the battery itself to be heavier it will mean the battery compartment would be larger and heavier
@Armathyx G that’s not entirely accurate. Compare the weight of Model 3 to a 3 series or a Model S to an S class. They’re not that different in terms of weight.
From a quick Google search I found that a conventional truck has a range of around 2500km, so with the range of 300-500mi, thats around 3-5 times that of a Tesla Semi. Decreasing the weight of the battery by these factors would result in 15-17t of load capacity. But that is under the assumptions that the 1 to 20 is for the same range. Also no logistics company would want to stop more frequently and longer to refuel. Sidenote: Pretty sure I saw a video by Wendover about electric airplanes, so they are a thing even without the hypothetical efficiency boost of batteries by Tesla
That might work pretty well in Europe though, the drivers are strictly limited by law to a maximum of 4.5 hours of continuous driving before they have to take a 45 minute break. With a speed limit of ~50mph for semis that comes out to under 250 miles between stops anyways, and 45 minutes should be enough to top up the batteries enough for the next 4.5h leg. Then after that you're officially finished for the day, so you can charge the batteries to full until the next morning.
Is the 300-500 range based on pulling a full load? Musk never indicates if it is. The heavier the weight, the quicker the drain on the batteries meaning possibly less range than Musk is indicating.
The costs for a bigger fuel tank are really low. So they have higher ranges for a more flexible use of the Truck. The need of every Truck is not to reach a range of 2500 km you only need a big enough market for ranges up to 800 km. When you refuel Diesel in a truck you have to pay a driver to do that while he is staring in the air. You can simultaneously unload/load your payload and recharge some range. If you want exactliy the same use than use a Diesel-truck but if you want to learn how to to be better than you have to learn how to use it for a better result. Thats a Problem with people who think that status quo is a static god-given status. But why other Truck-makers are developing electric trucks and only the Tesla-Version should be rubbish? He ended at the half of thinking about the technology.
I like the math done in this video and I want to say that I do enjoy your content. I feel you missed the mark a bit on this one though. Prerequisite, I am an automotive technician who had grown up around and is very familiar with trucking and semis. A logistics company factors in load capacity into its equation but it is not the most important number. What they care about most is getting "X" from A to B as fast and as cheap as possible. Cheap is the name of the game here because Diesel is downright expensive. Now, a normal rig can get close to 6 miles per gallon of fuel, hence the reason they need such a massive fuel capacity. The Tesla semi is FAR more aerodynamic than pretty much any modern rig can get close to (as the Tesla doesn't need a gigantic radiator along with many other things) because of this it can take advantage of its efficiency and have far less running costs. I will not bother to do the math for those as I am not an engineer or a battery chemist. What I can confidently comment on is Maintenance. And between electric vehicles and ICE. It's no contest. An ICE Semi needs regular oil changes, glow plugs, transmission repairs, so many DEX system repairs. The maintenance for a semi can top tens of thousands of dollars per year on the regular. Tesla Semi? It needs brakes. And only around a fifth of the time that and ICE semi needs them. Once the battery technology reaches production cost parity, Tesla will simply be a leader in a whole new fleet of electric Semis. Several other companies are already working on it. That's just the adoption of better technology.
Yeah... His lack of A to B maths in this video is a kinda huge omission... Here's a bit FYI: Assuming the advertised 600kWh/300mile & 1000kWh/500mile models - 100% Charging them at the new Megacharger theyre testing (assuming 1MW charge rate) would take 36min / 1hour respecively and cost $86 / $144 at the USA average electicity price of #0.144/kWh. Thats less than $0.30 per mile which i'm told is about half what diesel is currently. As for brake servicing - I guarantee you'll be changing MANY less of them on EV trucks due to companies mandating the maximum use of regen braking to recover all that stored kinetic energy and hence $$. This alone will save a boatload of cash operating in urban stop start environments where EV busses are currently smashing the competition! Also this truck isn't meant to replace long haul just yet so it doesn't need a battery as big as talked about in this video - my maths puts the weight of the 1000kWh batterypack at around 5T (3.3T just for the cells, 1.7T for the package). I've no idea what a truck engine/gearbox weighs but since the EV drivetrain will be much lighter I'd be willing to bet the weight penalty won't be anywhere near as severe as is discussed in this video.. Then there's the fact that these will definitely come with FSD by default for their 'convoy' mode.
And I'm pretty sure the truck will be far lighter because the lack of that massive engine as well. I mean sure, the battery may weigh a lot but it can't be fair to add the weight of a battery to the weight of an ICE truck and guess that's how much the electric truck will weigh right?
He is right, it's about 20 kg of batteries per kg of diesel, but 800 kg of diesel is 1'500 miles of range and some class 8 trucks can reach 2'000 miles of range loaded. Tesla has only promised 500 miles of range, so 4 tons of batteries.
@@johntheux9238 ok. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the point of the video. Is the main criticism of the tesla semi is that it only goes 500miles on single charge compared to 1500 miles as you mention? Otherwise they have explicitly stated that all specs are legitimate and load capacity is inline with other diesel trucks. I agree that range is VERY important, but as a trucking product that trades less range for better speeds/acceleration (time is money - albeit slower but passive charging), better braking, better safety, no pollutants, less fuel costs, less maintenance costs, it would seem there is quite a market for that, especially since they already have customers. I guess what I'm not understanding is the measure which makes this product a 'failure'. Is it simply due to less range, or would it be more accurately a failure if it doesn't sell?
@@_wat2do No, the guy in the video is an idiot who forgot to check out what's the range of a regular Semi truck. And 500 miles of range is enough since the Tesla Semi can be charged at the factory and not at a gas station.
@@_wat2do The Tesla Semi is definitively going to be an insanely good product just from gas savings. Just like every car that Tesla makes that can be charged at home every night.
How? What will the chassis or trailer and body be made out of? I'm genuinely curious. Vibranium and carbon fibre, maybe? Had to throw that in there😄 Edit: He said his numbers were wrong. Correct. A lot of the weight diesel/gas powered engines comes from the engine and the heavy mounts and transmissions in the vehicle's system. I do think that EVs don't have much over these vehicles, as Adam has mentioned already. I'm not beating that drum again Where does the weight in EVs add up? -Cooling systems, the batteries themselves(not too huge), the traiker they'd use to carry those supplies must be reinforced well to take Load after load as to not damage the batteries. His numbers are wrong, he says so..but i do think it presents a lot of unnecessary challenges in increasing capacity compared to normal trucks. But hey. It may be a good start in the direction of innovation. But I assume most trucks nowaday travel from far off places, to their final destinations to offload where they are intended to be and offloading just to put it onto another truck to offload somewhere more urban is not that time effective. Unless it's a pick up situation as is a Tesla truck drives to pick up supplies for a small town for a few weeks and does it every few weeks. Picking supplies from a town not to far off.. In that case I'd think they'd need to invest in a supply train or a tram, to get supplies or get groceries themselves
@@potatopotatoeOG I don't think you realize how heavy 33 tons is. So much mass in so little volume is ludicrous. Also you can find the weight of the semi on Google and "experts" believe it to be around 16 tons or less. I also advise you to read what Adam Something wrote in the comment section after he realized he was getting hate for assuming the weight of a truck without doing ANY actual research.
@@maxmai7972 Its not the first time Elon made something Work that seemed to be undoable. He made partly reusable rockets. So i dont think that he cant get a semi truck to weight less than 33 tons.
@@slamoto2 Wrong. Reusable rockets never seemed undoable, the soviets and nasa were experimenting with them in the '80s, decades before Musk. In the '90s there were experiments that proved reusable rockets are doable, prior to Musk. The problem with reusable rockets is not that they are impossible, it is that they are much more costly than non reusable rockets. Also, that electric truck is not here and last, your god Musk can't violate the laws of physics and chemistry.
@@durshurrikun150 proving that reusable rockets are doable and actually doing it is something else tho. But since i wrote it like its ok. Just wanted to say that he actually did it instead of just thinking about it. "The problem with reusable rockets is not that they are impossible, it is that they are much more costly than non reusable rockets." lmao sure. Maybe if you just think about the first rocket. But dont tell me that you actually belive that reusing a part of the rocket is much more expensive than building a completely new one. Ill rather buy a new pair of dishes after every meal instead of reusing it.
as an Elon fan watching your videos has made me less impressed with his projects because I never put the math into consideration, the only project I have faith in is starship going to mars and I won't be surprised if you make a logical video about how it won't be possible.
Yea this is barely researched and he sets off trying to find ways to discredit the project so he chooses his data to make his point more convincing. Yea innovation always has hurdles and anyone can point out it’s flaws that’s the easy part. The ironic thing is people like him used to discredit planes and trains in the same way saying it’ll never work based on simple calculations. I’m not a musk fan but still, shitting on new technology like this gets us nowhere, except views for himself 🤔
This video shouldn't be the reason for that. Real Enginnering (some actual engineers) did the same comparisons and calculations (but better) he did, and ended in a way more optimistic note. This video is just wack compared to the answers and the resources they provide. ruclips.net/video/oJ8Cf0vWmxE/видео.html
@@JT-zl8yp It says standard load on the website. 2kWh/mile*500miles/(240Wh/kg for a 2170 battery)=~4100kg or 4.1 ton battery. 1 ton ev allowance+standard ev weight reductions (no fuel pump, fuel tank etc.) means little to no payload penalty. They say it's actually 1.7kWh/mile which is even better so this is pessimistic.
@@timc7035 Then why not just mention the load capacity like any other company instead of the customer having to do multiple assumptions and calculations
EDIT: December 2022 update
We still don' t know shit about the Tesla semi despite the first one having already been delivered to Pepsi. No information whatsoever.
Hey folks,
You've brought up some good points in the comments, mostly regarding the Tesla Semi's range and weight, to which I'd like to respond.
*1) The Tesla Semi will be much lighter than a regular truck since it's electric.*
I chose the 16 ton figure arbitrarily, but that seems to be very much the upper limit as far as I can see. I've seen figures for regular trucks (that's truck and trailer) like 8 tons or less, depending on the type. Keep in mind that this varies very heavily (no pun intended).
As far as the Tesla Semi's weight, we don't know. Tesla won't publish it, which should be cause for alarm. Real Engineering guessed it at 7 tons without batteries, which, he says, is the same as a regular truck without an engine. An average truck combustion engine should be around 1.5 tons, add a ton of fuel for good measure, and in this case you have a regular truck that's 9.5 tons. Bookmark this for later.
*2) The battery range is a quarter that of a regular semi, so the batteries don't need to be that big.*
This is correct. The point I was trying to make in the video was how bad current batteries are if we want outcomes that are similar to regular trucks.
I've used Real Engineering's Battery Calculator to check: battery.real.engineering/ At a 500-mile range (804 km) and maxed-out weight, the battery clocks in at around 8 tons. Meaning that using Real Engineering's estimates, we'd have a 15-ton Tesla Semi versus a 9.5-ton regular semi. 5.5 tons less capacity, and a fourth of the range.
Also, keep in mind that the Tesla website doesn't tell us whether the range is when empty, or when fully loaded. Also, I doubt they factored in things such as ambient temperature or surface gradient. All this means that you'd most likely need a bigger battery.
Our numbers will fluctuate heavily, since the trucking industry is very diverse with lots of different weights, capacities, etc. In order for us to get a more accurate estimate, we'd need Tesla to actually publish their numbers, which they refuse to do. You'd think if the numbers were great, they'd be plastered all over the Semi website, but they aren't. Makes you think.
So what you're saying is that you don't really know the exact numbers either and are simply assuming the worst. "Makes you think" is the same kind of argument conspiracy nuts come up with if they can't come to a conclusive answer.
The first generation of Tesla Semi will of course not be the be-all and end-all solution to trucking. It will not be a replacement for all diesel trucks. I am however very certain that there will be many applications where it will excel and many trucking companies will flock to it due to the significantly lower total costs of operation that cheap electricity and low maintenance will bring.
Of course, either of us can be very wrong, but I suggest we contain the urge to point and laugh until the Tesla Semi actually hits the road and either flops or turns out to be a success.
Czechia being a screwed up failure and what do you do? Criticize other more successful ventures for not being perfect. Come to America, you'll fit in with the asinine -Trump- zombies.
@@cowboybob7093 SImilar to the Musk Zombies that think he is the smartest person on the planet. Instead of conforming to what the Trucking industries needs, Musk is trying to tell the Trucking industry you really need this.
The weigh guesses are not very well thought out. Does a Tesla Model 3 weigh the same as a comparable car minus an engine ~150kg plus a 480kg battery pack? No it weighs between 0-150kg more than a compact exec car of comparable performance. For a class 8 semi we lose, the engine, the transmission, the differentials/axles, the fuel tank and fuel system, 3/4 of the cooling system, the exhaust system. ~4500kg. Now from what Elon has said the battery is 700-800kwh, the 500 mile range is achievable in that calculator if you move rolling friction down to 0.0045 which is feasible with the most efficient tyres (which it will have). The next issue with the calculator default settings is that the packing factor is set at a crazy value. To achieve the same energy density as a Model 3 battery it needs to be set to 0.68 (if keeping batteries at 250wh/kg) which now results in a battery weighing ~4600kg. Which is the same as the amount of kit we removed.... Obviously we have to add the electric motors back in but as they are just 4 X Model 3 motors that will be around 500kg. But wait there's more, firstly battery specific energy will be going up by 50% in the next 5 years, secondly the battery is structural which means we can reduce the rest of the vehicle by ~7% finally we are assuming that a regular semi is perfectly optimised for weight I doubt it is! - At the last earnings call Elon Musk was on record as stating that the Tesla Semi will weigh no more than an equivalent class 8 semi, I see no reason to doubt that statement.
Your second point assumes that the goal is to provide the same range as a diesel, but that's not really necessary. Truckers can't drive 1500 miles at a time due to numerous labor laws and sleep requirements and even 500 miles is closer to the upper limit of a duty cycle and certainly well within the range of a mandatory break where a driver could charge while having lunch or whatever.
I have a wild idea: how about we place like a mega truck on a rail, with many cars for it to pull :o
Does it come with rgb lights?
You mean like a boat only with wings and a rocket engine? Sounds like a grand idea. I'll pitch in to fund it.
Something close to that doesn’t exist and won’t ever called Hyperloop.
Rail truck system!
FBI: Stay right there!
The very first point in the semi's specs is the 0-60 acceleration. Which is invaluable info for all the approximately zero trucking/drag racing hybrid companies.
actually there is truck drag racing, they preferred diesel or jet engine, also there is british truck racing, still electric truck would be heavier and wouldn't help the brakes and cornering at all
Honestly... I've never understood the obsession with 0-60 times. There is a reason the Toyota Corolla is the most famous car in the world, people just want a comfortable car to travel from A-B
Getting up to highway speeds in minutes can pose a safety hazard.
More interesting to the semi-buying community:
- Speed up a grade.
- Safety down a grade.
- Downtime (maintainence).
- Total cost of operation.
On all four of these metrics, the BEV semis are way ahead. As a bonus, they are simpler to drive and impossible (more or less) to jackknife.
@@jerrylove865 Uh? How do you get they are impossible to jackknife? Are you saying that because the drive axles are on the trailer that the truck will magically never jackknife? _Someone_ doesn't understand physics, lol. In fact, I would surmise a guess that these trucks are _more_ likely to jackknife when I think about it (the trailer will be pushing the cab forward, which is very bad when the whole vehicle is segmented). And also, since the drive axles are on the trailer, how the frick does dropping trailers work with these things? The whole point of a semi is that you can take the cab, grab a trailer, take it somewhere, drop the trailer off, grab another trailer and take it somewhere, etc. That simply won't be possible with one of these things because, I don't know, _the cab has no drive axles._ Also, rear-wheel drive cars are infamously terrible with traction in inclement weather (which also wreaks havoc on the effectiveness of EVs already when it comes to cold temperatures). Why on God's Green Earth would you want the drive axles to be at the back of the trailer? What you've basically done is made an even more terrible RWD vehicle. RWD is only good on the racetrack.
EDIT: At least I think that's saying they put it on the trailer? Not sure. It says "Rear Axles" so I assume that's what that meant.
@@Dhalin I cant recall which group did it but there is a video out there that they took a Tesla Model X and ran some tests with driving without pulling a load and with pulling a load to see how pulling a load effected the range. From their tests the range dropped dramatically under heavy load and they summarized that if both the truck and the trailer had batteries and motors, that might solve some of the performance issues a BEV might have when pulling heavy loads.
If Elon can increase the battery density by 50%, he might as well close down Tesla and open a battery company because that'll literally revolutionize the industry... Battery tech has been the limiting factor for not just EVs, but IoT, phones, laptops, etc. for a long time already.
At this point I'm suspecting that the things preventing us from having batteries with extremely high energy densities are the laws of physics themselves, i.e. natural thermodynamic limits on how much energy you can realistically (and SAFELY) get out of a reversible chemical reaction, regardless of the chemistry.
@@electric7487 Indeed that is EXACTLY the case. There are a few parameters you can fiddle with but Lithium-ion only has limited scope for improvement.
@@geroutathatI'm 90% this is a thing. The only problem is metal-air batteries aren't rechargeable
@@electric7487Michio Kaku said in one of his books (spanish speaker here, don't know the title, but should be something like "the physics of the future") that batteries have an intrinsic limit because they only work on the surface of the electrodes, and you need to remove the first layer to get to the second one, all the while, you need some form of the first layer to stay close to be able to recharge it.
He'll increase battery density right at the same time someone makes a fusion reactor that puts out more than it pulls.
New idea: we have one truck pulling multiple trailers. It can pull them along special steel rails to dramatically reduce rolling resistance and improve efficiency!!
"Dang, what's the 0-60?"
Said no trucking company _ever_
Well, asking why might be an appropriate question.
If your 0-60 is 15sec vs 20sec. Who cares both very slow, and rightly so, getting through a million gears takes time. Perhaps an actions per drive might be a good metric to compare.
Now if its fast enough that you can drive it like a car when not loaded, that makes a difference. If it has enough torque when loaded, it removes the feeling of weight and accelerating upto to useful speeds in a timely manner without gear changes also allows smooth constant acceleration which makes the payload more happy even though your getting upto speed far quicker.
@@Scholzey you're forgetting modern trucks have available smooth automatic gearboxes.
We haul 160,000 lbs. Power is a huge concern for our trucking fleet. We specifically buy ultra light weight trucks with the highest spec output.
Power makes a big difference.
Actually, they do. Horsepower matters for going uphill.
Most companies would considered letting go a driver who races a semi lol. Wasting fuel and being reckless.
You could reduce battery size by installing a diesel generator to charge the battery on the run.
Ironically, this is how hybrids actually work. The idea being that running a diesel generator to electric motors is more efficient than using a diesel motor.
@@mbdillon That's how diesel trains work. They're electric trains powered by diesel generators.
What Tesla actually did to reduce battery weight is have 12-25% the range of comparable trucks and greatly reduce drag. The result is a totally reasonable 1-2 t battery.
A train sort of powertrain would unironically be pretty good. And if it had electric only capability for short distances then that could cut down on emissions signficantly too.
@@__-fm5qv The problem isn't alternative "hybrid" solutions, there's a reason why it's typically one or the other. That reason is weight for transport, in our cars we can throw both in and call it a day but due to the nature of trucks you have to choose, reduced battery range for fuel and engine (plus all the extra stuff needed). So lets be lazy and assume you'd have to remove 50% of the battery for everything a diesel engine and fuel needs to increase the range to 500 miles and ease of refueling anywhere. This gives at least the Volvo VNR (only one displaying weight of truck) 130 Miles before the backup needs to kick in. At which point you'd be better off at owning a diesel only truck with it's reduced weight, UNLESS you drive inside a heavily urbanized situation where there are tons of red lights and assholes where acceleration truly matters...
FYI the Volvo VNC EV weights about 24,500LB about 8,500 more than the normal VNC, however what a lot of outlets including Adam have failed to include is the governments allowance of 2,000 pounds extra for EVs, this means it can haul 6500 less. Or to put it in simple terms a 52 ft trailer can hold 26 "standard" skids so each skid can still hold 1635 pounds of goods vs the 1885 for diesel. Note: numbers based on Motor 1 numbers which include 15,000 trailer. No idea how accurate the trailer number is, or if the 16,000 diesel includes full fuel or not. Also these numbers are meaningless unless the government actively checks trucks weight everywhere every time, just saying.
"the quickest acceleration-from 0-60 in 20 seconds" last time i checked a truck is supossed to transfer enourmous weigths from point A to point B not drag race..
It's better for the average person driving behind the semi. It's not a convenience solely for them, but to streamline traffic
You fail to realize that greater acceleration means greater torque, so by this logic a semi-truck will easily be able to outperform a diesel semi transferring cargo from one place over another.
Edit: I meant a tesla semi-truck not just a semi-truck
@@kappakgames580 Not the best unit to represent torque. Truckers ain't stupid and they know what torque number means, and they can handily compare it to the torque of available diesel trucks.
@@kappakgames580 Not really. Even if they're in downtown stop and go traffic it isn't going to help them get anywhere any faster. If you're talking about going up hills... semi's already do that.
@@paulaldo9413 Electric motors are the reason why Teslas accelerate really fast, but it also does create more torque than an internal combustion engine because they are far more efficient.
This aged well.
There weren't any deliveries. Tesla is keeping all the Semis.
That's not true, Tesla delivered 100 trucks to Pepsi on the 1st of December
This is deceiving, they delivered to Pepsi, a fleet.
@@TruckerReviewed that is false. Pepsi is expecting delivery of the 100 they ordered next year. They only have 36 deployed
@@chrishansen6626 I'm wrong on the number delivered, I accept my mistake.
@@MateoJFR EW ANOTHER ELON FANS EH? WAKE UP YOU DMBFCK.
"You may think this looks like a subway, but it's actually a highway underground."
So like, a sub highway, or subway?
Where are the sandwiches??!
You could call it a subterranian highway!
Subway? PLEBS. This is a "hypogean thoroughfare"!
A "sub-high-way". Cancel out the sub and high to get a "way".
Lowway
you know things are bunk when you use a statistic no-one in the industry gives a shit about.... literally no one in trucking - how fast does it go 0-60
you forget he left one of the most important items in his sales pitch, load capacity.
Lol good point, it might be dangerous for the cargo in fact ;D
When you present your new Semi to the crowd of fanboys and tech nerds - not truckers. That's why they used 0-60 because those people care about this.
Honestly trucking companies might care more about 60-0 for safety reasons...
Very much so. If you accelerate fast in a truck, you may leave the load on the pavement ! It works in Elon's fantasy world only.
When you think about it its really ironic that the biggest enemy of an electric car company are the batteries themselves
Ikr, when a BEV got crashed they just abandoned it. why not re use that battery to idk, maybe to store energy from a solar panel or to make another BEV (ofc if the battery isnt damaged)
It's the same with hydrogen-fueled vehicles.
@@ohongho if the battery isn't damaged that's what happens. That shits worth 10k
@@MichaelWerneburg hydrogen can at least be put out with water
@@randombrit13 Hydrogen combusts completely in an instant, there's no putting out a hydrogen fire. But I wasn't thinking of fire: it's been said that a gas car carries people while a hydrogen car carries hydrogen. Need a huge gas tank.
It’s 2022 and Elon still won’t tell us
the Load Capacity. 😅
And one more thing, spare parts.
Cargo companies cares a lot about the repairability of their fleet, this being a Tesla would automatically get crossed out...
"So your Tesla door fell off? That'll be $4700 and a month in the shop."
"Why is it so expensive and take so long?"
"Well ma'am, we have to disconnect and reconnect all the wires.'
"Why so many wires?"
"The factory kept adding sensors to tell if the door is falling off."
I'd think having a few hundred less moving parts would be a bonus.
Electric vehicles are much easier to repair...
@@kik1rik1 not if you have hundreds more electrical parts.
This has been a big problem with John Deere tractors and i think it's gonna be worse with Teslas.
I'd honestly love to have an electrical car that's not trying to be futuristic and is just a normal car..
@@whitehunter2545 again, not if you have hundreds of electronic parts
Watch the documentary about farmers against John Deere and tell me what you see.
I am waiting for him to invent the monorail!!
"Yeah I have a name for it. It's called the HyperRail"
@@buttersquids removing the "r" from "hyper" would be a more factual title! :)
He will call in unirail so he can say it was his idea.
He’s already working on it. The first (and probably only) iteration replaces the rail with a horizontal tarmac surface. The pods are initially Tesla model Y’s being driven by humans, but it’s totally not a road bridge.
Just the fact that this will put him closer to just building a standard train, I think it might be a step forward
Personally I’m okay with all the crazy whatnot. Succeed or fail, all this money being pumped into improving battery tech might one day at least make my phone last longer.
I think, it is happening in the other way. I think the only reason why we see electric cars is because of the research to make your phone to last longer.
or the bottom falls out of it when the hype fizzles out and there's nothing left to conceal its unviability, effectively poisoning public opinion and fostering doubt among potential industrial-scale adopters. it's almost like marketing niche luxury products to capitalise on the good faith behind renewable energy concerns, without making any effort to focus on the affordability and efficacy required to be adopted en masse, is a completely impotent and disingenuous solution to the problem.
@ur couzin check out solid state batteries, they're being developed currently and are not flammable, heavy and have a huge power increase
@@BabyFawnLegs The whole auto industry must be going crazy as they are all following Tesla's lead. Cars, trucks, vans, you name it, they are all committing to transition to electric! And Tesla's latest earnings report shows that they are taking in profits hand over fist while building new factories, what is the world coming to?
Conciousnes over a climate crisis.
If you have half a brain you cna see effect already. Speciay costal towns, i live in oneso can confirm.
Tho most likly would kill us anyways as this messures are slow, not enough and those more pressing would still be ignore.
US just mega sold Golf of mexico territory forr drilling.
Big petro has the goverment buyd, until people get a REAL president and goverment we are all fuckd.
was expecting him to invent the train again since the effeciency problem could be solved by removing the battery and adding a constant stream of electrical energy via a cable.
Hey, I love your other videos and I'm certainly no fan of Elon, but by 4:01 I found myself facepalming. Lets do the math properly. First of all, battery packs are around 250 Wh/kg, currently. We'll take the figure of 2kW per mile and a 500 mile range. That's 1MW of battery capacity or 4 tonnes (tons is pretty much the same unit). Take a conventional truck, strip out the existing mechanicals (motor, gearbox etc) and add electric motors. You save around 2 to 3 tons. Meaning most of your battery mass is free. Battery packs will improve to beyond 300 Wh/kg and possibly 350 Wh/kg later this decade. That's another ton saved.
I've no idea where you got the "20 to 1" but I'm guessing that you're talking about total theoretical energy density. Diesel is about 12 KWhr/kg. However the typical tank to wheel efficiency of a truck is 23%. Diesel engines might have a peak efficiency of 43%, but that's only at optimal load and speed. Energy is also lost in the drivetrain. Now the actual work being done is equivalent to 3 kWhr/kg. Add to this the fact that electric vehicles also have regeneration capability and diesels do not. www.mdpi.com/2571-8797/3/2/28/pdf
So in the real world the figure you're looking for is actually more like 6 to 1.
Obviously, the claimed 2KWhr/mile figure is optimal (on the flat). However regeneration (particularly in a truck) is your friend here, since you have a high efficiency drivetrain.
Tesla is not alone in developing battery powered trucks. They are absolutely going to happen. Btw maintenance and fuel are a huge part of the cost of trucking. Electric trucks are far less maintenance and the "fuel" cost is lower per mile.
Btw I'm an Engineer, currently involved in grid storage projects and electric (yes battery) powered trains.
I calculated the battery mass to be 16 t with my rudimentary calculations, which allows for 7 t of cargo. For the 300 mile range, 9,5 t of battery should be enough, and capacity is almost twice as much, 13 t, compared to 20 t of a diesel truck
I am also an engineer and I agree with your analysis. His 20:1 number is like an amateur who thinks theoretical numbers by themselves represent reality. He is simply an Elon hater. I came here to be entertained but I guess my brain is too big for that. Elon haters would not even question his analysis because it would certainly be entertaining for them.
Engine weight 3000 pounds, sure, but you seem to think electric motors don't weigh anything since you subtracted the engine and claimed that means the battery is free.
@@Matticitt Engine, transmission, ancillaries, driveshaft, differential, fuel tanks, exhaust system, pollution controls...
@@saumyacow4435 chargers, battery cooling system, inverters. Also electric cars use a single ratio gearbox.
if you want to help the environment, get a £500 second hand Ford Fiesta and donate/invest the rest of that 86k in land to preserve as a nature reserve or better yet a cleanup effort.
Valid point. Money has ethical and resourceful weight in multiple directions.
Look up eminent domain lol
True lol.
Teslas are mostly expensive virtue signals/flexmobiles. But nobody wants to drive a car made for the poors. Its not glamorous or instagramable enough.
Its the hipster car
Litterally not the same AT all...
Why do i have a feeling that the engineers warned the sales and marketing department multiple times about its shortcomings and were just ignored and had to do it anyway...
The amount if times I had to tell our marketing depart, no we can't claim that, we can't do that, and my favorite is when you have to tell them nobody can do it. "Why not, just make something!?"
And you have to explain to them you can't invent something that violates one of newtons laws no matter how the flashy the bullet point was.
Marketing is a sham.
Because.
But you are an expert!
@@jacobdesutter8354 mate, you just described my job on the daily.
“Why can’t you just make it work? You’re an engineer!”
Yes, I am an engineer, not a magician. FFS.
Electric cars have much higher torque then regular ICE engines so it wouldn’t be that crazy that it could actually be able to pull more in weight but that’s depends on the wheels
Imagine making a freight truck that gets outclassed by a toyota hilux lmao
LOL holy shit you're not wrong... 3,500 KG load capacity...
People from chad strongly agree
@@Blazekrieg420 this is a million dollar comment 🤣
Tesla semi won t need to charge before the completion of most trips and will be the fastest truck ever built. For the trips it needs to charge for, just spend half an hour every 5 or 6 like truckers should anyways and it s done. This is of course untill the trucks will drive themselves, which you can t tell of any other truck, can you?!
P.S. Toyota will be bunkropt or close to it within 10 years
@@lucadellasciucca967 you're right they're building a truck that defies the laws of physics and conservation of energy. It'll just float around freely without ever needing to charge. towing 80,000lbs with a lithium battery pack that'll need to be recharged every 20 years.
"epic bacon 420 Elon Musk way to go out"
I'm rolling in my bed laughing.
Yeah that was good
And I guessed he would do that with his space hyperpenis....
Meh its kinda stupid, though? Not the joke, the part about catching fire. As if truck accidents aren't a daily occurance now
Well, stay in the bed.
Fast enough to smash the cargo.
My favourite part about the hyperloop is the way he changed the design 3 times and now it gets traffic jams , except unlike a regular underground tunnel is as tight as the London metro so there's no escape, unlike being in a highway, pulling over and walking the hell away.
also, what happens if his very tight, tiny tunnels collapse?
@@UnknownGamer40464 People die and Elon Musk cries crocodile tears at the wake before explaining how this either was entirely the victim's fault or otherwise scapegoats his engineering team before firing someone to show his "solidarity" with his victims.
It's just loop, not hyperloop
But hey, hyperloop faces same problems
@@Mr.Monacle I mean realistically he's just reinvented the subway and made it less safe.
Thats not the hyperloop you're talking about. Thats a totally different thing. What you're talking about is the... car tunnel (??) he "invented" (???) some time ago.
lol “so, it’s a subway” - she said it as if she realized how fucking lame it was while she was saying it xD
This aged beautifully.
I know ryt 😂😂😂😂- what an idiot
like a fine wine.
??
Well, we still have no idea how much the truck can actually carry, which is somewhat telling.
@@Blaze6108 they said it was "fully loaded". Did they not specify the actual payload?
LOL, I like how they included acceleration into the truck specs. Who cares about acceleration. It's a truck, not a freaking space rocket.
it matters for ubran areas and traffic. A truck that can take smaller gaps when turning onto the freeway or intersection consistently will reduce its transit times and thus save more money. A truck, like the Hyundai's Xcient Hydrogen truck, which cant eve reach freeway speeds (max unloaded is 52mph or 85km/h) will increase transit times and increase costs.
@@engineeringtheweirdguy2103 you forgot the hourly charge
I mean 60 up a 5% grade with a full wagon ain't bad but I knew a guy who could run his kitty CAT up a 10% grade in the PA mountains doing 107 with 80,000 lbs.
@@engineeringtheweirdguy2103 yes but the truck itself weighs more and won’t be able to transport as much goods, so the costs will even out
of all the things to dunk on, the fixation on acceleration being a "useless" metric is weird. have y'all never been stuck behind a tuck that's taking a dangerously long time merging onto a highway? or forced to slow down or change lanes because a truck couldn't accelerate fast enough on an incline to keep pace with the rest of traffic?
The semi is being built by engineers and marketed by redditors, I just hope the engineers can make something good before the whole idea crashes and burns
Adam’s video is complete BS.
You can find the battery weight on Teslas website. He gives you the energy density and the energy used per mile. Simple math will tell you that the batteries will weigh less than 4 tons (3.33T)
Adam didn’t take any time whatsoever to actually understand any of this.
@@ChristopherGuilday ok elon alt
@@ChristopherGuilday that was one of my concerns but another was if they somehow actually manage to make solid state batteries by that time, the weight would drop a lot and the energy density would increase as well as solve the issues for fire, though I doubt it'll be anytime soon but one can only hope.
@@NobbGamingOfficial I'm not sure if what he's saying is true but there's no reason to be condescending, he may have a good point. Why not do some research and see if you can find something that disproves what he's saying?
Why does nobody talk about the origin of batteries? There's a certain, aggressive, globally dominant state in Asia can dominate the battery/tech business, has a manufacturing army, and would really love it if the world, but especially hungry states like the US, gave up oil and went crazy for electric cars. And all sorts of business and political leaders have deep, often corrupt ties to it, and a desire to invest in it, including Elon Musk.
It's fine, you just need to have 20 times the number of semis on the road. Totally fine. Just pass the costs onto the consumer, and replace the human drivers with autonomous driving.
You accidentally got really close to identifying a couple problems. #1) You can't put double the trucks on the road because there aren't the drivers. Even if you could, now your driver is worth less because he's providing less value (moving less weight). Driver pay has been a problem for years already. #2) Trucks are expensive, so local companies often run 2 shifts per day with one truck. Trucking company yard space is frequently just adequate for their current fleet. There's no room to have double the fleet with half the trucks charging.
@@reedr1659 I think you might benefit from re-reading Anthony's comment
And all that lovely CO2 from producing the batteries and producing the energy to power the batteries.
@@gdwnet And forcefully scrapping the old, working cars so that you can push newly manufactured ones onto people. Yummy.
@@lamjeri _And forcefully scrapping the old, working cars_
Which is what we have to do now due to the cost of importing parts.
I want to see an updated video on this after Tesla's recent announcement
Edit: just to be clear, I didn’t say this because I thought the Tesla announcement proved Adam wrong. But after seeing a bunch of people saying he’s wrong, I’m just genuinely curious to how he would respond to the Elon fanboys lol
its range is 500 miles
@@indarvishnoi2389
Adam admitted he only makes those videos to generate views for his profile, mindlessly pandering toward haters. And it shows; his arguments really suck compared to his other videos.
@@guilegameche3810 So Adam is like everyone else with an unfounded opinion, only shittier.
Looks like Adam was lying and hating. It looks like the load capacity is higher than with a volvo combustion engine truck.
Yea he was so dumb on making this video
The Tesla semi will be a amazing yard mule. Having working on the docks at UPS and FedEx. The diesel smoke can be choking at times. Maybe used for really short local deliveries.
Thats what its made for
I think typical daycabs and toters are prime candidates for this type of tech
That's exactly what they plan to use it for. The whole calculation in the video is based on the assumption that Tesla expects to have the same Energy capacity as a diesel semi, but they don't, not even close. Instead, they'll be able to maintain a reasonable payload capacity by having a much more limited range. But, ~90% of truck routes are below a realistic maximum range estimate for the Tesla semi. So, it's still definitely competitive, just not for EVERY route.
Volvo has already long range and mid range electric trucks, the Tesla semi is irrelevant already. And ıt's a real existing vehicle unlike the Tesla semi. And Volvo is in talks with local governments and large truck companies to establish a charging network and more.
@@evil7011 and also Volvo makes real vehicles with real safety and productivity oriented design. Tesla in the name of "cool sci-fi points" has robbed cars of freaking windshield wipers stalks...
they could be useful for battery manufacturers,
who might need to transport 17 tonnes of battery by truck /j
1 time use, cause you wont be able to drive it back
lmao
honestly I feel like the induction motors Elon insists on using is actually just as big of a problem as the batteries, like seriously those motors are extremely inefficient and waste incredible amounts of energy, I bet he could get the same range with half the batteries if he switches to high efficiency solid state motors, or double the range, hell if he gave up on the semi truck drag racing pipe dream and gave them a more conservative power output and went to 2 motors (one per rear axle) he could make a product that competes with conventional combustion engine semi-trucks.
But no it has to have a 0-60 of 2 seconds and use cheap ass induction motors with tons of batteries to compensate cause Elon.
@@didjterminator808 who cares, it does 0-60 in 1.0 seconds
@@didjterminator808 AC Induction motors are very efficient in a vacuum. The losses are incurred when conversion happens. I'm not sure solid state motors exisist unless you mean something like a wax motor. If you meant PM DC motor, I hope you like changing brushes. Teslas already use PM DC motors, but in the interests of reducing maintenance (brushes), the magnets are on the rotor and the stator is wound. This requires a "rotating" magnetic field to be generated hence incurring losses. The current choice is to either make it efficient but unreliable or make it slightly less efficient but much more reliable.
The real problem is with batteries.
I remember when learning for my drivers license over 20 years ago, that such a big truck causes 40 times the damage to roads a normal passenger car does (due to weight). This was accepted for the transport capacity.
With the electric truck causing as much road damage for a fraction of the transported goods, looks like another big reason to see it as failure to me.
@@liam3284 Right on. We're talking about a half ton battery on tesla cars. P.S: the battery ALONE!
okay but also this is america, we need to destroy our roads you dont understand simpleton. /sarcasm/
@@richardlamm4826 We already have those they're called normal roads.
Li ion battery fires are no joke. We still don’t know how to put them out in an uncontrolled environment (real world).
@@richardlamm4826 Are you serious? First of all as the guy below you said. They are called normal roads. But if you used a bit of common sense. Every material will eventually break or crack of thousands of tons of metal drove over it every day, every night, for weeks, months years and decades. So unless you invent a better and cheaper material, good luck.
Also: Your trucking company will have to either hire entirely new mechanics or train the existing ones for months because repairing these is probably a lot more complicated than diesel trucks.
Yes, aaaand no.
You'd have to hire interely new mechanics or train current new skills, because of EVs, but electric power have MUCH, MUCH less parts to wear down. No really a transmission, no valves and pistons rubbing each other, less fluids (no engine oil, often not even cooling installation), etc. So maintenance-wise electric cars actually have a large upper hand over internal combustion.
@@juliuszkocinski7478 not necessarily true either, while they have less parts to break, when tgey do break its really bad because these are specialized parts that cant be reliably stocked, meaning repair times go up drastically as they're put on indefinet backorder, as well as incredible safty liability. Many techs would need to undergo massive retraining in order to learn how to deal with the massive batteries, as well as needing special purpose built repair bays for the trucks. I've worked in the trucking industry for years now, there's not a single company I know that wants electric trucks (outside of corporate heads that dont understand how much it'll cost them) or even a truck repair shop willing to fork over the costs to update the facility to meet the safty requirements.
@@CreeperSandwich Yeah, but that's a parts issue. The actual matter is just training new mechanics (this is the assumption that you can, as we aren't even sure if you can considering most of it is probably OEM by Tesla).
@@CreeperSandwich and DC high voltage is quite a different beast than AC high voltage, so, no, your experience fixing your microwave oven won't be helpful with the huge a**ed battery
@@CreeperSandwich diesel truck parts were once specialized too until they were standardized and widely available due to adoption. Most of your argument are things that would have stopped diesel trucks in their tracks if corporate heads didn't put investment dollars into adoption.
Not only that but time. I’m sure shipping companies are very conscious of how long trips take, I cannot imagine how long it would take to charge an 11 ton battery, let alone a 17 ton one
On the other hand companies like Walmart that move their inventories around on their own time would love the fuel savings and the carbon foot print reduction. Probably why Walmart preordered so many. If they wanted to they could relay loads with these trucks. Even at a much reduced range Walmart would be able to get fantastic use out of it. A lot of trucking is within the range of these. It could go from distribution hubs to surrounding stores. Plenty of range for that even with a much lighter battery.
@@jonathanpowell9979 fuel savings I can see but I doubt they care about their carbon foot print.
@@AutonomousCollective They care about their carbon footprint if they're incentivized with carbon offset credits or whatever.
500 miles at 2kwh/mile means a 1000kwh battery. At a v3 charger that outputs 250kw it would take about 4-5 hours to charge from ~10% to 100%. You’ll likely be able to use at least two chargers which would effectively cut the charge time in half. The battery would be able to handle way more than that thought so it’s only a matter of time before truck chargers will be available to charge the trucks in the same amount of time it takes on a model 3 or y
@@ryanchad8384 Electrify America or, in Europe, Ionity or Allego now go up to 350kW specifically for trucks (or the rare luxury car that supports it), probably using 2 chargers for semis as you said.
So, with a 500 miles/1MWh battery, you can drive 350 miles twice (for a daily 700 miles route that's about all you can achieve during the legal 11 driving hours per day), with a single 43 minutes lunch break, charging from 30% to 50% of battery capacity and still have 10% of spare before slow-charging overnight. I am sorry to say you'll need to pee in a bottle outside of this break, or you will have way more electricity than needed... 😁
This is where the video goes wrong: Because of superfast charging, you actually don't need a 500 miles battery, a 400 miles battery would perform almost as well, with one 48 minutes lunch break after 360 miles to charge from 10% to 80% of battery capacity, and one small 13 minutes coffee break after 280 miles and before the last 60 miles, if you really drive the full 700 miles route.
Actually, for the same cargo load, the smaller and lighter battery pack should make for a truck more efficient than 0.5 miles per kWh, or at least, more efficient than a truck with a 500 miles battery pack, because it's not clear if the 0.5 miles/kWh efficiency applies to fully loaded 500 miles battery pack truck or empty 300 miles battery pack truck. I guess we'll have EPA ratings some time within the next 12 months, and real life numbers from customers shortly after.
Even worse... you have to haul the batteries around even if you don't have a load. So, if you drop off a load and need to drive back 100km without any return cargo (which many city deliveries don't have), you now have to haul that 17t on batteries (effectively twice your normal empty weight) back.
Exactly, that's why I'm not convinced that electric cars have a smaller carbon foortprint in the end. They always have to carry those heavy batteries around.
In the description: "I won't reupload again, and it shall stand as a monument to my hubris." LOL! Awesome, and I loved your video about Dubai!
I didn't rewatched it, why was it reuploaded?
@@0Clewi0 some footage of communist romania was copyrighted
@@user-jt5qc9og1p the irony
You added the battery weight on top of the 16 ton weight of a diesel semi, as if the electric semi is still carrying all the weight of the diesel engine, power train, fuel tanks, etc. You need to subtract those from the 16 ton starting weight and *then* add the battery weight.
Yup
Then Adam probably took some long range diesel semi and proved with it that long range Tesla semi is impossible.
Yeah, we know that. That's why proposed Tesla semi is rather short to middle range.
In diesel you can double the range by just doubling relatively light fuel tank. So it's done already to practical maximum, no big deal. In battery truck you have to compromise between range and truck weight. So Musk did. Hence, truck with low range.
ah yes, because electric motors and wiring have no weight at all.
@@Born_Stellar Of course they do, but you can't just add the weight of batteries to the weight of a diesel engine and power train. 😵
@@Born_Stellar the electric motor and wiring don’t weigh as much as a Diesel engine though do they
As much as I enjoy your videos man, there are a lot of omissions in this one.
Tesla's stated range is 300-500 miles, whereas that tank capacity (at 6.5 miles / gallon) is nearly 2,000 miles. The battery, in your scenario, would only need to be 25% or less of that capacity, meaning that we're looking at a 4-5 ton battery at most with that range. I assume that the selling point here from Tesla is for lower-tier trucks, not cross-country hauls.
Already, that means we're looking at a load capacity of 13 tons with your most unforgiving calculation there. With potential battery weight improvements you mentioned (which I personally think are possible considering that local air travel may start using electric planes soon, cool video from Wendover Productions on that), that would mean the battery would only need to weigh roughly 3 tons. That's 17 tons of load capacity.
Then, subtracting the weight of a semi truck engine, which is about 3000lbs or 1.5 tons, you're looking at a load capacity of 18.5 tons, plus any other weight you're able to shave off as a result of not having an internal combustion engine.
Lastly, considering that each truck is looking at an apparent $200,000 savings in diesel expenses per unit, that could understandably start to look attractive to companies, especially those who are looking at more local routes. This, in addition to the other features that Tesla has admittedly become pretty famous for such as self driving and safety add-ons, could be pretty enticing.
I think this video would have been a lot cooler if you'd attacked the Tesla semi truck concept from a range and long-haul viability perspective. This approach however feels kinda silly.
The topic could and should have been explored more. There are two things I'd like to say about your comment, however. 1 - you can subtract the 3k pounds because of the engine, but at the same time don't forget to add the weight of 4 heavy duty electric motors back in. They aren't weightless you know.
2 - do improvements in battery density reduce their weight? Or only volume?
This doesn’t matter, since it isn’t revolutionizing anything, it brings no advantage to weight.
@@guardian6975 Not in weight, but it's cheaper and more environmentally friendly with the same capacities for "short" travels. That sounds like innovation if you ask me.
Feels like he just hates Elon
@@jorgeabrahamaguilerareynos9264 Where is the enviromental friendliness, if majority of electric energy in the grid comes from coal power plants? also, how do you recycle bateries? how eco friendly is the production of the batteries?
The only place I see this having any use is as a depot yard shifter. At my UPS job, we have a number of small, lightweight tractors that move trailers both full and empty around the yard of the building. Moving them in and out of loading bays, but never on the actual haul to the next station. Electric ones can charge overnight off the building (which has solar) instead of consuming mass amounts of diesel just to shift trailers around.
Thought exactly the same.
I work in an industrial area and I see the electric ones and gas ones quite a lot, since some countries forbid running petrol/diesel carts / forklifts indoors.
So, electric forklifts (or tractors) but shittier then. Tesla would have to compete with every existing Toyota, Manitou, CAT , etc.
Good luck XD
Yep, that was my initial thought about them too. Not enough range for real use..yet
@@jjcc8379 An electric work lift would be great, we have a diesel Genie model that they use to repair conveyor belt drive motors and it really stinks up the place.
I laughed when I first heard they had a range of 300 miles. What's the point when it's undoubtedly going to cost more than a standard truck and take 4x as long to ship?
I do feel like tesla is shooting for the wrong market too early. I think this would make a great yard shifter/switcher. But also, correct me if I'm wrong as I don't follow what Tesla is doing, but why haven't they designed box trucks or vans? The market is still early (although the biggest contract, the USPS, was won by Oshkosh. Yeah, the MRAP people).
Plus it doesn't even have a sleeping cabin, it just is built to give the illusion of having one, and since it doesn't seem like it's going to be good for anything other than short trip deliveries, it seems extra pointless to even waste the weight faking that look.
Imagine a balancing scale ⚖️. On one side is rolling resistance; on the other side is wind resistance.
The Tesla semi is about 26,000 lbs, far too heavy to be profitable for weight-constrained loads (floor tiles/grain/gasoline), so it will always haul lightweight cube-constrained dry van loads (like potato chips).
This tips the balancing scale to where wind imparts more resistance than the tires, which means aerodynamic drag is the bigger factor in fuel economy. This is why the Tesla semi looks the way it is, and it's also why they chose California's 55mph truck speed limit to claim it has a 500 fully loaded range.
@@randgrithr7387 It sure is one great scam he has going.
"It's goes from 0-60 in 20 seconds "
Carrying capacity to Elon - *AM I JOKE TO YOU*
I want all the cargo to fly into the back when i speed off
@@yourex-wife4259 Heh! Exactly, cuz I often regret flooring the accelerator later on, when I open the trunk to find that all my carefully arranged junk has randomly rearranged itself. The more Musk talks, the less credible I find him to be.
Oh wow hahaha hahaha hahahahaha your so funny!!!!!!!!!!! With that original joke
If you had a truck that weighed 30 pounds but only pulled 3 tons it would accelerate 0-60 in like 5 seconds
I work in logistics. we already have a fleet of electric vans/street scooter to deliver light loads over short distances (sub 70 miles), they're great but a pain to repair when the battery goes (pushing a street scooter carrying 1/4 ton of goods up a hill aint fun). The entire point of that fleet is that the load and the vehicles are light meaning lower battery requirements, lower long term costs, etc. scaling up to the highest possible loads over the longest possible distances is such a stupid move, apart from it being the least cost effective and least reliable way to to run an electric fleet there are clear opportunities in the logistics market for small to mid range distribution.
honestly for long range Rail would be the soloution. Problem is its neglected in favour of road in most countries... i live in germany where cargo was actually moved from rail to road because the rail system was simply negelected for the past years.... when you have trucks ship stuff over half the continent theres something wrong... that should be a job for rail.
Agreed. Tesla Semi has never been marketed for long haul trucking, and presenting it as such is disingenuous.
From what I understand, some FedEx stations are already rolling out electric step-vans. Since most vans travel less than 100 miles from the station, it should be great for short-range, especially considering that the diesels they use get like 10 miles to the gallon and are even worse if the drivers idle
I love hearing from people actually in logistics/trucking on this because yall actually know what you're talking about, unlike the tesla nerds!
Also in this presentation musk said that "this beats rail in a convoy scenario" which is just ludicrous.
Beats rail?
Oh that's funny.
It's hilarious how anti rail that guy is.
rail is sacred, old but gold
I think it is literally illegal for trucks to convoy. So he is just a rich arsehole trying to sell the manure he pulled straight out of the orfice he is talking out of to pseudo science junkies.
@@jacobfreeman5444 illegal? Why is that?
If they ever get PEM fuel cells working efficiently I think that'd be a better option than lithium batteries for trucks. Oh and fix that whole kaboom thing.
Thats what volvo are doing.
Bev for local haulage, fuel cell for long rangw
Thinkin kinda the same thing, also trucks run more regular paths and refueling stations that produce their own hydrogen can therefor be placed where needed
It's not the fuel cells that are the problem. It's that you can only store certain amount of hydrogen on a vehicle because it is larger.
Well you have store it under 700 bar pressure. And you need twice the amount of liters to get same range. Plus the whole setup makes the truck weight more heavy then a ICE setup. So less load capacity. And fuel cells dosen’t work in the cold either. So your driving a fuel air bomb, that dosen’t work in the cold can carry less. And hydrogen production in its current form is neither CO2 neutral or if produced by Wind and solar so expensive that its economical unfieable. Also no industrial scale production exists to produce hydrogen in quentity currently to support the transportation sector.
He's gonna build a radiator and call it a Thermflopod
technically a Hyper Phlogiston Dissipator
Where's the "hyper"
Giga-therm
@@markplott4820 and a magic water teleportation cooling system
@@sandergjertsenstvold1051 there will be a bigger model in 3 years that will be called Hyper
You make some incorrect assumptions here. 1) You assume the Tesla semi weighs 16t when it is much smaller and lighter than a typical ICE semi truck. 2) When applying the 1 20 rule you assume the trucks will have the same range when an ICE can have a range of 3000 mi. A battery which can last 500mi will probably be more like 20/6 ≈ 3 times heavier.
The tesla semi also seems to be focused on shorter hauls. No one is arguing that the tesla semi will take over the entire logistics transportation market but may have it's niche and I can't ignore the environmental impact of an ICE semi vs electric. Elon is way over hyped for everything he does but let's still be objective here.
yeah exactly- the reason a semi is so heavy is bc of the engine, at least in part. without an engine the Tesla semi base excluding the battery would weigh less than an ICE truck. but yeah adding a battery would still be heavy and decrease load capacity compared to a traditional truck, but the video exaggerated it a lot.
@@drknowsalot_ a semi engine weighs 3000 pounds. Don't forget you have to install electric motors to replace it so it won't be that much lighter.
Electric cars are quite a bit heavier than the ICE equivalents. Why would this be lighter ?
@@TrueFilter he's talking about the dry weight- without fuel or batteries.
If the electric one without batteries is gonna be significantly lighter than the ICE ones without fuel, that's gonna offset the weight difference of the fuels a bit.
ok, let's just use a 1T battery
now you have a ludicrous range
I commented on the first upload and am not going to try to rehash everything I said, BUT... I feel like this video makes dunking on Musk a priority at the expense of disparaging a developing technology that lots of companies are pursuing, not just Tesla. A developing technology that
1) nobody is saying is ready to entirely supplant the world's fleet of diesel tractor trailers overnight
2) are surely going to be necessary in the face of net zero targets being adopted the world over, and
3) come with a host of other benefits such as reduced fuel and maintenance costs, plus the ability to act as stationary energy storage when they're parked, which fleet operators can leverage into another source of income.
Not to mention 4) there are VERY CLEARLY externalized costs to diesel trucks that we are all paying for. Remember climate change? Air pollution?
Basically, while I generally support calling out Elon Musk's BS, I think we need to be careful about shitting on developing technologies. Just because it's not immediately ready to replace its predecessor in every conceivable use case, does not mean its a scam. The world has enough problems with the fossil fuel industry creating FUD about electrification without well-meaning commentators jumping on the dog pile.
(Warning wall of text!!)
Thing is arguably (and this applies to electrics and fossil fuels) first how much of the electricity is supplied by fossil fuels VS Renewables second How is that energy transmitted generated and stored third the time it takes to wait for Either method to be used and fourth the Equivalent costs of either method to my knowledge Most energy is made by fossil fuels (a bit here and there of renewables and a bit of Nuclear energy there but most of it is supplied by fossil fuels and then we come to the second point how is it transmitted is or it generated on site? Or merely stored on site we obviously do not have perfect power transmission capabilities yet and a good deal of that power is lost as heat if its generated on site then most likely its made using Fossil fuels in some way (Like a diesel generator) and we don't have perfect batteries yet so basically the same issue as the first point and for the time taken for either method well to quote a favorite children's book of mine with a diesel its simply "A fill of oil a touch on the starter and we're off" my phone takes I believe an Hour to fully charge and even if you were to use the faster charging stations it would probably take the same amount of time as my phone if it was run down fully whereas with most internal combustion engines if you run out of fuel you can fill it up for about a minute or two (assuming its a car on both sides of the spectrum) and then your off to what you were doing in the first place so its more efficient in regards to time and for the last one behind curtain 4 arguably it costs more to charge an electric vehicle than it does to fuel an internal combustion vehicle because it comes all at once if you do a full charge at your home base if you will with an internal combustion vehicle you can at least sparingly fill it up at smaller stops(An internal combustion vehicle produces the same amount of torque even if its almost empty to my knowledge not too sure about electric vehicles though)
@@sockshandle a couple points. First on generation of electricity. The "bit here and there". Of renewables and nuclear is about 40% and that's in the US. Other countries that figure is higher. And renewables are growing all the time. Beyond that, numerous studies have confirmed that even if your electricity source is fossil fuel based, it is still more efficient and less polluting to burn those fuels at a power plant that can run at max efficiency and then power vehicles with electricity, rather than burning them in many millions of inefficient internal combustion engines.
Second, I'm not sure why people think that you need to wait until one sector (electricity generation) is carbon free before you would start transitioning another sector (transport) away from carbon? That makes no sense. You can do both at the same time.
As to charge times, yes that's a disadvantage. But again, no one is suggesting that EV trucks are going to be replacing the entire fleet over night, using only the currently available technology. But even still, I don't think truck drivers are currently driving the full range of their deisel truck, and then stopping only just long enough fill the tank(s) and then getting back on the road. In fact, that would very much go against labour and safety laws. They have to take breaks anyway.
@@adamlytle2615 the biggest lie people like to perpetuate is that coal burning power fueling an electric car is any worse that dumping fossil fuels into it.
Cause what people don't realize is that oil refiners, the ones that make that gas, are usually contracting directly with a coal power plant to supply all the electricity to refine their fuel. Cause it takes a LOT of electricity to power an oil refinery... So much so that even just powering a car off 100% coal power is STILL less carbon than the amount of carbon from the whole process of drilling and refining the oil.
@@SherrifOfNottingham Riiight. I had known that but didn't even think of it in this case.
The only reason other manufacturers are getting into electric cars is due to government pressure.
A few years ago at the winery I worked at, there was an fair type thing going on across the road so people were parking on the freshly mowed hay field beside the winery. A Tesla spontaneously combusted and it burnt down the field and something like 31 other cars I think
and!?!?
@@lucadellasciucca967 it was very excitinf
@@mrwinemaker Not gonna lie, finding this short post and conversation kinda made my day.
Semi trucks can go about 2,100 miles on a 300 gallons (roughly 800kg) of diesel fuel. 800kg x 20 = 16t ("1-to-20
rule") but the Tesla Semi has 300-500 miles of range so in the worst case scenario the battery can't weight more then 4 t. Tractors weight at most 11t, not 16t. The engine alone is at least 1t (which tesla doesn't have) There is no way the Tesla tractor weighs more then 10t. 36-(4+10)=22t of cargo assuming the absolute worst scenario. Adam Something claimed 3t of cargo. That is a faulty computation by an order of magnitude. Nice way to spin the numbers when you have the agenda.
Please now tell us how the tunnel he made for tesla cars is actualy great...
@@Ascalonir Why would I do that? The Boring tunnels are f*cking retarded. Same as this video.
@@Ascalonir the current tunnels are not the best to say the least imo, but Vegas is happy with them, and that makes Musk n CO. money to reinvest into tesla and spacex.
And remember, in the land of 5MPH stop and go traffic, 30 MPH travel through a tunnel is king
@@colejosephalexanderkashay683 vegas isnt happy with them, they are a tourist attraction but nothing else, they are supposed to transport over 4000 people per hour and they are currently doing 800? Or so
@@michelbruns they have already hit the 4400
www.teslarati.com/elon-musk-boring-company-lvcc-loop-4400-per-hour-capacity-test-video/
So I have a few things to say about your vid:
1. About the weight calculation: with the normal diesel Truck the main weight factor is the engine and not the fuel. But with the semi the battery is the main weight factor, NOT the electric motor that are pretty light.
So adding the weight of the battery to the 16t of the diesel Truck even though the semi hasn't got an diesel engine is just wrong and unrealistic. I would say the semi without the battery weighs maybe 5t but definitely not more.
2. To those who say "oh well but we already got trains". Yeah, you're right. And trains are, especially over a longer distance, way more efficient and environmentally friendly. But you can't leigh tracks to every grocery store so having a better alternative to diesel Trucks is definitely something good
What about charge time? It isn't uncommon in trucking for a team to work together so they can get 16 hours of time spent transporting each day. The fuel pumps for semis are larger and capable of more volume, which means their charge time isn't all that different from how long you'd spend filling the tank in your sedan.
I thought the same thing but the fact that this info wasn't provided by Tesla itself, I still think the conclusion of "It's just a shittier version of a truck" is still accurate.
And like, I'd be willing to forgo some efficiency in the name of burning less fuels, but will electric trucks even do that?
Oh also it's not "We can't lay track" it's "We won't lay track", trucks don't just go from warehouse to grocery store, they cross state lines along routes where train tracks used to exist
And what about the fact that Semi trucks can go about 2,100 miles on a 300 gallons (roughly 800kg) of diesel fuel. 800kg x 20 = 16t ("1-to-20
rule") but the Tesla Semi has 300-500 miles range so in the worst case scenario the battery can't weight more then 4 t. If your 5t for a tractor is correct (I was assuming 10t to be on a safe side)
then 36-(4+5) = 27t left for the cargo. This dude claims 3t left for the cargo, that is incorrect by a factor of magnitude. There is always a way to spin the numbers if you have an agenda.
So you think a semi engine, just the engine, weighs 11 tons? You for real? Here's a quote you might find insightful: "The engine in a semi-tractor weighs more than six times as much as the average car engine, according to The Truckers Report. Some of these truck engines weigh as much as 3,000 pounds." Also the 16t used in a video included the trailer don't forget. And the electric drivetrain also weighs something - and considering the power it must deliver it'll weigh a lot.
I agree it'd probably be lighter, without batteries, than a regular semi with its engine and gearbox but the difference will be quite small. Same as for cars. Removing the engine does not remove enough weight to offset all of the electric components.
How is the electric truck estimated to weigh 16t without any batteries? Furthermore I don't think the range for the electric truck would be the same as the range of the ICE truck, so the calculations do not seem very meaningful imo. Different use cases for both of these trucks. A quick google search estimates about 2000 miles of range for the ICE truck, and Tesla states 500 miles on theirs. So that would amount to 4x less battery weight according to your calculations, meaning 4.25t of battery.
Assuming that the bare vehicle without batteries is also lighter than a conventional truck, we come to 36t - (14t + 4.25t) = 17.75t load capacity over a 4x shorter range. IF (very big if in the US) the infrastructure allows it, that would probably a cheap alternative to fuel trucks if you don't need that much range and IF there is a single driver resting at charging stations. Not as bad as you paint the picture imo
Indeed! If that would be the case, it would seem as a reasonable alternative for short-range local routes
Yeah, still tablecloth calculation but it seems more correct.
I agree.
sorry. were do you get your numbers. were are you getting the 4.25 t number for the battery,
You are right! This is the comment I was looking for. The one who made this video is just plain stupid, absolutely no one would drive 2000 miles in a day. He just hates Musk and all his companies
Still don't know the weight, but here's a clue. They're going to Pepsi's Frito Lay division. Potato chips. One of the lightest loads on the road.
Oh! And DOT gave Tesla an extra 2,000 lbs. to play with!
Centered cab? Instead of a good view on the left, a poor view on both sides. There's a reason one seat yard tractors have the cab all the way to the left.
I really think the answer for long distance trucks will be hydrogen fuel cells. For cars fuel cells won't be worth it, but for trucks it's the only thing that will come close to a diesel engine.
2 comments from somebody who owns both a Tesla car and a semi truck:
1: a large portion of the trucks's weight is its engine and associated equipment. An electric motor is a lot lighter than a big diesel engine. You should have accounted for that in your calculations by subtracting at least a couple of tons from the Tesla truck.
2: The truck's fuel capacity is good for a thousand miles. You are trying to match that with battery capacity. For the stated battery range of 500 miles you should cut the battery weight in half.
Tesla truck is not ready to replace my semi yet, but your calculations are disingenuous and make it seem worse than it is
I believe the weight difference engine was would be around 1T, yea the range should have been around 500 miles but the truck is still a flop and the industry needs a couple of years to start using them. I believe there going to be used mainly on site to move things around
@@azargelin on my Cascadia the engine itself is 1.5 tons. Then there's the transmission, the radiator, starter... removing at least two tons would be fair.
Otherwise, yeah - this truck would be useful for dedicated runs of under 200 miles round-trip with lighter loads, and stuff like local store deliveries. But definitely not the random-route long haul trucking that I do.
This was a hit piece, blames Tesla for omitting key data, then cherry picks data to make their own point. Tesla semi can't compete on coast to coast runs, but there are dedicated short runs (100-250 miles) where the tesla would shine. Also, on range, the tesla does not need to idle. Drivers are required to take breaks, If breaks could be taken at charging point, range becomes a moot point.
@@richardcunningham9699 Yes. Most car lovers and even worse truckers are hyper conservative.
They don't understand the market is huge and Tesla just needs to be good in some niches to sell lots of trucks.
And they don't understand that you can change your behaviour. Battery swapping with battery rental never took off for consumers because we like to own. But companies don't like to buy depreciating assets. I'm pretty sure Tesla will eventually include highway battery swapping stations and sell trucks without batteries.
Just like many comments speak of overpriced Tesla maintenance shops. As if the truck servicing business was the same as the consumer car one.
In Germany they are testing a system where trucks use overhead power on the highway. Somewhat like trolley busses. I think this is a great idea.
whats the point then? if you have to build infrastructure just build a rail, its not flashy is not new but it actually works.
@@tugahenrik1 Of course, but I am talking about Germany, a country that already has a very well established rail network.
You can't transport everything with trains. It just isn't viable. However, trucks running on overhead power seems like a very logical option to me. Warehouse to warehouse transport for example, or warehouse to supermarket. You can't use trains for that.
And using trucks on overhead power is a lot better then using trucks with enormous batteries, or with combustion engine.
Noice
@@luuk777w
Well it doesnt have to be a train
Truck with overhead power but runs on rails instead of roads
@@tugahenrik1 because trains cant turn into someones driveway? If hes talking about what I think it is then the trucks will still carry medium range batteries for regular deliveries in cities.
Well, actually, there are these so called 'volume cargoes' (i.e. low density goods that take up all the space available in a vehicle while in terms of weight being nowhere near the load capacity). But then again, only a large logistics/haulage company can afford having in its fleet electric trucks particularly designated to that kind of cargo. Most of private carriers should be prepared to accept for transportation whatever their clients throw at them.
Yeah but 300-500 mile range? The average hauler truck can go halfway across the country on a single tank of diesel. Electrics have a long way to go before semi trucks are even going to be considered as an alternative
I had a load of milk crates once. It was like deadheading.
@@fryloc359, freight rates for volume cargoes would usually be calculated per cubic meter/feet and not per mt. Otherwise it may well appear as a deadhead voyage, like you mention.
@@GlebRysanov i just meant that load was so light, that while hauling it it felt like deadheading. The bonus was that the load was rejected, so I got to take it back to the shipper.
@@fryloc359, oh, I see. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
When he mentioned about how even if a motor failed the semi would still continue I started laughing. Sure the semi could still keep going even if a motor fails, but now the other motors have to work harder to make up for the loss. That will increase the chance of failure for the motors the more each of them get knocked out until you're stuck at the side of the road and need to replace all of the motors
Does a Boeing 737 engine failure on takeoff cause the other engines to exceed their rated specs? No, it just reduces the climb rate. A failed motor here would reduce acceleration, climb speed, and regen braking. Semi-trucks do not require nearly as much energy to maintain speed in flats or rolling hills.
It's still stupidly heavy at what I believe is 26,000 lbs, but the electric drivetrain on it's own is a solid concept. Hybrid trucks are the answer to the question Elon isn't willing to ask.
@@randgrithr7387 you do know that both drive trains are completely different from each other right? jet engines rely on producing thrust to move the plane. Trucks on the other hand need huge amounts of torque to get moving with all of their weight. You can easily replicate this with Lego motors, set up a car with four motors while they are dragging weight and slowly remove disconnect notes and see how they struggle to move until they can't move anymore
Edit: i did the maths properly later and the tesla semi makes zero sense lol.
Good points but you made a few big omissions that affect the final weight:
16 tonnes for the normal truck includes the engine and its ancillaries, cluthch, gearbox, differential etc. With electric setups that weight is lower.
You wont need the energy in the batteries to be identical as the motors as much more efficient that ICE and the drag coefficient is lower as it doesnt need intakes.
So the final cargo weight it could carry would be higher. But I still think it wont be that much higher.
Alright fair points.
But i still think that just making a train is leagues better than this in term of economy, environnement and capacity
But isnt he underestimation the ratio between diesel and battery.
According to a simple Google Search, so the numbers should be taken as an approximate, the energy densities of diesel an batteries rank like this:
Diesel 11000-12000 Wh/kg
Battery 100-150 Wh/kg
Lets take the lowest estimate of the diesel an the highest of the battery and add an efficiency of 40% to the diesel engine (Average should be around 45 so also the low end)
The ratio from diesel to battery should stand at (11000*0,4)/150 = 29,33.
So the ratio of 1 to 20 is pretty favourable to the battery at the moment. The calculation in the video would look more like 0,874 * 29,33 = 25,63 t
So the rest of the Truck would be allowed to weigh exactly 10,37 t which is impossible i guess?
@@vnmfxfreemontages9430 i think your energy density number for the lithium ion batt was inccorrect though. The most energy dense ones clock in at 260 Wh/kg. That brings the ration to 17 when using the most batttery-favourable figures.
@@Hello_there_obi Oh okay thats possible, like i said this were the first numbers google came up with.
But still the resluts stay in favour for the conventional semi instead of the Tesla Semi :)
@@vnmfxfreemontages9430 oh for sure! An electric semi is a really stupid idea at this point in time.
Tesla electric semi vs social imperialist train, who would win
Trains are capitalist in the US.
@@robinrussell7965 social imperialist countries have had better trains tho esp modern china. Even building one across Africa (for a small promise of cheap labour and resource extraction)
@@ryanleninfan1337 Does China move anywhere near as much as the US, and do they make their money back?
@Dominator yes they make their money back there are hundreds of Chinese corporations (exploiting workers and land) operating in Africa that the B&RI is meant to support lmao
@3N19MA yep, china is just another capitalist country looking to exploit. Has been since the 1980s dengite reforms. Sucks because of how much revolutionary potential there was in Africa that china could have been supporting at the time but they just stopped after Mao's death.
As a former truck driver, one thing to keep in mind is that many loads are bulky but not heavy and fill the truck without even approaching the 40T weight limit.
The range seems like a bigger issue to me.
Thanks Bill
The range is very bad. Add in an environment with a real winter and the range cuts by another 20-40%, which really doesn't leave a lot to play with. Stuck in the middle of nowhere during winter in an electric truck with empty batteries.. no thanks.
@@janbo8331 Frozen to death.
I work in grocery delivery in Texas and that range is hilariously bad for us. We have several deliveries breaking the 6-700 mile range. A 300 mile limit (and then having to charge instead of going right back out) is just laughable.
I live in a city where air quality is considered to be important enough to start phasing out diesel trucks for delivery. Electric last mile delivery is a very real thing here.
Well they did!
A payload of 60,000 pounds + for 500 miles.
It might be time to do some recalculating. 😂
there's no need for recalculation, adam assumed that an electric truck needs the same range as a diesel truck (about 4x more), which is nonsense. nobody has ever asked for that and tesla has only ever advertised the 500 mile range.
Seriously, how does someone do the math and conclude anything except “I’ve missed something here”. The dude concludes, “the company investing billions is wrong, not me” and releases the video. Brain dead.
Ah yes Adam something with a couple months(or less) research thought he had it all figured out and that thousands of R&D people(who had years of experience in the industry) at Tesla were wrong. 😂😂
@@elapplzsl well they are the same r&d behind the hyperloop so...
@@maxibon2129 Lol, no :))
If they have a 500kWh battery for a range of 300 miles, that battery would probably only weigh 4 tons since their 85kWh battery weighed half a ton.
It will probably be even less as the weight of the battery doesn't scale linearly. For example the casing gets proportionally smaller, when the volume goes up. The author of the video has literally no clue what he's talking about and the fact that so many people just blindly believe him is quite amusing...
@@onezweithree casing doesn't contribute to weight filled volume does which is proportional to the capacity of battery.
@@dev_among_men And he says that the author of the vid doesn't have a clue. The batteries in EVs are just huge amounts of small 18650 batteries lined up together. An average 18650 has about 12 Wh. You want a 12 kWh EV accumulator, you take 1000 of that boys. You want a 120 kWh accumulator, you take 10 000 etc. The weight of encasing is negligible. EV batteries weight is definitely proportional to their capacity.
The whole truck (batteries included) is estimated to weight 15 tons
Semi uses 4680 type batteries which Tesla is manufacturing themselves. Watch „Battery Day“ presentation for more details. They explained everything around cost and weight saving.
"My swindle sense is tingling.." Killing me.
As a truck driver I approve of this message! I drive a 16/17 ton DAF garbage truck that can carry 12/13 ton, It runs on Diesel and can work for 4/5 days on a full tank. We had a electric truck last year for a test from a different brand. It's weight was over 20 ton and it's carry capacity was 6 ton. The thing broke down the second day. I'm all for saving the environment but that same Diesel truck use to last only for a day with a full tank several models ago, so that's more progress than what the electric version has to offer.
exactly! musk's "solutions" only offer fake hope, which is even worse than doing nothing at all.
That's interesting, how long ago would those trucks last 1 day on a full tank?
@@jn48649 Those trucks are build around 2004/2008 the new ones replacing them are models from the last several years.
Like you said though, things make progress. I hope that we can eventually make a good electric truck for the sole purpose of Musk having one of his ideas at the very least evolve into something not dogshit
Diesels can just run on biofuel anyway
But it looks so cool and futuristic with all those sharp angles it has to be better then what we have now!!
and the central seating position is a pain for truckers that have to hand documents to police, weight stations, toll booths, etc
Even IF the battery/weight were OK, I don't want to imagine the infrastructure needed to charge all trucks that stopped overnight at a parking lot. You'd need a local substation at each of them (probably)
The infrastructure for this to be viable is massive, there would need to be charging stations in abundance, including at shippers/receivers. It would likely end up with a restructuring of the Hours Of Service for workers as well due to the recharge time required to top off. A quick Google search suggests that current electric cars can take up to 10h to top off, I can't imagine the time for a Truck.
@@JVLY I guess you don't have experience driving an electric car, so it's understandable. You can top up an electric car in 45 minutes, to 90% charge.
The idea is a truck driver takes an hour long lunch break or dinner break or whatever while their vehicle charges. While a forced break is not ideal, it's already a requirement by law, at least in the US, so it's more about making sure there are charging stations in route. Or just do the calculations in the video and have enough battery to go long haul without charging.
@@Danielle_1234 Guess my Google search must have resulted in something else and I didn't pay attention.
Regardless, I can't imagine the Semis would be using the same batteries as a car so I have to assume their charge time would still be significantly higher given the power requirement to push the weight.
Now, current HOS is 14h On Duty, 11 of which can be driven and a required break. The Charge time can't be taken from the 10h Off Duty time as, unless you're an Owner Operator, the truck is not your concern in that time. Charge time would need to be taken from the 14h On Duty clock which heavily cuts into a typical Day To Day. Not only would that truck haul a portion of the weight as a current rig, it would also have less hours of operation.
Now, if these trucks operated like Drones, that would be an entirely different story. Going between docking stations without needing to follow HOS guidelines. That feels like it's still a bit further out though.
That actually sounds horrific. The only upside that might actually bring is that theyed probably build new lots all together for that which at least would make Shure the additional 5x trucks would find parking spots to rest in
@@JVLY First of all, Cargo drones are already in use, the CTA in Hamburg is using electric platforms to move the containers around. Yes those are not public roads but it’s already possible.
In Europe you have to do a 45min brake after 4.5h. Max driving hours are 9 (there are special rules to do 10 but i don’t really wanna explain that) per day and there have to be at least 11h between shifts. So yeah you could load in those 11h if some crazy company would start to build charging stations and also enough parking spots. Or if you are lucky and unload at Amazon, then you can charge for 5h while waiting for a gate.
Let’s pretend we can charge those batteries in 11h. What about the range? The website states 300 or 500 miles. Wtf they don’t even know their own specs? Let’s use 400miles ~ 640km. We usually calculate 60km/h to give clients a very safe time window, it’s more like 70-80km per h. That would mean the truck could barely make 1 shift. But sometimes you have 2 drivers on 1 truck. That wouldn’t be possible with a T semi.
Also how long will those batteries survive when you charge them every day from, let’s be nice, 10% to 90%? A diesel only has to refuel every other day and can be used for at least a decade
Now to my own thoughts and questions (which are not directed to you july Jaziel)
Weight is a Faktor yes, but I also would like to know how much space they have. 80% of the loads we ship are way below the European weight limit. Do they have stupid 40ft dimensions or could you fit some EUR-Pallets in there?
About the 0-60, that are about 12miles above the German speed limit for trucks… Yes they do 59 here but still it’s above the legal speed limit and I can’t really believe that 60mph in a truck are legal in USA.
Also for those that think 0-60 sprint times matter, no they don’t, it’s about Nm. And acceleration doesn’t equals Nm or torque for the freedom unit user. You also have to keep stuff like air density, air temps, cw of the vehicle, weight distribution… in mind. You also have to add a few sec anyways since those 20s are most likely optimised conditions. And please name me 1 real Szenario where you have to go from 0-60 in a truck on public roads. Even during onramps you don’t go full pedal to the metal and lose 10miles of your range every second with a stupid sprint like that. And please compare the semi numbers with a proper truck, like the 5th gen Actros and not your 40 years old Peterbilt with a 16 gear Manuel gear box. Trust me the 650hp and 3000Nm are enough for the public roads and they don’t need 40s to get to 60. Will an Actros do the sprint in 20? Maybe not but does it really matter if he needs 25? A modern truck will still go up an 6 incline.
Elon should first try to build more superchargers before he starts to tackle an industry he might not understand. At least that’s what it looks like. But then again even politicians don’t understand the transport sector…
One huge thing you didn’t include is that states that in the European Union, electric semi trucks are allowed to be 2 tonnes (4,400 lbs) heavier than diesel equivalents, while in the US the allowance is 0.9 tonnes (2,000 lbs). So if the Tesla semi is over 1 ton heavier then a diesel truck, it can’t even hit the roads. When the Tesla semi’s hit the roads, it has to be the equivalent of a diesel truck (in load capacity).
Note that load capacity is not everything through. You are often limited by volume beforehand.
I guess the price (in terms of invest, upkeep and energy costs) will be the key factor. Even if it could load 5t less, if its 30% cheaper than diesel it will get quite a part of the market.
Let's calculate the battery wight for real through. In the EU, you are allowed to drive 4:30h, then you need to do a 45min mandatory break. Given the speed limit of 80km/h (so ~85-90 real) this results in 400km of required range between stops. Now you want to charge 10%==>80% because that's faster (and you have some reserve). So your target range is 400km*0,7=570km. That is the range a truck needs to have if you don't want slowdown. And therefore the requirement for most trucking companies.
So you are going to need a ~750kWh battery. And you need to recharge ~750kW constantly to be done in the 45 min. That's feasible from battery POV, charging 1kW/kWh (also called 1C). Assuming 200Wh/kg, we land at 3750kg of batteries. Maybe if you want some more buffer a little heavier. Pulling equal with Diesel is going to be hard, but its not that much over as the video suggests
@@wernerderchamp
Wrong.
All EV fans are 100% ignorant of the shipping industry.
@@sammencia7945 Just writing wrong is easy
If you know better, tell me where my mistake is
3:56 Electric vehicles do not have internal combustion engines, so the 16 ton figure doesn't make sense. Additionally, the Tesla semi has clearly less range than ICE semis (it is expected to require a recharge halfway through the workday) so the battery weight figure also doesn't make sense.
In addition: the Tesla semi is expected to be used in more niche contexts until the technology improves. These niche contexts include areas such as dockyards where the truck is involved in short trips with frequent loading/unloading "idling" periods.
It's also going to be used for delivering supermarket or food. Less dense cargo like these are volume constrained, making the lower weight capacity a non-issue.
@@spidermain As someone who works in specifically in grocery logistics you really underestimate how heavy groceries are. Just a carton of ketchup is difficult to lift up by a human, chocolate cartons are 50-60lbs each and not even that big. Not even going to try with the canned food. Unless you mean loading a truck with just crisps like use in a fritolay factory, it would still makes a product like this redundant for such a niche use case. If it's loading regular groceries then it would still end up getting round about the same laden weight as average cargo.
@@spidermain only for things like bread or mail.. things that Cube out and weight doesn't mean much ... But general grocery trucks do not cube out they weigh out
Right❤️
So take out about 1,5t for the engine and you still have a bad number.
Given the Tesla Semi delivery event: Suck it Adam, go Tesla!
🤓
Did he deliver it to customers? Or to his own company?
@@adamtravan3946 he delivered it to Pepsi co. A customer of Tesla.
Also missing an important key question. You only need a few minutes to load hundreds of liters of diesel fue in a semi truck. ¿How does supercharge work for a truck with a gazillion of KWh battery?
Idk abour regulations in America, but here in Europe if you drive a Semi you have to take regular breaks. Since the charging speed mostly depends on the battery size with a bigger battery you can charge faster too, thus you would probably charge it just as fast from 10-80% as you do with a any other EV, likel 20-25 minutes.
In Germany you for example have to take a 45 minute break after 4 1/2 hours of driving. It's unlikely that you will actually drive 300 miles in 4 1/2 hours in a semi.
@@LunnarisLP I don't know about how they do it in US or EU. But here in South East Asia, we put 2 drivers on each truck so they can swap seats when they need to take a break and the truck will still moving on the road.
@@keihazuki22 I somewhat doubt that Tesla is targeting south east asia as their market for the Tesla Semi, while they most certainly are targeting European countries who have strong targets to decarbonize their transportation sektor :D
In the long run tesla will obviously try to get their semis to be allowed to drive fully autonomous anyway but thats a whole different story and will likely take at least another 4 years lol..
It won't be long, Tesla is rolling out semi truck specific charging stations that will be able to get the batteries juiced in similar time as one of their cars.
@@LunnarisLP It still doesn't change the fact that the truck need time off in between while other trucks can run marathon for the whole day.
Ermm.. am I missing something? If we assume the efficiency stated is more or less correct (2 kWh/mi), which is believeable since Tesla's Model S uses around (0.25 to 0.3) kWh/mi, and we assume that the range is on the higher end of 500 miles then we can calculate a value for the required mass of the battery. Doing a bit of googling, it seems energy densities for current high-end lithium ion batteries are approximately 0.25 kWh/kg - with the very real prospect of that increasing in the future.
Using the efficiency, the energy required to move the truck 500 miles is E = 2 kWh/mi X 500 mi = 1000 kWh.
Using the expected energy density of Tesla's battery packs (today's tech), and including a realistic battery pack packing factor of 0.64, the mass of the battery, m = 1000 kWh / (0.25 kWh/kg * 0.64) = ~6250 kg. This is far lower than 17 t you estimated in your video (by a factor of ~x2.7..). I do see that you've commented a correction to this which is good, but even with the underlying estimates, the packing factor used is 0.47 which is way below current packs and Tesla's future structural pack design will strive to increase that factor close to 1, bringing the required pack mass down to ~4t. This, with the correction you made to the 16t mass of Tesla Semi without the pack, gives it plenty of load capacity for the use case of short to medium haulage.
Remember, the cost per unit mile to actually run the Semi will be lower than that of a Diesel truck. This will aim to counteract any financial inefficiencies caused by a slightly reduced load capacity.
But the SINGLE most important aspect of all this has been completely forgotten. The Tesla Semi is NOT competing against diesel trucks in the long run, it's competing against hydrogen fuel cell trucks with equally clean emissions (i.e. H2 sourced renewably) because we CANNOT continue to burn fossil fuels for ANYTHING. This should be reflected in a huge rise in the price of diesel if the world was just but this rise is unavoidable in the future anyway.
There are 10k comments on this video so I'm sure you aren't the first one to make this observation, but you're the first I've seen. That stat shouted at me for the whole video, and it completely undermines his argument -- especially paired with the other criticisms.
Omg you are so right, he even said: ‚1L of fuel is equal to 20kg of battery and this shows how unefficient the ENGINE is‘. like wtf it’s the efficiency of the batterie 😂 (sry for bad English)
This should be the top comment.
I get the sense you have a personal grudge against Elon Musk, lol.
That's because he has a brain and practical sense and can see trough Musk's snake oil salesman shenanigans, unlike his legions of zealots.
@@Narcan885 orrrr he is just stupid and doesn't understand why electric trucks are the future hahaha
@@simonjaz1279 no
@@thekappacombs hahaha well considering most of this video was flat out just wrong and idiotic...id say I'm right hahaha
@@Narcan885 they have continually been a driving force in battery tech and electric cars that is not snake oil. If you wanted to call it snake oil a decade ago that might have been fair but it is beyond ridiculous to say so now.
ya just imagine drag racing that when you got a load of glassware in the back! its a start though. batteries need to come down in weight, price & not catch fire. then electric is more viable. also the old 7.5 tonner would be better to electrify as they are inner city delivery vehicles.
Imagine the slosh with smoothbore tankers.
The problem is, we already at the practical limits of how many energy you can pack in single cell, a little bit more, and we are on the some of the explosives territory.
A better start would be to just use electric trains...
Why do you think Elon's truck weighs 16t ? Its engine is much smaller and lighter. Where did you get this data ?
That was my first thought, too. In my opinion, the weight of the battery is also much too high. Daimler has just started series production of the eActros, which has a capacity of 420 kWh and a payload of around 500kg to 1000kg less than a comparable diesel truck.
He made it up
@IKSDE XD he didn't calculate anything he basically did a thunderfoot or a engineering explained and just made up some basic working math that dosnt make logic sense oh yes 17ton battery
@@RandomGuyOnRUclips601 they aren't they pander to anything anti Elon for views despite before they were huge supporters because the needed the RUclips money
@@RandomGuyOnRUclips601 its stuff that says bad stuff about eletric but dosnt share any all of the bad areas of gas its sorta like tiktok it may seem true but it really isnt its biased info
Probably already said, but if not: another point is that the weight restrictions apply to the amount of weight per axles, so, adding more axles would up the load capacity.
Negative 80,000# gross vehicle weight without a permit on US highways
@WarriorCrimson so for the Tesla truck to be useable in a country where there are no battery charges outside of a city with city's thousands of kilometers apart you'd need like 20 axels and pray there no bush fires because of the harsh terrain some of these trucks cross
@WarriorCrimson it's just a truck but worse that's all Elon does he just makes something we already have but worse and every eats his ass over it
I been speaking bout bridge weight too lol
@@iiaubp9287 no u cant have 20 axles or more then really 5 sets anywhere
"It's coming soon in 2020" I had to check the date of this video to make sure, damn hilarious.
Glad I found this channel, it goes well with other channels like Not Just Bikes, CGP, Wendover Productions, Technology Connections and ofc Kurzgezal... that one. Subscribed!
I saw the title of the video and immediately thought Musk had designed some electrical device to aid chaps who can't quite "get it up"... Then I realised it was Semi as in "Semi Truck"... Damn...
Don’t buy into this too much, man. He didn’t even get his weight conversions right. 80,000 lbs is 40 tons, not 36.
@@AFMR0420 are you stupid or something? 80.000lbs = 36287kg rounded down that's 36 tons.
3:26 what? This is not a constant and it improving a lot in recent years. This is completely misleading. Why do hate Elon so much. What's wrong with you?
He is actually right about that, it's just that diesel Semi trucks have over 2'000 miles of range which is why they carry so much fuel. So for 500 miles they only need 4 tons of batteries.
Some of your range calculation assumptions are hard for me to buy into on this video:
-the assumption that the weight of "the rest of the truck that isn't fuel or load" is equal between ICE and electric
-the 1-to-20 rule (and later 1-to-13 rule) is a hand-wavy way of calculating the weight of required energy to match diesel fuel. It would probably serve your purposes better to look into the energy density differences between diesel fuel and Tesla batteries for the sake of these calculations
-the assumption that electric trucks need to have a range equal to the full-tank range of diesel trucks. Validating this assumption would require some market research that may have been too time-consuming for the video that you wanted to make.
And you also delve into the price and risk that a customer has to consider for this truck, and I see some assumptions there as well that require a second look:
-the assumption that automotive battery fires are as common as ICE automotive fires
-the assumption that the initial cost of the vehicle is the biggest cost factor to a customer (instead of something like fuel costs or maintenance costs). Again this requires you to do market research
Those were just some of the assumptions that I noticed in the video. I think if these assumptions were turned into calculations or hard numbers that customers care about, it would give better grounds upon which to make a strong conclusion at the end of the video. I am not sure which way the conclusion would go, but I see too many outlying variables for this to be a helpful video on which to base my own conclusion.
" I think if these assumptions were turned into calculations or hard numbers that customers care about, it would give better grounds upon which to make a strong conclusion at the end of the video." Ah, so just like Tesla should've done?
@@alreadyblack3341 It's very likely that they have internal calculations showing the cost effectiveness of their machine - it's not like Tesla is hemmorhaging money, regardless of what anyone says about their gaffes. Not to mention that this is a more proprietary/business oriented business endeavor as the average person is not going to be buying semi-trucks, so there's also a very strong likelihood that Tesla has preemptively asked companies that ship and haul things what their interest in a new vehicle like this may be.
Or, as Matthew Hull suggested, they could've just done market research to see what the trucker industry was like in recent years, how far the trucks go, how much they spend on fuel and maintenance, etc. etc. Trucking is a fairly diverse practice, with a wide range of needs across different industries and product transportations so I'd be surprised if no companies were intrigued by these new electrically powered trucks at all, but it all depends on whatever Tesla has internally learned or assumed about things.
Much more importantly than i think most people realize though is that this is very obviously a Tesla move towards making trucking an automated industry, since they'll now have their own proprietary electric semitrucks available when laws about self driving vehicles get more updated. And that *would* be an impressive change in the business, since they'll have trucks with no drivers that can be a pretty major paradigm shift.
@@mattrocde Nice word salad.
How does any of this pertain to the fact that this video would be much more arbitrary and useless if we had the numbers?
@@alreadyblack3341 Well actually having the numbers would mean the conclusions would be much more valid - as stated, Adam Something actually posted a comment about how his assumption of diesel to battery tonnages is potentially half of what he used for the video (a rather large margin of error in this case I'd say).
This video is a bald faced shot in the dark about what may or may not be true about the Tesla semitruck and also preemptively assumes that any lack of information about it must definitively be some kind of malice, when the reality of these projects is that major changes to designs can be made late into the project quite commonly. I won't say that this video is entirely useless, but it's total speculation and poses as some kind of analysis and exposure video, which is patently irresponsible to say about a truck which we know so little about. It'd be different if the video used very accurate assumption methodology, but the man himself told us the range of precision for the crux of the argument, that being the battery weight, spans more than double the minimum value.
The main value of the whole video is literally just one guy talking about how much he hates Elon Musk and Tesla without actually just stating that in plain English, since it's obviously not going to get us any closer to deducing what the result of this Tesla semitruck endeavor will be.
Yeah there's even a ton of assumptions on random business desires too.
Like...there's actually plenty of companies that don't give two shits about total range, and are more concerned about cost per mile. Not every truck is doing cross-country long hauls.
Likewise that means you don't have to put enough batteries in to match the range of a long-haul truck, and so all the stuff about the truck using up all the max weight and not being able to carry much load is all based on bullshit anyway.
I think you're missing something here, you didn't account for the fact that electric trucks won't need a lot of internal components to do with fuel management. You seem to have assumed that we have a conventional fuel truck, and add a lot of batteries on TOP of that. In reality, the electric truck would be lighter to begin with, since instead of a heavy engine/fuel systems/etc, it would just have an electric engine and some wires 🤔
That engine only weighs 1 ton. Combine that with the entirety of the conventional power train, and you *might* save up to 2 tons. Most of a rig's weight is in the rolling frame.
You are right. Assume that weighs 5t (or even 10t, which is ridiculously high), still Tesla Semi Truck can only do 8t (13t) compared to 19t for the already existing semi trucks.
@@AaronCMounts Yeah, that is because most American trucks seem to be constructed on very aged concepts. Most European manufacturers produce fully equipped trucks with a weight of under 9 tons, reaching as low as 6 tons.
@@kaffeetasse9455 European trucks typically use shorter frames, Cab-Over configs and have only small sleepers or no sleeper at all. Further, they're built for shorter range driving, thus have smaller fuel tanks. This accounts for the difference in weight.
American trucks are about 12 - 13 tons. The 17 tons he calculated was the combined weight of the truck and trailer together.
Indeed. You take out the engine, transmission, associated components (mounting systems, ancillaries), fuel tanks, etc. Then put in electric motors and you save several tons.
Though I'm doubtful of the claim, he says these trucks are said to have "convoy mode" too, which is basically just trains with extra step... that take up a lane on the highway.
Trains dont go everywhere. Trucks are able to hit hundreds of cities and deliver directly to stores. Trains can not.
@@williamcassell4269 it's too bad trucks don't already exist :(
@@williamcassell4269 damn that’s crazy almost like we should be focusing on building up rail infrastructure or something
@@williamcassell4269 Are you trying to make a pro Tesla truck case here?
@@joeyfatonefrombackstreetboys Has literally nothing to do with my comment or his. He is referring to trucks in convoy mode being a train with extra steps. They are not. They serve different functions. Convoys also serve a specific function. It appears from the string of comments below that people seem to think correcting a definition means I am a fan of Elon's design.
I was always disappointed that we went down the battery powered vehicle rabbit hole. I always thought fuel cell hydrogen was the better alternative and someone just needed to engineer a solution to more cheaply extract hydrogen molecules.... I don't know how its energy profile compares to diesel though.
Right now I'd say hydrogen is the least developed and least capable technology out of diesel, petrol or electric. that is probably because diesel and petrol engines have had about a century of constant development and improvement and batteries have been in use in a lot of electronics with car batteries sometimes literally using the same cells found in laptops or flashlights. I'd say right now hydrogen is probably where petrol/diesel engines were in 1910 in terms of widespread availability and development and batteries are where combustion engines were in 1940. But I also believe if given the appropriate attention hydrogen has the potential to surpass all three of the other technologies by far.
Hydrogen is used in some German areas where it's too difficult to electrify diesel trains. Also, Daimler (Mercedes) is building some hydrogen powered truck prototypes
@@gkulaitis I didn't know about the trains, I do know however that several car manufacturers are working on hydrogen vehicles, that doesn't change the fact hydrogen still needs a lot of work/innovation before large scale use is likely
Hydrogen needed to be pushed in the 1970's. Now that we have halfway decent electric vehicles hydrogen power doesnt stand a chance of taking over. Its far too inefficient compared to BEV. Like 60% loss during its whole cycle from extraction/generation to compression then transport or storage, then expansion and finally combustion.
Its far better than gas or diesel however.
@@klassensj2 efficiency is meaning less . It's cost.. total cost of ownership that matters most.. and hydrogen is around the range of 120,000 dollar a.t.moment
Isnt the head of the truck supposed to be lighter due to no big metal block engine?? Why they weight the same? 😳
Batteries?
He then added the battery weight later as well
because the video is full of bullshit and with only one goal: portraying an overly negative image.
@@tomfriesecke4420 ikr
He shits on everyone in almost every video he make
He just makes videos negative to get clicks and make ad money smh
@@tomfriesecke4420 "You know how Teslas sometimes spontaneously combust" This is where he lost all credibility. This argument is so ridiculous as statistics show, that Teslas catch fire every 207million miles compared to ICE vehicles every 19million miles.
I think you miscalculated the weight of the vehicle. The vehicle doesnt have an engine and thus it doesnt weigh 16t but it may weigh 20-25t with the battery included
That’s what I thought when I saw the math
Well he's known to talk negatively about anything good, so that doesn't surprise me.
not only engine, gearbox, driveshaft etc, and keep in mind this is first electric truck, anyone remember first diesel truck specification?
engine weighs only 300kg. but you need huge motors just to run 36t, so in the end truck will still weigh 16t
@@miszcz1983 wait electric trucks don’t have gears or a drive shaft this must be some Miracle tech
You can’t keep the same 16t weight as the fuel semi and then add the weight of the battery, that’s just plainly dishonest…
Why not? The fuel weighs X amount for a gas powered truck, the fuel weighs Y amounts for an electric powered truck. The weight of the fuel is compared in the video… and basic logic shows that its important when it comes to load capacity given there is a limit on how much these vehicles can carry (carry weight + the weight of the truck itself)
@@antibull4869 Because the weight of a diesel truck needs to include the massive engine block, transmission, power train, etc, all things an electric truck doesn't have. Then you're taking that weight, and adding on the weight of the battery to it!?.... Nonsense. Without the battery an electric truck is basically just a frame, probably weighing no more than like 6 tonnes.
Imagine applying the same ridiculous logic in reverse: "A tesla truck weighs 20 tonnes (for example), but a tesla truck doesn't have an engine, so for a regular truck let's add on the engine and transmission weight look now it's 30 tonnes! See diesel trucks are impactical!" Ridiculous, of course you would first subtract the weight of the battery.
@@Twas-RightHere In both instances, he assumes (and says) that the engines are included in the base 16 ton truck weight...which is fine, sure. In the comparison, he then assumes the same "base" weight for the Tesla truck...which is fine enough, but it's wrong in that electric engines - even big semi truck ones - weigh significantly less: where a diesel semi engine would weight about 1.5ton, an equivalent power electric engine (or 4 in this case) would weight in at about 0.5ton (because such things aren't as weightless as you're assuming).
So if the base weight for the diesel truck is 16 tons (which isn't far off if you also include the trailer), you can assume the base weight for the same-body truck using an electric engine to be 15 tons, which is about right if accounting for just the engines. There's further weight savings to be gained with the removal of shafts etc, but most of that gets added back in with the new axles and mechanicals. Add back the fuel and battery, and you get 17.5 tons for a diesel truck that goes about 1,800 miles in a fill-up, and our hypothetical equivalent electric truck-trailer combination would weight 32.1 tons to go the same distance on a single charge.
All that to say that the math of his argument is pretty honest. Now in his Tesla-hate, he may have overlooked the fact that Tesla did helpfully announce back in 2018 the theoretical weight numbers that they hoped to achieve when designing these trucks...even if they are now suspiciously silent on the final result. By the numbers Tesla released, these trucks aren't designed to compete with long-haul trucks - they are much more like Volvo's VNR mid-range electric trucks - and so I'd probably ding him on comparing a 1 ton fuel-carrying sleeper cab long-haul truck to whatever Tesla's trying to do...if Tesla hadn't done that themselves, as highlighted on "Inside EVs."
insideevs.com/news/336273/the-tesla-semi-weighs-in-part-3/
According to Tesla, they compared their 500-mile range truck plan to a 9.5tn diesel sleeper cab. Compared to that 9.5tn diesel truck (full of 200 gallons of fuel and an 1,800-mile range), their 500-mile range electric truck would weigh 11.9tn for a truck with less than one third the range as their comparison... and without Tesla's "lightweighting" plan included because I'm interested in comparing apples to apples and not apples to kumquats, since the trucking industry is also moving towards "lightweighting" and including that without also doing the math for the base diesel cab was ultimately pretty dishonest of Tesla, but what else is new.
Compare that their 300-mile range smaller truck would be about 9.8tn. Pretty close to the diesel truck, but keep in mind it has one sixth (17% of) the range...which is fine, because it's still a fine enough 40tn GVW truck that's not meant as a competitor for long-haul trucking, and this is why I've supported hydrogen vehicles for the last 12 years.
Anyway, that was a fun and pointless bit of research.
The regulators have already allow the extra battery weight in total load allowances. It's a non-issue.
@@lylestavast7652 I don't think that's gonna be that easy, there roads that have weight capacity because they can't hold the pressure of a 45 tons truck, just because, Tesla needs to be allow to sell trucks. They for sure are gonna limit they load amount and less load is less money, I don't think people are gonna love that.
oh noooooo oh nooooooo your wrong xD
@Jonny It's not, 17 tons of batteries is for 2'000 miles of range, which is what a diesel Semi does on a full tank. Tesla has only promised 500 miles so 3.2 tons of cells or 5 tons for the whole pack.
You are mistaken to think the Tesla semi weights the same as a petrol semi without the battery installed
Yeah the without a battery the tesla truck would weigh about 3,000lb less assuming they're built similarly
It goes way beyond that. He not only included the weight of the ICE components, but the frame as well. Electric trucks are built on an entirely different frame optimized for the drivetrain. He also neglects aerodynamic improvements due to the different design (since the engine isn't in the front taking up a bunch of space. Once you subtract all the ICE components and add in the battery/motors, its probably only a couple thousand pounds heavier than a diesel. I also see people slamming on them mentioning the 0-60 time as if trucks never merge onto freeways going uphill or just go up hills in general.
@@berto1014 Still useless for long-haul trucking. But, only 2 innovations away from dominating long-haul trucking.
1. Self-driving remote-operated trucks. The biggest bottleneck is not fuel, it's drivers. Take out the driver, let it be self-driving with a remote operator, boom.
2. Quick-swappable batteries or fleet caravans. If you can swap the battery out suddenly the limited range is meaningless. Or, if a semi truck can merge with a caravan of other battery-powered semis to increase its range (road train) suddenly the comparison is completely different.
@@gorkyd7912 totally agree.
Yeah, this guy has no ideas of his own so he has to shit on others.
A promised battery capacity jump ? Like his last battery "capacity" jump where in something like 4 years he managed to nearly DOUBLE the battery "capacity"... by DOUBLING the SIZE of the battery. Such brilliance... the man is a genius...
You're allowed to drive 4 hours, then a mandatory 30 minute break, then another 4 hours. So, assuming an adequate charger at every truck stop, only requires 250 miles of range, since trucks generally don't exceed 60 MPH. An average diesel car uses 5L/60 miles, average loaded truck needs 30L/60 miles. Using the same ratio on a Tesla Model 3, which needs some 12 kWh/60 miles, we get just over 70 kWh/60 miles. That means, the Semi only needs a 300 kWh battery. At current energy density of Tesla cells, that's 300 kWh : 0.25Wh/kg = 1200 kg! That's about as much as a diesel truck's engine weighs. The math checks out - Semi can absolutely be viable. Assuming there's a bunch of 600 kW chargers at every truck stop... Otherwise we need 600 kWh of batteries, that's 2.5 tonnes, to do the whole day. Since we now have 16 hours of break, we only need chargers with 40 kW - that can even be supplied by 3-phase AC stalls, or the very cheapest DC stations. The only situation where that's insufficient is tandem driving - in Europe it's rare, but I know it's common in the US, so in these cases we'll need something more. Either double the battery - but now we're running into weight constraints - or build Megawatt charging stations - but that's expensive. Tandem driving needs something more to work, it's not the time yet. However, the Tesla Semi is absolutely viable in all single driver scenarios. There's no reason not to switch to electric - and even better, it's perfectly reasonable cost-wise. Let's assume a 700 kWh battery, so a full day's charge, plus a bit of surplus for winter heating. At the current battery production cost of 142$, that Tesla currently achieves, the cost of such a battery pack is 700 * 142, or almost exactly 100.000$. A Mack truck sells for 150.00$. About 50.000$ of that is the diesel powertrain, so the truck body is about 100.000$. So, a Tesla Semi would probably be marketed at around 200.000$, maybe a bit more. That's 50.000$ more than a Mack. Now, 70 kWh of electricity needed for 60 miles costs as little as 7$ on night tariff. 30L of diesel needed for that is 30$ (a bit more in the EU, a bit less in the US). Assuming the truck always drives the full allowed distance, that's almost 200$ saved every single day! If it works every weekday, no weekends, that's 250 days a year, it'll recoup the extra costs after just one year of operation. This thing will sell like hotcakes!
Agree, finally someone who truly used his brain, first red flag was when he started adding the weight of the batteries to the weight of a diesel truck. Anyway good job
Thanks for this. While it's good to take the Musk hype with a grain of salt, don't make a video calling his ideas shit based on some assumptions instead of actual numbers.
none of these are going over the road >> frito/walmart/ups/amazon will glug glug glug these up and charge at their warehouses on private commercial power chargers. stupid truckers or broke fleets arent getting these for a decade
Hours of service in the states are capped. US drivers can drive up to 11 hours unless they have been on duty for 14, at least when I was driving before my disability. Stopping every 4 hours for a charge top off is not productive with current industry standards if on a long haul. It's a matter of pull the door closed and don't stop too often to get the road miles in the hours of service limits.
Drivers also need a bed to sleep at night.Because no one sleeps in hotels.They won't sell.
It is so funny to me how some people are ignoring that for this to be viable, you need to store massive amounts of energy in something very small. In other words, an easily accessible bomb.
I don’t think Elon musk knows what “revolutionize the world” means.
Semi trucks can go about 2,100 miles on a 300 gallons (roughly 800kg) of diesel fuel. 800kg x 20 = 16t ("1-to-20
rule") but the Tesla Semi has 300-500 miles of range so in the worst case scenario the battery can't weight more then 4 t. Tractors weight at most 11t, not 16t. The engine alone is at least 1t (which tesla doesn't have) There is no way the Tesla tractor weighs more then 10t. 36-(4+10)=22t of cargo assuming the absolute worst scenario. Adam Something claimed 3t of cargo. That is a faulty computation by an order of magnitude. Nice way to spin the numbers when you have the agenda.
To reverse modern advances in transportation perhaps ?
@@RandomGuyOnRUclips601 Look at the examples of electric trucks (that you can buy NOW) from Volvo, MAN, Scania, DAF etc. Many have ranges as low as 200 miles, which is in fact fine for a lot of urban trucking, logistics like warehouse to sales outlet traffic etc. Longer distances will need hydrogen fuel cells.
revolutionising the world would actually mean seizing his and other capitalists factories for the workers benefit ;)
@@archangel4597 In a communist version of 'utopia' maybe. We remember how that finally worked out for the USSR!
I'm happy with the German version of 'workplace democracy' with 'workers' on the board etc.
Ur first upload was picked up by the algorithm very graciously
@@Noam-Bahar A
@@Noam-Bahar A
@@Noam-Bahar A
You have a mistake in your calculations there. The vehicle weight for a electric vehicle without the battery's is not nearly the same as a vehicle with a massive diesel engine. The electric motors and inverters is A LOT lighter.
This is the obvious, blatant overlooking that makes me think oil companies sponsor these sorts of videos. Though that might be a little too much of a conspiracy theory.
The whole video is bull... Too much made-up numbers, while we still don't know anything that would help us say if it's good or not. I believe these trucks will be good for next to nothing, but the stats here are just empty hate-numbers...
Uhm.. A Mercedes Actros' engine (OM 471) weighs 1150 kg. Even asuming that the four electric motors and inverters are a lot lighter (taking Tesla Model S motor & inverter weight of 140 kg as a reference and multiplying it by 4 required for Tesla Semi, which is well underestimating the weight for similar components to drive a truck) you would just save ~500 kg. Next proposal?
@@PressurenFlames One way or the other gas powered vehicles are out of the way so it has to be renewable energy, the technology is still new, it's amazing how quickly many people want to dismiss it without realizing how important it is just because it cannot replace gas entirely right away, it's just getting started.
@@zereimu „The technology is still new“ - Do you know in which year the first race using an electric vehicle did take place?
December 1, 2022. The Tesla Semi truck started delivery today.
An electric cars weight is mostly the batteries themselves. So calculating the weight of a regular truck and adding the weight of the batteries is unfair.
The batteries are part of the powertrain and should be considered in the 16 tons weight of the truck itself.
Electric anything means no transmission, no drive shaft, smaller motors, no starter motor, no need for massive bushings underneath a massive motor reducing engine vibration , etc etc that reduce the weight.
To think that an electric semi would weigh 16 tons (truck) + 17 tons (batteries) is wrong in my opinion.
Not a Tesla fanboy. But an advocate of electric transport.
Recognize that the battery comes out to be heavier than the whole diesel truck, still. 17 > 16, even if we're using 17 and not 33. Then toss on a nice even 3 tons for all the ancillary stuff (a chassis, windows, steering wheel, the stuff that isn't batteries that an electric truck will need to have to be a truck) which would put it at 20 tons. This is not such a severe handicap, but it is still less capacity than current diesel trucks- ~16t electric truck capacity versus ~20t diesel truck capacity.
The video also completely ignores the advancement of the new 4680 battery in energy density.
@@pabrodi there was an entire section about this between 4 and 5 minutes.
@@pabrodi also remember that the 4680 batteries are higher capacity because they atr bigger and heavier (x5) not due to increased density.
In fact the larger cylinder should lead to greater space between each cell. Therefore the same capacity battery would likely be larger not smaller. Though this won't cause the battery itself to be heavier it will mean the battery compartment would be larger and heavier
@Armathyx G that’s not entirely accurate. Compare the weight of Model 3 to a 3 series or a Model S to an S class. They’re not that different in terms of weight.
From a quick Google search I found that a conventional truck has a range of around 2500km, so with the range of 300-500mi, thats around 3-5 times that of a Tesla Semi. Decreasing the weight of the battery by these factors would result in 15-17t of load capacity. But that is under the assumptions that the 1 to 20 is for the same range. Also no logistics company would want to stop more frequently and longer to refuel.
Sidenote: Pretty sure I saw a video by Wendover about electric airplanes, so they are a thing even without the hypothetical efficiency boost of batteries by Tesla
That might work pretty well in Europe though, the drivers are strictly limited by law to a maximum of 4.5 hours of continuous driving before they have to take a 45 minute break. With a speed limit of ~50mph for semis that comes out to under 250 miles between stops anyways, and 45 minutes should be enough to top up the batteries enough for the next 4.5h leg. Then after that you're officially finished for the day, so you can charge the batteries to full until the next morning.
Is the 300-500 range based on pulling a full load? Musk never indicates if it is. The heavier the weight, the quicker the drain on the batteries meaning possibly less range than Musk is indicating.
The 1 to 20 figure is wrong. It doesn't take into account the relative efficiency of drivetrains and it doesn't take into account regeneration.
@@pebmets It appears to be full load, but under optimal (flat) conditions. Remember that you also have regeneration.
The costs for a bigger fuel tank are really low. So they have higher ranges for a more flexible use of the Truck. The need of every Truck is not to reach a range of 2500 km you only need a big enough market for ranges up to 800 km. When you refuel Diesel in a truck you have to pay a driver to do that while he is staring in the air. You can simultaneously unload/load your payload and recharge some range. If you want exactliy the same use than use a Diesel-truck but if you want to learn how to to be better than you have to learn how to use it for a better result. Thats a Problem with people who think that status quo is a static god-given status.
But why other Truck-makers are developing electric trucks and only the Tesla-Version should be rubbish? He ended at the half of thinking about the technology.
I like the math done in this video and I want to say that I do enjoy your content. I feel you missed the mark a bit on this one though. Prerequisite, I am an automotive technician who had grown up around and is very familiar with trucking and semis.
A logistics company factors in load capacity into its equation but it is not the most important number. What they care about most is getting "X" from A to B as fast and as cheap as possible.
Cheap is the name of the game here because Diesel is downright expensive.
Now, a normal rig can get close to 6 miles per gallon of fuel, hence the reason they need such a massive fuel capacity. The Tesla semi is FAR more aerodynamic than pretty much any modern rig can get close to (as the Tesla doesn't need a gigantic radiator along with many other things) because of this it can take advantage of its efficiency and have far less running costs. I will not bother to do the math for those as I am not an engineer or a battery chemist.
What I can confidently comment on is Maintenance. And between electric vehicles and ICE. It's no contest. An ICE Semi needs regular oil changes, glow plugs, transmission repairs, so many DEX system repairs. The maintenance for a semi can top tens of thousands of dollars per year on the regular. Tesla Semi? It needs brakes. And only around a fifth of the time that and ICE semi needs them.
Once the battery technology reaches production cost parity, Tesla will simply be a leader in a whole new fleet of electric Semis. Several other companies are already working on it. That's just the adoption of better technology.
Yeah... His lack of A to B maths in this video is a kinda huge omission... Here's a bit FYI: Assuming the advertised 600kWh/300mile & 1000kWh/500mile models - 100% Charging them at the new Megacharger theyre testing (assuming 1MW charge rate) would take 36min / 1hour respecively and cost $86 / $144 at the USA average electicity price of #0.144/kWh. Thats less than $0.30 per mile which i'm told is about half what diesel is currently.
As for brake servicing - I guarantee you'll be changing MANY less of them on EV trucks due to companies mandating the maximum use of regen braking to recover all that stored kinetic energy and hence $$. This alone will save a boatload of cash operating in urban stop start environments where EV busses are currently smashing the competition!
Also this truck isn't meant to replace long haul just yet so it doesn't need a battery as big as talked about in this video - my maths puts the weight of the 1000kWh batterypack at around 5T (3.3T just for the cells, 1.7T for the package). I've no idea what a truck engine/gearbox weighs but since the EV drivetrain will be much lighter I'd be willing to bet the weight penalty won't be anywhere near as severe as is discussed in this video..
Then there's the fact that these will definitely come with FSD by default for their 'convoy' mode.
And I'm pretty sure the truck will be far lighter because the lack of that massive engine as well. I mean sure, the battery may weigh a lot but it can't be fair to add the weight of a battery to the weight of an ICE truck and guess that's how much the electric truck will weigh right?
Now that the semi is a reality can you revisit this topic. It seems as though all your kwh/kg assumptions were way off. Cheers
He is right, it's about 20 kg of batteries per kg of diesel, but 800 kg of diesel is 1'500 miles of range and some class 8 trucks can reach 2'000 miles of range loaded.
Tesla has only promised 500 miles of range, so 4 tons of batteries.
@@johntheux9238 ok. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the point of the video. Is the main criticism of the tesla semi is that it only goes 500miles on single charge compared to 1500 miles as you mention? Otherwise they have explicitly stated that all specs are legitimate and load capacity is inline with other diesel trucks. I agree that range is VERY important, but as a trucking product that trades less range for better speeds/acceleration (time is money - albeit slower but passive charging), better braking, better safety, no pollutants, less fuel costs, less maintenance costs, it would seem there is quite a market for that, especially since they already have customers. I guess what I'm not understanding is the measure which makes this product a 'failure'. Is it simply due to less range, or would it be more accurately a failure if it doesn't sell?
@@_wat2do No, the guy in the video is an idiot who forgot to check out what's the range of a regular Semi truck.
And 500 miles of range is enough since the Tesla Semi can be charged at the factory and not at a gas station.
@@_wat2do The Tesla Semi is definitively going to be an insanely good product just from gas savings. Just like every car that Tesla makes that can be charged at home every night.
Assuming that the truck weighs 33 tons is simply ridiculous. I'm not a Musk stan but seriously, 33 tons ? You are just being dishonest at this point.
How? What will the chassis or trailer and body be made out of?
I'm genuinely curious.
Vibranium and carbon fibre, maybe?
Had to throw that in there😄
Edit: He said his numbers were wrong. Correct.
A lot of the weight diesel/gas powered engines comes from the engine and the heavy mounts and transmissions in the vehicle's system. I do think that EVs don't have much over these vehicles, as Adam has mentioned already. I'm not beating that drum again
Where does the weight in EVs add up?
-Cooling systems, the batteries themselves(not too huge), the traiker they'd use to carry those supplies must be reinforced well to take Load after load as to not damage the batteries.
His numbers are wrong, he says so..but i do think it presents a lot of unnecessary challenges in increasing capacity compared to normal trucks. But hey. It may be a good start in the direction of innovation. But I assume most trucks nowaday travel from far off places, to their final destinations to offload where they are intended to be and offloading just to put it onto another truck to offload somewhere more urban is not that time effective. Unless it's a pick up situation as is a Tesla truck drives to pick up supplies for a small town for a few weeks and does it every few weeks. Picking supplies from a town not to far off..
In that case I'd think they'd need to invest in a supply train or a tram, to get supplies or get groceries themselves
@@potatopotatoeOG I don't think you realize how heavy 33 tons is. So much mass in so little volume is ludicrous. Also you can find the weight of the semi on Google and "experts" believe it to be around 16 tons or less. I also advise you to read what Adam Something wrote in the comment section after he realized he was getting hate for assuming the weight of a truck without doing ANY actual research.
@@maxmai7972 Its not the first time Elon made something Work that seemed to be undoable. He made partly reusable rockets.
So i dont think that he cant get a semi truck to weight less than 33 tons.
@@slamoto2 Wrong.
Reusable rockets never seemed undoable, the soviets and nasa were experimenting with them in the '80s, decades before Musk.
In the '90s there were experiments that proved reusable rockets are doable, prior to Musk.
The problem with reusable rockets is not that they are impossible, it is that they are much more costly than non reusable rockets.
Also, that electric truck is not here and last, your god Musk can't violate the laws of physics and chemistry.
@@durshurrikun150 proving that reusable rockets are doable and actually doing it is something else tho. But since i wrote it like its ok. Just wanted to say that he actually did it instead of just thinking about it.
"The problem with reusable rockets is not that they are impossible, it is that they are much more costly than non reusable rockets."
lmao sure. Maybe if you just think about the first rocket. But dont tell me that you actually belive that reusing a part of the rocket is much more expensive than building a completely new one.
Ill rather buy a new pair of dishes after every meal instead of reusing it.
as an Elon fan watching your videos has made me less impressed with his projects because I never put the math into consideration, the only project I have faith in is starship going to mars and I won't be surprised if you make a logical video about how it won't be possible.
Kurzgesagt did video about Mars colonization.
Adam didn't even put 5 minutes research in, so why would you change your mind?
Adam is a hater and people enjoy musk hate videos. No need to change your opinion.
Yea this is barely researched and he sets off trying to find ways to discredit the project so he chooses his data to make his point more convincing. Yea innovation always has hurdles and anyone can point out it’s flaws that’s the easy part. The ironic thing is people like him used to discredit planes and trains in the same way saying it’ll never work based on simple calculations. I’m not a musk fan but still, shitting on new technology like this gets us nowhere, except views for himself 🤔
This video shouldn't be the reason for that. Real Enginnering (some actual engineers) did the same comparisons and calculations (but better) he did, and ended in a way more optimistic note. This video is just wack compared to the answers and the resources they provide.
ruclips.net/video/oJ8Cf0vWmxE/видео.html
How about now? :D
Elon has still not published the load capacity...he said it carried 81000 lbs but thats the total weight...not the load capacity
@@JT-zl8yp It says standard load on the website. 2kWh/mile*500miles/(240Wh/kg for a 2170 battery)=~4100kg or 4.1 ton battery. 1 ton ev allowance+standard ev weight reductions (no fuel pump, fuel tank etc.) means little to no payload penalty. They say it's actually 1.7kWh/mile which is even better so this is pessimistic.
@@JT-zl8yp that is the legal limit
@@timc7035 Then why not just mention the load capacity like any other company instead of the customer having to do multiple assumptions and calculations
@@JT-zl8yp He said the payload was the same as a regular Semi so the truck is about the same weight.
This hasn't aged well
Aged very well! Unlike Musk fanboys! LOL