Tesla has confirmed it has given up on plans to make a Cybertruck range extender to achieve the range it originally promised on the electric pickup truck.

It started refunding deposits for the $16,000 extra battery pack.

When Tesla unveiled the production version of the Cybertruck in late 2023, two main disappointments were the price and the range.

The tri-motor version, the most popular in reservation tallies before production, was supposed to have over 500 miles of range and start at $70,000.

Tesla now sells the tri-motor Cybertruck for $100,000 and only has a range of 320 miles.

The dual-motor Cybertruck was supposed to cost $50,000 and have over 300 miles of range. In reality, it starts at $80,000 and has 325 miles of range.

Archive link: https://archive.is/CGbaE

  • ikidd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 hours ago

    It could be $15 and have the range of an ICBM, it can still sit on the lot and scare the kids walking by.

  • gradual@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    Is it just me, or is musk profiting off of selling people tech before it’s actually ready?

    Like, we don’t have the means right now to achieve what he advertises, so he lies about it and then ‘alters the deal’ after taking people’s money.

    • LeroyJenkins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      10 hours ago

      that’s been tech as an industry for the last decade. product releases, then all promised features come as a half baked update a year later… if at all. phones, games, cars, etc all use this strategy now unfortunately.

    • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Only a fool buys something on the promise of future upgrades and potential. Buy stuff on what it is now.

      This is a bad look for Tesla for sure, but no one should be going “I wouldn’t have bought it if I knew this would get cancelled”.

      • gradual@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        Yep.

        “Games as a service” are released as a “minimum viable product” to see if it can hook enough suckers to make it profitable enough for the company to finish making.

        If there aren’t enough saps that take the bait, development ceases and whoever put their faith in the product look like tools.

    • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      15 hours ago

      That’s exactly what he’s been doing with all his businesses. And it works. Tesla is still hugely overvalued as a company.

  • killeronthecorner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    164
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    “Thanks for all the $16k loans at 0% shmucks. We’ve kept the interest we made while rates have been up and now you can have it back while they’re dropping. Of course, your money is now worth less than it was when you gave it to us during high inflation. Suck it losers. Love, T E S L A”

    EDIT: deposit was $150. Still shitty but not the same impact

    EDIT 2: Or $2000? … tl;dr: shitty

  • apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    83
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    The dual motor was originally announced to be US$39,900, not 50,000. It is lies all the way down at Tesla.

    • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I was seriously considering it back then. My wife hated the look and wouldn’t let me even consider it, but as someone who likes Back to the Future and Tron, I didn’t hate the aesthetic, though it took some getting used to. And I want a comfortably large EV (my compact is too small for my old bones) with 500 miles to avoid range anxiety. A 100 mile distance in the middle of a midwestern winter without a charger at the other end is going to require 500 miles of range to get back home due to heating the battery and cabin, and driving at 80mph. And my longest daily commute was 212 miles round trip before someone asks how often I need to drive 100 miles away in the middle of winter.

      I wouldn’t say bullet dodged because I was never really close to getting one, but charging three times the price for only 60% range compared to that announcement is fucking insane.

        • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          I was transitioning from being a lotus notes developer to a java developer and I was moving back home to the Midwest from DC. As that job took a chance on me and allowed both, it was a really good fucking job for the moment. It eventually transitioned to hybrid.

          We had planned to move to the area but couldn’t find a place we liked and kept living with my folks until I just said fuck it and we bought a house near them instead and I dealt with the commute. Then Covid hit and I got laid off on my two year anniversary.

          Now, my commute is about 70 miles one way 1-2 times per week (and that’s still 3 hours total drive time). That’s a pretty typical drive for me. My kids also live kinda near where I work so even if it weren’t for commuting, I’d still make that drive quite often. As it is, I drive down the night before an office day, spend time with them and stay over night, and then drive back home about 2pm the next day (fucking hate rush hour in Detroit). But I can’t charge at their houses anyway so that doesn’t help.

          I drive a PHEV because there isn’t an EV out yet that can get me there and back. Though I finally have a plug at work if I get in early enough.

          • glimse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            1 day ago

            Now that’s dedication. I’d probably have driven myself into a ditch by the 3rd month of that (but I haaaate driving)

        • tamal3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Where I live is not super uncommon for people to drive an hour into the nearest city. I don’t recommend it, though!

          It really makes me envious when I see how much Europeans work: my partner already works more hours on average than the average European, and then his commute is on top of that. Why are we here? Give me mandatory vacation and a job I can bike to ANY DAY.

          • glimse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            21 hours ago

            I hate driving so much, I moved somewhere 15 minutes from work even though I only go in like 3 times a month

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      The dual motor was originally announced at 50k

      Single motor rear-wheel drive with 250 miles of range, 7,500-pound towing capacity, and 0–60 mph capabilities in under 6.5 seconds, for $39,900
      
      Dual motor all-wheel drive with 300 miles of range, 10,000-pound towing capacity, and 0–60 mph in under 4.5 seconds for $49,900
      
    • melsaskca@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      $39,900? Not $40,000? Does Elon still think that old “99” trick still works?

  • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Ima be honest, I like the design of this thing. I’m big into brutalism and the Delorean is one of my favorite car designs of all time. I was really hoping this would be good, but it has turned out to be one of the worst products in recent history in any category. It’s up there with the humane pin.

    It makes me a little bit sad because I will never be able to live out my cyberpunk fantasy of driving an electric truck made out of bare metal manufactured by a technofascist corporation.

    • slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I don’t know man, the hyundai ioniq 5 has way more delorean vibes than the cyber truck. The cyber truck just actually looks like how i was drawing cars as a child.

    • gradual@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I absolutely hated the design and feel bad for anyone who gets into an accident with this monstrosity.

    • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      What are you basing that extreme statement on? It seems to be far from a bad product, let alone “one of the worst products in recent history”.

      • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Basing it on the huge amount of recalls it has had? The fact that it is more dangerous than the Ford Pinto by a wide margin? The fact that the panels are glued on? That if you try to haul something with it you risk tearing it apart? Maybe the fact that it is more expensive than all its competitors while also having worse performance even though it was announced years before any of them?

        The bar for cars is so high right now too, like you sit down in a 25k Kia and you’ll hardly miss anything coming from a luxury brand other than the badge and maybe a little bit of engine power.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          The “recalls” have all apart from 1, iirc (the accelerator pedal cover), been delivered via OTA software updates. Calling them “recalls” in the first place is a bit silly since they’re not actually recalled.

          Many panels in many cars are “glued” on btw. Calling it “glue” is disingenuous too, attempting to make out like it’s not a specific panel bonding adhesive that is used all over the car industry.

          I’m assuming you’re talking about the JerryRigEverything video with your “risk testing it apart” comment, right? That was, for lack of a more correct term, complete horseshit. The “test” was “rigged” in a way that it made it seem like it failed when in fact it passed with flying colours, lasting like 10x the quoted force. There’s no real world situation where that failure would happen, because the test exerts pressure in a way that can’t happen in any regular situation a truck can be in.

          One thing I don’t think anyone can claim is that the cyber truck has worse performance than its competitors. It’s basically a supercar in terms of performance lol.

          I agree the car market is in a great place in terms of build quality and features even on low spec cars, but the Cybertruck still isn’t “one of the worst products in recent memory”, not even close.

      • slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        A 100k “rugged offroad” vehicle where the bumper falls off when you tow something, that isn’t waterproof, sometimes the rims just break, it can slice you apart and the car is held together by elmers glue and hopes and dreams. What other product in that price range is that shit?

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Ah the BS JerryRigEverything “towing” test. Of course people on here believe that was a problem for the cybertruck.

    • utopiah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      20 hours ago

      up there with the humane pin.

      Funny, or sad, how quickly we collective manage to forget bad grifts.

          • k0e3@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 hours ago

            I’m not a car guy so I don’t understand why your view seems to be so popular on the Internet (at least in the Anglosphere).

            Is Toyota doing the Sony thing where they double down on a certain — perhaps less practical — format in hopes that it will make them money if/when it gets adopted as an industry standard?

            • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 hours ago

              It’s the nature of hydrogen as a fuel. It’s a gas, and has a very low power density. You can either compress it, but that requires the car carry a robust (and heavy) pressure vessel around. Plus, all the delivery infrastructure has to handle hydrogen at those crazy pressures, or you need to carry the compressor in the vehicle, which again is heavy, and slow. The other possiblity is to condense the hydrogen by cooling it. But now you need bulky insulation for the tank, plus, it will either need active cooling from the car, or your have to accept that the hydrogen will eventually get too warm and blow the tank, and then you have to vent it.

              Hydrogen doesn’t make sense at car scale.

              • PieMePlenty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 hours ago

                Its not that I don’t agree with you but I figure there has to be a business case for it if Toyota is willing to keep investing in it for 25 years. Surely, at this point, they would have thrown in the towel but they keep at it. And to make maters more interesting, they don’t seem to give a shit about full electric either. It feels like they know something we don’t.

                • kameecoding@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  They bet on the wrong horse, they are reluctantly making the switch in BEV.

                  And the previous commenter didn’t even give the full picture, it’s that even making hydrogen is just wholly uneconomical any way you look at it, you can look up grey, green hydrogen.

                  The use case for hydrogen would be if someone drives like a shittton a day, so maybe semis, and like the less than 1% of drivers who need to dive that much.

              • k0e3@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 hours ago

                Thank you kindly! It just seems so weird that Toyota and even Japan seems so gung-ho about it. I guess it’s a case of sunk cost fallacy?

                • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 hours ago

                  Not sure. Toyota is a very conservative and risk-adverse automaker. My guess is that they thought it could work better in Japan, as they have less land area and more miles traveled by train. Hydrogen can kinda make sense for a service/fleet vehicle that works in a limited area and always returns to the same location at the end of the day. Hydrogen can be run through an ICE engine, or it can be used in a fuel cell to produce electricity. Plus, everyone else was doing R&D into BEVs, so doing a little into hydrogen makes sense. If you fall too far behind on BEV tech, you can just buy a competitor’s vehicle and reverse engineer it to catch up.

                  I’m not a business person. Take that all with a grain of salt.

    • Coreidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      23 hours ago

      I’ve got an aluminum foil wrapped turd that I know you’re interested in buying. Ready to ship!

  • mle@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    How hard can it be to produce a simple battery pack, for a company that is in the business of designing and producing battery packs no less…

    • JordanZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      Think the end of the article pretty much nails it.

      Tesla needed to install and remove it at a service center. Owners couldn’t remove them themselves. I think it was pretty much dead on arrival at $16,000.

      But I think it could also be as simple as it’s not worth producing due to demand – both due to insufficient people reserving it and not enough Cybertruck buyers to create a market for the range extender.

      Therefore, the range extender is dead for the same reason that the Cybertruck RWD now has the same battery pack as the AWD instead of a smaller pack for less money: the Cybertruck is a commercial flop, and it’s not a high-volume program enough to justify making several battery pack sizes, including a removable one.

    • Ledericas@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      the 3rd one is a reality disortion field motor for MUSKRATS musk supporters.

    • Oniononon@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      20 hours ago

      One runs front wheels, one runs rear wheels and third one powers the mental gymnastics it takes to be a tesla owner in 2025.

      • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        22 hours ago

        That makes even less sense. Distributing mechanical power on non steering wheels is easy, but for steering wheels requires a more complex and expensive coupling, as well as power losses. Just… why?

        • _stranger_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          I believe the three motor versions is to add extra power under load to the rear wheels. (A weight/power/range compromise between the 4 and 2 motor versions).

          The motors are essentially in line with the wheels (they have gearing but it’s minimal and internal to the motor housing, not attached like an automatic transmission would be, if that makes sense.)

          The “three motor” design is just the single motor design up front and the dual motor design in the back.

          I’m not sure if they ever actually released the single motor version though.

          • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            More power to the rear makes sense because you get more traction at the rear under normal acceleration, not just when carrying a load. It’s pretty typical of electric cars to do this, just like it’s typical to have bigger brakes on the front of all cars, because there’s more traction at the front under braking.

            There’s also the issue of torque vectoring. Without a differential, torque vectoring is essential, but under acceleration torque vectoring to the rear wheels is much more effective than to the front wheels, so that’s another reason to split the rear power but not the front.

        • XeroxCool@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          How do you figure dual front motors would alleviate any of what you said a front diff would need? Dual front motors will still be rigidly mounted to the chassis, requiring flexible couplings. The rear is also independent, requiring the same flexible couplings whether it’s a diff or motors. CV axles all around. Non-steer wheels still have vertical travel from the suspension.

          • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            20 hours ago

            You wouldn’t need a front differential, for one. But you’re right, unless they somehow made a directly wheel coupled motor that turned with the wheel, it l still needs CV couplings.

            As for rear, they don’t need CV axles. Two simple cross couplings are enough. The speed variability happens significantly when the wheels turn, going up and down is a negligible issue. Cars have been using the much chapter and simple cross couplings in the rear for decades.

            • _stranger_@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              18 hours ago

              The CT has four-wheel steering, so yeah, it’s actually more complicated than a regular truck in that regard. I remember reading something about the mechanisms to make that possible taking up a shitload of room.

  • FelixCress@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    107
    ·
    1 day ago

    However, Tesla had devised a solution to bring the range closer to what it originally announced: a separate battery pack that sits in the truck’s bed. Tesla called it a “range extender.” It costs $16,000 and takes up a third of the Cybertruck’s bed.

    You cannot make this shit up 😂

  • 𝚝𝚛𝚔@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    1 day ago

    Tesla and unfulfilled promises… Only slightly less an iconic duo than Tesla bad news and stock price going up.

  • Valmond@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 day ago

    $16.000 just to get what you paid for?

    Some people sure have a lot of money to spend.

    • gradual@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Some people sure have a lot of money to spend.

      It’s why everything is so expensive. So these fucks can give musk money.

    • lmuel@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 day ago

      Not quite.

      $16k to get closer to what they promised lol Probably won’t do that much considering the added weight