Tesla Cybertruck

In the alternative, this truck could appear in an action movie. A sliding panel in the back reveals a gun mounted in the cargo bed.
 
More seriously one approach to selling electric vehicles is to make them look very different to what’s gone before, why should they look like petrol cars.

Automobiles are the refinement of more than a century of development. While some of the design of an automobile is driven by the needs of the internal combustion engine and thus won't be relevant for an electric car, the bulk of the design is driven by the needs of aerodynamics and passenger safety/comfort and cargo haulage. There's little reason for an electric vehicle to look much different from a conventional auto, and changing for no other reason than just to be different is very likely going to drive the design away from good engineering.
 
The cybertruck is a unibody design as opposed to the body-on-frame construction of conventional pickup trucks. The sloping rear end contains 'sail pillars' to help the car to retain rigidity. From what I have read, unibody construction offers better utilization of space too. Helpful when deciding where to stick batteries. All in all, this design might owe a lot to functional considerations.
Greyhavoc's link to Techcrunch-piece in reply #24:
 

 
3mm thick body panel is a lot of material. Stainless. This thing is gonna last for centuries.
There are good reasons cars are made out of thin deformable panels instead of boiler plate.

So they can make more money on repairs most likely. Also, plastic parts are cheaper than metal. I've had front & under carriage panel damage from road debris on my 2015 Hyundai that my '78 Celica would have laughed at. Twice. If I hit a good sized bug at speed the whole front fascia would probably blow off. Just absolute $hit. (And Hyundai isn't alone in this kind of construction.)
 
Always be wary when you see phrases like "inflection point." It would be interesting to hear what plans the oil companies have as the world, supposedly, shifts away from gas cars. Saudi Aramco comes to mind (net income over 111 Billion USD in 2018).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is it correct that the Cybertruck would need a change in US Federal law to be road worthy due to lack of rear view mirrors?
 
There are good reasons cars are made out of thin deformable panels instead of boiler plate.

So they can make more money on repairs most likely.

No, thin deformable panels are used to make crashes more survivable. A car that does not deform will make you go SPLAT on the dashboard. Crash regulations have become more stringent over the past 50 years because cars from 50 years ago (made out of much thicker steel than is used today) were really bad at protecting their occupants.
 
There are good reasons cars are made out of thin deformable panels instead of boiler plate.

So they can make more money on repairs most likely.

No, thin deformable panels are used to make crashes more survivable. A car that does not deform will make you go SPLAT on the dashboard. Crash regulations have become more stringent over the past 50 years because cars from 50 years ago (made out of much thicker steel than is used today) were really bad at protecting their occupants.
Yes but there are degrees. I'm not saying we need something like my parent's Buick but plastic is just crap.

 
It depends. My car has bumpers made of ABS which is quite good at deflecting the odd chunk of gravel. Better than steel in automotive gauges.
 
Plastic bumpers etc, the automotive industry's way of saying they want your money for every little dinged panel and boy will it hurt. Plastic was supposed to be cheaper to replace, well, try telling that to dealers.
 
There are good reasons cars are made out of thin deformable panels instead of boiler plate.

So they can make more money on repairs most likely.

No, thin deformable panels are used to make crashes more survivable. A car that does not deform will make you go SPLAT on the dashboard. Crash regulations have become more stringent over the past 50 years because cars from 50 years ago (made out of much thicker steel than is used today) were really bad at protecting their occupants.


Having driven in cars from 50 years ago, having a seatbelt was good. Protection came from the speed/mass comparison. I think most modern cars would have little effect on a 50 year old four door. The rule then was the larger vehicle had the better chance of protecting the driver and occupants, assuming it was going around the speed limit and the driver was not intoxicated, and ready for those who were.
 
It depends. My car has bumpers made of ABS which is quite good at deflecting the odd chunk of gravel. Better than steel in automotive gauges.

I hit a relatively small piece of a shredded tire kicked up by a car in front of me on the highway. Hit just under the front bumper lower right. Tore up a piece of the wheel well. A second time a piece of debris came OVER the top of the car in front of me (again on the highway) hits the road right in front of me and cracks the front fascia across the bottom. (No, I don't tailgate. Traffic was such I pretty much had to eat it both times. In older cars I've owned it might have left a smudge on the paint but that's about it.)
 
I had a dent repair bloke knock on my door a while ago now, he had repaired a local car and was trying to scare up business. The other half's car was on a pcp scheme which did not want the job done until handover time and he looked at my car and told me, "The metal body is far too thick for me to deal with you'll have to get that done in a proper body repair shop. Bess is quite old now being a 1971 car.
 
Your dent repair bloke would probably have passed on fixing our car.
 

Attachments

  • 2015-06-30.jpg
    2015-06-30.jpg
    37.6 KB · Views: 26
That is rather pointless, the Ford can be refueled in a few minutes and is much more usable right now. Some time in the future this may change but right now the balance has not shifted far enough.
 
OMG that guy has got more than a touch of the verballs. Someone give him a breath mint, it might shut him up for a minute.
 
For the Tesla Cybertruck to excel in the pickup truck market, it will have to exceed or at least match the utility capabilities of the industry’s biggest players such as Ford, whose F-150 has become an icon of the United States. Elon Musk’s recent comment regarding the results of a rather shocking test on a Ford F-350 hints that the Cybertruck will have the goods to make it a formidable competitor in the pickup market, and then some.

 
Reminds me more of when they introduced the HUMVEE for civilians.
 
Sporting some modifications in the lights.

 
Sharp corners like that (see bed end) will never pass the first barrage of certification in many European countries. Let's hope Elon will realise that on time.
 
Considering the Cyber Truck is as big as a Humvee, I wouldn't have thought Europe was the market target ---
 
Of the USA's three most popular large pickup trucks in 2018 - Ford F-series, Chevrolet Silverado and Ram P/U - about 2.36 million were sold worldwide. Of that number, about 2.03 million were sold in the USA. Europe is not the target market for any large pickup truck.
 
And just look at the 'tug-of-war' video posted above, when I first read the title I thought they had miss-identified the Ford truck --- (they have a smaller one)
 
I can see a lot of Ram and F150 being driven in Europe. Lot is relative of course, but certainly more than real Amg.
Moreover Tesla is now becoming a popular drive. Ppl will adapt and choose their specific type given that there is a choice.

Moreover the size doesn't matter as much with heavy battery packs that tend to alter the body to power pack ratio and make it less dependent to the sole body weight. Hence a larger car won't burden your milage as much as for gazoline cars (see the model S out accelerating most sport coupé around). They can also be more aerodynamic (something gov should weight upon to impose minimals per type).

So that is why, everybody here (on that subject) should keep their heads fresh and not make 1980ish based projections (both side, fans and opponents).
 
Last edited:
I see a fair number off pickup trucks in the UK these days, not huge numbers admittedly but it’s nonsense to say they don’t sell over here.
 
Tesla shouldn`t have compared their Cybertruck to F-150 because it ( Cybertruck) is a Class 2B-3 medium-duty vehicle . So it should go against F-250. Besides that Tesla doesn`t state anywhere what is the vehicle`s weight? To me it seems that Tesla started designing a decent truck but was either running out of finances or decided to cut corners. As you can see the frame beneath the exterior is a stamped, curved surface. There is no reason to spend extra resources to do that and then apply flat exterior surfaces everywhere. My wild guess is that Tesla wanted to make the car very heavy on purpose so it would fit in medium duty segment where it could have easier crash test requirements. They decided to pull the bulletproof card to cut corners on exterior and add weight. It also doesn`t state anywhere what capacity is the battery. So we can`t estimate charging times either.

Also, Tesla presented an electric ATV. That was another scam. It is actually a 2001 Yamaha Raptor 700R with Tesla garbage panels attached to a Japanese ATV with Japanese batteries and Asian Kenda tyres.
I hope Tesla doesn`t end up like Nikola which has presented 3 of their own designed trucks but once production started they resorted to rebadging a 100% Italian Iveco.
In my opinion Tesla factories have excess capacity in long term as I doubt they will be able to sell so many vehicles considering their price, end of government incentives and escalating competition. Cybertruck is a dud, Model Y is a 70 % Model 3, And Model X and S are aging fast., Their coupe is an expensive niche model and the Semi is, well... somewhere out there. I hope I am wrong.
 
Rather than the post above here’s a more based in reality take on Tesla’s prospects.

This is bad news for the company’s critics and shorts. TSLAQ loves to claim that the downfall of Tesla is just around the corner. Last year, the narrative surrounding the company almost made it feel like Tesla’s failure was indeed imminent, with several Wall St. analysts embracing the “no demand” narrative. TSLA stock fell to over two-year lows as a result. Autonomy Day was practically dismissed by Wall St. Few took Tesla’s Robotaxi concept seriously. And Elon, who appears to be super passionate about the companies that he runs, turned serious.

Tesla turned its fate around after Q3 2019, with the stock climbing to record highs and giving shorts a painful blow worth over $2 billion. TSLA stock ultimately ended 2019 on a powerful note, showing that Elon Musk’s serious change of tone seemed to have worked.

The Tesla bears’ narrative is crumbling with sustainable demand seemingly being established by the company’s Model 3 numbers quarter after quarter. Sales continue to rise and Tesla is in the process of opening its second foreign production plant in Brandenburg, Germany. With the Model Y coming in Gigafactory 3, Elon Musk may have literally just danced on TSLAQ’s proverbial grave.


And here’s some more:


Or this:

 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom