Tesla Cybertruck's stiff structure, sharp design raise safety concerns -experts
www.reuters.com
The angular design of Tesla's Cybertruck has safety experts concerned that the electric pickup truck's stiff stainless-steel exoskeleton could hurt pedestrians and cyclists.

Tesla Cybertruck’s stiff structure, sharp design raise safety concerns - experts::The angular design of Tesla’s Cybertruck has safety experts concerned that the electric pickup truck’s stiff stainless-steel exoskeleton could hurt pedestrians and cyclists.

  • Earthwormjim91@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1674·
    11 months ago

    Gonna be real fun to see the crash test rating.

    Without crumple zones, all of the kinetic energy goes into the occupants.

    • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      803·
      11 months ago

      OTOH it weighs almost 7000lbs (~3100kg) so it’s going to plow through most of everything with its sheer mass.

      • Thorry84@feddit.nlEnglish
        1041·
        11 months ago

        You’d be surprised how much a concrete pillar holding up an overpass can actually take. They don’t break like in the movies, they are specifically designed to take big truck impacts and not fail. Anybody crashing a Cybertruck at highway speeds into one of those is instantly turned into red colored mashed potatoes.

      • ikidd@lemmy.worldEnglish
        19·
        11 months ago

        Go hit a 10"+ tree in a pickup and see how fast you stop. You can wander over and pick the engine up when it flies out the hood. The tree will loose some bark.

      • Cornpop@lemmy.worldEnglish
        551·
        11 months ago

        Believe it or not in the USA it’s actually based off of self compliance in the USA. There is no specific government body that has a standardized test that they have to pass to be made legal. The manufacture gets to make that decision themselves, then if there is an issue that the government finds later they can be pulled from the road.

    • casmael@lemm.eeEnglish
      7·
      11 months ago

      Yeah have you seen the footage it’s as stiff as the rod up musks butt hole

        • yeptemp69420@lemmy.worldEnglish
          10·
          11 months ago

          I’m pretty sure that’s BeamNG, yeah. That sand looks like a texture from Johnson valley, I’m pretty sure the wall they’re hitting is either a gas station or a garage model that was placed on a road, and the skid marks from the tires look the same as they do in BeamNG. You can see body panels and doors clipping through the body of the truck on several occasions, too.

      • Felix_Bardner@pawb.socialEnglish
        28·
        11 months ago

        Looked convincing at first, but it felt too clean- Then at 7 seconds in, you can watch a white panel clip straight through the door and windshield lol

      • Earthwormjim91@lemmy.worldEnglish
        428·
        11 months ago

        Because unless they have been outright lying in all of their specs, the entire body is made up of the same thick stainless steel that they have shown to be literally bulletproof.

        It’s 4x as thick as current sheet metal used in other vehicles, and twice as thick as the steel bumpers used in old cars that didn’t have crumple zones.

        That combined with the fact that they have stated that all of the strength and rigidity for the truck comes from the exoskeleton, that would preclude being able to crumple.

        They have not made safety a priority in anything on this monstrosity. The windows are are all laminated and shatterproof, meaning you can’t break them to escape if there’s a fire or you end up underwater and the body is bulletproof meaning that it can’t be torn open with the jaws of life if you need to be extracted.

        It’s a giant metal coffin.

        • weew@lemmy.caEnglish
          1·
          11 months ago

          I don’t know what the hell you’ve been reading, but they’ve never claimed the entire truck is solid stainless steel. Just the exterior panels.

          they claimed that the exterior panels would be able to add to the rigidity and strength of the truck. Not that it was 100% rigid or that the exterior made up 100% of the structural strength.

          The interior is still basically just a regular aluminum body like all their other cars.

        • Cornpop@lemmy.worldEnglish
          43·
          11 months ago

          Windows will shatter just like any other car window, and a jaws of life would pull apart that tin can no problem.

            • Cornpop@lemmy.worldEnglish
              2·
              11 months ago

              They are just regular tempered glass. That might have been the BS they claimed at the original announcement, but that did not make it to the production version.

        • DoomBot5@lemmy.worldEnglish
          515·
          11 months ago

          Ah, so it’s all from your incorrect assumptions about how materials work.

    • Chreutz@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2467·
      11 months ago

      I know it’s fun to bash Tesla every now and then for their ridiculous things.

      But do you really think, after making 4 vehicles with top of the line safety, that they will just say ‘eh, fuck it’ with the cybertruck?

      It’s an aluminum casting base construction, just like the Model Y, so why would there be no crumble zones?

      • hperrin@lemmy.worldEnglish
        242·
        11 months ago

        There are crumple zones, they’re just not as big as those in competing trucks. But yeah, the safety comparison is probably negligible, what really makes me think it’s a bad truck is the design of the bed. It’s got slanted walls. That really limits what you can haul and how you can get it into the bed.

        • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          27·
          11 months ago

          Let’s be real. No one is hauling anything in this truck. In my experience the more expensive truckk the less its actually used for anything.

          The entire cybertruck fleet hauling completed by 2030 is probably the equivalent to one year of 01 Nissan Frontiers…

      • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        11·
        11 months ago

        Really think they will just say ‘eh fuck it’

        Were talking about Elon here. Yes, I do think so. In addition, don’t give too much credit, the other vehicles would always be inherently safer because they’re electric.

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.caEnglish
    981·
    11 months ago

    Seriously, having been hit by a fairly rounded Impreza at low speed that still did significant damage, I’m shivering at the thought of what these edges would do to soft tissue and bone in the same conditions. The pressure at the contact points would be dramatically higher.

    • intensely_human@lemm.eeEnglish
      62·
      11 months ago

      Yeah cars should definitely not be colliding with people. The results are horrible. Welcome to civilization with cars, where our overall strategy for minimizing the death cars to do pedestrians is based on collision avoidance rather than making car-pedestrian collisions safe.

      • Sheltac@lemmy.worldEnglish
        51·
        11 months ago

        Making car-pedestrian collisions safe is a ridiculous idea failed to doom from the start. Cars are big and hard, people are small and squishy.

        I think the key is to prevent cars and people from coexisting as much as possible.

        • dumpsterlid@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          11 months ago

          Making car-pedestrian collisions safe is a ridiculous idea failed to doom from the start. Cars are big and hard, people are small and squishy.

          My quite large awd minivan that can tow 3500 lbs and fit a massive amount in the back has a hood that slopes down quickly to about a waist height. God forbid if I hit someone, they would clearly be scooped up onto the hood, which might sound bad but literally every single new pickup (with basically the same specs as my minivan on paper except with less capable AWD because of no weight in the back and a bed that doesn’t come with a cover like mine did) is basically designed to try to hit a pedestrian in the shoulders and head and smash them down under the vehicle. This isn’t a hypothetical safety thing, pedestrian fatalities are raising at an alarming rate because it has become cool for insecure men to drive around pickups that are optimized to kill a pedestrian in an accidental crash. Also, the rear cab seats of these pickups are extremely dangerous in a crash (there isnt any space to cushion collision) which is dark given that I always see losers driving around their whole family in these monstrosities treating it like a family vehicle.

          I agree though that kicking cars out of places that pedestrians are in and valuing pedestrian use of public ways over car use especially in urban areas is ultimately the best solution.

  • Eideen@lemmy.worldEnglish
    75·
    11 months ago

    That is what you get when you slack on pedestrian safety. This a regulations problem, not a Tesla problem.

    https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/12/07/while-other-countries-mandate-safer-car-designs-for-pedestrians-america-does-nothing

    However, under the federal government’s current safety rating system, known as the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP), almost every vehicle gets a four- or five-star rating. That’s because the system only takes into account the safety of those within cars, not all the people walking, pushing strollers, biking, or taking transit outside them.

    https://nacto.org/2022/05/24/why-the-u-s-gives-monster-suvs-five-star-safety-ratings-and-what-you-can-do-about-it/

    • duckCityComplex@lemmy.worldEnglish
      38·
      11 months ago

      This thing is huge, it does 0-60 in under 3 seconds, has sharp angles, and its styling does not seem to target the sensible end of the market… It’s like an industrial strength pedestrian destroyer.

      • Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        51·
        11 months ago

        I shudder to think what one of those cybertrucks would do if it tried to plow through a crowd of protesters.

        • intensely_human@lemm.eeEnglish
          63·
          11 months ago

          Probably about the same thing as any other vehicle.

          Jesus are we really gonna pretend this is the first vehicle that would obliterate a pedestrian in a collision?

      • chitak166@lemmy.worldEnglish
        527·
        11 months ago

        It’s actually a pussy-magnet.

        Even the pasty-facediest of incels will have no problems getting laid showing up in one of these bad boys.

        It’s just how the world works 🤷

        • crapwittyname@lemm.eeEnglish
          9·
          11 months ago

          I hear it has preprogrammed wait times for replying to text messages from females based on the redpill algorithm.

          • Tosti@feddit.nlEnglish
            2·
            11 months ago

            Comon… sarcasm is not always obvious… but his comment was sarcasm. It has to be. I choose to believe it is.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
          23·
          11 months ago

          I would like to hear from the women of Lemmy- how many of you would have sex with a man just because they drove a Cybertruck?

  • SpaceBishop@lemmy.zipEnglish
    6813·
    11 months ago

    could hurt pedestrians and cyclists

    I dare you to convince me that anyone still buying Tesla would not see that as a benefit. That’s going to be the number one selling point of this thing after articles like this make their rounds.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.comEnglish
        184·
        11 months ago

        Did you buy your Tesla since Elmo when full fash, and would you buy one now if you didn’t have one already?

            • casmael@lemm.eeEnglish
              13·
              11 months ago

              Not convinced cows look a whole lot like maps tho they have too many legs etc

            • chitak166@lemmy.worldEnglish
              618·
              11 months ago

              You have to be a special kind of stupid to think Musk is unique among billionaires.

              His only ‘uniqueness’ is the brand that’s attached to his name. If you notice, he behaves exactly like all other celebrity billionaires, such as Trump and Kanye.

              Every controversy is just free advertising for their brands.

              • Cows Look Like Maps@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                151·
                11 months ago

                You’ll notice OP wasn’t comparing billionaires, they were comparing automotive CEOs. So that’s a scarecrow argument. All of the other automotive CEOs have an order of magnitude less wealth than Musk.

                He has the wealth of a nation state and owns one of the world’s largest social media sites, a rocket company, a car company, and actively promotes far-right hate speech and meddles in international politics.

                • AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                  4·
                  11 months ago

                  At least he isn’t giving out copies of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

                  The automotive CEO most similar to Musk is probably Henry Ford, and I’m honestly not sure which one is worse.

              • freebee@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                11·
                11 months ago

                Trump, Kanye, musk etc are the weird ones. Very wealthy people are actually likely to hide from the public and only seek the attention of their ridiculously wealthy peers or whomever they want to buy influence, not from the entire world population with every brainfart they produce. It’s just the very top few has a hard time avoiding it because they’re on top of the lists and stand out. Kanye or trump are still * far* away from that wealthiest top. Look at the list of 1bn-80bn worth person: many you’ll barely have heard of before, if at all. It gets even more so if you ditch the Anglo-Saxon centered view on the list and look at the most wealthy people in China, Middle East etc

      • Albbi@lemmy.caEnglish
        355·
        11 months ago

        Why the fuck do people hate on the one class of people using the most efficient form of transportation that also provides exercise in a world that can’t stop spewing greenhouse gasses (For electric cars, those greenhouse gasses are being spewed at the power plant instead of from the car itself) and people don’t get enough exercise?

        Fucking. Madness. Cyclists should be applauded and not targeted.

          • Albbi@lemmy.caEnglish
            11·
            11 months ago

            I’d like to see the information debunking this. In my area, 89% of power is from fossil fuels. My naive understanding of this is that this will still generate emissions, although I would expect the capabilities of reducing harmful emissions to be much better at a power plant instead of having to build it into every vehicle. So my thinking is that emissions are still happening, just not necessarily where people are living and with better emissions management.

            Damn, the parent comment to mine got deleted, so nobody will see this anyway.

        • CADmonkey@lemmy.worldEnglish
          42·
          11 months ago

          I don’t know about other cities, but locally we have a very nice and well paved city-spanning network of bicycle paths that are parallel to, but separate from, the city streets. And we have a group of guys on their $10k bikes who ignore these paths to ride three across in a lane during rush hour on roads that will beat their wheels square, ignoring all red lights and stop signs. They make it hard for me to ride, because I get associated with these people by virtue of riding a bike.

          People don’t hate cyclists. They hate those cyclists.

          This is of course excluding those who hate everything which isn’t horrible for the planet. They hate bikes, electric cars, smaller cars that don’t burn much gas, vegetables, and any woman with a spine.

        • BearOfaTime@lemm.eeEnglish
          411·
          11 months ago

          Most efficient?

          Human bodies are god awful at converting fuel to useful mechanical energy.

          • hperrin@lemmy.worldEnglish
            5·
            11 months ago

            I’m pretty sure they meant most efficient in terms of emissions, not energy conversion. Even if you count farting as emissions, bikes put out basically no emissions. You’d have to get 100% of your electricity from renewables to match them in an electric car.

          • misophist@lemmy.worldEnglish
            3·
            11 months ago

            I’m sure that would be relevant if my body was attempting to push an entire car to work every day. When I cycle to work, I’m carrying at most 15 kilos of bike and belongings with me. With the efficiency multiplier of gears and wheels, I believe my 8 kilometer trip burns about 200 kilocalories. I don’t think that much energy will move an entire 2000 kilo car very far at all, whether it’s powered with electricity or petrol.

            • BearOfaTime@lemm.eeEnglish
              13·
              11 months ago

              And how much food does that require you to ingest? What did it take to produce that food, deliver it to you, and take it away when you shat it out?

              So easy to ignore all the inbound energy that was utilized for your body to produce 2kc.

              • misophist@lemmy.worldEnglish
                3·
                11 months ago

                200 kcals is like 1/10 of the average person’s daily intake, so maybe 1/3 of an average meal? Not much at all, comparatively. If you’re still concerned about efficiency, slap a small electric motor on the bike, but even a fully human-powered bike is more energy efficient than driving an entire car.

        • chakan2@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1127·
          11 months ago

          I’ll give you an honest answer. I live in a rualish area. There’s a 2 lane highway that’s roughly 50 miles from my city to another one. 55 and a lot of blind curves. Farmers in semi trucks use that road all the time for hauling stuff.

          Every summer there’s a pack of cyclists that try that route. They barely do 25. Every summer one of them does on one of the corners. You simply can’t stop a semi fast enough when something is doing half the speed limit, especially on a sharp corner.

          They’re a fucking menace. There literally hundreds of miles of trails to ride in my area, but they have to be on that one particular road. They’re simply the most self centered assholes in the universe IMO.

          • hperrin@lemmy.worldEnglish
            10·
            11 months ago

            That sounds like a problem with your county. If that many people are dying, wouldn’t it be worth building a separated bike path?

            • Throwaway@lemm.eeEnglish
              17·
              11 months ago

              I don’t know his county specifically, but often times the roads are designed to fit in an area, with a set number of lanes, and built to that width. You cant add bike paths with out redesigning, buying more land, and building miles amd miles of path. And for what? Five bozos to ride through in fair weather?

              Not enough benefits to justify the costs. Plenty better things to spend money on.

          • Throwaway@lemm.eeEnglish
            517·
            11 months ago

            Yeah,itd be one thing if they were using it for transport and actually not blocking traffic and being safe about it, but none of that is true. They all think they’re Lance Armstrong or something, and its the tour de france. People have places to be!

            • chakan2@lemmy.worldEnglish
              715·
              11 months ago

              That’s the crux of it. They could ride on the sidewalk and slow down…or they could simply move over and let traffic pass. But they don’t. It’s some holy war to piss off as many people as possible while wearing spandex.

              All the hardcore cyclists I’ve known are miserable insufferable people so it makes sense. Middle managers on their second or third marriages that hate their lives. There’s plenty of sport out there that offers superior fitness and doesn’t do damage to your prostate…but, whatevs.

      • kattenluik@feddit.nlEnglish
        212·
        11 months ago

        You have serious issues and world view problems to even begin to think things like that about people.

          • kattenluik@feddit.nlEnglish
            4·
            11 months ago

            Why do you believe they are joking? What indicates that especially with this behavior being common?

            • Darkenfolk@dormi.zoneEnglish
              12·
              11 months ago

              Oh fuck off, this behavior is not “common” more often than not people say shit like this to get a raise out of someone, or as a joke in the “image people actually behaving like this” way.

              • kattenluik@feddit.nlEnglish
                2·
                11 months ago

                I’m sorry but that’s not right at all, and people do actually think like this in the US and it is common.

    • And009@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
      71·
      11 months ago

      Didn’t expect them to act this stupid. They have no damn solution for this mammoth of a tin box, exerting pressures way above what is needed to obliterate any living thing at speed.

    • doctorcrimson@lemmy.todayEnglish
      6·
      11 months ago

      Yeah but actual production models only became available Dec 1st, and production is still low until sometime next year without any additional delays.

        • And009@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
          9·
          11 months ago

          They do… But just for the passengers inside.

          Although it’s not rocket science to predict the obvious design issue here.

          • books@lemmy.worldEnglish
            3·
            11 months ago

            Well, we allow anyone with the cash to drive giant ass trucks that have bumpers at sedan head height… So it’s not like this is terribly surprising

        • doctorcrimson@lemmy.todayEnglish
          3·
          11 months ago

          That seems like an odd reply to my comment about how the safety and other concerns are as much a concern now as they were when the cybertruck was announced.

          I guess to answer your question, USA vehicles go through nhtsa.gov certification process that requires a bare minimum safety features and then assesses a star rating for safety, both of which are specific to the class of vehicle in question. However, Early and Late release models do not appear to require NCAP ratings and sometimes trigger recalls such as the 2016 TESLA MODEL X P100D SUV AWD Later Release.

          It did make the news when Cybertruck Crash Testing videos were made public 5 days ago, but no rating has been made available online yet.

  • xX_fnord_Xx@lemmy.worldEnglish
    47·
    11 months ago

    It looks exactly like a ‘rad car’ that I doodled in my social studies notebook after slamming two bottles of Robitussin.

  • MyDogLovesMe@lemmy.worldEnglish
    372·
    11 months ago

    Again, this whole thing smacks of some entitled person (hmmm, who though?) who knows nothing, making design decisions that are stupid and self indulgent.

    I call it “The Homer”, just like the episode where Homer designed a car. You know the result…

  • hardcoreufo@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4211·
    11 months ago

    I don’t like Teslas, Musk or the cyber truck but it can’t be any more dangerous than the 4 ft wall of radiator traditional pickups have now. Not saying this isn’t a concern but I am way more concerned about the millions of pedestrian crushing rolling walls already on the road.

    • imaqtpie@lemmy.myserv.oneEnglish
      316·
      11 months ago

      I’m pretty sure it actually is significantly more dangerous. The front end of traditional pickups will still crumple and absorb a great deal of force. If the cybertruck is more rigid and the sharp edges have a potential to gash pedestrians on impact, that’s two factors that don’t apply to current pickups.

      • Zetta@mander.xyzEnglish
        51·
        11 months ago

        I don’t actually know the ride height but it looks like the cyber truck has a much lower nose when driving on normal roads compared to a lot of trucks, so while it may be very stiff, maybe it’ll just launch you over the hood.

        • weew@lemmy.caEnglish
          1·
          11 months ago

          The shorter and lower nose should improve visibility too. Regular pickups have a blind spot as large as an entire daycare center.

      • intensely_human@lemm.eeEnglish
        1216·
        11 months ago

        So are we really contemplating pickup trucks as more safe in a pedestrian collision because they have crumple zones?

        When a truck hits a pedestrian and the front of the truck crumples, is that pedestrian okay?

        • DV8@lemmy.worldEnglish
          194·
          11 months ago

          There’s a difference between a shattered pelvis and being impaled because someone thought sharp corners are cool and safety standards are oppression.

    • SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.caEnglish
      251·
      11 months ago

      Your wording makes it sound like the existence of even more dangerous trucks somehow excuses this dangerous truck. Both the 4 ft wall and the sharp metal blade edges are dangerous and irresponsible designs.

      • hardcoreufo@lemmy.worldEnglish
        146·
        11 months ago

        I’m not excusing it at all, I think it’s one of the worst vehicles ever made, too big, heavy and fast. People are for sure gonna crash these beasts.

        What I meant was I’d like to see traditional truck designs that have millions of vehicles on the road be scrutinized before the 10 cyber trucks. You’re way more likely to be hit by a regular truck which has a deadly design than a cyber truck just because of how many more are on the road.

        • SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.caEnglish
          147·
          11 months ago

          “I don’t like x but it can’t be worse than y” is a construction which serves to minimize how bad something is. Instead, let’s scrutinize both: “This cyber truck is ridiculously dangerous. While we’re at it, let’s also regulate the 4 feet tall wall of grill on other trucks.”

          • intensely_human@lemm.eeEnglish
            106·
            11 months ago

            Instead, let’s scrutinize both

            is a construction that leads to nothing getting done as a result of failing to acknowledge there are limited resources.

            The concept of “first” is absolutely key to accomplishing anything.

            • steveman_ha@lemmy.worldEnglish
              7·
              11 months ago

              … Doesn’t “limited resources” basically just mean here ones ability to consider more than one thought at a time? Surely a species capable of collaborative efforts like space travel can handle the complexity of generalizing to say “no, sorry, none of the human-bulldozer designs are okay actually”?

            • SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.caEnglish
              84·
              11 months ago

              Criticism is not a scarce quantity to be preserved. It spreads, like a fire. Take literally any social movement, like #metoo or BLM. People don’t suppress smaller stories to “save” criticism for bigger stories. The small stories add up. Right now, the F150 is one of the best selling cars in the US. The average American is no where close to criticizing it. But everyone already makes fun of the cyber truck. We can use that.

              “Let’s not criticize this dangerous truck design because we should save our criticism!” is the worst way to get people to criticize dangerous truck design.

    • jonne@infosec.pubEnglish
      21·
      11 months ago

      And those are largely banned from the EU as well. The issue is the lack of regulation in the US, it’s killing pedestrians daily.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.worldEnglish
      311·
      11 months ago

      Tesla seem confident it’ll be safer in part because of that.

      I’m wondering if they’ve done some something that can lower the front further if an imminent crash is about to happen with a pedestrian to lower the nose even more. Maybe it won’t work if you’re already at lowest setting, but if you’re raised at all maybe.

      You think they’d have advertised a feature like that though by now, so maybe not, but I bet they could.

      Would be a good feature for any vehicle with air suspension that can detect an imminent crash with a pedestrian

        • fosforus@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          5·
          11 months ago

          It definitely detects pedestrians: the live on-screen image shows them when they are nearby. They also claim to have automatic emergency braking when it detects pedestrians being in danger. I haven’t seen this in action, but then again, I don’t drive where pedestrians walk, so… But I can tell that my Tesla does weird short brakings on a motorway when nobody is close. Detects my future ghost, probably.

          Their own claim is that their cars are quite a lot safer than USA average: https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport – but I have heard it being rumoured that sometimes companies lie.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
            42·
            11 months ago

            But I can tell that my Tesla does weird short brakings on a motorway when nobody is close.

            I hope you never drive where there are patches of ice on the road.

            • fosforus@sopuli.xyzEnglish
              21·
              11 months ago

              I do, weekly. These don’t happen incredibly often, and they happen only when the cruise control is switched on. Not once have they caused a dangerous situation.

        • MrSpArkle@lemmy.caEnglish
          8·
          11 months ago

          This is not true.

          Anti collision systems of various sorts have been around for over a decade. The problem space is minuscule compared to self driving, and almost all car manufacturers offer both forward and reverse collision detection at this point.

          In fact I think EU is making it a requirement soon.

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.worldEnglish
            6·
            11 months ago

            Detecting a pedestrian where you would want to lower the front vs say a deer or moose (or other vehicle for that matter) where you don’t want to lower it is more complicated.

            Better to just not build the vehicle out of sharp polygons like it needs to be rendered on a Super Nintendo with FX chip.

            • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.worldEnglish
              21·
              11 months ago

              You could only enable the lowering in pedestrian heavy areas (city) assuming they legit can’t tell a moose apart.

              You aren’t going to find many moose in downtown NYC ;)

              Again, nothing to do with shape, this would be a good feature for any air suspension vehicle that can detect a pedestrian.

              Edit: And I’m not sure we need to worry as much about city deer, they are small enough.

              Edit: Also if they CAN detect a moose, they should do the opposite and raise the front.

          • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            11 months ago

            Any car with AEB has this capability which is a lot of cars ya.

            I don’t know how fast they can lower the vehicle though? There isn’t a lot of time between when AEB kicks off to slow you down and the accident.

    • bcron@lemmy.worldEnglish
      161·
      11 months ago

      Possibly unpopular opinion but I think the Cybertruck is about as dumb-looking as most any other truck on the market. 4 big doors, more cabin than bed, trucks in general are all goofy looking parking lot crawlers nowadays

    • Zetta@mander.xyzEnglish
      13·
      11 months ago

      Shit on me if you must but I actually like the look and features of the car. However I likely wouldn’t buy a Tesla in general

      • neidu@feddit.nlEnglish
        4·
        11 months ago

        It could be a good vehicle, if it was built by someone else.

        The past few years have revealed that while Tesla have the tech, they lack the basic precision manufacturing that other automakers mastered decades ago.

      • samokosik@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
        3·
        11 months ago

        I agree, features are nice and I also would enjoy trying to drive one. But in a for a long term usage, I bet the reliability will be an issue and also some Tesla shenanigans such as 20k for the battery.

        Thing is: I personally don’t give a shit about features. I like simple and basic vehicles that last for many years.

      • dukk@programming.devEnglish
        2·
        11 months ago

        You’d like the “features” of any car, it’s why they’re features. It’s the tradeoffs that actually matter.

        And yeah, it looked cool at first, but that’s really just because of its uniqueness. From an actual design perspective, it just looks…stupid.

      • Tinidril@midwest.socialEnglish
        3·
        11 months ago

        I’ll bet there are going to be some great deals for these on the used market when whatever cool factor there is collapses.

        • rab@lemmy.caEnglish
          3·
          11 months ago

          Good deals on used cars is a thing of the past I’m afraid

    • Kage520@lemmy.worldEnglish
      24·
      11 months ago

      I think the main market was supposed to be like a utility vehicle. It’s got some nice specs for actual work purposes for an electric vehicle, while saving money by not making a pretty body.

      I don’t know why some people like the look and want it for recreational use.

      • samokosik@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
        104·
        11 months ago

        It was supposed to be a utility vehicle but it genuinely failed. If I wanted a utility vehicle, I would get Toyota Land cruiser 79. For a utility vehicle, you need something reliable, something which does not have 246 useless electronic features and something you can drive while wearing gloves (you cannot so this with tesla considering every setup is made via the display).

        Tbh, to me is seems like a car which is made purely for city and for the ones who just want to show off. It definitely is not a proper workhorse.

        If I wanted a utility vehicle (which would be abused), I would look for:

        • big payload
        • 3 pedals
        • hand brake
        • steering wheel
        • 4x4, diff locks , transfer case
        • gear lever

        Nothing more is truly needed because it just adds the probability of failure.

  • Species8472@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    28·
    11 months ago

    Safety concerns…who would have thought? This cannot be an actual recent concern. Everybody could see the safety issues from the day it was unveiled…

    Good thing safety regulation is the reason why we hopefully will not see this monstrosity on EU roads.

    • emptiestplace@lemmy.mlEnglish
      8·
      11 months ago

      I’m just so amused by your inclusion of ‘hopefully’ in that sentence… hard to know what to expect when the whole world is a bit

  • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.mlEnglish
    281·
    11 months ago

    “Hey, I know you’re disappointed by the lack of Autopilot™, but look on the bright side, every Cybertruck comes standard with our patented Child Buster™ technology to cast those little shits into the depths hell where they belong!”

    • irotsoma@lemmy.worldEnglish
      16·
      11 months ago

      And perfect for running over protesters. And with the weight of this thing, there’s little likelihood of those pansies surviving. They don’t deserve life if they’re going to use it making your drive last 5 minutes longer.

      /s

  • filister@lemmy.worldEnglish
    282·
    11 months ago

    I hope this monstrosity will never be approved in Europe. Imagine the impact passengers of a Twingo or any other small city cat will experience in the unfortunate case of a head collision

  • Daft_ish@lemmy.worldEnglish
    263·
    11 months ago

    Here we go again, trying to shame a narcissist out of doing the thing he was doing to get you to react by shaming him.