10 ms·
As a concept the cybertruck looks really really cool. However, it's pretty scary if this is the final design. > The body of the Cybertruck is a unibody shell
by DoingIsLearning 6y ago
As a concept the cybertruck looks really really cool. However, it's pretty scary if this is the final design.
> The body of the Cybertruck is a unibody shell
The profile is full of sharp edges at torso/head level for pedestrians. The shell concept sounds like it would have nothing in the way of planned deformations zones for outside pedestrians or crumple zones for inside passengers.
Again perhaps this is just marketing bad ass looks and they will sanitize the final release but pretty scary if not.
- ChrisClark 6y agoConsidering the very top safest vehicles are all Teslas, I don't think they skipped safety on this one.
- wskinner 6y agoGP is talking about safety for pedestrians, not safety for passengers. Is Tesla the safest vehicle for pedestrians who are accidentally struck?
- arghwhat 6y agoI'd imagine that would be something like the V40 with its pedestrian airbags that pop up under the hood.
- Daho0n 6y agoThere's not a single Tesla in the safest cars tested by EuroNCAP. There were, in 2019, but even the small Toyota Yaris scores higher today. Remember a score of X in 2019 is way less than a score of X in 2021. The tests are harder to pass now.
- wilg 6y agoThis is a bit confusing, it doesn't seem like there are any tests of Teslas at all after 2019. (https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/safest-family-cars/#?selectedMake=7315&selectedMakeName=Tesla&selectedModel=0&selectedStar=&includeFullSafetyPackage=true&includeStandardSafetyPackage=true&selectedModelName=All&selectedProtocols=41776,40302,34803,30636,26061,24370,-1&selectedClasses=1202,1199,1201,1196,1203,1198,1179,40250,1197,1204&allClasses=false&allProtocols=true&allDriverAssistanceTechnologies=false&selectedDriverAssistanceTechnologies=&thirdRowFitment=false https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/safest-family-ca...) and the Teslas are the best in 3 of 8 classes in the 2019 "Best in Class" cars list on their website, which is the most recent year available. It does seem there were changes to the tests in 2020, but not 2021, and they say "2020 assessments differ significantly from previous years and star ratings should not be directly compared with those from earlier years." So IDK, your comment seems misleading?
- Daho0n 6y agoThe test was changed in 2020 yes (it was made harder). The you link is the last list but lots of cars have been tested since then. I'm aware than no Tesla have been tested in 2020 but you can still compare numbers if you have an idea what to look for (just don't only do X = X). For example the Tesla doesn't have as many air bags as those scoring high in 2020-2021 (even the mentioned small Toyota Yaris have Centre Airbags between the seats to get five stars) and even if you do compare scores directly (even though the new scores are harder to get) the Tesla with the highest score in the Vulnerable Road Users test (which is what the cybertruck would fail) scores 74 while the Toyota scores 78. The Polestar 2 gets 80. Saying Tesla is the safest cars today is not true. Most 2020-2021 cars are safer, even small ones and that's not even counting the mess that is Tesla's "autopilot".
- wilg 6y agoMeh, seems like a stretch. I’ll wait for the real numbers.
- bellyfullofbac 6y agoGotta love the casual dismissal of his explanations, but you're a Musk fanboy, so it's understandable. What he said makes sense. The tests get harder in order to ensure cars become safer. My car got the best safety rating when it came out, but that was 11 years ago. If Tesla hasn't changed its design for the 2020/21 models to improve safety, then my guess is it doesn't make sense for them to waste their resources testing it.
- wilg 6y agoIt's one year of change to the test, and I don't know enough about it other than the people doing the rating ask you not to compare them across years. So I'll wait to compare apples-to-apples. I'm sure there is some difference and the test becomes harder.
- Geee 6y agoThat's just bullshit. You can see all the tested vehicles from Euro NCAP website. They haven't tested Teslas in 2020 and 2021 because there hasn't been new models. Model Y hasn't been tested yet. In fact, on the Euro NCAP website their latest 'safest cars' list is from 2019, and you see that Model 3 and Model X are the safest cars in their category. You really think that the safest cars in 2019 can't pass the tests in 2021? https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/best-in-class-cars/2019/ https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/best-in-class-ca...
- Daho0n 6y agoYou don't seem to understand how the ratings work as it's not about not passing but that the 2019 Tesla's won't get five stars if they were tested today while other newer cars do get five stars. So no, the Tesla's are not safer than cars with five stars in 2020. They don't even have the required safety equipment to get the 5 stars. The safest car list is from 2019. All five star rating under the new tests are safer than the cars on that list. I'm sure newer Teslas will do fine but 2019 cars in 2020? No, they won't be in the top now. Edit: This thread is about the cybertruck and its edges that won't get a good score in the Vulnerable Road Users test. The old Tesla's don't even score as high as new small cars do.
- nightski 6y agoFrom what I have heard the sharp edges/straight lines are what keeps costs down. It's kind of miracle they are talking a 45k price point, and this is one of the reasons they can accomplish that.
- tomjakubowski 6y agoIn my last few moments, my head struck by the Cybertruck's sharp edge and its contents spilling open onto the crosswalk, I will contemplate this great miracle which saved rich people a few thousand dollars.
- xvector 6y agoNot to mention, the stainless steel exterior will be easy to clean, since your pesky shattered skull bone won’t find any paint to scratch! You can rest easy knowing that your viscera won’t be an inconvenience.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoCheck out the average price of a new truck, and then their annual US sales volume (Ford’s F150 specifically). Average America is who soaks up pickup trucks, not “the rich.” Tesla needs to compete with legacy automaker trucks if they’re to drive down the petroleum used by those fossil fuel vehicles (hence the need to keep per unit costs down). The fault for failure to prioritize pedestrian and bicyclist safety falls on federal policy makers, who could enforce these safety requirements by statute but don’t. Tangentially, it should also be wildly illegal to lift your pickup for on road use. “Don’t hate the player, hate the game.”
- rsynnott 6y agoThe F150 appears to start at 28k. Average price of a new truck in the US is 50k, but that's probably pushed up a lot by commercial purchasing. And realistically, if you think anything from Tesla is going to start at the price they claim it will start at in early marketing... well, that's optimistic. This will be a car that at least _should_ be bought only by very well off people. I'm sure some people will take on silly debt and spend most of their annual take-home salary on a car, but that won't be the norm. Well, hopefully.
- xvector 6y agoHere in the US, we don’t care about pedestrian deaths from trucks. Despite absurdly disproportionate deaths from trucks [1], our lawmakers and regulators are too busy jerking off with wads of cash from automotive lobbyists [2] to care about something lame like “dying bicyclists” or “crushed pedestrians.” [1]: https://usa.streetsblog.org/2016/10/31/why-american-trucks-are-so-deadly-for-pedestrians-and-cyclists/ https://usa.streetsblog.org/2016/10/31/why-american-trucks-a... [2]: https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a20879691/heres-how-much-the-major-automakers-spend-on-government-lobbying/ https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a20879691/heres-how-mu...
- dillondoyle 6y agolol the paper cuts!
- CalRobert 6y agoIn the US, you are de facto allowed to kill people with your vehicle, so long as you're sober. If you shoot a kid you probably can't get away with "well I was duck hunting at the playground, it was an accident!", but run them down in your truck and you'll have a sympathetic judge telling you this shouldn't stop you from getting back behind the wheel, and how the kid shouldn't have been there.
- bredren 6y agoRun away / spooked carriage horses that trampled were treated in a similar way.
- mandelbrotwurst 6y agoThis is a bad comparison. "Duck hunting at the playground" is more similar to driving your truck through a playground than it is to hitting a pedestrian who enters a roadway full of active traffic. Why should it be the driver's fault if someone else puts them in a situation where a negative outcome is unavoidable?
- Symbiote 6y ago
- jcims 6y agoHow much pedestrian safety design is in modern trucks?
- chrisseaton 6y agoPedestrian safety completely dominates the front-end design of trucks. See the radical redesign of the Defender for example.
- nbar 6y ago100% here in Australia the old Defenders have become a collectors items since the change to the new shape. I recall a lack of pedestrian safety stopped the original Defender entering the US market too
- teruakohatu 6y agoAny idea how Ineos' Grenadier gets away with a overtly OG Defender inspired design?
- chrisseaton 6y agoI don't think they really have. If you look at the profile it's been stretched out over the front, compromising the approach angle just like the new genuine Defender had to - I don't think there was any way around that. This isn't on topic, but I think the Grenadier has gambled and lost badly, and they're going to look like fools long-term. The new Defender is massively more rugged and capable than they thought it would be. They have these smug videos talking about how real Defender drivers want a non-electrically-managed simple vehicle, just in time for the Government to announce that internal combustion is going to be banned, so all vehicles will require electric control for a fuel cell or a battery and motor anyway. So what was the point? They have smug videos talking about how they've got proper rugged coil suspension. Well I work with actual military rugged vehicles and guess what they have electric air suspension like the new Defender, because it's actually better for the job. The Grenadier people are pitching in their adverts that the Defender has turned its back on rugged users like the game keepers of the highlands. Well guess what ask a game keeper and they've already bought the new Defender. I think the universally positive reviews of the new Defender and its off-road capability, including from reviewers looking solely at its use for example on farms and estates, makes the Grenadier look very backward. Turns out the old ways aren't always the best. (I have a new Defender at home, and still use a fleet of old Defenders at work. I wouldn't want a Grenadier.)
- matz1 6y agoI don't know, safety for the pedestrian is less of my concern when buying car.
- arnaudsm 6y agoI bet European regulators will never accept the current design. They'll probably have to design a safer version later, or skip the entire market.
- nimos 6y agoUS pick up truck sales are ~15x Europe. My guess is they skip it entirely.
- _ph_ 6y agoTesla does take reservations in Europe. Will be interesting how that turns out :)
- jedimastert 6y agoI seriously doubt that the average American pick up truck driver is going to consider a Cybertruck.
- mcndjxlefnd 6y agoHave you seen the reservation numbers?
- jedimastert 6y agoI'm not doubting that there's a huge interest or market, just that the intersection of that market and the standard American truck driver is not large
- DamnYuppie 6y agoDepends, for those who use them for work, which is a huge portion of the market, it can be very appealing. It will have higher torque than a diesel, so should be able to tow a lot more. I know many ranchers/farmers who are quite intrigued by the idea of them.
- 6y ago
- rsynnott 6y agoI assume this is marketing; I have difficulty believing that it could be made road-legal in its current form, at least in Europe. Maybe it's a US-only model, but even in the US I would've thought it was a bit too... pointy.
- X6S1x6Okd1st 6y agoSUVs and Trucks basically don't need to be safe for pedestrians or cyclists. It's really pretty fucked up & has def caused excess death.
- paxys 6y agoIf you are hit by a 6,000 lbs truck I doubt the shape of its edges makes much of a difference in determining your fate. Better driver assist features in the Tesla (compared to other trucks) have the potential to make things safer for pedestrians overall.
- Daho0n 6y agoWell it matters in the EU at least as most (all?) countries tax cars based on things like EuroNCAP ratings etc. Sharp edges = higher registration tax basically.
- chrisseaton 6y ago> Well it matters in the EU at least as most (all?) countries tax cars based on things like EuroNCAP ratings etc. Wow I didn’t know that. How does it work? Isn’t a EuroNCAP rating entirely voluntary?
- Daho0n 6y agoI obviously don't know the exact rules in all countries but here in Denmark there're different deductions from the standard registration tax based on things like if the car has minimum 5 stars in EuroNCAP, the price of airbags are completely excluded from the tax, etc. so yes it is voluntary but without it the cars gets taxed higher than the competition that did get a test (or a better test). Since EuroNCAP ratings are based on the car with the least amount of security in a line of cars even a very secure car will be more expensive if the manufacturer also sells a poorly rated version in the EU as it is the one the tax deduction is based on.
- crocodiletears 6y agoPedestrian concerns aside (this really can't be much worse than the other megalithic land yachts on the market), I like the idea of cars on the market that offer driver safety trade-offs in exchange for utility, aesthetics, or price. Insurance can price that into the premium. I'd gladly give up some physical security for certain benefits. Just put a 'do not resuscitate' flag on my card if the insurance won't clear or something.
- nikanj 6y agoThe SUV market offers numerous driver safety trade-offs in exchange for safety to everyone else on the road. Getting your compact car mangled by a F350 tank is horrible.
- crocodiletears 6y agoYes, I've been in that position. It ain't great. I'd like to be able to trade on my own safety, not others (e.g. sacrificing crumplezones for a more compact cabin and greater carrying capacity).
- GongOfFour 6y agoHow many F-350s do you see on a daily basis?
- kmonsen 6y agoI’m in the Bay Area and see since F-150 every time we go on the 101. That being said I would guess some cheap Honda or Toyota is way more popular. Maybe they just have more different models. Looking at the data is looks like gm sells most, with Toyota, Ford, and FCA battling for second.
- anonfornoreason 6y agoMove to the country and they are everywhere. Full size pickups are probably 30-40% of the vehicles on the road where I am, it’s pretty wild. Granted lots of farms around here and there are tax breaks for full sized trucks, so there are a ton around (lots on used market for this reason too).
- jayd16 6y agoAren't most passenger cars a unibody design? Its probably just marketing to make that big a deal about a unibody truck.
- kazen44 6y agomost modern care yes, Usually the frame of a car is also part of the body these days. (T-frames and H frames rarely exists these days.
- wilg 6y agoIs the idea that the Cybertruck is particularly dangerous for pedestrians more than idle speculation? I mean you're assuming there are no deformation or crumple zones for some reason, which seems ridiculous. Is it enough to just look at the thing?
- sjwright 6y agoThe vehicle shell is sheets of structural steel. It’s not likely to deform usefully when it strikes a wayward meat sack. Combine that with the plethora of small-radius bends that can concentrate the damage quite effectively. I’ve no doubt that Tesla can make it score well on crash tests though. Crumple zones don’t have to involve literal crumpling of a metal body—it could be achieved with other forms of deformation.
- sudosysgen 6y agoIt's not enough to look at it, the issue is the shape + a unibody stainless steel outer shell. Frame + Pane construction allows for crumple zones, I don't see how a unibody stainless steel will allow it.
- judge2020 6y agoWhatever you hit becomes the crumple zone, aka the other car. (/s - it probably is going to be super unsafe and get bad safety scores).
- JosephRedfern 6y agoI don't know anything about car design, but always assaumed that crumple zones mostly protected passengers rather than pedestrians. Is that not the case?
- throwaway0a5e 6y agoThe front end of your average modern car has a ton of flimsy plastic in the top of the front bodywork that's for pedestrian protection. It's basically a crumple zone but they don't call it that.
- ctdonath 6y agoNo responses here note the likely role of FSD actively avoiding pedestrians. If FSD can objectively & significantly decrease injuries, need for crumple zones is mitigated. “No impacts” is better than “softer impacts”.
- Waterluvian 6y agoCombining both approaches to safety would make Tesla look smart.
- fomine3 6y ago1. Make perfect FSD 2. Do something that not suitable for drive by human, like racing style steering,
- tim333 6y agoI imagine if you asked Musk he'd say the cameras and automatic braking will stop it hitting people though dunno how well that will work in practice.