- cross-posted to:
- fuckcars@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- fuckcars@lemmy.world
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.
You must log in or register to comment.
Gonna be real fun to see the crash test rating.
Without crumple zones, all of the kinetic energy goes into the occupants.
OTOH it weighs almost 7000lbs (~3100kg) so it’s going to plow through most of everything with its sheer mass.
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.
Been there, done that. 0/10. Do not recommend.
Same, hit a small (maybe 5") tree going about 60mph. Came to a complete stop immediately and put my head through the windshield. We went and peeled the license plate off the tree the next day.
I guess it put a little mark on the tree but it was basically fine, completely destroyed the car though.
For me it was a rather large tree that I hit at about 100km/h (+60mph). Tree was fine. Car, not so much. The ambulance ride was nice though, and the first responders thought we were extremely lucky to be alive.
Wear your seat belts kids.
I thought a car had to have that before it went on sale?
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.
Removed by mod
Believe it or not in the USA it’s actually based off of self compliance
Oh I believe it.
I hope they get pulled from the road. Problem is, he’ll just bribe some government officials
:O
Yeah have you seen the footage it’s as stiff as the rod up musks butt hole
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?
Because they wanted it to be bullet proof.
The safety standards are a regulatory requirement. They have to pass the same tests as any other vehicle.
Not in the US. We don’t have many safety regulations on vehicles and crash tests are not mandatory.
Correct. Especially large trucks are further exempted.
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.
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…
Yeah the practicality of the cybertruck is definitely questionable!
That actually would be on brand for Musk.
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.
Sorry about that.
Holy shit you were the driver?
Well, I drive an Impreza and I did hit a pedestrian at low speed several years ago, so probably.
It’s a small lemmy.world.
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.
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.
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.
That is what you get when you slack on pedestrian safety. This a regulations problem, not a Tesla problem.
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.
Brings back some “carmageddon” nostalgia though.
Hmm, that is a game I haven’t played in two decades.
It looks exactly like a ‘rad car’ that I doodled in my social studies notebook after slamming two bottles of Robitussin.
You should take Tesla to court for stealing your idea
“Raises”?
That was a concern the day it was unveiled years ago
That front trunk just looks like a guillotine
deleted
He’s going the distance
and he’s going for speed
“Let them fly private.”
He ate it all
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.
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.
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.
“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.”
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.
… 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”?
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.
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
I’m pretty sure Tesla is devoid of any technology that detects pedestrians.
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.
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.
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.
Detecting that collision is on the same order of difficulty as self-driving cars.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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…
No I don’t
Homer designed his own car, ignoring any advice from the designers and engineers who worked at the company, and ends up bankrupting said company cause no one likes the car.
I call it, the “HomerTruck!”
“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!”
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
we’ve combined the Orphan Crushing Machine and the Torment Nexus
If you ever felt like your truck didn’t look and drive enough like a prep counter, Elon Musk has got your back.
But, like a prep counter, the blood washes off easily
Pretty easy to solve. Just pay those experts to stfu. Shouldn’t be a problem for musk
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.
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
How long till these things are all sitting in random scrappers in the Mojave?
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
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.
