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.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    95
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Gonna be real fun to see the crash test rating.

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

    • Chreutz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      45
      ·
      2 years 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.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        2 years 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.

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years 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.

  • Eideen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    2 years 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/

  • xX_fnord_Xx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    2 years ago

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

  • MyDogLovesMe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years 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…

  • Muhr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Pretty easy to solve. Just pay those experts to stfu. Shouldn’t be a problem for musk

  • grte@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    If you ever felt like your truck didn’t look and drive enough like a prep counter, Elon Musk has got your back.

  • Marxism-Fennekinism@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years 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.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 years 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

  • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years 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.

  • hardcoreufo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 years 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.

    • SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years 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.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 years 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.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 years 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.”

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years 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

        • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 years 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.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 years 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.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years 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.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years 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.

  • filister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years 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

  • toofpic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 years ago

    Raises concerns just now? There’s a reason why civilian cars don’t look like military atvs - because they are not military atvs