Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Cybertruck is not brutalist

inverse.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 187 posts

Re: The Cybertruck is not brutalist

#101

Post by merb »

vinay427 wrote: post #67
SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #22

Brutalist or not, it’s not real. That car as shown will absolutely not pass crash testing, European homologation and pedestrian impact, both issues with it being 1/8” stainless steel panels (separate discussion how those make no damn sense!). It has no mirrors, or wipers. What has been shown is a roughly drawn concept. Anyone that thinks they’re going to get exactly that and exactly for $40,000 hasn’t been around the…

The lack of physical mirrors is an issue (at the moment) for US homologation, but wouldn't be for EU regulations.

the lack of physical mirrors would be problematic in the eu as well. maybe not for all countries, but since it's in germany: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stvzo_2012/__56.html it would be in other countries as well. (a lot of of eu guidances are driven by german manufacturers)

Re: The Cybertruck is not brutalist

#102

Post by thdrdt »

loa_in_ wrote: post #8

As a person with personal interest in visual arts I never have seen the appeal of appearance of many popular "great looking" cars of today's variety. Even muscle cars and luxury models. Cars up to 70's and 80's were really nice and aesthetically pleasing, and I find the Elon Musk's vision to be really nice and refreshing. It might be that I'm partial to science fiction in general, but I really would like to see this…

A lot of cars today are designed around regulations and with aerodynamics in mind.

For example in Europe you can't have a spoiler that could catch a cyclist. And it is prefered that there is room between the hood and motor in case of an impact with a pedestrian.

This is why a lot of cars start to look the same.

This is also why the cybertruck in it's current form will never be allowed in Europe. A door that doesn't dent on impact of a huge hammer gives a nice show but is a big no for a lot of different safety reasons.

Re: The Cybertruck is not brutalist

#105

Post by DennisP »

FisDugthop wrote: post #11
spectramax wrote: post #7

I disagree. If one definition of Brutalism is to be honest about materials - then Cybertruck nails that. Unpainted stainless steel is as brutalist as it gets. We can argue about the design intent of the way it looks and whether that’s Brutalism. Aesthetics is only one aspect of Brutalism. Another aspect of Brutalism is to expose innards without guilt - If Cybertruck doesn’t have non-structural decorations, farings, e…

I'm not sure whether a covered car can be brutalist, to be honest. When I think of a brutalist car design, I think of go-karts. Other features of brutalist design: * By exposing the skeleton, the object shows itself as a platform that can be built upon. However, the Cybertruck's convex hull and covered, armored plating do not lend themselves to confident self-expression, but instead drown out any attempt at customiza…

That last quote is essentially asking them to make the assembly artificially complicated to make it look more honest.

> Zammit realized then that the truck’s DeLorean-mated-with-a-Pontiac-Aztek aesthetic might be an effort to streamline the manufacturing process. “By being philosophically so pure and so functional, Tesla has completely eliminated a very large part of what is the traditional automotive assembly."

https://www.wired.com/story/why-tesla-cybertruck-looks-weird...

> The plusses for a folded stainless steel, origami truck are compelling: no paint shop and no expensive tooling. No Godzilla-scale stamping machines stomping it with multiple strikes. Without all that, the capital and environmental costs of using stainless steel body panels are small. And big attractions for a company that's sensitive to both types of green—cash and environmentalism. Just groove the steel where it's supposed to fold (avoiding cracks) and bend it on simple, cheap machines (like I was actually doing last week with my garage vise!)

https://www.motortrend.com/news/tesla-cybertruck-electric-pi...

Re: The Cybertruck is not brutalist

#106

Post by DennisP »

jakobegger wrote: post #46
spectramax wrote: post #7

I disagree. If one definition of Brutalism is to be honest about materials - then Cybertruck nails that. Unpainted stainless steel is as brutalist as it gets. We can argue about the design intent of the way it looks and whether that’s Brutalism. Aesthetics is only one aspect of Brutalism. Another aspect of Brutalism is to expose innards without guilt - If Cybertruck doesn’t have non-structural decorations, farings, e…

The Cybertruck is very carefully designed to hide a lot of it's structural components. It's designed to look "brutal", but it's not brutalist. It is very carefully designed to look a certain way. A brutalist truck would be something like a Land Rover Defender, or in the concept car world something like the trucks from Bollinger Motors. A brutalist truck does not use internal hinges that are hidden from sight; a bruta…

So a brutalist truck has to have bad aerodynamics? My impression is that brutalism believes "form follows function." For a car, that means aerodynamics matter.

And brutalist buildings seem to be more about monolithic concrete than exposed girders.

Re: The Cybertruck is not brutalist

#108

Post by aasasd »

For cars that fulfill some of the ideas of brutalism, see dune buggies or Ariel Atom.

The truck can be called (neo-neo-)modernist since it does away with indulgent decorative curves that bulbous current cars are full of (thanks to people learning to produce panels of whatever which shape), with barely-comprehensible shapes of headlights spilling all over the hood and sides, and rather importantly with radiator grille and other front decorations which are the last bastion of recognizable brand imagery on the otherwise-identical cars of today.

The truck is a reaction to current trends, just like Rivian. And like design movements were reactions to the preceding ones during the whole of the twentieth century.

Re: The Cybertruck is not brutalist

#109

Post by reaperducer »

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #22

Brutalist or not, it’s not real. That car as shown will absolutely not pass crash testing, European homologation and pedestrian impact, both issues with it being 1/8” stainless steel panels (separate discussion how those make no damn sense!). It has no mirrors, or wipers. What has been shown is a roughly drawn concept. Anyone that thinks they’re going to get exactly that and exactly for $40,000 hasn’t been around the…

Since when do pickup truck designers care about the European market?

Perhaps Tesla will make an EU-complaint version some day, but this is not that truck.

The market for pickup trucks in Europe is a rounding error compared to the market for pickup trucks in North America.

/Neither a pickup truck nor Tesla enthusiast.

Re: The Cybertruck is not brutalist

#110

Post by alex_young »

heavyset_go wrote: post #55
augustocallejas wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that comes from a satirical Facebook page, but in an effort for a serious response, this page does a decent job categorizing the different sub-genres: http://www.fourfa.com/styles/index.htm

Iterations of that copypasta have existed for like two decades.

Longer than that. Monty Python did something very similar in Life of Brian: https://youtu.be/a0BpfwazhUA
Post reply on HN