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

Ford CEO: Tesla's Cybertruck Is Only for 'Silicon Valley People'

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 108 posts

Re: Ford CEO: Tesla's Cybertruck Is Only for 'Silicon Valley People'

#61

Post by nonethewiser »

rootusrootus wrote: post #30
subsubzero wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

before the Obama administrations emissions rules[1] trucks and suv's were quite small, blame the rules put out in that ruling for why trucks and suvs are so gigantic, I too am frustrated with how big they are and I own a new truck! [1] - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-emissions-suvs-size...

Trucks were plenty big before Obama. An F150 today is largely similar dimensionally to one from, say, 2005. But it's generally lighter than a comparable version from then.

They are both larger and heavier than in 2005. This also reduces the efficiency requirements.

Re: Ford CEO: Tesla's Cybertruck Is Only for 'Silicon Valley People'

#63

Post by beezlewax »

dontupvoteme wrote: post #56
binarymax wrote: post #6

"I don't make trucks like that," Farley said. "I make trucks for real people who do real work, and that's a different kind of truck." You also make trucks that regular people don't need but buy anyway, and make our streets less safe. We need some regulation to only allow vehicles over a certain size to be commercial only.

>You also make trucks that regular people don't need but buy anyway, and make our streets less safe. This is a race to the bottom effect. Those old simpsons jokes revealed a sad truth of our american car based society - If you want a bigger chance of surviving an accident, you want you and your loved ones in a bigger car. Here in Europe you rarely get to speeds where you can even get a bruise in an accident, but in t…

In the cities in Europe maybe theres mo major speed. There are plenty of fatal accidents due to speeding or drunk driving on smaller roads though.

Re: Ford CEO: Tesla's Cybertruck Is Only for 'Silicon Valley People'

#64

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

xyzelement wrote: post #41
binarymax wrote: post #6

"I don't make trucks like that," Farley said. "I make trucks for real people who do real work, and that's a different kind of truck." You also make trucks that regular people don't need but buy anyway, and make our streets less safe. We need some regulation to only allow vehicles over a certain size to be commercial only.

The idea that trucks are dangerous and unnecessary is pretty prevalent on HN, and I can follow the physics argument but the same argument can apply to anything (a bicycle is more dangerous than a pedestrian) Are there stats that show that these trucks cause a social problem worthy of regulation, or do we just not like the archetypical truck guy?

It's pretty easy to find the answers you want with a couple of Google searches. Large trucks are way more dangerous to pedestrians (and especially dangerous and heartwrenching is all the kids who are killed every year when their parents drive over them because they can't see them over the giant height of the front grill). It's also simple physics that larger vehicles will produce more destructive crashes when average vehicle mass increases.

Your "bicycle is more dangerous than a pedestrian" is a very poor analogy. Bicycles provide a ton more utility than walking. The same can't really be said for a suburban parent driving a couple of kids to soccer practice in a giant truck vs. the station wagons of the past.

Re: Ford CEO: Tesla's Cybertruck Is Only for 'Silicon Valley People'

#65

Post by jona-f »

xyzelement wrote: post #41
binarymax wrote: post #6

"I don't make trucks like that," Farley said. "I make trucks for real people who do real work, and that's a different kind of truck." You also make trucks that regular people don't need but buy anyway, and make our streets less safe. We need some regulation to only allow vehicles over a certain size to be commercial only.

The idea that trucks are dangerous and unnecessary is pretty prevalent on HN, and I can follow the physics argument but the same argument can apply to anything (a bicycle is more dangerous than a pedestrian) Are there stats that show that these trucks cause a social problem worthy of regulation, or do we just not like the archetypical truck guy?

https://googlethatforyou.com?q=suv%20kill%20people%20study

Re: Ford CEO: Tesla's Cybertruck Is Only for 'Silicon Valley People'

#66

Post by akomtu »

staplor wrote: post #54
xyzelement wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that trucks are dangerous and unnecessary is pretty prevalent on HN, and I can follow the physics argument but the same argument can apply to anything (a bicycle is more dangerous than a pedestrian) Are there stats that show that these trucks cause a social problem worthy of regulation, or do we just not like the archetypical truck guy?

> The authors find that being hit by a 1,000-pound heavier vehicle results in a 47 percent increase in the baseline probability of being killed in the accident https://www.nber.org/digest/nov11/vehicle-weight-and-automot...

What's the rate of such collisions for trucks and sedans?

Re: Ford CEO: Tesla's Cybertruck Is Only for 'Silicon Valley People'

#67

Post by nonethewiser »

rsweeney21 wrote: post #48

I was working at Microsoft when Steve Ballmer said "No one is going to spend $500 on a phone" in response the iPhone. It's okay to own a truck even if you don't work on a farm. I own an f150 because it has way more legroom in the back than any SUV, it can haul my mountain bikes, and it's easy to haul stuff I buy from costco and home depot. Most of the time the back is empty. I don't think it makes me a horrible perso…

Trucks are great. Unparalleled utility when you need it and comfortable to drive. Comes in handy often as a homeowner. Its not surprising people in a dense city wouldn’t want one but obviously they have lots of utility.

Re: Ford CEO: Tesla's Cybertruck Is Only for 'Silicon Valley People'

#68

Post by tyfon »

binarymax wrote: post #6

"I don't make trucks like that," Farley said. "I make trucks for real people who do real work, and that's a different kind of truck." You also make trucks that regular people don't need but buy anyway, and make our streets less safe. We need some regulation to only allow vehicles over a certain size to be commercial only.

Here in Norway, anything that has an allowed total weight above 3500 kg is classified as a light truck and not a car, is limited to 80 km/h max speed and you need a different license to drive it (C1 instead of B).

The C1 license training is much more extensive and costs a lot more. You also need to renew it every 5 years as it's really a "professional" license.

I see the base F1 weighs 2900 kg without the driver. That leaves about 500 kg for other passengers and cargo, about the same as an ID.4 if you want to register it with a normal B license. But I am looking at their sales brochure here in Norway now and it is sold as a C1 vehicle which means it is also limited to 80 km/h max speed. Max speed is conveniently left out of all marketing material too!

Kind of puts a limit to it.

The ID.Buzz is selling quite well here to people who use them for work instead of shopping, making one of the versions (the cargo) the 7th most sold vehicle so far in 2023 [1].

The cybertruck I don't think will be legal at all here due to the lack of crumple zones to protect pedestrians. It was pulled from pre ordering quite some time ago.

[1] https://elbilstatistikk.no/

Re: Ford CEO: Tesla's Cybertruck Is Only for 'Silicon Valley People'

#69

Post by xyzelement »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #64
xyzelement wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that trucks are dangerous and unnecessary is pretty prevalent on HN, and I can follow the physics argument but the same argument can apply to anything (a bicycle is more dangerous than a pedestrian) Are there stats that show that these trucks cause a social problem worthy of regulation, or do we just not like the archetypical truck guy?

It's pretty easy to find the answers you want with a couple of Google searches. Large trucks are way more dangerous to pedestrians (and especially dangerous and heartwrenching is all the kids who are killed every year when their parents drive over them because they can't see them over the giant height of the front grill). It's also simple physics that larger vehicles will produce more destructive crashes when average…

// The same can't really be said for a suburban parent driving a couple of kids to soccer practice in a giant truck vs. the station wagons of the past.

Is it possible that these parents are seeing some utility that isn't obvious to you, and then buy the vehicles based on that utility?

As someone who had a compact car in college, then was a car-less New Yorker for 20 years, and now is a dad of two with an SUV, the utility is obvious :)

Re: Ford CEO: Tesla's Cybertruck Is Only for 'Silicon Valley People'

#70

Post by weaksauce »

xyzelement wrote: post #41
binarymax wrote: post #6

"I don't make trucks like that," Farley said. "I make trucks for real people who do real work, and that's a different kind of truck." You also make trucks that regular people don't need but buy anyway, and make our streets less safe. We need some regulation to only allow vehicles over a certain size to be commercial only.

The idea that trucks are dangerous and unnecessary is pretty prevalent on HN, and I can follow the physics argument but the same argument can apply to anything (a bicycle is more dangerous than a pedestrian) Are there stats that show that these trucks cause a social problem worthy of regulation, or do we just not like the archetypical truck guy?

would you accept that modern trucks have less visibility than an abrams tank as a stat that they are less safe? https://twitter.com/dannyman/status/1661087159082967040
Post reply on HN