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

Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#901

Post by megaman821 »

AshleyGrant wrote: post #898
megaman821 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lost pneumatic steering during a turn, and it nearly tore my arm off. Not sure most people would be able to drive over a few mph without powered steering. Hopefully the steer by wire systems are backed by another steer by wire system, so it would be terrible luck if you lost both at the same time.

What car are you driving that has pneumatic steering? Also, in my experience driving cars with unassisted steering, it's steering at parking speeds that is difficult, steering at speeds above about 10 mph is fairly easy.

The incident happened in the early 2000s and the car was Buick LeSabre from the 80s. I am no expert, so maybe it was some other steering assist technology, but it definitely wasn't easy to finish the turn without it.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#902

Post by jjeaff »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #708
throwitaway222 wrote: post #693

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in CA, it's $0.30 per KWH, so extremely misleading if you are there - which most of the purchases will be at. Also in CA that price is going up 5% per year.

OTOH CA doesn't have $3.30 gas prices either.

I've been filling up with e85 gasoline for $2.99 a gallon in California. not sure how common vehicles are that can run on e85, but mine is a 2007 model.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#903

Post by harambae »

65a wrote: post #702
kllrnohj wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lexus is already doing steer by wire, they used it to make a vehicle with a yoke that didn't suck to operate (as much anyway): https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2023-lexus-rz450e-steer-b...

Hasn't VAG had steer-by-wire for nearly a decade now?

Yes as well as some BMW’s, McLarens, at least some of the electric Hyundai/Kias and I’m sure a bunch of others I’m not as familiar with.

The shock over it on HN is just because of how few people here work in automotive.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#904

Post by demondemidi »

XorNot wrote: post #783
kalleboo wrote: post #663

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although if you wanted to, I don't see why you couldn't build a CAN switch?

I think the question would be why would you want to? At the point you're doing that, ethernet already exists including plenty of industrial specced hardware.

A few reasons: Ethernet electrical is more expensive and ethernet drivers are bigger code size then CAN, and more complex (buggier, you have a lot more buffers and way more state to manage with ethernet versus CAN). Plus CANFD can accommodate different frequencies, so cheaper hardware can participate on the same bus. This may change over time as larger cores are used (Renesas comes to mind) and bigger ethernet stacks that are already scrutinized can be shoehorned in.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#905

Post by Kirby64 »

danans wrote: post #460
thechao wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A guy at work has a Ford Ranger EV (I think it's the '97?); he's upgraded the battery & the charger. It'd be my ideal vehicle if they were produced, again.

Yep. And according to Wikipedia, it delivered 75 miles of range at 60mph on 26kWh NiMH battery. With 52kWh of today's batteries a vehicle in that format could easily do 150 miles (plenty for a work truck). You wouldn't be able sell it for $50k+ though.

150mi of range assumes nothing in it, no towing, etc. Not nearly enough. Also, that would assume the 52kWh of battery weighs the same. Maybe it does, but if it doesn’t then that may increase weight and decrease range.

Nobody wants 150mj range cars anymore because they suck for day to day use. 20-80% means you’re realistically getting 60% of that range usable. You better plug them in every single day otherwise you might have trouble.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#906

Post by neop1x »

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #820

It's a brutally agressive looking machine - I assume intentionally so. That flat front pretty much guarantees padestrian/cyclist/motorcyclist fatailities in a collision. And over on Ars Technica they say "Musk implied that in a crash with another vehicle, the Cybertruck [...] will destroy the other vehicle." [1] - and presumably therefore kills its occupants too. Opinion: this is the purest physical realisation of th…

I really hope it won't pass EU legislation. It's like an APC.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#907

Post by grecy »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #161
grecy wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elon said a long time ago they wanted their vehicles to be a smackdown for Internal Combustion Engines, and I think they're getting there. This is the kind of marketing that make regular people go "Wait, what? How is that possible?". More than about 10 years ago that was simply unheard of, and I'm certain people would have said it was impossible. Useful or not, it's a very impressive thing to do. 99% of automakers wo…

AFAICT, sports cars faster than a 911 are relatively common. What automakers would be happy to beat would be the 911's handling.

> AFAICT, sports cars faster than a 911 are relatively common

Can you provide a list please? You are very much mistaken without getting into supercar territory.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#908

Post by ben_w »

gambiting wrote: post #836
poulpy123 wrote: post #830

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what I don't get is why the effect of a crash on other isn't taken into account in the evaluation of car safety

The impact to pedestrians is taken into account. The impact on other cars isn't, because I don't see how you'd do that objectively - do you just crash it against an identical model? A selection of several other cars from different categories/brands? How would you determine those? Do you just test head-on collisions, or the whole gauntlet of impacts? Wouldn't that make any test require dozens and dozens of vehicles, a…

This is just an initial response, so probably flawed, but I'd suggest testing against a vehicle which only exists to represent the lowest safety rating (for occupants) that is allowed on the roads of whichever jurisdiction this is.

If the new design results in harm to the passengers, it's unsafe for existing legal road users.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#909

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

neop1x wrote: post #906
andyjohnson0 wrote: post #820

It's a brutally agressive looking machine - I assume intentionally so. That flat front pretty much guarantees padestrian/cyclist/motorcyclist fatailities in a collision. And over on Ars Technica they say "Musk implied that in a crash with another vehicle, the Cybertruck [...] will destroy the other vehicle." [1] - and presumably therefore kills its occupants too. Opinion: this is the purest physical realisation of th…

I really hope it won't pass EU legislation. It's like an APC.

During the initial cybertruck announcement, Musk said this is their first vehicle they were designing to only be exclusively sold in the U.S., specifically because they could create a crazier design by only having to conform to one set of regulatory constraints.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#910

Post by ben_w »

gambiting wrote: post #892
poulpy123 wrote: post #889

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it would be possible to test the effect of the car on a (or several) standardized objects, and compare the car resistance to these standardized objects

The issue with that is that manufacturers would obviously work to make sure their cars score super well against those specific objects. Would you be able to make sure it translates well to collisions against real life cars in real life situations? I'm not sure - usually when you start judging manufacturers on a certain metric they make sure to do well on that one metric at the cost of everything else.

Avoiding Goodhart's law is a general problem, and in this case it's the regulator's problem.
Post reply on HN