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

931–940 of 1001 posts

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#931

Post by ben_w »

illiac786 wrote: post #927
ben_w wrote: post #908

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

well a strong enough crash will always result in harm to either or both sides. One still has to define the type of crash etc. I hate these minitanks but I acknowledge it's not simple to test like this. Make heavier car forbidden on some roads or make them pay proportionally to a ratio of their empty weight vs. weight fully loaded would seem fair. This way trucks are not impacted, but stupidly heavy SUVs are. And appl…

> well a strong enough crash will always result in harm to either or both sides. One still has to define the type of crash etc.

Sure, but that's way beyond the scope of a comment on a web forum to enumerate let alone describe in detail. Whatever the current survivability standards are, they'll say speeds and directions etc., so reuse those but with the new car as the other object in the collision.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#932

Post by jacobolus »

cashsterling wrote: post #893
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…

Lets remember that most sedan [and smaller] cars do not fair well in collisions with pick-up trucks like the Ford F250... and neither do pedestrians and cyclists. Then consider all of the even larger, heavily industrial vehicles on the road... Does look like the cybertruck might be even burlier than a F250... but the point is, we already share the road with "mini-tanks" [that are intrinsically more dangerous to other…

And the manufacturers of all of these vehicles should be partially liable for damage caused.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#933

Post by deagle50 »

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…

Depressing yes, but not because of Musk/Tesla. We'd be surrounded by SUVs, trucks, carjackings, and deer regardless. Unfortunately the best I can do is get the biggest steel cage possible and look out for #1.

His statement is clearly hyperbole, if anything it shows that he gave up on protecting pedestrians long ago when it became clear most vehicle buyers and the regulatory bodies don't care.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#934

Post by stetrain »

_ea1k wrote: post #890
stetrain wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably it can charge either at 400V or 800V depending on the charger it's plugged into. But I think you're right, Ultium is still a 400V drive architecture versus this being an 800V drive architecture.

True, I left out that part. :) TBH, I'm really looking forward to seeing the Tesla tested on 800V CCS chargers via the adapter. It seems like it is at least possible that it might charge faster on those than on the current 400V superchargers. Of course, that would change if Tesla starts enabling 800V support on V3/V4.

In the Top Gear interview they confirmed the truck can do 350kW charging on a V4 charger, 15-85% in 18-20 minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uefydJUbRhc @ 34min

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#935

Post by spixy »

abledon wrote: post #497
adgrnhioaedntio wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 911 Turbo S has a 0-60 time of 2.6 seconds, but Car and Driver clocked it at 2.2. Its quarter-mile time is 10.1 seconds. https://www.caranddriver.com/porsche/911-turbo-turbo-s I don't know what's going on with that video. If we take Tesla's numbers at face value, which I definitely don't given their history, the 911 Turbo S is dramatically faster on the straights. Is Tesla claiming that the Cybertruck gets faster…

they said they went to a dealership, bought it, then brought it to the track. No modifications etc.

Do Porsche cars need to be break in? I know some cars limit engine power for first thousands of km (m).

https://extramile.thehartford.com/auto/maintenance/how-to-br...

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#936

Post by Dig1t »

FireBeyond wrote: post #77
duskwuff wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So the $40K CyberTruck is actually more like $57,000 $61k. Click on the tab that says "purchase price".

Fixed that. Thanks. Love those dark patterns. I'd gone with Purchase Price + Federal Tax. Of course Tesla has also thrown in $3,600+ on "probable gas savings". Probable gas savings is odd, because they also base some of their comparisons on an arbitrary 20mpg for ICE. "We've assumed a fuel economy of 20.0 miles per gallon for a comparable gasoline powered truck" Odd, because let's see: the Honda Ridgeline starts at 2…

I have a recent year F-150 and I basically never get more than 20 MPG. Actually I almost always get nearly exactly 20 MPG, it's not a bad estimate in my subjective experience.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#938

Post by Dig1t »

charred_patina wrote: post #448

God I am so disgusted by trucks as virtue/status signaling. This is just that turned up to 11. I really wish we just recognized cars as transportation and built them for that purpose, while providing alternatives. Such a misallocation of resources.

I'm a person who needs transportation, is building a house, has a family, and likes to go camping. 1 truck serves all my needs, particularly for the building a house thing. I can carry a full bed of tools, or haul plywood + drywall. I can also fit my big kayaks and camping gear.

A truck gives you so much freedom and flexibility to do real work, it is very empowering. I understand that many people buy a truck and don't actually utilize all its capabilities, but there are those of us that do.

For a person like me, what is the alternative world you envision? As an end user, what am I supposed to do to build my own house? Should I be forced to pay professionals to haul things and do work for me? Should professional trades people be the only ones allowed to own these types of vehicles?

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#939

Post by caconym_ »

kortilla wrote: post #929
caconym_ wrote: post #759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Addiction and substance abuse are complicated topics, but ideally somebody partaking of tobacco, drugs, or alcohol is aware of the risk to their own person of doing so, and has freely chosen to partake regardless. Unfortunately, though I'm well aware of the mortal danger excessively large and powerful personal vehicles pose to me and my family on the road, the only ways I can opt out of that danger are to a) not driv…

> In short, yours is not a good analogy because the danger posed by the use of harmful addictive substances is to the self, You didn’t read what I wrote. I specifically called out being under the influence. A drunk behind the wheel of the Corolla is far more dangerous to pedestrians than a teetotaling truck driver. Similar to anyone at a high risk of heart attack or stroke that gets behind the wheel.

I assumed that wasn't what you meant since it's an obvious non sequitur. Driving drunk is already illegal, and the fatality rate is down over 60% since its high point in the early 80s when we really started taking it seriously as a nation. That's the sort of impact taking a public health hazard seriously can have on human lives that might otherwise be snuffed out by it.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#940

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

palemoonale wrote: post #634
HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Drive by wire kind of scares me Physical linkages break too.

Has this ever happened to you? Good god, i want less SW in a car, not more. W/o power steering i can at least control a vehicle, only the brake pressure lost is a serious problem. Same with keyless starters, i remember this story about some French car experiencing a kind of highway run-off that couldn't be stopped due to this BS solution to a non-existing problem. "But hey, that's not innovative enough"

Yup. Got a set of Saturn Vue gearshift linkage cables in the garage because one broke and left the car in a non-drivable state and it had to be towed home. I have the entire assemblies because I was able to get by with just replacing the broken part and not entire cable going through the firewall.

I could go through a list of critical mechanical systems that have broken on cars I've driven over the years, including my beloved Toyota pickup.

> i want less SW in a car, not more

I just want Good Engineering Practice. Good engineering encompasses a lot, including doing a DFMEA (Design Failure Modes Effects Analysis) that will advise whether the software system is safer than the hardware linkage or vice versa.

Post reply on HN