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
    1631 year ago

    Gonna be real fun to see the crash test rating.

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

    • JohnEdwa
      link
      fedilink
      English
      771 year ago

      OTOH it weighs almost 7000lbs (~3100kg) so it’s going to plow through most of everything with its sheer mass.

      • Cornpop
        link
        fedilink
        English
        54
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Believe it or not in the USA it’s actually based off of self compliance in the USA. There is no specific government body that has a standardized test that they have to pass to be made legal. The manufacture gets to make that decision themselves, then if there is an issue that the government finds later they can be pulled from the road.

    • @Chreutz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -431 year 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
        221 year 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.

        • @Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          271 year ago

          Let’s be real. No one is hauling anything in this truck. In my experience the more expensive truckk the less its actually used for anything.

          The entire cybertruck fleet hauling completed by 2030 is probably the equivalent to one year of 01 Nissan Frontiers…

      • @SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 year ago

        Really think they will just say ‘eh fuck it’

        Were talking about Elon here. Yes, I do think so. In addition, don’t give too much credit, the other vehicles would always be inherently safer because they’re electric.

  • Avid Amoeba
    link
    fedilink
    English
    97
    edit-2
    1 year 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.

    • @intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      Yeah cars should definitely not be colliding with people. The results are horrible. Welcome to civilization with cars, where our overall strategy for minimizing the death cars to do pedestrians is based on collision avoidance rather than making car-pedestrian collisions safe.

      • @Sheltac@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        Making car-pedestrian collisions safe is a ridiculous idea failed to doom from the start. Cars are big and hard, people are small and squishy.

        I think the key is to prevent cars and people from coexisting as much as possible.

        • @dumpsterlid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Making car-pedestrian collisions safe is a ridiculous idea failed to doom from the start. Cars are big and hard, people are small and squishy.

          My quite large awd minivan that can tow 3500 lbs and fit a massive amount in the back has a hood that slopes down quickly to about a waist height. God forbid if I hit someone, they would clearly be scooped up onto the hood, which might sound bad but literally every single new pickup (with basically the same specs as my minivan on paper except with less capable AWD because of no weight in the back and a bed that doesn’t come with a cover like mine did) is basically designed to try to hit a pedestrian in the shoulders and head and smash them down under the vehicle. This isn’t a hypothetical safety thing, pedestrian fatalities are raising at an alarming rate because it has become cool for insecure men to drive around pickups that are optimized to kill a pedestrian in an accidental crash. Also, the rear cab seats of these pickups are extremely dangerous in a crash (there isnt any space to cushion collision) which is dark given that I always see losers driving around their whole family in these monstrosities treating it like a family vehicle.

          I agree though that kicking cars out of places that pedestrians are in and valuing pedestrian use of public ways over car use especially in urban areas is ultimately the best solution.

  • @Eideen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    751 year 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/

  • @SpaceBishop@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    551 year ago

    could hurt pedestrians and cyclists

    I dare you to convince me that anyone still buying Tesla would not see that as a benefit. That’s going to be the number one selling point of this thing after articles like this make their rounds.

  • Phoenixz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    511 year ago

    “Raises”?

    That was a concern the day it was unveiled years ago

    • @And009@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      Didn’t expect them to act this stupid. They have no damn solution for this mammoth of a tin box, exerting pressures way above what is needed to obliterate any living thing at speed.

  • @xX_fnord_Xx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    471 year 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
    351 year 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…

  • @hardcoreufo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    311 year 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.

    • @imaqtpie@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      251 year ago

      I’m pretty sure it actually is significantly more dangerous. The front end of traditional pickups will still crumple and absorb a great deal of force. If the cybertruck is more rigid and the sharp edges have a potential to gash pedestrians on impact, that’s two factors that don’t apply to current pickups.

      • @Zetta@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        I don’t actually know the ride height but it looks like the cyber truck has a much lower nose when driving on normal roads compared to a lot of trucks, so while it may be very stiff, maybe it’ll just launch you over the hood.

        • @weew@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          The shorter and lower nose should improve visibility too. Regular pickups have a blind spot as large as an entire daycare center.

      • @intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -41 year ago

        So are we really contemplating pickup trucks as more safe in a pedestrian collision because they have crumple zones?

        When a truck hits a pedestrian and the front of the truck crumples, is that pedestrian okay?

        • @DV8@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          151 year ago

          There’s a difference between a shattered pelvis and being impaled because someone thought sharp corners are cool and safety standards are oppression.

    • @SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      241 year 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
        81 year 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
          71 year 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.”

          • @intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 year ago

            Instead, let’s scrutinize both

            is a construction that leads to nothing getting done as a result of failing to acknowledge there are limited resources.

            The concept of “first” is absolutely key to accomplishing anything.

            • @steveman_ha@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              7
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              … Doesn’t “limited resources” basically just mean here ones ability to consider more than one thought at a time? Surely a species capable of collaborative efforts like space travel can handle the complexity of generalizing to say “no, sorry, none of the human-bulldozer designs are okay actually”?

            • @SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              41 year ago

              Criticism is not a scarce quantity to be preserved. It spreads, like a fire. Take literally any social movement, like #metoo or BLM. People don’t suppress smaller stories to “save” criticism for bigger stories. The small stories add up. Right now, the F150 is one of the best selling cars in the US. The average American is no where close to criticizing it. But everyone already makes fun of the cyber truck. We can use that.

              “Let’s not criticize this dangerous truck design because we should save our criticism!” is the worst way to get people to criticize dangerous truck design.

    • @jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 year ago

      And those are largely banned from the EU as well. The issue is the lack of regulation in the US, it’s killing pedestrians daily.

    • @NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -8
      edit-2
      1 year 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

      • Dem Bosain
        link
        fedilink
        English
        101 year ago

        I’m pretty sure Tesla is devoid of any technology that detects pedestrians.

        • @fosforus@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It definitely detects pedestrians: the live on-screen image shows them when they are nearby. They also claim to have automatic emergency braking when it detects pedestrians being in danger. I haven’t seen this in action, but then again, I don’t drive where pedestrians walk, so… But I can tell that my Tesla does weird short brakings on a motorway when nobody is close. Detects my future ghost, probably.

          Their own claim is that their cars are quite a lot safer than USA average: https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport – but I have heard it being rumoured that sometimes companies lie.

          • Flying Squid
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            But I can tell that my Tesla does weird short brakings on a motorway when nobody is close.

            I hope you never drive where there are patches of ice on the road.

            • @fosforus@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I do, weekly. These don’t happen incredibly often, and they happen only when the cruise control is switched on. Not once have they caused a dangerous situation.

        • MrSpArkle
          link
          fedilink
          English
          81 year 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
            61 year 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
              1
              edit-2
              1 year 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
            21 year 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.

  • @Species8472@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    281 year ago

    Safety concerns…who would have thought? This cannot be an actual recent concern. Everybody could see the safety issues from the day it was unveiled…

    Good thing safety regulation is the reason why we hopefully will not see this monstrosity on EU roads.

    • @bcron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      151 year ago

      Possibly unpopular opinion but I think the Cybertruck is about as dumb-looking as most any other truck on the market. 4 big doors, more cabin than bed, trucks in general are all goofy looking parking lot crawlers nowadays

    • @Zetta@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      131 year ago

      Shit on me if you must but I actually like the look and features of the car. However I likely wouldn’t buy a Tesla in general

      • @neidu@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It could be a good vehicle, if it was built by someone else.

        The past few years have revealed that while Tesla have the tech, they lack the basic precision manufacturing that other automakers mastered decades ago.

      • @samokosik@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I agree, features are nice and I also would enjoy trying to drive one. But in a for a long term usage, I bet the reliability will be an issue and also some Tesla shenanigans such as 20k for the battery.

        Thing is: I personally don’t give a shit about features. I like simple and basic vehicles that last for many years.

      • @dukk@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        You’d like the “features” of any car, it’s why they’re features. It’s the tradeoffs that actually matter.

        And yeah, it looked cool at first, but that’s really just because of its uniqueness. From an actual design perspective, it just looks…stupid.

    • @Kage520@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think the main market was supposed to be like a utility vehicle. It’s got some nice specs for actual work purposes for an electric vehicle, while saving money by not making a pretty body.

      I don’t know why some people like the look and want it for recreational use.

      • @samokosik@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        6
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It was supposed to be a utility vehicle but it genuinely failed. If I wanted a utility vehicle, I would get Toyota Land cruiser 79. For a utility vehicle, you need something reliable, something which does not have 246 useless electronic features and something you can drive while wearing gloves (you cannot so this with tesla considering every setup is made via the display).

        Tbh, to me is seems like a car which is made purely for city and for the ones who just want to show off. It definitely is not a proper workhorse.

        If I wanted a utility vehicle (which would be abused), I would look for:

        • big payload
        • 3 pedals
        • hand brake
        • steering wheel
        • 4x4, diff locks , transfer case
        • gear lever

        Nothing more is truly needed because it just adds the probability of failure.

  • @filister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    261 year 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

  • @grte@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    231 year ago

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

  • @Muhr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    211 year ago

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