Launch is Imminent

[strider]

The CT and the F-150 require home box equipment to use them as power walls. the cost of the equipment is $2,500 to $3,500. I have 2 friends that got founders CT orders in and lists the separate items needed / Included with founders' models... non founders models, the equipment will be sold separately.

You will not be able to draw large amounts of power through the onboard outlets. The connections will need to go through the charging outlet.

Yes, in order to get full power you need all of the dedicated hardware. But the CT has a 240V/9.6kW inverter in the bed. Lightning has a 240V/7.2kW inverter in the bed. I can build a cable with 2 male 14-50 plugs on it, plug one into the CT and plug the other end into a 14-50 outlet in my garage (after flipping the main breaker and/or removing the meter so as not to endanger the power company workers) and voila, I can power my house for only the cost of the cable. I need to actually measure my consumption but I am pretty sure I can run my house on 9.6kW. Not sure about 7.2kW.

 

[FastEddieB]

Let's say, for argument's sake, that CyberTruck repairs, when needed, will be relatively high. And that that portion of insurance rates will reflect that.

But that means on a given claim, the insurer may be on the hook for very close to the price of a new CyberTruck, assuming the truck is totaled. But that, at least, sets an upper limit on their liability. Not to mention that many "fender benders" that result in claims for damage on other vehicles may be absent if the CyberTruck is as resistant to minor dings as advertised.

But its personal injury claims that can climb WAY above the cost of a CyberTruck. Is it possible that adjusters will begin to notice that injury claims for those in CyberTruck accidents are WAY less than in smaller, lighter vehicles? And that may exert some downward pressure on premiums?

Just asking. Maybe someone with experience in auto insurance can opine.

 

[jebinc]

Let's say, for argument's sake, that CyberTruck repairs, when needed, will be relatively high. And that that portion of insurance rates will reflect that.

But that means on a given claim, the insurer may be on the hook for very close to the price of a new CyberTruck, assuming the truck is totaled. But that, at least, sets an upper limit on their liability. Not to mention that many "fender benders" that result in claims for damage on other vehicles may be absent if the CyberTruck is as resistant to minor dings as advertised.

But its personal injury claims that can climb WAY above the cost of a CyberTruck. Is it possible that adjusters will begin to notice that injury claims for those in CyberTruck accidents are WAY less than in smaller, lighter vehicles? And that may exert some downward pressure on premiums?

Just asking. Maybe someone with experience in auto insurance can opine.

Possibly... But liability claims, if the driver of the Cybertruck is found at fault in the accident, could be quite stratospheric - if Elon’s “indestructible” and “the other vehicle will lose,” BS is real. If so, property AND injury claims against the Cybertruck owner could be ________. To each.

 

[⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️]

Nope.
Exactly no-one wishes they had a 3-part frame. Or a 2 part. Or a 4 part. That argument is frivolous.
Least of all the owners, who will be paying stratospheric insurance costs to replace entire stupid mega-castings in all front/rear-end accidents.
Thus CTs are even more likely to get totaled, or incur obscene repair costs from minor accidents, then my current Tesla. For which I pay 2x the insurance rate of a comparable sports car.



More expensive for what?
Manufacturing (maybe, maybe not. Cite your manufacturing cost analysis, if you've done it)?
Post accident repairs (most definitely the other way around)?!!
Insurance costs?



Yeah, calling CT "exoskeleton" is pure marketing BS,
By definition, an exoskeleton is an external skeleton that both supports the body shape and protects the internal organs of an animal,
CT uses bolt-on steel body panels for all sorts of curious reasons, but support of the body shape isn't one of them.
Period.
Full stop.

Someone else might look at this claim as fraud, if that person were feeling less charitable towards Elon's and Tesla's claims.
However, there is an excuse for that too.
You see, even if it's fraud, it isn't.
Because, per Tesla, fraud == free speech.

Tesla Says It's Not Fraud, It's Free Speech

Elon Musk is dealing with even more legal headaches.

gizmodo.com

Yeah, really.
And thus Tesla's past fraudulent claims are protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution.
And Elon is never lying.
He is promoting free speech.

The only obvious problem with that claim is that the First Amendment doesn’t protect fraud, especially when people profit off of lies.
I guess it's a lesson a few are yet to learn.
Lets give them time.

How would it even be possible to make a true exoskeleton pickup truck or car? You could build a tank, but it would probably cost a lot more and have terrible range.

 

[Cal1]

Nope.
Exactly no-one wishes they had a 3-part frame. Or a 2 part. Or a 4 part. That argument is frivolous.
Least of all the owners, who will be paying stratospheric insurance costs to replace entire stupid mega-castings in all front/rear-end accidents.
Thus CTs are even more likely to get totaled, or incur obscene repair costs from minor accidents, then my current Tesla. For which I pay 2x the insurance rate of a comparable sports car.



More expensive for what?
Manufacturing (maybe, maybe not. Cite your manufacturing cost analysis, if you've done it)?
Post accident repairs (most definitely the other way around)?!!
Insurance costs?



Yeah, calling CT "exoskeleton" is pure marketing BS,
By definition, an exoskeleton is an external skeleton that both supports the body shape and protects the internal organs of an animal,
CT uses bolt-on steel body panels for all sorts of curious reasons, but support of the body shape isn't one of them.
Period.
Full stop.

Someone else might look at this claim as fraud, if that person were feeling less charitable towards Elon's and Tesla's claims.
However, there is an excuse for that too.
You see, even if it's fraud, it isn't.
Because, per Tesla, fraud == free speech.

Tesla Says It's Not Fraud, It's Free Speech

Elon Musk is dealing with even more legal headaches.

gizmodo.com

Yeah, really.
And thus Tesla's past fraudulent claims are protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution.
And Elon is never lying.
He is promoting free speech.

The only obvious problem with that claim is that the First Amendment doesn’t protect fraud, especially when people profit off of lies.
I guess it's a lesson a few are yet to learn.
Lets give them time.

You're so right but don't bother trying to explain this to the fevered faithful. The ONLY place the term exoskeleton is even referenced is in the animal world in exactly the way you described. Insects, crustaceans, etc. They don't even try to apply it to say a turtle because it actually has an internal skeleton.

This is Elon making up a new definition for something but of course if he says it, it must be true. Brilliance in one area doesn't mean you're smart about everything.

At first glance, it's an ok truck. Might be great but I need more reviews and real user feedback to see.

 

[⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️]

Possibly... But liability claims, if the driver of the Cybertruck is found at fault in the accident, could be quite stratospheric - if Elon’s “indestructible” and “the other vehicle will lose,” BS is real. If so, property AND injury claims against the Cybertruck owner could be ________. To each.

Just like any other big truck. This is why we need the CT, for self protection against all the jack wads out there driving huge trucks and SUVs.

 

[jebinc]

You're so right but don't bother trying to explain this to the fevered faithful. The ONLY place the term exoskeleton is even referenced is in the animal world in exactly the way you described. Insects, crustaceans, etc. They don't even try to apply it to say a turtle because it actually has an internal skeleton.

This is Elon making up a new definition for something but of course if he says it, it must be true. Brilliance in one area doesn't mean you're smart about everything.

At first glance, it's an ok truck. Might be great but I need more reviews and real user feedback to see.

@afadeev @Cal1 You’re about 10 hours late, unfortunately (see earlier posts). Your valid points were made back then, but the, “fevered faithful” became crazed and the rest of us left the room and enjoyed our Saturday.

 

[jebinc]

Just like any other big truck. This is why we need the CT, for self protection against all the jack wads out there driving huge trucks and SUVs.

Apples to apples. Elon himself brags that the CT will make mince meat of a rival in an accident, but the CT owner would remain victorious - or some BS line like that. Actually, he has many BS “indestructible” like lines and “toughness” videos. Also, many here believe the, “exoskeleton” is stronger than any other (including the other “big truck”).

If true, the CT will do more “damage” to a like vehicle it collides with. That will lead to insurance rates going up. Perhaps reevaluate your comment here, after reviewing your and other likeminded counter points made this morning - as well as the point I made in my post that you just replied to?

 

[gtgarner]

To date.

Model 3 and Y accidents are much safer for its driver than other vehicles. Per NTSA & IIHS (the people who don't really like Tesla). When Teslas haters say that their cars are the safest - I believe them.
I want me and my family safe. Not nearly as concerned about what it does to other objects like light poles - landscaping or even other vehicles that hit it. sorry

Tesla Safety Rating: Everything You Need to Know - VehicleHistory

How impressive is Teslas safety rating? The answer may surprise you. Your friends at Vehicle History have your back. Read on to learn more.

www.vehiclehistory.com

When those reports began coming out - insurance companies started dropping rates on Tesla's. Thats what happened to me with Allstate (full coverage).

In 2018 my annual insurance rate on my P3D was $X.
In 2020 my annual insurance rate was $X - 3 months.
Today as was in 2021 my annual insurance rate is $X - 2 months. (I was hit in the rear sitting at a light). Below is a pic of the $24k damage.

Last thing on my accident - My car was totaled out - until I told them about the price of FSD on my Maroney sticker. That made them repair it and not total it as the replacement value increased.

I have no doubt that the CT will follow in lock step with its current 4 brothers and sisters.

My insurance rate is my primary concern.

 

[mongo]

CT uses bolt-on steel body panels for all sorts of curious reasons, but support of the body shape isn't one of them.

Please show any example of the Cybertruck's stainless steel skin being bolted to the rest of the chassis.

Are you saying that Tesla engineering's claim of 25% of torsional stiffness resulting from the rear sail panels is false?

 

[gtgarner]

I see we are dancing with words again. This is turning into a nightclub.



No matter what CT's exoskeletons contributes to the vehicle...aint nothin like it in its class.

No matter what CTs 3 part casting contributes to the vehicle...aint nothing like it in its class.

Together - both the exoskeleton and the castings together solidify that - there just aint nothin like it in its class. Period.

This is why I stated that the exoskeleton and the casting works together for the structural integrity of the vehicle.

This clip shows how the rear casting (with wires and stuff already assembled on it) receives the exoskeleton affixed directly to it. There seems to be no other entity involved.

Listen for the tourist when he says - "Oh... the side panels". and the Tesla employee its "putting the exoskeleton on". Only about 20 seconds or so of footage on that.

And here I think we can see the exoskeleton affixed to the Casting in its rawest form. There doesn't appear to be anything between the exoskeleton and casting.

And here is one of the best clips showing a rear view the exoskeleton complete and hearing the tour guide say "the exoskeleton is complete.

Here we can see the Casting sticking out between the bucket and the exoskeleton. And look at the edge of the exoskeleton. Isn't this exciting?

GigaCasting Tour, 3 minutes.

 

[gtgarner]

When you put it all together:

 

[⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️]

Apples to apples. Elon himself brags that the CT will make mince meat of a rival in an accident, but the CT owner would remain victorious - or some BS line like that. Actually, he has many BS “indestructible” like lines and “toughness” videos. Also, many here believe the, “exoskeleton” is stronger than any other (including the other “big truck”).

If true, the CT will do more “damage” to a like vehicle it collides with. That will lead to insurance rates going up. Perhaps reevaluate your comment here, after reviewing your and other likeminded counter points made this morning - as well as the point I made in my post that you just replied to?

Survival of the fittest. Kill or be killed.

 

[⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️]

@afadeev @Cal1 You’re about 10 hours late, unfortunately (see earlier posts). Your valid points were made back then, but the, “fevered faithful” became crazed and the rest of us left the room and enjoyed our Saturday.

Who's the crazed one wasting their weekend on this stupid thread? Well, besides me.

 

[jebinc]

Please show any example of the Cybertruck's stainless steel skin being bolted to the rest of the chassis.

Are you saying that Tesla engineering's claim of 25% of torsional stiffness resulting from the rear sail panels is false?

Bolting would also create, "dissimilar metals" issues. (Stainless to aluminum casting using steel bolts, etc.)

 

[afadeev]

Please show any example of the Cybertruck's stainless steel skin being bolted to the rest of the chassis.

You can google CT manufacturing for yourself, or just look at the plant tour folks posted around CT launch party,

Video below provides an illustration, with plenty shots of the assembled CT unibody, with installed suspension, drivetrain, batteries, and the interior. In different states of assembly. Lots of shots without exterior body panels, or doors. Those get bolted/glued/welded/installed last.
The further in the video / tour you watch, the more body panels get attached to the unibody:

Wheels get attached last.
Granted, this is based on what Tesla has revealed.
It is entirely possible that portions of the "factory tour of the assembly line" were staged, and the assembly process is different.

Are you saying that Tesla engineering's claim of 25% of torsional stiffness resulting from the rear sail panels is false?

I said no such thing.
Body panels add rigidity to all modern unibody vehicle frames. Some more than the others. They also function as crumple zones.
So do the glued-on windshields.
So do roofs (metal, or glass).
So do strut tower braces.
Tesla's panels and glass pieces do all that as well. That doesn't make them "exoskeletons", though.

a

 

[texas_star_TM3]

Let's say, for argument's sake, that CyberTruck repairs, when needed, will be relatively high. And that that portion of insurance rates will reflect that.

But that means on a given claim, the insurer may be on the hook for very close to the price of a new CyberTruck, assuming the truck is totaled. But that, at least, sets an upper limit on their liability. Not to mention that many "fender benders" that result in claims for damage on other vehicles may be absent if the CyberTruck is as resistant to minor dings as advertised.

But its personal injury claims that can climb WAY above the cost of a CyberTruck. Is it possible that adjusters will begin to notice that injury claims for those in CyberTruck accidents are WAY less than in smaller, lighter vehicles? And that may exert some downward pressure on premiums?

Just asking. Maybe someone with experience in auto insurance can opine.

i think it will be the opposite.... once the Cybertruck uses the opponents vehicle as "crumple zone" due to its rigidity and you end up with fatalities in the other vehicle. that ain't cheap for your insurance if you are at fault...

 

[jebinc]

i think it will be the opposite.... once the Cybertruck uses the opponents vehicle as "crumple zone" due to its rigidity and you end up with fatalities in the other vehicle. that ain't cheap for your insurance if you are at fault...

Agreed. I made that very point the other day and was stoned by those "seated at table 6".

Launch is Imminent

The CT and the F-150 require home box equipment to use them as power walls. the cost of the equipment is $2,500 to $3,500. I have 2 friends that got founders CT orders in and lists the separate items needed / Included with founders' models... non founders models, the equipment will be sold...

teslamotorsclub.com

 

[texas_star_TM3]

Survival of the fittest. Kill or be killed.

let's hope nobody you love will be crushed by a Cybertruck who uses the opponents vehicle as crumple zone like a 1990s S-class.
Nowadays most vehicles are very very safe and have an appropriate crumple zone and protect pedestrians as much as they can.... well.... except for the Cybertruck

 

[mongo]

You can google CT manufacturing for yourself, or just look at the plant tour folks posted around CT launch party,

Video below provides an illustration, with plenty shots of the assembled CT unibody, with installed suspension, drivetrain, batteries, and the interior. In different states of assembly. Lots of shots without exterior body panels, or doors. Those get bolted/glued/welded/installed last.
The further in the video / tour you watch, the more body panels get attached to the unibody:

I have watched the tours and I have seen zero instances of the stainless panel being bolted on. Rather, they are bonded using structural adhesive.

CT uses bolt-on steel body panels for all sorts of curious reasons

Where?

You said previously:

but support of the body shape isn't one of them.

You replied with:

Body panels add rigidity to all modern unibody vehicle frames. Some more than the others. They also function as crumple zones.

Is rigidity not support?