635
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
635 points (95.9% liked)
Technology
59259 readers
1467 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So both the engineers and everyone in the comments is just saying they hate/like the look of it? That's the last important part. As I understand it, the Cybertruck is never going to be allowed to the roads in Europe because of how unsafe it is. That's what people should be interested in. Looks can be pleasing to some and ugly to others and that's ok.
I've been wondering about its crumple zones. So... does it not have any ?
The other car is the crumple zone.
I wonder how much the other car's crumple zone affects the performance of your own. I wouldn't be surprised if one car not having one would degrade the performance of the one that does.
In which case, these cars actually become a public safety risk.
The crumple zone absorbs kinetic energy / momentum and allows a smoother and slower deceleration for the passengers as the energy transfer of the impact gets drawn out over time. The suddenness of crashes is what causes the greatest injuries, so you want it to be less sudden.
If both cars have equally performing crumple zones then both zones contribute equally to this "jerk reduction" (a rapid change in acceleration is called jerk), but if only one has it then you only get half as good reduction and the slowdown will be more sudden.
I thought that might be the case but I didn't want to speak authoritatively.
Yeah this cyber truck is going to make accidents a lot worse.
So the pedestrians are as well?
Airbags
the bodies of children it's software won't detect will have plenty of crumple zones, don't see what's the issue
the thing is a giant slab of angled metal, when it crashes into things my guess is the hood will slide backwards and "dissect" entire people.
That's a threat with most vehicles and is easily engineered for. Aside from visibility problems, we can't know what real safety issues it might have until we get crash test data.
How unsafe is it? I've not seen any crash test results.
Afaik they haven't done any crash testing yet, or haven't released the results. The EU tends not to allow cars with sharp, angular front ends. Iirc that's why the latest Camaro can't be sold in swathes of Europe.
Why are people so convinced that the Cybertruck won't be safe? Of all the bad things we can say about Tesla, it's a fact that they're quite safe vehicles. I see no reason why the company would suddenly build a vehicle that is so unsafe it cannot be sold in Europe. Some comments in this thread say it doesn't have any crumple zones. How strong do you think 3mm stainless steel is? The strength of every vehicle comes from its frame, not from its body panels. Same thing with the Cybertruck.
Safety isn’t just about the driver though, you also have to think about what happens when they hit pedestrians or other cars. I gotta say, there’s a lot of vehicles I’d much rather be hit by than this if I had a choice
There are also pedestrian safety laws. I'm not convinced that the Cybertruck is less safe than any other similar-sized pickup truck. If anything, the nose is a bit lower, so it'd let a pedestrian fall on the hood more than if they were hit by another truck.
Either way, the stainless steel isn't going to be a factor, and the pickup market is flooded with vehicles that are less safe for pedestrians than lower cars.