I would guess that that is the main problem with the steel. It's really expensive to mold it to make it look like an actual normal vehicle. I could be wrong, but that's the only logical conclusion I can come up with as to why they are releasing such a hideous looking vehicle.
I saw a lot of fan renderings of what people thought the vehicle may of looked like on release. I think they should scrap the whole steel aspect, fire their designers, and hire some of the fan's that came up with some really cool designs, that the everyday truck driver may actually purchase. As it appears now, I really can't imagine who is going to be buying this truck.

the design is supposed to lower production cost and allow for that cheapish price

You can get a really nice, good looking truck, w/ equally shatterproof windows, for 70k.

70k not electric or 40 k electric so even cheaper faster and stronger even if the look is so so at that price it's a killer offering. Anyway it looks like a basic prototype and people who tested it confirmed it's a rough prototype so the final product is still unknown and the only surprise so far is the cost which with musk is far from final.

now all you need is Scotty to say "Clear Aluminium.. now would that be worth something to you?!?"

Close, it's $82k

Musk claims 150K orders for the cybertruck already. Real numbers or another Musk fraud?

Of course it's only $100 to reserve so not in the same league as previous reservations, but the number is still noteworthy give that Y flopped at < 10K total.

$100 refundable reserve that I can brag about on instagram? Shocked it's not 500k tbh.

Even if it's 150k it's just hype because it got so much attention & is so different. By the time they start shipping it, only a fraction will remain. Not like they will be able to make 150k of these before like 2023?

You have bad taste. Thats why you dont get it.

So contractors think its cool to drive a less efficient obsolete vehicle? what do contractors love about current trucks? Why can't a roofer drive a tesla truck?

You're obviously not a contractor. Have you ever hired a contractor, or even met one?

Contractors place a lot of stock in dependability, proven track record, and functionality. Furthermore, most have very strong brand loyalty.

Tesla's reputation is the opposite of dependability. Claiming bulletproof glass (which is stupid, and no one wants anyway) and then failing in such a spectacular fashion didn't win over anyone who actually uses a truck, or values reliability.

The bed on that truck is not at all functional for contractors, or anyone who actually uses their truck. The styling is terrible, and something no contractor is going to want to be seen in. When the truck is released it will have lots of problems, and anyone trying to use it as a truck for contracting is going to run into a bunch of problems that never even occurred to Tesla.

As to your original question, yes, contractors think it is cool to drive around in a less efficient, obsolete, vehicle. The contracting, independent business owning, "truck country", demographic is full of people who drive trucks that are larger than necessary, or practical for their business, which get 10mpg.

Do you really think everyone driving a diesel f-250 is doing so because it's necessary for their business?

Infinite range and proven high reliability with 3 minute full charge of 900 miles of range (which is what the F150 offers) is "obsolete"? Weird take. People swallow conmen bullshit far too easily.

Long answer short.

Yeah, basically.

Small/mini trucks are the norm in parts of the world where fuel costs are much more significant. Americans drive huge pickup trucks with 300+ HP not because they need the space or HP, but because they like to feel tough and powerful in big trucks.

Not Tesla, but SpaceX related.

Thread



window-gate

The level of desperation at TSLAQ is EXTREMELY HIGH.

Mad props for them actually running a real test. Usually these are all faked.

This is a good thread:



The "cybertruck" as it is now will basically never be street legal and hence not released. This is probably a good thing for Musk - a more standard design (not the brain fail of a 10 year old child in a man's body) could be good for sales. The fundamentals of a pickup truck with a large battery are pretty compelling. Been saying that for years.

This is horse **** from a Twitter account devoted almost entirely to anti-Musk sentiment.

There is also a fairly narrow window between now and FSD, which will dramatically reduce the risk of collisions (regardless of whether that is in 1, 5, or 10 years, I consider that a narrow window). A Panzerkampfwagen IV tank could be street legal if it had zero chance of colliding with anything/anyone.

Why are we talking about Cybertrucks when Fully Self Driving "feature complete" is here, for the first time in human history, in 34 days?

That's what Musk claimed to bondholders when he needed money 6 months ago.

Lol. Even a perfect FSD car will hit pedestrians/bicyclists/etc. because people are stupid and cars travel quickly. A zero chance of colliding with anything/anyone is absurd. It's literally impossible for the car to know what people are going to do and people the car can't even see will sometimes do something stupid. Think car going 30mph through an intersection and a bicycle running a red light that was blocked from view by another vehicle.

Your answer could be that these people don't deserve safety - but it's not going to be regulators answer.

I agree perfection is not imminent but the main point is FSD will reduce the chance of accidents by a huge % from the existing level.

As for regulators, in theory once they have compelling evidence FSD is safer than human drivers, they should allow it, but in practice they will require a higher standard, out of fear of backlash over accidents/incidents, but FSD will meet that standard. Also it will be so much safer and more convenient, and everyone wants it, regs/gov will recognize that. I do not think it will be a rate limiting factor at all, though depends on jurisdication.



TSLAQ vs market.