Yes, the specs (payload, towing cap, 0-60 times) are all pretty impressive, and it's more affordable than I thought it was going to be ($40-70K, depending on model level). The stainless steel body is also pretty cool (shout out to the DeLorean!), as is the built-in ramp.
BUT, styling-wise, it looks like it escaped from a 1980s sci-fi movie set. You know, the kind of movie where they try to imagine what cars will look like in 2025. And in this case, they imagined an angry-looking low pyramid on wheels.
I can only imagine the reaction on the job site if you pull up in one of these. For that reason alone, I think the market for these will be limited.
Still though, it'll draw lots of attention and mindshare, as most polarizing things do.
ps – I do get that in a market segment as crowded and competitive as the pickup truck, Tesla couldn't really just release a 'safe, me-too looking' pickup and expect it to make a splash. It did have to be a bit edgy and disruptive-looking.
But man, there is such a thing as not going full retard. They went full retard.
Maybe something more like the speculative render below would've worked better... one foot firmly set in the future, but not 'a bridge too far', either.
..... (^ what could have been)
MH: I want to go like my Dad did - peacefully, in his sleep, not screaming in terror like his passengers.
SS: COMPLACENCY IS LETHAL. VOTE in November.
Homer: I believe that the children are our future. Unless we stop them now.
Plat: I'd rather fellate a syphilitic goat than own a Cervelo.
Seam: Saw Bjork poop onstage back in the day. It blew my teenage mind.
Yes, the specs (payload, towing cap, 0-60 times) are all pretty impressive, and it's more affordable than I thought it was going to be ($40-70K, depending on model level). The stainless steel body is also pretty cool (shout out to the DeLorean!), as is the built-in ramp.
BUT, styling-wise, it looks like it escaped from a 1980s sci-fi movie set. You know, the kind of movie where they try to imagine what cars will look like in 2025. And in this case, they imagined an angry-looking low pyramid on wheels.
I can only imagine the reaction on the job site if you pull up in one of these. For that reason alone, I think the market for these will be limited.
Still though, it'll draw lots of attention and mindshare, as most polarizing things do.
Falcon 3.0 called. They want their low-poly truck model back.
Sarcasm aside...I doubt there is anyway in hell they can get something that unaerodynamic to have a 500 mile range for $80,000USD. You need a battery cell so large it costs more than the street price a fully kitted out Performance model Tesla. Ford's BEV truck was spec'd for a 400 mile range and estimates are it is well into 6-figures, due to non-aerodynamics and the needed size of the cell.
"Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity "
Musk's interpretation of a truck is an interesting one. It may play well with an urbanite who needs to purchase some slabs of Italian marble at the local Home Depot for a kitchen renovation project or for hauling trail toys from the cul-de-sac to the great outdoors. I'm not sure if it will appeal to a flannel shirt consumer that eats lunch from a pail and drinks from a thermos.
Did anyone not see the issues with the durability demos? The door panel actually wavered from the sledgehammer hit, and the ballistic windows spidered from what looked like a lob from the guy. Or maybe I'm not seeing this correctly.
...The stainless steel body is also pretty cool (shout out to the DeLorean!), as is the built-in ramp...
In this "race for efficiency", and with "range anxiety" concerns, I really don't understand why manufacturers are putting out vehicles that are increasingly heavier...EV and combustion alike. Shouldn't lighter weight be a focus as well? Powered doors/latches, cappuccino machines (new S8 option...that is kinda baller though), adjustable ride height systems, heated/cooled/massaging seats, seem to be becoming standard options, and all just seem like unnecessary weight keeping range extension from advancing.
I think this is nothing more the Musk trolling everyone. I don’t see how this is a finished product. It doesn’t look like it would pass any kind of crash test or pedestrian safety standards. I think what’s under this truck is going to be in the final product. But what your seeing is not what people will be buying in a year or 2. Tesla needs money to make this truck and Musk and a few of his engineers got together and came up with a way to get people to throw money at them and screw with all the people that think Musk is some kind of god.
It’s certainly different, but I can’t say I totally hate it in the context of a utilitarian truck. Trucks aren’t supposed to be pretty, they are supposed to do stuff, and other than awkward bed access, this seems to be pretty good at that.
In this case, the angularity seems to be a big manufacturing benefit. The thick stainless steel body panels can be stamped flat. I think the idea is that they can produce stainless panels for close the cost of normal curved non-stainless panels. Then, because they are using stainless, there’s no paint. The odd overall shape is likely an aero thing- can’t fault them for that.
In this "race for efficiency", and with "range anxiety" concerns, I really don't understand why manufacturers are putting out vehicles that are increasingly heavier...EV and combustion alike. Shouldn't lighter weight be a focus as well? Powered doors/latches, cappuccino machines (new S8 option...that is kinda baller though), adjustable ride height systems, heated/cooled/massaging seats, seem to be becoming standard options, and all just seem like unnecessary weight keeping range extension from advancing.
It's a status symbol with a thin veil of "I'm being efficient". Kind of like an well insulated McMansion... it still takes a carpload of energy to run, but it uses state of the art insulation and heating... I'm saving the world, but dang, I want to be comfortable..
This forum requires that you wait 2 days between posts. Please try again in 17 hours.
In this "race for efficiency", and with "range anxiety" concerns, I really don't understand why manufacturers are putting out vehicles that are increasingly heavier...EV and combustion alike. Shouldn't lighter weight be a focus as well? Powered doors/latches, cappuccino machines (new S8 option...that is kinda baller though), adjustable ride height systems, heated/cooled/massaging seats, seem to be becoming standard options, and all just seem like unnecessary weight keeping range extension from advancing.
The weight has a lot to do with crash resilience. It's really hard to make a light weight vehicle that does well in crash tests. For EVs, more weight means more battery cells- so it directly helps increase range.
In this "race for efficiency", and with "range anxiety" concerns, I really don't understand why manufacturers are putting out vehicles that are increasingly heavier...EV and combustion alike. Shouldn't lighter weight be a focus as well? Powered doors/latches, cappuccino machines (new S8 option...that is kinda baller though), adjustable ride height systems, heated/cooled/massaging seats, seem to be becoming standard options, and all just seem like unnecessary weight keeping range extension from advancing.
Some of those things don't add much to weight....although they do add to range worries (seat heaters). The ultimate problem...lighter weight is "easy" to do if you either raise the price astronomically (carbon fiber body like some "race" cars that cost 7-figures) and/or you make durability a real problem. In China, right now, they have some crazy light BEVs right now with amazing range consequently---but are also dirt cheap compared to any new US auto...but I would wager money there is no way on Earth they'd pass a proper safety inspection and/or collision test.
Durability ends up being a real problem, with any contemporary auto. Cars of course crumple by design....but with BEVs and even ICE-hybrids they can easily crumple in a minor/moderate collision enough to damage the battery cell....at which point the car is for all intents totaled, due to the cost of replacing the Cell. My 2010 Honda Insight I bought used last year for $5500USD (pricing error on dealership's part), I looked it up and the cost of a new Cell was $4,500USD.
What is more, even non-hybrid ICE cars can have obnoxious cost to fix body damage. Many cars have gone to lighter-weight "unibody" construction. Which is great for lowering curb weight. But in a collision you can no longer just replace a crumpled body panel from a minor fender-bender. My Honda is a unibody--idiot backed into my rear quarter panel/door and did "minor damage" as such things go in a Honda versus Hummer collision (yes, of course he drove a Hummer)---cost to fix it was $3,000USD 2/3 of which was fixing the unibody of the car.
"Refreshingly Unconcerned With The Vulgar Exigencies Of Veracity "
Maybe something more like the speculative render below would've worked better... one foot firmly set in the future, but not 'a bridge too far', either.
The weight has a lot to do with crash resilience. It's really hard to make a light weight vehicle that does well in crash tests. For EVs, more weight means more battery cells- so it directly helps increase range.
I get that batteries are heavy, and the weight of wiring for "EVs" is significant and not often thought about. However the heated/cooled/massaging seats, powered charge door/rear hatch door and door handles, entire car that raises when you open the door so you don't have to bend down as much, are all examples of "non-necessities" which do not require significant investment ro lower weight... again, in both EV and gas vehicles.
A 15lbs basic manual seat vs. 100lbs+ "luxury" seat is a good place to start to shave 200-300lbs. The cumulative affect of removing these comforts, even in the lower end models, would be significant, before you even start talking about light weight materials. At least offer a stripper model. The damage resistant body panels Saturn was using 30 years ago should have some use these days, or at least serve as a good starting point for additional development.
Point is, having half my cylinders shut down for better highway efficiency doesn't mean as much to me if the car is 300lbs heavier than the last model. It just seems like industry goals are counter productive.
Side note, I'm hating the move towards "all touch panel", and the inherent need for extended glances. I balked at having to pay $1,000 to replace my '92 Corrado's instrument cluster. I can't imagine what it will cost to replace an automotive grade display.
I get that batteries are heavy, and the weight of wiring for "EVs" is significant and not often thought about. However the heated/cooled/massaging seats, powered charge door/rear hatch door and door handles, entire car that raises when you open the door so you don't have to bend down as much, are all examples of "non-necessities" which do not require significant investment ro lower weight... again, in both EV and gas vehicles.
A 15lbs basic manual seat vs. 100lbs+ "luxury" seat is a good place to start to shave 200-300lbs. The cumulative affect of removing these comforts, even in the lower end models, would be significant, before you even start talking about light weight materials. At least offer a stripper model. The damage resistant body panels Saturn was using 30 years ago should have some use these days, or at least serve as a good starting point for additional development.
Point is, having half my cylinders shut down for better highway efficiency doesn't mean as much to me if the car is 300lbs heavier than the last model. It just seems like industry goals are counter productive.
Side note, I'm hating the move towards "all touch panel", and the inherent need for extended glances. I balked at having to pay $1,000 to replace my '92 Corrado's instrument cluster. I can't imagine what it will cost to replace an automotive grade display.
Weight doesn't matter much for freeway cruising efficiency anyways- it's mostly aero and motor efficiency there. It's mostly important for acceleration.
Panel displays really aren't that expensive, and getting cheaper. Wouldn't surprise me if it's not much more than your Carrado's instrument cluster (inflation adjusted) in a few years.
I think this is nothing more the Musk trolling everyone. I don’t see how this is a finished product. It doesn’t look like it would pass any kind of crash test or pedestrian safety standards. I think what’s under this truck is going to be in the final product. But what your seeing is not what people will be buying in a year or 2. Tesla needs money to make this truck and Musk and a few of his engineers got together and came up with a way to get people to throw money at them and screw with all the people that think Musk is some kind of god.
If there is one thing Musk is good at its selling hype. No need to trade in your F-150 just yet
Weight doesn't matter much for freeway cruising efficiency anyways- it's mostly aero and motor efficiency there. It's mostly important for acceleration.
Panel displays really aren't that expensive, and getting cheaper. Wouldn't surprise me if it's not much more than your Carrado's instrument cluster (inflation adjusted) in a few years.
Fair enough, but most commutes aren't uninterrupted highway cruises.
As far as panels, a dead section of screen, or bad connection would necessitate an entire panel replacement. Compared to the cost of a bad button or knob, its significantly higher. But the need to scroll, or dig through a menu to reach a function while driving is a bad move IMHO. Some menus literally scroll like a web page. With companies touting their great new safety features, I'm not seeing how the touchscreen is helping...but I guess that's why all the autonomous safety features are being added.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by SystemShock
