Confirmed Cybertruck specs: 5% smaller, 6x4 bed size, 5 seats, frunk, no pass through & more... (info from Tesla employee at Investor Day)

[fhteagle]

I really hate to say this but Tesla is doing one from the Ram playbook here. This deletes many of the features that had CT above the competition in my estimation. Really hope they put that stuff back at the real reveal and we find out if was just to throw off the other brands....

Sponsored

 

[happy intruder]

I really hate to say this but Tesla is doing one from the Ram playbook here. This deletes many of the features that had CT above the competition in my estimation. Really hope they put that stuff back at the real reveal and we find out if was just to throw off the other brands....

you know.....I had the same impression......but just couldn't put my finger on it.....I think we are going to be really disappointed at reveal....hope I am wrong.....but if they release the CT with missing items or less than we have been led to believe, the Model Y is looking better and better, especially if it has 4680s and HW4

 

[flamaest]

Please let the rear bed window roll down for HVAC camping mode... Wanted to be able to sleep in the bed, don't F it up Tesla.

 

[EV Rob]

We’ve bounced between pickups, SUVs and minivans, settling on the minivan (currently Pacifica PHEV) as it’s the only one that can carry six comfortably, and when needed, sheet goods and other cargo. The CT promised 6 adults and a standard truck bed fitting in a standard garage. May need to wait for the Cyber Van.

 

[cvalue13]

Wow, 5% reduction in overall size, more then I was expecting from the prototype dimensions.

Why wouldn’t you …

But yeah definitely looks like they've gone down to 80" wide, would've been better for them to keep 82" and do the 6 seat/console option.

82”?

5% smaller. But what is the length/width and internal dimensions?

Taken literally, 220” long X 75.8” wide X 74” tall

Closer in size to a Rivian than a Lightning

But agree, I wouldn’t take “about 5% smaller” so literal yet

Lack of 6th seat, might be a deal breaker. Not all families have 2 kids, was hoping this could function as family vehicle.

Interior dimensions, especially the shoulder width of the back seat, are what matter to me. If it can’t fit three car seats across in the back seat, then it means … I don’t have school drop off duty

and I don’t think people appreciate how low/tight that tonneau cover will feel. You’ll not be sitting up.

Due to the shape of the front of the bed I would guess it is more effectively a 5.5 ft bed.

You’re right, this is for all intents and purposes a 5.5’ X 4’ bed. The 5.5’ isn’t so surprising to me, because the geometric “trick” at the front never impressed me.

But the 4’ metric seems … shocking? That’s narrower than the space between the wheel wells in an F150, and narrower than the bed of a Rivian.

Can’t be 4’ … right?

unless you take 5% smaller literally, and then…

was this downsizing all the “price” of hitting 500mi range?

 

[AxelR]

How can someone compare a Y with a pickup truck.
This is still great and we don’t know the final specs.
I’ll agree that the center console looks a bit ridiculous but it’s good to have to put stuff (unlike the glovebox-less Rivian).

 

[happy intruder]

How can someone compare a Y with a pickup truck.
This is still great and we don’t know the final specs.
I’ll agree that the center console looks a bit ridiculous but it’s good to have since to put stuff (unlike the glovebox-less Rivian).

because it would be a good vehicle if you keep getting things taken away from the truck...lots of room and storage...

 

[FutureBoy]

Lack of 6th seat, might be a deal breaker. Not all families have 2 kids, was hoping this could function as family vehicle.

I thought they had 2.5 kids. Seems like the 0.5 kid could fit in the console. Then there is still room for a friend to come along. Unless the couple is divorced. Then it's a friend AND a "friend".

 

[lotus]

I think this is 99.98% the production truck. Mirrors and wiper may change before now and production.

I am very pleased to hear that Cybertruck will 5% more compact than the concept.

 

[lotus]

Saw the original CT at the Peterson Museum in LA last month. Way too big proportion. "Ugly" was my first impression It will NOT fit in most garages and driveways! Hope 5% reduction will be enough. Wife says she won't ride in it. I'm still excited to take delivery.

 

[FutureBoy]

Wife says she won't ride in it. I'm still excited to take delivery.

For many, the excitement here may have been caused by the wife's statement.

 

[cvalue13]

RE the windshield lightbar question, the Franz photo adds an interesting angle to it:

If that recess isn’t for a cop-car esque windshield light, I couldn’t begin to guess what it *is* for

 

[cvalue13]

I don’t *think* this is @greggertruck (right?), but echos several items relayed by @greggertruck

in all, starting to feel more towards a Rivian-sized truck, than a 1/2 ton sized truck



Namely:

• bed is “6”X4, from the wheel arch all the way back to rear wall of the bed “that’s because Tesla needs the extra space for the rear wheel steering”

• 5 seater instead of 6 seater

• needed to make it 5% smaller

• no pass through

• will have a frunk




A few other details

• plastic bumpers front and back “so they are 5mph compliant” - and seemingly that front bumper plastic reaches way under the front (note the apparent pop clip back near suspension)

Also, is that a carbon fiber underbody pan? (Photo enhanced)

• multiple tire options, investor day truck is on 35” 285/R18s (note the Franz truck was on a different tire)

• this back seat looks claustrophobic to me; not only is there minimal space between the back and front seats, not only do we know the “5% smaller” means they couldn’t fit 3 across (and so will be considerably narrower than most 1/2 ton trucks), but look at how the doors come up to chin height to back passengers

• here might here be an answer regarding the features at the top of the windshield / to either side of the front-facing camera:

this appears to me to possibly be a padded sun visor that either can be pulled back toward the driver (causing the padded bits to touch) or extended forward from the driver (causing the gap between padded bits seen above) - and when pushed forward like this appear from the outside as we’ve seen in other pics

a few other other bits and bobs to pick up from these photos:

And is this a rear facing in-cabin camera? If the rearview “mirror” is video, then an in-cabin rear camera would make sense for needing to view the back seat (kids in car seats, etc.):

and another pic from the IG post:

cargo rail system in better view, as are the tie down loops, and I’m getting the impression this tailgait might not be powered - just seems a lack of hinge-located umph for a motor to do the up/down work (but who knows)

 

[cvalue13]

Knowing I’ll catch some hell for the comment about being Rivian-sized:

• photo of back seat speaks for itself

• if we take the “5% smaller” literally (may not be 5% all around, but for present purposes) based on release day specs that would put this 5% smaller CT at: [EDIT TO ADD: Some have said 5% is down from much larger specs (eg 84” wide?) of alpha proto, ignoring the on-screen launch specs - which if so of course all the measurement estimates below are “wrong]

CT: 220” L X 75.8” W X 74” H

Rivian: 217″ L x 79″ W x 78″ H (Ranges 72-78 depending on suspension setting)

Contrast with F150 Lightning (nearly identical to CT’s release day specs):
232″ L x 80″ W x 77″ H


And so then about this “6”X4 bed

First, can’t understate how wild a 4 foot (46”) wide bed would be. For comparison to an F150 that is 50.6” between the wheel wells, and 65” wide elsewhere.

And as for the CT’s purported “6’” length, that’s going to be at the floor only:

here I’ve emphasized that geometry:

the floor area in red may be 6’

but the slope back in blue likely sliding to closer to 5.5’ at the green secondary back wall

then the obstruction of the aperture in yellow, to maybe 5’?

that all roughly amounts to a 5’x4’ aperture total, sloping gradually inward to what’s ultimately a 5.5’ to 6’ gradation of space

if a 6’ tall someone thought they could lay down even diagonal in that bed, they might be in for a head-butting surprise (on the blue slope) - but definitely not fitting 2 people side-by-side

Back to the Rivian comparison, its bed is 54” (4.5’) feet long but 51 inches wide. potato - potato.

Maybe a Tacoma option of beds is a helpful comparison:

5-foot bed 60.5 L /41.5 W (btwn wheel wells)
6-foot bed: 73.7 L / 41.5 w (brown wheel wells)

Given the CT’s sloping foreword wall, and 4’ width for most of the length of the bed, it’s certainly seeming like a Tacoma-esque bed, that ranges from a 6’ Tacoma at the floor to a 5-foot Tacoma at the bed height, with the roof overhang further occluding the usable bed space

In all, these Rivian-like exterior dimensions, but with a better-than-Rivian back seat (they’re the worst), and hybrid 6’-5’ bed, mean that the CT will beat the Rivian in some specs, while retaining a similar footprint of the Rivian. (The CT should also best the Rivian in frunk space.)

But it’s no longer seeming as likely that on a size/cargo, interior space level that the CT is beating the F150 or other 1/2 ton trucks.

That said, I half suspect these dimensions sacrifices were made in trade for various performance advantages. By shrinking by 5% does the CT achieve the weight reduction needed for 500mi range? Etc.

Mixed feelings for me. I don’t mind the idea of a smaller footprint truck (and I suspect a lot of Tesla buyers crossing over into a pickup will feel the same). But I really do need the back seat, bed, and other cargo-related dimensions.

madding this photo, that given the lighting really emphasizes and clarifies the interior dimensions of the bed:

 

[Ryuda]

The rearview mirror does not look like it would display digital camera rear view when tonneau cover is closed.
Also, the seats do not look like it supports both heated and ventilated system, perhaps just the heating.(hopefully I'm wrong)
I was hoping to see a driver display like the S and X models, but I can work without one.
Something tells me the license plates gonna kill the look of this truck.

Overall looks clean and well prepared for final production, hopefully the price is reasonable.

Sponsored