📡 EXCLUSIVE: Cybertruck specs update including dimensions, seating, displays, tires / wheels, accessories & more! [from video aired 3/10/23]

[charliemagpie]

Great job by Mathew. Any of us could have been in his position, but I wonder how many people would take the time to succinctly disseminate what they were told.

BTW, Elon did say the design is mostly done.. They are just tweaking now. Mathew is describing what is likely as close to final as practical.


I strongly disagree with his pricing opinion. Raptor base is about 78,000. ?

I do not think Tesla will include extra features and provide no choice for you in in its base pricing.

Its like saying..

'We have all the bells and whistles, and guess what ? Unlike Ford, we are forcing you to pay more for all the extra goodies.'

Never going to happen.

Tesla's will provide the BASE tri or quad, whichever one it is.. at the same price as Ford base prices Raptor. OR Less. Likely imo!!!!

If you want accessories such as winch, or whatever... that is extra.

Sponsored

 

[kbolt]

Journalist Matthew Donegan-Ryan had a chance to speak with Tesla executives at the recent 2023 Investor Day and learned info about dimensions, wheels & tires, configurations, variants, storage, bed size, performance, prices, weight and more! Check out the video and specs (some based on his own predictions) below:


Admin update: added info presented in the video:

Exterior dimensions (estimated) Dimensions (+/- 2 inch leeway):

• Wheelbase: 145”
• Length: 231”
• Width w/o mirrors: 84”
• Height: variable (air suspension)

Bed dimensions (estimated):

• Length: 73”
• Width: 49”
• Rear opening: 57”

*All dimensions shrunk about 5% from concept Cybertruck


2 variants available at launch:

• Base model with 2 motors
• Performance model with tri-motor (prediction)

Exterior / mechanical notes:

• There’s a frunk (opens like Rivian, not like F-150 Lightning)
• Rear wheel steering is standard for all variants / models.
• Air suspension is standard on all trims / models
  • Tested to handle Baja style racing
• Lightbar (at top of windshield) will make production and will have amber lights like the Tesla Semi
• No storage compartment sails
• Doors are not self-presenting - door buttons are on B and C pillars
• Bumpers and sideskirts are plastic construction (Tesla will likely offer off-road steel bumper accessory)

Interior notes:

• 5 seats in all models
• Steering wheel will be flat top bottom and rounded side (as seen on Beta prototype at Investor Day)
• 18.5” display will be Tesla’s largest ever
• No gauge cluster, center display, head-up display
• Rear console will have screen for rear passengers

Multiple wheels / tires packages

• 18" wheels options
• all-season and all-terrain tire options
• 285/65/R18 tire size
• Goodyear brand tires

Pricing prediction:

• Top of the line Cybertruck: $90k - $100k

Other notes:

• There is a secret Cybertruck accessories team working on own internal accessories (working on winch, off road lights, bumpers, bike racks, camping / overlanding accessories.

Not that exclusive since it's here and on Teslarati.

 

[Throwcomputer]

If you don't have time to check your speed, you're going too fast

Like I told my last wife, I say "Honey, I never drive faster than I can see. Besides that, it's all in the reflexes."

 

[scottf200]

Waiting for Elon to respond regarding tri motor vs quad motor...if Elon back tracks it's not the end of the world but be very weird to say they reduced the size but kept the same length. Also back tracks on quad vs tri. Gotta wait it out shouldn't be much longer now

I'm still hoping for tri-motor since they have good experience and data for that from the Plaid as well as the Semi. Would be good efficiency on the highway just like the semi.

 

[Throwcomputer]

I don't trust any man that hypenates his last name.

Lol.. secretly thinking the same thing while watching.

 

[Throwcomputer]

"Beware the ides of March........ " -Shakespeare

beware the ire of March.. this thread getting spicy!

 

[cvalue13]

I think his measurements are close to accurate, and make a lot of sense since they've been targeting the F150 all along. Fears of a midsize truck are gone.

Agree with all of your post really, but flagging the bolder part only for continued discussion (not quite disagreement)

I agree that fears of a mid-sized truck in exterior dimensions may be gone

But I’m not over my concerns (not conclusions) of the interior dimensions

Again, Rivian (also “an 80” truck”) is a perfect example of how full-sized exterior dimensions do not guarantee ample interior room

And there are other facts available (eg quotes from Elon) that can be interpreted as consistent with (not determinative of) this lingering concern

DISCLAIMER: I’m now compelled to obnoxiously over-parse my word choices to make sure that words like “concern” and “conclusion,” or “consistent” and “determinative” aren’t confused by sensitive

 

[Throwcomputer]

"it's just a glance to the right.... then you're back to the left".



SRSLY, you just get used to glancing to check, but most of the time I'm just on AP using cruise control to maintain speed and don't look. that's even on surface roads.

Can we do the time warp to 2026 already?! if not, I might put an ice pick to my own neck.

Shit.. it's almost midnight. I need to run to the bodega for a loaf of bread before I hit the theater!

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

Agree with all of your post really, but flagging the bolder part only for continued discussion (not quite disagreement)

I agree that fears of a mid-sized truck in exterior dimensions may be gone

But I’m not over my concerns (not conclusions) of the interior dimensions

Again, Rivian (also “an 80” truck”) is a perfect example of how full-sized exterior dimensions do not guarantee ample interior room

And there are other facts available (eg quotes from Elon) that can be interpreted as consistent with (not determinative of) this lingering concern

DISCLAIMER: I’m now compelled to obnoxiously over-parse my word choices to make sure that words like “concern” and “conclusion,” or “consistent” and “determinative” aren’t confused by sensitive

Well the bed is almost exactly as wide as an F150, and 6" longer than the most common F150 config, so from a bed perspective it is definitely full size and way larger than a Tacoma. That's key for a lot of uses and street cred, gotta fit that plywood. The cabin we'll have to see more, but it looks pretty roomy to me.

 

[FutureBoy]

Anyone know if the price of FSD is locked in with my registration? At the time of registration, I chose FSD option at $8000.

Um... Out in left field here. Not really on topic.
But you are new.
In theory the answer is yes.
Some around here dispute that but I believe the majority will tell you that it is locked in.

 

[cvalue13]

Well the bed is almost exactly as wide as an F150, and 6" longer than the most common F150 config, so from a bed perspective it is definitely full size and way larger than a Tacoma. That's key for a lot of uses and street cred, gotta fit that plywood. The cabin we'll have to see more, but it looks pretty roomy to me.

respectfully, disagree here - not in a way to shut down the conversation, but instead only to further it

as for width, it’s comparable at the wheelwells. But the beds are incompatible in width. An F150 bed is 65” wide, other than the relatively small (~1/3) portion of the bed with wheel wells. Lots of cargo takes advantage of that extra 15” of width. Giant tables have legs that straddle the wheelwells humps, 5.5’ wide sheets of material simply lay on the humps, not between them, etc.

The CT, in contrast, has no portion of the bed floor that is 65” wide. And effectively all of the bed floor is limited to that ~50” wide, because effectively all of the bed has wheelwell. (Or technically, wheel+4WS equip wells!) Then there’s the matter of the “6 foot” being only at the bed floor, with the bulkhead sloping back over the bed to a yet unknown reduction in literal or practical cargo space.

Which differences are why, I think if being fair as possible to the CT’s bed, I’d say the ~72” L X 50” W bed of the CT is ‘basically equivalent’ to the F150 short bed’s 67” L X 65” W bed. Depending on your use cases, you may prefer one or the other, or be agnostic.

But I wouldn’t confuse that with saying the CT therefore is “full sized” in bed: the Tacoma and other mid-sized trucks standardly offer longbed configurations in order to provide the same functionality as full-sizes shortbeds.

In fact mid-sized long beds are typically distinguishable by - this will sound familiar - being 6’ long, but only ~50’ wide (at widest point).

So if (contingent!) the bed is as is being described), personally I would defend the CT as having every bit the functionality of a full-sized short bed in the same way (almost literally) as does any mid-sized long bed.

Which is completely fine for most people’s needs. It is for mine (except rarely).

Though I have to admit disappointment that - and don’t think I can so quickly forget - that this conclusion would be to me a wild swing from my prior expectations of a CT with a 6.5’ bed with 60-65” width and no protruding wheel bumps. THAT was going to be a vehicle with the capabilities of an F250 in the envelope of an F150.

While I’ve been for a long time looking for an excuse to “need” F250-like truck capabilities, I’ve never gotten over the (for me) unnecessary size and fuel economy sacrifices. It was a key “wow” moment of the CT.

And it feels that in the face of this possible (contingent!) new bed information, people have been quicker than me to retreat to comparisons to an F150 short bed / mid-sized long-bed.

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

I wanna apologize to those who feel let down, I really do my best personally to not spread too much.....conjecture, but stick to facts. I wasn't preview'd the whole video, nor any portion - but I was provided with some information. Bumpers and winches. I actually made the image for Matthew to use of the Cybertruck showing the rugged bumper with the winch on it. We actually used a Raptor to take that bumper from, and I just matched it up on Cybertruck to show that.

I personally? I am not disappointed. Matthew is planning to release his dimension images next week. I also am sick of the milking but it's his info to do with as he pleases, we are lucky enough to get ANYTHING. He measured the truck himself with his iPhone app. I know there has been some claims that the app sucks, and it can. But, if you know how to use it - it works pretty well. See below I went and made my own example measuring my truck rear end.

That being said, Thanks to Matthew! Video is cool, we got some news. He stated to head with caution, things can change. And specifically, his dimensions could be off an inch or two.

I am sorry that the first slide that MDR presented showed dimensions identical to those in the unveiling, followed almost immediately by a statement that the truck dimensions have been reduced by 5%. Those two statements cannot coexist, and so I watched the rest of the video not knowing what MDR knows and doesn't know but had the podium to tell everyone his own views. At least when I spew my ideas you all know they are just opinions from someone that knows no more than the rest of you. That said, I know that you shared this information in good faith and we all follow this information as we see fit.

 

[cvalue13]

I am sorry that the first slide that MDR presented showed dimensions identical to those in the unveiling, followed almost immediately by a statement that the truck dimensions have been reduced by 5%. Those two statements cannot coexist,

They absolutely can coexist

Explaining How CT Could Shrink To The Same Size

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

respectfully, disagree here - not in a way to shut down the conversation, but instead only to further it

as for width, it’s comparable at the wheelwells. But the beds are incompatible in width. An F150 bed is 65” wide, other than the relatively small (~1/3) portion of the bed with wheel wells. Lots of cargo takes advantage of that extra 15” of width. Giant tables have legs that straddle the wheelwells humps, 5.5’ wide sheets of material simply lay on the humps, not between them, etc.

The CT, in contrast, has no portion of the bed floor that is 65” wide. And effectively all of the bed floor is limited to that ~50” wide, because effectively all of the bed has wheelwell. (Or technically, wheel+4WS equip wells!) Then there’s the matter of the “6 foot” being only at the bed floor, with the bulkhead sloping back over the bed to a yet unknown reduction in literal or practical cargo space.

Which differences are why, I think if being fair as possible to the CT’s bed, I’d say the ~72” L X 50” W bed of the CT is ‘basically equivalent’ to the F150 short bed’s 67” L X 65” W bed. Depending on your use cases, you may prefer one or the other, or be agnostic.

But I wouldn’t confuse that with saying the CT therefore is “full sized” in bed: the Tacoma and other mid-sized trucks standardly offer longbed configurations in order to provide the same functionality as full-sizes shortbeds.

In fact mid-sized long beds are typically distinguishable by - this will sound familiar - being 6’ long, but only ~50’ wide (at widest point).

So if (contingent!) the bed is as is being described), personally I would defend the CT as having every bit the functionality of a full-sized short bed in the same way (almost literally) as does any mid-sized long bed.

Which is completely fine for most people’s needs. It is for mine (except rarely).

Though I have to admit disappointment that - and don’t think I can so quickly forget - that this conclusion would be to me a wild swing from my prior expectations of a CT with a 6.5’ bed with 60-65” width and no protruding wheel bumps. THAT was going to be a vehicle with the capabilities of an F250 in the envelope of an F150.

While I’ve been for a long time looking for an excuse to “need” F250-like truck capabilities, I’ve never gotten over the (for me) unnecessary size and fuel economy sacrifices. It was a key “wow” moment of the CT.

And it feels that in the face of this possible (contingent!) new bed information, people have been quicker than me to retreat to comparisons to an F150 short bed / mid-sized long-bed.

You make some good points for sure, and I think it points to the purpose and limitations of the cybertruck. They planned from the outset to produce 250k a year. The F150 sells 1 million per year alone, the truck market is massive. The most popular config of the F is the full cab, 5'7" bed. So I think they took that model, and bettered it for almost all uses of that owner. I expect sales ratios are similar for RAM and GM models. The design of the CT means it won't be suitable for people who swap the box for flats, single cabs, etc. They are ignoring those smaller groups and going for the jugular, high profit family hauler/status symbols.

The CT will have the road presence of a full sized truck. It will have the spacious cabin. And it will have a bed that can lay drywall flat, and not on an angle like those wimpy men do with their mid-sized trucks. That offering covers a huge portion of the truck market, especially when you throw in off road abilities better than anything this side of a Wrangler.

 

[Throwcomputer]

. And it will have a bed that can lay drywall flat, and not on an angle like those wimpy men do with their mid-sized trucks.

?

Sponsored