Crash Test Video Measurements For Cybertruck Dimensions

[cvalue13]

Admit I did wonder if you were setting traps at times, but I didn't see the reveal coming.

There were hints - but admit several amount to inside jokes (between me and myself):

I didn’t go with the tire for the measure reference only because I thought the true “edge” may be a bit hard to find - or defend

Sponsored

 

[JBee]

not as much effort as I’ve spent collectively over dozens of threads witnessing the same exhausting pattern as seen in this thread.


For just one example of category, to date, on this forum, myself (and others I’ve watched) have done little more than draw ire and belittling for even the most honest attempts at discussions about the F150 Lightning. Post something critical of the F150 and it’s all pats on the back. Post something favorable, and you get shouted down. By people who don’t own one. Or who just step over stated qualifications in order exercise their demons by just dropping into a conversation to drop a turd in the punch bowl.

I’ve had so many recent ‘spats’ on here of the same nature as how the measurement thread devolved - as I’d expected it would. No matter how deeply caveated, nor how deeply researched, a person posts something on this forum that gets interpreted as skepticism of the kool-aid hordes favorite ideas, and it gets shouted down. Post instead an exactly equal amount of conjecture on a point that’s kool-aid approved, and it receives only qualified pats on the back.

Many classic examples are through this thread. In this extensive thread with supporting research but suggesting the CT is shorter than expected, one member chimes in repetitively only to say that perspective makes the effort meaningless. But in another thread, absent any supporting research or explanation, someone uses the photos (quite sloppily) and measurement techniques employed here to assert the CT is as long as expected, and that very same member comes in to say “that’s exactly right.”

It’s ridiculous, intellectually dishonest, and frankly - makes this forum a rather hostile place to be for anyone looking to have reasoned discussion about both the amazing and skepticism-inducing features of the CT as presently known (or any competitor vehicle). It’s an echo chamber of shouting.

And predictable. I knew a thread “proving up” near-Tacoma like proportions would bring out a few of the worst offenders. And as it was April 1st…

But maybe I’m just too jaded. After-all, who in their right mind spends this much time and effort to play a petty April Fool’s joke that is a meta-level critique of that behavior.

But speaking of attempts to have honest discussions (full of caveats!) about both the amazing and skepticism-inducing features of the CT: the interior dimensions of the CT.

But first here’s the (I think) unnecessary and obvious caveats, that will be ignored entirely to add air to the shouts: we won’t know the CT’s real interior dimensions until officially released, and interpreting currently available information is rife with issues of accuracy…

That caveat laid out:



the source of the above comments confusion is entirely on me, and the subterfuge of this this thread: I don’t stand behind the OP post shoulder width measurements taken from the exterior (which were all incorrect by design).

Conversely, the interior photo is a different matter. though rife with its own issues of accuracy, there do exist the checkerboard measure reference boards on the dummies that provide some modestly interesting insights to some interior scale. if nothing else, I *think* the two front seat dummies are the female versions of the “Hybrid III” dummy - which if so are pretty small dummies. Dimension can be found out there for those interested.

In any event, the interior dimension measurements both in my OP and last nights measurements I heavily caveated. The overhead dimension from OP I don’t stand behind.

I can agree that some are not interested in reasonable or deep discussion about a particular subject, but let's not fall in the trap ourselves with to much back patting. Bias is rife in most forums, and I find it sometimes comes with the territory, of feeling like you belong. That doesn't mean I excuse blatant disregard of "alternative" truths, but rather that in all things we should gain perspective not only by anothers opinion, but also by contemplating the reflection of our own bias, and in particular our own desires, that drive them.

In my case I try to strive for knowledge in pursuit of the truth, knowing full well that in my limited capability as a human, I can only ever hope to contemplate a fraction, of a mere approximation of it.

Some might ask why bother, and not even try. Others want to, but don't know how to even start to look. But in all these things, having the right knowledge and also understanding it, will promote more wisdom, and hopefully postive change.

This was something I noticed with the last Franz interview as well. In response to a question about the competition 'catching up', he responded that that is exactly what they want, for the whole industry to change to sustainablity. That means that even if they loose the battle of the brands, they still would of won the war against fossils.

I think that is the type of thinking we really need to focus on, how can we promote positive change to a sustainable future, and be a good stewart of our resources, both intellectual and physical, in our fleeting existence as DNA assembled star dust.

 

[Crissa]

I'm only to page 4, but you guys know there are multiple videos of this room and its markings on the Tesla channel, with a Model Y, right?

So you can have more reference objects.

-Crissa

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

There's talented high-effort trolling...and then there's this thread. A new bar has been set, lol. Kudos.

I read the entire thing this morning before you dropped this reveal. I didn't have time to actually check your figures - and my photogrammetry skills are nowhere near your level - but your methodology was obviously fine, with the initial possible rim error caveated.

I was disappointed to think you might be right but forced to consider it possible. The crits leveled at you were frustratingly off-base and obviously emotionally motivated. Admit I did wonder if you were setting traps at times, but I didn't see the reveal coming.

Nice one. I'd have been much less kind, haha.

It wasn't an April fools joke (he posted on April 2), and it wasn't trolling. He was just mistaken and now is trying to say he was correct all along and playing a game. If it was some weird type of trolling it was the worst ever, because he spent far, far more time trying to prove his point with diagrams and so forth than any of the rest of us did with short helpful responses. A strange thread indeed...

 

[greggertruck]

I'm only to page 4, but you guys know there are multiple videos of this room and its markings on the Tesla channel , with a Model Y, right?

So you can have more reference objects.

-Crissa

I mean this in the best way, quit wasting your time.

This might be the dumbest thread ever.

Anyway... Cybertruck is still 227.5" long.

It wasn't an April fools joke (he posted on April 2), and it wasn't trolling. He was just mistaken and now is trying to say he was correct all along and playing a game. If it was some weird type of trolling it was the worst ever, because he spent far, far more time trying to prove his point with diagrams and so forth than any of the rest of us did with short helpful responses. A strange thread indeed...

I'm kind of beside myself with how deep it's gone to create misinformation. Like not trying to be weird or anything, but this is next level odd. WHyyyyyyy do this?? My eye brows have never been so low.

 

[Crissa]

I GOT THE TIRE SIZE........... ?

(it's at 7 o'clock if you're blind)

285/65R20 That's a 33" tire

Made it to page 6. That tire size is 34.5, aka 35. I understand your measurements don't see this, but your number of pixels is pretty limited and fuzzy here. An inch off would be hard to spot.

-Crissa

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

I mean this in the best way, quit wasting your time.

This might be the dumbest thread ever.

Anyway... Cybertruck is still 227.5" long.



I'm kind of beside myself with how deep it's gone to create misinformation. Like not trying to be weird or anything, but this is next level odd. WHyyyyyyy do this?? My eye brows have never been so low.

I think he honestly believed his projections. Otherwise there is no good explanation. It's not funny, and the only person that spent much time on this thread was him, with diagram after diagram. If it was a genuine attempt to annoy or misinform, that's toxic and doesn't belong here.

 

[Ogre]

I think he honestly believed his projections. Otherwise there is no good explanation. It's not funny, and the only person that spent much time on this thread was him, with diagram after diagram. If it was a genuine attempt to annoy or misinform, that's toxic and doesn't belong here.

This is about the 4th thread he’s blown up like this where he’s taken some misguided idea and turned it into a giant pile of shit-posting.

Done with it myself.

 

[savagecabbage]

looks about right... 232" might be a bit long, but certainly in the ball park of correct. I would bet that this is not off by more then 4 inches.

 

[Deleted member 17810]

What kind of lens though?

 

[cvalue13]

It wasn't an April fools joke (he posted on April 2), and it wasn't trolling.

I posted on April 2 at 3AM. The post took a little time to build.

And it was content from Tesla’s April Fools video.

You may not like the point, but it’s my point.

It's not funny, and the only person that spent much time on this thread was him, with diagram after diagram.

let’s clarify: diagram after diagram explaining why your unsupported ‘critiques’ were ridiculous, showing I have some level of expertise on the subject

ultimately, the payoff was the ultimate proof of how unsupported your critiques were, and how they’re motivated not by the methodology but instead merely a distaste for the conclusions

Or are you now doubling down that all your “critiques” continue to be genuine, and so now you don’t believe the CT specs meet unveil, and in fact the beta prototype is LARGER than the unveil specs?

I don’t think so.

 

[cvalue13]

This is about the 4th thread he’s blown up like this where he’s taken some misguided idea and turned it into a giant pile of shit-posting.

Done with it myself.

I bet you are

Because you, too, are among those whose “critiques” are faced with a choice:

Stand behind your “critiques,” and so conclude the CT is not the size of unveil stats, but in fact larger than unveil stats (due to “perspective distortion” and the like”

or

Abandon your “critiques,” and so reevaluate your actual reasons for such vehement assertions of those critiques

I’m also done with it.

Was the point.

 

[TheLastStarfighter]

I posted on April 2 at 3AM. The post took a little time to build.

And it was content from Tesla’s April Fools video.

You may not like the point, but it’s my point.



let’s clarify: diagram after diagram explaining why your unsupported ‘critiques’ were ridiculous, showing I have some level of expertise on the subject

ultimately, the payoff was the ultimate proof of how unsupported your critiques were, and how they’re motivated not by the methodology but instead merely a distaste for the conclusions

Or are you now doubling down that all your “critiques” continue to be genuine, and so now you don’t believe the CT specs meet unveil, and in fact the beta prototype is LARGER than the unveil specs?

I don’t think so.

You're confused. I would like the CT to be smaller than it is. You were wrong, and now you're trying to say it was a (terribly unfunny) joke. Better to be wrong than to say you wasted everyone's time, especially your own.

 

[cvalue13]

Your width measurements are fairly wrong either way, because a) the CT sides are curved and not straight, with the rear doors being just as wide as the outside of the front wheel flares, and b) your internal shoulder height measurements, taken from the overhead shot are not at the correct points, that correlate with the inside door trim underneath. Have a look at the straight red lines and green lines that curve.

Hey @JBee now that (real world) day is done I wanted to circle back to these good observations/corrections

based on your helpful photo, there’s no distinction between either “w/ flares” or “metal to metal” measures: both ~= 82” +\- 1”-2” prolly

Either way, given the margin of error no good way to tell if CT will or will not require amber marker lights.

I hadn’t previously noticed how material that middle bulge in the metal envelope was - cool

Sponsored