Confirmed: 11,000 lbs tow rating / 2,500 lbs payload capacity (official specs)! + Shatter-resistant glass

[Rutrow]

Since you never put down a deposit on a CyberTruck you'd be staying ICE whether it towed 14k, 16k, or 20k anyway.

Sponsored

 

[Zhe Wiz]

You keep telling yourself legacy auto is a dying business. And Tesla is the epitome of greed. Musk is a greedy billionaire like the rest of them. With ethics of a potato. I have absolutely no respect for him, so Tesla is no different. If they actually cared, they would sell cars cheaper. Or build them better. Or not take fed money. They are no different than any other automaker, in fact they are measurably worse quality. And they have made poor choices to keep them behind the curve? No Car Play? No customization? Some people like that stuff. Do you see Tesla being collected and restored for 100 years? Do you see cars that 60 years later are worth 100x what their original price was? Do you see brand loyalty that has people buying the same vehicle for 30-40 years?

Wow. Soooo….why are you even here? If you truly believe all that ? you certainly have no intention of buying a Cybertruck! Rhetorical question, no need to reply. I think I know why you’re here. I think we all know why you’re here. ?

 

[HaulingAss]

An “HD” version of the Cybertruck doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, the 3/4+ ton segment is where the sails and unibody construction do become a real problem, and where you don’t want to be giving up ~500 lbs of payload to bulletproof ss panels either.

Tesla should go for what they teased back in 2017, traditional body on frame design with styling cues from the Semi:

Less than 20% of F-150s go to fleets:

https://fordauthority.com/2023/03/most-ford-f-150-pickups-sold-in-2022-went-to-retail-buyers/

There is no "giving up 500 lbs. of payload to bulletproof panels" because the bullet resistance is a side benefit to the structural benefits. Most of the weight of the SS is in the rear quarter panels and the doors, both which benefit from the strength of the SS, it's not dead weight (not just for bullet protection). The rear quarter panels tie the upper and lower structures together, along with the passenger safety cage, to allow the high tow and payload capacities, the stainless steel actually increase the capabilities of the truck, they don't decrease it. And the 3mm thick stainless steel that comprises the exterior of the door replaces softer steel and high strength steel intrusion reinforcements, so the additional weight is minimal while the benefit is more passenger protection from side impacts and intrusion from roll-overs.

Good stat there on fleet sales. That aligns more closely to what I recall when I looked into this years ago. If you look at fleet sales in terms of profits, they make up an even smaller slice of total sales.

 

[CyberJustice]

before anyone loses their mind on range and towing, the dual motor at the reveal was 10,000lbs towing and 300+ miles

Tri-motor is the one with 14K lbs towing and 500+ miles -- that's the one I'm waiting for.

 

[RVAC]

There is no "giving up 500 lbs. of payload to bulletproof panels" because the bullet resistance is a side benefit to the structural benefits. Most of the weight of the SS is in the rear quarter panels and the doors, both which benefit from the strength of the SS, it's not dead weight (not just for bullet protection). The rear quarter panels tie the upper and lower structures together, along with the passenger safety cage, to allow the high tow and payload capacities, the stainless steel actually increase the capabilities of the truck, they don't decrease it. And the 3mm thick stainless steel that comprises the exterior of the door replaces softer steel and high strength steel intrusion reinforcements, so the additional weight is minimal while the benefit is more passenger protection from side impacts and intrusion from roll-overs.

Good stat there on fleet sales. That aligns more closely to what I recall when I looked into this years ago. If you look at fleet sales in terms of profits, they make up an even smaller slice of total sales.

Looking at the curb weight I’m not seeing much that points in the way of that being the case. It’s 9” shorter than a Lightning, has a smaller and structural battery pack, no heavy steel frame and yet clocks in at 6700 lbs vs. the ~6500 lbs of a Lightning ER. At this point methinks they’re mostly being carried as dead weight.

Anyway, we’ll know when Sandy tears one down, no point in rehashing the exo debate ad infinitum.

P.S. The ~500 lbs figure is an extrapolation if they were to make one that is 231.7” or longer.

 

[newwave1331]

 

[Aces-Truck]

Payload numbers don't mean much, just have to believe in yourself ?

That looks like 2,250 lbs of cement (25 bags, at 90lb/bag). He should have bought the 60 lb bags (1,500 lbs)...

 

[Crissa]

Looking at the curb weight I’m not seeing much that points in the way of that being the case. It’s 9” shorter than a Lightning, has a smaller and structural battery pack, no heavy steel frame and yet clocks in at 6700 lbs vs. the ~6500 lbs of a Lightning ER. At this point methinks they’re mostly being carried as dead weight.

Anyway, we’ll know when Sandy tears one down, no point in rehashing the exo debate ad infinitum.

P.S. The ~500 lbs figure is an extrapolation if they were to make one that is 231.7” or longer.

...You're quoting weight guestimates as fact?

-Crissa

 

[flowerlandfilms]

If I knew how much 11,000 pounds was, and could convert it to kilograms in my head...
I still would have no idea how heavy that is.
Seems like a lot of towability though.
But until people see it on the road getting the job done, they won't believe it.

 

[RVAC]

...You're quoting weight guestimates as fact?

-Crissa

It's not being quoted as fact, it's a rough estimate derived from @JBee's surface area calculation which, if I'm not mistaken, was done on the basis of a 231.7" long truck. The context was an "HD" version of the Cybertruck, that would necessarily require a longer bed for it to make sense and hence be at least that length.

11.34 sqm x 24 kg/sqm (3mm SS) = 272 kg (600 lbs)
11.34 sqm x 4 kg/sqm (1.5mm alum) = 45 kg (99 lbs)

That's ~500 lbs if being carried as dead weight.

That's all beside the main point, Cybertruck's sail pillars and unibody construction alone would not make it a good candidate for the 3/4+ ton market.

 

[Bill837]

If I knew how much 11,000 pounds was, and could convert it to kilograms in my head...
I still would have no idea how heavy that is.
Seems like a lot of towability though.
But until people see it on the road getting the job done, they won't believe it.

A bit more than two fully loaded modern Ford Rangers.

Or a little bit less than a Hummer EV with a Miata tossed on top.

Or 110 average Red Kangaroos.

 

[Crissa]

That's all beside the main point, Cybertruck's sail pillars and unibody construction alone would not make it a good candidate for the 3/4+ ton market.

That's also a declarative. Without factual basis.

-Crissa

 

[HaulingAss]

Looking at the curb weight I’m not seeing much that points in the way of that being the case. It’s 9” shorter than a Lightning, has a smaller and structural battery pack, no heavy steel frame and yet clocks in at 6700 lbs vs. the ~6500 lbs of a Lightning ER. At this point methinks they’re mostly being carried as dead weight.

Anyway, we’ll know when Sandy tears one down, no point in rehashing the exo debate ad infinitum.

P.S. The ~500 lbs figure is an extrapolation if they were to make one that is 231.7” or longer.

You can't tell whether the panels are dead weight simply by comparing the curb weight of a Lightning to a Cybertruck because that assumes all else is equal (and we know it's not). First, we would need to know the curb weight of a Lighting outfitted with max tow package, second, we would need a dependable curb weight for a Cybertruck of a comparable configuration, which we still don't have.

In fact, the two are not comparable right off the bat, because the Cybertruck has higher tow and haul ratings. A more capable truck should naturally be heavier, all else being equal.

Also, the Ford doesn't come with air suspension and a metal air tank and compresser. You can't even get a system that raises and lowers the entire cabin and body by 8 inches. That comes with a weight penalty.

Also, the Ford doesn't come with rear wheel steering. That adds a weight penalty.

Also, the Ford will almost certainly not handle as crisply due to excessive chassis flex, leaving the weight comparison anything but apples to apples.

Finally, the Cybertruck comes equipped with a motorized metal vault cover that you can walk on without excessive flex. The Ford comes with an open bed. That's probably a 200-280 pound difference right there!

Using the curb weight difference to try to prove the stainless body is just dead weight is so far in left field I'm having trouble believing you are being sincere.

 

[VDR]

I bet these numbers are well within tolerance ranges. A truck that weighs ~7k Lbs will pull an 11k trailer very well. It won't be as white knuckle as someone driving a Rivian pulling the same trailer. I would bet this would pull anything under 15k just fine.

Seriously where did you get this white knuckle complete nonsense from?
The Rivian tows like a champ. I don't think you will find a more controlled trailering experience from any 1/2T.

Sponsored