Should Tesla introduce a "CyberSUV"?

[Cybertruck2024]

The Model X, more than any other vehicle in the lineup, could use a refresh or a replacement. I think a CyberSUV is a bad idea, the CT's look flopped in sales. There are just enough outsiders who want a weird vehicle to keep the CT afloat for Tesla. There isn't enough to keep two of these vehicles selling, as someone else said, the CyberSUV would just eat into the CT sales.

What would be a real game changer is either a truly refreshed Model X or a replacement that has:
- Keep the doors of the MX, that is the signature of the Tesla SUV.
- Make it a true 3 row SUV, Model X is far too small to be a true family SUV.
- Add SBW and faster charging speed from the CT.

The issue is this refresh easily doubles the sales of the MX, but that isn't really big numbers. So then the question is, would it be worth the significant investment to use MX as an advertisement piece showing Tesla has the best SUV on earth? Or since this doesn't have a measurable impact on Tesla's bottom line, does it even make sense to do? They could make the world's best SUV pretty easily, but it would be costly, likely take resources from something that makes more money, and never be a true needle mover in their results.

Sponsored

 

[Cybermo]

Make the Model X better, keep Cybertruck unique.

 

[VIXII1991]

Yes, 100%. I said from the start I wanted a CyberSUV.

Tesla just doesn't seem to want to make 10+ different models like other brands do. Tesla bread and butter is their Model Y.

This last minor refresh of the X would have been a perfect time for a redesign for a large 3rd row that can fit 6ft tall adults. (+ Up the range to 550+ and Charging speed to 350kW+)

 

[cyberdock]

Having owned a Model S Plaid, Model X Plaid, Rivian R1T and Rivian R1S, the Cybertruck is better than all of them! My one wish though would be a "CyberSUV". Basically create a Stainless Steel SUV based on the Cybertruck and make it two feet shorter.

Several reasons this might make sense:

1) In Q2, 2025, Rivian sold 3.5X more R1S than R1T. If this held true with Tesla, that would bring total "Cyber" sales to about 100,000 units.
2) The Cybertruck is criticized for not being a "Real" truck. But given the variety of SUV's (truck-based, car-based, crossovers), it would be a "Real" SUV.
3) It would give Tesla a boxy 3-row SUV that they currently don't have.
4) Would reduce the need for a Model YL in the U.S.
5) If they had a short overhang in the rear and reduced the slope of the roof (making it more square), I think it would actually look better, with better proportions and would not look as "ass heavy".
6) I would buy one tomorrow and sell the Cybertruck because I don't really need a truck and an SUV two feet shorter would fit in my garage and being more maneuverable.
7) The CT, especially Steer-by-wire and 4-wheel steering have RUINED me from all other vehicles! When I get in a non-CT I practically drive off the road when I make a 90 degree turn (i.e. I don't turn the non-CT steering wheel enough).

What do other owners think? Do you think Tesla should add a Cyber SUV, built on a shorter CT chassis?

Totally agree. I would even take 1 foot shorter or the same length( suburban length, as L version). I have model X, not enough 3 rd row, and the market for 3 row full size is huge. I want to tow my boat and bring all my toys, and carry my grandchildren.

 

[webspeedracer]

Yes, a large SUV on the Cybertruck platform would compete directly with Suburbans, Sequoias, Escalades, and is sorely needed in the lineup. The chassis is already there, just drop the stainless shell and put a sexy body on it. They’d have to redo the rear castings but Moms/Dads would love the 4WS for tight parking lots, and general maneuverability. 350-500kW is already baked into the platform so convenience factor is high.
An SUV on the CT platform would sell like hotcakes.

 

[TwiztOG43]

Yes, a large SUV on the Cybertruck platform would compete directly with Suburbans, Sequoias, Escalades, and is sorely needed in the lineup. The chassis is already there, just drop the stainless shell and put a sexy body on it. They’d have to redo the rear castings but Moms/Dads would love the 4WS for tight parking lots, and general maneuverability. 350-500kW is already baked into the platform so convenience factor is high.
An SUV on the CT platform would sell like hotcakes.

It’s inevitable that some YouTuber will DIY an SUV version, surprised it hasn’t even happened yet.

Maybe when we see more of the LR cybertrucks totaled/salvaged, since they do not have the Tonneau cover and air suspension under the bed.

With aftermarket companies making their version of the bed cap, most of the work would be the slopped roof line and bracing behind the rear seats to access the rest of the bed.

 

[bg002h]

Yes, a large SUV on the Cybertruck platform would compete directly with Suburbans, Sequoias, Escalades, and is sorely needed in the lineup. The chassis is already there, just drop the stainless shell and put a sexy body on it. They’d have to redo the rear castings but Moms/Dads would love the 4WS for tight parking lots, and general maneuverability. 350-500kW is already baked into the platform so convenience factor is high.
An SUV on the CT platform would sell like hotcakes.

A big suv should be easy based on cybertruck. It’s basically no different than any other aluminum unibody which can be dressed up to look like anything…glue a few different shaped panels on and it can look like a traditional suv, car, or truck.

 

[devdrone6]

 

[HaulingAss]

Yes, a large SUV on the Cybertruck platform would compete directly with Suburbans, Sequoias, Escalades, and is sorely needed in the lineup.

One of the reasons why Elon is successful as an American automaker, when over 100 other American Automakers have failed in the last 100 years (including GM, leaving shareholders with nothing), he knows there is no secret rule that his company has to cover the entire automotive market or be everything to everyone. He's perfectly OK with Tesla customers buying a van or large Suburban from a competitor.

The chassis is already there, just drop the stainless shell and put a sexy body on it.

The stainless "shell" is part of the chassis, drop that and you would have to redesign the chassis. This has been confirmed multiple times by Tesla engineers but the haters have insisted on trying to drown them out.

 

[HaulingAss]

A big suv should be easy based on cybertruck. It’s basically no different than any other aluminum unibody which can be dressed up to look like anything…glue a few different shaped panels on and it can look like a traditional suv, car, or truck.

Huh? Easy?

Are you an experienced automotive engineer? Why do you say it's easy to design a new vehicle?

I think that's just your naivety talking.

 

[devdrone6]

If you look at the underlying structure of the CT, it is most definitely not an easy shift to making it a van.

A big suv should be easy based on cybertruck. It’s basically no different than any other aluminum unibody which can be dressed up to look like anything…glue a few different shaped panels on and it can look like a traditional suv, car, or truck.

 

[webspeedracer]

One of the reasons why Elon is successful as an American automaker, when over 100 other American Automakers have failed in the last 100 years (including GM, leaving shareholders with nothing), he knows there is no secret rule that his company has to cover the entire automotive market or be everything to everyone. He's perfectly OK with Tesla customers buying a van or large Suburban from a competitor.



The stainless "shell" is part of the chassis, drop that and you would have to redesign the chassis. This has been confirmed multiple times by Tesla engineers but the haters have insisted on trying to drown them out.

That myth was debunked, ask Wes Morrill on X. The exoskeleton method was shelved and the panels are hung on the truck just like a steel or aluminum skinned vehicle. The only “exoskeleton” portion of the design was retained in the doors, so those would need to be the-engineered with crash bars if they changed to a traditional steel outer shell. That, and the rear castings forming the barrier between bed and cabin would need to be re-engineered in a pass-through SUV layout.
And, as much as I have deferred to Musks brilliance over the decades as an in investor, I recognize he has blind spots that hamstring Tesla. One such example: building the Model 3 before the MY (vastly more popular form factor, same underlying chassis). Tesla has built the MX on the MS chassis, so what ethos do you think prevents them from doing a CT/SUV matchup? Failing to put a large SUV on the CT chassis would be another mistake in a long list. Reason: Ford/GM/Toyota etc make huge profits on those vehicles precisely because it’s just a top-hat on a Pickup chassis, for which the Capex are already amortized, and it’s a high-margin product. Tesla has sunk huge Capex into CT with 48V, 4680 cells, and huge castings, but it’s a low-volume product because it’s a weird halo design. Building an SUV on the same chassis, with some modifications to the rear casting presses and new skin, would allow Tesla to serve an important gas-guzzling market while also further amortizing the CT Capex. I think it’s a huge mistake. That Musk is preventing Tesla from iterating in New market segments with existing chassis that could be put to that purpose. I also think he’s making a huge mistake by pivoting straight to FSD and canceling the small car unboxed concept. But the limitations of FSD, Particularly in northern latitude climates with inclement weather, is a broader discussion that we can have outside of the SUV debate.

 

[bg002h]

Huh? Easy?

Are you an experienced automotive engineer? Why do you say it's easy to design a new vehicle?

I think that's just your naivety talking.

After abandoning the exoskeleton, the design variations can go way way up. Retaining the triangle esthetic was a choice, but its original function was to permit an exoskeleton in the first place.

 

[HaulingAss]

After abandoning the exoskeleton, the design variations can go way way up. Retaining the triangle esthetic was a choice, but its original function was to permit an exoskeleton in the first place.

It's been confirmed by those who designed it that the skin is structural and that it's an exoskeleton.

I can see you are one of those keen to push false narratives. The exoskeleton was never abandoned, on the images presented at the 2019 reveal you can see the passenger safety cage is made of stamped and welded steel. This is evident in the images that show the compound curves around the door openings. The exoskeleton wasn't abandoned, you just didn't understand what Tesla presented in 2019.

 

[HaulingAss]

That myth was debunked, ask Wes Morrill on X. The exoskeleton method was shelved and the panels are hung on the truck just like a steel or aluminum skinned vehicle. The only “exoskeleton” portion of the design was retained in the doors, so those would need to be the-engineered with crash bars if they changed to a traditional steel outer shell.

I don't need to ask the lead Engineer of Cybertruck on X because I have a video recorded after FSD came to the Cybertruck in which Wes Morrill blows your false narrative out of the water. If the lead engineer says the super strong stainless steel acts as an exoskeleton, then I don't need to ask him on X. I've even time-stamped the video for you:



To be clear, he didn't say they had to drop the exoskeleton concept, he said it was an exoskeleton. Just what is it that you don't understand about that?

Also, Wes's boss, Lars Moravy, said the same thing (post Cybertruck release) in a public video (but I'm not going to hunt that one down for you). The thick stainless steel sail panels are what give the Cybertruck it's superior payload capacity. There is no doubt the panels are structural. You are simply full of shit pushing a false narrative. I'm sorry if this sounds harsh but when you attribute things to the engineers at Tesla that they never said (in fact they say the opposite), I'm going to call you out on it. I've corrected your misinformation before, but you keep repeating it as if saying it enough times will make it true. The actual engineers who created it disagree with you.

And, as much as I have deferred to Musks brilliance over the decades as an in investor, I recognize he has blind spots that hamstring Tesla. One such example: building the Model 3 before the MY (vastly more popular form factor, same underlying chassis).

I strongly disagree with you on this (but recognize it's a matter of opinion which should have come first, the 3 or the Y). IMO, Musk's decision to bring the more efficient sedan to market first was brilliant. This allowed them to exceed 300 miles of range with only a 75 kWh battery (which would not have been possible if the Y was first). The Model 3 also brought them to profitability and allowed them to follow up with a refined and enlarged version (the Model Y) which then became the best-selling car in the world. Always do your "testing" on the lower volume model, if possible, and then follow up with the knockout punch. You can't argue with the best-selling car in the world, gas or electric, for two years in a row (and on-track to make it three).

Tesla has built the MX on the MS chassis, so what ethos do you think prevents them from doing a CT/SUV matchup?

I don't think anything prevents them from making a CyberSUV. If they did, I would want to see it with another stainless steel exoskeleton. For it to be a derivative of the Cybertruck, it would need the super hard steel shell (or an entirely new chassis). But I don't get to decide the most productive way to spend Tesla's monetary and intellectual capital, that's the job of the CEO.

Failing to put a large SUV on the CT chassis would be another mistake in a long list. Reason: Ford/GM/Toyota etc make huge profits on those vehicles precisely because it’s just a top-hat on a Pickup chassis, for which the Capex are already amortized, and it’s a high-margin product. Tesla has sunk huge Capex into CT with 48V, 4680 cells, and huge castings, but it’s a low-volume product because it’s a weird halo design. Building an SUV on the same chassis, with some modifications to the rear casting presses and new skin, would allow Tesla to serve an important gas-guzzling market while also further amortizing the CT Capex. I think it’s a huge mistake. That Musk is preventing Tesla from iterating in New market segments with existing chassis that could be put to that purpose.

Tesla only has so much intellectual capital (not to mention monetary capital). Musk has made the decision to make Tesla more than a dominant car company. Car companies tend to be low margin businesses but the opportunities in AI, robocab networks, humanoid robots and grid scale energy storage systems dwarf that of the auto industry. So do the potential profits. These industries can also speed the transition away from fossil fuels faster than simply becoming the dominant automaker. It looks like Elon is leaving some crumbs for legacy auto, and startups like Rivian (if they don't fail first), as Tesla pivots towards more interesting and lucrative industries with more growth and profit potential. Elon is too brilliant to only build cars and rockets.

When you are the CEO of such a company, then, and only then, do you get to direct how they grow and what industries they enter.

I also think he’s making a huge mistake by pivoting straight to FSD and canceling the small car unboxed concept. But the limitations of FSD, Particularly in northern latitude climates with inclement weather, is a broader discussion that we can have outside of the SUV debate.

Ha-ha! When you run a company as successful as Tesla, send me a private message and let me know that you have made it! Until then, leave the big decisions of the world's most successful companies to the big dogs (in this case the man whose vision created that success). Tesla's best days are ahead of them. You ain't seen nothing yet. You stay in the peanut gallery throwing peanut shells at Musk. He's used to it, but he follows his own path. The naysayers don't derail him, they egg him on! If it makes you happy to pretend to have better business vision than Musk, that's your superpower, LOL!

Sponsored