“New” Cybertruck Photos with vault cover closed

[happy intruder]

Frunk was announced at reveal and there is absolutely oodles of space under that massive dash behind the frunk that could house 3-4 times the volume of the MS HVAC system etc. There is no issue with space even though the frunk hood might be short, simply because the windscreen is further forward because of the rake angle. We are definitely getting a frunk, I just want a big one with good access.

just need to wait and see how frontal crash tests work out

Sponsored

 

[TheFimMaker]

Van jó,sokkal jobb megoldàsom a csúnya,nagy ablaktörlőre,kérem segítsen valakit,aki tudja,van lehetősége tovàbbitsa ezt az információt Elon Musknak vagy vonHolzhausen-nel.Köszönöm.Üdvözlettel;Joe

 

[anionic1]

Its very likely that these prototypes don’t have the structural 4680 battery pack or the large idra cast front and rear. Really curious if that will change any exterior features.

 

[anionic1]

I wonder if that is going to be something easy to do like on my Jeep? Probably not.

The Jeep aesthetically pulls it off better for sure. The CT just looks like it’s missing doors.

 

[anionic1]

Too late, hopes are in stratosphere.

I am sure Elon got the message after the earnings call. No one is happy about the CT delays.

 

[Ogre]

Its very likely that these prototypes don’t have the structural 4680 battery pack or the large idra cast front and rear. Really curious if that will change any exterior features.

I strongly suspect they do in fact have structural packs. They have been manufacturing 4680s at lab scale for over a year and on a trial production line since sometime late last year. They have plenty of cells for prototypes.

The large gigacasting is unlikely though since they don’t actually have a large gigapress.

I seriously doubt that will impact exterior appearance though.

 

[uff_da]

Did anyone notice any rear wheel steering on this these images? I did not. I wonder if these are just older versions, or if 4-wheel steering is something getting re-thought under the "infinitely desirable, but not affordable"?

I don't remember seeing the Texas proto-type have rear wheel steering either... This is a feature I really want to park that beast (could care less about crab walking and tank turning- although, I have never done a tank turn in anything but a skid loader and I could see some fun had with that).

 

[Ogre]

I have to say, I think the truck looks so much better in some of the recent pictures than when I first saw it. I know some of you love the way it looks, but I made my reservation inspite of the way looks and because of the value. I'm starting to think it is going to look a lot better, especially in person, than I initially thought. The profile from the side back is quite nice.

Confirms what a lot of us suspected all along: A little grunge suits the truck quite well.

If you are the sort who treats their truck to a weekly spa day with a mirror finish and the hot wax treatment, it’ll be fantastic. But this truck is really ideal for those of us who who think a “Spa Day” for their truck involves a mud bath.

 

[Dusty]

A CT door probably weighs 4x as much as a single Wrangler door. I doubt if anyone would want to remove one to go doorless. If so, they'd do it once ... and discover the reality of livin' dat doorless life.

I like my dirt on the exterior, thank you.

 

[Ogre]

Did anyone notice any rear wheel steering on this these images? I did not. I wonder if these are just older versions, or if 4-wheel steering is something getting re-thought under the "infinitely desirable, but not affordable"?

I don't remember seeing the Texas proto-type have rear wheel steering either... This is a feature I really want to park that beast (could care less about crab walking and tank turning- although, I have never done a tank turn in anything but a skid loader and I could see some fun had with that).

I have not. Though I haven’t seen these doing tight turns where it would be most obvious either.

From an engineering perspective they will likely try to isolate any changes. So if the 4WS isn’t finished, these may well be normal 2 wheel steering versions for testing other things and somewhere out there is a 4WS model as well.

 

[Ogre]

A CT door probably weighs 4x as much as a single Wrangler door. I doubt if anyone would want to remove one to go doorless. If so, they'd do it once ... and discover the reality of livin' dat doorless life.

I like my dirt on the exterior, thank you.

The Cybertruck is not a Jeep Wrangler. There is some overlap, but it’s not a dedicated Off-road vehicle. It’s more of a jack-of-all-trades than a Wrangler is.

 

[TAP1A]

It is just simple geometry. the long picture shows more diagonally the shape of CT and other more square so it appears longer.

tbh if we are comparing these pics the truck looks to be about the size of a model x and a half. no way this is fitting in my garage. the model y is already tight as it is

 

[anionic1]

With Y mostly waiting for approvals the engineers need something to do. After approvals they will likely be focused on the ramp for a while. Then back to the CT.

I strongly suspect they do in fact have structural packs. They have been manufacturing 4680s at lab scale for over a year and on a trial production line since sometime late last year. They have plenty of cells for prototypes.

The large gigacasting is unlikely though since they don’t actually have a large gigapress.

I seriously doubt that will impact exterior appearance though.

Its tough to imagine that they would go through the effort of making the structural packs without the castings to attach to. If I were building a prototype (and i had a gazillion dollars) I wouldn't focus on the stuff people couldn't see as much. That structural pack relies on the unibody. It would give them more flexibility to mess with the body if they just threw it on a frame for the prototype. kind of like dealing with traditionally reinforced concrete vs. post tension.

 

[Ogre]

Its tough to imagine that they would go through the effort of making the structural packs without the castings to attach to. If I were building a prototype (and i had a gazillion dollars) I wouldn't focus on the stuff people couldn't see as much. That structural pack relies on the unibody. It would give them more flexibility to mess with the body if they just threw it on a frame for the prototype. kind of like dealing with traditionally reinforced concrete vs. post tension.

It’s possible. But what are they testing then? Without the structural pack any kind of performance metrics are worthless, they would be testing an entirely different vehicle.

They could make 2 castings for the rear and 1 for the front, and bond the 2 rear castings together the way they used to put the rear end of the Model 3/Y together. They could get the truck pretty damned close to final that way.

Maybe I don’t understand the point of having a test mule.

 

[Dusty]

They probably do have structural packs for the CT. They wouldn't have to fill it completely with 4680s. They only need, say, 1/3rd the total 4680s, and fill the rest of the pack with structural-equivalent dummy batteries. They don't need range they need a moving platform that allows then a few hours of data and testing every day.

But I do wonder how they're simulating the castings. I suppose you'd just hand assemble the 90-140 parts (front and rear) that the single casting would eventually replace, right?

Sponsored