Cybertruck “not a real truck” says survey among truck drivers

[charliemagpie]

I'm not a truck expert, and my brain isn't as big as a planet like some other peoples.

The Cybertruck will kick Lightings ass any day any time. No BS excuses
or BS hypotheticals.


Bring it on. And no whining.

Sponsored

 

[CyberGus]

Uhh, no, you don't replace asparagus with avocado. I think you need to re-examine your argument, @cvalue13

But avocado milkshakes are delicious.

-Crissa

Alton Brown made me avocado ice cream. It tasted like…frozen guacamole. And not in a good way.

 

[Ogre]

Alton Brown made me avocado ice cream. It tasted like…frozen guacamole. And not in a good way.

Saw Alton Brown live… was a bit disappointed. He was… Ok.

 

[RVAC]

Assuming still of course unveil stats, the top trim Tri Motor top optionality can tow a massive 14,000 pounds. Additionally, the Cybertruck offers a payload capacity of 3,500 pounds.

That bests the Lightning top optionality by 4,000lb towing, 1,500lb payload. Hands down winner vs Lightning. Super impressive, esp given the assumption weight of the CT (which weight kills the Lightning’s stats).

The top towing/payload optionality for an ICE F150 brings identical towing (14klb) and 250lb less payload (3,250). Those trucks unaltered will tow identical. Put $300 of sandbags in the bed of the F150 and deflate the tires 10%, and it will very likely drag a top-trim CT around squealing.

All of this to me merely re-makes my point: it matters which models and options you’re comparing, or none of it “matters” at all. Choose your position.

I choose the latter: if someone giddily exclaims the CT is more towing/payload capable than the Lightning, I applaud and look at my CT reservation number (longingly).

If they instead giddily reference the stupid unveil video “tow battle” (or equivalent assertions) between the CT and a minimally equipped F150, I think it’s an embarrassing indirect admission that they there don’t understand trucks. Ford may as well post a video of a maximally equipped F150 with sandbags in a “tow battle” with the lowest optioned CT with over-inflated, bald, tires. Both comparisons are equally stupid and meaningless.

The only difference I can see, is that around here some people would go stark-raving mad at Ford’s video, while simultaneously using the CT tow video as a basis to claim the CT’s superiority.

We were obviously talking F-150 ICE not just Lightning or else the F-250 would have never been part of the conversation given there's no EV variant. As I wrote previously I never stated a base F-150 should be compared with the top spec Cybertruck (a base F-150 should be compared with a base Cybertruck) so I don't see what you mean by choose your position.

Anyway in order to put an end to this infinite discussion we can say that the Tri-Motor directly competes with both a maxed F-150 and a base F-250. I just think the F-150 is the more appropriate of the two for a direct comparison because of the other factors at play (size/design).

 

[SwampNut]

How was the asparagus ice cream?

 

[RVAC]

How was the asparagus ice cream?

I wouldn't know, I've already shown Cybertruck isn't a 3/4 ton just like the industry doesn't consider a maxed out F-150 one either but hey the F-250 is the more appropriate comparison instead of a maxed out F-150 because reasons.

 

[SwampNut]

You’ve also shown that run-on sentences make no sense.

 

[Crissa]

We're allowed to have run-on sentences in conversational English. Well, we're not, but we do it any way.

-Crissa

 

[SwampNut]

I. Disagree.

 

[Kremmen]

And a massive 75% think it's inevitable eventually.

That's... Big.

-Crissa

Yep. The haters still perceive themselves as the voice of the people but they're soon going to find themselves becoming very much marginalised. A rump, membership of which makes one pretty visibly a weirdo. Your embarrassing racist uncle, that kind of deal.

 

[S.H.Peterson]

This machine will prove to be what it proves itself to be.
Anything outside of that is trying to calculate the number demons that is in my cousin Bryan's closet.

 

[jerhenderson]

Can it haul lumber and plywood from Home Depot/Lowes. . . Yes!
It's a real truck for me.

I can go to Costco.... real truck !

 

[mhaze]

These are class designations of relative capability. Saying the CT merely has these payload/towing stats as a “bonus” is like saying Ford produces an F150 that as “a bonus” has the capabilities of an F250. There’s no such thing: an F150 with the capabilities of an F250 is called an F250.

Your framing above suggests you think there is some Platonic ideal called an F150, that merely happens to have a certain level of capabilities. But that’s reversing the causation arrow on how these trucks are designated. Ford’s F150 is designated a “150” because of its capabilities - that’s what makes it a “half ton” truck rather than a “3/4 ton” truck: these are class designations of the relative capabilities of a pickup.

If a truck has a certain relative capability as a “3/4 ton truck,” Ford calls it an F250. Tesla’s truck, with similar relative capabilities, calls it a CyberTruck.

With the CT, Tesla is going after full-sized pickups, period. Why compete with ONLY the F150 market if you can build a vehicle that ALSO competes with/replaces the F250/350 market. This is not an either-or proposition.

In order to compete with all those segments simultaneously, you need a truck that isn’t as large a footprint as an F250/350 (market limiting), but that nonetheless has a full 6.5’ bed, the requisite power, payload and towing capabilities, but within the footprint/envelope of an F150 short bed.

Put differently, when you say essentially “Ford doesn’t make an F150 with a 6.5’ bed and these payload/towing capabilities” the obvious and uninteresting answer from Ford would be: yes we do, it’s called an F250 because it has those capabilities (and wait ‘til you hear about F650s).

And Tesla would rightfully respond, but they’ 40’ long!

Which brings me to:



Purely from a GVWR perspective that’s true. But that’s also why I said the a “2B-3” - the CT is class-defying, especially for a BEV.

The Lightning’s capabilities as a 1/2 ton class truck are on the lower end of that class’s capabilities because the truck’s weight.

The CT, meanwhile, manages to have the lower end of an 3/4 ton truck capabilities despite the battery weight.

These are class designations of relative capability. Remarkable for a BEV truck, the CT has 3/4 ton relative capabilities - which makes it a 3/4 ton truck.

You: “avocados are not a fruit, they are competing for sales with vegetables in the produce section, they just happen to have a seed which makes them better at competing with asparagus for people who want their vegetables to grow trees”

Which btw, is a different conflation from people who assert in effect: “the CT is a better full-sized truck than an F150 because the CT has a bigger bed, has higher payload, and higher max towing”

analogue: “the avacado is a better vegetable than an asparagus because an avacado has a seed that grows into a tree”

To which Farmer Ford would reply, “I mean, I also grow tomatoes, squash, cucumbers, peppers, eggplant, pumpkin….”
....

Wait...

I know Raptors come from small Raptor families that eat other trucks.

Don't F150s grow on F150 trees?

 

[cvalue13]

I know Raptors come from small Raptor families that eat other trucks.

Indeed, a rare breed that, while good at jumping and climbing, are junk at lifting and pulling

 

[Roy2001]

It reminds me Harley drivers once demand other motorcyclists not to call their bikes bikes.

Sponsored