Cybertruck Trailer Hitch/Casting Failure @10,400 lbs *VERTICAL LOAD*

[AlmostHuman]

Nah, you play into the hands of anti-Tesla morons by discussing their trolling as if it was legitimate. It isn't and you shouldn't. Be smarter.

Heheh okay

Sponsored

 

[AlmostHuman]

Nah, you play into the hands of anti-Tesla morons by discussing their trolling as if it was legitimate. It isn't and you shouldn't. Be smarter.

I think you are taking it too far the other way. Yes that test is silly and he is a tool. However even silly shit can help us figure out if there are legitimate issues that could be improved with some additional design changes or adjustments. That is what we call science, literally science is “The systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation.“ Science is one of the things help separate us from the tolls and idiots. Critical thinking is all but disappearing these days, we need people to think more. Many of the post on here are talking about how the Cybertruck is designed to have what failed, fail. I think most of us on here understand the internet and trolls, doesn’t mean we can‘t leverage the data produced by idiots for good.

 

[Speednet]

I think you are taking it too far the other way. Yes that test is silly and he is a tool. However even silly shit can help us figure out if there are legitimate issues that could be improved with some additional design changes or adjustments. That is what we call science, literally science is “The systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation.“ Science is one of the things help separate us from the tolls and idiots. Critical thinking is all but disappearing these days, we need people to think more. Many of the post on here are talking about how the Cybertruck is designed to have what failed, fail. I think most of us on here understand the internet and trolls, doesn’t mean we can‘t leverage the data produced by idiots for good.

It's not legitimate. I already said that. You're being played by a troll. I'm not engaging on this anymore, because it's clear what you're doing. Have fun dude.

 

[mongo]

It's not legitimate. I already said that. You're being played by a troll. I'm not engaging on this anymore, because it's clear what you're doing. Have fun dude.

The test showed the failure strength of the chassis is ~2x the standard SAE and European hitch test requirement. That is useful data.

 

[AlmostHuman]

It's not legitimate. I already said that. You're being played by a troll. I'm not engaging on this anymore, because it's clear what you're doing. Have fun dude.

I didn’t say it was legitimate, I said if there are legitimate issues. Slow down and read what I posted. It is all data, data is how we learn and can improve if needed. Your unwillingness to even see that all data is useful is part of the issues out there. I am in no way saying it was a good or scientific test. I’m not approaching this in an emotional way, simply pointing out that someone smarter than I could find something useful out of the silliness.

 

[pricedm]

I dont understand why so many people are offended by this video.

I'm not offended by the video.....just really bummed out at how the info gets reflected as a "failure" of the Cybertruck. Head over to Rivian forums, lots of "chest thumping" about how smart Rivian owners are and how dumb Cybertruck owners are. It's even worse with MSM. Misinformation is real.

 

[cybercricket]

Structures Engineer w BS and 28yrs as an Aircraft SE FedEx / Boeing / Airbus. Good test

Fix

Easy fix a doubler on the casting or better to just increase the casting thickness.

Increasing thickness in the casting is a no brainer, except they didn't pick the current thickness randomly either. They ran the calculations and determined the thickness and geometry based on the target strength requirements. In other words you can always come up with a "good test" that will break something. Like the other poster pointed out, before the casting failed on that particular truck there was a structural battery failure. So try solving for that now.

 

[mongo]

Increasing thickness in the casting is a no brainer, except they didn't pick the current thickness randomly either. They ran the calculations and determined the thickness and geometry based on the target strength requirements. In other words you can always come up with a "good test" that will break something. Like the other poster pointed out, before the casting failed on that particular truck there was a structural battery failure. So try solving for that now.

Always reminds me of this...

 

[CyberGus]

 

[Cyber Man]

No, that would be incorrect. If the receiver breaks under 10k static load, then it can only handle a similar dynamic load of 10k or so (not quite the same given time is probably a factor, but good enough for the argument).

Here’s a great video that explains what I’m saying above way better. In that video, he mentions that 10K lbs failure point means Cybertruck is 3.5 times better than F450 Towing limit!! As I said above, 1,100 lbs Tongue Weight does account for Dynamic load of the 11,000 lbs trailer. OEMs do skip plate testing and check for under/over steer failures to figure out Tongue weight.

It’s important to educate ourselves on how towing and tongue weight works instead of basing analysis on false theories or imaginary physics.

 

[Cyber Man]

Finally, straight from horse’s mouth! Thanks for sharing, @CyberGus!

 

[Cyber Man]

Here’s a great video that explains what I’m saying above way better. In that video, he mentions that 10K lbs failure point means Cybertruck is 3.5 times better than F450 Towing limit!! As I said above, 1,100 lbs Tongue Weight does account for Dynamic load of the 11,000 lbs trailer. OEMs do skip plate testing and check for under/over steer failures to figure out Tongue weight.

It’s important to educate ourselves on how towing and tongue weight works instead of basing analysis on theoretic or imaginary physics.

To add further, the OEM Tongue Weight doesn’t include Weight Distribution hitches. With a proper setup, these vehicles are incredible for short-distance towing. Here’s Andy from Can-am towing Airstream with Model 3:



If you are not convinced with Cybertruck’s pulling power, here’s a video showing how it surpassed every truck in the market. The weight of this trailer starts with 33,000 lbs and goes up as distance increases! That’s insane amount of power and capability!



Bottom line - Cybertruck is one badass towing truck for short distance towing. Don’t fall for the trolls and haters! Believe in science and physics!

As pull-through charging network increases, frequent long-distance towing is also not a problem! Hands down, you are getting the best utility and least maintenance Truck on the market for the value!

 

[cybercricket]

Here’s a great video that explains what I’m saying above way better. In that video, he mentions that 10K lbs failure point means Cybertruck is 3.5 times better than F450 Towing limit!! As I said above, 1,100 lbs Tongue Weight does account for Dynamic load of the 11,000 lbs trailer. OEMs do skip plate testing and check for under/over steer failures to figure out Tongue weight.

It’s important to educate ourselves on how towing and tongue weight works instead of basing analysis on false theories or imaginary physics.

Without going to the previous page(s) I vaguely recall you introduced the number 100,000lb and that's what I disagreed with. You were mixing dynamic and static rating comparisons. Here is the basic physics to help with that :

Since the F (force) = m (mass) a (acceleration)

F (max) = 4536 (10,000lb) * 9.8 (g) = 44452.8 N

that's basically the maximum force the receiver will take regardless of the other variables.

a (max) = 44452.8 / 499 (1,100lb) = 89 m/s (exactly 9g)

That's the acceleration at which 1,100lb will exert equivalent force of 10,000lb under its own weight. For 100,000lb the maximum acceleration is then :

a (max) = 44452.8 / 45359 (100,000lb) = 0.98m/s

Which is probably impossible on Earth

 

[cybercricket]

To add further, the OEM Tongue Weight doesn’t include Weight Distribution hitches. With a proper setup, these vehicles are incredible for short-distance towing. Here’s Andy from Can-am towing Airstream with Model 3:

Weight Distribution hitch would slightly change the vector at which the Force is applied to the receiver. That's not necessarily better, if the OEM receiver is optimized for taking the force at an angle and not straight down.

 

[mongo]

Without going to the previous page(s) I vaguely recall you introduced the number 100,000lb and that's what I disagreed with. You were mixing dynamic and static rating comparisons. Here is the basic physics to help with that :

Since the F (force) = m (mass) a (acceleration)

F (max) = 4536 (10,000lb) * 9.8 (g) = 44452.8 N

that's basically the maximum force the receiver will take regardless of the other variables.

a (max) = 44452.8 / 499 (1,100lb) = 89 m/s (exactly 9g)

That's the acceleration at which 1,100lb will exert equivalent force of 10,000lb under its own weight. For 100,000lb the maximum acceleration is then :

a (max) = 44452.8 / 45359 (100,000lb) = 0.98m/s

Which is probably impossible on Earth

I think you're mixing 1,100 tounge on a 11k trailer and 100k tongue (versus 100k trailer with 10k tongue).

Regardless, a 11k trailer with 1,100 tongue needs less than 9gs to produce 10k pounds at the hitch. A 1,100 pound trailer with all mass at tongue would need 9gs.

Sponsored