Ryan Shaw's Cybertruck (Cyberbeast) Review | Off-Roading, Sand Run, Beast Mode Launch, Towing

[VR Driving]

Sponsored

 

[VR Driving]

This should be the first video of the Cyberbeast outside of the initial press reviews

 

[cvalue13]

Ok, I stopped watching when he repeats that bullshit torque figure

That’s not how any company reports, torque, and it sure as hell isn’t how are “” journalist should report it without explaining what it is

probavly a bit of an overreaction, but someone please just review this truck on real terms

 

[VR Driving]

pretty disappointed at the CB's built quality. That alcantara dash looks like its straight out of west coast customs

 

[chevrofreak]

Ok, I stopped watching when he repeats that bullshit torque figure

That’s not how any company reports, torque, and it sure as hell isn’t how are “” journalist should report it without explaining what it is

probavly a bit of an overreaction, but someone please just review this truck on real terms

There is nothing bullshit about that torque figure. ICE vehicles have engine torque numbers because they can measure that number on an engine dyno. You do that with an EV you would have to use the battery and controller hooked to an engine dyno to do a similar measurement, and nobody does that. Horsepower in an ICE is calculated as Torque X RPM / 5252. In an EV they calculate horsepower based on the electrical power consumed by the motor. If you put an EV on a chassis dyno, you will get a torque number that isn't accurate because they were not measuring engine RPM at the same time. Actual torque applied to the ground is a more real world figure than torque at the motor. GM did something similar with the Hummer EV. Expect to see it more.

 

[Cyberman]

Very watchable.

 

[cvalue13]

GM did something similar with the Hummer EV.

it was BS then, too - to the same extent I meant it above

Of course what they’ve given is an actual calculation. I didn’t mean it wasn’t. But another actual calculation is instead of miles per hour is “centimeters per second.”

but people don’t report centimeters per second, because the purpose of these is to provide relevant comparisons

The style of torque reporting Tesla is doing is not been the industry standard to date, even for Tesla - until maybe the new Roadster

and here’s what they did with the Roadster:

notice it says “wheel torque”

they’re taking the power at the engine, multiplying by the gearing ratio to the wheel

Torque absent HP and RPM is meaningless on its own

Take a Dodge Desmond with 972nM torque at the engine. In first gear, through final drive, that’s 14,000nM at the wheel. In 2nd gear it’s still 10,000nM. (All ignoring multiplication.)

This is why engine manufacturers or OEM’s tend to quote torque back at the engine.

Which with the Roadster would be about 750ftlbs of torque

if Tesla wanted to provide a figure that gave a relavent comparison, they could do what all OEMs other than GM have done to date: provide the relevant conversion, and then otherwise site Hp and 0-60 etc.


Otherwise, and without an explanation or context, what Tesla is reporting isnt useable as a comparison to other vehicles not listed in the same terms. At which point one starts to wonder why they provide the figure at all.

personally, the reason smells to likely to be to confuse and mislead. It leads the unwitting thinking eg the Roadster has 10X the torque as the Dodge Deamon, when in fact it has less (in the most relevant context of assumptions).

just like with the Roadster “wheel torque” figure - it’s basically meaningless on its own absent context.

The 2020 Ford Super Duty diesel, for example, makes roughly 17,200 lb.-ft. of wheel torque in first gear.

Tesla can cite speed in cm/second all it likes, but it’s as possible as it ever was to convert that to mph and at least also give that figure - or at least for someone reporting it to do so.

in standard terms, the CT’s torque at the wheel can be easily converted back through the drivetrain to a standardly presented ~750 ftlbs of torque

just like Ford does with the Lightning

 

[chevrofreak]

it was BS then, too - to the same extent I meant it above

Of course what they’ve given is an actual calculation. I didn’t mean it wasn’t. But another actual calculation is instead of miles per hour is “centimeters per second.”

but people don’t report centimeters per second, because the purpose of these is to provide relevant comparisons

The style of torque reporting Tesla is doing is not been the industry standard to date, even for Tesla - until maybe the new Roadster

and here’s what they did with the Roadster:

notice it says “wheel torque”

they’re taking the power at the engine, multiplying by the gearing ratio to the wheel

Torque absent HP and RPM is meaningless on its own

Take a Dodge Desmond with 972nM torque at the engine. In first gear, through final drive, that’s 14,000nM at the wheel. In 2nd gear it’s still 10,000nM. (All ignoring multiplication.)

This is why engine manufacturers or OEM’s tend to quote torque back at the engine.

Which with the Roadster would be about 750ftlbs of torque

if Tesla wanted to provide a figure that gave a relavent comparison, they could do what all OEMs other than GM have done to date: provide the relevant conversion, and then otherwise site Hp and 0-60 etc.


Otherwise, and without an explanation or context, what Tesla is reporting isnt useable as a comparison to other vehicles not listed in the same terms. At which point one starts to wonder why they provide the figure at all.

personally, the reason smells to likely to be to confuse and mislead. It leads the unwitting thinking eg the Roadster has 10X the torque as the Dodge Deamon, when in fact it has less (in the most relevant context of assumptions).

just like with the Roadster “wheel torque” figure - it’s basically meaningless on its own absent context.

The 2020 Ford Super Duty diesel, for example, makes roughly 17,200 lb.-ft. of wheel torque in first gear.

Tesla can cite speed in cm/second all it likes, but it’s as possible as it ever was to convert that to mph and at least also give that figure - or at least for someone reporting it to do so.

in standard terms, the CT’s torque at the wheel can be easily converted back through the drivetrain to a standardly presented ~750 ftlbs of torque

just like Ford does with the Lightning

The difference being that those ICE vehicles have multiple gear ratios, and most EV's only have one. The EV isn't going to gain or lose that torque, because it isn't changing gears, it will be putting roughly that same amount of torque to the wheels at any vehicle speed when maximum motor power is applied. That is why EV to ICE power comparisons are apples to oranges, and it is probably time to come up with a different way to represent their power than what we have been using for the last century.

 

[Pops]

pretty disappointed at the CB's built quality. That alcantara dash looks like its straight out of west coast customs

I have a CB on order. This is very bad. What would happen if you refuse delivery in that state, do you lose your deposit? Is it fixable? Ugh. It looks hand made, and poorly done at that. I wonder if you could order a replacement part from the standard AWD.

 

[cvalue13]

it will be putting roughly that same amount of torque to the wheels at any vehicle speed when maximum motor power is applied

I may not understand what you're trying to say, but what it seems like you’re saying just glosses over what seems like a similar level of variance still embedded

RPM and speed still change in an electric motor/drivetrain

The torque does change in an electric car depending on speed and HP

The 10Knm wheel torque figure still makes assumptions about rpm and speed

Point being, none of these figures - the old approach or the new one - are some golden, invariant, figure … really neither more than the other

it’s always been the case that the real measure are the extranaly quantifiable results, like 0-60, towing performance, etc.

HP and torque figures have always been what they still are, however reported, which are similar to EPA figures: a singular result under a set of assumptions, and variable depending on how those assumption are altered, but useful to the extent people use roughly equivalent standards and report in similar terms

it is probably time to come up with a different way to represent their power than what we have been using for the last century.

maybe it is maybe it isn’t based on my above response

But assuming it’s time to convert, means it’s also probably still time to explain that’s what you’re doing - maybe even to provide the relevant “old” figure alongside it, until people widely understand

which of course is why epa provides its figures in MPGe terms, alongside mi/kWh, etc.

 

[HaulingAss]

In before people say the reviewer must have been bribed by Tesla!

 

[SAVFPV]

I enjoyed it and didn’t think I could want the truck and more than I do, yet after this video I do! RGB interior light choices was something new I learned about

 

[Hello4x]

Curious, if the screen goes out, can you still use voice command to change climate, observe power/range, perform some typical commands you would do with the screen etc.

 

[Woodrick]

I have a CB on order. This is very bad. What would happen if you refuse delivery in that state, do you lose your deposit? Is it fixable? Ugh. It looks hand made, and poorly done at that. I wonder if you could order a replacement part from the standard AWD.

Everyone has to stop making decisions based on YouTube influencers.

If you want build samples, look at some of the recent vehicles, not the oldest.

 

[Tommytuna]

Nice to see some off-roading in a review. Worth watching

Sponsored