So the Cybertruck fits in a garage (at under 19ft long)... But was the size reduction worth it for you?

[anionic1]

So the truck was reduced in length to be able to fit in a garage. OK. But what about the width? The garages I've had are pretty tight on the width. In fact tight enough that it is almost too tight to open the drivers side door let alone driver and passenger. Seems pointless to get the length shortened if I won't be able to get in or out of the truck once it is inside the garage.

I completely agree.

Sponsored

 

[greggertruck]

We are basically talking about 3" in length here. Which is mostly off the nose. Making a mountain out of a molehill here.

There's been many many many mole hills, and one correct dimension posted the whole time.

 

[greggertruck]

I don't think the width will change that much. Maybe an inch, but the prototypes that are out there testing are looking close to 80" to me (78" if I was to guess). Clearly much wider than a Tacoma (~75"), but clearly not as wide as a F-250 (80").

IMO the big reason for no 3rd seat up front is the screen. As obsessed as Tesla is with safety, having a person sit right behind a big glass and metal thing with no airbag is just ripe for a safety issue.

You talking max width, or doors width, or mirror width? Which do you want?

 

[cvalue13]

You talking max width, or doors width, or mirror width? Which do you want?

yes

 

[henchman24]

You talking max width, or doors width, or mirror width? Which do you want?

Max width without mirrors. The normal standard for trucks. Ford F150 (non-Raptor) are 79.9" (Raptor 86.6"), Tundra 80.2", Ram 82.1", and Silverado 81.25". Cybertruck looks like a ~78" truck to me from the photos, but some angles make it seem narrower or wider.

 

[henchman24]

This doesn’t really make sense on a little further thinking.

it would only make sense if the CT interiors we’ve seen had a fixed console that was the width of a meaningful 3rd seat, and the back seat showed the width of a meaningful 3rd seat. Then it would make sense to say, “it clearly has room for a third seat up front, but they must have instead made it a fixed console because of thr screen”

but instead we see a narrow console like the ones seen in a Tacoma or midsized truck, and unlike any console width seen in a full sized truck. And the back seat appears to reflect this as well.

which leaves us with only the following, seemly unlikely, needle to thread: the CT’s center console is so narrow only because the CT’s driver/passenger side seats (front and back) are huge and wider than comparable full-sized trucks.

that possibility seems notionally unlikely (why make bigger seats?) as well as visually unsupported (the Ct driver/passenger side seats don’t appear any larger than in other full sized trucks)

what to me is far more likely a scenario: traditional truck makers with traditional designs have been waging a war of interior space for decades, and within the packaging of a traditional truck design have managed to over time and many iterations eek out massive exteriors. Whereas the CT’s exterior packaging is radically different and as a result has not allowed for the same interior packaging space.

This scenario can be seen squarely in the Rivian, which isn’t even a revolutionary design in either interior or exterior packaging - making trucks is hard.

To me, the backseat looks big enough for 3 wide quite easily.

 

[cvalue13]

To me, the backseat looks big enough for 3 wide quite easily.

no doubt that, for now, the answer comes down to one's perceptions and the reasonableness of inferences based on available limited information

that said, when relaying perceptions and inferences (esp those that might be taken as controversial) I do try and show my work

and I'm all ears for inferences that are borne of something more

 

[SSonnentag]

As long as the bed can take a 4'x8' sheet, I gladly welcome the efficiency gains that a slighly smaller size can offer.

 

[audi2tesla]

I'm not planning to park mine in my garage.

 

[CyberspaceTom]

Shortening the nose does not hurt but losing the middle seat does. In either case, it would fit in my garage if I wanted to park it in there. However, the garage is where the boat goes.

 

[pricedm]

Were the size sacrifices worth it?

Do you work for WSJ or Barrons?

What are these "sacrifices" you speak of?

 

[CHC]

The biggest sacrifice is looks IMO. The CT will likely be right at 80in in width. The Model X is a hair under 79, so it would not make sense that it is narrower

 

[cbrtrckrsrvd112219]

Four doors, seats 5, and has a 6-foot bed. What "sacrifices" should I be evaluating?

Making it longer also adds weight, reduces the turning radius, reduces the entry/exit angle, and makes it harder to park generally.

I agree 100%! what sacrifices? it is still big ass truck matching F-150 in size and beating it in utility.
It is a car and car must be in the garage: in winter from cold and snow and in summer from heat. I dont get people leaving their cars on driveway while garage filled with crap.
so I am happy to hear it will fit in standard garage. and it will be more manageable to park at costco and home depot.
If I wanted 18 wheeler, I would buy 18-wheeler, but still would not keep it on my driveway

 

[greggertruck]

yes

Are we trusting my dimensions now post call? kiiiiidding.

Mirror width I don't positively have, but the other two I have somewhere, will report back in a bit.

 

[2DVS4U]

I will just be happy to finally get a Cybertruck, with 3500 sq. ft of garage size is not an issue, I don't even park my work trucks outside so I will definitely be keeping it inside for sure.

Sponsored