Traditional internal combustion engine pickups are banned in many urban areas in China, which has also limited pickup sales in the country. Fortunately, the restrictions on pure electric pickups are being lifted, and sales are sure to increase significantly.
Snark for snark bud. Your mansplaining was a bit much. The point I was making was that the truck doesn't need the protection of a shelter. Regardless of bullets or no.
@greggertruck based on the picture you are showing for possible frunk size I think it will work fine. I do hope it is power lift. I see value in giving up some frunk volume if it means better interior cabin space which is more important to me.Got it, so to push the question back in a different worded way, "how is Cybertruck smaller in dimension, but has a bigger bed space than the F150?"
I think they compromised in frunk space, Lightning frunk for instance appears to effectively take up the full engine bay. Cybertruck frunk looks basically like this:
The Cybertruck frunk, if I have understand correctly, is just the area in front of the wheels, it doesn't really push back. Yesterdays deck you can actually even see the mounting points for the frunk tub!
orange is the lining of the frunk tub, green is where I believe it actually bolts down.
Compare to this unmarked
All that "dead" space behind is where motors go, ac system, fan etc. In the OG Cybertruck, this was sandwiched on top of itself. That little typical Tesla frunk was a top on top of the systems that are now instead mounted behind, between the wheel wells.
NOW... "what about the bed?!"
Well, the bed protrudes into the backrest of the Cybertruck - we al know. One big benefit to Cybertruck build style is, unlike a traditional body on frame/ ladder truck, there is no brake in the bed / cab. On a regular truck... You lose a couple inches right there between space and steel. I'd say 2, roughly. It is my belief they are quite possibly not spouting the floor length of the bed, but rather the length to the backrest. I think that length, to the backrest, is right at 6', while the floor begs an additional several inches, landing at nearly 6'3" or so. That's 3" or 4" lost/ gained, depending how you see it, thanks to the backrest overhang.
So to tag back to the primary question of "how did Cybertruck get a bigger bed in a smaller package and still run around claiming it's a full size pick up?"
They didn't run with a preexisting truck style, and donate space to a semi useless frunk. The frunk on Cybertruck is plenty big! Highly effective, and very useful. To put it nicely, the Lightning is too useful. It's just mondo and has been both the butt of jokes, and praise! They got that - the mega frunk. It's huge! But really, it's in the way. So Cybertruck chopped some front, about 4" and made a more efficient front build out, while still maintaining it's great frunk design!
How often do you use for frunk, @cvalue13 or any other Lightning owners. It's not specifically IF you do, it's how empty it stays really. I'd wager that much of the space is generally unused, and that Cybertruck will be super useful.
Hope this makes sense, curious of your thoughts.
The Jay Leno video clip driving the Cybertruck went into the boring tunnel. That was the original prototype.
A pretty major difference in length between the Cybertruck and pretty much any other truck is also the bumpers. The F150 front bumper is ~2-3" protruded from the grill and the rear bumper is a solid 5". On the Cybertruck, the bumpers do not look to protrude much (if any) past the body. It doesn't look to me that you have taken that into account in the postings that I have seen (admittedly haven't been lurking here long).some helpful thoughts in there (and confirms my separate view of the Frunk size)
but none of it catches the drift of the thought experiment
you’re conversation above focuses on one side of the coin: the CT is ~4.5” shorter than an F150 SCREW, but the CT manages to have a bed that is ~7” longer - great trick, I’m here for it.
but to pull off the above trick, the inverse is also true: the parts of the CT that are *not* the bed are ~11.5” *shorter* than the parts of the F150 that are not the bed
Accordingly, while we can all agree it is great that the CT bed is ~7” longer than the F150 SCREW bed, it begs the question of so where compared to the F150 did the CT shave off the other 12” ?
At a high level, the answer has to be that the CT’s nose to bulkhead length is roughly 12” shorter than the length of an F150’s Nose to bed bulkhead
Which is why I pointed out that the answer is *not* the “useless” space forward of the wheel-wells, as that dimension is roughly identical between the trucks
And I’m not sure that I buy that a material amount of the difference is the bed bulkhead area. Factoring in the tonneau channel, etc, there’s just not that much more space between an F150 cab rear and its bed front.
in any event, to answer your musings over the Frunk:
all the time I use it. It’s among the top three most useful differences between the ICE and Lightning, and an absolute game-changer for almost anyone who’s driven a truck for decades.
which brings me to:
Bro
Dont make me go pull receipts
Pretty certain that just 6-8 months ago you were among the people hee-hawing about how the size of CT’s mega Frunk was going to put the Lightning to shame, fit more things, be even more awesome-bigger, etc.
This about-face of narrative is almost painful to watch!
I’ll tail off with a different question:
We know the CT bed is now ~6” shorter. We know the Frunk is materially smaller than earlier thought.
Given that the Lightning Frunk volume is 14.1 cubic feet. And given that an 8’ truck bed has 77 cubic feet of volume:
Where, then, do you think Tesla has put the “100 cubic feet of exterior, lockable storage”?
I’d guess the CT Frunk ends up being half the lightning, say 7cu feet
If the CT bed (not counting the sails) is 6’ long, by the standard 19” high, by 50” wide, that’s 39.5cu feet. The sails are less than half that, but I’ll give it to them for the moment, that’s a bed volume of 60cu Feet
that gets us to Frunk + bed/tonneau and f 67cu feet
You hiding some sail storage deets? 30+ cu ft is a long way to go!
I've seen garages here that are nicer than my first apartment.My more immediate question is why not a single garage I have seen in America has painted drywall??
What's up with that?
Yes and as repeated, here just using rough numbers and measures for a few thought experiments.
I think you're selling short the 1" at most on the back. The Lightning bumper picture has the line running through the hitch and middle protrusion of the bumper and is further back still. We are probably at least 3" difference there. The front pictures are from different angles with some distortion. Even so, the front bumper on the Lightning protrudes forward beyond the grill. That angle does make the Cybertruck look to have the bumper out in front though. Probably minimal difference there.Yes and as repeated, here just using rough numbers and measures for a few thought experiments.
That said, since we both seem interested in double-clicking a degree of resolution further:
Let's take your bumper point, which while reasonable to perceive when eyeballing it turns out to be false.
(Let's for present purposes ignore the photo above of the Raptor, which has a unique bumper set, and instead use my Lightning as the more relevant comparator.)
Lightning Length: 232.70 inch
CT Length: 227.5"
Delta: 5.2"
There are visual ques that make it appear that the Lightning bumpers extend materially more than the CTs, such as the bumper protrusion inward of the quarterpanel, but these are illusions - in reality, the bumper protrusions of both vehicles are near enough for present purposes to say they are on average (between front and back) identical, or off by ~1" at most. The Lightning may have a fraction more rear bumper protusion, but if so the CT has a fraction more front bumper protrusion.
Below aren't perfect comparator photos, but they get across the point:
Like the bumper point above, other differences that people point out turn out to be on inspection a bit in favor of one vehicle or the other, to an averaged conclusion of - still - where'd that 12" go?
For just a few examples, above @greggertruck understandably on perception and some rough mental image purports that the F150 loses functional length between the rear cab bulkhead and the front bed bulkhead. Here again, on inspection, this turns out to be unclearly different between the vehicles, and one could even argue the CT may lose more space here given that unlike the F150 the CT has to have room for not only the normal bulkheads, but also the tonneau channel.
As it turns out, the F150 has only 0.5-0.75" between the rear cab bulkhead and the front bed bulkhead, although the bed's uppermost 'lip' would cause people to armchair otherwise.
From there, one can collect a half dozen other such minor differences, but each will variously seem too close to call, or split regarding which vehicle gains/loses an 1" here and there - to an average conclusion of ...
.... where did that 12" go?
I'll leave with just one more thought: based on my comparative photos (scaled), the CT and the F150 have ~identical distances between (A) the tip of the nose, and (B) the dashboard line nearest the driver.
a
Which is to say, if that is true, and the CT has a 7" longer bed than the F150, the missing 12" is at least in material part somewhere within the cab dimensions.
Not at all to suggest there might not be an inch or two gained/lost elsewhere, and not at all to suggest that it's exactly 12", but instead only to scope that on a directional and magnitude basis, there is some chunk of the CT that is materially shorter, and it aint the "nose" and it aint the bed.
As long as Cyberlandr can still work and not be stupidly small, I'm okay with the size reduction.
That's part of the crazy technology that Elon keeps telling us the CT has. It works like a Tardis.
