Two crash tested Cybertruck spotted in California!

[Diehard]

Go ahead. Try and Ding My Door.

DING MY F*CKING DOOR, TRY IT!

/Roy Kent

I have a feeling a buncha coal rollin, diesel lovin idiots with steel balls in their pockets will be hunting parked CTs and we won’t have to dare anyone. Rivian was funny looking and Lightning under the radar but CT is unapologetically a threat to the establishment. I would’t be surprised if some nutcases stared acting up.

Sponsored

 

[CyberGus]

I have a feeling a buncha coal rollin, diesel lovin idiots with steel balls in their pockets will be hunting parked CTs and we won’t have to dare anyone. Rivian was funny looking and Lightning under the radar but CT is unapologetically a threat to the establishment. I would’t be surprised if some nutcases stared acting up.

Two words: "Sentry Mode"

 

[BigAl]

You know one thing I noticed is that the CT doesn't look much different after the test... anyone notice that?!?

 

[Mini2nut]

What are the Federal regulations for bumpers?

49 CFR Part 581, “The bumper standard,” prescribes performance requirements for passenger cars in low-speed front and rear collisions. It applies to front and rear bumpers on passenger cars to prevent the damage to the car body and safety related equipment at barrier impact speeds of 2½ mph across the full width and 1½ mph on the corners.

This is equivalent to a 5 mph crash into a parked vehicle of the same weight. The standard requires protection in the region 16 to 20 inches above the road surface and the manufacturer can provide the protection by any means it wants. For example, some vehicles do not have a solid bumper across the vehicle, but meet the standard by strategically placed bumper guards and corner guards.

Are all vehicle classes required to meet the Federal bumper standard?

No. The Federal bumper standard does not apply to sport utility vehicles (SUVs), minivans, or pickups trucks; only passenger cars. The agency has chosen not to regulate bumper performance or elevation for these vehicle classes because of the potential compromise to the vehicle utility in operating on loading ramps and off road situations.

 

[WHIZZARD OF OZ]

FOR SALE: Perfect set of CYBRTRK Tyres.
Used ONCE. Will throw in the rims(!)

 

[WHIZZARD OF OZ]

You know one thing I noticed is that the CT doesn't look much different after the test... anyone notice that?!?

'Built Ford Tougher'

C Y B E R T R U C K _ R O U G H E R

 

[FarAway]

This is interesting, there is Tesla X in there. BTW, I will not be buying a Ford Bronco.
Is this real video or CGI?

Crash tests head on 50 mph

 

[Coolbreeze704]

This is interesting, there is Tesla X in there. BTW, I will not be buying a Ford Bronco.
Is this real video or CGI?

Crash tests head on 50 mph

That was amazing. What a difference in the results between these. Seems like crossovers faired much better. Escalade owners will have a steering wheel through their chest! Same with Range Rover, but the Bronco owner is in many pieces. That was ugly.

CX 90 though was stout.

 

[israndy]

It's CGI, like this:

 

[cvalue13]

You know one thing I noticed is that the CT doesn't look much different after the test... anyone notice that?!?

tell me what test it was, and I’ll tell you if I’m interested?

meanwhile, that observation isn’t necessarily a good thing. If these were in one of the material high speed tests, it would be a PROBLEM that the truck isn’t smashed to bits

the Smashing to bits is what keeps occupants in one piece, absorbing the energy load

vehicles don’t “pass” high speed crash testing by being less destroyed. They pass by being destroyed in the right way.

so take your pick, sort of:

• these trucks were in a high speed test, don’t look that damaged, and so the CT engineering design is back to the drawing board

OR

• these trucks were in some low speed test and have expected crumple

 

[BigAl]

tell me what test it was, and I’ll tell you if I’m interested?

meanwhile, that observation isn’t necessarily a good thing. If these were in one of the material high speed tests, it would be a PROBLEM that the truck isn’t smashed to bits

the Smashing to bits is what keeps occupants in one piece, absorbing the energy load

vehicles don’t “pass” high speed crash testing by being less destroyed. They pass by being destroyed in the right way.

so take your pick, sort of:

• these trucks were in a high speed test, don’t look that damaged, and so the CT engineering design is back to the drawing board

OR

• these trucks were in some low speed test and have expected crumple

I’m aware of what happens during a crash test… I was simply making an observation… maybe it has internal crumple zones… who knows, all I’m saying is that it doesn’t appear much different than normal while being covered… nearly any shrinkage at all… once again… just an observation.

 

[cvalue13]

I’m aware of what happens during a crash test… I was simply making an observation… maybe it has internal crumple zones… who knows, all I’m saying is that it doesn’t appear much different than normal while being covered… nearly any shrinkage at all… once again… just an observation.

my @ of you was somewhat misdirected, was really a jumping-off for not exactly your comment but some like it

that said, the marginal point was that these CTs not “appearing much different than normal” suggests to me that this wasn’t a NHSTA-like frontal full overlap test at 35mph

Not sure what other tests it’d be

Here’s a Model X and Model Y, with highest marks, after a full overlap at 35mph - and what acing that test looks like (cabin fine, front end demolished)

 

[CyberGus]

This is interesting, there is Tesla X in there. BTW, I will not be buying a Ford Bronco.
Is this real video or CGI?

Crash tests head on 50 mph

That's impressive-looking CGI. Maybe based on actual crash tests?

Sponsored