The Squandered Opportunity of the Cybertruck

[PassMMM]

Separately, I think the cybertruck has a very small, niche consumer base because it is just that ugly. F150 lightening will keep Ford dominating the pickup class until at a minimum others catch up.

It's different and instantly recognizable, which can be interpreted as either a good or bad thing.  But I wouldn't dismiss it as "just that ugly" to most potential customers. The current offerings of pickup trucks are so uniform across all brands that I think few could distinguish between brands if you cover up the badges. Objectively both the cyber truck and 'traditional' pickups are characteristically angular and boxy.  To me the cybertruck evokes the "flying wedge of cheese' of the 1990s Lamborghini Tesstarosa which I personally dislike but others find sexy and iconic. Perhaps not an accident that the key demographic of the cyber truck are males who were boys in the 1990s.

tl;dr - 'ugly' is intensely subjective, particularly in cars and fashion.

Completely agree re: subjectivity here. But whether you think it is ugly or amazing, I think your comparison to the flying wheel of cheese just reinforces the point I had made - the market will be niche here. If the goal was to create a cool vehicle that a small % of people will find amazing, mission accomplished. If the goal was to significantly break into and ultimately lead the pickup class, I see this largely as a failure.

[PassMMM]

I think the non-legitimate use driver will be more common. Used to be smaller vehicles were cheaper, so you could point to someone in a pickup going to the office and say they are wasting $$. Now, SUVs are basically the most popular vehicle class for all drivers and for example, Ford's Maverick truck is literally the cheapest 2024 model they have. Obviously there are other options than buying new, but driving your base Maverick to the office is about to be the most financially savvy vehicle decision (until you weigh in fuel/insurance costs but many will not doe that).

Separately, I think the cybertruck has a very small, niche consumer base because it is just that ugly. F150 lightening will keep Ford dominating the pickup class until at a minimum others catch up.

This is a good point. The move towards the huge SUVs was just vanity for most, so why should trucks be any different? or any car 'nicer' than is strictly necessary?

But extending the argument - we could talk most people out of being 'legitimate' owner of most things. Couple in a 3/4 BR house? fashionista with impressive wardrobe? How about anybody with more clothes than a washerful? Where does it really end?

Well said about this trend being part of the larger consumerism wave that encourages people to own much more than they "legitimately" need, and probably unfair to only keep such a standard for pickups. I'm sure others have had this thought 100 times, but the product markets in homes, vehicles, tech, etc. just follow the average consumer who wants more - more sq ft, more car, more tech, etc. Whatever market there is for cheap products that get the job done, it is small and often does not have a ton of options. Go to a nice suburb and try to count the number of 3 bed 2 bath modest homes that were built in the last 15 years; look how vehicle manufacturers are largely abandoning the sedan class or have tech-less options; watch to see how few refrigerators will be made in the next 5-10 years without wifi capabilities.

A bit off topic for cybertruck I guess. FWIW I think it's cool, but at a base price of over 60k I can think of a lot of vehicles I think would be way cooler to own.

[GuitarStv]

I think the non-legitimate use driver will be more common. Used to be smaller vehicles were cheaper, so you could point to someone in a pickup going to the office and say they are wasting $$. Now, SUVs are basically the most popular vehicle class for all drivers and for example, Ford's Maverick truck is literally the cheapest 2024 model they have. Obviously there are other options than buying new, but driving your base Maverick to the office is about to be the most financially savvy vehicle decision (until you weigh in fuel/insurance costs but many will not doe that).

Separately, I think the cybertruck has a very small, niche consumer base because it is just that ugly. F150 lightening will keep Ford dominating the pickup class until at a minimum others catch up.

This is a good point. The move towards the huge SUVs was just vanity for most, so why should trucks be any different? or any car 'nicer' than is strictly necessary?

But extending the argument - we could talk most people out of being 'legitimate' owner of most things. Couple in a 3/4 BR house? fashionista with impressive wardrobe? How about anybody with more clothes than a washerful? Where does it really end?

Well said about this trend being part of the larger consumerism wave that encourages people to own much more than they "legitimately" need, and probably unfair to only keep such a standard for pickups. I'm sure others have had this thought 100 times, but the product markets in homes, vehicles, tech, etc. just follow the average consumer who wants more - more sq ft, more car, more tech, etc. Whatever market there is for cheap products that get the job done, it is small and often does not have a ton of options. Go to a nice suburb and try to count the number of 3 bed 2 bath modest homes that were built in the last 15 years; look how vehicle manufacturers are largely abandoning the sedan class or have tech-less options; watch to see how few refrigerators will be made in the next 5-10 years without wifi capabilities.

A bit off topic for cybertruck I guess. FWIW I think it's cool, but at a base price of over 60k I can think of a lot of vehicles I think would be way cooler to own.

I don't think we should only keep reasonable standards for trucks (does anyone?)!  We should be calling out and laughing at dumbassedness in all it's forms.  No refrigerator, television, alarm clock, thermostat, or light bulb in your house needs to be internet connected.  This was a thread about a dumbass truck though, it makes sense that people would comment specifically about the truck.

[FINate]

I think the non-legitimate use driver will be more common. Used to be smaller vehicles were cheaper, so you could point to someone in a pickup going to the office and say they are wasting $$. Now, SUVs are basically the most popular vehicle class for all drivers and for example, Ford's Maverick truck is literally the cheapest 2024 model they have. Obviously there are other options than buying new, but driving your base Maverick to the office is about to be the most financially savvy vehicle decision (until you weigh in fuel/insurance costs but many will not doe that).

Separately, I think the cybertruck has a very small, niche consumer base because it is just that ugly. F150 lightening will keep Ford dominating the pickup class until at a minimum others catch up.

This is a good point. The move towards the huge SUVs was just vanity for most, so why should trucks be any different? or any car 'nicer' than is strictly necessary?

But extending the argument - we could talk most people out of being 'legitimate' owner of most things. Couple in a 3/4 BR house? fashionista with impressive wardrobe? How about anybody with more clothes than a washerful? Where does it really end?

Well said about this trend being part of the larger consumerism wave that encourages people to own much more than they "legitimately" need, and probably unfair to only keep such a standard for pickups. I'm sure others have had this thought 100 times, but the product markets in homes, vehicles, tech, etc. just follow the average consumer who wants more - more sq ft, more car, more tech, etc. Whatever market there is for cheap products that get the job done, it is small and often does not have a ton of options. Go to a nice suburb and try to count the number of 3 bed 2 bath modest homes that were built in the last 15 years; look how vehicle manufacturers are largely abandoning the sedan class or have tech-less options; watch to see how few refrigerators will be made in the next 5-10 years without wifi capabilities.

A bit off topic for cybertruck I guess. FWIW I think it's cool, but at a base price of over 60k I can think of a lot of vehicles I think would be way cooler to own.

I don't think we should only keep reasonable standards for trucks (does anyone?)!  We should be calling out and laughing at dumbassedness in all it's forms.  No refrigerator, television, alarm clock, thermostat, or light bulb in your house needs to be internet connected.  This was a thread about a dumbass truck though, it makes sense that people would comment specifically about the truck.

In my ideal world the big three would go back to smaller old body style with lower bed rails and better visibility. Again, lamenting that Tesla didn't do something more reasonable and useful. The rumored Lucid pickup design looks better, though we'll have to see about specs and price.

Pickups are an easy target to poke fun at as inefficient, and I sorta agree, but it's often not as bad as it may seem with recent developments. The F150 Hybrid has a combined EPA rating of 25 MPG. That's the same as the 2023 Subaru Crosstrek with a manual transmission, but with up to 12,700 lbs of tow capacity. The smaller Maverick Hybrid gets a combined 37 MPG, which is quite good and probably the best option for folks that want a pickup format but don't plan on towing or hauling a lot of weight.

[Metalcat]

I think the non-legitimate use driver will be more common. Used to be smaller vehicles were cheaper, so you could point to someone in a pickup going to the office and say they are wasting $$. Now, SUVs are basically the most popular vehicle class for all drivers and for example, Ford's Maverick truck is literally the cheapest 2024 model they have. Obviously there are other options than buying new, but driving your base Maverick to the office is about to be the most financially savvy vehicle decision (until you weigh in fuel/insurance costs but many will not doe that).

Separately, I think the cybertruck has a very small, niche consumer base because it is just that ugly. F150 lightening will keep Ford dominating the pickup class until at a minimum others catch up.

This is a good point. The move towards the huge SUVs was just vanity for most, so why should trucks be any different? or any car 'nicer' than is strictly necessary?

But extending the argument - we could talk most people out of being 'legitimate' owner of most things. Couple in a 3/4 BR house? fashionista with impressive wardrobe? How about anybody with more clothes than a washerful? Where does it really end?

Yep.

It's pretty much the unifying consensus of this entire community that a lot of what is marketed to us doesn't have a "legitimate" benefit.

[JLee]

You have to read the entire article. He discusses range, price, towing capacity, cargo capacity. You know, stuff that trucks are used for.

Maybe you missed it, but the author discusses how ground clearance is a fairly meaningless metric for offroading. What really matters is angle of approach and angle of departure. The Hummer EV is a better off road vehicle, and it also has 4 wheel steering.

As for the uniqueness of the other stuff, this only matters if these add value. Does a fraction of a second better 0-60 time really matter for a pickup? Really, now, let's be honest, it doesn't matter.

In almost 30 years of driving I've never broken a side window, and have repaired maybe 3-4 chips on a windshield, which was both easy and cheap. Super tough glass was never something consumers in general asked for. Same with bullet resistance.

Ford could make the F150 unique by gold plating it, which would also make it a lot more expensive, but this wouldn't add value relative to the cost. This my issue with CT's stainless steel body -- expensive, heavy, and limits the body design. In 2015 Ford went the other direction and started using aluminium for the F150 body. This cut the truck's weight by 700 lbs, which improved MPG while also increasing tow and cargo capacity. That's a truly utilitarian design change because it has actual useful benefits to customers.

FWIW a top trim Lightning is north of $90k.  It's blatantly disingenuous to compare the top trim Cybertruck with the lowest trim Lightning.

The author compares acceleration of Cyberbeast with other top end EV pickps... these are all in the 90-100k range. This is a fair comparison. Cyberbeast is very marginally faster than a $90k R1T. And the author makes clear than a $50k Lightning Pro is slower, with 0-60 in 4.0s, which is still pretty damn good, plenty fast for a truck.

The Lighting XLT is priced lower than lowest spec CT, yet can tow 10,000 lbs, so these are fairly close in this department. As the author notes, however, towing with an EV (unless very short distances) isn't realistic due to greatly reduced range and difficulties charging with a trailer.

Remember how many people were shit talking Tesla over the last decade?   What's the world's best selling car right now?

Help me understand. Are you saying we should never be critical of Tesla because of their past success?

This basically seems to boil down to "I didn't ask for this and I don't think other people asked for this, so it's dumb."  That's fine, you don't have to agree with Tesla.  I also think the CT is a bizarre vehicle that doesn't need to exist -- but claiming there's nothing unique about it is just absurdly...absurd. FWIW I have owned a Tesla, a Lightning, and a Rivian and there's more to them than what reading numbers will tell you -- but it seems you are the expert, so I'll just leave this here.

This my issue with CT's stainless steel body -- expensive, heavy, and limits the body design.

F150 Lightning Platinum: 6,893 lbs
Rivian R1T quad motor: 7,148 lbs
Hummer EV 3X: 9,063 lbs
Cybertruck/Cyberbeast: 6,843 lbs

[FINate]

You have to read the entire article. He discusses range, price, towing capacity, cargo capacity. You know, stuff that trucks are used for.

Maybe you missed it, but the author discusses how ground clearance is a fairly meaningless metric for offroading. What really matters is angle of approach and angle of departure. The Hummer EV is a better off road vehicle, and it also has 4 wheel steering.

As for the uniqueness of the other stuff, this only matters if these add value. Does a fraction of a second better 0-60 time really matter for a pickup? Really, now, let's be honest, it doesn't matter.

In almost 30 years of driving I've never broken a side window, and have repaired maybe 3-4 chips on a windshield, which was both easy and cheap. Super tough glass was never something consumers in general asked for. Same with bullet resistance.

Ford could make the F150 unique by gold plating it, which would also make it a lot more expensive, but this wouldn't add value relative to the cost. This my issue with CT's stainless steel body -- expensive, heavy, and limits the body design. In 2015 Ford went the other direction and started using aluminium for the F150 body. This cut the truck's weight by 700 lbs, which improved MPG while also increasing tow and cargo capacity. That's a truly utilitarian design change because it has actual useful benefits to customers.

FWIW a top trim Lightning is north of $90k.  It's blatantly disingenuous to compare the top trim Cybertruck with the lowest trim Lightning.

The author compares acceleration of Cyberbeast with other top end EV pickps... these are all in the 90-100k range. This is a fair comparison. Cyberbeast is very marginally faster than a $90k R1T. And the author makes clear than a $50k Lightning Pro is slower, with 0-60 in 4.0s, which is still pretty damn good, plenty fast for a truck.

The Lighting XLT is priced lower than lowest spec CT, yet can tow 10,000 lbs, so these are fairly close in this department. As the author notes, however, towing with an EV (unless very short distances) isn't realistic due to greatly reduced range and difficulties charging with a trailer.

Remember how many people were shit talking Tesla over the last decade?   What's the world's best selling car right now?

Help me understand. Are you saying we should never be critical of Tesla because of their past success?

This basically seems to boil down to "I didn't ask for this and I don't think other people asked for this, so it's dumb."  That's fine, you don't have to agree with Tesla.  I also think the CT is a bizarre vehicle that doesn't need to exist -- but claiming there's nothing unique about it is just absurdly...absurd. FWIW I have owned a Tesla, a Lightning, and a Rivian and there's more to them than what reading numbers will tell you -- but it seems you are the expert, so I'll just leave this here.

This my issue with CT's stainless steel body -- expensive, heavy, and limits the body design.

F150 Lightning Platinum: 6,893 lbs
Rivian R1T quad motor: 7,148 lbs
Hummer EV 3X: 9,063 lbs
Cybertruck/Cyberbeast: 6,843 lbs

How much lighter, and better, would CT be with a lighter body? Maybe even aluminium. More range, smaller battery, lower cost. This would have made it unique in ways that are meaningful, rather than Musk's vision for a dystopian future.

[JLee]

How much lighter, and better, would CT be with a lighter body? Maybe even aluminium. More range, smaller battery, lower cost. This would have made it unique in ways that are meaningful, rather than Musk's vision for a dystopian future.

That's an interesting question given the top-trim Lightning Platinum does have an aluminum body and is heavier, has a larger battery, and less EPA range when compared to the top-trim CT.

[FINate]

How much lighter, and better, would CT be with a lighter body? Maybe even aluminium. More range, smaller battery, lower cost. This would have made it unique in ways that are meaningful, rather than Musk's vision for a dystopian future.

That's an interesting question given the top-trim Lightning Platinum does have an aluminum body and is heavier, has a larger battery, and less EPA range when compared to the top-trim CT.

My guess is this is from the body on frame design.

[JLee]

Also note the next trim down below Cyberbeast is $20k cheaper ($80k), has 20 miles more range (340 mi EPA), still does 0-60 in 4.1 seconds, and is 240 lbs lighter.

Pinnacle trim models have never been the reasonable value play (F150 Lightning Platinum, Model S Plaid, etc).

[FINate]

Also note the next trim down below Cyberbeast is $20k cheaper ($80k), has 20 miles more range (340 mi EPA), still does 0-60 in 4.1 seconds, and is 240 lbs lighter.

Pinnacle trim models have never been the reasonable value play (F150 Lightning Platinum, Model S Plaid, etc).

I'd rather have the R1T dual motor (also $80k), which has similar performance and range specs but without exotic body or (IMO) ugly design. Just can't bring myself to drop that kind of money on a truck at this point.

[Just Joe]

Yeah I believe, for better or worse, the limiting factor on Cybertruck sales will be the "to be different" design decisions having an impact on production rate. Just wrapping up a read of the August 14, 2023 article by David Brooks, How America Got Mean, I think of all the people that do subscribe to "rugged individualism" and want everyone to know how tough they are. Doesn't matter how ugly many people find it, the whole halo around this vehicle projects a message that buying it helps make America great again, mostly by showing everyone how amazing and strong the guy driving it is.

This isn't a Pontiac Aztek. It has "merits", even if many of those are thoroughly unnecessary and likely going to be left unused by those owners.

But the opportunity for the Cybertruck, according to some, would have been a truly mindful reinvention of what a pickup truck should be. Not in shock value and "toughness", but in efficiency and optimization and cost effectiveness.

I think you are discounting how quickly people will habituate to this design. It is jarring at first glance but only because we are used to vehicles not looking like that. 3 years from now it will hardly register as being 'different' and won't be jarring at all.

I fully expect the Tesla truck to turn into the next PT Cruiser at some point.

[neo von retorch]

I fully expect the Tesla truck to turn into the next PT Cruiser at some point.

Someone will hoard them?

Oooh might as well cover them all at once:
Are the Chevy HHR, PT Cruiser, Nissan Cube, Pontiac Aztek, etc. all legitimately bad cars to own/drive or do people just hate them because they're ugly as f**k?

At any rate, I can't tell if you're saying it will "turn into" a "cool car", or a car that is considered a joke. Because the PT cruiser is considered both depending on who you ask!

I'm reminded of the Plymouth Prowler, though. That was a very "cool" looking niche car... but I heard from owners that it was kind of awful to drive, since you could see the front wheels bouncing over bumps and it was wildly distracting.

Out of all the weird cars that came out of the ’90s, the Plymouth Prowler is by far the most unusual, but also the most intriguing. I mean, no other production car looks like this on the road, and I have to say, even 21 years on, the Prowler still looks fresh, modern and unquestionably rad.

[JLee]

Also note the next trim down below Cyberbeast is $20k cheaper ($80k), has 20 miles more range (340 mi EPA), still does 0-60 in 4.1 seconds, and is 240 lbs lighter.

Pinnacle trim models have never been the reasonable value play (F150 Lightning Platinum, Model S Plaid, etc).

I'd rather have the R1T dual motor (also $80k), which has similar performance and range specs but without exotic body or (IMO) ugly design. Just can't bring myself to drop that kind of money on a truck at this point.

The R1T is a great truck - the biggest miss IMO is the lack of significant AC inverter. The absurdly short bed is helped by the cantilevering tailgate, which when down provides 7 feet of flat space.  Rivian only gave the R1T a 1500 watt inverter...even the new Tacoma hybrid has 2400 watts of AC inverter capability. The Lightning has 2400 watts by default and 9600 watts as an option w/the Pro Power package.

Payload capacity on the Rivian is also lower than I'd like but since I'm a poser who doesn't do a lot of "real truck stuff" it's fine for me.

[sonofsven]

The weight of the CT is in the same range as a 3/4 ton, so not that unusual as far as trucks go.
Does it have similar capacity to a 3/4 ton as far as payload and towing and price?

The redneck-ish guys I talk with aren't buying the CT because of range anxiety. Lots of them have big trucks because they tow big fifth wheels and big boats all over the western US and Canada to go fishing and hunting. And Mexico. They can fill up with diesel and be on their way. They have a great fear of being stuck charging somewhere, especially because of the time it would take, also because the charging network is not built up in these out of the way places. They add extra fuel tank capacity to their trucks.

The Toyota Tacoma has sort of morphed from a truck to a family hauler and lifestyle vehicle.The crew cab short bed is by far the most popular configuration, for good reason. It has tons of aftermarket accessories you can add for all sorts of uses. It's not generally used as a tow vehicle except for shorter runs. I can see the CT moving into this market, if it works, and if it's reliable: two of the Tacoma's biggest selling points. The Tesla customer has already proved they are willing to spend quite a lot to "save money on gas".

[JLee]

The weight of the CT is in the same range as a 3/4 ton, so not that unusual as far as trucks go.
Does it have similar capacity to a 3/4 ton as far as payload and towing and price?

The redneck-ish guys I talk with aren't buying the CT because of range anxiety. Lots of them have big trucks because they tow big fifth wheels and big boats all over the western US and Canada to go fishing and hunting. And Mexico. They can fill up with diesel and be on their way. They have a great fear of being stuck charging somewhere, especially because of the time it would take, also because the charging network is not built up in these out of the way places. They add extra fuel tank capacity to their trucks.

The Toyota Tacoma has sort of morphed from a truck to a family hauler and lifestyle vehicle.The crew cab short bed is by far the most popular configuration, for good reason. It has tons of aftermarket accessories you can add for all sorts of uses. It's not generally used as a tow vehicle except for shorter runs. I can see the CT moving into this market, if it works, and if it's reliable: two of the Tacoma's biggest selling points. The Tesla customer has already proved they are willing to spend quite a lot to "save money on gas".

I think the Rivian played to that market pretty well - it's basically a fancy EV Tacoma.  Somewhat (un?)related, I'm really interested to see how the new hybrid Tacomas are...there's a lot of potential there.  I'd really love to see a plug in hybrid Tacoma, similar to the Wrangler 4XE (but reliable).

[FINate]

The weight of the CT is in the same range as a 3/4 ton, so not that unusual as far as trucks go.
Does it have similar capacity to a 3/4 ton as far as payload and towing and price?

Not sure if this is a rhetorical question, but easy enough to look up. The F250 Super Duty can tow up to 23,000 lbs and has a payload capacity of 4,300 lbs. Starts at $45k.

[sonofsven]

The weight of the CT is in the same range as a 3/4 ton, so not that unusual as far as trucks go.
Does it have similar capacity to a 3/4 ton as far as payload and towing and price?

Not sure if this is a rhetorical question, but easy enough to look up. The F250 Super Duty can tow up to 23,000 lbs and has a payload capacity of 4,300 lbs. Starts at $45k.

Rhetorical. I don't think the CT will be cutting into sales of 3/4 ton pickups much.

[FINate]

The weight of the CT is in the same range as a 3/4 ton, so not that unusual as far as trucks go.
Does it have similar capacity to a 3/4 ton as far as payload and towing and price?

Not sure if this is a rhetorical question, but easy enough to look up. The F250 Super Duty can tow up to 23,000 lbs and has a payload capacity of 4,300 lbs. Starts at $45k.

Rhetorical. I don't think the CT will be cutting into sales of 3/4 ton pickups much.

Agreed. I don't even think it'll cut into the 1/2 ton market much. It may steal some potential Lightning or Rivian buyers, but for the most part it will be SUV types that want an electric something that can occasionally haul furniture or a BBQ purchased at a big box store. I suppose that's not entirely bad, though a Model Y would be better for everyone (easier to park, better for the environment).

[nereo]

Just pointing out that “…that can occasionally haul furniture or a BBQ purchased at a big box store” describes most current pickup truck owners.

Pickups dominate auto sales in the US, even among the suburban crowd. I remember one survey that said something like half of all pickup owners said they had not trailered anything in the last 12 months.

[FINate]

Just pointing out that “…that can occasionally haul furniture or a BBQ purchased at a big box store” describes most current pickup truck owners.

Pickups dominate auto sales in the US, even among the suburban crowd. I remember one survey that said something like half of all pickup owners said they had not trailered anything in the last 12 months.

No argument here. But how many of these folks will buy a Cybertruck instead? We'll have to see how the market responds, but I think it's a relatively small number. Because for these folks their trucks are lifestyle accessories. The boring design of pickups is a feature, not a flaw. Those seeking attention do big lifts, large wheels, lots of chrome, fancy paint jobs, coal rolling mods, etc. CT is attractive to a different sort of attention seeker. Was talking with a friend that lives in Santa Cruz and he mentioned that he's seen a couple of CTs around town. His observation: tech bros being obnoxious driving around aggressively.

[Just Joe]

I fully expect the Tesla truck to turn into the next PT Cruiser at some point.

Someone will hoard them?

Oooh might as well cover them all at once:
Are the Chevy HHR, PT Cruiser, Nissan Cube, Pontiac Aztek, etc. all legitimately bad cars to own/drive or do people just hate them because they're ugly as f**k?

At any rate, I can't tell if you're saying it will "turn into" a "cool car", or a car that is considered a joke. Because the PT cruiser is considered both depending on who you ask!

I'm reminded of the Plymouth Prowler, though. That was a very "cool" looking niche car... but I heard from owners that it was kind of awful to drive, since you could see the front wheels bouncing over bumps and it was wildly distracting.

Out of all the weird cars that came out of the ’90s, the Plymouth Prowler is by far the most unusual, but also the most intriguing. I mean, no other production car looks like this on the road, and I have to say, even 21 years on, the Prowler still looks fresh, modern and unquestionably rad.

I mean the cybertruck will turn into a cartoon truck for some people. Something they would never own even if they had the cash to buy one.

[ColoradoTribe]

Missed opportunity? I don’t think so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5zDNaY1fvI

[FINate]

LOL, Stuck Tesla Cybertruck Prototype Gets Towed Up Snowy Hill By a Ford

The Tesla fanatics are riled up, claims of sabotage/false flag ops. Oh, and software failures.

To be fair, this is more likely the case of an overconfident driver that drank the Elon Koolaid. And the stock Cybertruck tires (like most all terrain) are terrible on snow. I've gone up steeper inclines on hard pack snow in an F150 with Blizzaks without any drama.

[Metalcat]

Evidently Tesla has gone back to including their clause that Cybertrucks cannot be sold be resold for the first year.

They had the 50K anti-flipping penalty originally, then got rid of it after backlash, and now brought it back. Cybertrucks owners who sell within a year of purchase can also be banned from buying future Tesla vehicles.

Also,.the language apparently is structured that they can sue over attempts to resell, not just completed sales.

Can someone explain this to me? Why is Tesla so concerned with people reselling their vehicles to the point that even after pressure to get rid of it that they would insist on bringing it back?

I guess I'm not understanding the harm to Tesla. Say one of the first 10 buyers drives it around for a few weeks and then resells it to one of his CEO buddies who is insanely jealous for 500K. How does the premium that CEO buddy is willing to pay for it look *bad* for Tesla??

I feel like I'm missing why this would be so critically important to Tesla that they're willing to face backlash for it again, and look like they waffled on the issue.

[ColoradoTribe]

Evidently Tesla has gone back to including their clause that Cybertrucks cannot be sold be resold for the first year.

They had the 50K anti-flipping penalty originally, then got rid of it after backlash, and now brought it back. Cybertrucks owners who sell within a year of purchase can also be banned from buying future Tesla vehicles.

Also,.the language apparently is structured that they can sue over attempts to resell, not just completed sales.

Can someone explain this to me? Why is Tesla so concerned with people reselling their vehicles to the point that even after pressure to get rid of it that they would insist on bringing it back?

I guess I'm not understanding the harm to Tesla. Say one of the first 10 buyers drives it around for a few weeks and then resells it to one of his CEO buddies who is insanely jealous for 500K. How does the premium that CEO buddy is willing to pay for it look *bad* for Tesla??

I feel like I'm missing why this would be so critically important to Tesla that they're willing to face backlash for it again, and look like they waffled on the issue.

There are reservation holders who reserved with the intent of getting an early CT and flipping it for a profit. Tesla is attempting to discourage folks from buying with the sole intent of flipping. I’m agnostic as to wether they should try to police this or not, but that is the reasoning I believe. Tesla is trying to prevent price gouging and profiteering why they undertake the ramp. Once CT is being produce at volume, I think Tesla is fine with market forces dictating price.

[ChickenStash]

Stopping flippers/scalpers is not exactly new and not unique to the auto industry. They damage the brand by inflating the price and preventing the target consumers from actually buying the products. GM was denying warranty claims on flipped Corvettes, Ford sued GT owners that flipped, Ferrari will blacklist flippers.

Even on the normal consumer retail side of things, great efforts are taken to prevent scalpers from buying up the inventory for hot products. In the short term, the sales are the same, but in the long term the damage to the brand because the real consumers can't get the products will significantly reduce sales.

[Metalcat]

Evidently Tesla has gone back to including their clause that Cybertrucks cannot be sold be resold for the first year.

They had the 50K anti-flipping penalty originally, then got rid of it after backlash, and now brought it back. Cybertrucks owners who sell within a year of purchase can also be banned from buying future Tesla vehicles.

Also,.the language apparently is structured that they can sue over attempts to resell, not just completed sales.

Can someone explain this to me? Why is Tesla so concerned with people reselling their vehicles to the point that even after pressure to get rid of it that they would insist on bringing it back?

I guess I'm not understanding the harm to Tesla. Say one of the first 10 buyers drives it around for a few weeks and then resells it to one of his CEO buddies who is insanely jealous for 500K. How does the premium that CEO buddy is willing to pay for it look *bad* for Tesla??

I feel like I'm missing why this would be so critically important to Tesla that they're willing to face backlash for it again, and look like they waffled on the issue.

There are reservation holders who reserved with the intent of getting an early CT and flipping it for a profit. Tesla is attempting to discourage folks from buying with the sole intent of flipping. I’m agnostic as to wether they should try to police this or not, but that is the reasoning I believe. Tesla is trying to prevent price gouging and profiteering why they undertake the ramp. Once CT is being produce at volume, I think Tesla is fine with market forces dictating price.

I understand what they're trying to do, but I don't understand why. I certainly don't understand why to the point that they would risk reputational damage at a time that they really can't afford it by removing this policy due to our license pressure only to reinstate it, knowing the public sentiment against it hasn't changed.

How is this SO important to Tesla, and what harm do soaring resale market prices do to them??

[neo von retorch]

... flippers/scalpers ... damage the brand by inflating the price and preventing the target consumers from actually buying the products ...

what harm do soaring resale market prices do to them??

Might have cross-posted, but this should help answer it. Basically the same thing dealer markup does...

Buyers were very happy about $40k Cybertrucks and $40k Ford Lightnings. But then Ford Lightnings got dealer markups (on top of price hikes from Ford!!), just as had happened with the Ford Mustang Mach-E. This makes buyers think "this vehicle is too expensive for what I'm getting" instead of remaining a good deal for the masses. The Corvette was mentioned - GM positions the Corvette as the "super car for the masses", but to do that, it had to be closer to $60k than $100k.

Tesla will have enough problems marketing the Cybertruck as "the EV for everyone" when they release the first $61k Cybertruck five years after they announced it without it quickly becoming a scalped and resold $75k model. So it kind of makes some sense, even if most buyers think largely about the freedoms they want with something they buy rather than about limiting bad actors.

I guess it's all to say that in theory Tesla wants to compete on price with the Cybertruck, not on prestige, the way rare car collector's operate.

[Metalcat]

... flippers/scalpers ... damage the brand by inflating the price and preventing the target consumers from actually buying the products ...

what harm do soaring resale market prices do to them??

Might have cross-posted, but this should help answer it. Basically the same thing dealer markup does...

Buyers were very happy about $40k Cybertrucks and $40k Ford Lightnings. But then Ford Lightnings got dealer markups (on top of price hikes from Ford!!), just as had happened with the Ford Mustang Mach-E. This makes buyers think "this vehicle is too expensive for what I'm getting" instead of remaining a good deal for the masses. The Corvette was mentioned - GM positions the Corvette as the "super car for the masses", but to do that, it had to be closer to $60k than $100k.

Tesla will have enough problems marketing the Cybertruck as "the EV for everyone" when they release the first $61k Cybertruck five years after they announced it without it quickly becoming a scalped and resold $75k model. So it kind of makes some sense, even if most buyers think largely about the freedoms they want with something they buy rather than about limiting bad actors.

I guess it's all to say that in theory Tesla wants to compete on price with the Cybertruck, not on prestige, the way rare car collector's operate.

So it's actually *supposed* to be an everyman truck??

I'm a little confused by the branding then. Why put so much effort into making it different and weird if they want it to be more universal??

The model S was *the* must-have prestige vehicle for awhile, but looked really generic, meanwhile the Cybertruck is supposed to have mass appeal, but they made it as ostentatiously distinctive as possible?

I feel a little lost...

[neo von retorch]

I don't think you're the only one... see https://old.reddit.com/r/RealTesla/comments/10m5xvg/who_exactly_is_the_cybertruck_supposed_to_appeal/ if you can stand Reddit :)

The Cybertruck was announced as "what a truck can be in the future", and at $40k, that's absolutely 100% a mass appeal pickup truck. In 2019, the average price of a full-size pickup truck was a bit over $50k. But it doesn't look like "the pickup truck you drive today, but electric." And in fact, Ford made pretty much just that. Even got close on price... at first. But that didn't last long amid chain supply crunches, inflation, and initial production constraints. Suddenly the Lightning is mostly an $80-100k bleeding edge truck. And that seems to be what Cybertruck is now that they've launched it, and only $80k+ models are available (and in super low quantities.)

So given what Tesla did with the Model 3 and Model Y, and the initially announced price for the Cybertruck, it would seem like a strategy of an electric truck that most pickup truck buyers could buy and use and forget about their old trucks. But based on the appearance and real world pricing, it seems like it's supposed to be a niche vehicle. Your guess is as good as mine!

[ColoradoTribe]

I don't think you're the only one... see https://old.reddit.com/r/RealTesla/comments/10m5xvg/who_exactly_is_the_cybertruck_supposed_to_appeal/ if you can stand Reddit :)

The Cybertruck was announced as "what a truck can be in the future", and at $40k, that's absolutely 100% a mass appeal pickup truck. In 2019, the average price of a full-size pickup truck was a bit over $50k. But it doesn't look like "the pickup truck you drive today, but electric." And in fact, Ford made pretty much just that. Even got close on price... at first. But that didn't last long amid chain supply crunches, inflation, and initial production constraints. Suddenly the Lightning is mostly an $80-100k bleeding edge truck. And that seems to be what Cybertruck is now that they've launched it, and only $80k+ models are available (and in super low quantities.)

No real mystery IMO, Tesla will charge a premium to early adopters for the “privilege” of being first because they can and these folks are willing to pay the premium. The higher margins to start will defray the cost of the ramp until those costs can be spread over more units, at which time Tesla will begin lowering prices as the work down the reservation list.
So given what Tesla did with the Model 3 and Model Y, and the initially announced price for the Cybertruck, it would seem like a strategy of an electric truck that most pickup truck buyers could buy and use and forget about their old trucks. But based on the appearance and real world pricing, it seems like it's supposed to be a niche vehicle. Your guess is as good as mine!

[neo von retorch]

No real mystery IMO, Tesla will charge a premium to early adopters for the “privilege” of being first because they can and these folks are willing to pay the premium. The higher margins to start will defray the cost of the ramp until those costs can be spread over more units, at which time Tesla will begin lowering prices as the work down the reservation list.

[JLee]

LOL, Stuck Tesla Cybertruck Prototype Gets Towed Up Snowy Hill By a Ford

The Tesla fanatics are riled up, claims of sabotage/false flag ops. Oh, and software failures.

To be fair, this is more likely the case of an overconfident driver that drank the Elon Koolaid. And the stock Cybertruck tires (like most all terrain) are terrible on snow. I've gone up steeper inclines on hard pack snow in an F150 with Blizzaks without any drama.

Many all terrain tires are fine in snow. I believe the CT comes with mud terrain tires, which don't have siping and are horrible.

[FINate]

LOL, Stuck Tesla Cybertruck Prototype Gets Towed Up Snowy Hill By a Ford

The Tesla fanatics are riled up, claims of sabotage/false flag ops. Oh, and software failures.

To be fair, this is more likely the case of an overconfident driver that drank the Elon Koolaid. And the stock Cybertruck tires (like most all terrain) are terrible on snow. I've gone up steeper inclines on hard pack snow in an F150 with Blizzaks without any drama.

Many all terrain tires are fine in snow. I believe the CT comes with mud terrain tires, which don't have siping and are horrible.

Agreed. Which is all the more reason CT is ridiculous. Spend a few hundred bucks on Blizzaks for an old pickup or Subie and it would've been just fine. No need to shell out $100k on a truck. And yes, I'm being critical of the ridiculously expensive fancy IC trucks as well! Reminds me of the guy that does the jeep trails in Moab with an old Crown Vic. You can find videos of him on YouTube (search Moab Crown Vic) -- it's hilarious to hear the jeep crowd with their expensive lifted vehicles nervous laughing in disbelief as this guy does the same exact trails.

[JLee]

LOL, Stuck Tesla Cybertruck Prototype Gets Towed Up Snowy Hill By a Ford

The Tesla fanatics are riled up, claims of sabotage/false flag ops. Oh, and software failures.

To be fair, this is more likely the case of an overconfident driver that drank the Elon Koolaid. And the stock Cybertruck tires (like most all terrain) are terrible on snow. I've gone up steeper inclines on hard pack snow in an F150 with Blizzaks without any drama.

Many all terrain tires are fine in snow. I believe the CT comes with mud terrain tires, which don't have siping and are horrible.

Agreed. Which is all the more reason CT is ridiculous. Spend a few hundred bucks on Blizzaks for an old pickup or Subie and it would've been just fine. No need to shell out $100k on a truck. And yes, I'm being critical of the ridiculously expensive fancy IC trucks as well! Reminds me of the guy that does the jeep trails in Moab with an old Crown Vic. You can find videos of him on YouTube (search Moab Crown Vic) -- it's hilarious to hear the jeep crowd with their expensive lifted vehicles nervous laughing in disbelief as this guy does the same exact trails.

If you don't care about body damage, you'd be surprised at what can go where, lol.

[GuitarStv]

LOL, Stuck Tesla Cybertruck Prototype Gets Towed Up Snowy Hill By a Ford

The Tesla fanatics are riled up, claims of sabotage/false flag ops. Oh, and software failures.

To be fair, this is more likely the case of an overconfident driver that drank the Elon Koolaid. And the stock Cybertruck tires (like most all terrain) are terrible on snow. I've gone up steeper inclines on hard pack snow in an F150 with Blizzaks without any drama.

Many all terrain tires are fine in snow. I believe the CT comes with mud terrain tires, which don't have siping and are horrible.

Agreed. Which is all the more reason CT is ridiculous. Spend a few hundred bucks on Blizzaks for an old pickup or Subie and it would've been just fine. No need to shell out $100k on a truck. And yes, I'm being critical of the ridiculously expensive fancy IC trucks as well! Reminds me of the guy that does the jeep trails in Moab with an old Crown Vic. You can find videos of him on YouTube (search Moab Crown Vic) -- it's hilarious to hear the jeep crowd with their expensive lifted vehicles nervous laughing in disbelief as this guy does the same exact trails.

If you don't care about body damage, you'd be surprised at what can go where, lol.

Sounds like the slogan of an extremely 18+ website.  :P

[Telecaster]

Agreed. Which is all the more reason CT is ridiculous. Spend a few hundred bucks on Blizzaks for an old pickup or Subie and it would've been just fine. No need to shell out $100k on a truck. And yes, I'm being critical of the ridiculously expensive fancy IC trucks as well! Reminds me of the guy that does the jeep trails in Moab with an old Crown Vic. You can find videos of him on YouTube (search Moab Crown Vic) -- it's hilarious to hear the jeep crowd with their expensive lifted vehicles nervous laughing in disbelief as this guy does the same exact trails.

OMG!  I just watched some vids.  I am dying.  That guy is the best. 

[shadowmoss]

I paid $6K for my Toyota truck (still a new idea and still manufactured in Japan) in 1984?  I think.  Wish I still had it.  I drove Toyota trucks, same small size, for 20 years.  Usually put 300K miles on them and they weren't totally shot at that.

[Just Joe]

I agree. Up the safety a little but sell me something simple. Preferably not dog ugly like the Aztek or a Yugo. The 1980s Toyota truck would be great.

[MrFancypants]

LOL, Stuck Tesla Cybertruck Prototype Gets Towed Up Snowy Hill By a Ford

The Tesla fanatics are riled up, claims of sabotage/false flag ops. Oh, and software failures.

To be fair, this is more likely the case of an overconfident driver that drank the Elon Koolaid. And the stock Cybertruck tires (like most all terrain) are terrible on snow. I've gone up steeper inclines on hard pack snow in an F150 with Blizzaks without any drama.

Many all terrain tires are fine in snow. I believe the CT comes with mud terrain tires, which don't have siping and are horrible.

Agreed. Which is all the more reason CT is ridiculous. Spend a few hundred bucks on Blizzaks for an old pickup or Subie and it would've been just fine. No need to shell out $100k on a truck. And yes, I'm being critical of the ridiculously expensive fancy IC trucks as well! Reminds me of the guy that does the jeep trails in Moab with an old Crown Vic. You can find videos of him on YouTube (search Moab Crown Vic) -- it's hilarious to hear the jeep crowd with their expensive lifted vehicles nervous laughing in disbelief as this guy does the same exact trails.

Reminds me of this…

https://youtu.be/TmBibFdMIRU?si=0pCtCNHLvMPAwk6g

[FINate]

Finally starting to get a little info from a few real owners (not employees or hand-picked celebs).

It looks like the issues CT is having on snow may be a general issue with the AWD system. Not clear if hardware or software or both.

Watch A Tesla Cybertruck Fail An Off-Road Obstacle That Was Aced By A Subaru Crosstrek

This is a production vehicle. I don't understand why Tesla, after having made a big deal about its toughness and go-anywhereness, would allow this to make it into customers' hands with such a glaring deficiency. Other than setting the suspension height and stiffness, the CT should always just manage the drive-train to prevent any wheel from spinning freely. Like, it should just do the right thing in every situation. That's the whole point of software.

If you watch the video at the 5m mark (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AH4eyJCwbE&t=300s) it really highlights the problem with a long+wide vehicle with a super stiff frame. The hill in question isn't that extreme, but the long distance between the wheels on the CT, combined with no flexibility in the frame, means the suspension system has to work that much harder to keep wheels on the ground. Which it fails at, whereas the 4Runner and Crosstrek don't have this issue.

Maybe an OTA update will fix this. But, man, this is already a polarizing vehicle and Tesla is making it look much worse than it needs to.

[bacchi]

This is a production vehicle. I don't understand why Tesla, after having made a big deal about its toughness and go-anywhereness, would allow this to make it into customers' hands with such a glaring deficiency. Other than setting the suspension height and stiffness, the CT should always just manage the drive-train to prevent any wheel from spinning freely. Like, it should just to the right thing in every situation. That's the whole point of software.

My pulled-out-of-my-ass theory is that, when Musk overpromises, some engineers somewhere have to work very hard to deliver. In other words, they simply didn't have time.

Alternatively, when you treat a car like software, this is what you get: beta testing by consumers.

[FINate]

This is a production vehicle. I don't understand why Tesla, after having made a big deal about its toughness and go-anywhereness, would allow this to make it into customers' hands with such a glaring deficiency. Other than setting the suspension height and stiffness, the CT should always just manage the drive-train to prevent any wheel from spinning freely. Like, it should just to the right thing in every situation. That's the whole point of software.

My pulled-out-of-my-ass theory is that, when Musk overpromises, some engineers somewhere have to work very hard to deliver. In other words, they simply didn't have time.

Alternatively, when you treat a car like software, this is what you get: beta testing by consumers.

Based on history I'd say this is a good theory.

Maybe it's just a software issue that will be fixed over time. But maybe not. There was apparently an issue with the diff lockers when the RC CT getting a Christmas Tree got stuck in the snow, so it's possible something else is going on with the hardware. At the very least the software should apply the breaks to a free spinning wheel to transfer power to the wheel with traction... this is something automakers figured out decades ago.

Watching the video again, it also looks like the air suspension may be too stiff. All that clearance doesn't do much good if the suspension doesn't make use of the full range of travel. But it's difficult to tell without a more detailed view.

[neo von retorch]

https://www.thedrive.com/news/tesla-cybertruck-owner-gets-coming-soon-message-when-trying-to-lock-diff

As it seems, the functionality simply isn't ready for customer roll-out just yet.