Tesla's Cybertruck " just a concept "

[bob10]

If the truck goes into production, expect something very different from the display model. But it should be a very capable vehicle.

Everything wrong with Tesla’s Cybertruck (https://www.msn.com/en-au/motoring/research/everything-wrong-with-teslas-cybertruck/ar-BBXkzKP?ocid=spartandhp)

[loanrangie]

Wow, who didn't see that coming [bighmmm].

[goingbush]

The article is bull****. Those quoted regulations are for passenger cars, does not apply to vehicles over 4500GVM . Just because the features are not obvious does not mean they are not there - eg side indicators and centre stop light is clearly obvious here.

theres more than one been spotted driving around different locations


https://youtu.be/dPrcl5f4rhU

[Tombie]

What a load of bull that article is...

Radius of 2.5mm is already in the folds.
Indicators and lights is a 10 second job to laser cut and fit in side panels, as is mirrors in the corners of the door.

I’d suggest that mirrors with indicators could solve that easy, as will the potential to be the first vehicle using cameras.

Rear brake light height is met by the entire rear lighting.

Softened corners already are smoother than a bullbar and as mentioned at 4.5t is subject to a completely different set of regulations.

Once again MSN report total crap! (And the Tri-motor is $103k subject to no LCT and a rebate for EVs).

[JDNSW]

At least in NSW cameras are not a legal substitute for mirrors, although it may happen.

But this is sort of avoiding the major issue with it, that at 4.5tonnes, it cannot be driven on an ordinary licence.

[Tombie]

At least in NSW cameras are not a legal substitute for mirrors, although it may happen.

But this is sort of avoiding the major issue with it, that at 4.5tonnes, it cannot be driven on an ordinary licence.

Cyber*truck*

Don’t see any major issue in there at all....

Also, if GVM is capped as can be done with other LTs they can be registered for Class C licence.

[Eevo]

At least in NSW cameras are not a legal substitute for mirrors, although it may happen.

But this is sort of avoiding the major issue with it, that at 4.5tonnes, it cannot be driven on an ordinary licence.


i never noticed that it was over 4.5t.

[Tombie]

At least in NSW cameras are not a legal substitute for mirrors, although it may happen.

But this is sort of avoiding the major issue with it, that at 4.5tonnes, it cannot be driven on an ordinary licence.

Wheel spacers aren’t legal - unless factory fitment (exemption).

Rims wider than 8” aren’t legal - unless factory.

No reason our archaic ADRs can’t be updated to suit modern tech [emoji41]

[Eevo]

Cyber*truck*

yeah but americans call everything a truck. even a d2 is a "truck" over there.

[Tombie]

yeah but americans call everything a truck. even a d2 is a "truck" over there.

No they call them Jeeps [emoji6]

[Eevo]

No they call them Jeeps [emoji6]

lol. i dont know about that but ive def heard them call disco's and landcruisers trucks.

[goingbush]

At least in NSW cameras are not a legal substitute for mirrors, although it may happen.

But this is sort of avoiding the major issue with it, that at 4.5tonnes, it cannot be driven on an ordinary licence.

Yes it can, The Iveco Daily 4x4 GVM is 5500kg , but you can get it plated at 4495, just a paperwork formality , no engineering needed. Same as Canter and Hino 4x4. Then register as a Dual Cab Ute or Tray and drive on a Car Licence & still does not have to comply with passenger car safety rules , no Airbags, ESC or pedestrian BS needed either.

This happens in all states off Australia & Im sure will be the CyberTruck workaround too if you want to drive it on a car licence & have cheaper DC Ute rego . You just can't load it above 4495 kg .

[goingbush]

i never noticed that it was over 4.5t.


Its not , Kerb weight is well below 4500, the GVM needs to be around 5500, if its going to be serious competition for Ford / Chev / Dodge "Trucks". GVM mass is what the compliance id done to , not kerb weight.

[goingbush]

Wheel spacers aren’t legal - unless factory fitment (exemption).

Rims wider than 8” aren’t legal - unless factory.

No reason our archaic ADRs can’t be updated to suit modern tech [emoji41]


For new new vehicles ADR's are irrelevant, We have no motor manufacturing . Vehicles are now imported on the back of EU Certification (or whatever country they are made) , This is how Iveco get away with selling unroadworthy trucks.

However to get my modified brakes certified by a VASS engineer I have to almost completely re-engineer the complete brake system to make it backward compliant with ADR's , the brakes fail ADR in many areas. The standard truck simply can't pass and does not have to under the new rules. This is going back to 2013.

[vnx205]

.... ....
... .... brakes
.... ...


A friend of mine had an Iveco. His comment on the subject was that when a horse suddenly appeared on the road while he was towing a trailer, he was left wondering why the Iveco was fitted with brakes that obviously belonged on a Toyota Corolla. :)

[Homestar]

Wheel spacers aren’t legal - unless factory fitment (exemption).

Rims wider than 8” aren’t legal - unless factory.

No reason our archaic ADR's can’t be updated to suit modern tech [emoji41]

You'd be surprised how up to date some of the ADR's are these days - I was looking through a few recently. For example, brakes can be 'fly by wire' now - no connection between the pedal and the brakes via hydraulics required if an OEM wants to build such a machine. Previous ADR's mandated there had to be. There's also a tonne of stuff around EV's too which allows tech unlike what we are used to seeing. Seems that although a little slow, the law makers are at least trying to keep up with some of the latest tech, although there's always going to be a lag between what an OEM invents and when this will make its way into them.

There is also a draft paper about cameras for mirrors too, so that's not far away I shouldn't think.

[goingbush]

A friend of mine had an Iveco. His comment on the subject was that when a horse suddenly appeared on the road while he was towing a trailer, he was left wondering why the Iveco was fitted with brakes that obviously belonged on a Toyota Corolla. :)

Would you believe that Corolla front rotors (DBA 2742) are the same diameter & thickness as Iveco Daily 4x4 front rotors, At least the corrala rotors are Vented , the Iveco brakes are Not !! At least they will somewhat stop a Corolla , no hope of stopping an Iveco.

if you haven't seen it heres what Ive done to make my truck stop on par with a family wagon. , Going Bush (http://www.goingbush.com/iveco5.html)

[RANDLOVER]

People do seem to like to hate the Cybertruck though, a guy at work was trying to tell me the demo vid had a 2wd F-truck vs a 4wd Cyber-truck, and because the Cyber-truck was slightly uphill meant it had more traction according to the laws of physics.

[bob10]

Would you believe that Corolla front rotors (DBA 2742) are the same diameter & thickness as Iveco Daily 4x4 front rotors, At least the corrala rotors are Vented , the Iveco brakes are Not !! At least they will somewhat stop a Corolla , no hope of stopping an Iveco.

if you haven't seen it heres what Ive done to make my truck stop on par with a family wagon. , Going Bush (http://www.goingbush.com/iveco5.html)

Interesting. Had a quick read, Outback Travel Australia have this to say about the brakes on the Iveco. Would you agree?


No matter how much testing truck makers do, there are inevitable issues that develop with first-generation products in the Australian environment. The post-2013 Iveco Daily was no exception.Several owners had braking issues, quoting situations where the front discs became red hot while the rear drums remained cool. The culprit was invariably a poorly-set-up load proportioning valve on the rear axle. That’s been eliminated from the 2017 model, Iveco says, by the fitment of an ESP9 braking system.

[3toes]

Electric vehicles are heavy. That is due to the large battery packs required to give range and move when loaded. In U.K. have put different rules in place for electric vehicles both cars and commercials as otherwise could not drive on current licence classifications.

Trucks in Europe are limited to 40 to 50 miles an hour on roads that are generally of good quality and always surfaced. Perhaps would not need the same braking as one doing 60 on a less than a average road conditions

Think you also need to consider that an IVECO is purchased as you want a cheap truck, not that this should impact safety

[goingbush]

Interesting. Had a quick read, Outback Travel Australia have this to say about the brakes on the Iveco. Would you agree?


No matter how much testing truck makers do, there are inevitable issues that develop with first-generation products in the Australian environment. The post-2013 Iveco Daily was no exception.Several owners had braking issues, quoting situations where the front discs became red hot while the rear drums remained cool. The culprit was invariably a poorly-set-up load proportioning valve on the rear axle. That’s been eliminated from the 2017 model, Iveco says, by the fitment of an ESP9 braking system.


First thing I did was remove the Rear Load Proportioning Valve , it did not help the brakes as the rear brakes are totally ineffective, I could write a book about it ... oh wait . The RLPV is only of any use on vehicles without ABS , the Iveco has ABS so the valve is not required - simples. The rear drums auto adjuster does not work & only the leading shoe can be manually adjusted . its a complete shamozzle. but we are way off topic now.

Back to the Cybertruck, It has no brake pedal, It uses regen braking all done by the throttle pedal , as regen wears off about 5kmh I the hydraulic brakes take over - fly by wire !! I would option a brake pedal though , esp for 4x4 work.