A Tesla Cybertruck driver was killed in what appears to be the first reported fatal crash involving the electric pickup truck, which has yet to undergo third-party crash testing.
Recent data indicates that Cybertruck may have achieved the highest sales among electric pickup trucks in the U.S. during the second quarter of 2024. With an estimated 15,000 to 20,000 units already on the road and a reported sales rate of 1,754 units per month, the Cybertruck is increasingly visible on roadways.
Well… say hello to a lot more fatal crashes. Involving pedestrians.
On the bright side, this was a single vehicle, single person crash.
The cybertruck front is actually lower than a lot of other comparable trucks, and has a slanted hood, both things that will reduce pedestrian fatalities compared to some of the other flat neck high bricks out there.
It’s just a matter of does the truck cut them in half or not with that front edge of which we don’t have any data on yet.
Eg. This is beside a f150 raptor
That’s not entirely accurate, a cyber truck has adaptive suspension that can lift the truck as much as what you’d get on a 6" lift. In the Pic you are showing it’s at it’s lowest position.
This is beside a f150 lightning, and the CT is a little more raised on this one. Not sure about the lightning though with the angle
That’s not a real picture, the Tesla is photoshopped in (and a bad render at that, not even a picture of a real cybertruck).
Jesus fucking christ, how did i not see that until you pointed it out. I was just picking pictures out of search result gallery. I thought it was odd one wheel was on a platform but didn’t see how fake it was.
This is one from a video of 2 real trucks with the CT being lower while also not in the lowest suspension position.
Edit: Which also conveniently shows how high it would impact this person for each vehicle lol
It’s still lower than many other trucks even when higher. This is the driving position and the most efficient for aero. They could drive in higher modes though yes.
You mean the truck with hoods higher than the roof of my car? Those should be illegal as well.
There really should be a limit yes, but then they’ll get some commercial use loop hole and allow it anyway like they do for truck emissions:(
My neighbor has a lifted truck and it’s up to my neck. It’s crazy.
They should bring back laws for how high a bumper should be off the road
Unfortunately the materials really matters with pedestrian motor vehicle accidents. When I first started working in orthopedics and rehabilitation, metal fenders and bumpers were still regularly on the roads and causing very specific injuries.
When a metal bumper hits you, it doesn’t just cause blunt force trauma, it tends to shear muscle away from the bone. There was a specific ankle foot orthosis that was widely produced up until the early 2000s that was meant to replace calf muscles that were scooped off by metal bumpers.
This truck is basically a giant flying wedge of stainless steel, I don’t see any pedestrian walking away from an accident with this monstrosity.
Any thoughts on how the plastic bumper at the bottom might impact that? Do you think that might make any difference at all? You’re still going to hit the metal parts regardless, but that initial impact might be plastic, (edit: and then start the forces of throwing you onto the hood)
I really wanna see a 3rd party agency test this so we can finally get some answers, but with the lower front/angle, but the metal/front edge, it might even turn out to be a less fatalities, but more injuries type of situation. That edge is going to be the key factor.
Less deaths wouldn’t excuse more injuries though. I half wonder if the NHSTA will eventually force Tesla to add some sort of rounded plastic thing around the front edges.
Edit: I just want to clarify on the injury/death ratio, I don’t mean that the deaths just turn into injures, but that there is actually more injures. Like if there was 100 pedestrian accidents, and other trucks were 10deaths/20 serious injuries, that the CT might be 5 deaths / 50 serious injuries.
Any thoughts on how the plastic bumper at the bottom might impact that? Do you think that might make any difference at all? You’re still going to hit the metal parts regardless, but that initial impact might be plastic
It may prevent some of the older type injuries where you get your calves scooped off in a parking lot, but it doesn’t really look like it protrudes out far enough to help out in any other way.
really wanna see a 3rd party agency test this so we can finally get some answers, but with the lower front/angle, but the metal/front edge, it might even turn out to be a less fatalities, but more injuries type of situation. That edge is going to be the key factor.
From what I understand they won’t be allowed in Europe due to their increased protections in pedestrian safety standards. Not sure if they did actual testing, or they just didn’t meet the minimum standards.
From what I understand they won’t be allowed in Europe due to their increased protections in pedestrian safety standards. Not sure if they did actual testing, or they just didn’t meet the minimum standards.
I’m pretty sure that’s the case yes. The front doesn’t meet the required safety requirements.
It also has sharp corners that will ruin your day- instead of Bouncing off fairly flexible body panels, that are round and blunt, you’re getting nailed by rigid, sharp corners.
Which concentrate what force is there.
yeah but at least some of your body will roll right over! after the crash you can crawl to the lower half and try to stitch it back. ezpz
Well that’s my comment about getting cut in half.
But it’d almost be certainly be better to get hit by a lower, slanted shape even if solid than a slightly flexible higher flat wall
Higher is bad in general and many trucks are comically high.
It’s not that you’d be cut in half.
It’s that the force of the impact is concentrated onto a single point. (Specifically the corner.)
Also, kids exist and are more likely to not be seen, shorter doesn’t much help them.
Being shorter is one thing, but that’s just a whataboutism. The design of the CT is broadly unsafe, from drive by wire systems that insert delayed control signals, to shitty suspension that can’t handle hard and sudden braking under any kind of real load, to tires that get cut by its own hub cover, to lethal body panels and being ridiculously heavy.
I mean… the meme is that the front edge is going to cut people in half and be deadly. And we agree that’s probably a problem that we’ll need to see crash data from. But that’s just one part of the front of which others are arguably safer.
Kids will get killed by all trucks regardless. Having the front impact heads in an accident is a losing proposition for everyone and doesn’t have any relevance in the discussion.
The rest of that is all meaningless as well until there is other data and you just grasping for straws.
That Ford grill is made out of ABS plastic, like a big Lego.
The Cybertruck is made out of steel, like an anvil.
As trucks get taller, you’re more likely to get impact wounds on vital organs and pushed forward and RUN OVER which is going to be a worse time for you.
The CyberTruck is more likely to get you onto it’s hood (unless it’s fully raised at the time), which should increase your survival chance ASSUMING that edge doesn’t increase lethality and only increases injuries.
Edit: Also newer cars (not trucks AFAIK) even have special features within their hoods to further increase the likely hood of not getting injured. On newer Model 3’s for example it could pop up during an accident to act as a better cushion when you hit it.
Edit: Further, and this goes for all vehicles, if you know you’re about to get hit, get your feet OFF the ground. It will reduce the friction and increase your odds of going onto the hood if it’s not a brick wall you’re hitting instead of being pushed forward/run over.
Ridiculous.
How do you even get a vehicle past safety regulations and up for sale without third party crash testing?
Money
You have a car company owned by one of the richest (and thus one of the most powerful) people in the world.
When you’re famous they let you do it.
Dang
Grab ‘em by the standards
Boeing did it.
I found this article informative.
In order to sell a new vehicle in the U.S., manufacturers must provide information from their own company crash tests to NHTSA to ensure compliance with federal standards.
Yup, regulatory capture at work. You see this a lot in EPA and OSHA as well - “we’ll take your word for it until serious shit starts happening a lot.”
They all do spot checks.
It would cost a shitload of money if they had to clear every single model, or product or service.
So either everything gets more expensive (people complain), or we increase taxes further (people complain)
Instead we race to the bottom (people die)
You’re getting downvoted but people REALLY don’t understand the field of regulation. How many regulators do people think exist? Compare that with the number of engineers and technicians designing building and testing cars at the OEMs? Do you think these people can get 100% validation? Do you think there is budget or appetite to achieve this level of regulation?
It’s not even a desirable goal. Do you think every batch of food and agricultural goods that is manufactured or imported is 100% inspected? How feasible do you think that is?
The point is regulators are generally able to use sound statistical methods to obtain excellent levels of public safety with TINY budgets. Sure, more would be better, but it will never be necessary to get close 100% coverage simply because most humans WANT to make a quality product and most manufacturers… at least have a brand to protect in terms of not killing anyone.
Nobody is asking for 100% coverage, that’s a strawperson argument. We just want someone in the process to have two things 1) the public interest 2) authority to do something.
Engineers and technicians are servants. Capitalists are in charge and they’d poor mercury down and infant’s throat for a dollar. This idea that we should rely on good actors in the system is just another version of “trust us bro”.
I get your sentiment, certainly. When regulations work well they protect engineers and technicians from the pressure to cut corners to save money. That’s hard work that can only be done by well funded and fully empowered regulatory bodies something that’s unfortunately become a political issue and is being actively undermined.
That being said I’ve been on both sides of the engineer-regulator relationship and I’ve rarely been in a “trust us bro” situation. Both sides want a safe, high quality product. When regulators work well, they can definitely protect engineers from capitalist pressure. Being able to say “sorry, I know it’s expensive, but we have to do it or we won’t get certified” is worth its weight in gold when you’re trying to design a good, safe product!
So we do what conservatives keep telling us works for everything, privatize it.
Regulations should be made to require all models be tested by a 3rd party that is not a government agency or government funded. If some schmuck wants to sell something potentially dangerous, it’s on them to foot the bill proving it’s not dangerous. They stand to benefit from the sales, it shouldn’t be on the public anyway to be paying for that.
Public safety should be managed by public entities, not private. That’s a blatant conflict of interest and I’m not a fan whatsoever.
Some things can sometimes work well, like when the regulation is publicly managed but privately tested using straightforward methods. UL does decent work here, but the profit incentive on both sides creates a nasty conflict of interest and puts pressure on engineers and technicians that compromises their work and integrity.
There is nothing fundamentally broken about our regulatory system except politics. If the funding stops getting cut and politicians stop gutting regulatory bodies’ ability to interpret and enforce regulations there won’t be a problem.
Regulators in general care about their work, care about public safety, and use sound statistical approaches to getting the best bang for the taxpayer and corporate dollar. Keeping private profit out of the equation means costs are low and companies aren’t at a competitive disadvantage internationally.
I suspect nhtsa is facing pressure to push through EVs as part of the larger effort to promote move to carbon emissions reduction.
What an incredibly bold claim with zero evidence to back it up.
Deregulation.
There’s miles of safety regulations for cars in the US,
Yes, you can really tell that when you compare cars for EU markets to those for USA.
Didn’t Murika only legalise adaptive headlight a few years ago?
I don’t know about Cybertruck but other Teslas rank high up in the safest cars ever tested. Would be surprising if this wouldn’t apply to cybertruck too though who knows.
Edit: also, 15 to 20k units sold and this is the first fatal crash involving one
Numbers skewed by time spent out of service waiting for something.
Watch that crash test video and tell me that’s safe…it crashes like a 72 Impala.
other Teslas rank high up in the safest cars ever tested.
I’ve heard that, but now I kinda think they probably just made those up.
Well, the euro NCAP tests give them some of the highest scores as well, so I do trust that (not including cybertruck).
Cybertruck, built Fraud tough
A few years ago the fightfighters in my town had to undergo new training because there was a tesla car fire at an accident scene that they had a very hard time putting out. Shit just wouldn’t stop burning.
Lithium fires need to be doused in salt to put out. Or, technically you can put out a metal fire with gasoline.
You go from a class D fire to a class B fire, and then you can put that out as normal. But yeah, salt is better.
Water is the last thing you want to use on class D fires, followed by CO2. Both have the oxygen ripped off by the burning metal, making the fire burn hotter.
A dump truck of sand also does the trick…but it better be very dry sand
It does. New tech has new problems, but nothing we can’t work with
Hopefully a more responsible company can figure out how to make those batteries safer since I’m not counting on tesla to do it.
And it’s not because I think their r&d teams are bad. It’s more like their narcissistic CEO will probably fire anyone who points out any problems or he’ll just straight up ignore them and keep selling his mobile single use crematoriums.
A first step would be for Tesla to make it easy to escape the car in case a fire breaks out and power is cut. You know, as other manufacturers do already.
Fair enough. Tesla as a company gets worse and worse the more I learn about them.
I was about to call bullshit but it appears I missremembered Angela Chao had a Model X
I sleep well knowing this thing will never be street legal in the EU.
Wait, first?
That was the first crash?Huh. I thought for sure people who buy those crash on the way home from the dealership. Of in their garage if “car” is delivered.
deleted by creator
From the article:
appears to be the first reported fatal crash
(emphasis mine)
And they say people can’t read anymore. It’s hidden there in the very first sentence of the article. Who would think to look there?
To be fair, that’s not what the headline says
First of all, I’m illiterate.
Second of all, yes, I am surprised by that. Bump one pedestrian and it’s a fatal accident.
Only 19999 more.
DPS confirmed the driver was fatally injured at the scene, but his identity remains unknown due to severe burns. The intense fire also prevented authorities from identifying the vehicle’s license plate or VIN.
Holy shit, it straight up cremated him in a lithium fire. Teslas are a fucking abomination.
There is a video of the cybertruck crash test and the thing is very stiff with very little no crumple zone - so most of the energy of the impact goes directly to the driver and passengers.
And the edges are sharp like a knife in a crash. Incredibly dangerous.
Tesla Cybertruck Cuisinart Edition.
emergency rooms going to have a name for crispy filleted cybertruck crash victims.
I hope it will be called “an Elon special.” His name should always be associated with it
It’s almost like you should follow the lessons of the past and… Who am I kidding, muskrat is a billionaire therefore he’s a super genius who knows better than the decades of research into collisions…
I mean it was a cool idea on first glance because it does things differently. But then a sane person would think about it for a while and listen to the engineers why there is a reason cars don’t look like that.
The driver was too high-poly to survive the collision.
The crazy part about all that steel and those difficult to break windows means its going to be a hard vehicle to escape in a fire or underwater. He may have bought a tesla but nobody deserves to die for that decision.
If you choose a car with an unproven safety record, you accept the high likelihood you will die in the event of a crash.
I just realized that this is my first time seeing “First fatal crash” reported for a car model (I don’t pay much attention to cars)
I realize that with the number of car accidents that happen daily, every model is bound to have a fatal one eventually, but huh… witnessing “the first one” feels weird. Morbid.
