Farley Says Boring Vehicles Are Going Away

[jpd80]

 

13 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:

I mean, I thought that moment was hilarious personally because I've said it to customers I've had enough of and found some validation there, but what's that have to do with the we/us thing?

It was hilarious but he did it knowing that major sponsors were sitting in the crowd 

because he’d just had a major issue with them earlier that day, it was a continuation 

of a dialogue he’d been having and had nothing to do with trying to bribe him with money,

he made that the issue so he could attack them….. they had already pulled out, not coming back.

 

These are not customers, these are advertisers and there’s a big difference….

 

Edited January 26 by jpd80

[Captainp4]

14 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

 

It was hilarious but he did it knowing that major sponsors were sitting in the crowd 

because he’d just had a major issue with them earlier that day, it was a continuation 

of a dialogue he’d been having and had nothing to do with trying to bribe him with money,

he made that the issue so he could attack them….. they had already pulled out, not coming back.

 

These are not customers, these are advertisers and there’s a big difference….

 

Advertisers are customers, they pay you to run their ads. Still not seeing how this ties into the we/us narrative that's going on here.

[jpd80]

17 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:

Advertisers are customers, they pay you to run their ads. Still not seeing how this ties into the we/us narrative that's going on here.

Just an observation that a person so easily triggered by a simple question cannot be that differnt away from the cameras..

He doesn’t suffer fools and has had years to weed out dissenters so now everyone agrees with is vision…

Edited January 26 by jpd80

[Captainp4]

11 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Just an observation that a person so easily triggered by a simple question cannot be the same away from the cameras..

He doesn’t supper fools and has had years to weed out dissenters so now everyone agrees with is vision…

Those are certainly all words

[jpd80]

11 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:

Those are certainly all words

 

Just like “go F yourself” but hey, it’s Elon’s money to loose…..

[Captainp4]

11 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

 

Just like “go F yourself” but hey, it’s Elon’s money to loose…..

Are you from the part of Australia where I can call you a cunt and it's a term of endearment? 

Either way, GFY ?

All jokes, don't ban me pls

[jpd80]

11 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:

Are you from the part of Australia where I can call you a cunt and it's a term of endearment? 

Either way, GFY ?

All jokes, don't ban me pls

LOL yeah,  I have been referred to as  a ‘taint - something in between/ covers both maybe?

unreservedly apologise fo any offence inferred for posting Musk’s GFY quote.

As a manager in a service industry, I could never do that, even on my worst day…

[tbone]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

I know car engineers usually couldn't care less about exterior styling, but there was a report that came out that some Tesla engineers found the CT so ugly that they tried to put together their own proposal, I'm not joking. 

I can’t disagree with them.  Not a fan of the styling.  It seems to be trying to be different just for the sake of being different.  

[jpd80]

49 minutes ago, tbone said:

I can’t disagree with them.  Not a fan of the styling.  It seems to be trying to be different just for the sake of being different.  

Sounds like they were stuck with the styling because the stainless steel panels can only be bent in one direction,

well that’s what I’ve been told…

 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

Sounds like they were stuck with the styling because the stainless steel panels can only be bent in one direction,

well that’s what I’ve been told…

 

 
Raw stainless was absolutely completely unnecessary but Musk’s ego would not allow necessary changes.

[70 Stang]

3 hours ago, Captainp4 said:

I mean, I thought that moment was hilarious personally because I've said it to customers I've had enough of and found some validation there, but what's that have to do with the we/us thing?

Considering who he said it to.....and the context.....it was exactly what needed to be said 

[jpd80]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

 
Raw stainless was absolutely completely unnecessary but Musk’s ego would not allow necessary changes.

Yes thank you, that’s an example of Musk thinking and the engineering team then told to make it work.

 

Im sure that there were more  than a few issues to work through, the fact that vinyl wraps are now an option

also suggests that the original idea of elimination a paint station probably now results in a more costly covering.

 

Edited January 27 by jpd80

[DeluxeStang]

5 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Sounds like they were stuck with the styling because the stainless steel panels can only be bent in one direction,

well that’s what I’ve been told…

 

Yeah, apparently the steel was so strong it required new metal presses, because it would have broken the old ones. So here's the thing, I get that having such a hard material is ideal for having durable body panels, and the additional rigidity improves performance and driving dynamics. But here's what I don't get, as I'm not an engineer, wouldn't you want to engineer a bit of flex into something like a truck? 

 

From my limited understanding, a material, a design that has a little bit of give to it, is generally preferable if it's going to be under heavy loads and abuse on a frequent basis. The heavy loads and abuse something like a fullsize truck is going to be subjected to. So couldn't having this overly rigid design cause long term issues for CT owners who frequently tow and haul over the course of several years. 

 

Another flaw with that hardened steel, and I have to be missing something here, but it almost looks like the CT did away with crumple zones. I have to be overlooking something, because there's no way Tesla engineers forgot how crumple zones work, and why they're important for improving safety. But in the crash test vids I'm looking at, I'm not seeing a ton of deformation, and that's concerning. 

 

4 hours ago, akirby said:

 
Raw stainless was absolutely completely unnecessary but Musk’s ego would not allow necessary changes.

Elon is the dumbest smart guy I've ever seen. He occasionally has groundbreaking and innovative ideas, but he needs to get past his ego, and actually recognize that if other people are telling him something is a bad idea, maybe there's a reason for that. 

[DeluxeStang]

On 1/25/2024 at 7:37 PM, fuzzymoomoo said:

Ive seen a couple of Mavericks with camper tops on them. It doesn’t look that bad. 

They look pretty good. The shells are a little pricy, about $3,500 for a color matched one last time I checked. But for a purchase that most people will get use out of for years, that's not an awful price. 

[jpd80]

2 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Yeah, apparently the steel was so strong it required new metal presses, because it would have broken the old ones. So here's the thing, I get that having such a hard material is ideal for having durable body panels, and the additional rigidity improves performance and driving dynamics. But here's what I don't get, as I'm not an engineer, wouldn't you want to engineer a bit of flex into something like a truck? 

 

From my limited understanding, a material, a design that has a little bit of give to it, is generally preferable if it's going to be under heavy loads and abuse on a frequent basis. The heavy loads and abuse something like a fullsize truck is going to be subjected to. So couldn't having this overly rigid design cause long term issues for CT owners who frequently tow and haul over the course of several years. 
 

I think he got the idea of using advanced spacex material in a vehicle and insisted on it going through to completion.

I dunno, maybe the original of raw stainless steel finish appealed to the new era look but as soon as In began to 

hear about vinyl wrap option, I began to wonder about the whole stainless steel usage, thought exoskeleton

now just for just external panels maybe overkill?

 

 

Quote

 

Another flaw with that hardened steel, and I have to be missing something here, but it almost looks like the CT did away with crumple zones. I have to be overlooking something, because there's no way Tesla engineers forgot how crumple zones work, and why they're important for improving safety. But in the crash test vids I'm looking at, I'm not seeing a ton of deformation, and that's concerning. 

An engineer pointed out to me CT crash test synced up with F150 showing drivers head moves further into the airbag and decelerates a lot slower than in the CT.

I didn’t understand the significance until the higher  deceleration rate in the CT was pointed out by automotive engineer John Cardogan. He rambles on a bit about Thanos X (Musk) so feel free to fast forward.
 

 

Quote

 

Elon is the dumbest smart guy I've ever seen. He occasionally has groundbreaking and innovative ideas, but he needs to get past his ego, and actually recognize that if other people are telling him something is a bad idea, maybe there's a reason for that. 

I have no doubt that the engineers at Tesla are tops in their field, I think Musk rides on their coat tails and gets credit for their success.

You can do that when you’re the boss….

Edited January 27 by jpd80

[akirby]

Don’t forget you basically have to wipe it down daily to prevent corrosion from bird poop and other contaminants.  Owners will not be happy long term.

[Rick73]

8 hours ago, jpd80 said:

I think he got the idea of using advanced spacex material in a vehicle and insisted on it going through to completion.

I dunno, maybe the original of raw stainless steel finish appealed to the new era look but as soon as In began to 

hear about vinyl wrap option, I began to wonder about the whole stainless steel usage, thought exoskeleton

now just for just external panels maybe overkill?

Maybe Musk got idea of stainless from DeLorean car and “Back to the Future” movies.  ? 

 

Motor Trend claims it’s 301 grade stainless, 3 mm thick, at least in door panels, which seems too thick to me due to excessive weight, but who knows?

 

https://www.motortrend.com/news/tesla-cybertruck-electric-pickup-bulletproof-stainless-steel-body/

 

I watched video a few times and doubt seriously one can determine that differences in dummy head movement is due to use of stainless.  It can just as likely be differences in vehicle structure, seatbelt, or airbag differences.  I’m not sure deceleration rate of head in that context is all that important anyway unless we knew peak rates, and how they compare to human limits.  The entire premise of his argument is questionable in that it would contradict benefit of using pre-tensioning seat belts which limit movement, or in race cars limiting helmet travel.  I’m not defending Tesla Cybertruck at all, just saying the video’s conclusion on safety is too simplistic to be of any real value.  Speaking from personal experience, I would be more concerned about what happens to an occupant’s neck when head is allowed to move that far.  As long as head doesn’t strike a hard object, I would not be as worried about high instantaneous deceleration rates.  Video makes it sound like brain will become scrambled inside skull which seems unlikely.

[mackinaw]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Maybe Musk got idea of stainless from DeLorean car and “Back to the Future” movies.  ? 

 

Motor Trend claims it’s 301 grade stainless, 3 mm thick, at least in door panels, which seems too thick to me due to excessive weight, but who knows?...

 

Nobody's mentioned cost so far.  A quick search shows that stainless steel costs substantially more than conventional carbon steel.  I wonder about repair costs too.

[Captainp4]

1 hour ago, mackinaw said:

 

Nobody's mentioned cost so far.  A quick search shows that stainless steel costs substantially more than conventional carbon steel.  I wonder about repair costs too.

Repair costs will be interesting to see. On one hand it's going to resist minor dings and maybe even light fender benders, on the other hand people that can still work bare metal without filler and paint to hide behind are very few and far between (hell, even brand new cars have filler on the panels sometimes) so it's likely going to be full panel replacement if there's any distortion of the metal. Unless this particular alloy has a "memory" and can be easily stretched/shrank back. I wonder if the quarters are bolted on or bonded? Haven't seen anything about the one that got hit right after the delivery event yet.

[Rick73]

51 minutes ago, mackinaw said:

 

Nobody's mentioned cost so far.  A quick search shows that stainless steel costs substantially more than conventional carbon steel.  I wonder about repair costs too.

Stainless is generally more expensive than carbon steel, but for a car I have no idea how the material premium affects the total product cost.  Must be higher otherwise many other manufacturers would be building stainless cars.  If it eliminates paint, how much does it save towards offsetting more-costly stainless?  I don’t know.

 

Repair costs should probably be questioned.  Cybertruck may be more difficult to damage, but if it gets damaged, does it mean more replacement of parts?  I assume a little filler and paint will rarely be possible unless vehicle is painted or wrapped.  On other hand, labor is so high maybe it’s cheaper to replace entire stainless panels than steel and then have to match paint.

 

Another concern I’d have with stainless is that if you replace an entire panel, surface finish may not match rest of vehicle.  If so, would they have to polish entire vehicle to match?  And at what cost?

[jpd80]

31 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:

Repair costs will be interesting to see. On one hand it's going to resist minor dings and maybe even light fender benders, on the other hand people that can still work bare metal without filler and paint to hide behind are very few and far between (hell, even brand new cars have filler on the panels sometimes) so it's likely going to be full panel replacement if there's any distortion of the metal. Unless this particular alloy has a "memory" and can be easily stretched/shrank back. I wonder if the quarters are bolted on or bonded? Haven't seen anything about the one that got hit right after the delivery event yet.

This type of material work hardens when it is deformed or bent, so no you’re not going to be able to work out dents. Full panel replacements may indeed be required and then the issue of different surface texture, maybe a vinyl wrap is then required?

Edited January 27 by jpd80

[jpd80]

30 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Stainless is generally more expensive than carbon steel, but for a car I have no idea how the material premium affects the total product cost.  Must be higher otherwise many other manufacturers would be building stainless cars.  If it eliminates paint, how much does it save towards offsetting more-costly stainless?  I don’t know.

 

Repair costs should probably be questioned.  Cybertruck may be more difficult to damage, but if it gets damaged, does it mean more replacement of parts?  I assume a little filler and paint will rarely be possible unless vehicle is painted or wrapped.  On other hand, labor is so high maybe it’s cheaper to replace entire stainless panels than steel and then have to match paint.

 

Another concern I’d have with stainless is that if you replace an entire panel, surface finish may not match rest of vehicle.  If so, would they have to polish entire vehicle to match?  And at what cost?

CT May be a great vehicle to own and to  impress others who want it bad enough to jump the queue an pay overs to get one.

Other than that I don’t see any reason. to own one, especially with so many unknowns.

Could we end up seeing a lot o those reservations evaporate over the next year when people have to commit to a $79k order?

[Captainp4]

28 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

CT May be a great vehicle to own and to  impress others who want it bad enough to jump the queue an pay overs to get one.

Other than that I don’t see any reason. to own one, especially with so many unknowns.

Could we end up seeing a lot o those reservations evaporate over the next year when people have to commit to a $79k order?

The original promises made a good case for me. 14k towing, 500+ mile range. It made perfect sense for my business that tows roughly 9-10k daily, under 300 miles a week, and not more than 100 in a day, on a set route, comes back to the shop every night, and only used when the grass is growing (so, warm, no cold weather range loss concern). The 4 wheel steer looked pretty damn cool to not have to make 30 point turns on dead end roads too when towing the 26ft trailer. All that AND lose the diesel fuel and maintenance costs? SIGN ME UP!

What we got was 11k towing, 340 mile range (you can get ALMOST 500 if you drop ANOTHER 16k on range extender pack that will surely diminish payload capacity even more) and on top of that has none of the towing doodads Ford has on the Lightning that make your life easier when towing. The stainless body was appealing to me too because despite any effort made to avoid it, you're going to send projectiles hurtling towards your own truck if you own a lawn care business and can't always choose the best location to park. If you get up close on my 2010 250 you'll see tons of little dings (still looks pretty dang good from 5-10ft, but if you look close you'll see them).

But like I said earlier in the thread, just watching and waiting before I make my decision when my number gets called.

[Captainp4]

14 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

 But here's what I don't get, as I'm not an engineer, wouldn't you want to engineer a bit of flex into something like a truck? 

 

 

This same argument was made when the 04 150 came out with a fully boxed frame by the other guys that looked like they were twerking on the high speed bump tests. Same argument about the Ridgeline being too stiff because it was unibody. Not that I'm a fan of that thing, but lol. They said c channel semis worked because they flex and give, etc. .. more torsional rigidity doesn't seem to have any real world implications other than better driving dynamics from everything I've seen over the last 20 years or so of following the car/truck world. I imagine it has it's limits, but my instinct tells me sticking with c channel frames is just a cost saving thing.

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

CT May be a great vehicle to own and to  impress others who want it bad enough to jump the queue an pay overs to get one.

Other than that I don’t see any reason. to own one, especially with so many unknowns.

Could we end up seeing a lot o those reservations evaporate over the next year when people have to commit to a $79k order?

Based on specs, I expect Cybertruck must have a fairly large battery, in order of about 150~160 kWh (rough estimate) which makes it much larger than that of Model S and X.  By comparison, I would expect that Cybertruck will cost more to manufacture, particularly when considering unusual stainless body.   Anyway, I would not be surprised if cost goes up beyond $79k for AWD variant over time.  Rich buyers will probably get the even more expensive + $100k beast option.