2024-03-28 02:15:59
This is actually bad. During a crash, a car is supposed to deform, to absorb the energy and protect it's passengers. [Link][Link] Representing that the lack thereof is a strength of the Cybertruck, instead of a flaw, is setting a dangerous precedent for publicly perceived car safety. NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(146-4-29) Author
2024-03-28 02:42:06
NNN - Incorrect to assume crumple zones are always better than rigidity. The purpose of a crumple zone is to target the energy absorption from the crash away from the cargo. In this example, the Tesla passenger would be sitting in a crumple zone, so rigidity is better. [Link][Link] NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(12-1-42) Author
2024-03-28 03:23:45
NNN - leave comments to the comment section CURRENTLY_RATED_NOT_HELPFUL(3-0-10) Author
2024-03-28 06:09:30
NN. Holy F#$^ people are you ready to have people die so you can shill Elon? Saying this thing is a tank is dangerous ground as it simply isn't. There is a reason it's not sold in the EU. [Link] CURRENTLY_RATED_NOT_HELPFUL(19-3-31) Author
2024-03-28 15:40:01
The sides of cars (where the side of the Truck was hit) do not have crumple zones. [Link] In this case the Nissan took most of the impact forces however, the truck visibly did buckle and take some of the impact. NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(16-0-12) Author
2024-03-28 16:53:50
As mentioned above, Cybertuck got T-boned. A vehicle doesn't have a crumple zone on its side, because it's right where the passenger is. The passenger would die if it crumpled from a side collision, like being T-boned. Crumple zones are on the front and rear, not the side. [Link] NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(9-0-6) Author