Tesla Master Plan: Part Deux

  • Thread starter CodeRedR51
  • 1,503 comments
  • 113,499 views
Which one do you have to buy for it to function briefly as a boat?
If I'm buying something called the "Cyberbeast," which is the top range model, it better act as a boat.

Also, Cyberbeast sounds like a cyberpunk-inspired gay porno with a questionable production value. I can see the tagline now: Richard Longfellow is Cyberbeast!
 
Also, Cyberbeast sounds like a cyberpunk-inspired gay porno with a questionable production value.
Has there ever been a porno, gay or straight, that didn't have questionable production value?

Tangentially, is lesbian porn technically gay porn or does it depend on the audience?
 
Last edited:
I thought it was awesome that they drag raced the 911 towing a 911. That was the most Top Gear sequence I've seen since its heyday on BBC.

Would like to see more shots of the delivered truck and its quality. The A-pillar is sort of shocking in how much better it looked compared to that RC cack.
 


Edit:

Interesting review. It has a few low points though. One is the insinuation that pedestrian safety can be dismissed with getting hit by a vehicle is not good either way. That's super dumb. The other is that Tesla introducing some kind of brand new feature is "balls", which is supposedly a good thing, rather than a lack of care - which is something Tesla has been prone to.
 
Last edited:
I thought it was awesome that they drag raced the 911 towing a 911. That was the most Top Gear sequence I've seen since its heyday on BBC.
Or since it was originally done, in 2016, by MotorTrend.



 
Tangentially, is lesbian porn technically gay porn or does it depend on the audience?
Are they real or make-pretend?



Edit:

Interesting review. It has a few low points though. One is the insinuation that pedestrian safety can be dismissed with getting hit by a vehicle is not good either way. That's super dumb. The other is that Tesla introducing some kind of brand new feature is "balls", which is supposedly a good thing, rather than a lack of care - which is something Tesla has been prone to.

This feels far more infomercial than journalism.
 
Last edited:
This feels far more infomercial than journalism.
I agree. Interesting points though, regardless of the salesy feel. There were things they refused to come back to - like the fact that the go-kart kept up after all, or the bed size, range, or much at all about the interior, or the frunk... it was mostly discussion about the steering and "goes fast" which, to its credit, it does seem to do... at least that version of it.

The most salesy part of it to me was the discussion of voltage. I don't care. Get the power around the best way you can think of getting the power around. You did it well? Great. It means nothing to me.
 
Last edited:
I agree. Interesting points though, regardless of the salesy feel. There were things they refused to come back to - like the fact that the go-kart kept up after all, or the bed size, range, or much at all about the interior, or the frunk... it was mostly discussion about the steering and "goes fast" which, to its credit, it does seem to do... at least that version of it.

The most salesy part of it to me was the discussion of voltage. I don't care. Get the power around the best way you can think of getting the power around. You did it well? Great. It means nothing to me.
The argument seemed to be that higher voltage = less production cost. Great. For Tesla I guess? The fact that the Cybertruck costs 50% more than it was originally supposed to kind of undercuts the production efficiency idea....along with you know, the rest of the truck.
 
Are they real or make-pretend?
Confused Season 1 GIF by Paramount+
 


Top Gear also liked it, but I think this review is a bit more honest. At the very end he talks about rippling in the panels, awkward edging at the corners. You can see that, and @Famine's favorite corner in everything they're showing. You kindof have to forgive the panels as being inferior in some ways for... perhaps some benefit.

About the paneling though. I do hate that it was designed from the outside in - with the wedge shape picked first and the engineering followed suit. I don't know whether it's total fabrication that the skin being rigid is an advantage and results in weight savings, but if that is true and not just marketing, it does provide a little justification for the odd shape.

Do I want one? No. Not remotely. I am interested in what happens with this weird exoskeleton going forward though. Does it get dropped as a gimmick, or is it actually useful? Panel durability and rigidity are highlighted for crash, scratch, dent, body flex, and even weight savings. It comes at the cost of a flat, difficult to fabricate body and some ugly seams.
 
Last edited:


Top Gear also liked it, but I think this review is a bit more honest. At the very end he talks about rippling in the panels, awkward edging at the corners. You can see that, and @Famine's favorite corner in everything they're showing. You kindof have to forgive the panels as being inferior in some ways for... perhaps some benefit.

About the paneling though. I do hate that it was designed from the outside in - with the wedge shape picked first and the engineering followed suit. I don't know whether it's total fabrication that the skin being rigid is an advantage and results in weight savings, but if that is true and not just marketing, it does provide a little justification for the odd shape.

Do I want one? No. Not remotely. I am interested in what happens with this weird exoskeleton going forward though. Does it get dropped as a gimmick, or is it actually useful? Panel durability and rigidity are highlighted for crash, scratch, dent, body flex, and even weight savings. It comes at the cost of a flat, difficult to fabricate body and some ugly seams.

It isn't an exoskeleton, that's the conceit. The project was conceptualized as having a load bearing true stressed body design. For many obvious reasons, this is unworkable for a production vehicle so somewhere along the line the body panels went from being structural to being cosmetic with a normalish unibody construction under it. The reason the panels are thick/rigid is that they have to be to resist warping/oil canning with such a flat shape. Even cars like the Countach had a lot of subtle curvature. The panels on the Cybertruck are dead-flat. I think there is honestly a weight penalty for the construction they used - the AWD F150 Lightning (notably not designed from the ground up to be an EV) weighs 6,083lbs while the AWD Cybertruck weighs 6,600lbs. The CT has a slightly larger battery, but not larger enough to explain away 600lbs.

Ultimately, the Cybertruck is an exotic car meant to get people talking. It doesn't matter that it's not useful, practical, or affordable. It's a Halo product that will undoubtedly get people into Tesla showrooms. But Tesla couldn't just lead with that, because it doesn't make sense for a pickup truck, so they have to continue the ruse of this being a real & practical vehicle.

I dislike the Cybertruck, but I would take one over a Hummer EV, the stupidest car ever made, in a heartbeat.
 
The last time our local environmentally-conscious drug dealers tried to do bidniss in an EV, it didn’t go so well.

IMG_2019.jpeg


Cybertruck should be far superior.
 
I think there is honestly a weight penalty for the construction they used
I wouldn't be surprised based on the leaked photos of the Cybertruck production line and the unmounted body panels if Tesla hasn't made the opposite of an "exoskeleton" and essentially have recreated the Fiero in pickup truck guise but with big ass stainless steel panels instead of plastic ones. That would explain the rumors that there were issues with structural rigidity late in development if they were having trouble making up for the lack of stressed body panels and why the thing is such a porker in the end (just like all of GMs fiddling with spaceframes ended up being vs their contemporaries until they started toying with using aluminum and wood in their construction).
 
Last edited:
feels far more infomercial than journalism.
Its not video about truck, but Camissa praising what Tesla doing for humanity while looks stupid.

His shows are closest thing we have to golden age of Top Gear. Totally subjective, stupidly fun and clever.
 
It isn't an exoskeleton, that's the conceit.
It really has a big impact on the way I view the car. The panels have such obvious drawbacks, including appearance. If they're actually useful, I might even forgive them. But if Tesla is just blowing hot air about their usefulness - how I can forgive the panels for being ugly and resulting in such a wedge of a vehicle if they're also less useful?
 
"I would hang myself if I worked for a traditional car company right now, out of sheer embarrassment. When they start pulling this thing apart, their mind is going to be blown to the point of like 'Why do we even come to work every day?'
"





... Excellent discussion with Jason Cammisa on the Cybertruck.
 
"I would hang myself if I worked for a traditional car company right now, out of sheer embarrassment. When they start pulling this thing apart, their mind is going to be blown to the point of like 'Why do we even come to work every day?'
"
This is one of the most bizarre things I've ever heard in a YouTube video, and I watch Shmee150.
 
The fact that that's the pull quote you put as your lead in for why people should watch an 80 minute video suggests that you are incapable of such embarrassment.
 
Last edited:
"Why do we even come to work every day?"

Probably because if you work for another automaker, you're going to be treated better, with better benefits, and not have to listen to an overgrown man-child who constantly says the most asinine crap on the social media company he bought then drove into the ground.
 
Debatable. Also, what you producing is matter too.
I think pride in something you contribute to the making off sits much lower on the list of what working for a company gives you back. Certainly lower than remunerative return and mental wellbeing. You should work to live not live to work.
 
Also, what you producing is matter too.
Companies feel that and use it to their advantage. In my experience, jobs that offer some level of personal satisfaction or where people are highly motivated out of their personal conviction end up paying a lot less, because it doesn't take as much to recruit. Whether that's charity work, research, or just a company with solid good mission statement, it generally pays less. You want to make good money and be treated well? Go do a job that people don't want because it's disfavored for one reason or another. Oil companies often offer a lot of those kinds of jobs.

SpaceX and Tesla are supported in part by enthusiasm, which means it doesn't have to pay as well.
 
Last edited:
Back