I Think Cybertruck Manufacturing Run Will be Short Lived

[egandalf]

and so a larger number of body variations will be needed to meet all of the customer needs

I don't think they are trying to meet all of the customer needs. More like the 80/20 rule. They're probably making a truck that works for 80% of the market right off the line (per points made by @Crissa above). The 20% will either be unsolved for now (flatbeds) or solve through 3rd parties (I firmly believe 5th wheel towing will be solved by someone, eventually).

I live in truck-central rural Kentucky and agree that the most common mods I see (subjective, yes) are toolboxes, racks, and covers. That's definitely in the 80% ballpark.

Personally, I'm far more interested in the interior mods than exterior b/c the Cybertruck already solves all of the exterior needs I've ever had save the roof rack and that was an extreme outlier use-case for me.

Advertisement

 

[azjohn]

Watch alot of 'How It's Made'. Hehe.

Scoring is really quick for robots; it's all straight lines with a hard edge. Score deeply with alot of weight, youcan treat steel like glass. Score shallowly and you can the use those points to bend it accurately.

You're right about Tesla focusing on optimizing: by using folding vs stamping, the shapes can run at higher tolerances. Higher tolerances are easier to automate to... the more accurate your parts are, the less robots have issue with alignment.

And the Cybertruck sems to be being designed with fewer panels, pieces, and bends. So simpler to build. If cars were made out of box-tube steel, they'd be super cheap. But no one wants a car like that. Unless it's a Cybertruck.

-Crissa

I used to watch that show, I do remember an episode on how they make propane tanks

 

[Diehard]

Personally, I'm far more interested in the interior mods than exterior b/c the Cybertruck already solves all of the exterior needs I've ever had save the roof rack and that was an extreme outlier use-case for me.

I am really curious about how that works in CT. I dislocated a shoulder once trying to unload a heavy Kayak off of a taller roof rack. My current truck has an adjustable rack on the bed that is fairly low. I hope I don’t have to pay with another dislocated shoulder for owning a CT. Lowering the air suspension should be a bit of help.

 

[Mini2nut]

Short lived production run? I personally don’t see that happening with the CT.

The truck will be super popular in the commercial vehicle market. Tradesman, utility companies, landscapers, HVAC companies, service and delivery companies, etc. will flock to this truck due to its super durable SS body, tough Armor Glass that deters break in's, standard lockable tonneau cover, reasonable MSRP, no maintenance SS exterior and low running costs per mile when compared to an ICE pickup.

I still pinch myself that Tesla is actually building this apocalypse ready truck. It‘s the polar opposite of planned obsolescence that is so common in the auto industry. I don’t see why the truck won’t last 50+ years into the future and be handed down through generations.

 

[Faffle]

Thanks for the great replies. Let me add some specific assumptions I am making:

1) FSD Level 5 achieved
2) Multiple jurisdictions have supplied regulatory approval
3) Tesla moves all manufacturing to the production of Tesla fleet TAAS vehicles because the value of TAAS vehicles in Tesla fleet far outweigh open market sale value (See Tony Seba).

Question: If Tesla is only producing robo-taxis and robo-transport for their own fleet, which vehicles would they choose?

My thoughts: I originally thought that the Cybertruck was pure genius in that it would be simplifying the manufacturing process (no paint shop etc.) and is designed without the planned obsolescence so intrinsic to the current ICE industry. Perfect as a robo-taxi especially with all of the seats plus room for cargo. I am now thinking that a robo-taxi probably does not need to be bad-ass and be able to run the Baja. Semis, vans and model Ys would make more sense to me. So, if the time-line of 5 years for Tesla's FSD TAAS to ramp up is accurate, then we probably won't have the Cybertruck produced for more than 5 years. All good news, I think for the goal and will also make the value of my CTruck go up.

What are your thoughts?

You could end up being right but like you said, you're making assumptions. I have no facts to dispute your point of view, just my personal feelings and assumptions. They didn't just pick the price out of thin air and they seem to think it will be easier to mfg. not harder. At this point i find the ct cool and want it. Most things people buy are like that.

 

[flowerlandfilms]

I read the 2 articles and was a bit amazed that anyone would say that the correct terminology for torque is lbs-ft vs ft-lbs. Is this really important to the author? I am directly involved in the unit/quantity industry and the common usage of torque is ft-lbf (pound force vs pound mass). Perhaps in the sheet metal industry the common usage is lb-ft but there are many other industries in the world. This is simply nit-picking because units are 'commutative' in that there is no ordering of terms; both are perfectly correct from a notational perspective.

...Newton Metres (Nm) for me thanks...

 

[egandalf]

I am really curious about how that works in CT. I dislocated a shoulder once trying to unload a heavy Kayak off of a taller roof rack. My current truck has an adjustable rack on the bed that is fairly low. I hope I don’t have to pay with another dislocated shoulder for owning a CT. Lowering the air suspension should be a bit of help.

Similar - I had to move a 17-foot aluminum canoe and figure out how to do it without a roof rack. What a pain, but thankfully a one-time in my case.

Here's the screencap of a rack concept from the unveil - there are plenty more concepts in a quick Google search. I think with the "squat" mode enabled it should help. I could see welding a winch to help as well if it's something you do frequently enough to warrant it.

 

[lancethibault]

A large portion of population drive inefficient polluting ugly trucks because they think they look tough.

The ugly comment aside, to address the "look tough comment". Maybe they (I) they drive them because they need the ground clearance sometimes, the 4x4 capability sometimes, the cargo space sometimes, the cargo capacity in terms of weight sometimes, the interior space sometimes, the towing capacity sometimes, etc...and they don't want to have multiple vehicles to accomplish what they need, when they need it, or rent when needed, or schedule deliveries opposed to picking up whatever it is they need when they need it themselves.

I personally could give two $%!s how tough it looks but it better have a comfortable interior. Full size trucks are the vehicle I can use for everything I need to do.

 

[strongsafety31]

2 things struck me when I read the article posted below. The thick stainless Steel on the Cybertruck is heavy and it will slow the manufacturing process because of the laser-cutting, bending and welding being much slower than stamping, which can be run at 50+ stamps per minute. Also, it would seem that the lack of curves in the truck is detrimental to reducing the co-efficient of drag. So, once the autonomous driving is implemented, why would Elon keep pushing the constrained resource batteries at a Cybertruck Behemoth that is heavy, slow to manufacture and has a poor airfoil. Maybe the robo-taxi fleet will be made from a lighter stamped SS or aluminum and be shaped more in line of an Aptera. After-all if autonomous driving nearly eliminates accidents, why do we need a tough shell other than for bush driving? Even contractors really only need rust proof, strong bed and good towing chassis. Wish I knew the plan.

https://stampingsimulation.com/forming-stainless-steel-part-2/

The CT manufacturing run will not be short lived, unless you call 1.5 million vehicles 'short lived'. This doesn't include new orders.
An angular body means cheap production costs.
.30 drag coefficient is better than all trucks and most cars.
No paint means cheap production cost.
Thick steel means longevity and no rust.
When the model 3 came out it had hundreds of welded panels on the body. On the model Y this has been reduced to one casting on the front and one casting on the rear and the structural battery pack. Tesla is trying to reduce this to one casting across all of their models. That shows how rapidly they modify and improve. The CT will see the same improvements.
The CT will probably have no side view mirrors, no windshield wipers, FSD, a central tire inflation system, be bullet proof to 9mm, have a cabin and bed climate control system, solar panels on the bed cover, 0-60mph time of 2.5 seconds (tri-motor), and the ability to power all types of tools needed on a jobsite or supply power to a travel trailer if you are camping.

 

[egandalf]

The ugly comment aside, to address the "look tough comment". Maybe they (I) they drive them because they need the ground clearance sometimes, the 4x4 capability sometimes, the cargo space sometimes, the cargo capacity in terms of weight sometimes, the interior space sometimes, the towing capacity sometimes, etc...and they don't want to have multiple vehicles to accomplish what they need, when they need it, or rent when needed, or schedule deliveries opposed to picking up whatever it is they need when they need it themselves.

I personally could give two $%!s how tough it looks but it better have a comfortable interior. Full size trucks are the vehicle I can use for everything I need to do.

All good points. Around my area, we've got a number of trucks that are set up to burn HEAVY amounts of diesel in order to "roll coal" at other drivers. I have doubts that there's any functional reason to do so and, yes, I think they do that to look tough.

Lift kits (and drop kits) are legit, extra lights are legit, etc. But the tough factor applies to some, for sure.

 

[Diehard]

I still pinch myself that Tesla is actually building this apocalypse ready truck. It‘s the polar opposite of planned obsolescence that is so common in the auto industry. I don’t see why the truck won’t last 50+ years into the future and be handed down through generations.

Model S at $80K, CT dual at $50K? Pinching is well warranted.

 

[Diehard]

The ugly comment aside, to address the "look tough comment". Maybe they (I) they drive them because they need the ground clearance sometimes, the 4x4 capability sometimes, the cargo space sometimes, the cargo capacity in terms of weight sometimes, the interior space sometimes, the towing capacity sometimes, etc...and they don't want to have multiple vehicles to accomplish what they need, when they need it, or rent when needed, or schedule deliveries opposed to picking up whatever it is they need when they need it themselves.

I personally could give two $%!s how tough it looks but it better have a comfortable interior. Full size trucks are the vehicle I can use for everything I need to do.

I didn’t mean to offend anyone’s taste. My point is that if you look at design and marketing campaign of most automakers, it revolves around tough for a reason. They do a lot of research. I don’t blame Elon for going after that emotional hook. You may make all your choices intellectually. Believe me I do my best to do the same but I don’t always succeed and I know many others that struggle with the same. For me driving something different is more important than though, but that is an emotional choice too which has nothing to do with functionality or mobility. To me it is a perfectly valid approach by Tesla to make something fully functional, yet attempt to project a tough image. Again sorry if I offended you.

 

[Frank W]

I would add also to the list of modifications to trucks is being lifted and once again the CT already comes out ahead with the added bonus of being lowered. ?

 

[Frank W]

I didn’t mean to offend anyone’s taste. My point is that if you look at design and marketing campaign of most automakers, it revolves around tough for a reason. They do a lot of research. I don’t blame Elon for going after that emotional hook. You may make all your choices intellectually. Believe me I do my best to do the same but I don’t always succeed and I know many others that struggle with the same. For me driving something different is more important than though, but that is an emotional choice too which has nothing to do with functionality or mobility. To me it is a perfectly valid approach by Tesla to make something fully functional, yet attempt to project a tough image. Again sorry if I offended you.

You mean “fake tough” regarding “My point is that if you look at design and marketing campaign of most automakers, it revolves around tough for a reason” don’t you? ? Elon’s words.

 

[android04]

Thanks for the great replies. Let me add some specific assumptions I am making:

1) FSD Level 5 achieved
2) Multiple jurisdictions have supplied regulatory approval
3) Tesla moves all manufacturing to the production of Tesla fleet TAAS vehicles because the value of TAAS vehicles in Tesla fleet far outweigh open market sale value (See Tony Seba).

Question: If Tesla is only producing robo-taxis and robo-transport for their own fleet, which vehicles would they choose?

My thoughts: I originally thought that the Cybertruck was pure genius in that it would be simplifying the manufacturing process (no paint shop etc.) and is designed without the planned obsolescence so intrinsic to the current ICE industry. Perfect as a robo-taxi especially with all of the seats plus room for cargo. I am now thinking that a robo-taxi probably does not need to be bad-ass and be able to run the Baja. Semis, vans and model Ys would make more sense to me. So, if the time-line of 5 years for Tesla's FSD TAAS to ramp up is accurate, then we probably won't have the Cybertruck produced for more than 5 years. All good news, I think for the goal and will also make the value of my CTruck go up.

What are your thoughts?

More to your point, and to add in agreement to what others here are saying, I don't think the Cybertruck makes sense for use as a robotaxi. At least at first, there might only be a few cases where somebody needs the bed space for a robotaxi, and we have to wait and see if FSD will evolve to be able to handle trailers. But I think it makes more sense for somebody that needs to haul or tow things to rent a truck. The Cybertruck will use more energy than the Model 3/Y/S/X and does not make sense for use as a people-hauler because that added energy usage will eat into your profit. The cheaper $25k Tesla that will be made in a handful of years makes more sense for the purpose, and perhaps FSD will be closer to feature-complete by them.