My design update render (size reduction & leveling)

[Ehninger1212]

LOL im picturing myself working at Tesla loading the 3D CAD model into the computer and hitting *Scale -3% after Elon's tweet

Advertisement

 

[noturaveragecitizen]

I really hope that the CT takes up this rendering , because the other one completely changes the looks .

 

[Cybr on]

It sure will be???

 

[ldjessee]

I am fine with the bed as long as it is 6ft or longer and the tail gate can be left flat to extend the bedlength... I think I will need it for my motorcycle to fit.

Now if the tailgate is less tall, that means there is less room for the ramp... Hmm...

 

[rr6013]

A 2nd version, an International version, in addition to the first has been announced that there're working on it.
Elon tweeted that it would 73 inch's wide but it may now be 2 or more inch's wider.

It will be interesting to see how many of the existing orders swap over, and how many new orders are generated.

Basically 15/16ths scale CT.

This 2nd ver. CT dimensions match size of a TOYOTA 3rd Gen 4Runner (1996-2002) Limited model which features wheel arch flares. O-O 73 inches; its body width measures ~67 inches. The wider hedge adding another 2" is interesting. It could be EXO panel design requirements.

This would cut a lot of weight out of the vehicle. Definitely, it improves handling. Interior will be 5 persons. And it affords consumers a compact model CT, which I would be a swap over, probably. That will depend on intangibles like comfort quality of a more narrow cockpit interior, window sill height top and bottom.

But it might cost Tesla too much tooling, re-engineering and support for two versions. For instance body panels would be non-interchangeable and proportions change cabin height causing doors to be smaller. Cost savings would be smaller motors and battery.

SO a smaller CT looks to be a completely new platform, new engineering, new foundry, new parts, new panels, new computer and even the interior would be new. All non-interchangeable with its Big CT brother. Unless, Tesla are pulling a Chevy Colorado trick lofting a full size bed matched to a compact cabin. As Chevy defines it " a midsize truck with full-size capability". Then its a No, hell NO.

Notice that lowering the mid-line AND 3% reduction in overall size may fix interchangeability problems. 3% of 78" width is 75+" width which is exactly Elon Musk's 2" hedge added to 73" width = 75 inches overall. I bet he's going down market for cause if true. It's a wait and see...

 

[Geo]

Basically 15/16ths scale CT.

This 2nd ver. CT dimensions match size of a TOYOTA 3rd Gen 4Runner (1996-2002) Limited model which features wheel arch flares. O-O 73 inches; its body width measures ~67 inches. The wider hedge adding another 2" is interesting. It could be EXO panel design requirements.

This would cut a lot of weight out of the vehicle. Definitely, it improves handling. Interior will be 5 persons. And it affords consumers a compact model CT, which I would be a swap over, probably. That will depend on intangibles like comfort quality of a more narrow cockpit interior, window sill height top and bottom.

But it might cost Tesla too much tooling, re-engineering and support for two versions. For instance body panels would be non-interchangeable and proportions change cabin height causing doors to be smaller. Cost savings would be smaller motors and battery.

SO a smaller CT looks to be a completely new platform, new engineering, new foundry, new parts, new panels, new computer and even the interior would be new. All non-interchangeable with its Big CT brother. Unless, Tesla are pulling a Chevy Colorado trick lofting a full size bed matched to a compact cabin. As Chevy defines it " a midsize truck with full-size capability". Then its a No, hell NO.

Notice that lowering the mid-line AND 3% reduction in overall size may fix interchangeability problems. 3% of 78" width is 75+" width which is exactly Elon Musk's 2" hedge added to 73" width = 75 inches overall. I bet he's going down market for cause if true. It's a wait and see...

You could be right on a number of points Rex, but I'd suggest on one point, that because the CT is of such a planar design all throughout the vehicle.
I see that it would be far easier to have parts in common, and where not actually in common, to still have significant synergy.
I don't see it necessarily requires a whole new platform.
Most pickup's come in a variety of permutations of cabins and bed lengths etc. All on the same platform.
I can easily see that being the case here too. Certainly there would be a ready made market for at least 1 other bed length option.

ie. to laser cut a flat piece of sheet metal in 2 sizes is very minor additional work.

If the Model Y shares something like 75% of the components of Model 3, Large Cybertruck and "Goldilocks Cybertruck" will likely share much, and I certainly hope they share the same wheels, suspension, drivetrain and battery configuration.

For the most part don't change the design, just necessary tweaks to balance the aesthetics when you lop the bed down to 5 1/2 or 5 ft.
And if you want to take out a little width, its done down the spine of the truck.

I dare say that as per the Cybertruck Order disclaimer for an International version and Elon's confirmation of a smaller width Cybertruck, that they would well and truly already be designing parts that are common to both versions.

I'm just hoping they release it sooner rather than later. I think it will be in huge demand, in the U.S and Internationally.

P.S. Perhaps someone may have a breakdown of the numbers of the different varieties of F150's and could post them ?
Or for instance what's the total volume of trucks sold by bed length ?

Hey Rex have you been pulling my leg, "new foundary" seems a little over the top

 

[rr6013]

Foundary was "catchall" - literary license. It was to cover for dropping weight may be change in thickness or gauge of individual S.S. sheets. That portends working sheetmetal post roll delivery or mixing gauges which begats innovation. At the end of the day, size matters.

When making millions of S.S. panels 3% adds up to real USD $$$,$$$,$$$. Unlike SpaceX one-off rockets produced XX/yr, Tesla will run at production scale. Looking back it was necessary in prototype to cut out a standard sheet of S.S. It is what lended CT that all-purpose sledgehammer-tough look.

Revised mockups online of 3% size reduction, window eyebrow narrow and frontend snubnose truncation have it looking refined (ala car design values). The last thing Tesla needs is a dressed up CT in high heels that comes with $3000 Mondays only dancing thru desert puckerbrush. CT must be romping over dunes tough and tearing up hillclimbs, rock or no rock - without Mondays. I have my doubts CT rocks but none that its low-CG out climbs the competition. That attractive nuisance alone will fill many a Monday at Tesla, for the uninitiated.

As far as the popular garage excuse cutting 3%, Tesla can't risk turning Cybertruck into a Garage Queen. The HUGE majority of FORD pickups don't sleep in a garage. Catering to a garage cult forgoes Tesla disrupting FORD's working class truck sales. Tesla will not get any deeper than 3-4% of FORD pickup sales if that garage queen meme over-dominates CT sledgehammer tough messaging. Talk about redmeat bait! Sledgehammer's have swing weight. Elon needs to keep it in the formula as metaphorical FORD knockout punch that it is.

SO Elon can tweak but not change CT success formula. 3% is 15/16ths rig change. The burden on Tesla is to demonstrate it's a tweak not change.
AND if change; change for better - to the rig - in meaningful ways other than the damn thing fits in a home garage.
THEREFOR Baja! A meaningful rig change - no tweak. One that adds a tough-factor beyond degrees.

 

[TyPope]

Foundary was "catchall" - literary license. It was to cover for dropping weight may be change in thickness or gauge of individual S.S. sheets. That portends working sheetmetal post roll delivery or mixing gauges which begats innovation. At the end of the day, size matters.

When making millions of S.S. panels 3% adds up to real USD $$$,$$$,$$$. Unlike SpaceX one-off rockets produced XX/yr, Tesla will run at production scale. Looking back it was necessary in prototype to cut out a standard sheet of S.S. It is what lended CT that all-purpose sledgehammer-tough look.

Revised mockups online of 3% size reduction, window eyebrow narrow and frontend snubnose truncation have it looking refined (ala car design values). The last thing Tesla needs is a dressed up CT in high heels that comes with $3000 Mondays only dancing thru desert puckerbrush. CT must be romping over dunes tough and tearing up hillclimbs, rock or no rock - without Mondays. I have my doubts CT rocks but none that its low-CG out climbs the competition. That attractive nuisance alone will fill many a Monday at Tesla, for the uninitiated.

As far as the popular garage excuse cutting 3%, Tesla can't risk turning Cybertruck into a Garage Queen. The HUGE majority of FORD pickups don't sleep in a garage. Catering to a garage cult forgoes Tesla disrupting FORD's working class truck sales. Tesla will not get any deeper than 3-4% of FORD pickup sales if that garage queen meme over-dominates CT sledgehammer tough messaging. Talk about redmeat bait! Sledgehammer's have swing weight. Elon needs to keep it in the formula as metaphorical FORD knockout punch that it is.

SO Elon can tweak but not change CT success formula. 3% is 15/16ths rig change. The burden on Tesla is to demonstrate it's a tweak not change.
AND if change; change for better - to the rig - in meaningful ways other than the damn thing fits in a home garage.
THEREFOR Baja! A meaningful rig change - no tweak. One that adds a tough-factor beyond degrees.

Fitting in the garage is just one measure. Fitting into parking spots is another and is the reason my F350 sits in the garage and I now drive an older Prius the 10 miles to work. I'm hoping the CT fits better than my 22' long truck so I can replace my current two vehicles with one.

 

[Sputter]

Nice Work! I like it better this new way, just the right size

Me too. Much better. Especially from the rear. Elon's prototype is just too high in the rear.

 

[ldjessee]

Until I am picking mine up, I am not assuming anything is set in stone.

 

[Geo]

I'd switch in a heartbeat. I don't really need a truck, I need an EV. I can do with a Model Y, but having the bed to put my "stuff" in was a game-changer. Maybe 20% of sales of the current CT will be to guys that actually take them to the worksite. I don't think it's even that high for ICE trucks. I'd be ecstatic to drive a smaller CT, it needs to have 35 inch tires though.....

Mprimo, since you did some good work on the revised dimensions, and the overlay was great in highlighting where the differences are likely to be, why don’t you have a go at your interpretation of the additional version of Cybertruck that they’re working on, given what we know and what can be estimated !
Perhaps give Franz a run for his money. I think like you I wasn’t looking for a truck but Cybertruck is a great All Purpose Adventure Vehicle.
Im just looking forward to the “Goldilocks” additional version that will be a little more practical around town.


Original Cybertruck : length 231.7”, width 79.8”, bed 78” x 57”

Revised Cybertruck : length 224.7”, width ~82”, bed 78” x 59”

International Cybertruck : length ~208 “, width 75”, bed ~62” x ~52”

We know Elon tweeted it would be 73” wide. But it may now be 2” or more wider.
We know many mid size pickups are between 208” and 210” long,
but Cybertruck is more space efficient without a front ICE engine.
We know most mid size pickups have a 60” - 61” bed length.

Could perhaps the roof peak be lower per the revised CT, but maybe the rear roof line more closely follow the original Cybertruck ?!?!
Do you think they need to reduce the space from the cabin ? Either from the front and the rear ,or just the rear, or none from the cabin at all ?

P.S. Also yes on the 35" tyres.
Also these numbers may be slightly off, Elon said he was settling them with his engineering team last week and would be releasing them
after that. So they can't be too far away.

 

[Kriber01]

Smaller tailgate means shorter ramp ? I personally liked the attitude of original design, you guys should have bought a bigger garage ?

 

[mprimo]

Smaller tailgate means shorter ramp ? I personally liked the attitude of original design, you guys should have bought a bigger garage ?

LOL, I had one until I bought a house in the city, I was already thinking about how I can cut into the house for a few more inches before these new specs. I don't think you'll notice the difference with the tailgate. The angle might be a little steeper. I estimate only a few inches shorter.

 

[mprimo]

Mprimo, since you did some good work on the revised dimensions, and the overlay was great in highlighting where the differences are likely to be, why don’t you have a go at your interpretation of the additional version of Cybertruck that they’re working on, given what we know and what can be estimated !
Perhaps give Franz a run for his money. I think like you I wasn’t looking for a truck but Cybertruck is a great All Purpose Adventure Vehicle.
Im just looking forward to the “Goldilocks” additional version that will be a little more practical around town.


Original Cybertruck : length 231.7”, width 79.8”, bed 78” x 57”

Revised Cybertruck : length 224.7”, width ~82”, bed 78” x 59”

International Cybertruck : length ~208 “, width 75”, bed ~62” x ~52”

We know Elon tweeted it would be 73” wide. But it may now be 2” or more wider.
We know many mid size pickups are between 208” and 210” long,
but Cybertruck is more space efficient without a front ICE engine.
We know most mid size pickups have a 60” - 61” bed length.

Could perhaps the roof peak be lower per the revised CT, but maybe the rear roof line more closely follow the original Cybertruck ?!?!
Do you think they need to reduce the space from the cabin ? Either from the front and the rear ,or just the rear, or none from the cabin at all ?

P.S. Also yes on the 35" tyres.
Also these numbers may be slightly off, Elon said he was settling them with his engineering team last week and would be releasing them
after that. So they can't be too far away.

I don't think you can make an "International" version of this truck. 220" is possibly the shortest length you can make it before the rear seats become useless. At 208, they would have to design a new (NON-TRIANGLE) truck or a 3 seat single cab truck. Seeing how massive this thing was at the reveal, I doubt they gave a single thought to the Euro market. I'll try playing with the design to see how a smaller version would work......

 

[Kriber01]

LOL, I had one until I bought a house in the city, I was already thinking about how I can cut into the house for a few more inches before these new specs. I don't think you'll notice the difference with the tailgate. The angle might be a little steeper. I estimate only a few inches shorter.

I'm sure it will turn out great, hopefully the air suspension will give it enough drop to get it in to my garage. ? But I'm not interested in a small truck, my silverado is 230 inches and fits fine.. Good job on the rendering, I hope to see more ??