Tesla Pickup Truck Demo Fiasco

Guest OMFG by David Middleton

‘Oh My F*cking God’: Tesla ‘Cybertruck’ Fractures During Demo

Elon Musk’s Tesla has unveiled its latest vehicle, a bizarre pickup truck, to a largely skeptical public. The truck was touted as having “impact-resistant windows” that were promptly smashed inwards with a small metal ball during a live demonstration on Thursday.


“You want a truck that’s really tough. Not fake tough,” Musk said, claiming that the truck’s body could withstand 9mm handgun bullets.

Von Holzhausesn then demonstrated the impact-resistant technology used on the truck’s windows, picking up a stainless steel ball and throwing it after a soft windup at the driver side window. The window promptly smashed, with Elon Musk audibly stating “oh my [fracking] god,” before instructing Holzhausesn to test the rear passenger window, which also promptly smashed. A video of the incident can be seen below:


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 22, 2019 10:05 pm

More Tesla hate. Boring.

Reply to  JWSC
November 22, 2019 10:19 pm

LOL! There is no defense. And stating facts is not “hate”. It was a disaster of such magnitude it could be mistaken for an SNL skit,

Bryan A
Reply to  rah
November 22, 2019 11:06 pm

SNL or No SNL the truck looks like a POS.
What a rancid design.

Reply to  Bryan A
November 23, 2019 1:50 am

Reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Homer designs a car.

Reply to  MarkH
November 23, 2019 2:42 am

MarkH, I was thinking one of the episodes of Top Gear when Clarkson, May, and Hammond design a car.


Reply to  MarkH
November 23, 2019 9:43 am

Homer’s design actually made sense. It was just too expensive.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  MarkH
November 24, 2019 10:06 pm

“Bob Tisdale November 23, 2019 at 2:42 am”

The Top Gear EV chassis was from a TVR, which makes sense. Teslas were going to use a chassis from Lotus IIRC but in the end built their own. Probably a good thing as LOTUS stands for Lots Of Trouble Usually Serious.

Reply to  Bryan A
November 23, 2019 2:04 am

Design with straight, boxy (ugly) lines, i.e. simple, low-cost pressing tools. Could mean Tesla getting stingy.

Reply to  pierre gosselin
November 23, 2019 5:09 am

Try no pressing tools ?

The design stages for any new vehicle follow a by now accepted route. Design Salon, Conversion to feasibility, Clay Model, Press tool production, setting up of the line, to name a few. Needless to say all of that takes money, and a sizeable development staff, neither of which Tesla would seem to have.

I’d have to guess, that the latest Tesla product is nothing more than a handmade lash up to enable Musk to throw some scraps to the fanbois ? As for the windows breaking, Musk is clever enough to know that the knocking of Tesla is such a cliche now, that having the windows break will get him even more publicity ? 🙂

Patrick MJD
Reply to  pierre gosselin
November 23, 2019 6:06 am

“Fanakapan November 23, 2019 at 5:09 am”

I worked at the Honda (HUM) factory in Swindon, UK, in the 1990’s. Honda and Rover used to share stuff. Honda shared engines, gearboxes electrics etc (I used to date a nice lady in Honda purchasing then), Rover shared body panels (Rover 200 = Honda Accord). Honda used to reject up to 80% of the body panels that came out of the Rover plant just across the road. So they put in their own CNC pressing plant. A mighty machine it was.

Reply to  Bryan A
November 23, 2019 4:11 am

It looks like a badly-thought-out Tinkertoy idea.

Reply to  Sara
November 23, 2019 11:27 am

..it’s been my understanding that a ‘truck’ has a bed…..to haul stuff

John Endicott
Reply to  Sara
November 25, 2019 6:24 am

1.a large, heavy motor vehicle used for transporting goods, materials, or troops.

A truck or lorry is a motor vehicle designed to transport cargo. Trucks vary greatly in size, power, and configuration; smaller varieties may be mechanically similar to some automobiles.

No where in those definition is a “bed” required.

John Endicott
Reply to  Sara
November 25, 2019 6:32 am

Add, BTW, latitude, the tesla truck does have a bed. The back end, while closed in most of the images related to the demonstration, does open up to reveal a bed.

Reply to  Bryan A
November 23, 2019 7:24 am

Cardboard and duck tape could have made a better looking “vehicle”.

What a ‘butt-ugly” mock-up.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Rocketscientist
November 23, 2019 11:43 am

Did you ever see the Red-Green movie about the duct tape goose?

Reply to  Bryan A
November 23, 2019 7:44 am

“Bryan A November 22, 2019 at 11:06 pm
SNL or No SNL the truck looks like a POS.
What a rancid design.”

Just how much of that design is the battery? Looks to be at least half.

Then, exactly how much hauling capacity is left for non-battery hauling? One suspects that between battery and passengers, the truck can’t carry much.

Bryan A
Reply to  ATheoK
November 23, 2019 9:40 am

Supposed to be rated for 7500 pounds.
3 different models ranging from $35,000 to $65,000.
Odds are, like the 3, the $35,000 version will get the most orders but only the $65,000 model will be built.
At least, so far as looks go, Tesla still has the other models S3XY…

Reply to  ATheoK
November 23, 2019 11:37 am

Stated cargo capacity is 3500 pounds. That’s the same as the Heavy Duty trucks from Ford, Chevy and Ram. Based cargo capacity on an F-150 is 1,000 pounds which is why it’s call a half ton model.

The based model of the Tesla truck has a towing capacity of 7500 pounds with the highest model able to tow 14000 pounds.

The specs are quite impressive, especially at the price points. The design not so much.

Steven F
Reply to  ATheoK
November 23, 2019 1:08 pm

The typical tesla battery is about 6″ thick and is bolted to the bottom of the vehicle and between the tires.The bead of the truck is 6.5 feet deep and the truck is about 6 feet wide with enough room to seat 6 people.

Tombstone Gabby
Reply to  ATheoK
November 23, 2019 8:24 pm

ATheoK asked “exactly how much hauling capacity is left for non-battery hauling?”

So, one of the higher costing units could haul my 27 foot travel trailer. I pull into an RV park for the night. “I need a site where I can recharge my Tesla.” Some would just laugh, the rest would tell me exactly what to do with the vehicle.

It’s a truck? Can I get a 4′ by 8′ sheet of plywood into the ‘bed’? (Sheets that have overlapping edges run about 49 1/2 inches.)

I think I’ll hang onto the ’03 F-350 with the Banks turbo for a while yet…..

Pop Piasa
Reply to  ATheoK
November 24, 2019 1:35 pm

To be fair David, I paid over $50K for my 12 year old 4×4 F-250 Diesel Lariat in 2008.
I will still race a Tesla towing trailers like my loaded Merhow Equistar 3-horse with 11.5′ short wall living quarters and bath, if the Tesla can even tow a gooseneck hitch, from St. Louis to Phoenix. I can get there in 48 hrs, the Tesla will likely be stuck charging at a place that has no horse-friendly lodging overnight since it’s range towing will undoubtedly be very short, just like my distance between fuel stops. Of course, my fuel stops are 10 minutes and back on the road. What do you do with livestock while charging a state of the art electric truck?

Pop Piasa
Reply to  ATheoK
November 24, 2019 2:11 pm

Tombstone, your 7.3 is superior in design and longevity. I wish they would have perfected it instead of screwing up with the 6.0 and 6.4 engines.

John Endicott
Reply to  ATheoK
November 26, 2019 8:59 am

Tombstone Gabby, Tesla’s cybertruck has a bed of 6.5 feet and 78.8 inches wide. For comparison the F-150 (which is what it’s being marketed against) has bed options of 5.5, 6.5, and 8 feet lengths and 80 inches wide. So if a 6.5 foot bed F-150 will meet your bed-size needs, so should the Tesla, if it won’t than neither would the Tesla. (speaking only of bed sizes which is only one factor that goes into buying or not buying any particular model of truck). based on your specified dimensions, the answer appears to yes but only if it’s acceptable to you to have a couple of feet of the length hanging out the back (as I’ve seen on many a truck on the roads), same as if you were to try it was a 6.5ft bed F-150.

Reply to  rah
November 23, 2019 2:24 am

Really, you think this was an accident?? C’mon, if you watched the whole video you’d have seen where they compared auto glass versus tesla glass and the tesla glass survived a hard impact.

Either there was clear malevolence on the part of someone to install the wrong glass (possibly, but not likely) or it was intentional in order to get wider distribution.

For me, the glass wasn’t the problem. Did no one else notice that the truck shape itself comes from a 70’s horror sci-fi film. What, are tesla drivers going to start cutting pedestrians in half now?

/still loves musk for what he’s done with spacex

Reply to  Paul
November 23, 2019 11:15 am

Do you know how many rockets spacex blewup getting to where it is?

Do you know how many rockets everyone has blown up?

While I will never buy a tesla, I have been in negotiation with spacex and will likely contract a smallsat launch in the next 2 years, along with anyone else who has any commercial launcher sense.

Reply to  Frenchie77
November 23, 2019 8:04 am

“Frenchie77 November 23, 2019 at 2:24 am
Really, you think this was an accident?? C’mon, if you watched the whole video you’d have seen where they compared auto glass versus tesla glass and the tesla glass survived a hard impact.”

So, you invent a conspiracy theory? To protect Tesla?
Exactly what is/are Tesla’s experience with glass and optically transparent materials?

That they ‘claim’ to test auto glass is extremely suspicious.
Modern auto glass is extremely tough.
Which is why tungsten tipped hammers to break auto glass are popular accessories as protection against getting stuck inside a car; e.g. car gets submerged.

The tungsten tip is intended to force tempered glass to chip; where any damage is then catastrophic to the glass sheet.
Automobile companies have already hosted media events where windshield safety glass is harshley tested before witnesses; e.g. Cadillac, Mercedes benz.

Given the decades of efforts to strengthen glass and other optically transparent technologies; one must be suspicious of Tesla’s claims. It is more likely that Tesla relied upon existing technology and patents.
Getting sold on auto glass that is”unbreakable” usually means unbreakable by non-hard-metallic means. Yes, that includes most soft tipped pistol bullets.

Reply to  ATheoK
November 23, 2019 11:12 am

What, you need a conspiracy to fake a video in order to make it go viral?

Do you know what youtube is?

John Endicott
Reply to  rah
November 25, 2019 6:18 am

Now, now rah. To be fair, it was far funnier than an SNL is currently capable of.

Phillip Bratby
Reply to  JWSC
November 22, 2019 10:24 pm

Is it a hate crime to hate Tesla?

Bill Powers
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
November 23, 2019 7:22 am

Actually it is a hate crime to brand honest inquiry as denial of cultural orthodoxy. The kind of hate that causes little girls to scold adults for acting in a way that improves children’s lives and demanding a return to the dark ages of wooden wagon and boat travel and forest destruction for fuel.

Skeptics should keep the Spanish Inquisition in mind and actively fight back against the type of hate that is frightening little children into therapy. For this type of hate leads to torture racks and forced adherence to stupidity when authority runs amok.

Reply to  Bill Powers
November 25, 2019 9:36 pm

re: “Skeptics should keep the Spanish Inquisition in mind”

Overblown in scope and the means used; Can I ask that you become fully informed on this subject? It gets OLD reading the same misinformation, misconceptions.

Reply to  JWSC
November 22, 2019 10:52 pm

Yeah, totally unfair. Tesla doesn’t always lose money. link 🙂

old construction worker
Reply to  commieBob
November 23, 2019 1:23 am

Take away all the subsidies and Cal’s Co2 trading scam and yes the do loose money.

Reply to  JWSC
November 22, 2019 10:54 pm

… hate. Appeal to empathy?

As for Tesla, surely they tested the glass before demonstration.

Reply to  n.n
November 23, 2019 1:07 am


Garland Lowe
Reply to  goldminor
November 23, 2019 5:07 am

Stop calling me Shirley.

Bryan A
Reply to  n.n
November 23, 2019 9:44 am

They did “Drop” the steel ball from a height onto the glass and it bounced. Those problem is far more likely to be one of having a different window glass mounted in the truck than what was expected for the demo

Planning Engineer
Reply to  JWSC
November 22, 2019 11:39 pm

Musk and Tesla are major contributors to the overhyping of “green” tech. Many find his sometimes outlandish claims as regards his solar roof, batteries and solar tech to be credible. He enjoys adulation from many media sources. Here he is praising the capability of the windows, when he hasn’t even tested them in advance for his own scheduled demo. Touting the windows was a poor marketing call, but falls far short of abysmal for an engineering claim.

I struggle with Musk and find this telling. https://judithcurry.com/2017/10/27/trying-to-make-sense-of-musk-love-and-solar-hype/

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  Planning Engineer
November 23, 2019 5:21 am

Funny…I saw the “Tesla to aid Puerto Rico” linked incessantly on social media. That is the first follow-up I’ve seen.

Reply to  JWSC
November 23, 2019 1:11 am

You can handle the truth?

Alan Chapprll
Reply to  JPS
November 23, 2019 5:19 am

The Biggest money earner for the near Tesler market is installing Gasoline powered gen-sets in there cars, ( Northern California )

Matthew Bergin
Reply to  Alan Chapprll
November 24, 2019 5:27 am

It would be much easier to carry those generators in the truck. 🤣🤣

Reply to  JWSC
November 23, 2019 1:53 am

I don’t care about the tesla cars, good or bad, but Musk with his ego trip has tarnished the name of Nikola Tesla one of the greatest inventors and engineers the world has ever seen, and it is unlikely to see in foreseeable future, if ever again.

Sceptical lefty
Reply to  Vuk
November 24, 2019 9:58 pm

I don’t always agree with you, but this time you nailed it.

Reply to  Vuk
November 25, 2019 9:45 pm

re: “one of the greatest inventors and engineers the world has ever seen”

No, not really; He was the Elon Musk of his time.

A more versatile and a man with MORE overall impact on tech in that day AND inventing devices that SAVED LIVES – George Westinghouse. Then there is Benjamin Lamme, who writes in his biography on both Tesla and Westinghouse.

Westinghouse was the man to whom Nick Tesla sold patents.

Westinghouse was THE man who invented and perfected the railway AIR BRAKE system.

Please, become educated: WESTINGHOUSE (Full Documentary) | The Powerhouse Struggle of Patents & Business with Nikola Tesla

Reply to  JWSC
November 23, 2019 1:56 am

It’s not a case of “Tesla hate”.
Tesla has picked up >USD4.5 Billion of US Govt handouts and has yet to make a sustainable profit or satisfy forward orders in a timely manner.
And this is the best that Tesla can do to promote a new concept?
Then again ……any publicity is good publicity (maybe?)

Col Mosby
Reply to  JWSC
November 23, 2019 7:36 am

Tesla fully deserves to be hated, mainly because of its lying, greedy, disgusting owner, Elon Musk. If any ever doubted that Musk has no taste, the design of this most outrageously ugly truck (?) will remove all doubt. Musk sucks and nothing any of his lapdogs can say will change that fact.

Reply to  JWSC
November 23, 2019 8:04 am

Anyone who doesn’t worship at the feet of Elon is a hater. Boring.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  JWSC
November 23, 2019 11:42 am

Are you suggesting that it was hate that drove the little boy to observe that the king had no clothes? Why would you assume that everything negative about Musk is driven by hate? It sounds like a personal problem.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  JWSC
November 23, 2019 2:09 pm

Sounds like someone has an expensive stock that is worth nothing.

John Endicott
Reply to  JWSC
November 25, 2019 6:38 am

JWSC: More Tesla hate. Boring

Please point out the hate? reporting what actually happened at the demonstration is not hate.

Harold Thiel
November 22, 2019 10:06 pm

Not to worry, I’m sure these pickups will do well in really cold weather.

Reply to  Harold Thiel
November 23, 2019 6:10 pm

Haven’t you heard about The End Of Cold? Coming to a theater near you.

November 22, 2019 10:15 pm

This made it onto the CBC (Canadian Broadcorping Castration) during prime time. Without the incident I think the truck would have been mostly ignored.

Was this an publicity stunt? People who care already know that bulletproof glass breaks when hit with a projectile. link

November 22, 2019 10:16 pm

Another vehicle that will produce more toxic waste to manufacture, require more child labour and slave labour to source the materials for than any fossil fuel vehicle would require or produce in it’s life. And this is progress?

Reply to  Richard
November 22, 2019 11:04 pm

Shared… shifted ecological impact. Also, environmental, labor, and monetary arbitrage. That said, it’s curious that an uprising in Hong Kong would coincide with the first authentic effort in a long time by an American President to confront the arbitrage games played by globalism (e.g. anti-nativism) advocates. The same coincidence that underlies 12 trimesters of witch hunts, warlock trials, and impeachment efforts by Democrats, press, social media platforms, and patrons, foreign and domestic.

This is progress or monotonic [unqualified] change, less the imputed positive denotation and connotation.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Richard
November 22, 2019 11:15 pm

There is a YouTuber called John Cadogan here in Australia who calls Musk “Electric Jesus”. Says Musk is convincing people to save the planet by consuming more. In that respect, he’s not too far wrong.

Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 23, 2019 4:16 am

looks like SA govt is going to spend?? millions to add 50% more useess batteries to gain ONE hr of ???no volume listed) of power for blackouts
the ones we rarely hd before green schemes ruined our reliable coal and gas produced electricity

Patrick MJD
Reply to  ozspeaksup
November 23, 2019 7:29 pm

Apparently, SA has the cheapest power in Australia. I am not quite sure how that is worked out, but that is what people claim. They also claim SA sells it’s excess renewable power to other states. A lot of these people what deep cycle batteries are, lithium ion batteries are not deep cycle. How long will it be before the original installation will need to be replaced?

Tombstone Gabby
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 23, 2019 8:41 pm

Patrick MJD wrote: “They also claim SA sells it’s excess renewable power to other states”

It was about four days ago – the wind was blowing in South Australia. They had more power than they could use. According to the AEMO site, they were paying (!) Victoria $1,000 per MW to take the excess.


Prices can change every five minutes. The data-dashboard shows five State’s current “demand”, ‘regular’ “generation” and “other” – wind, solar, and hydro combined. Interesting to watch the pricing vary as the ‘renewables’ wax and wane.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 24, 2019 1:38 am

You believe that Govn’t website in 5 to 30 minute segments?

It is really easy to spit numbers out on a website.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 24, 2019 1:40 am

Just wait until the SA battery gets a 50% upgrade!

Tombstone Gabby
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 26, 2019 10:26 am

Patrick MJD

I note your reply comments below. AEMO is only partly (60%) ‘government’, the balance is ‘private’. And yes, I do believe the figures shown on their web site. For five minute intervals, try:


In the right-hand upper corner: choose the “5 Min” icon. The five states are shown in the upper left-hand corner. Step through the states and note the spikes in pricing.

I’ve never come across the actual cost of the SA battery – I guess someone had to pay for the development of the pickup/truck.

November 22, 2019 10:18 pm

How embarrassing.

You’d think someone would have tested it first.

Another one in the eye for the Tesla fanboys.

old construction worker
Reply to  Dreadnought
November 23, 2019 1:17 am

But their computer model said that wouldn’t happen. LOL

Reply to  old construction worker
November 23, 2019 5:59 am

+ 1

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Dreadnought
November 23, 2019 6:49 am

Maybe they should have watched the 1934 Chrysler Airflow show. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFl5pEe-7uo

(Rescued from the spam bin) SUNMOD

Bryan A
Reply to  Trying to Play Nice
November 23, 2019 12:37 pm

Looks like the same result Musk had. Must have been the wrong glass on the truck during the demo

Gunga Din
Reply to  Bryan A
November 23, 2019 3:05 pm

Or the wrong truck behind the glass.

November 22, 2019 10:18 pm

Elon Musk…cologne for millennials

November 22, 2019 10:20 pm

Give me a 240/120 plug-in off the battery, plus I will put my 600 Amp diesel welder in the truck bed and I will be forever off grid and will unhook the utility. That will make life more energetic anywhere I go. I am not opposed to a robust electric truck. I dreamed about that since I was a little kid on the farm in the 1950’s.

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  Earthling2
November 23, 2019 8:06 am

“. . . I will be forever off grid and will unhook the utility.”

Good luck with that.

Reply to  Gordon Dressler
November 23, 2019 10:27 am

While I don’t have an electric truck with a huge lithium battery, I do have a lot of lead acid batteries and portable solar panels at one of my remote properties that I run my RV and camper off grid. Works great for half the year on solar, but does cost more of course than utility for diesel in winter. And a lot of lead acid batteries are a real pain. But it evens out over the course of the year if I were there year round. I truly hope they get this tech figured out since my example of an electric truck with 240/120 would be a huge asset for me and my business having my own reliable electricity anywhere without requiring the expense of hooking up to the grid and paying for electricity. Ideally, this EV Truck would have a high efficient micro ICE built in and save hauling around a heavy CAT diesel 600 Amp welder that has about 18 Kw output at 240V.

What I don’t believe presently is whether these lithium ion batteries will last for thousands of cycles for that many years. Like my lithium ion batteries for the chainsaw, lawnmower and all other power tools, it seems 3-4 years and 1-2 cells goes bad and the entire battery is toast. Just like the LED lights bulbs they advertised a 20 year guarantee for, but yet they have only been on the market for 3-4 years, and now already they fail. For 8 months of the year I am better off with the old incandescent light bulbs, if only for the heat they give off.

Patrick MJD
November 22, 2019 11:01 pm

I watched that video last night. It all seemed OK until the door bashing section.

Captain Climate
November 22, 2019 11:02 pm

Elizabeth Holmes with a factory in a tent. It’s probably still early, but this clown’s pyramid of lies is beginning to collapse.

How much more capital will be burnt by scammers and why can’t the government spend 1% of its time on climate change instead focused on stopping sleeping drivers from killing people with their Tesla’s?

November 22, 2019 11:52 pm

This is a publicity stunt. The truck’s shape looks unacceptable(ugly) until they create a situation that justifies a skynet vehicle from the terminator movies. And here we are talking about it, so it works. Who knows with all the muslim illegal immigrants one day you will need bulletproof stainless steel truck cuz regular cars will be smashed. I am in Europe.

Reply to  jani129
November 23, 2019 12:36 am


I have a friend who lives on a little island in kent, named, Isle of Sheppey, its a retirement island which was mostly white british family’s, but now a mosque has been built 😐

Adam Gallon
Reply to  jani129
November 23, 2019 12:53 am

Sounds like you should be in America. Kindly emigrate.

Reply to  Adam Gallon
November 23, 2019 4:58 pm

We have mosques here. Just not everywhere – yet.

Gunga Din
Reply to  jani129
November 23, 2019 3:09 pm

(I guess the Polo must have been a Tesla?)

November 23, 2019 12:14 am

It was funny, I have to admit….

but if you look at the numerous online clips of how to shatter a car window (which can be useful in case of emergency) you’ll see that modern car window glass is actually very difficult to break, unless you get a concentrated impact from a metal object… a ball bearing would be ideal!

Reply to  griff
November 25, 2019 9:23 am

What a lot of people misunderstand is that “bulletproof” does not mean the window/vehicle body will not experience any damage. It means the vehicle’s occupants will not be killed. Of course, all of this doesn’t take into account spalling. When bullets hit metal, the metal produces fragments on the other side that can fly around and injure the vehicle occupants.

Besides that, the 9mm handgun is a very low bar when talking about bullet proof vehicles. The soft point low velocity round does not carry nearly as much energy as typical rifle rounds. 9mm is less than 400 ft.lbs. A typical rifle will produce over 2000 ft.lbs.

November 23, 2019 12:21 am

Looks like a smooshed Delorean. Really ugly and cheesey, like 1970s sci-fi cheesey. Perhaps if Musk spent less time slandering heroes and violating securities laws he would have more time to ensure he doesn’t beclown himself.

Bengt Abelsson
November 23, 2019 1:00 am

Of course a glass piece is cracked when subject to that impact.
A bullet-proof glass is NOT supposed to be unscatched after doing its job, which is to prevent the projectile protruding through the glass, is special cases also preventing spalling ( small glass particles that may damage eyes).
It is entirely possible that EM did not know that – as indicated by the comments here.

steven mosher
Reply to  Bengt Abelsson
November 23, 2019 2:02 am


Bengt Abelsson
Reply to  David Middleton
November 23, 2019 3:09 am

Then, about 4x the kinetic energy.
(Densty of steel /density of rock)

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  Bengt Abelsson
November 23, 2019 8:24 am

No. KE = (m*V^2)/2. The Tesla demo throws were probably around 30 mph (definitely, not a full windup fast pitch as one might see in baseball. If we conservatively estimate the throws at 40 mph, then (75mph/40 mph)^2 = 3.5.

The upper range density of granite is about 2.8 gm/cc, whereas the density for most steels is around 7.9 gm/cc. If the rock and the steel ball were the same average diameter, the KE ratio from mass alone would be 2.8.

Therefore, the KE of the thrown steel ball would be only about (2.8/3.5) = 0.80 = 80% of the kinetic energy of the rock asserted to have hit the windshield at 75 mph, under the above assumptions.

Nick Werner
Reply to  Gordon Dressler
November 24, 2019 8:24 am

That was only strike two.
With one more try and a decent wind-up, Musk’s assistant could have thrown that ball in one window and out through the other side!

Bengt Abelsson
Reply to  David Middleton
November 23, 2019 6:24 am

Bulletproof glass comes in broad range of grades, basically what kind of threat youwant to protection from. .38 pistol or 30.06 FMJ, or in between.
Cost and thickness doubles per grade step.
So, the picture of the NYPD car is not very clarifying, IMHO.

Bryan A
Reply to  Bengt Abelsson
November 23, 2019 12:31 pm

Al-ON (Aluninun-Oxide and Nitrogen) would be better

Reply to  David Middleton
November 23, 2019 9:26 am

@ David Middleton,
Where were you doing 75 ?
Don’t answer that, the big question is the velocity of the rocks you encountered 🙂

Reply to  u.k.(us)
November 23, 2019 5:12 pm

In some of the northern states (at least) speed limits are 80 mph on the interstate highways. My usual rule of thumb is that I can get away with driving 15% over the speed limit anywhere. In an 80 mph, I mentally calculate 92 mph without worrying about the cops.

I take long distant rides on my Triumph Trophy SE motorcycle. In N Dakota, S Dakota, Montana, Idaho, and others, we pretty much ride as fast as we feel comfortable. No, we’re not kids. We’re on Medicare, which kicks in when you crack 60 years of age. But powerful bikes are exhilarating.

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  Bengt Abelsson
November 23, 2019 5:27 am

The first onw didn’t just crack the glass…it went right through (Musk remarked that at least the second one didn’t go through). That is not what it is supposed to do.

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  Michael Jankowski
November 23, 2019 8:43 am

Actually, the first (and second) thrown steel balls bounced off the glass . . . neither went through the window glass. Please watch the linked video of the first throw in the article above and you’ll clearly see the ball drop from the window after impact and then roll back toward the thrower.

Captain Climate
Reply to  Gordon Dressler
November 23, 2019 9:21 am

It created a hole in the glass, not a crack. “It went through” means if that were a bullet, you’d be dead.

Planning Engineer
Reply to  Bengt Abelsson
November 23, 2019 12:13 pm

I agree knowledgeable people should have expected the window to crack. Elon Musk and perhaps his supporters and development team did not expect it to crack. When his other technological ventures fail to perform adequately, the defense can be offered again that any knowledgeable person should have know n they wouldn’t perform as “expected/promised /marketed”, But that is hardly a defense of Musk and his efforts. That is the indictment that should be made now.

Carl Friis-Hansen
November 23, 2019 1:42 am


“Tesla was short on battery details but the company did state there would be options for over 250 miles, over 300 miles, and over 500 miles, with prices starting at $39,900, $49,900 and $69,900, respectively. Fast-charging at over 250 kilowatts will also be possible.”

So double the range = double the price (or close). When I wand to double the range of my diesel Land-Rover, it only cost a fraction than the car’s original price for an extra tank, or I can just load a few Jerry-Cans.

Where do you find a 250kW outlet at the moment?

I wonder what the practical range is, in the sense that pick-up trucks are often used to carry lots of heavy equipment, towing the boat or cement mixer down the moody gravel roads, with the cabin heater on?

david sinfield
November 23, 2019 1:47 am

To be fair a 3 litre diesel engine and a landrover transmission would make that a quite nice vehicle for some light forestry work.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  david sinfield
November 23, 2019 5:59 am

What Land Rover transmission? The transmissions up to the LT77, LT380 along with the LT230R/T transfer case? All BAAAAD!

Heck! I bought a brand new 1994 Land Rover Discovery that had the intermediate gear compression “washer” (More like a copper tube) in the LT230T transfer case completely “unadjusted”, ie, not made correctly, not compressed, not pre-loaded, right out of the factory. And I paid for it! It’s no wonder Land Rovers are not made in Solihull anymore.

Ron Long
November 23, 2019 1:51 am

The comments about bullet-proof glass cracking when struck, like Gengt A. above, are correct. The glass isn’t supposed to totally fail and generate sharp fragments that cut the occupants. Also, how heavy was that steel ball? A bullet from a 9mm is going much faster but is much lighter, so the kinetic energy might be about equal. Elon Musk seems to be on a losing streak of late, I wonder what that is about?

David Lupton
Reply to  Ron Long
November 23, 2019 2:14 am

The point made elsewhere was that while the front windshield is supported on all edges and would have survived the demonstration, the side window glasses are only supported at the sides. They therefore were able to flex and crack. His mistake was to pick on the side windows because they were in the view of the audience

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  Ron Long
November 23, 2019 2:34 am

The steel ball used here would have to be a lot heavier:
The kinetic energy = 0.5*m*V*V
where m is the mass of the ball or bullet and V is the speed.

Tiny particles in space can penetrate metal structures in satellites due to the enormous speed.

Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
November 23, 2019 6:40 am

Exactly right. Also such factors as striking angle, compound obliquity due to curved surfaces, and projectile shape come into play.

Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
November 23, 2019 8:11 am

“Carl Friis-Hansen November 23, 2019 at 2:34 am

Tiny particles in space can penetrate metal structures in satellites due to the enormous speed.”

Satellites and even the Space Station are not heavily constructed.
Most of their sheathing is thin foil.

Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
November 23, 2019 8:59 am

There is a video on You tube of a guy breaking tempered glass, including the windshield, by throwing sharp bits of gravel at it. Glass is very sensitive to the sharp quartz points found in many kinds of gravel.
The so-called Gorilla glass and other solution strengthened glasses aren’t new, just more expensive. Our 2013 Toyota has a windshield similar to this stuff. I haven’t tried to scratch it because just the replacement glass costs twice what a standard temper windshield does.

But it does clean easily and seems much more clear than the glass in our older car.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
November 23, 2019 1:55 am

I wonder what the weight of the batteries in this new truck are? On a purely anecdotal point, my local garage told me of a case where the owner of an expensive hybrid was less than pleased that after three years of ownership his batteries were now down to about 14 miles range before requiring a recharge. The future beckons (not).

November 23, 2019 1:56 am

Tesla electric cars are expensive, but I suppose fulfil the function they were created for.

I have no idea of Diesel/petrol powered truck prices in the US, the load they are expected to carry, or the distances they need to go before a refuel.

So can anyone fill me in as to whether tesla electric trucks are going to be practical and find a market?

Reply to  tonyb
November 23, 2019 3:32 am

In Australia, many pickup trucks are sold in a “sports” configuration. They never carry a load heavier than the weekly groceries, or go further from home than the owner’s office. That is the market Tesla is looking for. Inner-urban virtue signalers.

Justin Burch
Reply to  Hivemind
November 23, 2019 6:23 am

Bingo! If you look at the distances and loads that say a person driving with a horse to a rodeo is going to need, this truck just can’t do it. The specs have it about as powerful as an SUV. This is purely a vanity item. I have a real truck and I do real truck stuff with and I’ll be keeping my F150 thank you. It doesn’t even have a full sized bed. Where are you going to put bales or a deer carcass? A bunch of city people in the comments were saying terrible things about people who have pick ups as if everyone who drives a pick up is a yahoo and saying the government should force everyone with an F150 to use one of these instead to save the planet. I’ll shoot myself first.

Reply to  Justin Burch
November 23, 2019 10:23 am

We traded a hot new saloon for a 12 y/o F150 when we retired and used it to completely rebuild a house. It does guzzle gas, but it is still going strong 7 years later. Love that truck.

Reply to  tonyb
November 23, 2019 7:00 am

Tesla owners tend to be libtards. Truck owners tend to actually use their vehicles for work in construction, farming, etc. There is a demographic of owners of large trucks that are compensating for some physical deficiency. It’s possible that the Telsa truck could appeal to compensating libtards.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Scissor
November 24, 2019 1:50 pm

I see it replacing a Honda Ridgeline or Chevy Avalanche for a FOMO libtard who needs to advertise his monthly $gross- or $debt.

Reply to  tonyb
November 23, 2019 10:39 am

Range of up to 500 miles. Can pull 14,000 pounds and does 0-60 in 2.9 seconds.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Simon
November 23, 2019 6:04 pm

Trucks usually have stuff in the back and if it ain’t strapped down will end up on someone else’s bonnet/hood accelerating at that kind of rate. Lets not talk about stress loads while towing at 0-60 in 2.9 seconds. Pure gimmick!

Andre Detommaso
Reply to  Simon
December 2, 2019 6:36 am

Simon, Look at people who have done real tests with the Tesla X pulling something as small as a light camper. O taking it off road. Or using it in the winter. It’s eye opening

Ed Zuiderwijk
November 23, 2019 2:10 am

And those are the defects you can see.

November 23, 2019 2:24 am

What’s the GVM (gross vehicle mass).

Doesn’t matter how much torque you have if the weight sinks you to the floor-pan in moderately soft terrain.

Max mileage is usually quoted for dead-flat road @constant speed. Not lugging an extra tonne of battery up and down mountains, over rough terrain.

4” suspension travel is not very exciting, either. Sounds like it is more aimed at the yuppie end of the SUV market – a woke version of the “Toorak Tactor”.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  PeterW
November 23, 2019 11:32 am

You said, “Max mileage is usually quoted for dead-flat road @constant speed.” And at room temperature, not -20 F.

Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 23, 2019 2:43 pm

…….or 120F.

Either way, the heater or aircon is going to suck battery.

November 23, 2019 2:46 am

It’s safety glass (laminated) on side windows, not yet a federal requirement here in the States. BFD.
It looks like it’s made from scrap left over from SpaceX, designed in spare time.

Flight Level
November 23, 2019 3:10 am

Let’s talk electric tugs. Those high-tech low, flat, remotely controlled vehicles that scoop the nosewheel and push aircraft from gate to taxiway.
Can tow aircraft up to 95 tons (A320, 737..). That is on flat surface, in low winds with aircraft engines off.

Battery capacity: 24 kWh, lead/gel type. Max operational endurance between recharges: 5km on rigorously flat surface, 15 to 20 gate short pushbacks. Max zero load speed: 5km/h. Vehicle only weight: 5’400kg. Battery cycles lifespan: unknown, estimated to 300-400 deep cycles. Charging time: 3 hours.

Just some numbers to illustrate the reality of towing. Which is what trucks are supposed to do.

Reply to  Flight Level
November 23, 2019 4:13 am

Pickup trucks are supposed to haul things! Most people haul things in the bed far more than they tow trailers with pickups. ‘Either way, I bet this big truck driver won’t see any of the “Hot Shots” (Independent contractors hauling freight on trailers with 1 ton or 3/4 ton pickups) using a Tesla truck. Not practical for the distances they generally travel.

Reply to  rah
November 23, 2019 4:22 am

so if its a pickup truck
then where the hell would a 1ton haybale be put?
most of the old toyo trucks in Aus fit a large bale easily though some need the tailgate dropped

Reply to  rah
November 23, 2019 6:06 am

While the demonstration was rather “oops” with the side glass, it would have been much more preferable to have a demonstration of why many do buy pickup trucks and that is for the load capacity and towing ability. Crew cabs were designed for companies to transport workers to a work site, not for hauling families to a shopping center, which it seems to have morphed into.
Loading the unseen bed of the pickup with 30 sheets of ¾ inch plywood or ½ inch drywall would have been nice. Perhaps attachment points for ladder racks or hold downs could have been done. Rather curious as to why the range of towing a large trailer is not mentioned.

Rod Evans
November 23, 2019 3:24 am

It has all the design input of an inverted wheelbarrow. I suppose the clever bit was putting four wheels on it rather than just the usual one.
Can’t wait to see how it goes up the local muddy hills round here. Wading through the swollen steams might be a challenge.

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  Rod Evans
November 23, 2019 4:49 am

Right on Rod.
Reminds me about a Camel Trophy in Africa, where they used reinforced Land-Rover Discoveries and got issues negotiating some soft terrain, when a happy African passed by the same spot in his prehistoric lightweight Series One Land-Rover and asked if he could be of any assistance.

The electric milk trucks they used in England some 50 years ago, even though heavy, made a lot of sense. It was stop-and-go all the time over a short total distance.

Battery driven vehicles will be used where feasible, without the need to subsidize them.

If our governments really wanted to reduce plant food contribution from vehicles in an economical way, they would have continued the former trend of using LPG on the ICEs. Unless if I am mistaken and the fabrication of LPG creates more plant food than petrol and diesel production.

November 23, 2019 3:39 am

Musk’s demonstration reminds me of this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrTksfYEC64

Tobias Meier
November 23, 2019 4:03 am

Concerning the glass:

The glass did not fail. It behaved exactly like armored glass should. The steel ball did bounce off and the glass stayed in one piece instead of showering the interior with its pieces.

Tesla and Musk expected the steel ball to bounce off in the same fashion as in the prior test and Musk asked the other guy to try again with the rear side window.

Obviously in previous tests the glass behaved differently which implies they thought their armored glass to be superior to standard armored glass.

Tesla and SpaceX have iterative design and production as their core philosophy. So this is just a new data point for them and it will improve their knowledge base and their products.

TSLA is a massively shorted stock by a wide margin. If this were not the case, Tesla would habe a hugely bigger market cap and could move production and research much faster forward.

If Tesla only grabs 1% of the non-commercial 99% commuter truck segment, they will habe a decent demand for the cybertruck.

The average reaction was like “Ugh. What is this? Must be a joke before they show the real one.”.

Btw, exactly my reaction.

After seeing it from multiple angles and seeing it driving around it just grows on you bit by bit.

It is a new platform for them. Very easy to see that this will be a base for delivery vans and other small to medium commercial vehicles. E.g. delivery van for frozen goods, emergency vehicles, etc..

Just as a PR stunt – with the glass test “failure” being intentional – this introduced Tesla into conversations about trucks. “Did you already watch the Tesla fail?” leading to a much wider range of people talking and thinking about Tesla as a manufacturer of trucks while being exposed to “That ugly thing accelerates faster than a Porsche.”, “If I put a solar roof on my house, I can use this truck as a battery backup in case of power outages”, “The camping part isn’t to shabby”, etc..


This one is at least a major PR success.

Tobias Meier
Reply to  David Middleton
November 23, 2019 5:43 am

Why are you commenting on a post about a car when you are obviously not old enough to drive?

Tobias Meier
Reply to  David Middleton
November 23, 2019 7:24 am

Learn not to drink and post.

If you are unable to refute something, just let it be. It really doesn’t paint a good picture.

Reply to  David Middleton
November 23, 2019 8:24 am

Have you reached the level of Deacon in the Church of Musk yet?

Reply to  Tobias Meier
November 23, 2019 7:13 am

You might wish to brush up on your understanding of market cap vs capitalization.

Tobias Meier
Reply to  Scissor
November 23, 2019 7:32 am

You might want to brush up on the relation between market cap and getting favorable rates for loans.

Reply to  Scissor
November 23, 2019 8:45 am

About the only thing Tobias got right is that the stock is highly shorted. Usually, the shorts in these cases are correct in the long term, though higher trading volatility is also common.

Matthew Bergin
Reply to  Tobias Meier
November 23, 2019 6:09 am

Sorry you are mistaken this so called truck couldn’t compete with my 1992 4.9L Ford F150. The only thing it can do that my truck can’t is give you a lot of electronic toys to play with while you wait for the battery to recharge. I can carry more load and travel almost 3 times further than the tesla truck( I have dual tanks almost 60 gallons) before I need to refuel. Then when I do refuel it only takes 6 minutes. My truck was bought used five years ago for $200, still operates perfectly, averages 21 mpg, does not require any oil to be added between oil changes and has 340,000 miles on it. I can buy a lot of fuel for $70,000.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Matthew Bergin
November 23, 2019 3:28 pm

But … but … I’m sure that after all the “because it’s GREEN subsidies and tax credits and free cash because it’s GREEN” (am I being redundant?) were eliminated, your old truck would not be as practical as … er … uh … not look as weird as a Tesla DeLorean!

November 23, 2019 4:25 am

The truck was touted as having “impact-resistant windows” that were promptly smashed inwards with a small metal ball during a live demonstration on Thursday. – article

So nobody tested the window glass before installing it? Yeah, that’s REAL salesmanship and REAL TIME planning, ain’t it?

If Musk weren’t such a flibberty-gibbet, some of his bright ideas might work, but he can’t even manage what could have been a successful company, if he had paid attention to it and done his CO job properly. He has the attention span of a gnat, or maybe not even that much, and he should have seen the result of that disastrous demo coming by testing it ahead of time. DIMWIT!!!

Since pickup trucks are supposed to be practical machines, not yuppie decor, this is not only unappealing to the eyes of those who drive/buy the F-150 and the Ram and all those other pickups.

Maybe if we’re lucky, his Good Idea Fairy will go back to drinking in that cheap bar s/he/it came from.

Flight Level
Reply to  Sara
November 23, 2019 5:15 am

Something tells me that Tesla won’t provide demo sponsorship trucks to the upcoming “Gold Rush” show season.

Steven Mosher
November 23, 2019 4:52 am

very cool design, reminds me of F117.

fun little toy to own.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Steven Mosher
November 23, 2019 6:31 am

We know how you like models, oh, sorry, climate toys.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 23, 2019 7:57 am

models? look UAH is a model of temperatures, I prefer thermometers.

Reply to  Steven Mosher
November 23, 2019 8:29 am

Since we have less than 1% of the number of sensors needed to actually measure the temperature of the world, and most of the ones we do have, have major problems.
Converting thermometers to temperature is the job of models.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Steven Mosher
November 24, 2019 4:04 am

“Steven Mosher November 23, 2019 at 7:57 am

look UAH is a model of temperatures, I prefer thermometers.”

Yes I bet you do. It’s where the French insert things for toothache too.

Bryan A
Reply to  Steven Mosher
November 23, 2019 12:48 pm

Sorry Mr Mosher but I can’t agree about the design.
To me, it resembles a High School – Shop Class – Frankentruck student build project.
Unsure just how aerodynamic the truck would be as far as potential range goes.

Steven Mosher
Reply to  Bryan A
November 25, 2019 12:41 am

Nobody asked you to agree.

John Endicott
Reply to  Steven Mosher
November 25, 2019 6:52 am

And nobody asked you to respond to Bryan A’s comment. see comments like that work both ways.

Tom Abbott
November 23, 2019 5:01 am

Is there a big demand for bullet-proof pickup trucks?

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 23, 2019 8:46 am

If you live in the worst of the US inner cities.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Gordon Dressler
November 23, 2019 3:00 pm

Why limit that to “inner cities”?
And it’s not ALL US cities.
Chicago, LA, NY, SF … you know, the ones that now call themselves “sanctuary cities”.

Captain Climate
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 23, 2019 9:28 am

Nope. This thing only appeals to nerds and the extremely gullible. And probably to paper billionaires that the Escobars want to kill.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Captain Climate
November 23, 2019 11:35 am

Captain Climate
It appears that Musk is unclear on why people buy pickup trucks. What he has made is a large sedan with good towing capability.

John Endicott
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 25, 2019 6:56 am

Which is what the urban virtue signaling driver is apt to go for. I’d say Musk is keenly aware of his target audience.

Michael Jankowski
November 23, 2019 5:35 am

I saw someone all giddy over the fact you could get one with a built-in compressor and use the battery as a generator. Yippee.

Wonder how the NTSB will feel about the supposedly super-hard shell and what it can do to other vehicles in an accident.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Michael Jankowski
November 23, 2019 6:29 am

Solid, cold-rolled stainless steel body (LMAO)? No crumple zones? Won’t pass EU crash tests. FAIL!

I think this is diversionary.

Tobias Meier
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 23, 2019 7:27 am

The question being:

Is the EU a major market for this.

No. Truck sales in the EU are marginal.

Reply to  Tobias Meier
November 23, 2019 8:44 am

Truck sales are not large in the EU and even the rich and woke would baulk at that sensationally ugly design


Patrick MJD
Reply to  Tobias Meier
November 23, 2019 4:47 pm

Remember, ICE diesel and petrol vehicles are soon to be banned in the EU with incentives for EV’s. People who want a truck in the EU will have little choice.

Bengt Abelsson
Reply to  Patrick MJD
November 23, 2019 7:46 am

Actually stainless steel, grade 304 I presume, is a very good material from crash energy absorption pov.

Then, actual detail design is more important.

Reply to  Bengt Abelsson
November 23, 2019 9:00 am

Put an ‘L” for leaded on the end of that 304 and I’ll agree. Otherwise not!

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Bengt Abelsson
November 23, 2019 4:07 pm

As far as I could tell, it’s all flat sheet metal which isn’t really that good at providing protection in a crash as well as structural strength, it’s why traditional trucks are built on a separate, ladder frame, chassis with a bolted on body. It’s also why Land Rover “Defenders” are no longer made. Most monocoque bodies are made of shaped/formed metal parts that, while made from thin metal, are very strong once all assembled, but also deform in a crash situation.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Michael Jankowski
November 23, 2019 7:08 am

I’m thought the idea of the crush zones in vehicles was to absorb the energy in a collision to save the occupants from death or serious injury. So Musk’s super rigid truck will come out OK but you have to buy new occupants?

Steven F
Reply to  Trying to Play Nice
November 23, 2019 1:04 pm

There was a model S that was rear ended by a big rig at 40 miles per hour. The driver of the tesla waked away without a scratch. And no part of the passenger cabi was breached. The tesla lost its trunk. The damage to the semi was worse. Due to the need to protect the battery Tesla overall are more rigid with fewer crumple zones. Every tesla car currently in production gets top safety marks.


Ethan Brand
November 23, 2019 6:09 am

I am fairly confident this was a staged publicity stunt. He garnered much more publicity than the otherwise ugly truck would have alone. Classic strategy.

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  Ethan Brand
November 23, 2019 8:51 am

I guess all that extra publicity explains why Tesla closed down 6% on yesterday, the day following the pickup truck reveal.

If it was a “staged publicity stunt” to increase buzz about Tesla’s new pickup, it did that to the financial detriment of the company.

John Endicott
Reply to  Gordon Dressler
November 25, 2019 12:02 pm

Stocks go down, stocks go up, stocks go back down, etc. It’s what stocks do. Ultimately, unless Tesla is looking to immediately unload some stock to raise capital, closing down (even by 6%) on any particular day doesn’t do jack to the financials of the company.

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  John Endicott
November 27, 2019 7:22 am

John, the daily price of any stock can greatly impact the bottom line financials at the time convertible bonds issued by the company come due. Case in point: Tesla had to pay out $920 million in cash to cover convertible bonds due on on February 27, 2019, because the stock was not at or above $359.87 per share, the price set years previously for the bond redemption to be in new stock only.

John Endicott
Reply to  Gordon Dressler
December 2, 2019 9:36 am

Gordon, that again falls in the same category I already mentioned “raising capital”. The stock rising or falling on any particular day doesn’t mean jack to the financials except when the company is actually doing something that involves the stock price (selling stock, as I exampled previously, or converting bonds as you mention) which does not happen every day.

Patrick MJD
November 23, 2019 6:12 am

There was another stainless steel bodied car that was a total success and that was on the back of subsidies too. The DeLorean, oh wait!

November 23, 2019 7:03 am

Can this “pickup truck” be loaded with a welding machine, a full set of tools, and a heavy steel work deck, then go out on a remote job site for 12 hours, in – 40 degree temps or + 40 C temps, without so much as a current bush nearby, and drive 90 miles back to a camp site at 80 mph? Then turn around and do it all again in few hours? Day after day?

Can it when the job is done, load up a 5th wheel trailer added to its already 12,000 lb weight, and climb up a mountain pass at 80 mph and keep on going for 5 more hours back home to the wife and kids?

Now we are talking real toughness, not fake toughness.

Reply to  KT66
November 23, 2019 7:17 am

Batteries don’t function well at extreme temperatures or loads, so no the Tesla truck could not meet the challenges you describe, notwithstanding the lack of infrastructure in remote locations.

Reply to  KT66
November 23, 2019 8:41 am


I suspect that your example is pretty extreme.

More realistically would it be able to cope with the ‘average’ work load for this size of vehicle and does it cost an ‘average’ sort of price and have ‘average’ running costs/life span/maintenance costs?


Reply to  tonyb
November 23, 2019 10:38 am

These type of challenges are not really out of the ordinary for getting the job done on any given work day throughout N. America. Meeting these types of challenges are within the capabilities of the Ford, Ram, and Chevy, competition right now. Even today’s 1/2 tons are more capable than 10 years ago.

3/4 ton + trucks are not inexpensive but they are actually only a bit more expensive than most traditional 1/2 ton trucks. I’m going to buy an F350 or equivalent for only few dollars more instead of an F150 or equivalent.

Perhaps Tesla hopes to under cut the 1/2 ton grocery gitter market with their less capable and lesser expensive options, but considering a very capable Cummins diesel powered Nissan now is challenging command of that market segment, already undercutting traditional Chevy or Ford 1/2 tons for price, what is the point?

Reply to  KT66
November 23, 2019 5:41 pm

. . . but considering a very capable Cummins diesel powered Nissan now is challenging command of that market segment . . .

Looks like that option from Nissan may be no more:


Reply to  sycomputing
November 23, 2019 8:05 pm

That’s too bad. I think that will be a mistake, as Nissan will have nothing to distinguish itself in market place. However, it could be that American diesel truck buyers will opt for a heavier duty truck anyway.

Reply to  KT66
November 25, 2019 6:51 pm

Ford has a nice diesel for the F-150 now looks pretty good.

Reply to  tonyb
November 23, 2019 2:56 pm

I we are to talk “realistic”, how realistic is it to think that people will avidly buy a vehicle that will only do “average” tasks and not everything you want it to?

My average use may be around the farm, but I ALSO want the same vehicle to climb mountains when I’m hunting, or do thousands of kilometres in remote country on holiday trips.

Similar situations face urban commuters whose daily trips are short, but who do inter-state drives several times per year.

Not everyone is wealth enough to have a specific vehicle for each purpose.

Ruling out 10, 20 or 30% of useage is not a clever design feature.

John Endicott
Reply to  PeterW.
November 25, 2019 6:14 am

If your “non-average” uses are few, you don’t need “a specific vehicle” for each purpose, you can rent the specific vehicle for the few days out of the year that you need it. Not everyone is wealthy enough to own a car, an RV/camper and a u-haul type van (for example), so most people opt to buy the one that they use on a daily basis (for most that would be a car) and rent the others (the RV/camper or the u-haul type van) on the rare occasions when they need them.

Every vehicle rules out the “10, 20 or 30% of usage”, if they didn’t there’d only be one vehicle design that does everything and that’s the only design that would be available for purchase.

Tom Abbott
November 23, 2019 7:33 am

If Musk’s pickup truck is actually workable, then the only drawback would be the design of that ugly body. That ugly body might start up a cottage industry with people swapping out regular pickup bodies for the ugly one. You could have yourself a Tesla pickup truck that looked like a 1953 Chevy, or my favorite, the 1965 Chevy pickup, longbed or shortbed.

I get the Motor Trend channel on my satellite service and it’s just amazing to see what these extraordinarily talented people can do with a vehicle. Pretty soon I’ll be watchig them swap out Tesla pickup bodies. I bet they could do it in a day or two.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 23, 2019 1:03 pm

The truck is unibody construction not body on frame, swapping out wont be possible.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  SttandupPhilosopher
November 24, 2019 4:26 am

“The truck is unibody construction not body on frame, swapping out wont be possible.”

After watching these automobile specialists manipulate metal with their cutters and welders, I wouldn’t bet money on them not being able to put another body on a Tesla pickup truck. In fact, one group did a project just recently where they worked on a unibody-type vehicle and they decided to change all that and gave the vehicle a full conventional frame. They can do the same to a Tesla if they wanted to do so.

November 23, 2019 8:20 am

Try palladium glass.

D. Anderson
November 23, 2019 9:13 am

Another stunt to get people talking about him

I’m just tired of him.

Walter Sobchak
November 23, 2019 9:24 am

OMFG? Puts me in mind of CBGB/OMFUG which was a music club in the East Greenwich Village area of NYC.

The owner of the club. Hilly Kristal, opened the venue in December 73. He claimed that the name meant “Country, BlueGrass, Blues” and “Other Music For Uplifting Gourmandizers”.

Acts such as The Ramones, Patti Smith, Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers, Talking Heads, Blondie, The Police, Beastie Boys, and Guns N’ Roses played there. When the lease expired in ‘06, it wasn’t renewed because of skyrocketing rents.

I am pretty sure I know what OMFUG meant, but I don’t have a clue about CBGB.

Dr. Bob
November 23, 2019 9:36 am

Glass aside, any EV will have a challenge of energy density. Just a brief review of the chart in this article shows that batteries have the worst energy density of any energy source.


Simple physics says that EVs are a failure from the start. And with crude oil at a reasonable prices and abundant supply, there is no need to change energy sources. One also has to consider the efficiency of conversion of different primary energy sources into energy available for transportation uses. Here electricity has multiply losses along the pathway whereas crude to fuels is a very efficient process, about 90% energy efficient. So there is no driving need to go to EVs.

Reply to  Dr. Bob
November 23, 2019 11:04 am

It makes sense to use EV’s to avoid real air pollution at point of use, e.g. wharehouses, mines, large polluted cities.

It doesn’t make much sense to use EVs where conditions might be extreme or electrical infrastructure is limited. Several times in recent snow storms in Colorado, I’ve seen Telsa’s at the side of the road or limping along. I think to myself, by AWD gas powered Subaru is half the price and actually works for my intended use.

November 23, 2019 10:34 am

In the early 1980s, I was stationed in Germany at a ammunition-storage site. The main guard tower had windows made of bullet-resistant glass. One of the MPs tested a window by throwing a rock at it. The window cracked vertically along the whole length of the window. (I don’t know if the MP had to pay for the damage).

Peter Morris
November 23, 2019 10:37 am

Why would I want shatterproof side glass?

Any of you ever been involved in a rollover accident or driven into a body of water by accident?

Given the non-zero probability of Musk’s acolytes doing something idiotic with their vehicles, it wouldn’t be long before someone died while trapped in one of these ugly toasters.

If it was going to be built, that is. But it’s not. Look at it. You can’t fit adults in the back seat! The roof plunges WAY too low. And stainless steel isn’t that great of a finish. Ask anyone with stainless appliances. Or a DeLorean.

Some of you think you’ve found the lady! Suckers! She’ll be in his palm next time you look.

Reply to  Peter Morris
November 23, 2019 11:01 am

That’s a good point. Over here in the UK motoring organisations sell a combined torch with a seat belt cutter and a sharp point to break windows. In effect shatterproof glass of the type described would seal you inside the vehicle in the event of an accident


Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Peter Morris
November 23, 2019 11:39 am

I’ve often wondered if one could expect the electric windows to operate properly if the vehicle was submerged.

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 23, 2019 12:27 pm

It is always best to wind down the windows before submerging the car./SARC

The electric is likely to work for a while, but in a case of an emergency it may be difficult to find the contact. The issue may be important. In Amsterdam, The Netherlands, about one car a week enters one of the countless canals. You get help here fast, but if you are unlucky to enter a canal outside town, you may be really out of luck.

How does BEVs work when submerged? It has a lot of electronics in it! Will all power be switched of if submerged, will water shorten or ignite the batteries and so on? Is such a scenario standard safety test for certificate of approval?

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
November 24, 2019 10:00 pm

The electrics in cars are, usually, 12v/DC, and can operate in water without an issue for sometime, even with a typical lead/acid battery under water too. The issue in passenger compartments would be pressure isn’t equalised before you can get the door/window open before you run out of air. The Tesla battery packs are a whole other issue.

steven F
Reply to  Peter Morris
November 23, 2019 1:21 pm

Watch the video, 5 full sized adults got out of the truck. The optional 6th seat was not installed in the truck shown. Instead a very large armrest was between the front seats.

Reply to  Peter Morris
November 23, 2019 2:57 pm

The Big question is “Does the toast toast on the first try?”

John Endicott
Reply to  Peter Morris
November 25, 2019 10:46 am

You can’t fit adults in the back seat!

5 adults exited the vehicle during the demonstration (two from the front and, three *from the back*). In future you might want to avoid making statements about things you clearly know nothing about and that anyone can easily see is untrue with a simple google.

November 23, 2019 10:51 am

As an avid participant in the shooting sports, I wondered how a steel ball thrown at moderate (soft ball) pitcher speed would compare to that touted “9 mm stopping” glass.

A standard 9mm bullet is 115 grains, and leaves the muzzle at ~1200 ft/sec, yielding about 360 ft/lbs energy.
I assume the stage “pitcher” (given his lazy windup) achieved a steel ball speed of 50 mph (approx 75 ft/sec). That steel ball would have to weigh 27,600 grains to match the energy of a 9mm round. That’s nearly 1.8 kgs of steel ball.

That guy in the video didn’t throw a 1.8 kg steel ball.

November 23, 2019 10:52 am

“Tesla stock sinks after unveiling of $39,900 electric pickup”

So much for those here that thought the unveiling was a success.

Nick Werner
Reply to  rah
November 23, 2019 12:09 pm

Pessimists could be overlooking an important point. It’s inevitable that after the Tesla pickup is available, at least one journalist from the NY Times will eventually know someone that actually drives a pickup. So they will be able to tell everyone how much better they understand voters in fly-over country.

November 23, 2019 6:03 pm

No self respecting person would trade their F-150, Ram, or Silverado for this

John Endicott
Reply to  Roger
November 25, 2019 10:48 am

No, but urban virtue signalers might (assuming they actually had a F-150, Ram, or Silverado to trade)

November 24, 2019 12:34 am
willem post
November 24, 2019 4:11 am

Tesla Inc Chief Executive Elon Musk said on Saturday that there have been about 150,000 orders thus far for the electric carmaker’s Cybertruck, which was unveiled late on Thursday.

I think there will be 500,000 orders within a few months.

This truck will be highly competitive with other cult vehicles, such as Jeeps, Hummers, etc, and it will cost much less.

“146k Cybertruck orders so far, with 42% choosing dual, 41% tri & 17% single motor”, Musk said in a tweet, adding separately that the orders were achieved without any advertising or paid endorsements.

Some Wall Street analysts praised the launch, but others doubted the futuristic design’s mass appeal.

With a starting price of $39,900, the Cybertruck’s angular body in gun-metal gray resembles an armored vehicle. Its website shows that an immediate payment of $100 is required to reserve an order for the Cybertruck.

Tesla plans to start manufacturing the truck around late 2021.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  willem post
November 24, 2019 9:54 pm

I read that just under 200,000 orders had been places after the announcement, so $20m for sowing of something that does not exist, and probably won’t not in the form shown. 2021 is not a long time in the auto industry. Given all the flat steel in that unibody, I’d be interested in how it’s put together to support that carrying capacity as spec’d.

Jake J
November 25, 2019 10:39 am

I own a dinky little Think City 24kWh EV and a Ram 3500 diesel pickup truck. I like both of them quite a bit, but they are vehicles and not causes. I therefore feel qualified to be pretty objective about all this, and lend a perspective and some information not yet seen in this thread.

The biggest show-stopper is range. Tesla says the base model will have a 250-mile range, and the top-end one will have a 500-mile range. Let’s have a closer look. For starters, you must subtract 20% from the claims; if you habitually use more than 80% of a lithium battery, you’d better plan on much more frequent, and expensive, replacements than you expected. Every EV maker tells its customers to use 80% of the charge to preserve battery life; some advise as low as 60%. Moving on, I submit this video:


That video is long and daunting. For those who don’t want to torture themselves with the nerd-level demonstration and explanation, I will summarize presently. The video shows a Tesla “extended range” Model X towing a trailer. This is done in ideal battery weather, yet they managed to drive it only 195 miles of the claimed 325-mile range before ran out of juice — and only that far by disabling the A/C, slowing down to ridiculously low highway speeds, and finally positioning it in the slipstream of a truck to reduce drag and save fuel.

So the Model X got 60% of the claimed range. Why? The answer is that, for 65 of those 195 miles, they towed a 4,500-pound trailer, which is within the Model X’s 4,960 lb. towing ability. During the towing segment, the Model X got roughly one-third the fuel economy that it did when unloaded. While towing, the Model X used almost 1 kWh per mile. And that’s a 4,500 lb load; Tesla claims that its “Cybertruck” will tow 14,000 pounds. Why did they pick 14,000 pounds? Because that’s what a Ford F-150 truck will tow.

Electric motors have plenty of torque, so I have no doubt that the “Cybertruck” will be able to tow a 14,000-pound trailer. The question is: How far? Around the block? If you use that vehicle for normal truck stuff, like towing and hauling, your range will be utterly abysmal. The 250-mile range on the base model will be very lucky to hit 50 miles if it’s towing, say, 10,000 pounds, and a lot less if that tow is happening in cold weather or uphill or both.

Now to truck features. The demo “Cybertruck” had no side mirrors. (Just wait until they put those on and see what it does to fuel economy.) Here’s another simple stupid one: Where does the spare tire go? In a conventional pickup, it tucks up into a space in the frame near the back of the box and the back seat, depending on the configuration. You fish a jack extension into a slot, then turn it to lower the spare. The “Cybertruck” has a “skateboard” pan that holds the battery. Put the tire below that, and you’ll materially reduce fuel economy due to drag.

When I mentioned this on a forum dominated by Tesloids who’d obviously never owned a truck, someone said, in effect, you fool the spare goes below the truck bed but above the skateboard. Hmm. Where do we start? How about with the fact that the vast majority of trucks are sold with fiberglas bed liners? If Tesla were to finesse that by designing a liner with a removable section over the spare, then there’s the reality that people haul stuff in their trucks. So to change the tire, you get to remove everything in the bed? Oh, and my truck has a Mopar rail system to which bed dividers are attached. I’m going to remove everything in the bed, and reposition the dividers to change a tire?

Moving along, where does one put a a toolbox, a contractor rack, a winch, a camper shell, a winch, or a fifth-wheel attachment? How about a grille guard or a plow blade? Better forget about those last two, because the Cybertruck is a unibody. Any grille guard (which, by the way, is usually where a winch is mounted) that doesn’t attach to a separate frame is mere truck jewelry. Forget about putting a plow blade on a unibody. Kids, there’s a reason that full-size pickup trucks are body-on-frame. And where are the bed steps? And how about those high sides? Kids, there’s a reason why Honda redesigned the Ridgeline.

You’ll note that I have not yet mentioned the aesthetics. To put it mildly, I don’t care for the brutalist look. I quite highly doubt that the prototypical full-sized truck buyer will either. But that’s neither here nor there.
What really matters is that the “Cybertruck” isn’t a truck at all. It’s a California hipster toy masquerading as a truck. Tesla’s mistake was to enter the full-size pickup market, which is characterized by a highly demanding core customer base. They should have started with a compact truck, which for all kinds of reasons would have been a far easier and more forgiving market.

Johann Wundersamer
November 29, 2019 12:38 pm

Car glass safety requirement approval –

snippet from the webb:

Safety glass is used in all automobile glass. It is manufactured to reduce the likelihood of injury, if it breaks. Windshields are made from a lamination process. … When a small object strikes a piece of safety glass, typically only the outer layer of the windshield that is struck breaks.


Are car side windows safety glass?

Car and truck side windows are made of tempered glass, while others are laminated. … It is called this because the glass is designed to shatter into tiny, harmless glass balls instead of shattering into shards that can cut or injure passengers.

My comment: in an accident it is better when the rescue team has access to the passenger compartment.

In case of a fall into water trapped in the car this can be lifesaving.



Verified by MonsterInsights