Spoken like a true Musk acolyte.
Hey Tesla, Honda is calling and they say they want their Ridgeline back!Yes, I am a “commoner” just like you. And the only difference between us is you are especially susceptible to Tesla marketing words.
Ridgeline frame:
Cybertruck frame:
So they have thicker body panels made of stainless steel that allows Tesla to save on paint and forces their customers to either drive a refrigerator or spend $12000 on a wrap that won’t last more than 3 years.
Very revolutionary.
An exoskeleton is a biological term. When it used on a manufactured item like a truck, it is simply a descriptor that describes how it's different from other trucks have body on frame construction. It wouldn't be completely out of line to call all unibody vehicles "exoskeletons" because the structural part of the vehicle is exterior to the rest of it. It encloses it. But the Cybertruck takes this a step further by making the outer skin offer significant stiffness advantages and support to the underlying frame and making it repel normal impacts without damage (like a crab).
Patents always list multiple embodiments to cover various uses and to make the patent as broad as possible. In the example of the door, the Tesla patent is pointing out that the benefits of an exoskeleton are not limited the chassis of the vehicle, but also the doors, in the event of a crash. And that is one of the weight saving benefits of constructing the doors as if they, in isolation, are also exoskeletons. All other doors have an internal crash beam to strengthen the door in the event of a side impact. The Cybertruck has no crash beam inside the door, it doesn't need one. None of this speaks to whether the rest of the vehicle is an exoskeleton. A door is just a door and the Cybertruck would still be an exoskeleton, even if the doors were not.
Tesla says FSD beta is not yet Full Self Driving. That is the end goal. Tesla makes it crystal clear it's not there yet.
Yep, it's infinite mass. It's an engineering joke. Don't act naive. Is this the best you can do?
No. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, then it's a duck. You clearly don't know what an exoskeleton denotes. Tesla doesn't call it an endoskeleton because that wouldn't be as appropriate. I think it's funny the lengths some people go through to try to prove Elon wrong about anything at all. As if they find it deeply offensive that he declared it was an exoskeleton. Just hilarious! It shows how much he threatens some people.
Your deprogramming is going to be very expensive for your family.An exoskeleton is a biological term. When it used on a manufactured item like a truck, it is simply a descriptor that describes how it's different from other trucks have body on frame construction. It wouldn't be completely out of line to call all unibody vehicles "exoskeletons" because the structural part of the vehicle is exterior to the rest of it. It encloses it. But the Cybertruck takes this a step further by making the outer skin offer significant stiffness advantages and support to the underlying frame and making it repel normal impacts without damage (like a crab).
I'm glad you brought up the exoskeleton of a crab. It too is a composite structure like the Cybertruck:
If your claims were true, the exoskeleton could only be the tough, hard outer layer. But you can see how the crabs exoskeleton gains strength by having materials with different properties layered into a composite structure that is stronger than the sum of its parts.
Beyond this, if you have ever eaten a crab, you know that the shell has internal bracing that goes beyond the composite composition seen in the photo above. Yet it is still a classic exoskeleton. The definition of exoskeleton is not as strict as you seem to be convinced it is.
Patents always list multiple embodiments to cover various uses and to make the patent as broad as possible. In the example of the door, the Tesla patent is pointing out that the benefits of an exoskeleton are not limited the chassis of the vehicle, but also the doors, in the event of a crash. And that is one of the weight saving benefits of constructing the doors as if they, in isolation, are also exoskeletons. All other doors have an internal crash beam to strengthen the door in the event of a side impact. The Cybertruck has no crash beam inside the door, it doesn't need one. None of this speaks to whether the rest of the vehicle is an exoskeleton. A door is just a door and the Cybertruck would still be an exoskeleton, even if the doors were not.
I can see I'm not going to change your mind about the differences between an exoskeleton and an endoskeleton, but the Cybertruck is certainly not the latter. An F-150 is. The only reason why there are so many people that are so adamant that Cybertruck is not of exoskeleton construction is because they want to make anti-Elon, anti-Tesla noises. This is nothing new, people have been trying to throw shade on Elon and Tesla since the beginning. People will take issue with just about anything he says. But Elon is not stupid, and he doesn't roll over just because someone wants to disagree with him. If a crab is an exoskeleton, with its composite shell, then so is the Cybertruck. Using such an overly restrictive definition of "exoskeleton" would also exclude almost every single animal that is currently classified as an exoskeleton.
The anti-Elon noises are strong, but there is little behind them but hot air, anger and fear.
Go for it. I bet no one blinks an eye. Because they don't feel threatened by you.
You ignored the comments I posted from the industry professionals who say it is not an exoskeleton by industry standards. Then you acknowledge that the CT casting and panels are not fundamentally very different from a unibody - which is exactly what the industry experts are saying. The door fabrication is not an exoskeleton - it's a stressed skin assembly. If Elon called it what it really is - a cast unibody with stressed skin panels for better safety, I would have no problem whatsover.An exoskeleton is a biological term. When it used on a manufactured item like a truck, it is simply a descriptor that describes how it's different from other trucks have body on frame construction. It wouldn't be completely out of line to call all unibody vehicles "exoskeletons" because the structural part of the vehicle is exterior to the rest of it. It encloses it. But the Cybertruck takes this a step further by making the outer skin offer significant stiffness advantages and support to the underlying frame and making it repel normal impacts without damage (like a crab).
I'm glad you brought up the exoskeleton of a crab. It too is a composite structure like the Cybertruck:
If your claims were true, the exoskeleton could only be the tough, hard outer layer. But you can see how the crabs exoskeleton gains strength by having materials with different properties layered into a composite structure that is stronger than the sum of its parts.
Beyond this, if you have ever eaten a crab, you know that the shell has internal bracing that goes beyond the composite composition seen in the photo above. Yet it is still a classic exoskeleton. The definition of exoskeleton is not as strict as you seem to be convinced it is.
Patents always list multiple embodiments to cover various uses and to make the patent as broad as possible. In the example of the door, the Tesla patent is pointing out that the benefits of an exoskeleton are not limited the chassis of the vehicle, but also the doors, in the event of a crash. And that is one of the weight saving benefits of constructing the doors as if they, in isolation, are also exoskeletons. All other doors have an internal crash beam to strengthen the door in the event of a side impact. The Cybertruck has no crash beam inside the door, it doesn't need one. None of this speaks to whether the rest of the vehicle is an exoskeleton. A door is just a door and the Cybertruck would still be an exoskeleton, even if the doors were not.
I can see I'm not going to change your mind about the differences between an exoskeleton and an endoskeleton, but the Cybertruck is certainly not the latter. An F-150 is. The only reason why there are so many people that are so adamant that Cybertruck is not of exoskeleton construction is because they want to make anti-Elon, anti-Tesla noises. This is nothing new, people have been trying to throw shade on Elon and Tesla since the beginning. People will take issue with just about anything he says. But Elon is not stupid, and he doesn't roll over just because someone wants to disagree with him. If a crab is an exoskeleton, with its composite shell, then so is the Cybertruck. Using such an overly restrictive definition of "exoskeleton" would also exclude almost every single animal that is currently classified as an exoskeleton.
The anti-Elon noises are strong, but there is little behind them but hot air, anger and fear.
It's well known that the auto industry "experts" hate Elon and Tesla for making them look bad. Tesla is the company that is making people realize just how inefficient legacy auto is, and how little value they bring to the new car buyer for their money, while simultaneously eating into their sales volumes and dropping prices of cars that legacy auto couldn't even make for 50% more than it costs Tesla to make. Tesla even makes legacy auto engineering look boring and outdated. It's no surprise that they try to downplay Tesla's strength, their engineering expertise.
It's a Trainwreck of either a sad pathetic brainwashed person grovelling at Elons feet or a troll. I actually hope for his sake he's just a troll. The other option is too sad
