We can get dumber
Guy looks exactly as I would’ve imagined him.
I can hear him saying, “of course it will be fine” with a tone that implies questioning the fineness was the stupidest thing he’s ever heard, because he thinks projecting confidence works for anything just like it works for tricking people that he knows things he really doesn’t.
And then there’s a good chance he acts like there was no way anyone could see the result coming once it’s clear that it isn’t, in fact, fine.
You can just tell that dumb motherfucker is trying to explain what actually went wrong
That photo is somewhat disappointing due the the lack of a douchebag vanity plate.
How American do you need to be to drive directly on the beach
Tbf, there are American beaches known for being drivable. Specifically, Daytona Beach.
Cyberstuck
Fuck. That is a much better title.
You can still change it! No one will notice it!
A wave od horror washing over me as I realize these idiots can afford a Cybertruck while I can only have an old beater.
wealth and stupidity come hand in hand in many, many cases.
I think this is partially because in order to make a lot of money in most cases you have to fuck someone else over and never have it occur to you thats what you’re doing. Like if you find out you can buy t-shirts for €1, then you go to your neighbor and tell them they can have a t-shirt for the low price of €30 (and manage not to feel bad about that) you’re a successful businessman and a pilliar of the community.
And if you can get someone to even do the part of finding the $1 t-shirts for another $1 instead of you doing any work, you are a job creator.
Why don’t you buy a Cybertruck on a loan and pay monthly installments? Better yet, put it on your credit card and push the debt into the future.
Oh, maybe because you’re not nuts. Drive that old beater until it dies.
Maybe they could try this (before going on the beach)?
In all seriousness track retrofits tend to do really poorly outside of snow.
OK, in the end, I won’t install them on my Gen 2 Prius. Thanks for the tip!
You can get them on UTVs (side-by-sides). They also suck there, because if you try to reverse over something you can pretty much rip the track off
An argo, dollar for dollar, is the best thing to take into the bush.
What am I looking at? Should I conclude that Cybertruck is a bad off-road vehicle, or that sand is an unsuitable surface for driving, or both?
Yes both
Mostly that the driver is an absolute muppet. Sand like that is so soft you sink to your ankles walking in it, the truck never stood a chance.
Please don’t denigrate the muppets like that. Muppets are cool. This guy is not.
An F-150 weighs just over 4,000 pounds. A Cybertruck weighs nearly 7,000.
That’s a lot of weight pushing into the soft sand.
This isn’t true. Many higher trim F150s (bigger cab, 4wd, luxury interior) weigh over 6000lbs. Only the smallest, cheapest ones used for work vehicles are on the 4000lb range. Not defending the Cybertruck, but repeating false info doesn’t help.
repeating false info doesn’t help.
The 2023 F150 King Ranch Super Crew has a curb weight of 4,912 pounds. The Cybertruck is nearly a ton heavier.
It’s not an unfair to explain that being heavy affects traction in the sand, and batteries weigh a freaking ton. In the case of the F150 Lightning, for instance, the battery is 1800 pounds, and it’s pretty close to the Tesla in weight.
Side note: the King Ranch Super Crew sounds like a range of chicken burgers.
Some of the trims listed here are 5800 lbs: https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/2023/models/f150-limited/
If you look at the f250, some are over 7500lbs: https://www.ford.com/trucks/super-duty/models/f250-xlt/
Sure, if you intentionally try to make it as heavy as possible, it’s only a thousand pounds lighter.
Or you go for the F250 and reach into a completely different class of vehicle it can get heavier.
I bet a Navy destroyer weighs even more!
Only the smallest, cheapest ones used for work vehicles
So, the only cases where using F150 is even justified?
Just wait. That sea air is gonna do wonders for that
trucksbrick’s complexion.Stupidity ages like a fine wine. Give it a couple of more years and you will be surprised about your ability to bend the concept of rational thinking.
Step-Elon I’m stuck!
We can only hope there’s another billionaire on board
That was such a great spectacle
A tragedy of the greatest magnitude. How many of them have to be washed ashore until we do something?
Imagine walking to the beach
I’m reminded of L.A. Story. “Nobody walks in L.A.!” *Proceeds to drive three houses down.*
Walking is for communists
I’m not saying this never happens, because it sure does, but something about this picture is off
The tire tracks make zero sense.
The car shadow also looks off compared to blue tent thing to the right. The car shadows appears lighter and shorter.
It’s a design problem？
Yes. Design say vehicles allowed, but detruck get stuck.
Yes. The problem is Elon Musk designed it.
baylife
Since no one else has said it, this isn’t a design flaw of the truck. The operator didn’t let air out of their tires. Before driving on sand you really want to let your tire PSI down to like 15 to be safe. I used to pull hummers out of the beach with my old four cylinder Nissan pickup because their drivers were often overconfident they didn’t need to deflate their tires (or just completely unaware). I don’t like Tesla but this is an operator error, not a fatal flaw of the truck.
It’s more of the taking $150k truck that doesn’t like sand, salt, or water to the beach.
You aren’t wrong though
I used to race cars, and would over/ under inflate my tires based on the weather and track conditions. Never thought about driving on sand, but that’s a super useful tip that I would wager most people have never heard.
It’s not just sand, rock crawlers will deflate tires down to single digits (that’s why they use beadlocks) so that the tires actually wrap around the rocks.
I guess you’re talking about psi.
(No offense to you, dear Buffaloaf, I just looked it up and thought I might share).
For everyone of the 191 non-USA countries, 10 psi is 0,69 bar or 690 hPa. That’s pretty low.
By the way, why is psi written in such a weird way? It should be lbs/ in^2
As an Aussie I’ve used metric for everything my whole life, but I’ve just realised that everything I’ve ever used to inflate stuff has been metered in PSI. I just know that ~30PSI is good for tyres, ~15PSI is good for soccer balls.
I wouldn’t know the conversions because there’s no use for it because that’s not what the pumps use. Weird.
Because in^2 is generally said “square inches.”
So it’s “pounds per square inch.”
Sometimes “per” will get its own letter, like in PPM - parts per million - and sometimes it’s left off, as in PSI.
Thanks, friend :)
I know how it comes to be, I just think it’s stupid.
For example, kW times h is not the same as kW per hour. That’s why kWh means kilowatt times hour.
If I wrote ms to denote meters per second that would create massive confusion.
Wait wait Wait, can you give me more on this kWh thing? I thought I understood this already.
A single kW is a unit of power, literally 1000 watts.
A kWh is a unit of energy, as in stored or delivered. Draw 500 watts for 2 hours? That’s a kWh. Or have a battery that can hold 1 kWh, then assuming 100% efficiency you could draw 1000 watts from it for an hour before it was empty.
All of this is kW times hour, I would say? But in my mind I would interchangeably say per hour as well, they feel the same.
Obviously I’m wrong, but I’d like to know why lol
If you use exactly 20 kW for an hour, it will translate to 20 kWh. But if your power usage varies over time, you can’t keep track of it so simple. It’s just how it is.
The unit is really watt [W] and the Greek prefix kilo (k) for 1000. This way it’s fast and easy to convert to different scales (like Mega, Giga etc) for comparing numbers
A watt is a derived unit for a rate of change, an amount of energy used in a unit of time, so P = E / t. A kW per hour would be a rate divided by time, or E / t^2, resulting in another rate.
More colloquially, think of watts/power by analogy to another rate, that of speed. Moving at a speed of 100kph for 3 hours results in 300 speed-hours of distance. Saying 100 kilometers per hour per 3 hours sounds awkward, but is actually a weird way to say acceleration, a rate of change of speed. (And probably a hint to get your car serviced.)
Anyway, the key is to think of a kilowatt as a rate, not a quantity.
