Tesla’s troubled electric pickup is illegal in Europe, yet somehow a barely modified model has found a way to get licensed. A group of European transport organizations claim this ride could spell disaster.
Doesn’t the existence of this modded truck prove that statement wrong? Because I’m pretty sure you made the only statement explicitly refuted by the existence of this truck.
No, because no one intends to hit a pedestrian with the car they are buying. That’s why we need to mandate safer vehicles, not trust people to factor that in as they look for a car.
I say build in spring loaded spikes that impale the driver in the event of a collision with a pedestrian. Since the cyber truck pretty much has that facing the pedestrians, if the driver is faced with the threat as well maybe they’ll be more careful with their driving.
I’d say auto stop features and multiple camera views on reverse are a good selling point of a car. I certainly regret not getting the overhead camera view on the vehicle I purchased (and the blind spot indicators which don’t apply to pedestrians).
I’d also like to see the infra-red windshield overlays make it out of the prototype stage. This night vision/heat vision feature helps to alert you to deer, dogs, wildlife, and those dumb asses that insist on walking down the road at night in dark clothing in my neighborhood.
Pedestrian safety is looking at the amount of damage that a car could do to pedestrians in an accident. It comes down to how the car is built. Things like no sharp edges, no hard materials, no dangerous liquids can leak out etc.
It is quite the opposite of what Massa Elon had in mind when he designed that silly truck. And that’s why this is a topic at all.
No, most parents will consider vehicle safety for their kids, airbag effects on toddlers, scoring on side impacts, etc… and don’t give two shits about other people’s kids.
There is no overlap in the venn diagram of people who want a Cybertruck and people who consider pedestrian safety when buying a personal vehicle.
Actually, is there anyone that makes vehicle purchasing decisions considering pedestrian safety scores?
Doesn’t the existence of this modded truck prove that statement wrong? Because I’m pretty sure you made the only statement explicitly refuted by the existence of this truck.
Congratulations?
No, because no one intends to hit a pedestrian with the car they are buying. That’s why we need to mandate safer vehicles, not trust people to factor that in as they look for a car.
pssh, speak for yourself
I say build in spring loaded spikes that impale the driver in the event of a collision with a pedestrian. Since the cyber truck pretty much has that facing the pedestrians, if the driver is faced with the threat as well maybe they’ll be more careful with their driving.
I’d say auto stop features and multiple camera views on reverse are a good selling point of a car. I certainly regret not getting the overhead camera view on the vehicle I purchased (and the blind spot indicators which don’t apply to pedestrians).
I’d also like to see the infra-red windshield overlays make it out of the prototype stage. This night vision/heat vision feature helps to alert you to deer, dogs, wildlife, and those dumb asses that insist on walking down the road at night in dark clothing in my neighborhood.
That wasn’t meant by “pedestrian safety”.
Pedestrian safety is looking at the amount of damage that a car could do to pedestrians in an accident. It comes down to how the car is built. Things like no sharp edges, no hard materials, no dangerous liquids can leak out etc.
It is quite the opposite of what Massa Elon had in mind when he designed that silly truck. And that’s why this is a topic at all.
Parents, maybe? They are usually so concerned about children’s safety, whether that’s their kids or someone else’s.
No, most parents will consider vehicle safety for their kids, airbag effects on toddlers, scoring on side impacts, etc… and don’t give two shits about other people’s kids.