this post was submitted on 05 May 2025
814 points (98.9% liked)

Cyberstuck

845 readers
696 users here now

A place to post your Cybertruck fails! We're here to make fun of this hunk of shit and throw as much shade as we can to that garbage bag of a human elon.

No doxxing No slurs No racism And no fucking nazis!

founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
 
all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 164 points 5 days ago (2 children)

The YouTuber EngineeringExplained also explained how although the cybertruck complies with the requirements for its advertised tow rating, this tow rating system is vastly inadequate for the real world and all other manufacturers overbuild the crap out of their trucks because they know that.

This is why cybertrucks are known to literally rip their frames apart while towing what they are technically rated for.

[–] Rubisco@slrpnk.net 48 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)
[–] DogWater@lemmy.world 24 points 5 days ago

Engineering explained is an excellent YouTube channel.

He also debunked the claim that the cybertruck won a drag race vs a 911 while towing a 911

[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago
[–] LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works 8 points 4 days ago

Wait, so every car manufacturer has already identified the problem decades ago, decided that bad press is worse than a few more dollars, and fixed it? Except the disruptive genius who knows everything? Nice.

[–] OpticalMoose@discuss.tchncs.de 119 points 5 days ago (1 children)
[–] blitzen@lemmy.ca 13 points 5 days ago

Shuttle Endeavour is housed at the California Science Center in Los Angeles, and fun fact, the Tundra that towed it is also still on display there.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 76 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Looks more like a rocket engine

[–] walden@sub.wetshaving.social 38 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Yep, an unfortunate typo. A jet engine of that size would be more impressive because they weigh more.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

That's not a typo, that's a good old mistake. If they wrote "roket engine" it would be a typo.

[–] walden@sub.wetshaving.social 2 points 4 days ago

Ha that's funny, I could have sworn I wrote "mistake", because I had the same thought. Oops

[–] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 41 points 5 days ago (2 children)

FYI according to CPI inflation $2,500 in 1972 is worth about $19,000 today. Based on a comparison of median individual income that would be similar to about $25,000. Either way, the truck cost about the same as a Honda Civic does today.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I paid less for my first house in 1994 than a cybertruck costs today, in current dollars.

Vehicles are insanely expensive in real dollars today.

[–] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It's more that they're way bigger and more complicated now. A simple vehicle is still pretty much the same as I showed in my comment,

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 4 days ago

the car market, especially in america, is completely fucked beyond saving. EVERYTHING is gargantuan and lethal.

in a sane world most people should only be driving small electric moped cars.

[–] PanArab@lemm.ee 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I don’t think you can even get a Chevrolet Colorado for that price. If only Chinese pickups were available in the US.

[–] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The issue is more a market issue than anything. People prefer to buy giant trucks instead of reasonable ones.

[–] PanArab@lemm.ee 2 points 4 days ago

In the US you are mostly true. The Maverick and Santa Cruz shows there’s a market for sensible pickup trucks but it is relatively small.

[–] Hupf@feddit.org 13 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Of course a plane would be super light, how else could it fly?

[–] JoeDyrt@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 days ago

Empty Weight of a Boeing 747 is 325,660–336,870 lb. (wiki)

It carries 4 turbo-fan engines, each of which weighs approximately 12,000 lbs. (also wiki)

So the 747 weighs at least 27 times heavier than one engine, on average. ( iOS calc)

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 30 points 5 days ago

Continued astonishment at how consistently and repeatedly they self-own with stunts like this. Humiliation fetish is the only explanation.

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 29 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)
[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 43 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

The Mini Cooper EV pulled a plane not long ago, it's all for show.

[–] GluWu@lemm.ee 42 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Single humans pull planes all the time as strong man stunts

[–] veroxii@aussie.zone 19 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Planes are super light or how else would they float off into the air to fly? /s

[–] Tja@programming.dev 4 points 4 days ago

That have hollow bones!

[–] LeFrog@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I think you missed the !:

![](https://www.digitaltrends.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/TundraTowsEndeavour004.jpg)

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 days ago
[–] lettruthout@lemmy.world 15 points 5 days ago

We’re sure that the engine isn’t pushing the Cybertruck?

[–] noughtnaut@lemmy.world 14 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

A giant thank you for reminding me of the now-ancient first-ever viral video - 405

[–] Doctor_Satan@lemm.ee 3 points 4 days ago

The effects still hold up. Better than a lot of big budget movies of that era, even.

[–] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 22 points 5 days ago

Considering what usually tows these things around, it's kind of a weak flex.

[–] invertedspear@lemm.ee 16 points 5 days ago (1 children)

In either case, how impressive is this really? If you balance the load properly to keep the tongue weight within spec, all you’re then doing is overcoming inertia and the friction of the wheels. What is the force to overcome those in either picture?

[–] takenaps@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The magnitude of the friction on the tires is still dependent on the load so would be hard to say without crunching the numbers.. but ya I agree with u, its probably much less impressive than it appears, which is all that really matters w demos like this

[–] baldingpudenda@lemmy.world 5 points 5 days ago

There was also a demo of a cyberpunk pulling a train. I think it was practical engineering on YouTube. He then goes on to explain how little it actually takes to break fiction, why there's slack so you only pull one cart in the beginning and get inertia to do a lot of the work. It basically called out the stupid demo, and went on to show why trains are awesome.

[–] Pnut@lemm.ee 11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It was a bit before my time but my cousin pointed this out to me a few years ago. Truck ads were absolutely nuts back in the 80s. They 100% destroyed every one that was in the commercials.

[–] vivendi@programming.dev 2 points 5 days ago

INDEPENDENT

FRONT

SUSPENSION

[–] 2910000@lemmy.world 10 points 5 days ago

I just watched the 1972 ad.
It's weird they used a mechanical grating sound in their background music

[–] The_Che_Banana@beehaw.org 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

19, 126 in today's Trumpbux

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 days ago

Every day we stray further from the light.

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

looks like the warhead of icbm, hes delivering to putins planes.

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago
  1. That's an engine, the other end of an ICBM
  2. Doesn't Russia already have their own warheads? You know, since they're such a global constant threat?
  3. Is there anything going on in the world that doesn't involve Russia according to you?
  4. Did you check under your bed? Behind your couch? In your closet? You know, for mind-control devices, etc?