this post was submitted on 05 May 2025
633 points (98.8% liked)

Cyberstuck

828 readers
817 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
 
top 37 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] noughtnaut@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

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

[–] lettruthout@lemmy.world 9 points 2 hours ago

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

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 2 points 2 hours ago

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

[–] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 29 points 9 hours ago (1 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 5 points 3 hours ago

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.

[–] Pnut@lemm.ee 10 points 9 hours 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 1 points 3 hours ago

INDEPENDENT

FRONT

SUSPENSION

[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 134 points 14 hours 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.

[–] LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works 1 points 36 minutes 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.

[–] Rubisco@slrpnk.net 40 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (2 children)
[–] DogWater@lemmy.world 21 points 11 hours 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 11 hours ago
[–] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 20 points 10 hours ago

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

[–] OpticalMoose@discuss.tchncs.de 107 points 14 hours ago (1 children)
[–] blitzen@lemmy.ca 8 points 6 hours 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.

[–] 2910000@lemmy.world 9 points 9 hours ago

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

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 68 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Looks more like a rocket engine

[–] walden@sub.wetshaving.social 33 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

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

[–] Tja@programming.dev 3 points 1 hour ago

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

[–] mrsemi@lemmy.world 19 points 13 hours ago (4 children)

Rocket engines are a subtype of jet engine.

[–] walden@sub.wetshaving.social 14 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

I could be compelled to agree, but "An air-breathing turbojet engine of that size..." doesn't have the same ring to it. Jet engine usually refers to something that has the traditional suck, squeeze, bang, blow method of propulsion, and rocket engine is used to refer to something that just burns straight fuel (with its own oxidizer, etc.).

Technically my air compressor blow gun is a rocket, but I wouldn't ever refer to it as one.

But hey, language evolves, so maybe being hyper specific will catch on.

[–] sourhill@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 10 hours ago

While this broad definition may include rocketwater jet, and hybrid propulsion, the term jet engine typically refers to an internal combustion air-breathing jet engine such as a turbojetturbofanramjetpulse jet, or scramjet. In general, jet engines are internal combustion engines.

[–] cadekat@pawb.social 9 points 11 hours ago

Huh, TIL!

A jet engine is a type of reaction engine, discharging a fast-moving jet of heated gas (usually air) that generates thrust by jet propulsion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_engine

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 28 points 14 hours ago

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

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 26 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)
[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 38 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

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

[–] GluWu@lemm.ee 39 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Single humans pull planes all the time as strong man stunts

[–] veroxii@aussie.zone 14 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] Tja@programming.dev 1 points 1 hour ago

That have hollow bones!

[–] LeFrog@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I think you missed the !:

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

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 1 points 12 hours ago
[–] invertedspear@lemm.ee 15 points 14 hours 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 10 points 11 hours 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 4 points 6 hours 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.

[–] The_Che_Banana@beehaw.org 6 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

19, 126 in today's Trumpbux

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 2 points 12 hours ago

Every day we stray further from the light.