In a situation where maybe both would have survived otherwise, now at least one party is goo.
It's a Prisoner's Dilemma. If everyone drives fat, rigid SUVs, I gotta do to. That's why there is a law
A crumple zone in an EV is pretty simple though, since you don't have to worry about the heavy engine getting shoved into the front passengers.
I'm not sure why it's such a popular notion that the cybertruck won't crumple? It's literally got a big empty space at the front as a feature.
Ordinary cars crumple but they don't fall apart if you lean on them or drive down a bumpy road. They have strength in some situations and specially designed failure modes in others.
It could be as simple as putting some scores in the metal so that it folds in a particular way when sufficient force is applied.
Because it's supposed to be bulletproof and have a virtually indestructible surface which you cannot dent or scratch. It's possible that this was meant as nothing more than resistance to minor assault but taking the statement literally and assuming a completely rigid reinforced frame makes a lot of sense.
> Ordinary cars crumple but they don't fall apart if you lean on them or drive down a bumpy road.
Ordinary cars are not billed as bulletproof and virtually indestructible.
Different properties. Bulletproof vests are flexible and distribute the force rather than being just hard and heavy for example. Diamonds are scratch resistant, but shatter.
Until we see the actual tests, it's all just speculation with minimal information. Resisting a hammer does not prove anything about collisions.
Ncap includes these tests and it seems they're more interested in flexibility in that case, not in crumbling.
it is generally very bad for the person who gets hit by the car