Not only Cybertruck. Also other trucks like Ford F150 etc.

Trucks in general are awful for pedestrians and other motorists, but the Cybertruck is made specifically of sharp angles that will rip and tear more than a big flat vertical wall running into you.

Pickup trucks aren't flat vertical walls like a semi though. They are a high wall with a hood.

While "sharp" edge can certainly break bones, getting hit with a high hood causes people to slam their head into the hood with very little travel time compared to a low hood. Head injuries are far more likely to cause death.

Of course, the risk varies based on height. Sharp edges a couple feet off the ground are far more dangerous to someone only a couple feet tall.

clear case of bias infecting judgment.

The front is rounded which is the place you'll hit in the vast majority of cases.

Cool, I get to have a slightly convex wall run into me before then get pulled under the tires

That disagrees with your statement about the cybertruck.

Buses are terrible too

Now account for how many vehicles we can get off the road if we have proper bus service, and the impact on pedestrians and cyclists.

Or consider the licensing requirements (class 2 + an air brake endorsement here in BC), and how difficult it is to buy, and store, a 40' bus, compared to any modern truck.

This is a daft comparison that only serves to muddy the waters, and attempts to excuse excessively large modern trucks

A bus provides equivalent utility to maybe 20-40 cars and is driven by a professional driver, so I'm not too worried.

Unlike Ford trucks, the cybertruck isn't even street legal in Europe due to its anti-human design. They are not the same.

Good luck with that. This is the CEOs pet project, who spent 3mo openly and directly dismantling regulatory groups in the U.S. while at the same time threatening to pull out of key defense and aerospace initiatives if the poor guy didn’t get his way

I wish we had more respect for innovation.

I’m sorry, are you suggesting that Musk is an innovator?

Are you suggesting he's not? That's utterly crazy. The problem isn't that he isn't an innovator, the problem is that not all of his innovations are good ideas, and that the ones that were good ideas were good enough to give him the power to distort market forces.

It's not legal in europe.

Neither are many vehicles sold in the US. That doesn’t tell us much.

I’m not sure if you mean to imply that most US vehicles aren’t sold in Europe, but I don’t think that’s the case -- there are plenty of US cars in Europe (including Teslas, although they’re going rapidly out of fashion).

I don't think any US cars are capable of being sold without a whole heap of changes. US cars in Europe have been modified to meet the regulations. Same of course for European cars in the US.

Right, I just meant that for most popular US car models, the manufacturers do all the checks and modifications needed to sell a European variant, but that's specifically not the case for the Cybertruck.

Either the design is fundamentally incompatible with European regulations, or they just don't think there's market demand. But note that other US truck do sell in Europe and the UK, e.g. the F-150.

There's something special about the Cybertruck. The special thing seems to be that it's a lemon.

Same as rat poison, coming 2026...

2028.. Europe starves...

Maybe not by default, but it can be done:

https://insideevs.com/features/727202/tesla-cybertruck-europ...

> “The car has modifications for sharp edges in the form of rubber edge guards that could come into contact with pedestrians at the front and back,” Slovak said.

So, like a bumper car?

Not entirely unlike it. It's also like the foam inserts on a product, when you take it out from its cardboard box.

Not shown on every image, but here are some:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GShMjCQXkAAfy40?format=jpg&name=...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GSUGKXlXgAASb8o?format=jpg&name=...

> the Cybertruck looks like it was designed to inflict maximum harm to pedestrians in a crash

Isn't that the selling point?

Mechanically sure, but I still feel way safer when a Tesla (of any kind) is approaching me as a pedestrian or bicyclist than any other vehicle (except maybe Waymo) because I know they will alert the driver and brake if necessary. Any other car, especially older trucks, I'm quite afraid of, based on experience.

> because I know they will alert the driver and brake if necessary.

This is not necessarily accurate.

https://x.com/TaylorOgan/status/1681240264554209281 ("Warning: Graphic; Last month, a 76-year-old pedestrian was tragically mowed down by a Tesla Model S in Brooklyn, NY. Both of his legs were torn off, according to witnesses. New data from the NHTSA says the Tesla was engaged on Autopilot/Full Self-Driving mode.")

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/model-y-doesnt-stop-...

https://www.tesladeaths.com/

I own several Teslas, would not trust them to stop for a pedestrian while in any driver assist mode. It may work, but if you rely on it, be prepared for consequences when it fails, as you are the responsible party when it fails.

You would need to compare the data against the data of non-smart trucks. I'm guessing it's an order of magnitude more dangerous to be a pedestrian around a normal truck.

Automatic emergency braking is a standard feature on many new cars, and will be mandatory for all new passenger cars and light trucks in the U.S. by September 2029. I am open to the assertion that Tesla's AEB, when scoped to pedestrian scenarios, is superior to other AEB systems, but this assertion requires independently verified data and evidence for support.

https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-safety/automatic-em...

https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-safety/aeb-with-ped...

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

https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2024-04/final-ru... [pdf]

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a63027394/feds-automated-e...

Dumb trucks don't encourage their drivers to turn their brains off.

That first crash sure doesn't sound like Autopilot/FSD, given that the car kept going after the crash.

Tesla is currently renting vehicles for $60/day due to diminished demand; if one would like to test this personally, the cost is minimal. Avoid bodily injury whenever possible during testing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coeaqdexknE

https://electrek.co/2025/11/10/tesla-cant-sell-cars-so-renti...

Edit: @romaaeterna Are you willing to stand in front of it while it is at speed without a safety driver? I am trying to reconcile the mental model with risk appetite and potential gaps between priors and current state.

I have a Tesla and a drive FSD back and forth to work every day. It's great

Edit in response to your edit:

Would I risk myself standing in front of a FSD Tesla versus in front of an Uber or an average human-controlled car with the standard percentage chance of the human texting or being otherwise distracted or drunk or tired? I would take FSD. And I think that a mathematical rather than emotional evaluation of the odds would make risk-minded people do the same.

Hopefully not anywhere near me. My family needs me.

They must love drama

In my experience, Tesla drivers are some of the worst drivers on the road. They seem to pay the least attention to what's going on around them and are the most likely to pay fast and loose with the rules of the road. I don't know what's to account for this. There has been at least one study out of Berkeley that suggests that people who drive more expensive cars are more likely to break the rules of the road. It's possible that (at least here in Seattle), this is more likely to be the driver's first car since many people driving them are highly paid tech workers who often hail from others countries and who may not have as good of a grasp of driving in the US. Or it may be that this is enabled by autopilot itself (if your car is taking care of the safety you don't have to pay as much attention).

The last reason is the biggest imo. Previously if you didn't pay attention you would crash relatively often. Now you aren't punished in the same way. In the same way spell check made us worse spellers. You aren't required to pay attention to detail, so you never develop that skill.

I taught my kids to drive both manuals and automatics. Usually we got the hang of driving an automatic, and then added manual in to the mix.

But with one of my kids, it was exactly as above. They scared the crap out of me, because they just would not focus well enough. We transitioned to a manual so that they were required to focus on the task at hand, and they then turned into a good driver.

(Aside: my kids, now college+ age have all gotten great deals on cars on college budgets, because they were willing to take a manual that cost far less due to reduced demand).

> There has been at least one study out of Berkeley that suggests that people who drive more expensive cars are more likely to break the rules of the road.

In Germany, we have a joke - BMWs don't need turn signal indicators, they have built-in precedence that comes with paying the money one needs to have to afford a BMW.

Who needs Fahrvergnügen when you can have Bezahltumvorfahrtsgefühligkeitsrechtserwartung (Paid-for-precedence-feeling-of-entitlement-expectation)?

Totally forgot about that. It's been decades since I've seen a far fig Newtons commercial.

May be misplaced considering Teslas have hit pedestrians. Additionally, many cars have pedestrian/object collision detection.

Virtually every car made in the past 5-10 years emergency brakes. I mean, modern Honda's have the same level of autonomous driving as Teslas.

As a motorcyclist I feel far less safe when one is around me.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tesla-fatal-seattle-are...

Are collision avoidance system and automated emergency braking not standard in the US? Here in Switzerland basically every new vehicle has them.

Given the amount of pedestrians that have been killed by Telsas in "autopilot" mode, I can't say that I agree.

Could you give me some numbers about deaths caused by Tesla versus other brands per mile driven? It seems to be very difficult to find enough information to draw any conclusions.

I believe the only information is crowd-sourced:

About: https://electrek.co/2025/02/06/elon-musk-approved-tesla-full...

Actual data: https://teslafsdtracker.com/

My Honda has a break alert system.

Is this really happening though?

It looks like it's designed to inflict maximum harm, but it seems that it's actually less likely to kill you than an F-150 or Silverado or Ram. It has a lower hood height which is the aspect that has been hypothesized to be the reason that trucks kill pedestrians at a much greater rate than cars.

I'm not trying to condone Cybertruck here. I hope the Cybertruck becomes a rallying cry to mandate pedestrian safety in the US, and that mandate becomes data driven and indicts F-150 et al.

Are there enough Cybertrucks on the roads for us to detect their danger levels statistically? I’ve never seen one and I don’t live in the middle of nowhere or anything…

We seen a good dozen or more in a couple of weeks in Orlando.

To be clear, I agree with you on them being statistically insignificant.

The problem is that Cybertruck drivers are likely to have a boisterous driving style which may skew the results - what other kind of personality would purchase a vehicle that is less practical than other trucks, less practical than other EVs and, whether we like it or not, carries a signal to other people on the road.

> The problem is that Cybertruck drivers are likely to have a boisterous driving style

What leads you to believe that?

It's certainly a conversation worth having, but a fundamental difference between the CT and something like an F150 is utility -- the CT is unapologetically a lifestyle vehicle emphasizing form over function. A regular pickup is very utilitarian. I know it's fashionable to argue that half-ton pickups are very commonly used as lifestyle pickups too, but at least the design is clearly aimed at function over form.

So the argument probably is less about how the design should change, but how to avoid incentivizing the use of utility vehicles for family duty.

Disclaimer: I drive an F150 Lightning, so I'm part of the problem I suppose; but damn if it isn't just about the most useful all-around family vehicle I've ever owned. As long as you don't routinely drive downtown, and I don't.

The design 100% has to change. There is a marketing battle for the highest hood, since it looks dope as fuck. We should mandate a maximum hood height for all vehicles that's dependent on driver visibility. When the next F-150 needs three steps to enter because the hood is too high and we woke up and mandated that pedestrian visibility needs to be maintained, then that's when change will happen.

It's been slowly increasing in size. Pickups last century were slightly smaller but not dramatically so -- if you look at like-for-like. A bigger driver of size IMO is the appreciate we now have for crew cabs. Those used to be rare to see on the road, now it's regular cabs that are extremely rare.

> When the next F-150 needs three steps to enter

This is mostly an aftermarket thing, and a superduty thing. My Lightning has running boards that are a little awkward to use because it isn't tall enough to justify them. I use them when getting in and out but only because they're otherwise in the way of my leg, not because the truck is hard to just step into.

My kids are old enough right about now that if Ford were to come out with an electric Ranger, I might trade. I do like how the midsize trucks drive (though the Lightning is quite remarkable in how well it drives for a half-ton size truck).

Pickups are about 10 inches taller now than they used to be. That seems like a lot to me.

According to the youtube video that a different commenter linked (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpuX-5E7xoU), lowering the hood height by 10 inches will make the truck 81% less likely to kill a kid in a collision.

90s trucks sure. But they turned into tonka trucks over the last 30 years. The grills and everything just keep getting bigger.

It’s actually worse than that though. Ford got rid of the heavy duty package on the f150 and said to customers “just buy the f250 instead”. Which is even more tonka.

A pickup from the last century is utilitarian with their 8 foot beds and a box height low enough to reach in from the side. Modern pickups much less so.

I can't say I agree that "regular pickups" are very utilitarian, unless you're talking about the base trim work trucks. They seem to me to be incredibly expensive luxury vehicles for the most part.

FortNine did a great rundown on this phenomenon last year:

"Grilles That Kill"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpuX-5E7xoU

NJB did as well: https://youtu.be/jN7mSXMruEo

For the stereo-typical truck driver, a motorcycle Youtube channel is going to be much more sympathetic than a bicycle channel.

Of course the stereotype doesn't always apply, I certainly know people who have transporting bicycles as a major use case for their truck.

Cybertruck is a great case study in how people confuse form for function.

In a world where technology is advancing exponentially, aesthetics increasingly offer a poor signal for performance, and only those who obsessively look under the hood and disregard form will see through it all.

Yep. There were endless articles and hundreds of comments here about how atrocious the crash safety of the cyber truck must be for occupants. Everyone knew for a fact it had no crumple zone, etc.

Then the actual crash testing data comes out…… And crickets.

Peoples intuition is very, very wrong.

Yeah it seems like a lower hood height would be an improvement, but it's also pretty obvious that sharp corners are going to make things much worse! There's no way you can say "it seems that it's actually less likely to kill you"...

Two wrongs don't make a right. Stupidly tall grills that look butch, kill people who would've survived the impact but for the vanity of the truck buyer. Now we get the only pickup that is bucking that trend, but it has knife-sharp edges. We live on the stupid timeline.

have you got any stats to back that up?