Pine tar ruins car roofs all the time, road tar on paint, etc. Comparing a ford f150 to a ford maverick, on the underbody and protection, the maverick is already rusting so quick compared due to lack of protection to keep the price down.
I've always wondered why car reviews sites don't actually review stuff that matters more to longevity and use, rust protection, frame coating, exposed parts, skid plates, wheel wells (felt/plastic/etc), common costs and repair times for (quarter panels, common parts that fail, belts, hoses, etc), audio quality, window noise (acoustic glass vs normal), suspension, etc.
Tesla cars have had major water and dirt issues collecting in its underbody, but its a car, so dirt and gravel roads really are bad on it.
> The Cybertruck doesn't even have a clearcoat, which is insane.
Why? Conventional car body is steel, which rusts easily. So it's (most likely) galvanized + protected by various layers of paint.
If that paint is damaged (scratch, dent, whatever) the underlying steel will rust. Repair may be along the lines of "sand down, apply primer, apply color, apply clearcoat".
Stainless steel is different. The base material itself doesn't corrode (as) easily. Similar to say, aluminium, titanium or even copper. Repair: sand down until scratch / ugly spot is gone, sand down with increasingly finer grit, finish with polishing material (wool or whatever), done.
There is a catch: some conditions may corrode even stainless steel. A common culprit is salt(s). Especially repeated wetting / drying cycles where droplets of salt water concentrate, potentially causing so-called "pitting". Various grades of stainless have various degrees of resistance to this.
The Cybertruck uses 301 alloy stainless? Perhaps the thought was "if it's good enough for rockets, it's good enough for a car". But... exactly that may not be so!
It's not hard to imagine road or environmental conditions that don't apply (significantly) to rockets: ocean breeze containing salty droplets, winter road conditions (including de-icing salts), small stones hitting a car's underside, etc etc. Also 1.4~3 mm. thickness is more easily compromised than whatever thickness a rocket's hull is.
304 stainless is common (and good enough for maaany applications). 301 is probably similar. But in eg. marine applications, 316 (or 316L) alloy is common.
So maybe Tesla goofed (or penny-pinched?) on their choice of alloy? Or they didn't, and this is a non-issue blown out of proportion? Who knows. I wouldn't worry about it unless dipping-in-salty-water is regular pasttime.
Lower cost, simpler process, and marginally lighter weight come to mind. But the trade off doesn’t seem great for the consumer (and the weight is truly negligible on a heavy EV).
The other poster had a good point. A marine-class alloy would make a big difference in coastal and salted road areas.
I like it when automobile manufacturers push the design and technology envelope, like BMW did with Smart Car. I view the CyberTruck in a similar vein. But still, I’ll wait till version 2.0 with this one.
yes... but the handbook says exactly the same about all their other models of car, and has done for years. Clearly it wasn't written for/about the cybertruck specifically.
Absolutely. But it feels a bit to me like you’re missing the point. If their blend of stainless was designed to last 30 years, then it wouldn’t need to be cleaned per the owners manual. It also seems that clear coat would be a good protective step against the concerns they raise. So it seems as though your argument spins in quite tight circles.
TFA makes a point of how weird it is that Tesla just say “Cybertruck” not “the Cybertruck”, so whether it was written for the Cybertruck or not, it has at least been updated for the Cybertruck.
29 comments
[ 7.6 ms ] story [ 78.3 ms ] threadI'm imagining for sale ads a few years from now 'Cybertruck. Runs good. Lots of character. Must sign waiver of liability.'
I've always wondered why car reviews sites don't actually review stuff that matters more to longevity and use, rust protection, frame coating, exposed parts, skid plates, wheel wells (felt/plastic/etc), common costs and repair times for (quarter panels, common parts that fail, belts, hoses, etc), audio quality, window noise (acoustic glass vs normal), suspension, etc.
Tesla cars have had major water and dirt issues collecting in its underbody, but its a car, so dirt and gravel roads really are bad on it.
The point is that this happens even though a typical car body is protected by an electrocoat, primer, basecoat, clearcoat, etc.
The Cybertruck doesn't even have a clearcoat, which is insane.
“…they didn’t clearcoat it?!”
Tesla is great at batteries and wheeled computers, but man, they have some serious blind spots when it comes to building vehicles.
I wonder if you can get an aftermarket ceramic coat or similar protectant on it.
Why? Conventional car body is steel, which rusts easily. So it's (most likely) galvanized + protected by various layers of paint.
If that paint is damaged (scratch, dent, whatever) the underlying steel will rust. Repair may be along the lines of "sand down, apply primer, apply color, apply clearcoat".
Stainless steel is different. The base material itself doesn't corrode (as) easily. Similar to say, aluminium, titanium or even copper. Repair: sand down until scratch / ugly spot is gone, sand down with increasingly finer grit, finish with polishing material (wool or whatever), done.
There is a catch: some conditions may corrode even stainless steel. A common culprit is salt(s). Especially repeated wetting / drying cycles where droplets of salt water concentrate, potentially causing so-called "pitting". Various grades of stainless have various degrees of resistance to this.
According to this article: (thx Wikipedia!)
https://www.motortrend.com/news/tesla-cybertruck-electric-pi...
The Cybertruck uses 301 alloy stainless? Perhaps the thought was "if it's good enough for rockets, it's good enough for a car". But... exactly that may not be so!
It's not hard to imagine road or environmental conditions that don't apply (significantly) to rockets: ocean breeze containing salty droplets, winter road conditions (including de-icing salts), small stones hitting a car's underside, etc etc. Also 1.4~3 mm. thickness is more easily compromised than whatever thickness a rocket's hull is.
304 stainless is common (and good enough for maaany applications). 301 is probably similar. But in eg. marine applications, 316 (or 316L) alloy is common.
So maybe Tesla goofed (or penny-pinched?) on their choice of alloy? Or they didn't, and this is a non-issue blown out of proportion? Who knows. I wouldn't worry about it unless dipping-in-salty-water is regular pasttime.
This one is very much a staple of SpaceX's rockets.
The other poster had a good point. A marine-class alloy would make a big difference in coastal and salted road areas.
BMW owns the Mini brand, which is not really pushing the envelope that much. But I like what they tried with the i3.
Plenty of stupid things about the Cybertruck if you want to be a hater. This isn’t one of them.
Personally, I want one.
hope you get and enjoy your truck though
It’s likely you barely have any remaining non-hazed clear coat to begin with.
It’s still happening. You’re just oblivious.
Ask someone who actually owns a new car with nice paint.
gl;hf
> The stainless steel body panels have no translucent “clear coat” paint.
Plenty of stainless steel has been outdoors for 30 years and shows no sign of degredation.
I’m not making a statement about clear coats that don’t exist on Cybertrucks.
https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/ukio9d/cybertr...
https://frinkiac.com/caption/S10E15/310476