You also won't have any issue getting third-party damage insurance in Europe, as the insurance companies are required to make an offer.
You also won't have any issue getting third-party damage insurance in Europe, as the insurance companies are required to make an offer.
Honestly I might even have bought a nice electric truck, but that weird box on wheels just ain't it :(
Europe will type approve anything that proves it's safe and follows basic conventions. That will most likely include the Cybertruck, as the question really isn't "is this car a good idea?" - even bad products that nobody needs or wants get type approved, and Cybertruck really will not be the worst thing that happened to European roads.
Tesla knows very well how to get a US car type approved in EU with minimal adjustments. It was very curious to watch with previous models. They are quick, too.
> most of the traditional American big pickups like Dodge RAM are type approved - why not a Cybertruck then?
I'd guess pedestrian safety would be one of the main issues.
Every model Tesla introduced was US only first few years. People individually imported the first hundreds of cars during these initial years. Tesla then introduced an European version of the car with technically minimal adjustments.
Purely out of curiosity — can you name one or two such vehicles? I'm really interested how they are so unsafe, or rather, which byzantine (non-?)regulation deems them so unsafe :D
Regulation (EC) No 78/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council (9) sets out requirements for the protection of pedestrians, cyclists and other vulnerable road users in the form of compliance tests and limit values for the type-approval of vehicles with regard to their front structure and for the type-approval of frontal protection systems (for example, bull-bars). Since the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 78/2009, technical requirements and test procedures for vehicles have developed further at UN level to take account of technical progress. UN Regulation No 127 laying down uniform provisions concerning the approval of motor vehicles with regard to their pedestrian safety performance (‘UN Regulation No 127’) currently also applies in the Union in respect to type-approval of motor vehicles.
So: 1) the regulation you said does not exist does in fact exist,
2) it may be one of the reasons the Cybertruck is not yet type approved.
Time will tell, if and when Tesla manages to register it, possibly with some changes to the construction. Or it will deem the EU market too small for that.Yeah, Sorry, I worded that poorly. Can you give an example of a car that is more unsafe (by some generic reasoning) than the Cybertruck, but still type approved?
Naive comparisons like "the hood is lower" are not enough to make this kind of statement, as the remaining differences (sharp angles and a very different material) are too large to make this determination without actual testing.
How did you come to your earlier assessment? Did you ignore the differences in material and sharp angles? I'm not well-versed in the area, but it seems more than reasonable that they have an impact on the outcome of pedestrian collisions.
Tesla has announced that they are in process of making Cybertruck version that complies with EU regulation, but Cybertruck is hard to adjust. Lack of crumple zones is a big issue.
Getting it approved as commercial vehicle should not be a problem, but nobody wants that. Not Tesla, and not the consumers.
There's an abundance of news articles about Tesla's VP of Vehicle Engineering, Lars Moravy, saying they can't get it due to some 3.2mm exterior radius requirement that is impossible to do on the 1.4mm stainless steel they use:
https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/tesla/cybertruck/buying
https://motortrends.net/news/tesla-cybertruck-wont-enter-eur...