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.
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.
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.
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?