Connect with us

News

Tesla owner scores Elon Musk’s “V1” Boring Brick to perform drop test comparison

(Credit: What's Inside/YouTube)

Published

on

A Tesla owner recently acquired a rare “V1” sample of Elon Musk’s Boring Company brick for a durability test. Dan Markham from YouTube’s What’s Inside channel was able to get his hands on two Boring bricks and had some fun performing a drop test to compare its durability with potential competitors in the market.

Markham managed to get a hold of two Boring Bricks from the first batch of 500 “V1” pieces, thanks to a Boring Co. employee. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO has talked about inexpensive bricks made out of tunneling rock since 2018, and in true Elon Musk fashion, he called them Boring Bricks. Musk had stated that the Boring Bricks would cost 10¢ a piece, significantly lower than bricks on the market.

Besides the Boring Brick’s material and affordable price, another intriguing feature about it would be its durability. When Musk introduced the Boring Brick, he emphasized its strength. “[Boring Bricks are] Rated for California seismic loads, so super strong, but bored in the middle, like an aircraft wing spar, so not heavy,” Musk said later in a tweet.

Markham wanted to put Musk’s words to the test and compared his Boring Bricks with four traditional alternatives. He bought an average red clay brick for 53¢, a used clay brick for 58¢, a cinder block brick reinforced with steel for 71¢, and a normal cinder block brick for 43¢.

(Credit: What’s Inside/YouTube)

For his durability test, Markham dropped each brick from different heights until they broke into pieces. For the first test, he dropped them from chest-level and the Boring Brick passed with no problem. The 71¢ cinder block brick reinforced with steel passed without any scratches, and the 53¢ red clay brick survived the first test as well with a slight chip in the corner.

Sadly, the 58¢ clay brick and 43¢ cinder block were eliminated in the first round after both broke in two.

For the second test, Markem went up a flight of stairs and dropped the bricks from about 10 feet above the ground. The remaining bricks all passed the second round relatively unscathed, except for a small chip on the corner of the red clay brick and a tiny one on the Boring Brick.

Advertisement
-

In the third test, the Boring Brick proved its durability once more, surviving a fall from about 12-14 feet above the ground with just another slight chip. By this time, the only other brick that survived Markham’s durability test was the cinder block brick reinforced with steel, which cost over 7x the price of the Boring Brick.

The What’s Inside? host’s test was undoubtedly fun and did demonstrate the durability of the Boring Brick at some level. However, the durability of bricks is usually tested through compression and there are other factors to consider when judging a brick’s quality.

Nevertheless, Markham’s video managed to show that the Boring Brick is a viable product and could be another potentially revolutionary idea from Musk. At its price point, Boring Bricks could change the construction and housing market. Markham paid a little extra for his Boring Bricks but didn’t seem to mind since they were commemorative pieces. He paid $200 for each Boring Brick and gave one of them to a friend.

Elon described Boring Bricks as “lifesize LEGO-like interlocking bricks” in the past. Based on the bricks that Markham acquired, it appears that Musk is sticking to his plan. The Boring Brick had two holes in the center reminiscent of Lego bricks, with “The Boring Company” written in the middle. These should allow for easy buildouts for construction projects, as the bricks are optimized to be laid with relatively little effort.

Watch Dan Markham’s Boring Brick durability test in the video below.

Advertisement
-

Maria--aka "M"-- is an experienced writer and book editor. She's written about several topics including health, tech, and politics. As a book editor, she's worked with authors who write Sci-Fi, Romance, and Dark Fantasy. M loves hearing from TESLARATI readers. If you have any tips or article ideas, contact her at maria@teslarati.com or via X, @Writer_01001101.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.

Published

on

By

Starlink D2D direct to device vs Verizon, AT&T (Concept render by Grok)

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.

The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.

That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.

The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.

Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.

Advertisement
-

SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.

The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.

Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know

Published

on

Credit: KTVU

A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.

The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.

There were no injuries reported.

The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.

However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.

At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.

The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.

The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.

An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.

A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.

“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”

Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.

Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.

Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:

  • You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
  • You must leave the area immediately.
  • Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
  • Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.

After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.

Continue Reading