News
Tesla Cybertruck isn’t better than 1949 technology when it comes to off-roading, says popular Trucking channel
The Tesla Cybertruck is, without a doubt, one of the most discussed vehicles in recent memory. The pickup’s polarizing and robust design has vehicle fanatics raving about the possibility of changing the tune of the American truck market today. In a recently published video from The Fast Lane Car YouTube channel, the team discussed why they believe the Cybertruck will fail to be an effective mode of off-road transportation. They highlight its heavy-weight and low-body design as two of the reasons it will fall short of impressively navigating through rocks and trails.
“If you look at what you need for off-road ability, you need ground clearance, you need gearing, you need articulation, you need underbody protection, right?” The trucking experts add, “If you look at the off-road tech, the stuff that you needed back in 1949 is the stuff you still need in 2020-2021.”
Typically, offroading vehicles that find success in challenging terrain have short wheelbase are lightweight and tend to told hold higher-than-normal ground clearances that assist in traveling over sharp crests on trails. TFL’s Tommy Mica highlights these attributes during the video, stating that an offroading vehicle’s biggest enemy is weight.
“Just like on-road, the enemy to off-road is weight. The lighter the weight, the easier it is to crawl up obstacles to maneuver difficult situations. The Cybertruck is going to be huge and is going to be monstrously heavy,” Mica says.
While it is ideal to have a lighter vehicle for offroading situations, that does not mean a heavy car will have issues 100% of the time. In fact, there are many vehicles that hold a weight that is similar to the Cybertruck’s estimated 5,000-6,500 pound curb rating. One is the 2019 Ford F-150 Raptor, a truck that was recognized by Popular Mechanics as one of the top 12 best off-road vehicles available. Weighing in at over 5,500 pounds, the Raptor has been spotted climbing intimidating stretches of steep offroading trails without much of an issue.
Additionally, Mica states that the Cybertruck’s low ground clearance will inhibit the vehicle’s ability to navigate over steep land grades and sharp objects on a trail. However, the Cybertruck’s 16″ ground clearance is higher than the 8.7″ measurement of the top-ranked 2019 Ram 1500 Rebel from Dodge and the previously mentioned F-150 Raptor’s 11.5″ clearance.
TFL tested a Long-Range configuration of the Model X in its off-road tests. Citing a diminished loss of range due to increased power usage, and increased worry over puncturing the vehicles underbody battery pack made their experience not-so-memorable. However, the Model X was never aimed toward off-road performance specifically. While the electric SUV does have traction control capabilities that have performed well on off-road courses in the past, the Model X was not meant for navigating through vicious trails of rocks, branches, and uneven terrain.
Even so, using the Model X’s performance as an off-road vehicle as the basis to prove the Cybertruck’s inability to function on trails just seems silly. The two cars maintain entirely different packages. Comparing a Ford Escape’s off-road performance to the F-150 Raptor’s wouldn’t be justifiable either, as the two vehicles are completely different and aimed toward different functions.
Besides, Tesla CEO Elon Musk has stated that the Cybertruck’s size and dimensions are not finalized. In early December 2019, Musk said the width and length would both be revised to fit inside a residential garage. “We can prob reduce width by an inch & maybe reduce length by 6+ inches without losing on utility or aesthetics,” Musk said.
The Cybertruck’s off-road performance won’t be solidified until the release of its Dual and Tri motor variants in 2021. However, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the electric truck will be more than capable of holding its own in tight terrain, especially considering its most powerful variant packs a tremendous punch.
Watch The Fast Lane Car’s video mentioning the Cybertruck’s offroading ability below.
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.
The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.
The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.
Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.
The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.
Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.
Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.
Elon Musk clapped back at France’s decision to withhold the approval for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised system, projecting a clear and blunt message to French Transport Minister Phillippe Tabarot, after he publicly rejected the technology in its current form.
Tabarot outlines several concerns with Tesla Full Self-Driving in a detailed video statement, where he said, “The safety trade-offs are not yet sufficient to authorize it as it currently stands,” he said. He emphasized that FSD is not a true self-driving system and that the driver remains fully responsible.
Key issues Tabarot also brought up included allowing speeding when surrounding traffic exceeds limits and what he believes are insufficient guarantees of driver attention during complex urban maneuvers such as lane changes, intersections, and roundabouts.
Delaying the approval of FSD in France will cost lives
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 22, 2026
While acknowledging technological progress and France’s support for autonomous innovation, Tabarot stressed that deployment must prioritize road safety. He noted ongoing technical discussions with Tesla, the Netherlands, and other European partners, with further ecosystem meetings planned for the fall.
Musk’s rebuke highlights the human cost of regulatory caution. Tesla’s latest safety reports provide compelling data supporting accelerated adoption. In the most recent 12-month period, vehicles using FSD (Supervised) recorded one major collision per approximately 5.1 million miles driven, dramatically better than the U.S. national average of one crash per 698,000 miles.
Even Tesla vehicles driven manually with active safety features outperform the average by a wide margin. These figures come from billions of real-world miles of telemetry, showing FSD vehicles involved in far fewer incidents than both manual Teslas and the broader U.S. fleet.
Critics argue Tesla’s comparisons require careful scrutiny regarding reporting thresholds and fleet demographics, yet the data consistently positions FSD as a potential lifesaver. With road fatalities remaining a leading cause of death worldwide, Musk contends that proven safer technology should not face prolonged bureaucratic hurdles.
France’s measured approach reflects the broader European regulatory caution, which many, especially Musk, have been critical of in the past. However, as autonomous systems from Tesla and competitors like Waymo demonstrate superior safety in independent studies, pressure is mounting for harmonized approvals.
Musk’s warning carries the belief that every month of delay may equate to avoidable tragedies on European roads.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines
