Did this fella just realalize he forgot to hit the send button 2 years later.

[GnarlyDudeLive]

If you would identify what the crash absorbsion rails are, you would know they aren't a part of the cast.

Give me cast specific info and I'll beleive you. The front crash tubes are only good for impacts up to 5-20mph if both are impacted evenly, like on any other modern car.

With a cast you can't tell where it has microfractures, without complete disassembly and a specific x-ray machine.

I don't recall indicating that the crash absorption rails were part of the castings. In most vehicle collisions regardless of ICE or EV where the damage goes beyond the absorption rails the vehicle will be totaled out by insurance.

Watching some of the more recent build videos of Tesla's, the assembly process is beginning to look extremally simple in comparison to ICE vehicles. That being said, we may very well be getting to the point of where *if* a casting needed attention, the casting cost could be higher than a 125 piece stamped/welded/glued front or rear clip *however* the labor costs to replace the entire casting may be easy and quick enough to have a lower total cost for repair.

 

[JBee]

I don't recall indicating that the crash absorption rails were part of the castings. In most vehicle collisions regardless of ICE or EV where the damage goes beyond the absorption rails the vehicle will be totaled out by insurance.

Watching some of the more recent build videos of Tesla's, the assembly process is beginning to look extremally simple in comparison to ICE vehicles. That being said, we may very well be getting to the point of where *if* a casting needed attention, the casting cost could be higher than a 125 piece stamped/welded/glued front or rear clip *however* the labor costs to replace the entire casting may be easy and quick enough to have a lower total cost for repair.

Agreed.

Given the low cost of the casts for manufacturing, being sub $100 by some estimates, it is far, far more likely that a whole cast would be disassembled and replaced with a brand new one. It could even become common place for this to occur, if no further structural damage was observed on the rest of the frame. Like from a side impact into the cast, rather than a high speed frontal impact, where the cabin would be exposed to deformation and component fatigue.

But that is no way cast welding repairs as proposed by some ill-informed "pun-dents" here!
That is new part replacement.

 

[rudedawg78]

Ya-who?

 

[PilotPete]

Is Yahoo still around?

Yep, and So is AOL! AOL has the contract now to serve the Verizon email accounts. Guess they aren’t sending out CDs with free online time any longer…

 

[PilotPete]

Agreed.

Given the low cost of the casts for manufacturing, being sub $100 by some estimates, it is far, far more likely that a whole cast would be disassembled and replaced with a brand new one. It could even become common place for this to occur, if no further structural damage was observed on the rest of the frame. Like from a side impact into the cast, rather than a high speed frontal impact, where the cabin would be exposed to deformation and component fatigue.

But that is no way cast welding repairs as proposed by some ill-informed "pun-dents" here!
That is new part replacement.

Link to videos below. First off, Tesla isn’t using a generic aluminum, and with the gigacasting, the possibility of cracking is greatly reduced. He mentions he spoke with a supposed expert and the recommendation for THIS type of aluminum when cracked, is to weld it. One of the things he points out is the crush zone surrounding the casting. Before the impact gets to the casting, there are body parts to protect it. And he makes the comment that a standard unibody (sans castings) is more likely to be written off than a Tesla, because a unibody spreads the impact out in areas that may make the vehicle unrepairable. In another interview I saw, Tesla was talking about how their design team works WITH the production team AND the repair team when they are designing the vehicle. So when the vehicle rolls off the line, they already have an idea of how to fix it.

Then we have Elon’s tweet. He directly says you cut the bad part off (using a Tesla supplied jig) and bold the new piece on.

The last is Sandy (and a sledge hammer) showing the difference between welded steel and a casting. It certainly is eye opening.

I think the take away from all this is that there is a whole lot of FUD about the gigacasts, and that is being stoked by detractors, when the truth is, it is safer. And in the long run, that is ALL that matters.

 

[JBee]

Link to videos below. First off, Tesla isn’t using a generic aluminum, and with the gigacasting, the possibility of cracking is greatly reduced. He mentions he spoke with a supposed expert and the recommendation for THIS type of aluminum when cracked, is to weld it. One of the things he points out is the crush zone surrounding the casting. Before the impact gets to the casting, there are body parts to protect it. And he makes the comment that a standard unibody (sans castings) is more likely to be written off than a Tesla, because a unibody spreads the impact out in areas that may make the vehicle unrepairable. In another interview I saw, Tesla was talking about how their design team works WITH the production team AND the repair team when they are designing the vehicle. So when the vehicle rolls off the line, they already have an idea of how to fix it.

Then we have Elon’s tweet. He directly says you cut the bad part off (using a Tesla supplied jig) and bold the new piece on.

The last is Sandy (and a sledge hammer) showing the difference between welded steel and a casting. It certainly is eye opening.

I think the take away from all this is that there is a whole lot of FUD about the gigacasts, and that is being stoked by detractors, when the truth is, it is safer. And in the long run, that is ALL that matters.

Hey PilotPete buddy.

I normally try to avoid getting stuck between bipartisan politics and hype about the cybertruck, and try to stick the things I know, which colours my perspective of what people say, versus what they actually mean, and what everyone else wants what they said, to mean.

EM is a classic example of this, where he is just vague enough to get your imagination going, and pundits make up the rest of the story to sell clicks. It's borderline made my YouTube search unusable.

So in this case, aren't you curious that in the same breath you mention one claim that there is a protective structure in front of the cast to protect it, and in another EM claim that you can cut a part off to replace and bolt a new peice on, that those are in fact the same parts, namely the crush cans, that are in front of the cast? EM doesn't say anything about the cast, just that the crush rails can be replaced. Which is the whole purpose of the crush rails/cans in front of the cast.



But let's continue here for a second.

Although, I can believe aluminum cast "can" be welded, I don't believe that it will be for repairs because:
1) If the cast is damaged, it's likely to have been a serious impact, meaning;
2) cast could have microfractures that can only be detected with disassembly and x-ray
3) could have damaged or impaired cabin integrity
4) will no longer perform as intended after being welded
5) workshop and insurance don't want to be liable for unsafe repair
6) it is far cheaper and easier for everyone involved to replace a $100 (even a $2‐3,000) cast with a brand new whole one, 'if' the remaining structure is unaffected
7) BY bolting a new cast onto the remaing frame.

Now in my eyes, that looks way more sensible, than getting your local panel beater, to whack on a weld bead, and hope that all the hype will keep it together when your life depends on it.

 

[Crissa]

No, the purpose of the gigacast is to make an assembly of parts lightly and quickly, rather than taking individual parts and welding them together originally.

There's no politics here. Those welded parts are, not in the nature of them, more repairable than the cast ones, just because they're welded. Repair has to be designed into the shape originally. Space has to be left for replacement parts to added in.

Crush cans in the welded version serve the same purpose as in a gigacast: to collapse before the main body crumples. This does two things; makes it more repairable and it makes the occupants survive more intense impacts.

But if they don't leave that space for the replacement part in the welded version, it's not going to be repairable.

And no, you can't just replace a gigacast. At that point you've completely parted out the vehicle.

-Crissa

 

[CyberGus]

No, the purpose of the gigacast is to make an assembly of parts lightly and quickly, rather than taking individual parts and welding them together originally.

There's no politics here. Those welded parts are, not in the nature of them, more repairable than the cast ones, just because they're welded. Repair has to be designed into the shape originally. Space has to be left for replacement parts to added in.

Crush cans in the welded version serve the same purpose as in a gigacast: to collapse before the main body crumples. This does two things; makes it more repairable and it makes the occupants survive more intense impacts.

But if they don't leave that space for the replacement part in the welded version, it's not going to be repairable.

And no, you can't just replace a gigacast. At that point you've completely parted out the vehicle.

-Crissa

I'd agree that in almost any scenario, a damaged casting will include so much other damage that replacement is not economically feasible.

However, that doesn't mean repairs are un-possible.

 

[Bill W.]

Chances are high that our insurance companies would simply total out the vehicle for collisions that would require gigacasting repair.

 

[Crissa]

Chances are high that our insurance companies would simply total out the vehicle for collisions that would require gigacasting repair.

Most unibody cars are in the same case.

-Crissa

 

[JBee]

So which is it now, are you writing off cars with damaged casts, or welding them to repair them?

Or welding them to write them off? Lol. What a bunch of ill informed forum jokers...just stop making up stuff up and research a bit before making stuff up.

The whole point of the different size webbing on the cast is for progressive absorbsion of energy along the load path. That means impact energy is disipated by deforming the cast (or crush rail under 20mph) like a compressed spring, along it whole length.

There is no welding technique in the would that can "un-compress" the cast.

The crush cans are on the front of the casts, and can be replaced. You can see them. It's not only on the non-cast assemblies.

Maybe you guys missed this from the horses mouth:

 

[Bill W.]

So which is it now, are you writing off cars with damaged casts, or welding them to repair them?

Or welding them to write them off? Lol. What a bunch of ill informed forum jokers...just stop making up stuff up and research a bit before making stuff up.

The whole point of the different size webbing on the cast is for progressive absorbsion of energy along the load path. That means impact energy is disipated by deforming the cast (or crush rail under 20mph) like a compressed spring, along it whole length.

There is no welding technique in the would that can "un-compress" the cast.

The crush cans are on the front of the casts, and can be replaced. You can see them. It's not only on the non-cast assemblies.

Maybe you guys missed this from the horses mouth:

In the states, insurance premiums tend to be higher for electric vehicles. Since we are still in the early stages of transitioning from ICE to EV, the collision repair costs are still a work in progress. It is the insurance company that will decide if a vehicle is cheaper to repair or if it should be totaled out, not the body shop. Right now, an EV is more likely to be totaled out after a certain level of collision than an ICE vehicle. Could some of these be repaired by knowledgeable/competent repair personnel? Absolutely, but we are not yet at that comfort level. You/we may not like it or agree, but this is the current situation.

 

[CyberGus]

Or welding them to write them off? Lol. What a bunch of ill informed forum jokers...just stop making up stuff up and research a bit before making stuff up.

I do my own research

 

[GnarlyDudeLive]

In the states, insurance premiums tend to be higher for electric vehicles. Since we are still in the early stages of transitioning from ICE to EV, the collision repair costs are still a work in progress. It is the insurance company that will decide if a vehicle is cheaper to repair or if it should be totaled out, not the body shop. Right now, an EV is more likely to be totaled out after a certain level of collision than an ICE vehicle. Could some of these be repaired by knowledgeable/competent repair personnel? Absolutely, but we are not yet at that comfort level. You/we may not like it or agree, but this is the current situation.

Due to the value of an EV battery pack and motors on a totaled EV (assuming the battery is intact), I could see insurance companies totaling out an EV then parting it out for $. Technically I would think an EV would have more working drivetrain parts in this scenario than an ICE vehicle would. ICE motors and all the moving parts within are not very fond to sudden abrupt collisions. Metal on metal parts while still working can be damaged.

 

[JBee]

Sorry guys.

I've re-read the thread and see that I have bundled different comments together in my responses, instead of responding to each individually for clarity.

Let's try again:

It is the insurance company that will decide if a vehicle is cheaper to repair or if it should be totaled out, not the body shop. Right now, an EV is more likely to be totaled out after a certain level of collision than an ICE vehicle. Could some of these be repaired by knowledgeable/competent repair personnel? Absolutely, but we are not yet at that comfort level. You/we may not like it or agree, but this is the current situation.

Agreed.

I was never trying to make the point that it wasn't insurance companies making the desicion to write off the vehicle. They do, for good reason.

Rather, I was making the point that as soon as the cast was damaged, beyond the compression of the front crush rails, then the vehicle was in a serious collision. That same collision is likely to have resulted in forces being transferred into the rest of the vehicle frame, and those forces could have caused other, inperceivable damage, that could affect its further performance.

Because of this I concluded, given the low cost of making a cast, that it would be more cost effective to replace the cast, if a front quater side impact, or less severe front impact "did not" cause any further damage to the frame.

In particular, offset impacts bend the cabin frame, which is a writeoff either way, seeing that unibody frames are also difficult to realign in such a way that they are still safe.

The point here is that if the casts themselves are impacted they have been exposed to excessive forces, meaning further damage may have resulted. Therefore just repairing the cast, if that was possible or not, is no guarantee of it performing well afterwards.

I do my own research

Sorry Gus. I didn't specifically mean to target you with my comments.

The video you posted shows some interesting details on what parts of the cast could actually be welded, and admittedly I missed watching it 1st time round.

I agree with the video commentary in the end, and also think that cast fender tab is a poor design for repairs. I think the one in the Lars video shows a different design, that might be a bolted bracket now.