- A recent report claimed that Tesla Cybertruck was more explosive than Ford Pinto, but didn’t think about a few things.
- First, the sample size sold by Cerberli is small, and fire statistics can be compared with Pinto misleading.
- Still, the report is touring online, where we can clean up the facts from the data reports in the process.
Tesla Sebert-like views are as shocking as any vehicle in the last half century. Whether it was vandalized in the parking lot, welcomed by stubborn fans, putting down trimmed debris, or allegedly driving yourself straight into the light pole, the truck seemed to inspire a strong reaction anywhere. With such a strong opinion, the attention was drawn, and with it, the headlines that needed to doubt the truck involved.
More: Tesla Cybertruck allegedly drove himself to the light pole
One such claim comes from a related article come on By a writer named Kay Leadfoot (BTW) seems to be working on the spot with a cute dog, Raymundo Leadfoot. The work is entirely focused on statistics, running under compelling titles, “It’s official: Seberac is more explosive than Ford Pinto”and somehow cross Various platform.
In the article, the author claims that Sebok is more explosive than Ford Pinto (the important word we want to go back to). Leadfoot further said that the risk of a fire was 17 times as likely as Pinto. To support this claim, they cite five reports of five deaths in Cybertruck, with three fires.
The figures behind the claim
Leadfoot estimates that so far 100,000 units sold, 14.52 deaths Death in a fire. To be clear, in the real world, these are five fire-related deaths reported in five separate events.
On the contrary, despite selling about 3,173,491 times in the decade of production from 1970 to 1980, we only know the deaths of the Ford Pinto fire. This means only 0.85 people died in Pinto due to fires per 100,000 units Sell. In short, this is the breadth and depth of reports reporting on foot.
In short, this is far from objective Apple to application data. First, the delivery numbers for Cybertruck are so small that comparing the data is problematic. For example, let’s pretend that two companies are engaged in the business of building and developing bonfires.
Business A started, building only one bonfire, while Business B built 1,000 bonfires, but only two were started. Technically, Business A has a higher success rate (100% vs. 0.2%), although Business B produces 100% fires. Due to the sample size, it makes no sense to compare them.
Flawed data and misleading classifications
Next, Leadfoot included the explosion in Las Vegas in this data, which should be said to be one of many “fires” about the study. According to their praise, the author wrote: “I know the last inclusion is controversial because the driver’s burns were reportedly behind the body, so feel free to re-rule without including the Las Vegas incident. These statistics. “Even if this data point is not included, the point ONE is important.
Read: Someone sells a truck with a yellow Ford Pinto van for $16k
Furthermore, Fuelarc’s report treats all fires as the same, when in fact, the cause of the fire is actually important. In the case of Pinto, the fire was specifically related to documented design flaws (poor-positioned fuel tanks ruptured in rear-end collisions). In a fatal Cybert-style accident, the driver hit a tree. In another person, the driver turns to the ditch. Third, well, that doesn’t even count because it’s a terrorist attack.
What does “explosive” actually mean?
Finally, mainly because we’re already here, let’s discuss the claim that the Seiberks are more “explosive” than the Pinto. The word is important because Leadfoot claims that the report is “honest” and the explosive word is specific. According to the Oxford Dictionary, explosion is “a violent expansion in which energy travels outwards in shock waves.”
Except for that Cybert-style fire in Las Vegas, any use of literal fireworks, and the battery itself remains intact. Leadfoot honestly points out that fireworks can explode. Any vehicle? no. In fact, even pinto rupture in the gas tank is not a real explosion. After the accident, fuel will eventually be everywhere and often catch fire. Here is an example.
None of this means that Seberak is completely safe, or that it is not without defects or failures. But that’s saying that engaging headlines don’t always tell a complete story. A few years later, once we get data on hundreds of thousands of network collisions, there may be serious fatal flaws, and comparing two cars will make sense. For now, the report feels more like an anomaly or anomaly than good hard data to draw any real-world conclusions.
Lies, damn lies and statistics
Mark Twain famously says there are lies, damn lies and statistics. That seems to be what we have here. If Leadfoot just wants to get attention, then they will definitely do it. If they were going to write something really insightful, they wouldn’t seem to hit Cyberthruck’s side with Ford Pinto if they tried. (Please don’t merge this MS/MR Leadfoot into a merge, making sure the two cars will completely explode 170% during the time they are together… maybe.)
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.