I was confused on if they meant deadly to drive, or deadly to other people/vehicles that they hit. It appears that the article is about deadly to drive (I suspect that they are also very dangerous to those they hit, but that's just a gut feeling).
As much as I detest Cybertrucks, this study seems pretty flawed.
>the approximately 34,000 Cybertrucks on the roads had five fire fatalities
Is how they calculated it. Except they don't know how many are sold. And one of those five fatalities was actually a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Three of the remaining four fatalities occurred in a single incident. No information about how much these were driven, either.
Not sure I like the definitive sounding headline of this article, or the report ("the Cybertruck is More Explosive than the Ford Pinto") given the unknown variables, caveats, etc.
As much as I detest Cybertrucks, this study seems pretty flawed.
>the approximately 34,000 Cybertrucks on the roads had five fire fatalities
Is how they calculated it. Except they don't know how many are sold. And one of those five fatalities was actually a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Three of the remaining four fatalities occurred in a single incident. No information about how much these were driven, either.
Not sure I like the definitive sounding headline of this article, or the report ("the Cybertruck is More Explosive than the Ford Pinto") given the unknown variables, caveats, etc.