3D Print Mirror Delete Covers (now printed in stainless steel)

[TickTock]

Going in for tint tomorrow. Given the issues reported with post-tint water interfering with the door controls, I thought it would be prudent to cover the exposed, up-facing, mirror connector. I used my Foodsaver to create a custom-sized bag. Had to slit up the back halfway to make room for the connection to the cover but the exposed pins are fully covered now.

Sponsored

 

[TickTock]

..and here is a slightly less ghetto solution for folks with a printer that can do FLEX.

https://www.printables.com/model/943201-cybertruck-mirror-connector-cover

 

[TickTock]

Update: I went through a few more iterations and finally have a decent model for SLM printing in 306 stainless. I printed them with in3dtec for about $60 total for the pair including shipping. The model is uploaded here - use the v3_metal versions for metal only (design rules are somewhat different for SLM than for FDM printing).

I got two pairs so I could put one on while I experiment with sanding the other to match the CT finish. However, the standard glass-bead finish that they come with doesn't look too bad:

 

[TickTock]

Full pic with metal covers:

 

[TickTock]

I don't know if anyone else printed the metal version of the mirror delete covers. I designed and uploaded a new trim version (_v4) which I think looks better. It extends the trim taper all the way to the edge of the door instead of stopping at the edge of the cover.

 

[Cybergirl]

I don't know if anyone else printed the metal version of the mirror delete covers. I designed and uploaded a new trim version (_v4) which I think looks better. It extends the trim taper all the way to the edge of the door instead of stopping at the edge of the cover.

I'm interested in ordering a set of your SS mirror delete covers and trim pieces. Please confirm my understanding of what files I need to upload to IN3DTEC:

Driver side SS cover: CTMDCv3_metal_DS.stl
Passenger side SS cover: CTMDCv3_metal_PS.stl
Driver side long trim piece: CTMDTv4_DS.stl
Passenger side long trim piece: CTMDTv4_PS.stl

Do the files specify the material to be used in the printing?
Thanks!

 

[TyPope]

Current Arizona law on the subject of vehicle equipment states:

A motor vehicle that is constructed or loaded in a manner that obstructs the driver's view to the rear of the vehicle from the driver's position shall be equipped with two mirrors located in a manner to reflect to the driver a view of the highway for a distance of at least two hundred feet to the rear of the vehicle. This section does not apply to a fully autonomous vehicle that is incapable of operation by a human driver.

A.R.S. § 28-956

Amended by L. 2021, ch. 117,s. 11, eff. 9/29/2021.

So you're right, the table is wrong on that point. Arizona doesn't require two mirrors. Furthermore, Arizona law doesn't explicitly state how a clear view 200 feet to the rear of a vehicle is to be achieved unlike, say, Illinois which does. If the vehicle is constructed or loaded to obstruct such visibility, two side mirrors are then required. Since the CT provides a means to provide a view to the rear of the vehicle for 200 feet using a camera and display, one could argue that mirrors on the CT are not required.

Tow a trailer and you'll obstruct the driver's view 200ft back... then, you'd need "two mirrors located in a manner to reflect to the driver..." Not screens, mirrors.

If the mirrors go, you mustn't tow.

 

[TickTock]

I'm interested in ordering a set of your SS mirror delete covers and trim pieces. Please confirm my understanding of what files I need to upload to IN3DTEC:

Driver side SS cover: CTMDCv3_metal_DS.stl
Passenger side SS cover: CTMDCv3_metal_PS.stl
Driver side long trim piece: CTMDTv4_DS.stl
Passenger side long trim piece: CTMDTv4_PS.stl

Do the files specify the material to be used in the printing?
Thanks!

Yes but only print the covers in metal (306 SS) and get the glass bead finish (free). The trim pieces should be printed in PETG or TPU. in3dtec does offer FDM PETG printing but I've always done the trim on my own printer so have no experience with in3dtec on anything other than SS. Can't imagine they will be any problem for them if I can print them on a consumer machine, but they might has some obscure design rules that I am not meeting. Let me know if they have any issues and I will fix it.

I went ahead and ordered two of covers for each side (half the cost is shipping anyway). The glass bead finish from the factory looks pretty decent (see my 8/21 post above) but I got a second set to try sanding down to match the truck finish.

 

[Cybergirl]

Yes but only print the covers in metal (306 SS) and get the glass bead finish (free). The trim pieces should be printed in PETG or TPU. in3dtec does offer FDM PETG printing but I've always done the trim on my own printer so have no experience with in3dtec on anything other than SS. Can't imagine they will be any problem for them if I can print them on a consumer machine, but they might has some obscure design rules that I am not meeting. Let me know if they have any issues and I will fix it.

I went ahead and ordered two of covers for each side (half the cost is shipping anyway). The glass bead finish from the factory looks pretty decent (see my 8/21 post above) but I got a second set to try sanding down to match the truck finish.

I received this response from IN3DTEC:

"Thanks for reaching out to us. My name is Stephanie and nice to talk to you.

Please check the below image, the below two parts have thin thickness which might break during the printing. Please help increase the thickness by using the below recommendation.

Metal Printing: 0.5mm is minimum
TPU: 0.8mm is minimum

Thanks and please feel free to upload your files to our website and get instant quote."

They recommend a minimum thickness for metal parts. Did you get a similar warning? Should I tell Stephanie to proceed with the files as is? Thanks for your help.

 

[TickTock]

I received this response from IN3DTEC:

"Thanks for reaching out to us. My name is Stephanie and nice to talk to you.

Please check the below image, the below two parts have thin thickness which might break during the printing. Please help increase the thickness by using the below recommendation.

Metal Printing: 0.5mm is minimum
TPU: 0.8mm is minimum

Thanks and please feel free to upload your files to our website and get instant quote."

They recommend a minimum thickness for metal parts. Did you get a similar warning? Should I tell Stephanie to proceed with the files as is? Thanks for your help.

Dang it! I *did* see that same 0.5mm DRC message and I fixed it. However, it appears I forgot to update the file on the Prusa site. Delete the _v3 you have and download the "vSS" models I just replaced them with instead.

TPU is a great choice for the trim since it is flexible. The only geometries I found <0.8mm were at the logo and at the notch for the cover (see below). I don't think we want to increase that notch since the cover is only 0.5mm thick. I uploaded a _v4b set of trim pieces with the logo removed. You can see if they will accept it. If not try PETG - that may not have the same 0.8mm rule.

 

[Cybergirl]

Dang it! I *did* see that same 0.5mm DRC message and I fixed it. However, it appears I forgot to update the file on the Prusa site. Delete the _v3 you have and download the "vSS" models I just replaced them with instead.

TPU is a great choice for the trim since it is flexible. The only geometries I found <0.8mm were at the logo and at the notch for the cover (see below). I don't think we want to increase that notch since the cover is only 0.5mm thick. I uploaded a _v4b set of trim pieces with the logo removed. You can see if they will accept it. If not try PETG - that may not have the same 0.8mm rule.

Thank you.

BTW, I've been testing the use of Tesla's 3-camera display as a substitute for using the side mirrors. It works well for benign driving situations. On a recent road trip where I found myself more dependent on the map view, however, I found myself going back to using the side mirrors. I've concluded that I need dedicated side view cameras installed before removing the side mirrors on the truck.

I ordered a blind spot camera system from AliExpress that might serve the purpose.

I chose this system for the less obtrusive shark fin cameras that are mounted ahead of the front doors, and the 6.25" split screen display. I plan to do a quick, preliminary install to test the system as a viable mirror replacement on my trip to Arizona. I think that mounting the display on the dash above the steering wheel will be ideal. It's a 12V system, so if I decide to do a permanent install I'll have to find a 12V circuit in the truck to tap into.

Another option is to buy two displays, one mounted on the driver side A pillar and the other on the passenger side A pillar which would be more natural for drivers used to mirrors.

Unfortunately, the 120 deg camera view angle will make cars appear further away than they really are, much like the CT's rear view camera display does. A narrower angle camera (e.g., 80 deg) would minimize that distortion although at the expense of a more restricted field of view.

The link to the AliExpress page is here if anyone is interested.

 

[Cybergirl]

Thank you.

BTW, I've been testing the use of Tesla's 3-camera display as a substitute for using the side mirrors. It works well for benign driving situations. On a recent road trip where I found myself more dependent on the map view, however, I found myself going back to using the side mirrors. I've concluded that I need dedicated side view cameras installed before removing the side mirrors on the truck.

I ordered a blind spot camera system from AliExpress that might serve the purpose.

I chose this system for the less obtrusive shark fin cameras that are mounted ahead of the front doors, and the 6.25" split screen display. I plan to do a quick, preliminary install to test the system as a viable mirror replacement on my trip to Arizona. I think that mounting the display on the dash above the steering wheel will be ideal. It's a 12V system, so if I decide to do a permanent install I'll have to find a 12V circuit in the truck to tap into.

Another option is to buy two displays, one mounted on the driver side A pillar and the other on the passenger side A pillar which would be more natural for drivers used to mirrors.

Unfortunately, the 120 deg camera view angle will make cars appear further away than they really are, much like the CT's rear view camera display does. A narrower angle camera (e.g., 80 deg) would minimize that distortion although at the expense of a more restricted field of view.

The link to the AliExpress page is here if anyone is interested.

Is removing the side mirrors worth the trouble and expense? I think so, or I wouldn't be considering it. The benefits to me are:

1) A reduction in aerodynamic drag (small range improvement)
2) Reducing the width of the truck. Even when folded, Cybertruck mirrors obstruct movement when parked in my small garage.
3) Off-road travel. The CT's stainless steel exterior is resistant to pin-striping by brush on wilderness trails, but the plastic mirrors are easily damaged.
4) Better visibility. Cameras provide a wider viewing angle than mirrors.
5) Better visibility. The side mirrors add to the loss of visibility due to CT's long A-pillars.
6) My driver side mirror is damaged. The cost to repair is more that the cost of a camera system.

Oh, and improving the appearance of the truck, in my opinion.

There are some negatives as well:

1) There's an adjustment period to using side cameras vs mirrors.
2) I'll have to cover the holes left when the mirrors are removed.
3) Some states require side mirrors by law so there's a risk of being ticketed there.
4) Installing cameras (hiding wires, finding a 12V power source) will be tricky.
5) Tesla may yet release software that allows side camera views along with the map, making my camera system superfluous.

Comments?

 

[TickTock]

Is removing the side mirrors worth the trouble and expense? I think so, or I wouldn't be considering it. The benefits to me are:

1) A reduction in aerodynamic drag (small range improvement)
2) Reducing the width of the truck. Even when folded, Cybertruck mirrors obstruct movement when parked in my small garage.
3) Off-road travel. The CT's stainless steel exterior is resistant to pin-striping by brush on wilderness trails, but the plastic mirrors are easily damaged.
4) Better visibility. Cameras provide a wider viewing angle than mirrors.
5) Better visibility. The side mirrors add to the loss of visibility due to CT's long A-pillars.
6) My driver side mirror is damaged. The cost to repair is more that the cost of a camera system.

Oh, and improving the appearance of the truck, in my opinion.

There are some negatives as well:

1) There's an adjustment period to using side cameras vs mirrors.
2) I'll have to cover the holes left when the mirrors are removed.
3) Some states require side mirrors by law so there's a risk of being ticketed there.
4) Installing cameras (hiding wires, finding a 12V power source) will be tricky.
5) Tesla may yet release software that allows side camera views along with the map, making my camera system superfluous.

Comments?

Also: Better visibility at night. Not only do the cameras have better light sensitivity than my eyes, The sw enhances the image further - saturating any headlight/highbeams so they don't blind you and dim features are enhanced. On top of that, if you have tinted windows, the cameras don't get impacted by that so you get a better image thaw through the windows&mirrors. It's also helpful in the day when travelling away from the sun. You can see the sun but it doesn't blind you and block your visibility of the rest of the image.

 

[Cybergirl]

Also: Better visibility at night. Not only do the cameras have better light sensitivity than my eyes, The sw enhances the image further - saturating any headlight/highbeams so they don't blind you and dim features are enhanced. On top of that, if you have tinted windows, the cameras don't get impacted by that so you get a better image thaw through the windows&mirrors. It's also helpful in the day when travelling away from the sun. You can see the sun but it doesn't blind you and block your visibility of the rest of the image.

Good point. I've experienced these drawbacks. I'm having more difficulty driving at night. Anything that can mitigate such problems is welcome.

 

[Outlaw1]

I removed mine immediately at delivery as I was taking it to get wrapped. Took me 5 minutes. I may need the driver side mirror to pass inspection every 2 years. I'm not sure what "in like manner" is below. If so, I'll add that one back when I take it to get inspected....and remove it once I pass.

The truck would not easily fit in my garage with the mirrors on. That's the main reason I removed them. I'll take all the other benefits. I use the side cameras, blindspot dot, and center screen as side mirrors when changing lanes. Working great for me and no issues from the police or highway patrol so far ??.

For Missouri
(1) All motor vehicles which are so constructed or loaded that the operator cannot see the road behind by looking back or around the side of the vehicle shall be equipped with either an inside or outside mirror, or both, that will reveal the road behind.(2) All motor vehicles which were equipped by the manufacturer with an inside mirror and all 1968 and later model vehicles manufactured with both an inside and a driver's side outside mirror, shall be equipped in like manner. Do not inspect passenger side outside mirrors.(3) Reject vehicle if:(A) Forward vision is unsafely obstructed by mirror assembly;(B) Mirror does not provide a clear view of highway to rear because of cracks, discoloration or improper mounting;(C) Mirror is broken or has sharp edges exposed;(D) Mirror is very difficult to adjust or will not maintain a set adjustment; or(E) There is no required mirror.

Sponsored