Every EV has issues...

[SWO]

This fiasco sort of justifies Ford's measured approach to sending out updates. If this had happened to the Mach E, it would have be caught in EA and they would have delayed full roll-out until it was fixed as we've seen with other (smaller?) issues in the past.

Sponsored

 

[SWO]

Recap is excellent. Quality control in the auto industry has become a consumer nightmare. I worked on implementation of world wide quality control I SO 9000 back in the 90s for a major steel producer. Car producers jumped on the same quality #1 pitch during this time and found it effective but it hit their bottom line.Quality issues compounded when third party parts suppliers began supplying parts. Today it seems every part manufactured by a third party is on a recall list. Auto producers need to reign in quality defects at point of origin since many parts assembled come from 4th and 5th tier manufacturers. It's a challengung endeavor but costly. It must be more cost effective just doing recalls.

Agree. Maybe the solution is that manufacturers need to not outsource as much? When the contracts for these parts transfer risk to the supplier for any production delays (I've read about fines down to the minute for assembly line delays), one could argue it incentivizes them sending substandard parts instead of late parts?

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Recap is excellent. Quality control in the auto industry has become a consumer nightmare. I worked on implementation of world wide quality control I SO 9000 back in the 90s for a major steel producer. Car producers jumped on the same quality #1 pitch during this time and found it effective but it hit their bottom line.Quality issues compounded when third party parts suppliers began supplying parts. Today it seems every part manufactured by a third party is on a recall list. Auto producers need to reign in quality defects at point of origin since many parts assembled come from 4th and 5th tier manufacturers. It's a challengung endeavor but costly. It must be more cost effective just doing recalls.

I still haven't taken my Tacoma in for a rear stop lamp water leak recall. I have a cap on the bed and the repair would require removal of the cap. There's no way I'm letting the dealer touch my cap and I don't have a place to store it right now.

My reading suggests that recall conformance is about 67% overall, which means it's almost always cheaper to pay for recalls than to fix QA.

 

[Logal727]

This wasn't even an OTA update from Hyundai. A dealer tech updates the software.

He also miss the point of this thread, ALL cars have issues

 

[eleven24]

Recalls don't require mechanical repair, it's a process of documenting and retaining a historical record of issues and how the manufacturer addresses them. Some recalls are just documentation issues. Such as correcting something in a manual or label. I had a label applied to a vehicle just to correct the load rating being a few pounds less than listed. It's important to maintain a history of these so people can refer to them when researching vehicles to understand aspects of the vehicle and how they are dealt with. For example, I've looked at the recalls of Hyundai, and even though they have a long warranty that would cover issues, the issues look problematic that appear as excessive cost cutting or low safety margins resulting in major issues in the long run.

A very good point regarding documentation. That said, the eagerness of the media to report negatively on EV's is always a reminder that electric vehicle adoption faces a very strong headwind coming from big corporations that stand to lose a lot of revenue because of it

 

[Ghost Ryder]

I don't get your point. There's a safety issue that requires repair. Tesla refused to fix it voluntarily, so the NHTSA forced the issue. If Tesla had just acted responsibly in the first place, this would have never been a recall, it would have simply been an OTA update.

I think there should be a distinction between hardware and software issues.

In Tesla's case, they push the boundaries of what's acceptable in "beta testing." In this particular case, the NHTSA did not agree with them therefore forcing them to change the parameters.

This is different from a mechanical fault where OEM where a part did not function as expected. Like an airbag that would send shrapnel in your face, or a roof that would fly off. etc.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

He also miss the point of this thread, ALL cars have issues

yes, all OEM has issues, just some have more issues then others.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

I think there should be a distinction between hardware and software issues.

In Tesla's case, they push the boundaries of what's acceptable in "beta testing." In this particular case, the NHTSA did not agree with them therefore forcing them to change the parameters.

This is different from a mechanical fault where OEM where a part did not function as expected. Like an airbag that would send shrapnel in your face, or a roof that would fly off. etc.

I don't agree. This stance essentially presumes that software problems are less dangerous than hardware problems. In the case of Tesla, their software is dangerous and has caused accidents and deaths.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

I don't agree. This stance essentially presumes that software problems are less dangerous than hardware problems. In the case of Tesla, their software is dangerous and has caused accidents and deaths.

Its the wild west when it comes to testing automated driving and driver assistant on the streets. Personally I think there needs to be more stringent guidelines. But as far as dangerous, their autopilot is safer than a human driver and accounts for less accidents and death based on miles driven. Do you trust your fellow drivers more than tesla's autopilot?

 

[ab13]

Its the wild west when it comes to testing automated driving and driver assistant on the streets. Personally I think there needs to be more stringent guidelines. But as far as dangerous, their autopilot is safer than a human driver and accounts for less accidents and death based on miles driven. Do you trust your fellow drivers more than tesla's autopilot?

I don't trust either, but that statistic is not really accurate. What the data really says is that people with money that buy $50k+ cars, driving in nice weather, to high paying jobs, in nice neighborhoods, may have lower rates of accidents compared to the rest of the people. The rest including people driving old beaters with no safety features, in bad weather, to low paying jobs, in unsafe roads/areas, because that's the kind of car and jobs they can get.

A proper scientific comparison would have the same people driving the same routes using the system and not using the system for alternating periods over a year or more.

 

[Ride_the_lightning]

A very good point regarding documentation. That said, the eagerness of the media to report negatively on EV's is always a reminder that electric vehicle adoption faces a very strong headwind coming from big corporations that stand to lose a lot of revenue because of it

Agree. WSJ article today hyping the danger of EVs getting hacked. I actually agree with their premise - OEMs playing fast and loose with cloud connected software that can actually control a vehicle. However, they compelled left out that the gas powered Ford F150 (and by extension gas vehicles from all OEMs) also uses the same damn BlueCruise technology, sync 4, etc. Somehow they’ve decided only EVs have electronics in them. Gas cars only use good old fashioned fossil fuels. No celular connection needed I guess…

It’s a legit problem that turned into an EV hit piece.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

I don't trust either, but that statistic is not really accurate. What the data really says is that people with money that buy $50k+ cars, driving in nice weather, to high paying jobs, in nice neighborhoods, may have lower rates of accidents compared to the rest of the people. The rest including people driving old beaters with no safety features, in bad weather, to low paying jobs, in unsafe roads/areas, because that's the kind of car and jobs they can get.

A proper scientific comparison would have the same people driving the same routes using the system and not using the system for alternating periods over a year or more.

Actually, if you're just looking at Tesla, look at the data of just accidents involving tesla. Are there more accidents when Autopilot is engage or not. Its not perfect, there are many variables, but that's as close as you can get in the real world.

I would wager that there are more accidents when autopilot is not engage and humans are in control.

FSD is another story, I don't think its ready for prime time yet. Its pretty impressive, and getting better by the day, but I still wouldn't trust it to drive my kids to school.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Do you trust your fellow drivers more than tesla's autopilot?

Absolutely I trust other drivers more than I trust Tesla's software.

Human stupidity is easy to predict and relatively easy to react to. I've been riding motorcycles for decades and I still trust human stupidity over....Human stupidity multiplied by developer overwork and underpay, lack of a full instrument suite, bad software design, bad software testing, terrible unit testing related to edge cases, minimal to no hysteresis, etc., etc., etc...add in inattentive "backup" drivers who are at least as bad as drivers without autopilot... That whole mess is much, much more difficult to predict.

I have yet to find any independent, reliable, third-party-confirmed evidence that autopilot is safer than humans.

 

[ab13]

Actually, if you're just looking at Tesla, look at the data of just accidents involving tesla. Are there more accidents when Autopilot is engage or not. Its not perfect, there are many variables, but that's as close as you can get in the real world.

I would wager that there are more accidents when autopilot is not engage and humans are in control.

FSD is another story, I don't think its ready for prime time yet. Its pretty impressive, and getting better by the day, but I still wouldn't trust it to drive my kids to school.

The real issue is that people don't understand what they are being presented, but are willing to agree with the conclusion being told to them.

Sure it's possible to compare when autopilot is engaged and not engaged in Tesla vehicles, but in some cases it's probably not engaged when the weather is bad and collisions are more likely. The miles with autopilot are more likely during good weather and travel in certain parts of the country.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

Absolutely I trust other drivers more than I trust Tesla's software.

Human stupidity is easy to predict and relatively easy to react to. I've been riding motorcycles for decades and I still trust human stupidity over....Human stupidity multiplied by developer overwork and underpay, lack of a full instrument suite, bad software design, bad software testing, terrible unit testing related to edge cases, minimal to no hysteresis, etc., etc., etc...add in inattentive "backup" drivers who are at least as bad as drivers without autopilot... That whole mess is much, much more difficult to predict.

I have yet to find any independent, reliable, third-party-confirmed evidence that autopilot is safer than humans.

Data is released by Tesla. So how are you going to get third party confirmed evidence if you don't use Tesla's data on when auto pilot is on?

As far as trusting human stupidity, I've seen plenty of people veering into lanes while on their phones, changing radio stations, or sleepy or just not paying attention. With autopilot, the car is kept within its lane. Does it veer off sometimes? sure, but I would wager a hell lot less than human drivers who are easily distracted.

To be clear, I'm not talking about FSD, just autopilot.

Sponsored