In China Tesla has done recalls that were not done in the US, even though the models were made in the same factory. So they are trying to avoid them if possible.
No, you are now flat out lying. If there were any kind of significant problem, NHTSA would be all over Tesla (and has been in the past). The FACTS are that BEVs have significantly lower fire rates than ICE (and hybrids, which are ICE variants). This has been borne out over and over and over.
And if you go an READ what those "recalls" were, they were all things for regulatory purposes. Things that were addressed in pretty much all cases with OTA updates. They were NOT manufacturing defects.
Did you even look at the info in the twitter thread? It's a huge math error, that article from autoinsurance"EZ". So here's the math, for those that want to see the data and not mis-information.
I did read the recall. If the government says it's a recall, it's a recall, doesn't matter how it is addressed. This was also probably why Tesla changed their mind about regeneration option choices in the US and other places, because they knew China would require it. Recalls aren't only for manufacturing defects, they can be for design or function.
Tesla sold cars in China are built in the Shanghai factory. I don't believe they sell China Made cars in the US. US sold cars are made in the Fremont factory, and recently in the Austin factory.
This is a lie on your part. It was literally a "feature update" that the Gov request Tesla (and other auto manufs) add.
This is correct, Chinese-assembled cars shipped to the USA would be subject to very large tariffs, which is why Tesla doesn't do it, at all. They do import some of the LFP battery packs from China for the SR Model 3, but that's the extent of it.
Now you are conflating. That dataset addresses, specifically, crash-caused fires. It also still supports the conclusion that BEVs have lower fire rates than ICE/hybrid (but more severe fires).Did you even look at the info in the twitter thread? It's a huge math error, that article from autoinsurance"EZ". So here's the math, for those that want to see the data and not mis-information.
This is the government data they used, table 2:
https://t.co/Fp36A4ydi8
It shows here the percent of fires relative to crashes for the electic-gas hybrid category is 1.36%. The electric vehicle category is higher at 1.96%, however there is only 1 data point, so it's too small to really evaluate. But that shows there is no significant difference, based on the data is this survey.
What "EZ" did, shown in their chart below, was incorrectly add up the quantities in the Total crashes column instead of the Fire column. So they added up electric (51) + fuel cell (1) to get 52. For gas they added compressed natural gas + diesel + gasoline + propane to get 199533. For hybrid they, for whatever reason, took electric diesel hybrid + electric gasoline hybrid + (flexible fuel (14146) + convertible fuel (134)) to get 16051. That number should really be 1771, and that's collisions, not fires.
The fact is, that data table shows something completely different than what the article said, but that article was good for getting page hits, so they didn't bother to correct it since many people referenced it.
There are investigations going on, but those are probably very long term issues.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nation...fety-investigation-vehicle-batteries-recalls/
The China government webpage says
I'm not doing anything. Many other people seem to blindly take this "EZ" blog article for a real fact, when in fact it was useless because the government report says there is not enough data, and those were from over 6 years ago anyway.
