Tesla Slashes Prices

[theduke]

Actually it isn't because I have the hybrid from Japan. There was some recall for the gas only versions due to some improper battery issue. Gas version has a completely different engine and source of parts. This car has only 2 recalls, neither has anything to do with the car function and it has the AGM battery.

The third article you quoted says
"The NHTSA investigation of battery fires in Toyota’s RAV4 has nothing to do with EVs, hybrids, or lithium-ion batteries."

And it said
"Improper battery installation or prior front end collision repair was a factor in the EWR Field Reports"

Which meant it had to do with a repair or change of the battery done elsewhere.

The linked NHTSA report says
"The 12V battery B+ terminal shorts to the battery hold down frame which may result in the sudden loss of electrical power, vehicle stalling, and/or a fire originating in the engine compartment."

I have an AGM battery not located in the engine compartment. So it doesn't apply, and I already read all these previously.


Also based on the IIHS insurance data from over a dozen insurance companies, my hybrid is in the mid to lower percentile for probability of non collision fire insurance claims.

You COMPLETELY missed my point. My POINT was that cars can have significant fire risks even if they are NOT EVs.

In fact, EVs are the least likely to have fires (Tesla's included) of the 3 categories, hybrids being the highest of the group (makes sense, they are the most complicated, mechanically and electrically).
https://insideevs.com/news/561549/study-evs-smallest-fire-risk/

Sponsored

 

[Ghost Ryder]

People can start posting more of these, but here's a couple more. Tesla has always fought NHTSA investigations.

https://www.kcra.com/article/sacramento-county-tesla-catches-fire-siblings-escape/42751273

https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local...n-fire-at-fort-lauderdale-dealership/3020643/

Are you saying that if an OEM fight the NHTSA, they will abandon their investigation and not issue a recall?

I'm not arguing that there aren't any Tesla Fires. There clearly are. But statistically are there more frequent when compared to other EVs or other cars in general. Further more is there a design fault causing these fires or are they flukes from either road hazard or a mechanic working on the car causing a short?

I stand by the fact that there isn't a design flaw causing these fires as there isn't a recall yet.

 

[Mach1E]

Are you saying that if an OEM fight the NHTSA, they will abandon their investigation and not issue a recall?

I'm not arguing that there aren't any Tesla Fires. There clearly are. But statistically are there more frequent when compared to other EVs or other cars in general. Further more is there a design fault causing these fires or are they flukes from either road hazard or a mechanic working on the car causing a short?

I stand by the fact that there isn't a design flaw causing these fires as there isn't a recall yet.

Even if there was a design flaw, how could you admit it if Tesla can do no wrong? ?

That said, I’m with you on this one. Tesla fires make headlines because they’re easy clickbait articles and that’s all the news cares about these days.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

Even if there was a design flaw, how could you admit it if Tesla can do no wrong? ?

That said, I’m with you on this one. Tesla fires make headlines because they’re easy clickbait articles and that’s all the news cares about these days.

I'll admit Tesla is wrong when they're wrong. But I put a lot of weight on personal experience. I've been buying cars for a long time. I've owned toyotas (celica and camry), honda/acura (accord and integra), mazdas (miata and Rx7), BMWs (330, x5), Porsches (911, Cayenne Turbo), Mercedez (GLA), Ford (had a probe and now MME), and Tesla. For the most part I've been happy with all of them, but the MY was the first model I bought twice.

Both of them had panel gaps, but they were quickly remedied by the local service center. The carbon fiber rear spoiler on my MYP started delaminating slightly, but Tesla mobile service replaced it in my driveway. No question that Tesla build quality is not up to par compared to other OEM, but my experience with their service center has been great, better than BMW, Porsche, Merc. And those guys aim to please. So I forgive a lot of Tesla's faults because they quickly remedied the few issues I had conveniently without any fuss. The exact opposite of what Ford is doing with HVBJB debacle. That and I find that a lot of Tesla hatred is not directed at the car itself, but rather due to hatred of Elon. It's a vicious cycle, anti-tesla headlines gets clicks thereby encouraging more negative headlines, whether they're warranted or not. How many headlines do you think Tesla would of gotten if they left their drivers stranded like Ford did with their HVBJB failed?

My neighbor recently asked me about my experience with the MME and the MY. I told him the truth. That MME was built better, but Tesla had better tech, charging, and overall better response when something goes wrong. Range was about the same for both. He ended up getting a MY LR.

 

[EVandSolar]

Except that this isn’t the result.

The 5 cycle test results in higher range for Tesla.

When the model Y and Mach E are tested under the same conditions, the Mach E comes slightly ahead.

The ONLY place the Y ends up ahead is when they use the 5 cycle test and compare it to the 2 cycle Mach E test.

Only logical conclusion? The 5 cycle test actually isn’t more demanding for electric cars.

This article explains It better:
https://insideevs.com/news/586646/how-tesla-wins-on-epa-estimated-range/amp/

“In summary, Dykes shares that "Low speed efficiency and a willingness to run extra test cycles," allows Tesla to get better results than its rivals. Essentially, he says Tesla works to "use the rules to the utmost advantage." “

“
When many automakers run the two cycles, they get the EPA range number for the car's window sticker based on 55 percent city driving and 45 percent highway driving. The blended calculation is then reduced by 30 percent for the sticker. Some automakers even reduce the range figure further for the window sticker to make it even more applicable to real-world driving.

Tesla runs all five cycles, makes its calculations, and then the number could be reduced by just 23 or 24 percent for the window sticker. The additional tests include a high-speed test, an air conditioning test loop, and a cold test cycle. All of these extra tests cover a short distance and have low average speeds.

Not only does Tesla benefit from the smaller reduction, but also, some of the additional tests favor Tesla's high efficiency at lower average speeds. The heat pump in Tesla's cars also helps with the cold test cycle.”

The opinion of the person who wrote the article should not be conflated with fact. The fact as reported by the EPA, is:

"Compliance data are measured using EPA city and highway test procedures (the “2-cycle” tests), and fleetwide averages are calculated by weighting the city and highway test results by 55% and 45%, respectively. These procedures are required for compliance; however, they no longer accurately reflect real-world driving. Compliance data may also encompass optional performance credits and adjustments that manufacturers can use towards meeting their emissions standards.
The second category is estimated real-world data, which is measured using additional laboratory tests to capture a wider range of operating conditions (including hot and cold weather, higher speeds, and faster accelerations) encountered by an average driver. This expanded set of tests is referred to as “5-cycle” testing. City and highway results are weighted 43% city and 57% highway, consistent with fleetwide driver activity data. The city and highway values are the same values found on new vehicle fuel economy labels, however the label combined value is weighted 55% city and 45% highway. Unlike compliance data, the method for calculating real-world data has evolved over time, along with technology and driving habits."

Tesla is using the test cycle that the EPA says is more accurate and reflective of real world driving. This means they are NOT trying to game the system. In fact, Ford is using the outdated 2 cycle test which is why they have to scale down their results so much in the EPA numbers they report. They aren't even reporting the 2 cycle test results, at all. It is NOT the tougher standard. Ford is simply choosing to scale the results way back. Tesla is obviously NOT scaling the test results way back. This is apparent since Tesla easily achieves its EPA rating when driving approximates the EPA range test cycles.

What I will agree is that there needs to be a way to have apple to apple comparisons between manufactures. Your insistence that Tesla use the same outdated 2 cycle test that Ford uses is NOT the answer as you seem to think. This is obvious since Ford has to scale back their results so much to get what they feel is a more accurate estimate. What I disagree with is your highly biased opinion stating that Tesla intentionally lies about range by intentionally using an easier test. Your evidence is the opinion of a YouTube reviewer. Imagine, someone in the media's opinion could possibly be wrong. The truth, as stated by the organization that came up with the test, is that it is NOT easier. The description of the test, for anyone open minded and willing to use reason, is that the test is actually a bit more challenging.

The only reason EPA rated range varies so much between Ford and Tesla is that Ford scales back their results some arbitrary amount. So your righteous indignation on the matter, in summary, is that Tesla should guess how much Ford would want them to scale back their EPA test results, and only use that on their window stickers.

P.S. using a heat pump does not increase range and efficiency compared to a 2 cycle test in warm temps while NOT using heat pump. It reduces range less than it otherwise would, but still reduces range vs the 2 cycle test which is not done in cold weather with the heat pump running.....again, let's use our brains here.

Heat pump...increases efficiency vs not having heat pump. The author claims that, compared to the 2 cycle test done in warm temps without heat pump, that running the car in cold weather with heat pump is done to game the system and increase efficiency....what a load of garbage.

The real reason EPA ranges vary so much between manufacturers is because everyone is free to reduce actual results any random amount they want.

The only viable solution is for the EPA to require the same reduction factor on whichever test cycle they choose as the single, uniform standard. And I agree 100% this should happen.

 

[Mach1E]

Tesla is using the test cycle that the EPA says is more accurate and reflective of real world driving. This means they are NOT trying to game the system. In fact, Ford is using the outdated 2 cycle test which is why they have to scale down their results so much in the EPA numbers they report. They aren't even reporting the 2 cycle test results, at all. It is NOT the tougher standard. Ford is simply choosing to scale the results way back. Tesla is obviously NOT scaling the test results way back.

…………,

The only viable solution is for the EPA to require the same reduction factor on whichever test cycle they choose as the single, uniform standard. And I agree 100% this should happen.

And this is the exact problem!

Step 1- admit there is a problem.

The consumer doesn’t know, understand, or care about the crazy ways they calculate the test.

The general public will, rightly so, assume that all cars are tested under the same standardized conditions.

But instead there is an odd man out.
And that’s Tesla. And even you admit they CHOOSE not to scale the results back and that inflates their results compared to the competition.

Sure, one solution (and yes, it’s the better solution) is for the EPA to adjust the test.

But until that happens, the only easy solution is for the odd man out to get in line and either use the same test, or scale back more to make it an even comparison for the consumer. And you say the EPA should “require” this, but Tesla could do this on their own!

We seem to agree on the problem, but not sure why you disagree that Tesla could do a temporary solution now.

Trying to argue which test is more accurate is kinda pointless. If the consumer drives like the EPA, they’ll get EPA results in either test.

 

[theduke]

Not trying to stir the pot . . . but since this has been talked about here, with people liking to say "but Musk promised coast to coast driving in 20xx".

What happens when it really happens? And I bring this up because we now have multiple reports of intervention-free drives from SF to LA.

Here is one such drive:


Anyone that has ever driven in either of these cities should appreciate the difficulty of this. Is it perfect - NO. But it looks to be getting extremely useful in the 11.3.x and 11.4 versions.

(and for those that complain about Autopilot vs. FSD - please bear in mind that AP is a 4 year old product that has NOT had software updates to it in years - all dev focus has been on FSD).

 

[Mach1E]

Not trying to stir the pot . . . but since this has been talked about here, with people liking to say "but Musk promised coast to coast driving in 20xx".

What happens when it really happens? And I bring this up because we now have multiple reports of intervention-free drives from SF to LA.

Here is one such drive:


Anyone that has ever driven in either of these cities should appreciate the difficulty of this. Is it perfect - NO. But it looks to be getting extremely useful in the 11.3.x and 11.4 versions.

(and for those that complain about Autopilot vs. FSD - please bear in mind that AP is a 4 year old product that has NOT had software updates to it in years - all dev focus has been on FSD).

What happens when it really happens?

We’ll say things like-

“about dang time! Only a decade late for those who paid $15,000.”

or

“big deal? Google has logged millions of miles with driverless cars!”https://waymo.com/waymo-driver/

Sure, a few test runs with no driver intervention are a good step in the right direction……. But seriously…….. driverless cars have been around for a long time now. Not sure why Tesla is taking so long to fulfill the promise.

 

[theduke]

What happens when it really happens?

We’ll say things like-

“about dang time! Only a decade late for those who paid $15,000.”

or

“big deal? Google has logged millions of miles with driverless cars!”https://waymo.com/waymo-driver/

Sure, a few test runs with no driver intervention are a good step in the right direction……. But seriously…….. driverless cars have been around for a long time now. Not sure why Tesla is taking so long to fulfill the promise.

"Driverless" cars have been geofenced to TINY little areas where they can work, and at times of day that make them very impractical (Cruise - I'm looking at you).

This is a drive - ONLY using cameras and AI. No HD maps, no lidar, no radar even. Just AI and cameras, in rush hour for both cities (no one's driverless cars currently do rush-hour driving that I am aware of).

I don't care if it's late, this is impressive, and no one else is even close to a drive like this.

 

[Mach1E]

"Driverless" cars have been geofenced to TINY little areas where they can work, and at times of day that make them very impractical (Cruise - I'm looking at you).

This is a drive - ONLY using cameras and AI. No HD maps, no lidar, no radar even. Just AI and cameras, in rush hour for both cities (no one's driverless cars currently do rush-hour driving that I am aware of).

I don't care if it's late, this is impressive, and no one else is even close to a drive like this.

That’s the thing, it’s not that impressive.

Why choose to use less technology when it’s available now?

They should be using HD maps, LIDAR and/or radar.

Why? Because that’s what it takes to get the job done in the safest way possible.

Why try to set a record while hopping on one foot if you have two feet available?

 

[theduke]

That’s the thing, it’s not that impressive.

Why choose to use less technology when it’s available now?

They should be using HD maps, LIDAR and/or radar.

Why? Because that’s what it takes to get the job done in the safest way possible.

Why try to set a record while hopping on one foot if you have two feet available?

OK, this is just pure haterspeak now. LIDAR = EXPENSIVE, I have a friend that works for Luminar and each Lidar is over $1500 in bulk, and you need multiple ones on a car to obtain enough info for the car to have an understanding of what is around it. Cameras are cheap and reliable.

HD maps - you clearly don't know what you are talking about. Within five minutes of mapping a route in HD, the map is out of date. Cars move (you clearly didn't even watch the video - the Tesla was driving around cars double-parked, etc.). This is the inherent problem with HD maps, they become obsolete quickly, and they are worth very little in high-traffic scenarios.

Safety - I've already posted that data that FSDb is safer than a human driver, but you don't like the dataset (but can't post one of your own to refute it).

Simple question - Bluecruise can't even take a freeway exit. Where is the "competition"? This is something that every person that owns a Tesla built since 2017 can use and install on their car (at $200/mo if they don't want to pay the flat rate).

 

[Ghost Ryder]

That’s the thing, it’s not that impressive.

Why choose to use less technology when it’s available now?

They should be using HD maps, LIDAR and/or radar.

Why? Because that’s what it takes to get the job done in the safest way possible.

Why try to set a record while hopping on one foot if you have two feet available?

Everything have trade offs. Of the top of my head, I can see cost and size when comparing cameras to LIDAR. Sure LIDAR may be more effective initially, but with development and AI training, if Tesla is able to make Camera only Self Driving just as effective, if not more, than wouldn't that be the correct way to go?

Also I disagree with you that driving from LA to SF unassisted is not impressive. I think it's remarkable compare to where we were just a few years ago.

 

[Mach1E]

Everything have trade offs. Of the top of my head, I can see cost and size when comparing cameras to LIDAR. Sure LIDAR may be more effective initially, but with development and AI training, if Tesla is able to make Camera only Self Driving just as effective, if not more, than wouldn't that be the correct way to go?

Also I disagree with you that driving from LA to SF unassisted is not impressive. I think it's remarkable compare to where we were just a few years ago.

But it’s not as effective, thus why not impressed.

It’s 2023. Yes, I would have been blown away by hands free driving in 2009. And I was……. When google did it in 2009.

It’s the timeline that’s unimpressive.

If you asked a trivia question to people: “in what year did Tesla drive a FSD from LA to SF without interruption” Most people would probably guess around a decade ago.

Tell them “2023” and the result? Not impressed.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

But it’s not as effective, thus why not impressed.

It’s 2023. Yes, I would have been blown away by hands free driving in 2009. And I was……. When google did it in 2009.

It’s the timeline that’s unimpressive.

If you asked a trivia question to people: “in what year did Tesla drive a FSD from LA to SF without interruption” Most people would probably guess around a decade ago.

Tell them “2023” and the result? Not impressed.

It may not be as affective yet although I'm not aware of any other OEM or company that has a car that can drive from LA to SF unassisted. That includes city driving. And to do it at a reasonable cost is just the cherry on top.

I don't recall reading anything about google/waymo making a completely unassisted drive from LA to SF in 2009. But if in fact they did, and now only geofence in a very small area under ideal condition in 2023, that should say something about how difficult it is to achieve.

We're going to have to disagree on whether people will find it impressive, but when most people have not even experience bluecruise or tesla AP, having a car drive from point A to B without intervention is pretty remarkable.

 

[ab13]

You COMPLETELY missed my point. My POINT was that cars can have significant fire risks even if they are NOT EVs.

In fact, EVs are the least likely to have fires (Tesla's included) of the 3 categories, hybrids being the highest of the group (makes sense, they are the most complicated, mechanically and electrically).
https://insideevs.com/news/561549/study-evs-smallest-fire-risk/

The difference is most companies will find the root cause and issue a recall. Exactly what Ford did with the F150 Lightning.


The item you reference is incorrect and inaccurate. I looked at the raw data when the article first came out and they calculated the information wrong. Even the original report said that, as I recall, hybrids were less risk than the other vehicles. I guess I will have to post the info here on this thread.

I linked previously to this person's response where he showed the error. Same error I saw, they included flexible fuel vehicles under the hybrid category when those are ethanol type vehicles, not hybrid. That increased the count for hybrid about 10x, which is clearly an error.

Sponsored