Tesla Slashes Prices

[theduke]

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.

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.

The F150 fires started even before some of the vehicles left the shipping lot from the factory.

Sponsored

 

[theduke]

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.

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.

 

[macchiaz-o]

 

[voxel]

I stumbled upon this diagram and it sums up what Bjorn’s 1000 km tests have shown.

Efficiency and charge speed together matter than one or the other.

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a40929408/ev-charging-chart-rates/

 

[ab13]

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.

The F150 fires started even before some of the vehicles left the shipping lot from the factory.

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/

 

[ab13]

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.

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.

Using translation (some appears to be translated inaccurately based on the wording):
https://www.samr.gov.cn/zw/zh/202305/t20230512_355181.html

"The vehicles within the scope of this recall do not allow the driver to choose the energy regenerative braking strategy; at the same time, the driver may not provide enough reminders when the driver depresses the accelerator pedal deeply for a long time. The superposition of the above factors may increase the probability of mistakenly stepping on the accelerator pedal for a long time, which may increase the risk of collision and pose a safety hazard.

　　This recall was carried out when the State Administration for Market Regulation initiated a defect investigation. Affected by the investigation, Tesla Motors (Beijing) Co., Ltd. and Tesla (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. plan to use the vehicle remote upgrade (OTA) technology to push newly developed functions for vehicles within the scope of the recall, so as to reduce the number of cases caused by long-term deep-dive problems. Depressing the accelerator pedal leads to a collision risk caused by excessive speed. Features include: (1) on vehicles that do not have a regenerative braking intensity selection, provide an option to allow the driver to select the regenerative braking intensity; (2) adjust the factory default state of the vehicle regenerative braking strategy; (3) A reminder is issued when the driver depresses the accelerator pedal deeply for a long time. "

 

[Ghost Ryder]

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.

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.

 

[theduke]

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.

Using translation (some appears to be translated inaccurately based on the wording):
https://www.samr.gov.cn/zw/zh/202305/t20230512_355181.html

"The vehicles within the scope of this recall do not allow the driver to choose the energy regenerative braking strategy; at the same time, the driver may not provide enough reminders when the driver depresses the accelerator pedal deeply for a long time. The superposition of the above factors may increase the probability of mistakenly stepping on the accelerator pedal for a long time, which may increase the risk of collision and pose a safety hazard.

　　This recall was carried out when the State Administration for Market Regulation initiated a defect investigation. Affected by the investigation, Tesla Motors (Beijing) Co., Ltd. and Tesla (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. plan to use the vehicle remote upgrade (OTA) technology to push newly developed functions for vehicles within the scope of the recall, so as to reduce the number of cases caused by long-term deep-dive problems. Depressing the accelerator pedal leads to a collision risk caused by excessive speed. Features include: (1) on vehicles that do not have a regenerative braking intensity selection, provide an option to allow the driver to select the regenerative braking intensity; (2) adjust the factory default state of the vehicle regenerative braking strategy; (3) A reminder is issued when the driver depresses the accelerator pedal deeply for a long time. "

This is a lie on your part. It was literally a "feature update" that the Gov request Tesla (and other auto manufs) add.

https://electrek.co/2023/05/12/tesla-1-million-car-recall-feature-update/

Chinese authorities fully approved the cars as they were designed when they were sold to customers, and then, after the fact, asked that Tesla allow for more granular regenerative breaking options, and to have the screen flash up a warning if the accelerator is depressed to a certain level or beyond.

THIS WAS NOT A MANUFACTURING OR SOFTWARE DEFECT - it is additional functionality (added because of a now-famous incident where an 85+ yo Chinese man kept his foot firmly down on the accelerator and sped through a town, hitting multiple people - a case which the Chinese Gov fully absolved Tesla of any liability, FYI).

That's called moving the goalposts, not a manuf defect.

It's called a "recall" because OTA updates are such a novel thing for regulatory authorities that they don't have a different "bucket" to classify these kinds of feature add-ons.

 

[theduke]

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 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.

 

[theduke]

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/

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).

I was talking overall fire rates however, of which crashes would be a part. Overall fire rates for BEVs are far far lower than ICE and hybrids.
https://driveelectriccolorado.org/myth-buster-evs-fire/

 

[Ghost Ryder]

It's really sad that there is such an agenda to paint Tesla in a negative light in the media. It's one thing to have an opinion piece, it's another to outright lie. They don't even pretend to be objective anymore.

If Tecla's were truly awful cars (I'm looking at you Vinfast), I would understand, but I don't think a rational, objective person would put Tesla in that category.

 

[ab13]

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.

The link I showed says, the following, so they have 3 imported models (S, X, 3) that have been sold in China.

" Starting from May 29, 2023, some imported Model S, Model X, Model 3 and domestically produced Model 3 and Model Y vehicles with a production date between January 12, 2019 and April 24, 2023 will be recalled "

 

[ab13]

This is a lie on your part. It was literally a "feature update" that the Gov request Tesla (and other auto manufs) add.

https://electrek.co/2023/05/12/tesla-1-million-car-recall-feature-update/

Chinese authorities fully approved the cars as they were designed when they were sold to customers, and then, after the fact, asked that Tesla allow for more granular regenerative breaking options, and to have the screen flash up a warning if the accelerator is depressed to a certain level or beyond.

THIS WAS NOT A MANUFACTURING OR SOFTWARE DEFECT - it is additional functionality (added because of a now-famous incident where an 85+ yo Chinese man kept his foot firmly down on the accelerator and sped through a town, hitting multiple people - a case which the Chinese Gov fully absolved Tesla of any liability, FYI).

That's called moving the goalposts, not a manuf defect.

It's called a "recall" because OTA updates are such a novel thing for regulatory authorities that they don't have a different "bucket" to classify these kinds of feature add-ons.

The China government webpage says
" The vehicles within the scope of this recall "

 

[ab13]

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).

I was talking overall fire rates however, of which crashes would be a part. Overall fire rates for BEVs are far far lower than ICE and hybrids.
https://driveelectriccolorado.org/myth-buster-evs-fire/

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.

If people can't figure out the different between real fact and journalism, and random website article, then that's the problem.

If you are using stats, you have to compare vehicles of similar categories and ages, which is called out in government reports of vehicle fire, that 10+ year old cars are the main ones that have fire issues. What is generally reports, doesn't include that information, so you are comparing relatively new EV cars to 10+ year old other cars.

 

[theduke]

The China government webpage says
" The vehicles within the scope of this recall "

You read Chinese? You know the translation is accurate?

Whatever you need to tell yourself to sleep buddy.

Tesla "recalls" = OTA software updates for every computer component in the car.
Everyone else = painful multi-hour trip to the stealership for some components

Sponsored