My thought as well. I don't think anything has ruled out charging not being the issue. The only thing that has been said is that the supercharger itself was not a problem. Everything from the charge port to the battery is still suspect AFAIK.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
My thought as well. I don't think anything has ruled out charging not being the issue. The only thing that has been said is that the supercharger itself was not a problem. Everything from the charge port to the battery is still suspect AFAIK.
lol, well I have to say I would have paid a little more for a slightly wider path to the front door of the house
I was in Norway summer last year, and stayed for a night in a small Bed + Breakfast in a rural part of the country (near the Trollstigen). I wasn't in the Tesla, but conversation somehow strayed onto EV's. I was surprised how not everyone is particularly happy with the skewing of benefits for EV's
So let's just stretch things a little further and say it was Norwegian Luddites setting fire to Teslas in revenge attacks
All you non-Norwegians here on TMC seem so hung up in all these wild conspiracy theories (or hoverboard-theories), compared to the discussion on the Norwegian EV forum by Norwegian owners. Maybe because we're such calm, rational people :biggrin:, or maybe because many of you Americans have financial investements in TSLA, which makes it much more prudent for you to blame external factors.
But you're right, EVs are hated by many Norwegians who feel rich EV owners leech on society with all the incentives and don't pay their fair share of car- and road taxes. EV rapid chargers are sometimes vandalized, which could, of course, be dangerous. Though I haven't heard about systematic vandalization by EV-haters, just random vandalization.
I doubt this fire was caused by a vandalized or accidentally damaged SC plug, where missing isolation between pins in the plug created a spark, since the fire was internal to the car and the driver was able to retract the SC plug from the charge port after the fire had started.
My personal theory is that this fire was caused by sloppy service of the car's internal charging cabling or junction box at one of Tesla's overstretched Norwegian service centres. Maybe a big fat wire wasn't fastened properly, or some screws weren't tightened properly.
The timing indicates it had something to do with supercharging. This fire started right after charging started, which probably isn't a coincidence. Hoverboards aren't that useful in Norway in the middle of winter anyway, so that's fairly unlikely. Any baggage/christmas presents/leftover fireworks which could have ignited in the trunk, could have ignited at any time on the 2hr journey from Oslo to the Brokelandsheia supercharger, or indeed even before that.
Now the wreck is owned by Tesla, so I doubt we'll ever know what really happened.
Anyhow: Norwegian statistics show that ICE cars have much, much greater risk of fire than EVs. And Norway has the highest percentage of EVs in the world. Until these statistics change, I'm not worried. But just in case, since the normal interior back door handles won't work if the 12V is cut by a fire, I have showed my kids how to use the emergency back door openers under the back seats.
Oi... I'm not from 'Murica, I'm Limey and proud of the fact
P.S. I agree with the rest of your appraisal of the situation. Most likely a fault in a Tesla supplied item, but still a very rare occurrence compared to an ICE.
Oi... I'm not from 'Murica, I'm Limey and proud of the fact
Yeah, sorry, I wasn't really referring to you, just happened to hit reply to your post... :biggrin:
Johann Koeber
Happy Owner
I reported a damaged SC cable on Jan 8. Have not been back to Feuchtwangen to check if it has been repaired.
Careful! I tried to hint on something like this earlier and was told that speculation was useless here...
But yes, this is also my personal theory... It was after all - from my understanding of the situation - bought from Tesla as a CPO car just days before, and had probably a service/check in that compound, so this is probably it's first SuC-visit after that.Careful! I tried to hint on something like this earlier and was told that speculation was useless here...
It could also be a poor contact on the HV contactor, the only moving part in the charging chain, and something that might have not been called into action for months.
Debris chromatography might be too late unless proper samples were taken at the scene of the fire (in metal cans, sealed). If there was accelerant present, it evaporated by now.
Norwegian reports do not mention any sniffers (dogs, people or instruments) being involved in the investigation.
If both the owner and the driver claim they had no cargo in the car at the time of the incident and they both check as credible people then the forensic tests may be redundant. The car was 2 days into new ownership, not enough time to stuff it up with clutter. It is also easy to establish if the driver is a smoker.
If the driver is a non-smoker (or did not smoke in the car) and cargo caught on fire, then it must have been a case of spontaneous combustion. Not impossible but highly unlikely.
The car circuitry arcing could have caused the fire. The fire is likely to cause arcing. Thus, even if evidence of arcing is found on copper wires in debris (if they haven't melted), it proves nothing as it is impossible to say which came first. However if we assume that arcing came first, it might be a useful data point.
The best bet in this investigation is to collect circumstantial evidence - owner and driver stories, car interference history and to put the pieces of the puzzle in the most logical and likely way.
Whatever the truth is I am pretty sure we will never know.
I agree with scaesare on this issue. I have thermography done regularly on thousands of electrical connections that have no good reason to go bad. There is never a report that does not show dozens of bad connections. They go bad due to wear, tear, vibration, age, dirt, poor workmanship, etc.
The reason often stays unknown. Often, dealing with the consequences and trying to figure out a root cause of one bad connection is more difficult and more expensive that preventative scanning of thousands of connections. Scanning is likely to catch bad connections early before they cause trouble.
Last edited:
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
I also agree with the theory that there was some sort of loose or incorrect connection somewhere just inside the supercharger connection area (junction box perhaps?)--probably something that was modified or replaced by the service center--and wasn't replaced or assembled correctly, or was defective.
Either way, given the extreme rarity of this event it seems clear to me that it's not an inherent design flaw.
Either way, given the extreme rarity of this event it seems clear to me that it's not an inherent design flaw.
I agree. Even if they determine it's the obvious birthday cake in the trunk, there's no benefit in returning the words "fire" and "Tesla" to the headlines.
I agree that we never hear about this again...unless an analyst asks about it at the Q4ER CC....And, I doubt they will as it seems like a very isolated case.
Whilst part of me for pure geeky interest would like an answer, I think we are beyond it now. This is a good thing. If it were a Ford or GM, we'd never know (and frankly never care)
The only reason this was even in the press at all was because it was a Tesla. They get the benefits of click through and social media, but unfortunately that comes with the flip side of negative issues being magnified. IOW don't hate the player, hate the game
I'm with AlMc here it's likely to be completely forgotten about by Q1-16
I hope they find something and if it's possible correct it. (Even better would be the outside cause, of course.)
I've taken a couple of cross-country trips with my dogs and left them in the car while supercharging. With this possibility out there I'm much less comfortable with that. (I regularly ping my app to make sure the a/c is on, but a fire is something much worse.)
ICE vehicles do catch fire, but they don't tend to do it if you've left them alone for 20 or 30 minutes while "refueling". Attempts to say "it could happen to anyone" don't really persuade me.
I've taken a couple of cross-country trips with my dogs and left them in the car while supercharging. With this possibility out there I'm much less comfortable with that. (I regularly ping my app to make sure the a/c is on, but a fire is something much worse.)
ICE vehicles do catch fire, but they don't tend to do it if you've left them alone for 20 or 30 minutes while "refueling". Attempts to say "it could happen to anyone" don't really persuade me.
It's hard to put numerical values on the risk, since Tesla doesn't publish Supercharging information on a regular basis. I wish they would, so that the risk metrics could be lined up against other things that we consider "unlikely" - a death on your cross-country drive, for instance - or being struck by lightning. And we have to remember that the fire may not be attributable to charging anyway. Without that information, any decisions we make relating to this are emotional, not rational.
I agree entirely; it is unclear how to judge risk. It's also true that many of us go nonlinear thinking of the possibility that we would be putting our pets at risk.
My main point is that I hope Ampedrealtor is incorrect that Tesla will just go quiet on this. It is possible, of course, that the fire made it practically impossible to determine root cause and they will have no choice.
My main point is that I hope Ampedrealtor is incorrect that Tesla will just go quiet on this. It is possible, of course, that the fire made it practically impossible to determine root cause and they will have no choice.
