Cabin Overheat Protection Could Prevent The Worst Day of Your Life

[Patrick0101]

People don't leave babies in cars on purpose, but lapses happen. Simply telling people to "stop doing it" is not a solution. 693 children have died of vehicular heatstroke since 1998, with 32 of those deaths occurring in 2016. Cabin overheat protection feature should be a standard in every vehicle with 200-miles+ of electric range.
Cabin Overheat Protection

 

[Gig103]

"The feature works by automatically turning on the vents and air conditioning of the vehicle once the temperature inside hits a sweltering 105 degrees Fahrenheit"

Sounds like a great way to come out to a drained battery here in Arizona. The darn thing would never turn off, my garage reaches 100 degrees by the time I wake up for work, and the outdoor temperature hits 115 regularly.

 

[Jason S]

Features can be disabled, yes? Since I simply do not have children in my car, I do not enable the feature. The cabin heating/cooling can be something that parents can turn on.

I don't recall seeing this feature, but when I do I'll just disable it.

 

[Acrono]

Simple solution: don't have kids.

 

[Max*]

This is a bullshit feature. If you leave your kids in a car even at 105 degrees, it'll be just as bad as not having overheat protection.

This feature is more of to avoid the internals of the car from deteriorating from extreme temperatures. There's been several threads speculating that heat causes the glue on the screen of the MCU to melt (the bubbles), and other failures.

Once this feature is settable (not 105F), it'll become useful. Until then, just another marketing gimmic "look shinny" from Tesla.

 

[cdub]

Oh my the complaining on this forum is getting ridiculous.

I recall Elon saying this could run for quite a while without affecting range too much.

 

[artsci]

Oh my the complaining on this forum is getting ridiculous.

I recall Elon saying this could run for quite a while without affecting range too much.

It's become a complaint forum and therefor of less and less value. I spend much less time here. Tesla is all evil and everything they do is to screw we owners - that kind of stuff is irrational and gets old in a hurry.

 

[SomeJoe7777]

This is a bullshit feature. If you leave your kids in a car even at 105 degrees, it'll be just as bad as not having overheat protection.

Ridiculous.

105F = Heat exhaustion + dehydration.

130F+ = Heatstroke and death.


As usual these days, we seem to live in the era of "post-truth". No one cares what's true/accurate, they only care about what they believe.

 

[kavyboy]

It's become a complaint forum and therefor of less and less value. I spend much less time here. Tesla is all evil and everything they do is to screw we owners - that kind of stuff is irrational and gets old in a hurry.

I think we have a right to complain, but not continually harp on the same things over and over. I was getting cynical and angry, but I am trying to change my attitude. I regret bringing any unproductive negativity to the forums.

 

[mal_tsla]

Plus Elon said the car can do this for a year. It's not that hard for it to hold the temp at 105.

The only concern I had was it will stop when battery hits 20%. If that should ever happen (let's say you started with a low SOC), it might turn out to be a sad choice.

 

[Max*]

Ridiculous.

105F = Heat exhaustion + dehydration.

130F+ = Heatstroke and death.


As usual these days, we seem to live in the era of "post-truth". No one cares what's true/accurate, they only care about what they believe.

You're about 3% way there to changing my mind.

Now show me some proof that a child can survive for extended periods of time at 105F, and you'll be 100% of the way there.

Otherwise, "as usual these days, we seem to live in the era of "post-truth". No one cares what's true/accurate, they only care about what they believe."

 

[Max*]

@SomeJoe7777 And then there's this: https://www.ok.gov/health2/documents/weatherwatchforchildren2.pdf Interpret as you like, it's not the inside of a car, just safe temperatures for children .105F is red in every line, and interpreted as -- Condition RED - most children should not play outdoors due to the health risk. INFANTS/TODDLERS should play indoors and have ample space for large motor play.

So until you can prove that 105 = is JUST Heat exhaustion + dehydration, I'm back to what I posted originally. And you can believe what you want.

 

[SomeJoe7777]

@SomeJoe7777So until you can prove that 105 = is JUST Heat exhaustion + dehydration, I'm back to what I posted originally. And you can believe what you want.

What you believe or what I believe is irrelevant, the truth doesn't care.

I don't owe you any kind of proof. You owe yourself. I won't do your research for you.

 

[Max*]

What you believe or what I believe is irrelevant, the truth doesn't care.

I don't owe you any kind of proof. You owe yourself. I won't do your research for you.

I'm right, neeener neeener, can't prove it, but neeeener neeeener

 

[Ben W]

@SomeJoe7777 And then there's this: https://www.ok.gov/health2/documents/weatherwatchforchildren2.pdf Interpret as you like, it's not the inside of a car, just safe temperatures for children .105F is red in every line, and interpreted as -- Condition RED - most children should not play outdoors due to the health risk. INFANTS/TODDLERS should play indoors and have ample space for large motor play.

105F refers to "in the shade" temperature. Clearly "playing outdoors in the sun" is a bad idea in those conditions, but e.g. "resting in the shade" (equivalent to sitting in a temperature-controlled car) is survivable all day, if you stay hydrated. People regularly spend 10-15 minutes in 190F saunas without problems; a car with 105F interior temperature is mild compared to that. The A/C also keeps the relative humidity low, which helps a lot.

An informative link is here: How hot can the interior of a car get – and how quickly? : HeatKills In a nutshell, interior temperatures for a car parked in the sun will eventually (after an hour or so) rise about 40-45 degrees (F) relative to the outside temperature. So Tesla's mechanism is equivalent to parking your car in 60 to 65-degree ambient weather.

 

[Max*]

The A/C also keeps the relative humidity low, which helps a lot.

I was under the impression that the AC doesn't go on, it's forcing outside air into the car (getting hot air out, blowing moderate air in), like a fan blowing. Was I wrong?

 

[SomeJoe7777]

I'm right, neeener neeener, can't prove it, but neeeener neeeener

How is this different from your claims here:

This is a bullshit feature. If you leave your kids in a car even at 105 degrees, it'll be just as bad as not having overheat protection.

This feature is more of to avoid the internals of the car from deteriorating from extreme temperatures. There's been several threads speculating that heat causes the glue on the screen of the MCU to melt (the bubbles), and other failures.

Once this feature is settable (not 105F), it'll become useful. Until then, just another marketing gimmic "look shinny" from Tesla.

These accusations are also without proof and citations.

If you provide no evidence or proof for your own claims, how do you justify holding others to a different standard?

 

[Ben W]

I was under the impression that the AC doesn't go on, it's forcing outside air into the car (getting hot air out, blowing moderate air in), like a fan blowing. Was I wrong?

That's a good point. It should certainly take the heat index (temp + humidity) into account, and adjust the target temperature/humidity as appropriate to maintain a safe range. New Orleans at 105 °F is quite different from Las Vegas! I couldn't find a specific answer, but I'll ask the next time I talk to Tesla.

 

[Max*]

These accusations are also without proof and citations.

I provided a link later on for safe temperature for kids, maybe just maybe, I looked into it before posting . I stated where I got the info about the MCU bubbling in hot areas, if you really want, I'll find the thread(s). Tesla has a history of putting out shinny things while not fixing [minor?] broken items. What more proof and citations do you need?

If you provide no evidence or proof for your own claims, how do you justify holding others to a different standard?

I don't, which is why I provided a link, and called you out that if you disagree show me proof of where I'm wrong. Instead of doing so, you took a holier than thou approach, said you don't owe me anything and said to go do your own homework (paraphrased).


Anyways, until you have something more than "go do your own homework", I'm done.

 

[SomeJoe7777]

@Max* ,

The link you provided later is about safe outdoor temperatures for children playing.

A) That is much different than a child in the same temperature environment that is just sitting, not playing.
B) The document you provided talks in vague terms about safety, but offers no medical evaluation of the direct physiological effects of ambient temperature and exposure duration on a child's health and well-being.
C) The document talks about "safety" but this is presented in parental terms. The goal of the document is guidelines on what children could tolerate for normal activity, not what a child could tolerate to escape death or permanent injury.

Because of these items, the document is not applicable to the situation Tesla is attempting to address (hot car deaths).

You claim that Telsa's motivation is not really to address hot car deaths, but instead to protect the equipment. Other than other owners with random speculation presented in threads on this forum, you offer no proof of this. In fact, there is not really enough evidence to even establish that the equipment is prone to damage at high temperatures. I could easily cite my own experience in that I live in Houston, TX, have had the car for 2 summers where the interior temperature has routinely climbed north of 140F, and my equipment has not suffered any damage. (Due to small sample size of ONE, this anecdote is also irrelevant and proves nothing, the same as the other threads on this forum).

You claim that this feature is a Tesla "marketing gimmick". This is a conclusion that holds only if your previous claim (that the function does not and is not intended to prevent hot car deaths) is true, and only if the claim would then increase Telsa sales, which hasn't been investigated either.

I find all of your claims in this post to be purely speculative, without evidence, and without proof. I will treat them as such.