True. We were almost always set up with a loaner. The benefits of being customers for 22 years, I suppose.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Car and Driver suffers Model 3 failure on 12/25, but car told them about it remotely
- Thread starter e-FTW
- Start date
Theres a fundamental difference in the reliability of Tesla vs German brands.
German cars will fail and it is planned and designed like this. Each parts meets rigorous failing standards to only last 5 to 10 years and 100k max.
Tesla engineers their cars to last 1 million miles , most of the problems are unforseen issues, not planned and mostly related to pushing forward new tech and being new in the field .
Which company would you want to go with ?
German cars will fail and it is planned and designed like this. Each parts meets rigorous failing standards to only last 5 to 10 years and 100k max.
Tesla engineers their cars to last 1 million miles , most of the problems are unforseen issues, not planned and mostly related to pushing forward new tech and being new in the field .
Which company would you want to go with ?
Anyone seen the update yet? Looks like it was a short in the inverter which prompted the car to protect itself by blowing the HV fuse:
Our Tesla Model 3 Is Up and Running Again after Getting a New Rear-Motor Assembly — Car and Driver
Our Tesla Model 3 Is Up and Running Again after Getting a New Rear-Motor Assembly — Car and Driver
I did not know this. Would you please provide a link to an article reporting on this fact so we may learn more?
boriszima
Member
Agreed!! Not picking up the phone is not new for Tesla. Their inability to even have a voicemail in 2018 for model 3 (june 30thsh) forget answer the phone (as i remember the prompt would say our lines are busy etc) when I tried them multiple times, was one of the factors that cost me the lifetime premium connectivity. Subsequent tries to get them to fix a scratch was frustrating and I gave up finally and earlier this year i tried multiple times to talk to parts at the cleveland service center to buy/price spare wheels with no luck. Finally got hold of the service guys who took down my VIN, telephone, email etc and then never called me back. My philosophy with Tesla to other potential buyers is its a great car and amazing if you are a techy, but plan to have a second car and a lot of patience.
First make sure it's not just the wheel well liner rattling. Easy to tape down to confirm.
Scenario A: An ICE engine fails. The user has to park the car and get the car towed and fixed.
Scenario B: The AP system fails on a Tesla (camera out etc). The user drives home normally without AP, and gets it fixed when he/she has time.
My point is that the CR methodology will group both A and B as major failures, even though they are fundamentally different. In scenario B the car "deteriorated" only to the point that it was functionally equal to the ICE car at its full function. Yet CR will count this as a major failure.
So you get an ICE car with X major engine failures and zero AP failures (because it doesnt have AP). And you get a Tesla with X major motor failures (the same as the ICE car) and Y AP failures. CR adds up X+0 for the ICE car, and X+Y for the Tesla, and reports it as one number for each car. Conclusion when you view the numbers? The Tesla breaks down more even though in actuality it had equal engine failures as the ICE car. This is a classic example of statistical skew (categorization bias).
I didn't say AP should be excluded from statistics, I said the classification of AP and similar systems (EV or ICE, it doesnt matter) hasn't been properly tackled yet by CR. I dont pretend to know how they should do it, but they certainly dont do a good job atm. I'm not even saying Teslas are reliable, I'm saying we don't know based on the methodology CR use.
I don't think the tesla would break down more in that math because it doesn't have as many parts as an ICE engine so X would be much less.
I haven't seen anything where CR says the model 3 is "above" average quality. Still, keep in mind they have sold a lot of model S cars. Also, the rating of quality is based on what they see in more recent cars and the early model 3s were not rated all that great. It helps if you read about how they come up with their ratings. It's not an easy process.
I'm glad Tesla is improving. I don't think there is much chance the model X issues will ever be addressed. Tesla seems to have a laser focus on the model 3 and Y at the moment. Their future is hanging on these two cars and they know they need to sustain demand. If model 3 demand had dropped off in Q4 the stock would have nose dived. Here on they should be good with Shenzhen ramping up now and the Y later in the year. No room anywhere in there to actually pay much attention to the S or X.
You think the Beta issues of the autopilot are factored into the CR reliability results? I would expect not. They aren't including horsepower or ride quality either. If the AP breaks, that will be included.
You think AP failure should be considered minor? In my opinion major/minor should relate to cost of repair. There's no question that out of warranty repairs on the AP are most likely going to be major expenses but someone correct me if I'm wrong.
BTW, AP is not a matter of the Teslas being EVs, so it isn't about updating their methodology to account for EVs.
Like what?
A car works, or it doesn't.
It successfully converts potential energy (stored in any of its forms) into kinetic energy, on demand, or it doesn't.
You are making much ado about Tesla selling EVs. So do many other automakers.
CR judges them all based on reliability and safety. Tesla delivers on the latter, but leaves much to be desired on the former.
No revisions or EV indulgences are required.
You are making excuses for Tesla based on its marketing people pre-pending word "Beta" to its features.
Tesla's labeling AP, auto-wipe, Dashcam, TACC, Autosteer, NOA, Summon as "Beta" is 100% shameless marketing BS.
My bottom line is very simple, and is properly measured by CR surveys (which I do fill out annually) - if an Automaker sells a feature, it has to work. It has to work well, and work reliably.
(Car with a functional AP) >> (Car without AP) >> (Car with a broken AP).
Broken means it used to work, but now it doesn't, and requires service visit to the SC to remedy (BTDT).
Calling half of car's features "Beta" does not excuse Tesla from the obligation to deliver them to market in a functional and reliable state.
I've also owned many BMWs, still have one. Here, in NY/NJ area, I can get a service appointment, with a loaner, 2-5 days in advance.
A service appointment w/o a loaner is readily available for the next business day, is the one after, at the latest.
If you have an error condition with your car (vs. regular service), appointments are prioritized and slotted for the next available time slot, including same day service.
Sadly, service has gone downhill at Tesla as sales have grown.
Tesla's earlier stated ambitions to "Creating the World’s Best Service and Warranty Program" have simply not been their priority:
Creating the World’s Best Service and Warranty Program
*sigh*
Last edited:
And you shamelessly post your personal perspective as fact every chance you get. In almost every single post, you make some absurd claim that Tesla has a huge quality problem, yet there's no evidence of it. If you want to cite CR surveys, that's your call but that's exactly what it is ... a CR survey. First, it's CR survey recipients only. That's already a limited, focused group. Second, it's self-selective in that people with an issue are disproportionately represented. Third, as others have pointed out there's no real distinction about a "major" versus a "minor" issue in those surveys. It's entirely subjective.
We get it, you have had some issue(s) with Tesla quality or service. But we have plenty of equivalent examples of people not having issues (or having what they consider minor issues). I've had cars from many other manufactures. From the same manufacturer, some have had issues and some have not. I don't get to make wild, brand-wide claims about it.
I heard it on the Tesla Daily podcast which had an in depth interview with the director of auto at Consumer Reports. He was commenting how the Model 3 reliability was much better (it placed 5 out of 12 in the reliability rankings in its class). It was very recent when the new Consumer Reports dropped.
Of course they remarked there were still tons of issues with the X and it’s doors. It is what it is.
I guess you drank the kool aid like keydiver in the thread I pointed to and many others.
If you think they're unforseen, well, then it's a case of they (Tesla) don't know what they don't know and is a significant barrier to reaching your claim. I highly doubt the rest of any currently shipping or previously shipped Tesla will have major subsystems still working w/their original parts even at the 500K mark.
Just look at the 3+ folks here on TMC who on their 7th+ drive unit on their S (Drive Unit Replacement Poll, 6th drive unit replacement and more, Drive Unit Replacement Poll), the disastrous FWDs on the X, the MCU problems on the S (e.g. eMMC wearing out, LCDs leaking, bubbling and yellowing), door handles failing on S, half shafts on S (Clunking sound is costing me a bundle to fix out of warranty), half shafts replaced over and over on numerous X (Acceleration Shudder), and control arm failures on S (Cracked forelink? and Another front suspension control arm failure).
And, every single year Consumer Reports has reliability data, the Model X ends up in the bottom 10 for reliability, including at least 1 showing at dead last.
Some folks who've been here much longer than you had these reactions to "goal of 1 million mile powertrain" before.
Low Speed, High Pitch Whine
Low Speed, High Pitch Whine
I'd say what I posted at Official Tesla Model S thread - Page 348 - My Nissan Leaf Forum is still true, despite the tweet. Judging by the DU failures we've seen on the 3, I doubt very many real customer Model 3 DU's will reach 500K miles, for various reasons (e.g. requires replacement, accidents or car becomes non-longer economical to keep running due to repairs).
It's funny that automotive reliability and durability testing is crickets still.
Last edited:
You also missed the point that I made saying this is new tech and it is a new company working out some things. You will also notice the continual improvement. Likewise the German brands continue to fall apart after 5 years by design. It shouldn't be this bad after 10 generations of cars. We all know Tesla needs to improve but they are continuing to do better especially with the 3. What I'm trying to point out is the philosophies of the car manufacturers.
Similar threads
