Chelsea's opinion

[Robert.Boston]

Please don't spread false rumors or jump to conclusions.

Like Bob, I find Chelsea to be a straight shooter and she calls them how she sees them. I wouldn't assume that what she says is anything more than her honest opinion.

The press isn't the place to give your unvarnished opinions. As a leader of the EV community, Chelsea has a responsibility to consider how her comments will be taken in a broader context. IMO she failed to do so in this article. I don't know whether it was out of some lingering animosity towards Tesla or just some ill-considered remarks, but her comments are not helpful or constructive towards supporting a shift to EVs.

 

[Norbert]

Face it - as wonderful as the Model S may be in it's current form, it is still very much a work in progress that is still being refined.

Sure, however many things are subject to automatic software updates, and we are putting a spotlight on every detail here in this forum.

These types of issues very rarely crop up with mature car companies.

I disagree. For one thing, we wouldn't know, and for another, if you look at recalls (just recent ones) of major companies, those issues are often much more serious.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

Not in this case. However it is an ill-placed distraction from Tesla's achievements which deserve congratulations.

I very much see it as Robert described it above (even before he wrote it).

 

[NigelM]

The press isn't the place to give your unvarnished opinions. As a leader of the EV community, Chelsea has a responsibility to consider how her comments will be taken in a broader context. IMO she failed to do so in this article.

Chelsea didn't write the linked article, the author is Damon Lavrinc. Chelsea was just quoted at the end of the article.

 

[doug]

The press isn't the place to give your unvarnished opinions.

A fair point, but I don't see anything particularly wrong with what she said to Wired. "Engineering Excellence" and "Value" were part of the criteria for the award. The car is expensive, so value is debatable (though I'd argue it is a good value for its class). Compared to other automakers Tesla is a young company, so the Model S is an "infant program". Production is just starting to ramp up. Not sure how Norbert is insulted by the term. It means young, not childish. Many infant projects are stillborn. Fortunately the Model S is not. Some glitches are to be expected, so "engineering excellence" may be debatable. Again, since I'm more interested in the drivetrain, rather than the bells and whistles, I think the engineering is superb.

 

[meloccom]

I wasn't offended by anything Chelsea said.
Despite the current up mood we're all feeling at the moment after the MT award, the truth is that Tesla has some way to go before they are financially secure. Elon admitted this himself.
The Model S whilst more affordable than the Roadster, is still a car for people who are probably better off than average.
So Chelsea has a point to my eyes.
On a more personal note some time back I worked for an insurance company and was fired in the most egregious and unfair way.
I still have all my insurance through them and recommend them to others when asked as I recognize the difference between the Company and the A-H--- who was responsible. From what I have read of Chelsea I haven't seen any pro or con bias in her writing, but I believe she is trying hard to remain an independent voice which is important in her position.

 

[Norbert]

A fair point, but I don't see anything particularly wrong with what she said to Wired. "Engineering Excellence" and "Value" were part of the criteria for the award. The car is expensive, so value is debatable (though I'd argue it is a good value for its class). Compared to other automakers Tesla is a young company, so the Model S is an "infant program". Production is just starting to ramp up. Not sure how Norbert is insulted by that. It means young, not childish. Many infant projects are stillborn. Fortunately the Model S is not. Some glitches are to be expected, so "engineering excellence" may be debatable. Again, since I'm more interested in the drivetrain, rather than the bells and whistles, I think the engineering is superb.

In a sense, everything is "debatable", and everyone is allowed to have a different opinion.

Every car needs to be worth its price, whether the price is high or low. Chelsea simply doesn't want EVs to be "expensive", she wants low-cost ones. To simply say it's expensive and just with that putting MotorTrends evaluation into question, is somewhat disrespectful.

Saying that Model S is an "infant program", if you take this term in its objective meaning, would be pointless. Did she say the same thing when the Volt received awards? MotorTrend expressively values that Tesla, as a new company, has created something new. And she (ironically, as an EV advocate) just says: it is so new that "it will undoubtedly have early technical issues". Pointing out the obvious here becomes a way of rubbing something in which doesn't need to be rubbed in, and that is what I find disrespectful in this context. I find it annoying, and insulting towards MotorTrend. I'm not insulted, but I imagine I might be if I were a MT judge. It kind of implies that they missed the obvious. And, I think, only expresses that she prefers established car manufacturers.

 

[vfx]

A fair point, but I don't see anything particularly wrong with what she said to Wired. "Engineering Excellence" and "Value" were part of the criteria for the award. The car is expensive, so value is debatable (though I'd argue it is a good value for its class). ... so "engineering excellence" may be debatable. Again, since I'm more interested in the drivetrain, rather than the bells and whistles, I think the engineering is superb.

When I wrote the original line i was thinking like Robert's statement above, I love Chelsea and her pointing out the possible downside did seem like she was quoting some naysayer. I want her to be a cheerleader but know her well enough that she sees it from all sides. I also realize she might have said ten positive things and one cautionary statement and that one quote may have been cherrypicked.

Like the Roadster is a value price compared to other supercars the Model S is a value for the high tech features it offers and gasoline savings. And Doug is right pointing out the engineering is not about longevity (MT has said this) so engineering a drivetrain that FAR exceeds any other pure EV and matches and beats 100 years of ICE development is so so worth an award.

 

[elecblue]

A fair point, but I don't see anything particularly wrong with what she said to Wired. "Engineering Excellence" and "Value" were part of the criteria for the award. The car is expensive, so value is debatable (though I'd argue it is a good value for its class). Compared to other automakers Tesla is a young company, so the Model S is an "infant program". Production is just starting to ramp up. Not sure how Norbert is insulted by the term. It means young, not childish. Many infant projects are stillborn. Fortunately the Model S is not. Some glitches are to be expected, so "engineering excellence" may be debatable. Again, since I'm more interested in the drivetrain, rather than the bells and whistles, I think the engineering is superb.

Yes, like Aptera.

The Model S glitches are small in comparison to the Fisker Karma.

 

[efusco]

In a sense, everything is "debatable", and everyone is allowed to have a different opinion.

Every car needs to be worth its price, whether the price is high or low. Chelsea simply doesn't want EVs to be "expensive", she wants low-cost ones. To simply say it's expensive and just with that putting MotorTrends evaluation into question, is somewhat disrespectful.

Saying that Model S is an "infant program", if you take this term in its objective meaning, would be pointless. Did she say the same thing when the Volt received awards? MotorTrend expressively values that Tesla, as a new company, has created something new. And she (ironically, as an EV advocate) just says: it is so new that "it will undoubtedly have early technical issues". Pointing out the obvious here becomes a way of rubbing something in which doesn't need to be rubbed in, and that is what I find disrespectful in this context. I find it annoying, and insulting towards MotorTrend. I'm not insulted, but I imagine I might be if I were a MT judge. It kind of implies that they missed the obvious. And, I think, only expresses that she prefers established car manufacturers.

I don't think she meant anything pejorative by "infant program"... Just another way of saying "in it's infancy", aka "new/emerging".


Evan, Via Tapatalk

 

[Norbert]

I don't think she meant anything pejorative by "infant program"... Just another way of saying "in it's infancy", aka "new/emerging".

No, in context it was a way of implying that the Model S's 'engineering excellence' is "somewhat debatable", without actually making the case. Whatever that means. Well, it's obvious what it means: A lack of maturity which questions MotorTrends's evaluation.

To be blunt: She says the Model S might not deserve the award. (Even if she might deny it in this literal form.)

 

[vfx]

Here's MT's reason for Engineering:

When you talk about engineering excellence, it’s a seven passenger vehicle. Five adults and two children can fit and it has an amazing amount of cargo space. It has a front trunk and a rear trunk. It’s a great driving car. There’s no penalty here. It’s the fastest American built sedan based on our numbers. 0-60 in under 4 seconds for the signature Performance model and it also handles really well. And on top of it, it has this fantastic electric technology. Well you look at the criteria, it’s all of these that hit it out of the park.

Why Tesla Cleantech News and Analysis

 

[woof]

These types of issues very rarely crop up with mature car companies.

Have to disagree there. When the 2005 Acura RL came out, it was a technological marvel, and had a ton of "first model year" issues. I had the XM Radio subsystem replaced 5 (yes 5!) times for various software bugs and glitches. The RL was recalled twice, and the nav system would crash at least once a month. However, I loved that car, even moved into the 2008 RL when my lease was up. Amazing the differences the 2008 had after 3 years of bug fixes in what was essentially the same car. That experience showed me "beta testing" a car can be fun, and has prepared me for driving the BMW ActiveE as a real beta tester. The troubles reported against the Model S so far are minimal compared to those reported against the ActiveE (which, admittedly is a beta car).

So yes, mature car companies do have these type of issues, and many more.

 

[Arnold Panz]

I think the whole point, for me, is given her husband's past situation with Tesla, the author should have found a more impartial person to quote, or if he wanted to quote her, provided a standard disclaimer or explanation about her possible bias w/r/t Tesla. The whole point of such disclosures is that it puts in context a quote from someone and the reader has the necessary information to give the quote its proper weight and credence.

Her quote might be totally fine (or not), but the point is that a typical reader would want to know what happened to her husband and how it might affect her feelings about Tesla before giving credence to her quote, and if that's the case then they should have erred on the side of disclosure.

 

[Dave EV]

Have to disagree there.

My point was - aside from the technical issues (which may or may not be in-line with other cars - I know that I'd certainly be less willing to be a "beta" tester for Acura than Tesla) - there are features which are completely missing with no ETA which are hyped.

A couple examples:

1. Auto extending door handles.
2. Jump seats.
3. Charge timers.

Look - I completely understand why Tesla is pushing forward - getting a car into production is HARD. But that doesn't mean that describing the Model S as being in it's infancy is not accurate.

 

[strider]

I don't think she meant anything pejorative by "infant program"... Just another way of saying "in it's infancy", aka "new/emerging".

But the implication of her message is that somewhere there is an EV program that is not in its infancy and to that I say, please show it to me. The Leaf is still in its infancy - witness battery degradation problems, optimistic range estimates, etc. Just because it's coming from a "mature" car company doesn't mean they know anything about EVs and can do anything better than an upstart. ALL EVs on the market today are infant programs. I hope that the reporter took her statements out of context or asked an odd question as the way it appears in the article it's definitely a backhanded comment.

The other way to look at her statement was that an ICE should have won since it's an established technology. Well, duh. Like others it just hit me the wrong way, like she'd rather see an ICE win than Tesla. My wife and I both loved her in WKTEC and ROTEC but lately it seems like she's been in a dark place. I'll try to listen to she and Evan's podcast.

 

[Norbert]

1. Auto extending door handles.
2. Jump seats.
3. Charge timers.

Those of us (on this forum) who are interested in these details already know that. You might as well mention remotely controlled pre-heating and pre-cooling. Jump seats are apparently a supplier issue, and the others are resolvable by software updates, AFAIK.

Look - I completely understand why Tesla is pushing forward - getting a car into production is HARD. But that doesn't mean that describing the Model S as being in it's infancy is not accurate.

The point in question is not the accuracy. Imagine there is an interview about an actress receiving an Oscar the day before, and some movie expert (who is usually flirting with competing actresses) says nothing much more than "that's a huge achievement, but I think she is old". And then you defend that by saying "yeah, but she really *is* old, and she has wrinkles to prove it". While others say she is the best actress in the world.

 

[JRP3]

My wife and I both loved her in WKTEC and ROTEC but lately it seems like she's been in a dark place.

I think she'd be amused that we are 4 pages deep discussing a single quote from her. She does seem to have a different view than many of us regarding what is needed for EV's to take hold and she may have some personal animosity against Tesla but I can't say I'd characterize anything about her as "dark". She seems to want cheap EV's using a single standard connector with little regard for fast charging, the exact opposite of Tesla. I think we first need expensive, desirable EV's before we get to the less expensive ones, that having a single charge connector is not yet a big deal, and that fast charging is important for perception, if not so much for actual use.

 

[brianman]

She seems to want cheap EV's using a single standard connector with little regard for fast charging, the exact opposite of Tesla.

Knowing the challenges (past, present, and future) of EV social adoption by the mainstream, in the face of that the best answer is something like "That's great for Tesla. It's great for EVs. I want to see ___, but that takes nothing away from the accomplishment of the Tesla team with the Model S."

That's it. Simple, sweet. Your point is made, nobody upset.

Sometimes it's best to hold back a little in public commentary: Think Romney regarding London Olympics. (IMO) His facts were right, his manners were the problem.

 

[DrComputer]

After speaking with Chelsea many times at several events, as many people here have said she does have a specific perspective on how she thinks the EV movement should progress. Only history will show us if her views are correct or Elon had it right. Either way, I tend to agree more with Elon's approach. The simple thing that I think she sometimes overlooks is that "perception is reality" for most of the car buying public. Just like it didn't work for Ross Perot, you can't keep showing people graphs and charts telling them that the average person only drives 32 miles per day and that they only need an electric car that can travel 75 miles on a charge. The reality is people currently drive ICE cars that can get 300+ miles on a tank of gas. Since you can't easily change people's perception of the limitation, I agree with Tesla's stance of meeting their perception with a reality of a car than can go 300 miles on a charge and fill up quickly at a SuperCharger station. Is it a waste of time for Tesla to invest money in such an infrastructure? Chelsea says it is. On paper it probably is a bad investment. But, if it can shift the perception that EV's can never compete with ICE cars then I think the investment will pay off in the end by changing the perception to meet reality.

 

[Arnold Panz]

The reality is people currently drive ICE cars that can get 300+ miles on a tank of gas. Since you can't easily change people's perception of the limitation, I agree with Tesla's stance of meeting their perception with a reality of a car than can go 300 miles on a charge and fill up quickly at a SuperCharger station.

This is, by far, the biggest selling point when I talk to people about the car. Once I say "300 miles" for the range, the whole tenor of the conversation changes and people are absolutely blown away that it gets that kind of range. Not having to think about or worry that you're going to run out of battery, even if it would rarely happen, is peace of mind that is needed to get this disruptive technology to be accepted with the wider public.