I agree with this. The abysmal reliability of the early cars drags down the entire Tesla score (shouldn't the aggregate scores be weighted by the sales volumes of the various years?). My 2016 has not had any significant problems.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I feel older cars should be lumped in with new ones when we are talking overall reliability. Most new cars from any manufacturer have very few problems in their first year. So by that stick, every manufacturer makes reliable cars. You don't really see how actually reliable a car model is until you are several years into ownership and since most people own cars for 5 years, how well those 2013 and 2014 cars are holding up is still relevant.
Like it or not, Tesla has yet to prove their long-term reliability. We won't know for a few years how much better the 2016s are holding up than a 2014 or a 2012.
EarlyAdopter
Active Member
My December 2012 built Model S had a number of issues at first, but they were all fixed by August 2013. Never had a problem again. Yet, by Consumer Reports survey, it would rank low.
My December 2014 built Model S hasn't seen a Service Center once (other than once for the Ludicrous mode upgrade). Most reliable car I've ever had.
My December 2014 built Model S hasn't seen a Service Center once (other than once for the Ludicrous mode upgrade). Most reliable car I've ever had.
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
Similar story here. After a few service visits in 2013 - most of which were for FREE UPGRADES rather than fixing something broken - our 2012 has been a very good car. It compares favorably to our 2015. I know other pleased 2012 owners. Definitely not the case that all early cars sucked.
They might (?) have been statistically worse, but a lot of individual cars are great. Of course, that is part of the problem with this type of reliability statistics - even cars with poor ratings can still have most customers be happy, because average problem rates have plummeted over the past few decades. Mist cars just don't have problems these days, so the reliability figures mean less for most customer's experience.
They might (?) have been statistically worse, but a lot of individual cars are great. Of course, that is part of the problem with this type of reliability statistics - even cars with poor ratings can still have most customers be happy, because average problem rates have plummeted over the past few decades. Mist cars just don't have problems these days, so the reliability figures mean less for most customer's experience.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
I agree, with a caveat: Tesla is unusual in having a rate of change far above competing manufacturers. The reliability metric works well for GM or Honda, and is not very informative for Tesla.
Last edited:
For what they measure it is. From what I saw last year and this year the CU reliability rating was pretty accurate.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Does it surprise you to find that any result is a perfect fit for at least someone ?
When you use the same metrics that meet a common denominator for the classes you are testing against, over time the results become more reliable and caparative. That goes for the cars Tesla was measured against. If you compare that subjectively to people you know and things you read that come to the same conslusuon you can have even more confidence in the results. There's nothing in CU's findings that surprises most people.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Data, it's there if you want to read it. No need to be insulting though ok?
CR is not treating Tesla any different than any other brand. It's funny how some try to argue how CR's method is flawed or unfair. It's just statistics. Fact is Tesla needs to work on reliability.
Krugerrand
Meow
Fact is they have worked on it and to a degree that the current rating doesn't in fact accurately describe current reliability.
brucet999
Active Member
What is "current reliability"?
Reliability data must be historical and so cannot absolutely predict quality of newest production. Reliability of this month's production can't be known for another year or two, or three.
Well said. The 2016 that seem reliable now may end up in service centers a year from now. We don't know that yet.
This score (44) is the reliability index based on the readers' survey. It is a different number than the road test score for which the Model S was ranked as the highest scoring vehicle ever and resulted in changes to the index (from what I recall). Great to drive, but not ranked by owners as the most reliable vehicle ever. No news here.
Last edited:
whitex
Well-Known Member
You could group data in many different ways, as long as you have enough data. For manufacturers that have consistently high scores that doesn't matter, however for low overall reliability sometimes breaking down the data helps buyers identify patterns. A long time ago I remember someone calculated reliability data for Hyundai cars manufactured by day and it turned out cars manufacturers on Tuesdays were twice as reliable (statistically) than ones made on any Friday. Once their manufacturing quality improved, that data wasn't useful anymore.
Reporting by smaller groupings runs into many issues. Biggest issue is sample size - not enough data even if they managed to poll all the cars. Tesla makes improvements every week, so should the stats be collected by week? How many survey respondents do you think you need per week of VIN's to get statistically meaningful results? Even if they got every VIN owner to respond, how useful is it to know that cars from first half of January are more reliable than from second half May, but less reliable than from June, but only in 2016, in 2015 it was the opposite? To illustrate problems with small sample size, I've owned 2 Model S, and my 2015 had many more service center visits than 2013 (nothing serious, but still). Based on just those 2 cars I could conclude the quality is getting worse. Annual grouping provides trend averaging. If Tesla is consistently improving quality, then their score will go up.
They rated the Tesla Model S in 2014 and 2015 "Best Car Ever". It had the highest "buy" recommendation they've ever had for two years. In fact it was one of the reasons many of us bought it during that time. Last year CU said Tesla's P90DL had the highest performance ratings of any car they have ever tested. It broke their testing methodology. I bring this up because it doesn't fit the statement "Consumer Reports almost never gives high scores to high end products." I think what happened is over time the 2012, 2013, 2014 cars started going into the shop and reported problems while at the same time Tesla started improving on their side in 2015 and 2016.
Similar threads
