Consumer Reports gives the Model S a low reliability rating "44" out of a 100?

[msnow]

And also, they somehow got most of the early cars to fail their drive units...

What can we all do in this post truth wilderness?!?!?

CR also does cross validation on these surveys on multiple levels. They don't reveal their exact validation techniques for obvious reasons but they do say, contrary to what a few have said upthread, that the more likely scenario is that the car manufacturer would attempt to "stuff the ballot box" with positive responses from their employees. Also, if I recall correctly a huge percentage of the respondents (95%?) said Tesla service was great and that they would buy another one. Not something you would say if you were trying to destroy Tesla.

Re the post truth, conspiracy theorists all you can do is call them out to prove it or just ignore everything they say and hope others will do the same.

 

[whitex]

you have one of those problematic early editions. my first one was 33797 and had many issues, my late '15 has not been back yet.

My first '13 vin 26xxx had no issues for almost 2 years, '15 vin 84xxx had a few in first 6 months, so opposite experience. It tells us nothing really, not statistically relevant. What is needed is more cars to provide an average, and that is what CR is providing.

And yes, issues were never critical, Tesla took care of everything and I've experienced nothing but great service, which is a big reason why I ordered a third one.

 

[SteveG3]

CR also does cross validation on these surveys on multiple levels. They don't reveal their exact validation techniques for obvious reasons but they do say, contrary to what a few have said upthread, that the more likely scenario is that the car manufacturer would attempt to "stuff the ballot box" with positive responses from their employees. Also, if I recall correctly a huge percentage of the respondents (95%?) said Tesla service was great and that they would buy another one. Not something you would say if you were trying to destroy Tesla.

Re the post truth, conspiracy theorists all you can do is call them out to prove it or just ignore everything they say and hope others will do the same.

actually, I emailed one of the senior CR people in their vehicle department a couple of years ago about the possibility of their survey results on the Model S being targeted for this kind of manipulation. he wrote me back to hear more, including my suggestions on how to avoid this. while he didn't explicitly say that CR doesn't have any manner in which they validate the survey results or the validity that reviews are from actual owners of the vehicle in question, he wrote nothing to indicate either is the case as we discussed these issues. he did not indicate whether any new security measures would be added to their surveying process.

I don't doubt that a middling reliability score is accurate for the Model S when looking at 2012-2016, but I'd really like to see CR incorporate some means of validating that reliability submissions are only from Tesla owners. Not only is Tesla regularly smeared in the media, the small number of Tesla's on the road compared to nearly all other vehicles make such a potential skewing of the data very very easy.

 

[msnow]

actually, I emailed one of the senior CR people in their vehicle department a couple of years ago about the possibility of their survey results on the Model S being targeted for this kind of manipulation. he wrote me back to hear more, including my suggestions on how to avoid this. while he didn't explicitly say that CR doesn't have any manner in which they validate the survey results or the validity that reviews are from actual owners of the vehicle in question, he wrote nothing to indicate either is the case as we discussed these issues. he did not indicate whether any new security measures would be added to their surveying process.

I don't doubt that a middling reliability score is accurate for the Model S when looking at 2012-2016, but I'd really like to see CR incorporate some means of validating that reliability submissions are only from Tesla owners. Not only is Tesla regularly smeared in the media, the small number of Tesla's on the road compared to nearly all other vehicles make such a potential skewing of the data very very easy.

Steve, I might not have been clear enough. They actually publish a couple of different FAQ's on their methodology (you can find them online) regarding reliability, validation and methods. Some are very vague just like your contact but they definitely say they have ways to do this. They've been doing it with millions of cars per year for many years to refine it.

 

[SteveG3]

Steve, I might not have been clear enough. They actually publish a couple of different FAQ's on their methodology (you can find them online) regarding reliability, validation and methods. Some are very vague just like your contact but they definitely say they have ways to do this. They've been doing it with millions of cars per year for many years to refine it.

yes, they do make a couple of vague comments on this in the Q&A. clearly they have thought about this and taken some measures to have some capacity to detect game playing. they express confidence that their results have never varied from other sources of data to the point of raising a red flag when they've compared data. they also say that someone stuffing the ballot is a hypothetical weakness in their system, but that they have methods they do not want to publicly disclose that they are confident no one has defeated.

honestly, on the one hand, given the $8 billion or so betting on the stock going down in price (and Jim Cramer's assertions about basic hedge fund techniques,

), the kind of nonsense the recent Bloomberg article exposed (apparently from the fossil fuel industry), and the fact that some guy in Australia filed something like 30 claims of failed suspensions with the NHTSA based on his claimed reading of salvage photos of Teslas, I'd kind of be surprised if no one spent $5-10K to actually try this. on the other hand, given that the Model S's rating seems about right, it doesn't seem like test results have been materially skewed even if such an attempt was made.

ps... anyone know if there's a way of posting a link to a video with the link showing but not the video itself?

 

[CalBlue 85D]

MS still has the highest CR road test score ever and owners rate it highly for satisfaction. Great to drive, but at the same time not ranked by owners as the most reliable vehicle ever. No news here.

 

[u00mem9]

Don't you find it ironic that some of you are doing exactly what you are accusing others of doing in your conspiracy theory?

You are aware of the documented issues especially with the early cars, and you are (now) aware of the effort CR goes to in analyzing the data they receive. Several have even agreed that the assessment seems correct for tesla reliability.

But in the next breath, there is more talk about how this might be a grand strategy to trick you by big oil or whatever. You are spreading completely baseless narratives that are essentially just speculation. The ONLY reason is that the data presented by CR is conflicting with what you wish were the case. Please, knock it off.

I'll try one more thing to get some of you to open your minds a little, and then I'm out: Many of you here are environmentally conscious and strong proponents of changing human actions to reduce climate change. What do you think when you see skeptics of climate change jumping through hoops and making all kinds of speculative arguments to justify their rigid position?

That's exactly how desperate some of these "but, but, maybe the hedge fund bogey man responded to the survey, and that way I can hang onto my preferred worldview that Tesla is perfect" responses look from where I'm sitting.

Please stop being part of the very problem you are complaining about.

 

[jbcarioca]

For decades CR has been consistent and, in statistical terms, appeared to be both valid and reliable. That said, to more complex the product tested and the more unconventional the product tested, the less the actual utility of their processes.

For decades we all knew their reviews of Porsche, even Mustang and Camaro, would be less useful to potential buyers than would be if the comparison were between competing minivans, for example. So, where does Tesla fit in?

Tesla is anamolous in so many ways that it broke all the CR paradigms. First it was the "best car ever tested" then the Model X was the "least reliable". These extremes are entirely understandable once we consider who CR are, and how they approach testing and surveys.

CR testing is mostly about statistical comparisons of performance, as in " how much damage does the high spin cycle cause for delicate clothing". By the numbers the Tesla Model S blew away the competition, except for interior space. As for missing handles to help Ingress/egress, adequate interior storage and all those crucial minivan attributes, even CR's normallly phlegmatic testers were overwhelmed.

CR reliability data makes no material distinction between problems identified and fixed remotely by a manufacturer and any other problem. They make little disntion between a dashboard squeak and a transmission failure. A driveline replacement made prior to failure rates the same as one that left the driver stranded. If there was a free loaner car during repairs, doesn't count. Then, intention to buy another, and owner satisfaction does count, but only completely separate from the JDPower/CR style, Things Gone Wrong Metric.

Nobody needs to game the CR system to produce these results. They only need to ignore the metrics actual owners value when assessing their own satisfaction. CR, in my opinion, is quite honest, but they are limited. So what?

For my part I am a loyal CR devotee for refrigerators, washing machines, and other appliances. So, also, for mobile telephone service providers, soap powders and so on. Otherwise, even for smartphones, much less cars, I would not dream of making a decision based on either positive of negative feedback from them.

I sympathize with the dilemma presented to CR, and others, by Tesla. Traditional paradigms are breaking...

 

[kort677]

My first '13 vin 26xxx had no issues for almost 2 years, '15 vin 84xxx had a few in first 6 months, so opposite experience. It tells us nothing really, not statistically relevant. What is needed is more cars to provide an average, and that is what CR is providing.

And yes, issues were never critical, Tesla took care of everything and I've experienced nothing but great service, which is a big reason why I ordered a third one.

2 of my issues were critical, one was so bad they sent a flat bed immediately

 

[Aieukl378]

Yes and here, I fixed this for you.

Your "say it enough times and it's true" strategy doesn't work here. Go spread your mis information somewhere else.

 

[Aieukl378]

CR would never know - you sign up for the magazine or online account, when the surveys come out - you tell them you have a Tesla and it sucks - 100 replies - $25 each - a very cheap smear campaign. CR would never know you weren't a real Tesla owner.

Easy Peasy

You're right, and this is not conspiracy theory stuff at all. For instance, it's well documented that Amazon sellers can purchase positive or negative reviews e.g. Amazon sues 1,114 people offering fake product reviews and this is Amazon with deep pockets and whole departments that investigate product review fraud...and it still happens all the time. CR is tiny in comparison. There is nothing to stop me right now from enlisting Fiver to take out a few hundred subscriptions to CR and take the CR survey. And I'm just one person...not a deep pocketed highly motivated corporate operative.

Again, I'm not saying this happened nor early Teslas did or did not have some problems but these reviews/ratings warrant looking at with a critical eye.

 

[kort677]

Like almost anything else you find on the internet the value of the info corresponds directly to what you've paid for it.
nothing

 

[msnow]

Your "say it enough times and it's true" strategy doesn't work here. Go spread your mis information somewhere else.

I provided facts you provided wild speculation. Much of your "theories" have already been considered and addressed by the publisher. Have you read them?

 

[Aieukl378]

I provided facts you provided wild speculation. Much of your "theories" have already been considered and addressed by the publisher. Have you read them?

Sorry...not entering your world of crazy...bye.

 

[supratachophobia]

CR would never know - you sign up for the magazine or online account, when the surveys come out - you tell them you have a Tesla and it sucks - 100 replies - $25 each - a very cheap smear campaign. CR would never know you weren't a real Tesla owner.

Easy Peasy

Far more plausible....

 

[supratachophobia]

And also, they somehow got most of the early cars to fail their drive units...

What can we all do in this post truth wilderness?!?!?

Ehhh, drive units were actually a real problem. But I can surmise there are several reasons why they are not so much anymore:

1. 20 or so revisions to the old large units (this includes the possibility of a non-conductive material used for the bearings to prevent pitting through electrolosys)
2. New smaller design drive units
3. Slightly dialed down power/remaps acceleration curve to RWD vehicles
4. Dual motor cars take stress from single motor drive-train and split it between two units

 

[msnow]

Ehhh, drive units were actually a real problem. But I can surmise there are several reasons why they are not so much anymore:

1. 20 or so revisions to the old large units (this includes the possibility of a non-conductive material used for the bearings to prevent pitting through electrolosys)
2. New smaller design drive units
3. Slightly dialed down power/remaps acceleration curve to RWD vehicles
4. Dual motor cars take stress from single motor drive-train and split it between two units

I took his response as sarcastic. If you look at his previous responses he's saying these were real (not made up) issues at that time.

 

[u00mem9]

I have no doubt the new units are better (I sure hope so because I have a rwd that uses the original larger drive)

But that improvement will be shown in CR reports going forward. That is the system...all automakers wish they could forget some mistakes made a few years ago that have since been fixed, but they usually can be clearly identified from the data. i.e. Full model change between 2009 and 2010 and all the transmission data changes from black circle to half red...you know the 2010 solution worked.

I'm hopeful the improvements tesla has made will show up soon.

I'd also like to point out that if Tesla thought some mass conspiracy was misleading potential buyers, they can simply share data from the entire production history of model S. They aren't going to do that, because it would probably scare us to death! Lol

I think lobster was just trolling us. If not, the cognition force was not strong with that one.

 

[Aieukl378]

I have no doubt the new units are better (I sure hope so because I have a rwd that uses the original larger drive)

But that improvement will be shown in CR reports going forward. That is the system...all automakers wish they could forget some mistakes made a few years ago that have since been fixed, but they usually can be clearly identified from the data. i.e. Full model change between 2009 and 2010 and all the transmission data changes from black circle to half red...you know the 2010 solution worked.

I'm hopeful the improvements tesla has made will show up soon.

I'd also like to point out that if Tesla thought some mass conspiracy was misleading potential buyers, they can simply share data from the entire production history of model S. They aren't going to do that, because it would probably scare us to death! Lol

I think lobster was just trolling us. If not, the cognition force was not strong with that one.

If you and your partner in crime read the actual words(basic reading skills are a level 1 Padawan cognition requirement btw) in my posts you would find my opinion is objective and pretty much the opposite of trolling.

 

[msnow]

If you and your partner in crime read the actual words(basic reading skills are a level 1 Padawan cognition requirement btw) in my posts you would find my opinion is objective and pretty much the opposite of trolling.

As a newbie I can understand why you don't want to accept the CR data. You somehow think it devalues your investment and you only want to hear positive news (pretty flowers and birds chirping). Rest assured that all of us here that disagree with you understand that the review was a snapshot of owners issues at that time and that much has been improved since. As best we can we are dealing with facts here not wild speculation or conspiracy theories.