Dissing Tesla Reliability

[jaguar36]

We have a difference of opinion. An annoyance it is, a failure it is not.

I guarantee that the bean counters who looked at the cost of the replacement (and its associated service costs like loaners and such) would consider it a failure. And I would guarantee that the engineers responsible consider it a failure if its gotta be replace.

But as I previously stated its not the same level of fail as if the car was undriveable.

Also, the Valet service where Tesla picks up the car and drops off a loaner is now either gone or very expensive.

 

[kort677]

Understood. In my case the nearest center is 185 miles away in Nashville, TN not a drive I'd want to take for repairs. I'll gladly concede you have the farther drive.

I'm looking forward to the day that they open up more stores and service centers within the eastern third of my state.

just to clarify, it is a bit over 250 miles R/T, my issue is that back in dec. of 2013 when I placed my order Tesla had claimed that they were opening a service center about 25 miles from where I live, two years later they are still indicating that they are opening a service center 25 miles away, I feel as if I was deceived. Years ago I passed on buying an Aston Martin because the closest service center is a 4 hour drive away and I probably would not have bought the Tesla knowing that service would be a bit of an ordeal.

 

[Max*]

I guarantee that the bean counters who looked at the cost of the replacement (and its associated service costs like loaners and such) would consider it a failure. And I would guarantee that the engineers responsible consider it a failure if its gotta be replace.

But as I previously stated its not the same level of fail as if the car was undriveable.

Also, the Valet service where Tesla picks up the car and drops off a loaner is now either gone or very expensive.

I disagree with the bolded.

If the bean counters thought that the constant replacements cost more than actually fixing the problem (i.e. developing a drivetrain that doesn't need to be fixed -- which costs engineering $$, testing $$, etc.), it would've been done.

What's the point of consistently paying more to patch a problem than to fix it outright? They probably see it as a wash, or it's not as big of a deal as everyone on TMC makes it out to be (if it's only 1-2% of the cars on the road with failure, it might be cheaper to refurbish them, then to redesign the drivetrain).

 

[jaguar36]

I disagree with the bolded.

If the bean counters thought that the constant replacements cost more than actually fixing the problem (i.e. developing a drivetrain that doesn't need to be fixed -- which costs engineering $$, testing $$, etc.), it would've been done.

What's the point of consistently paying more to patch a problem than to fix it outright? They probably see it as a wash, or it's not as big of a deal as everyone on TMC makes it out to be (if it's only 1-2% of the cars on the road with failure, it might be cheaper to refurbish them, then to redesign the drivetrain).

First off, I suspect it has been done, or is being done. Even if the cost isn't higher than the cost to develop a fix, its still a huge cost that directly impacts the bottom line, and nobody is going to be happy with.

 

[AB4EJ]

Tesla is very engineering driven (reminds me of my previous employer, Mercedes). The engineers will push for improvements; they want to make the best car possible, and will not be happy with failing drive motors (or anything else). In an engineering driven company, the engineers tend to have priority over the bean counters. Not only that, but management will be looking at warranty costs, and pushing the organization to improve vehicle reliability.

What I think may be going on is this: Tesla is still a relatively small company, and they are simultaneously building the S, developing the next MS face-lift, rolling out the X, and developing the 3. Engineering effort is being split across these projects, each of which is challenging. This the same for logistics, manufacturing, production control, etc. I have worked in this type of environment (for over 15 years), and it can be very tough to work in - you can have issues with team member burn-out. So you can sometimes see how this can translate into product problems. Good companies overcome these kinds of problems, but it takes time.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

I guarantee that the bean counters who looked at the cost of the replacement (and its associated service costs like loaners and such) would consider it a failure. And I would guarantee that the engineers responsible consider it a failure if its gotta be replace.

But as I previously stated its not the same level of fail as if the car was undriveable.

Also, the Valet service where Tesla picks up the car and drops off a loaner is now either gone or very expensive.

DUs have been replaced out of a sense of expediency, however Tesla is rolling out field repairs for some of these noise issues. DU replacements will hopefully become a thing of the past and in favor of a couple of hours of service time. Not unlike a tune-up.

 

[jaguar36]

Not unlike a tune-up.

Awesome, so we'll be back to the equivalent of a 1970s ICE!

 

[Max*]

Awesome, so we'll be back to the equivalent of a 1970s ICE!

You can work on a 1970s ICE yourself, not so much with a Tesla...

 

[kort677]

DUs have been replaced out of a sense of expediency,

what is your source of your claim? in my opinion the reason they are swapping the units out is because they haven't been able to engineer a viable solution.

 

[green1]

what is your source of your claim? in my opinion the reason they are swapping the units out is because they haven't been able to engineer a viable solution.

Tesla stated otherwise, they say it just needs a shim, but that the service centres don't generally do that sort of work, so instead they swap the unit, then send the old one back to get shimmed. Then they give your old one, now fixed, to the next person who needs one (hence why they usually get a re-manufactured one, if Tesla hadn't found a way to fix them, they'd have to be handing out new ones)

 

[Max*]

Tesla stated otherwise, they say it just needs a shim, but that the service centres don't generally do that sort of work, so instead they swap the unit, then send the old one back to get shimmed. Then they give your old one, now fixed, to the next person who needs one (hence why they usually get a re-manufactured one, if Tesla hadn't found a way to fix them, they'd have to be handing out new ones)

That doesn't mean it's not a design flaw.

 

[green1]

That doesn't mean it's not a design flaw.

Where in that quote did I say it wasn't?

I fully admit that Tesla hasn't made a perfect car. They've made one that is of average reliability, with some parts that fail on some cars. Nobody is denying this.

 

[Max*]

they haven't been able to engineer a viable solution.

if Tesla hadn't found a way to fix them, they'd have to be handing out new ones

That doesn't mean it's not a design flaw.

Where in that quote did I say it wasn't?

I was just adding to the train of thought above. I agree with kort677, it's a design flaw with no engineered solution. A patch (refurbishment, whatever you want to call it), is not a solution, it's a kludge. Hence it's a design flaw.

 

[green1]

curious, what failure rate is deemed acceptable? it does not appear that Tesla has had a significant failure rate or we would see high warranty costs on Tesla's financials, and more than the small handful of people reporting it.

 

[Max*]

curious, what failure rate is deemed acceptable? it does not appear that Tesla has had a significant failure rate or we would see high warranty costs on Tesla's financials, and more than the small handful of people reporting it.

Are you asking me? I already answered that a few posts up:

I disagree with the bolded.

If the bean counters thought that the constant replacements cost more than actually fixing the problem (i.e. developing a drivetrain that doesn't need to be fixed -- which costs engineering $$, testing $$, etc.), it would've been done.

What's the point of consistently paying more to patch a problem than to fix it outright? They probably see it as a wash, or it's not as big of a deal as everyone on TMC makes it out to be (if it's only 1-2% of the cars on the road with failure, it might be cheaper to refurbish them, then to redesign the drivetrain).

 

[AmpedRealtor]

what is your source of your claim? in my opinion the reason they are swapping the units out is because they haven't been able to engineer a viable solution.

Referencing exactly what Elon has said a number of times, especially what he said during an earnings call several quarters ago.

- - - Updated - - -

I was just adding to the train of thought above. I agree with kort677, it's a design flaw with no engineered solution. A patch (refurbishment, whatever you want to call it), is not a solution, it's a kludge. Hence it's a design flaw.

What is a patch/repair if it isn't an "engineered solution"? Obviously a repair would be designed by the engineers to address the issue.

 

[Max*]

What is a patch/repair if it isn't an "engineered solution"? Obviously a repair would be designed by the engineers to address the issue.

It's not a solution to the underlying problem.

If my computer is broken, and I'm holding it together by a piece of duct tape, that's an engineered solution (I'm an engineer). But that doesn't fix the underlying problem of <fill in the blank>.

 

[islandbayy]

Tesla stated otherwise, they say it just needs a shim, but that the service centres don't generally do that sort of work, so instead they swap the unit, then send the old one back to get shimmed. Then they give your old one, now fixed, to the next person who needs one (hence why they usually get a re-manufactured one, if Tesla hadn't found a way to fix them, they'd have to be handing out new ones)

On the contrary, I've gotten the shims, and it's done at the service center, and it did not fix anything. Drive unit 1, clunked so badly that it echoed between houses on my street when I backed into my driveway (I have it on video/audio). Drive unit 2, developed the milling noise before eventually developing the clunk as well right before it was replaced. Milling noise so loud neighbors could hear it INSIDE their homes as I drove by.
I'm about 8,000 miles into drive unit #3, this one appears to have been a new unit, ending in a "P" for the revision. It is now starting to Clunk as well, much how my original one was. Not enough (based on experience) that Tesla will do anything, so for now, it's just a passing thought when I visit the service center next time.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

It's not a solution to the underlying problem.

If my computer is broken, and I'm holding it together by a piece of duct tape, that's an engineered solution (I'm an engineer). But that doesn't fix the underlying problem of <fill in the blank>.

So if the underlying problem is a seal around the motor bearings becoming warped and the solution is to replace the part with an updated part, that is not an adequate solution? I mention this specifically because this is what my service center told me about 6 months ago.

 

[Max*]

So if the underlying problem is a seal around the motor bearings becoming warped and the solution is to replace the part with an updated part, that is not an adequate solution? I mention this specifically because this is what my service center told me about 6 months ago.

IF that's what's really happening, that's an engineered solution.

BUT from what I've read here (I personally am at ~10k miles, and no DU issues), that the new repair doesn't work. So then you never fixed the underlying problem, and are patching a bad part with a mediocre part (the mediocre part being upgraded).

But that's still not a solution to fix the underlying problem.