Glare from side repeaters in blind spot camera?

[Durzel]

The chrome trims do fit but you have a sort of double lip. Looks OK though if you want a chrome finish. Honestly, the repair isn't that difficult if you take your time and as long as you have a way to make a hole in the housing which won't destroy the innards!

Unfortunately I don't have a suitable drill that would limit the depth of the bit. I can pretty much guarantee if I tried to do it with a hand drill that I'd go straight through and drill the PCB. I do have a Dremel, but again - handheld and likely to pierce deeper than I intended.

Perhaps someone could consider offering it as a service?

 

[jabloomf1230]

do have a Dremel, but again - handheld and likely to pierce deeper than I intended

My Dremel has an adjustable black plastic jig attachment that limits drill depth. I'd carefully wrap and mount the repeater unit in a vice and the drill incrementally.

 

[Durzel]

I've been quoted a 7-10 day lead time on the -D parts.

I've pulled the trigger on the revised estimate with the -D parts. I don't particularly want to spend £290, but Tesla are making it clear that they're not doing it under warranty, and I don't have the tools to do a job of it myself without feeling like I'll mess it up. Would rather just try selling the unmolested cameras on eBay or something to try and recoup some costs.

Don't like admitting defeat, but I also don't want to have to turn the "blind spot" feature on and off depending on the time of day.

 

[andaconda]

After contacting Service today this is the message I got in return.

Needless to say I canceled that appointment. I told them I could live with it for that price!

 

[Seminole]

Unfortunately, except for some rare cases, the only ones being replaced under warranty seem to be situations where one does it and one does not. It's much harder to claim they are operating as normal when each side is different.

 

[Tronguy]

Thing is.. Tesla is Just Asking For A Class Action Lawsuit.
Let's get this straight:

1. There are via holes in the circuit board.
2. They leak light from the turn signal into the camera casing.
3. There are transparent portions of the circuit board on the side opposite the via holes that have no copper between the outside surface of the circuit board and the interior of the camera casing that allows light to leak through.

I'm a EE. I happen to, from time to time, design circuit boards, and not as a hobby. Filling via holes is an option when one sends the board out for fab. Putting copper on various layers in various places is what the layout guy does before sending the board out for fab.
Nobody "designed" it, in the sense of, "I designed this to do "X"". Frankly, they screwed up and made a bad design.
It's not a component defect, in the sense of, "This capacitor came from a bad batch from our vendor. We need to replace those, since they're going to fail." It's a defect in the design. Literally.
Now, it may have been Tesla's subcontractor who did the screw-up. Stuff happens. And, when you've got a zillion of the things out there and either (a) nobody noticed (ha!) or (b) more likely, nobody was likely using the repeaters in a case that Tesla's engineers thought would show up rarely and was therefore not worth fixing. Now we got the cameras where we can see them and the design defect is obvious. And, as I and others have mentioned before, this may interfere with FSD. It certainly does interfere with our use of the camera with the turn signals on at night.
Let this proceed to trial with discovery, end up in front of a judge and actual, non-Tesla experts, and Tesla will go down in flames.
We're probably all under the arbitration clause. But no arbiter would have problems with the above and which way to go. And, now that I think of it, isn't there some company that does robo-file-arbitration, that turns the usual, "Arbritation means that class actions are impossible, and they're weighted towards the company" stuff on its head? And, with the robo-file, ends up costing the company on the other end more than they'd pay in a normal class action in front of a judge.
Methinks that Tesla should stop playing dodge-'em and do the fix. Yes, it's money. No, it's not that huge.
Maybe somebody should tweet this whole business to Musk and point out the idiocy in the company's stance. How does one go about this, anyway?

 

[MP3Mike]

Let this proceed to trial with discovery, end up in front of a judge and actual, non-Tesla experts, and Tesla will go down in flames.

Don't be so sure. Take a look at the suit against Toyota for the shrinking gas tank: Appeals Court Denies Prius Fuel Tank Class Action Lawsuit

Plaintiffs Henry and Veronica Troup alleged in the class action lawsuit that the Prius models were manufactured with a flexible fuel bladder rather than the standard steel or plastic gas tank, which causes the bladder to shrink in cold weather and reduce the amount of gas the tank can hold by nearly half the advertised capacity. The plaintiffs alleged Toyota had failed to meet standards for express warranty, but the 9th Circuit ruled that the basic warranty protected buyers from “defects in materials or workmanship” and not design choices.

It seems like it sets a precedent that "design choices" are not covered under the warranty...

 

[Durzel]

Yeah, let's be realistic.

Until Tesla released the blind spot feature, this was basically a non-issue. Some people might have noticed it if they left the camera view on all of the time, but I don't recall seeing anyone talking about it until post-blind spot release. Now people are saying cars need to be recalled, etc.

There have been people questioning how it might affect FSD, and surmising that abortive automated lane changes while on AP might be down to blown out camera feeds. Whilst that's eminently possible, I don't think it has been proven and if people are talking about taking Tesla to court then they'd have to be able to technically prove that the problem impacts paid-for functionality to have any chance of winning I think. That is, I think, not a simple task.

I rolled the dice trying to get mine replaced under warranty, but lost the bet. I still want to get them replaced, though, because the amber blowout is extremely distracting at night, beyond being useless as a blind spot feed. Also the idea that there is a feature in the car that I can't use properly because of deficient hardware would niggle me constantly.

 

[STS-134]

There have been people questioning how it might affect FSD, and surmising that abortive automated lane changes while on AP might be down to blown out camera feeds. Whilst that's eminently possible, I don't think it has been proven and if people are talking about taking Tesla to court then they'd have to be able to technically prove that the problem impacts paid-for functionality to have any chance of winning I think. That is, I think, not a simple task.

If FSD cannot even handle a small amount of glare from a turn signal (which disappears completely when the turn signal is off), then there's absolutely no way it's ever going to be able to handle...oh I don't know, headlights shining into the cameras, landscaping lights aimed improperly, etc. If FSD cannot even handle this, then it can't ever drive the vehicle autonomously. That said, the glare is annoying out of the corner of my eye in the display at night, but it's absolutely not a safety issue. IMHO, it's actually a safety issue to be looking at the lower left corner of the display in the first place when you're trying to change lanes.

 

[jabloomf1230]

The faulty repeater units do function correctly between dawn and dusk. The vast majority of driving occurs between 0700 and 1900 hours. In a location like either Atlanta or LA, most driving occurs year around between dawn and dusk. However in places like Montreal and Seattle in winter more driving is done when the repeaters are nonfunctional. It seems like Tesla could do a limited warranty repair in northern climes instead of replacing every repeater unit.

 

[GlmnAlyAirCar]

The faulty repeater units do function correctly between dawn and dusk. The vast majority of driving occurs between 0700 and 1900 hours. In a location like either Atlanta or LA, most driving occurs year around between dawn and dusk. However in places like Montreal and Seattle in winter more driving is done when the repeaters are nonfunctional. It seems like Tesla could do a limited warranty repair in northern climes instead of replacing every repeater unit.

That reminds me of the remedy for the Pentium FPU bug. How did that turn out for Intel?

 

[dolfs]

Unfortunately, except for some rare cases, the only ones being replaced under warranty seem to be situations where one does it and one does not. It's much harder to claim they are operating as normal when each side is different.

As I mentioned in my tale: Tesla is actually not acknowledging this as a warranty issue when they do it for free. They were very careful to state all the same things (as designed, etc.), but then list it as "goodwill". This, no doubt, is an attempt to avoid it being forced into a warranty issue by mass complaints pointing at any statement where they acknowledge it is a warranty issue.

 

[Tronguy]

As I mentioned in my tale: Tesla is actually not acknowledging this as a warranty issue when they do it for free. They were very careful to state all the same things (as designed, etc.), but then list it as "goodwill". This, no doubt, is an attempt to avoid it being forced into a warranty issue by mass complaints pointing at any statement where they acknowledge it is a warranty issue.

As I said above, this is "Tesla playing Dodge-'em." I strongly suspect this isn't going to end well.

 

[STS-134]

As I said above, this is "Tesla playing Dodge-'em." I strongly suspect this isn't going to end well.

What grounds would NHTSA have to force a recall? I could see this being an issue if side cameras were required, but they're not. I hope it happens because I find this defect to be annoying and I don't want to pay to fix it but I'm not sure how we get from here to there.

 

[Seminole]

What's more likely to happen than a recall is Tesla just disabling the feature. It was never there to begin with until they added it and they could argue it has no impact on FSD as the computer is smart enough to handle with the brief washout during the flashes. And you don't have anymore problems if you don't have a blind spot camera view anymore!

 

[STS-134]

Yeah, this "feature" was poorly thought out, and really only makes sense if the image is displayed on a HUD in the corner of the windshield on the side you're signaling toward. Otherwise it just makes it more dangerous to switch lanes because your eyes are looking in a direction they shouldn't be looking (at the center screen) when you're trying to change lanes. And Tesla certainly isn't about to add a HUD to their vehicles because that would increase costs.

 

[andaconda]

What's more likely to happen than a recall is Tesla just disabling the feature. It was never there to begin with until they added it and they could argue it has no impact on FSD as the computer is smart enough to handle with the brief washout during the flashes. And you don't have anymore problems if you don't have a blind spot camera view anymore!

Or only incorporate it in the newer cars with known updated cameras. W.e purchased our (old) cars knowing we didn't have the feature to begin with. JMTCW

 

[Mr. Brig]

Anyone have a link to a video showing the new cameras operating at night with the blinkers on? I'm considering an upgrade.

 

[Durzel]

Anyone have a link to a video showing the new cameras operating at night with the blinkers on? I'm considering an upgrade.

 

[M3 2018]

This is a defect in the design of the side camera parts

1. There are via holes in the circuit board.
2. They leak light from the turn signal into the camera casing.
3. There are transparent portions of the circuit board on the side opposite the via holes that have no copper between the outside surface of the circuit board and the interior of the camera casing that allows light to leak through.

It's wrong to charge us all $350ish a pop for their poor broken design.

We have had side cameras on our cars the entire time and we have had access to view them at night, it was flashing the entire time, but not worth mentioning until now. As long as the car is under warranty we should be covered. With this being a safety issue, they would even have to replace this outside of warranty. BTW - anything side mirror / blind spot related should be and is a safety issue...to think otherwise makes no sense to me.

Tesla will be reimbursing people and fixing this. They will be forced to due so. Please let us know how we can help move this.

I do think that this would (if understood by the public) have market ramifications in precepted market value of Tesla (stock). It's that big a potential safety recall with clear broken design with the camera part. I can not see this any other way, trying to but I can't. I just wish Tesla would do the right thing. Why are they making customers individually fight them on this? Oh to play Tesla dodge-'em with early adopters that have supported Tesla early on with their money.

Please fight Tesla on this, they need to do what is right for safety and reputation.