Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Model S Accident/Fire

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Mighty negative. Welcome to the forum and your 12th post.

You will probably find people here love their Tesla's and this 'accident' is old news at this point.

Like I said before, if it's really a freak accident, there's no point. If it's just uncommon, I'd rather see one less S totaled every year or few via a modified module design.

I don't think pointing out that it may be possible to improve the battery module design is negative, but to each their own...

I imagine that once I get one, in a year or so, assuming I can get something more concrete from sales or ownership about the battery warranty than I have so far, I'll probably complain about the interface, tire wear, pano roof, and a few other things too.

At that point I guess I'll be the Hitler, or at least Saddam, of teslamotorclub. :love:
 
Like I said before, if it's truly a freak accident, then there's no need to design for it and it won't happen for another decade or few. But if it's just an uncommon accident, then it's probably worthwhile to design for it.
It was an object beefy enough to be able to penetrate the pack, small enough to fit under the front bumper, but shaped in a way that while passing under the car part of it was hit, which rotated the longer part of the object up and into the pack. I'm imagining an "L" shape or modified "C" shape, such that the shorter section is pointing up with the longer section pointing towards the oncoming vehicle. As it passes under the car the short section gets struck, which causes the object to pivot up and the longer section jam into the pack. A slightly larger object would hit the bumper or get caught further forward under the frunk area, a slightly smaller object would just pass under the vehicle. Unless the object is something that is regularly dumped on the road in just the right position, it's a freak accident.
 
Yes that would be a BIG no. There is nothing wrong with the design.

I suspect you're right, and certainly hope so. But you have zero grounds to make such a matter or fact declaration. And it would be imprudent for Tesla to do so. I hope they use this incident to investigate the design, consider potential improvements and, if it is found that there are any practical changes that can be made for little or no increase in cost, then it would behoove them to do so. It's magical thinking to think that everything is perfect on this vehicle and the difference between a supporter and a mindless fanboy is the ability to recognize the difference.

If I'm betting, I'm betting with you that ultimately no changes will be found to be necessary. But I hope that the geniuses at Tesla take a cold hard look at this incident, and look at it like an opportunity to make good into great if they can find a way to do so.
 
I'm sure this has been said 1,000 times already but...here is my non-scientific two cents that probably nobody is going to care about.

The cars are already built nearly like tanks but remember ...even tanks all have SOME level of vulnerability. There are "tank killers". I agree that you cannot design for every possible threat that may present itself.

On the other hand, I also believe the brilliant minds at Tesla understand all too well that when you are putting forward new and disruptive technology, you have to be better than, not simply as good as entrenched traditional technologies and business models. I think Tesla has done much to show that they ARE better, not just what they say but what they have done and what they continue to do. I would also put money on it that they will not just sit by without giving serious thought to the question "is there more we can reasonably do now". I don't think these people ever stop thinking about continuous quality improvement.

I just look at the handling of this car and the fact that a nearly 5,000 lb curb weight vehicle stops on a dime. It stops better than our Prius!!! There is some awesome engineering in this vehicle. I am reminded of this every day. I have been able to react instantly in numerous situations to avoid a potential crash due to nut jobs doing dumb things (like pulling a u-turn from a curb in front of me [responsiveness], making a left turn in front of me when I was already in the intersection [braking]). Sometimes I think the Model S came secretly equipped with the "Cloak of Invisibility". I wonder if I could have pulled it off (not the cloak, the avoidance) with the other car.

So how do you balance the "perception" of this "vulnerability" that is getting all the attention now when the bigger picture of the masterful engineering of this vehicle is being taken for granted because the Model S generally does it all with such grace. Not an easy task.

Sure when the news first broke I was a little apprehensive and confused because I already knew somebody personally who had been presented with a really substantial piece of road debris and no opportunity to avoid it (see Dr. Computer's post). His Model S battery pack was dented and there was some damage in the front that was repaired but it all checked out fine. His friend traveling with him in a roadster had essentially the whole bottom end torn out and no fire there either.

There have, unfortunately, already been a number of really serious other accidents involving Teslas. I notice it's the other car that seems to fare much worse than the Teslas. I saw a Model S one day at side of the road with the entire frunk crumple zone having been "used" during some impact. No fire there either.

I also look at this in terms of what I, as Model S owner/driver can learn from this that is particularly useful. For one thing, knowing the appropriate actions by the early responders could come in handy. First, cool it down with lots and lots of water. As I understand it, battery fires take a lot to cool them down. I took note of Elon's words in his response. I had read the "early responder's guide" once out of curiosity but it obviously didn't stick with me. When I read the fire department report that had been posted online prior to Elon's reponse, I didn't immediately recognize some of the mis-steps that may have made the fire worse. Now, however, I think I'd be there yelling at them trying to get them to do it right if I were in that same situation. They might not listen, but I'd be trying. As time goes by and EV's are more commonplace, hopefully there will be a greater knowledge base of how to deal with the odd situations like this which will hopefully continue to be a rare occurrence.

Other than that, let's look again at the consequences here. Sure, bummer to lose the cool car but the driver was able to get the car off the highway and get safely away without injury before the fire emerged. Not the worst outcome there ever was or could have been.
 
Last edited:
I suspect you're right, and certainly hope so. But you have zero grounds to make such a matter or fact declaration.

Sure I have grounds--it's called an opinion. And if asked if I would pay $400 more for a thicker battery cover, my answer is no, as this accident was just that. They happen with any car, and you can never make a perfect car. That's it.
 
It was an object beefy enough to be able to penetrate the pack, small enough to fit under the front bumper, but shaped in a way that while passing under the car part of it was hit, which rotated the longer part of the object up and into the pack. I'm imagining an "L" shape or modified "C" shape, such that the shorter section is pointing up with the longer section pointing towards the oncoming vehicle. As it passes under the car the short section gets struck, which causes the object to pivot up and the longer section jam into the pack. A slightly larger object would hit the bumper or get caught further forward under the frunk area, a slightly smaller object would just pass under the vehicle. Unless the object is something that is regularly dumped on the road in just the right position, it's a freak accident.
That pretty well sums it up. The incidence of these objects, or object capable of causing similar damage, is what will determine if this is a freak accident, or just uncommon. If one out of every thousand objects capable of causing an accident on the roadway is similar, then we'll see something like this every year or so, and Tesla should tweak the module design to account for this. If it's closer to one every ten thousand+, then it's probably not worth it.
 
Sure I have grounds--it's called an opinion. And if asked if I would pay $400 more for a thicker battery cover, my answer is no, as this accident was just that. They happen with any car, and you can never make a perfect car. That's it.

I think that depends on your conversation. In my posts I'm trying to speak factually, so I have a bunch of conditionals/assumptions as well as indefinite (may, possibly, etc..) descriptors.

Responding to one of those with an opinion can confuse things because some people assume you'll take the same tact, myself included.
 
That pretty well sums it up. The incidence of these objects, or object capable of causing similar damage, is what will determine if this is a freak accident, or just uncommon. If one out of every thousand objects capable of causing an accident on the roadway is similar, then we'll see something like this every year or so, and Tesla should tweak the module design to account for this. If it's closer to one every ten thousand+, then it's probably not worth it.
I think the problem with adding more armour is that it would either reduce ground clearance further or barring that, would reduce headroom in the interior, which is already pushing the limits for tall people. It's too bad the FD punched holes in the top of the battery pack. By all reports the fire was completely contained under the vehicle and none of the upper body was in flames before they did that. What they should have done was simply spray cold water on the top of the battery pack to help it cool and then let the one isolated bank of batteries burn itself out. The design is actually pretty ingenious. Tesla will need to spend a little money educating rescue personnel in the future though. That would be money well spent.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure how accurate that is. People paid for dent proof body panels, which won't prevent a car from being totaled. They might pay for impact resistant battery modules that will. I certainly would. You may not, etc...
Dent proof body panels actually have a use as the probability your car will be dented at least once in its lifetime is extremely high (almost inevitable). While in this case, the probability that you hit an object that will puncture 1/4 inch plate is extremely low, and adding a extra buffer does not necessarily prevent such a puncture (even in this exact same event).


Was this punctured by a pole? Based on the article it was something off of a semi that was low enough to get under the car and beefy enough to punch a hole in the bottom. It seems like a design that could avoid problems from objects like this would be a good idea.
Whatever the object was punched a 3-inch diameter hole and also punctured or shorted cells (that's the only way the cells would catch fire). So I would assume the object was somewhat pole-like (or at least able to able to reach a certain depth into the pack such that the buffer you suggest may not be that useful).


Like I said before, if it's truly a freak accident, then there's no need to design for it and it won't happen for another decade or few. But if it's just an uncommon accident, then it's probably worthwhile to design for it.
As I said, given what we know so far, this IS a freak accident. Keep in mind this is the first time this happened.

I don't think pointing out that it may be possible to improve the battery module design is negative, but to each their own...At that point I guess I'll be the Hitler, or at least Saddam, of teslamotorclub. :love:
Your low post count plus a majority of those posts expressing doubt in the Model S design rings bells for lots of people. There was another commenter in this thread that fit that profile and let's just say he got plenty of negative rep for it.
 
Let's consider how often we've heard of a similar incident in an ICE, minus the fire. In other words, has anyone ever heard of the bottom of any car being impaled by a similarly shaped object? I have not.

My mom ran over a piece of metal on the freeway in her brand new Audi A4--punched a hole in the oil pan. By the time the car noticed, turned on the idiot light and she pulled over, the oil had completely drained out of the engine and it seized. The A4 was so new at the time, they did not have parts in the US and they ended up having to ship an new engine from Germany.

I think the total tab was north of $25K--luckily her insurance picked it up.

O
 
Let's consider how often we've heard of a similar incident in an ICE, minus the fire. In other words, has anyone ever heard of the bottom of any car being impaled by a similarly shaped object? I have not.

In the past couple of years;

1] My business partner had a crowbar (road debris) rip up through the bottom of his fuel tank in a Toyota ICE car. He, and the passengers, exited the vehicle safely and there was no fire - but the tank pretty much emptied onto the road.

2] Another friend brought his ICE back from service and parked it alongside a few other cars in his carport. He was called out by security guard an hour of so later, with the entire carport flooded with petrol. The service technician had neglected to tighten a connection. Again, no fire.

Both consider themselves very lucky that there was no fire. In both cases, I guess they were just lucky there was no source of ignition (as the other two sides of the fire triangle were there in abundance).
 
How could something unexpected that doesn't occur before 100 million miles have been driven not be a freak accident?

You drive another billion miles, and you will most likely have a handful of other types of freak accidents, none of which could be prevented by the same protective measures. Reacting to each one of them with a redesign would be uneconomical and make the car less attractive.
 
In the past couple of years;

1] My business partner had a crowbar (road debris) rip up through the bottom of his fuel tank in a Toyota ICE car. He, and the passengers, exited the vehicle safely and there was no fire - but the tank pretty much emptied onto the road.

2] Another friend brought his ICE back from service and parked it alongside a few other cars in his carport. He was called out by security guard an hour of so later, with the entire carport flooded with petrol. The service technician had neglected to tighten a connection. Again, no fire.

Both consider themselves very lucky that there was no fire. In both cases, I guess they were just lucky there was no source of ignition (as the other two sides of the fire triangle were there in abundance).

The exact thing happened to me in my Ford Fusion Hybrid. I ran over a crowbar and it punctured my gas tank. Other drivers on my roadway alerted me to pull over. All the gas ran out of the car. $2000 for the repair and 4 days. This was on i-20 outside of Atlanta GA.
 
2] Another friend brought his ICE back from service and parked it alongside a few other cars in his carport. He was called out by security guard an hour of so later, with the entire carport flooded with petrol. The service technician had neglected to tighten a connection. Again, no fire.
This doesn't fit the profile of an object punching up into the bottom of the vehicle. So far we have three events that do meet the criteria, two of them involving crowbars, which seems really strange since I'd think a crowbar would lie on it's side and just pass under a vehicle, unless a wheel caught it and flipped it up, which may be what happened.
 
> strap on your roadkill to transport home for dinner. [lorih]

MS_roadkill_01.jpg


Kalu Kalai, we eat today
Like Cabbages and Kings
--