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

No CCS compatibility; legal?

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
It's the rule for most fleets because it's (apparently) safer to pull forward than back out. That's probably especially true in our Teslas which don't have cross traffic alerts.
The reason many large companies, construction sites and military make you park ass in is case of an emergency evacuation where everyone can leave quickly without everyone trying to back out of their parking spot while in panic mode. Just makes sense and is a better way to park once you put some thought into it.
 
The reason many large companies, construction sites and military make you park ass in is case of an emergency evacuation where everyone can leave quickly without everyone trying to back out of their parking spot while in panic mode. Just makes sense and is a better way to park once you put some thought into it.

I back in so that I don't have monster blind spots when I pull out
 
It is pretty insane that 4 people could order the same exact Tesla, same model year, with the exact same specs a week apart, and yet each person could receive a slightly different version of the car (one has no matrix headlights, another other 3 have matrix but 2 of the 3 don't have CCS compatibility, and one of the 2 non-CCS enabled cars doesn't come with the charging cable standard).
It’s part of Tesla's Agile production method.

Legacy automakers use the Toyota Production System. It replaced the Ford production system for many reasons, the most important was to increase consistency. The Ford production method had workers on an assembly line each doing their thing, and an inspection of the car at the end. Problems with materials or workmanship were noted on final inspection and these cars were sent back to be fixed. That was inefficient and expensive, and the percentage of cars rejected at final inspection was expensively high.

A main goal of the TPS is consistency. To this end, any line worker can stop the line if they find a problem. It empowers the workers, everyone is an inspector, the number of goofs that make it down the line goes down dramatically. The more consistent the output, the fewer cars actually need to be inspected. Pretty consistent, inspect only 1 out of 1000, really consistent, inspect only 1 out of 2500. This reduces production costs. The enemy of consistency is change, and TPS is pretty resistant to change. The design is locked one year before it goes into production, minor change at 2 years (change in shape of grill), more at 4 years, and so on until major model change at 6 to 8 years.

Production line changes result in more errors by workers, consistency goes down until they get used to the change. And since production is in a line, everything stops when changes are made. Counter to the goal of consistency.

Tesla operates in an entire different manner. No long production lines, instead production cells. Innovation and change are the driving forces. While legacy automakers fight changes, do small ones every 2 years, Tesla makes on average 27 production line changes per model per week. That's changes in the shape of the metal, changes in the electronics, etc. In one of Sandy Munro's teardown videos he found 13 design changes in the octovalve alone in only three months. The factory's AI computer knows what's in each individual car and so does the car's software. And computers perform every nondestructive test possible as a final inspection on every single car. Not 1 in 1000.

There may be several versions of the same part being made at the same time. One example of Tesla's Agile business, I think by Joe Justice, is that if an engineer dreams of a change to a part that would improve it by 2% or make it 2% less expensive to produce, he can send out an email the next morning asking for anyone who wants to help in in this project. He is given all the equipment and space needed to produce a prototype. Once that is done, and it is better than the existing part, that individual part goes into a production car. The AI computer keeps track of it. Then the next job is to ramp up production and feed more and more of the new part into the cars, replacing the old part gradually as the new part ramps up. Theoretically until the new part is 100% of the parts going into the cars. But that doesn't happen, because others come up with more changes and their better part phases in, then another, and another.

The production systems couldn't be more different. One is a model based on the past, the other the model of the future. A Tesla is a constantly evolving vehicle. One's expectations should evolve, too.
 
I dont like it either, but from a legal perspective am pretty sure there isnt much that can be done.
The still unanswered question is whether Tesla is going to do the upgrades at no cost to the owner on the cars that they shipped in a "crippled" state compared to vehicles before them.

There's a lot that Tesla never explicitly promised in the sales contract and that the DOT doesn't require:
- Air conditioning
- Radio
- Keyless entry
- 12V power outlet
- Glovebox

I wonder if anyone would be okay with Tesla leaving these items out and, if Tesla did, whether there would be any legal recourse?
 
The still unanswered question is whether Tesla is going to do the upgrades at no cost to the owner on the cars that they shipped in a "crippled" state compared to vehicles before them.

There's a lot that Tesla never explicitly promised in the sales contract and that the DOT doesn't require:
- Air conditioning
- Radio
- Keyless entry
- 12V power outlet
- Glovebox

I wonder if anyone would be okay with Tesla leaving these items out and, if Tesla did, whether there would be any legal recourse?
You don't need legal recourse, no one is forcing you to accept delivery of the deficient car. Just say no.
 
How did Tesla solve the problem of consistency ?
I can’t answer for Tesla, but I would imagine since consistency is the opposite of innovation and change they wouldn’t find it desirable. So it’s not a problem for them.

If one wants a car that is identical in every way to every other car that rolls off the assembly line this year, all of the legacy automakers would be happy to sell them a car.
 
The still unanswered question is whether Tesla is going to do the upgrades at no cost to the owner on the cars that they shipped in a "crippled" state compared to vehicles before them.

There's a lot that Tesla never explicitly promised in the sales contract and that the DOT doesn't require:
- Air conditioning
- Radio
- Keyless entry
- 12V power outlet
- Glovebox

I wonder if anyone would be okay with Tesla leaving these items out and, if Tesla did, whether there would be any legal recourse?
You’d have no legal recourse at all. Your recourse would be to purchase a vehicle that has the items you want from another manufacturer.
 
I have found the Tesla way to be quite fair indeed.

If you order a Tesla for future delivery, and an improvement is entered into production prior to yours getting produced...you get the improvement automatically, at no cost. Customers have gotten free trailer packages, updated small battery, heat pump, HEPA filters, improved battery chemistry, dual pane windows, swiveling displays, updated wheels, better construction techniques, upgraded computers, structual battery packs etc. All at no additonal costs. In addition, ownes often get Free OTA updates integrating additional functions and enhancements at no additional charge.

If the price of your configuration goes up prior to delivery, you still get the original agreed upon price.

Believe these two policies are very generous, and should be more appreciated on this forum, instead of just bemoning that your individual car did not make the cut for implementation.

Now, there will always be new owners that complain that their car was built just after a desirable update. That is just how the cookie crumbles. Owners are not entitled to all the improvements that will be coming down the pike after they take delivery.
 
Tesla deleted a feature temporarily. Are they going to do upgrades to add this feature at no cost to the owners on these specific vehicles to avoid bad PR?

You mean matrix headlights? I highly doubt they'll be retrofitting where they were removed. That's just my guess. Perhaps if someone *really* complains, but many owners won't even know. I thought I read that the connectors aren't the same, so this might not even be feasible.
 
If you end up keeping it, you can buy the $140 part that enables CCS1 charging. It's easy to install. Then you just buy the $309 CCS1 to Tesla adapter that Tesla only sells in South Korea at present.

And Tesla never specified or promised the ability to use CCS1 charging anywhere. It's a bonus feature that some get and wasn't even enabled until this past winter.
Excuse my ignorance, but > where>>>"you can buy the $140 part that enables CCS1 charging."?