Amazing, retreating to tires sizes to account for speed discrepancies? even if that was the case, he should run his numbers, 0.0708 in tire size diameter differences between the 19" and 21" wheel/tire setups does't make up a 6 MPH speed difference... It's actually .2 MPH @ 60 MPH....
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
NYT article: Stalled on the EV Highway
- Thread starter Jeeps17
- Start date
- Status
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
rolosrevenge
Dr. EVS
What's really odd is that he didn't make up something much more plausible, like he had to zoom around a cluster of cars going slightly slower than him. That happens quite regularly and no one would bat an eye at it, but saying that the cruise control overshot by 15 mph? That's just crazy.
A year from now people will be whining about privacy when they start seeing youtube videos pop up showing the briefing process for every reporter that is offered a test drive vehicle.
Broder never expected anyone to call him out on his terrible review. So, he is caught trying to make up stories that sound true. He is no better at lying than writing a review.
Though truth was clearly not his objective in this report, the truthful explanation for accelerating up to 81mph would have been something like "This car is so smooth and quiet and has such killer torque and acceleration, I just couldn't resist punching it because it's so dang FUN!"
ModelS8794
Member
I'd like to narrowly address the simple question of whether the article contained provably false statements. This is the claim that, if shown to be accurate, should force action on NYTs part with respect to a retraction or admission of fault. I initially felt comfortable granting the reporter the benefit of the doubt, but as I reflected on the following, I am less and less sure there's a case to be made explaining these discrepancies away. I make no claim that these discrepancies are evidence of any specific kind of motive, merely that they are demonstrably false and highly unlikely to be the result of simple error in note-taking.
The portion of the article that most clearly proved false is his statements regarding his trip from Delaware to Manhattan. That segment can be accurately bounded in the article and in the logs based on his statement:
Tesla's logs show Milford charge taking place at mile 323 (ref: the blown-up portion indicating his puttering around the rest stop). 73 miles less indicates his drive leaving Manhattan began at mile 250. He had a 0-2 mile 'joyride' with his brother before than, so the drive to Manhattan ended somewhere around mile 248-250. I have shaded the appropriate area in the chart below, which overlays Broder's speed chart and his HVAC chart. You can see by the speed changes that this end point sits squarely within a passage of miles with lots of stop and go driving, indicative of driving through Manhattan.
What follows is the NYTimes article text, followed by a reference [in brackets] to the data collected over the same period, and my comments.
This is Broder's normal driving procedure, well before he gives any indication that he is limiting himself in comfort or speed in any way.
[speed maintained at 59-60 mph through this long stretch, HVAC varies between 71 and 73 degrees]
Leading up to this point, Broder feels comfortable driving at 60 mph. Somewhere in here he dispenses with his 60 mph cruise control, and we see a stretch of driving with cruise control adjusting to between a 1mph reduction, 2 brief 2mph reduction, and a large stretch back at 60 mph, no reduction at all versus his preferred speed during the entire segment. His comfort setting also vary between 71 and 74 degrees, indicating he is not in the midst of any "range-maximizing guidelines" with regard to cabin climate.
[speed varies from a minimum of 58 mph to a maximum of 70 mph, HVAC adjusted to 70 until end of segment and arrival in Manhattan]
We can see a clear change of habit coinciding with this call to Tesla. Cruise control is disengaged, speed is variable, and climate is adjusted at the same time, down to 70 degrees.
The climate does not change again until after he completes his trip to Manhattan, dropping to 64-65 only after he has driven through stop and go traffic (in Manhattan obviously) for a number of miles, during which time he picked up his brother, took him for a drive, dropped him off, and then started his next segment from Manhattan to Milford.
From this matching up of events with logs, it seems very clear to me that Mr Broder was untruthful about his experience driving from Wilmington to Manhattan.
1) He said he was forced to compromise his speed, driving for stretches at well below prevailing traffic speeds. But he did not; in fact he reduced his speed a maximum of 2mph, and an average of 0-1 mph, compared to the prevailing speed he was driving leading up to his claimed concern-induced adjustment in driving speeds.
2) He claimed to employ range-maximizing techniques by dropping climate control to uncomfortable levels both before and after calling into tesla for advice. But he did not; in fact his climate control was set between 71 and 74 degrees the entire segment leading up to his calling into Tesla, and dropped only 1-2 degrees from his heretofore desired climate level, to 70, during the period after he spoke to tesla and for the rest of his drive into Manhattan.
3) He claimed these series of compromises made him physically uncomfortable, cold and anxious with freezing feet and white knuckles. But his actions show he made only the most minor of adjustments to his driving habits and climate control, driving variably between 58 and 70 mph, and leaving the cabin HVAC at 70 degrees. Is driving 58-70 mph on I-95 approaching Manhattan out of practice with prevailing driving habits? No. Do one's feet tend to freeze at 70 degrees? No.
The claims Broder makes in this article are not reflective of his actual driving experience between Wilmington and Manhattan. His story, as written, reflects a highly negative experience that simply did not take place. If a journalist interviewed a source who relayed this story, and then later discovered these logs detailing the actual drive, I cannot see how he would conclude the story is anything but a fabrication created to relate a fictional experience.
The portion of the article that most clearly proved false is his statements regarding his trip from Delaware to Manhattan. That segment can be accurately bounded in the article and in the logs based on his statement:
Tesla's logs show Milford charge taking place at mile 323 (ref: the blown-up portion indicating his puttering around the rest stop). 73 miles less indicates his drive leaving Manhattan began at mile 250. He had a 0-2 mile 'joyride' with his brother before than, so the drive to Manhattan ended somewhere around mile 248-250. I have shaded the appropriate area in the chart below, which overlays Broder's speed chart and his HVAC chart. You can see by the speed changes that this end point sits squarely within a passage of miles with lots of stop and go driving, indicative of driving through Manhattan.
What follows is the NYTimes article text, followed by a reference [in brackets] to the data collected over the same period, and my comments.
[Speed leaving DE varies 50-62, then cruise control set at 62, 61, and 60 mph. HVAC at 71-72 degrees]
This is Broder's normal driving procedure, well before he gives any indication that he is limiting himself in comfort or speed in any way.
[speed maintained at 59-60 mph through this long stretch, HVAC varies between 71 and 73 degrees]
Leading up to this point, Broder feels comfortable driving at 60 mph. Somewhere in here he dispenses with his 60 mph cruise control, and we see a stretch of driving with cruise control adjusting to between a 1mph reduction, 2 brief 2mph reduction, and a large stretch back at 60 mph, no reduction at all versus his preferred speed during the entire segment. His comfort setting also vary between 71 and 74 degrees, indicating he is not in the midst of any "range-maximizing guidelines" with regard to cabin climate.
[speed varies from a minimum of 58 mph to a maximum of 70 mph, HVAC adjusted to 70 until end of segment and arrival in Manhattan]
We can see a clear change of habit coinciding with this call to Tesla. Cruise control is disengaged, speed is variable, and climate is adjusted at the same time, down to 70 degrees.
The climate does not change again until after he completes his trip to Manhattan, dropping to 64-65 only after he has driven through stop and go traffic (in Manhattan obviously) for a number of miles, during which time he picked up his brother, took him for a drive, dropped him off, and then started his next segment from Manhattan to Milford.
From this matching up of events with logs, it seems very clear to me that Mr Broder was untruthful about his experience driving from Wilmington to Manhattan.
1) He said he was forced to compromise his speed, driving for stretches at well below prevailing traffic speeds. But he did not; in fact he reduced his speed a maximum of 2mph, and an average of 0-1 mph, compared to the prevailing speed he was driving leading up to his claimed concern-induced adjustment in driving speeds.
2) He claimed to employ range-maximizing techniques by dropping climate control to uncomfortable levels both before and after calling into tesla for advice. But he did not; in fact his climate control was set between 71 and 74 degrees the entire segment leading up to his calling into Tesla, and dropped only 1-2 degrees from his heretofore desired climate level, to 70, during the period after he spoke to tesla and for the rest of his drive into Manhattan.
3) He claimed these series of compromises made him physically uncomfortable, cold and anxious with freezing feet and white knuckles. But his actions show he made only the most minor of adjustments to his driving habits and climate control, driving variably between 58 and 70 mph, and leaving the cabin HVAC at 70 degrees. Is driving 58-70 mph on I-95 approaching Manhattan out of practice with prevailing driving habits? No. Do one's feet tend to freeze at 70 degrees? No.
The claims Broder makes in this article are not reflective of his actual driving experience between Wilmington and Manhattan. His story, as written, reflects a highly negative experience that simply did not take place. If a journalist interviewed a source who relayed this story, and then later discovered these logs detailing the actual drive, I cannot see how he would conclude the story is anything but a fabrication created to relate a fictional experience.
Norbert
TSLA will win
jbherman
Member
Arnold Panz
Model Sig 304, VIN 542
Model S 8794, great write-up. You should send this to the Public Editor at the NY Times. She is allegedly "investigating" what both sides have said. My concern is that because she is not particularly knowledgeable about technical issues (as far as we know), she will lose some of these specifics among Broder's obfuscations. In fact, my sense from re-reading Broder's responses is that he's counting on people not understanding enough to simple elide some of his more ridiculous claims. For example, he simply cannot explain why he was consistently driving so much faster than he wrote in his piece, and he blames it (possibly) on two things -- the cruise control not adjusting quickly enough on downhills and the tires being 19" and not 21". As noted by many here, the Model S (and apparently all EVs, including Roadster) strictly adhere to the mph set on the cruise control when it is on, and there aren't any downhills on the portion of the road he was driving when this allegedly happened. And, if the tires were to blame (WTF?), if anything a smaller tire would record greater distance, not less.
In any event, these are the types of minute details that I sense Broder is counting on the public and the NY Times Public Editor missing, and your detailed analysis would be quite helpful for her. Hers will likely be the final word, and could make the difference between the Times doubling down in its defense of Broder versus cutting bait and admitting that "mistakes were made".
BTW, I "like" the Times on Facebook and saw that they posted Broder's original write-up today. They are LOVING the page views and clearly fomenting this controversy. How pathetic for such an esteemed paper to be reduced to this. I'm embarrassed for them.
In any event, these are the types of minute details that I sense Broder is counting on the public and the NY Times Public Editor missing, and your detailed analysis would be quite helpful for her. Hers will likely be the final word, and could make the difference between the Times doubling down in its defense of Broder versus cutting bait and admitting that "mistakes were made".
BTW, I "like" the Times on Facebook and saw that they posted Broder's original write-up today. They are LOVING the page views and clearly fomenting this controversy. How pathetic for such an esteemed paper to be reduced to this. I'm embarrassed for them.
Norbert
TSLA will win
Significant point.
He turned it down (still 64F) much later than he claimed. Just one of many ways he used more energy than you would think based on his account. Also shows that the seemingly scientific precision of the article does not exist at all... when it comes to details, especially those that are (usually) difficult to detect.
Actually take a look at the state-of-charge chart (not just the rated-range chart). The rated-range (display value) goes down a lot, but the SOC (closer to actual value) does only about 5 - 8%. It may be mostly a display effect. (Of course there are also real losses, some due to cold and some not.)
CapitalistOppressor
Active Member
I just checked, and the knuckles at least were still white -
Stalled on the E.V. Highway - NYTimes.com
Few, I think my eyes must be playing tricks after reading about this so much. Sort of glad to still see it up there, to me it most simply and loudly shows how off-base the article was, although 8794 sure paints a clear picture too. Just hope nobody reading it for the first time thinks that is legitimate.
Norbert
TSLA will win
I don't think it's a matter of fashion - Broder lied about the car running out of energy and needing to be flat bedded. The data is there. Maybe in France you can call it fashionable. I call it lies no matter how you put it. With the data that has come out I don't see how NYT can survive without pulling the article, apologizing, and firing Brody - unless they don't care about their reputation. I don't see how you can continue to defend this guy and the NYT when it's clear that the writer lied and his attitude was not to report but rather damage. Brody's intentions were clear when he blasted EV's a year ago - I have not idea what your intentions are.
Yes, @ModelS8794, please send your writeup in to the NY Times. Try and make sure it gets to the editorial staff.
Having a bit of a background in journalism from my college days, what strikes me is the different stories that could have been written from the same events and what Broder actually chose to emphasize in his story.
He could have written a fine story about pushing an EV's range to the edge and how that's a bad idea on a roadtrip in cold weather.
He probably could have written a fine story on how on EV drivers have to be more careful, especially since the car and Tesla phone people may give you different answers and sometimes neither may be 100% right.
With permission beforehand and recordings of all the phone conversations, he could written a great "challenge" story: Tesla says I can do X. I decided to trust Tesla's directions and this is what happened.
Instead he chose to focus on how the car ran out of energy. Yet he pushed the car to the edge way in a high risk fashion: 5 miles of range left is way too late to be looking for charging stations. Do that with an ICE and you could run out of gas too. If you run out of power (or gas) at that point, I think most people would call it operator error.
Then there's what seems to me to be the contradiction between the what he said (or at heavily implied) and how the logs show he actually drove.
This frankly is not the level of journalism I'd expect out of a New York Times reporter. Or for that matter, any reporter even though I know that most journalists aren't what I'd like them to be.
If I were a NY Times editor and I was convinced that the logs were correct, I'd fire Broder. If you want to write a story and are willing to pick the facts/events that line up with your story, ignore the rest and not tell your readers up front what story you wanted to write, there are plenty of crappy newspapers in the country where you'll fit right in. You shouldn't be at the NY Times. And if you're willing to just make stuff up, go work at the National Enquirer.
Having a bit of a background in journalism from my college days, what strikes me is the different stories that could have been written from the same events and what Broder actually chose to emphasize in his story.
He could have written a fine story about pushing an EV's range to the edge and how that's a bad idea on a roadtrip in cold weather.
He probably could have written a fine story on how on EV drivers have to be more careful, especially since the car and Tesla phone people may give you different answers and sometimes neither may be 100% right.
With permission beforehand and recordings of all the phone conversations, he could written a great "challenge" story: Tesla says I can do X. I decided to trust Tesla's directions and this is what happened.
Instead he chose to focus on how the car ran out of energy. Yet he pushed the car to the edge way in a high risk fashion: 5 miles of range left is way too late to be looking for charging stations. Do that with an ICE and you could run out of gas too. If you run out of power (or gas) at that point, I think most people would call it operator error.
Then there's what seems to me to be the contradiction between the what he said (or at heavily implied) and how the logs show he actually drove.
This frankly is not the level of journalism I'd expect out of a New York Times reporter. Or for that matter, any reporter even though I know that most journalists aren't what I'd like them to be.
If I were a NY Times editor and I was convinced that the logs were correct, I'd fire Broder. If you want to write a story and are willing to pick the facts/events that line up with your story, ignore the rest and not tell your readers up front what story you wanted to write, there are plenty of crappy newspapers in the country where you'll fit right in. You shouldn't be at the NY Times. And if you're willing to just make stuff up, go work at the National Enquirer.
While there is a lot of debate about whether Broder "faked" the report, I think Elon went too far as well. But as I've read a lot about how fast/slow he drove, and how most people drive at 70+ on the highway, we all know that if you drive an ICE car at 70+ your mileage will drop... duh. And how many people have we all seen on highways or in town walking with a gas can because they ran out.
I love my S, and realize that I am an early-adopter of incredible technology, and it will a) have bugs, and b) have a learning curve for me. Anyone remember having to set dip switches for "interrupts" before plug-and-play. I am willing to PLAN my longer trips, including have a "plan B", in order not to spend $90 to go 270 miles in my old FX45.
And "range anxiety" I thnik is called a Leaf.
I love my S, and realize that I am an early-adopter of incredible technology, and it will a) have bugs, and b) have a learning curve for me. Anyone remember having to set dip switches for "interrupts" before plug-and-play. I am willing to PLAN my longer trips, including have a "plan B", in order not to spend $90 to go 270 miles in my old FX45.
And "range anxiety" I thnik is called a Leaf.
- Status
