I would say it must be less than $40K for someone to consider that. I know I wouldn't buy it if it was over $40K especially a 2013. Repairs might range into the thousands without warranty after a few years use.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Brando
Active Member
Elon Musk, CEO August 15, 2014
The Tesla Model S drive unit warranty has been increased to match that of the battery pack. That means the 85 kWh Model S, our most popular model by far, now has an 8 year, infinite mile warranty on both the battery pack and drive unit. There is also no limit on the number of owners during the warranty period.
Moreover, the warranty extension will apply retroactively to all Model S vehicles ever produced. In hindsight, this should have been our policy from the beginning of the Model S program. If we truly believe that electric motors are fundamentally more reliable than gasoline engines, with far fewer moving parts and no oily residue or combustion byproducts to gum up the works, then our warranty policy should reflect that.
To investors in Tesla, I must acknowledge that this will have a moderately negative effect on Tesla earnings in the short term, as our warranty reserves will necessarily have to increase above current levels. This is amplified by the fact that we are doing so retroactively, not just for new customers. However, by doing the right thing for Tesla vehicle owners at this early stage of our company, I am confident that it will work out well in the long term.
– Elon
======================
OK, I didn't read all 561 messages. But I can say none of the messages I read seemed to be aware of this warranty statement.
So almost all complaints seemed imaginary. I can understand why Tesla would be especially cautious about safety related repairs such as AutoPilot. But it would seem disc brakes/suspension/tires could be done by 3rd parties. (Air Suspension?). Continued update of software? That might require a fee. Elon may reasonably wait for more data points before setting policy - seem reasonable.
The only problem I have read in getting spare parts was from using Model S salvaged to build VW stretched Van
July | 2014 | Stretchla Blog
You can go and read his thoughts, he has many thought provoking ideas.
Aside from the Aussie at the end of a dirt road
The story behind the ‘false’ Tesla suspension complaints to NHTSA
Elon: Of greater concern: 37 of 40 suspension complaints to NHTSA were fraudulent, i.e. false location or vehicle identification numbers were used. Would seem to indicate that one or more people sought to create the false impression of a safety issue where none existed. Q is why?
and the Chicago Lemon Law Lawyer "have settled for $126,836…including $18,500 in lawyers fees."
The Lemon Law King Reaches Settlement With Tesla In Model S Case For $126,836
Are there other cases where owners were treated unfairly?
(I'll go Google the two above and see if I can find any resolutions)
The Tesla Model S drive unit warranty has been increased to match that of the battery pack. That means the 85 kWh Model S, our most popular model by far, now has an 8 year, infinite mile warranty on both the battery pack and drive unit. There is also no limit on the number of owners during the warranty period.
Moreover, the warranty extension will apply retroactively to all Model S vehicles ever produced. In hindsight, this should have been our policy from the beginning of the Model S program. If we truly believe that electric motors are fundamentally more reliable than gasoline engines, with far fewer moving parts and no oily residue or combustion byproducts to gum up the works, then our warranty policy should reflect that.
To investors in Tesla, I must acknowledge that this will have a moderately negative effect on Tesla earnings in the short term, as our warranty reserves will necessarily have to increase above current levels. This is amplified by the fact that we are doing so retroactively, not just for new customers. However, by doing the right thing for Tesla vehicle owners at this early stage of our company, I am confident that it will work out well in the long term.
– Elon
======================
OK, I didn't read all 561 messages. But I can say none of the messages I read seemed to be aware of this warranty statement.
So almost all complaints seemed imaginary. I can understand why Tesla would be especially cautious about safety related repairs such as AutoPilot. But it would seem disc brakes/suspension/tires could be done by 3rd parties. (Air Suspension?). Continued update of software? That might require a fee. Elon may reasonably wait for more data points before setting policy - seem reasonable.
The only problem I have read in getting spare parts was from using Model S salvaged to build VW stretched Van
July | 2014 | Stretchla Blog
You can go and read his thoughts, he has many thought provoking ideas.
Aside from the Aussie at the end of a dirt road
The story behind the ‘false’ Tesla suspension complaints to NHTSA
Elon: Of greater concern: 37 of 40 suspension complaints to NHTSA were fraudulent, i.e. false location or vehicle identification numbers were used. Would seem to indicate that one or more people sought to create the false impression of a safety issue where none existed. Q is why?
and the Chicago Lemon Law Lawyer "have settled for $126,836…including $18,500 in lawyers fees."
The Lemon Law King Reaches Settlement With Tesla In Model S Case For $126,836
Are there other cases where owners were treated unfairly?
(I'll go Google the two above and see if I can find any resolutions)
Brando
Active Member
After 8 years if you can't get critical parts for repair, then parting out your Model S/X and selling parts on Ebay might actually be profitable.
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
I agree that it would be better if Tesla was more flexible on when owners can buy an extended warranty. And on getting parts. And on third parties doing service.
But my Roadster was out of warranty for 4 years. I'm glad I didn't buy an extended warranty, it would have been a waste of money.
My wife's Model S ran out of the original bumper-to-bumper warranty 2 years and 25k miles ago. So far, there has been no need for an extended warranty.
The usual advice is to ensure that which you can't afford to replace, and self-insure if you can afford it. Although psychologically there is some comfort to having an extended warranty even if you can afford repairs and the warranty is unlikely to pay off.
But my Roadster was out of warranty for 4 years. I'm glad I didn't buy an extended warranty, it would have been a waste of money.
My wife's Model S ran out of the original bumper-to-bumper warranty 2 years and 25k miles ago. So far, there has been no need for an extended warranty.
The usual advice is to ensure that which you can't afford to replace, and self-insure if you can afford it. Although psychologically there is some comfort to having an extended warranty even if you can afford repairs and the warranty is unlikely to pay off.
We'll probably have to find out what the majority and nature of repairs are and how much they cost before we can find out whether an extended warranty makes sense.
There will be ones where extended warranty is a waste (8 years down the road) but on the contrary, there will be ones footing huge repair bills without an extended warranty to cover the repair costs, which is a great unknown for Tesla vehicles.
There will be ones where extended warranty is a waste (8 years down the road) but on the contrary, there will be ones footing huge repair bills without an extended warranty to cover the repair costs, which is a great unknown for Tesla vehicles.
bharned3
Member
glhs272
Unnamed plug faced villian
Good to know there have been no complaints for the past two months.
Well let me help you out there... My complaint is that my car is not breaking often enough... in fact I haven't had the pleasure of doing any service to my car for over 50K miles... what the heck?
Haha, same thing with my 02 Civic. Just mainly changing oil and the engine cleaner and cabin air filter.
Good to know some of the Tesla Model S are trouble-free.
Do you drive it hard which could be the very reason for some earlier drive train unit failures.
This just came in, good thing it's for the X and not the S:
AAA Raises Insurance Premiums For Tesla: High Claim Frequency, Costly Repairs
AAA finds that the Model X has claims filed 41 percent more often than the average, and repairs cost a whopping 89 percent more than the average, according to the Institute.
AAA Raises Insurance Premiums For Tesla: High Claim Frequency, Costly Repairs
AAA finds that the Model X has claims filed 41 percent more often than the average, and repairs cost a whopping 89 percent more than the average, according to the Institute.
I think its one of those "my insurance will handle it (because im afraid to try to handle it myself) kind of scenarios". I'm guilty of it since purchasing my S...
Red Sage
The Cybernetic Samurai
These were replies to points made on other threads elsewhere, but I believe they apply here to, as reasoning behind Tesla not 'opening up' their cars for what some would term 'regular maintenance' by supposed 'independent shops'...
Please take a look at the 'RISK FACTORS' section of Tesla's SEC filings. One of the points they call out involves aftermarket, third party modifications to their cars. I understand it may seem rather sensationalistic to some, but Tesla must indeed 'make it difficult' for others to apply 'an aftermarket solution' for many things. Not so much those who simply want to add a handy dandy HUD, or other secondary display device, as it is to dissuade those who want to hijack every aspect of the vehicle OS both for electric 'hot rodding' as well as for nefarious purposes. Tesla must protect their intellectual property, the aspects of the vehicle that are unique to their own design process, the things that keep the cars safe. Because the reports of a fatal street racing crash on a broadcast of 'I'mWitlessNews at 10:00' won't mention at all that someone used a aftermarket mod that defeated safety systems like stability & traction control systems along with ABS when they spout their drivel about 'The DANGERS of ELECTRIC Cars!' at all. Tesla must be aware of such things at all times.
--------
I do not make this stuff up:
--------
In retail, anything you do to make life easier for Customers, consequently also makes life easier for Criminals. It is a fundamental factor of Loss Prevention Services (Security) to monitor the leaks that occur as a result. There is a certain level of loss that is expected as a part of regular business. That doesn't mean you should allow your world to be overrun entirely by those who choose to take advantage. There are a multitude of reason why the phrase, "This is why we can't have nice things," was coined.
Take a look around Los Angeles. By the building codes, public places are supposed to have at least two easily accessible points of ingress/egress. It is a matter of safety, and businesses typically are not supposed to be allowed a Certificate of Occupancy if that parameter is not met. When a local fire marshal notes that an entry/exit point is blocked, or locked, or non-operational, fines and citations should be applied.
But ever since the riots of 25 years ago, that requirement has been largely ignored. In particular, new construction for grocery stores, department stores, big box stores, and particularly drug stores, may have only one point of entry/exit. Older strip malls that previously had two openings either permanently closed or blocked off the secondary entry with shelves of stock. All so that potential thieves and looters would only have one way in, and one way out. The need for loss prevention and security overwhelmed that of fire safety. Of course, this also means that if someone during a future riot were to simply start a fire that blocked that entry/exit route, everyone left inside would probably die. Oops.
Anyway, I digress... Early on, shortly after the release of the Tesla Model S, the USB ports in the center console allowed you to plug in a mouse and a keyboard to operate the MCU if you wanted to. It was quite convenient for those who didn't want to use the touchscreen for all entry of addresses or web searches. But, at some point afterward, during one of the Over-the-Air updates, the USB keyboard functionality was removed. Why? Because some USB keyboards also come with USB ports of their own. And, since the Model S used a version of Linux, certain keyboard combinations that were not possible on the MCU screen could be used to 'escape' into a command line interface if someone were clever enough to figure out how to do it. Tesla may have found, and then eliminated a potential exploit, without making it public knowledge. Thus, something that was functional and convenient for Customers, was also a gateway to Hackers and had to be done away with. Tesla wisely does not allow the use of keyboards any longer, so that no one has a way to launch their own executable files to overwrite or modify data stored in the system.
There is the outside chance, however unlikely, that if someone were allowed innocent access to data through an OBD II port, they could gain two-way access to not only READ but also WRITE data to the system. Just because something were to identify itself as a GPS system, doesn't mean it couldn't be something else instead, or in addition to that. Tesla has to take such things into consideration. This is a fundamental concept of computer security -- never trust the Client. I know it seems harsh, but thems the breaks and stuff.
--------
https://www.wired.com/2015/03/60-gadget-thatll-make-car-hacking-easier-ever/
--------
Please understand that aftermarket tuners make no secret of the fact that they tap into both the engine management computer and OBD II port in order to make their software hacks work on modern ICE vehicles.
This has been going on for a very long time. Because of the way the CAN bus works, once you are able to monitor the signals from one internal system to another and decode what they are saying and why, you can then intercept them and have your own computing device act as a means to spoof those signals. So, if a sensor learns that too much NOx is being produced, and tries to inform another part of the system, you can intercept that warning and report that the nominal acceptable amount of NOx is being generated instead. This is what automotive hacking is all about -- you can tell the system any lie you want with a your hand on a stack of Bibles -- or Playboys for that matter -- and it will believe you.
Tesla cannot allow anyone direct access to such systems prior to electric vehicles being ubiquitous, above reproach, and perfectly acceptable by the populace at large, in a position that no one gives credence to FUD anymore. That will take time. I imagine another 15 or 20 years or so, at least.
Please take a look at the 'RISK FACTORS' section of Tesla's SEC filings. One of the points they call out involves aftermarket, third party modifications to their cars. I understand it may seem rather sensationalistic to some, but Tesla must indeed 'make it difficult' for others to apply 'an aftermarket solution' for many things. Not so much those who simply want to add a handy dandy HUD, or other secondary display device, as it is to dissuade those who want to hijack every aspect of the vehicle OS both for electric 'hot rodding' as well as for nefarious purposes. Tesla must protect their intellectual property, the aspects of the vehicle that are unique to their own design process, the things that keep the cars safe. Because the reports of a fatal street racing crash on a broadcast of 'I'mWitlessNews at 10:00' won't mention at all that someone used a aftermarket mod that defeated safety systems like stability & traction control systems along with ABS when they spout their drivel about 'The DANGERS of ELECTRIC Cars!' at all. Tesla must be aware of such things at all times.
--------
I do not make this stuff up:
Any unauthorized control or manipulation of our vehicles’ systems could result in loss of confidence in us and our vehicles and harm our business.
Our vehicles contain complex information technology systems. For example, our vehicles are designed with built-in data connectivity to accept and install periodic remote updates from us to improve or update the functionality of our vehicles. We have designed, implemented and tested security measures intended to prevent unauthorized access to our information technology networks, our vehicles and their systems. However, hackers have reportedly attempted, and may attempt in the future, to gain unauthorized access to modify, alter and use such networks, vehicles and systems to gain control of, or to change, our vehicles’ functionality, user interface and performance characteristics, or to gain access to data stored in or generated by the vehicle. We encourage reporting of potential vulnerabilities in the security of our vehicles via our security vulnerability reporting policy, and we aim to remedy any reported and verified vulnerabilities. Accordingly, we have received reports of potential vulnerabilities in the past and have attempted to remedy them. However, there can be no assurance that vulnerabilities will not be identified in the future, or that our remediation efforts are or will be successful.
Any unauthorized access to or control of our vehicles or their systems or any loss of data could result in legal claims or proceedings. In addition, regardless of their veracity, reports of unauthorized access to our vehicles, their systems or data, as well as other factors that may result in the perception that our vehicles, their systems or data are capable of being “hacked,” could negatively affect our brand and harm our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results. We have been the subject of such reports in the past.
Tesla SEC Filing -- RISK FACTORS
Our vehicles contain complex information technology systems. For example, our vehicles are designed with built-in data connectivity to accept and install periodic remote updates from us to improve or update the functionality of our vehicles. We have designed, implemented and tested security measures intended to prevent unauthorized access to our information technology networks, our vehicles and their systems. However, hackers have reportedly attempted, and may attempt in the future, to gain unauthorized access to modify, alter and use such networks, vehicles and systems to gain control of, or to change, our vehicles’ functionality, user interface and performance characteristics, or to gain access to data stored in or generated by the vehicle. We encourage reporting of potential vulnerabilities in the security of our vehicles via our security vulnerability reporting policy, and we aim to remedy any reported and verified vulnerabilities. Accordingly, we have received reports of potential vulnerabilities in the past and have attempted to remedy them. However, there can be no assurance that vulnerabilities will not be identified in the future, or that our remediation efforts are or will be successful.
Any unauthorized access to or control of our vehicles or their systems or any loss of data could result in legal claims or proceedings. In addition, regardless of their veracity, reports of unauthorized access to our vehicles, their systems or data, as well as other factors that may result in the perception that our vehicles, their systems or data are capable of being “hacked,” could negatively affect our brand and harm our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results. We have been the subject of such reports in the past.
Tesla SEC Filing -- RISK FACTORS
--------
In retail, anything you do to make life easier for Customers, consequently also makes life easier for Criminals. It is a fundamental factor of Loss Prevention Services (Security) to monitor the leaks that occur as a result. There is a certain level of loss that is expected as a part of regular business. That doesn't mean you should allow your world to be overrun entirely by those who choose to take advantage. There are a multitude of reason why the phrase, "This is why we can't have nice things," was coined.
Take a look around Los Angeles. By the building codes, public places are supposed to have at least two easily accessible points of ingress/egress. It is a matter of safety, and businesses typically are not supposed to be allowed a Certificate of Occupancy if that parameter is not met. When a local fire marshal notes that an entry/exit point is blocked, or locked, or non-operational, fines and citations should be applied.
But ever since the riots of 25 years ago, that requirement has been largely ignored. In particular, new construction for grocery stores, department stores, big box stores, and particularly drug stores, may have only one point of entry/exit. Older strip malls that previously had two openings either permanently closed or blocked off the secondary entry with shelves of stock. All so that potential thieves and looters would only have one way in, and one way out. The need for loss prevention and security overwhelmed that of fire safety. Of course, this also means that if someone during a future riot were to simply start a fire that blocked that entry/exit route, everyone left inside would probably die. Oops.
Anyway, I digress... Early on, shortly after the release of the Tesla Model S, the USB ports in the center console allowed you to plug in a mouse and a keyboard to operate the MCU if you wanted to. It was quite convenient for those who didn't want to use the touchscreen for all entry of addresses or web searches. But, at some point afterward, during one of the Over-the-Air updates, the USB keyboard functionality was removed. Why? Because some USB keyboards also come with USB ports of their own. And, since the Model S used a version of Linux, certain keyboard combinations that were not possible on the MCU screen could be used to 'escape' into a command line interface if someone were clever enough to figure out how to do it. Tesla may have found, and then eliminated a potential exploit, without making it public knowledge. Thus, something that was functional and convenient for Customers, was also a gateway to Hackers and had to be done away with. Tesla wisely does not allow the use of keyboards any longer, so that no one has a way to launch their own executable files to overwrite or modify data stored in the system.
There is the outside chance, however unlikely, that if someone were allowed innocent access to data through an OBD II port, they could gain two-way access to not only READ but also WRITE data to the system. Just because something were to identify itself as a GPS system, doesn't mean it couldn't be something else instead, or in addition to that. Tesla has to take such things into consideration. This is a fundamental concept of computer security -- never trust the Client. I know it seems harsh, but thems the breaks and stuff.
--------
https://www.wired.com/2015/03/60-gadget-thatll-make-car-hacking-easier-ever/
--------
Please understand that aftermarket tuners make no secret of the fact that they tap into both the engine management computer and OBD II port in order to make their software hacks work on modern ICE vehicles.
This has been going on for a very long time. Because of the way the CAN bus works, once you are able to monitor the signals from one internal system to another and decode what they are saying and why, you can then intercept them and have your own computing device act as a means to spoof those signals. So, if a sensor learns that too much NOx is being produced, and tries to inform another part of the system, you can intercept that warning and report that the nominal acceptable amount of NOx is being generated instead. This is what automotive hacking is all about -- you can tell the system any lie you want with a your hand on a stack of Bibles -- or Playboys for that matter -- and it will believe you.
Tesla cannot allow anyone direct access to such systems prior to electric vehicles being ubiquitous, above reproach, and perfectly acceptable by the populace at large, in a position that no one gives credence to FUD anymore. That will take time. I imagine another 15 or 20 years or so, at least.
I still believe they need SDK for infotainment only functions. They've proven they can't keep up with software improvements and bug fixes with their autopilot tunnel vision.
Holy smokes! There is so much horse manure and misinformation in this post I don't know where to start. Aside, from the dramatic irony that for someone complaining about the FUD surrounding electric cars, your post happens to contain gobs of out of context fear mongering WIRED articles about devices and technologies that are no where near as dangerous as you think. That SEC statement is legal catchall CYA rubbish, allowing people the RIGHT to fix THEIR cars is not going to cause it to irrupt into flames.
Please try talking to Ingineer or the many other skilled and competent electrical, mechanical, and software engineers (including myself) on this forum who know the MS inside and out better than half the techs at Fremont before going off on a misinformed tirade about "safety".
yeesh, what is it with this forum?
EDIT: upon re-reading not sure if the OP is being facetious or not
Red Sage
The Cybernetic Samurai
How to Start: Typically, if someone disagrees with a post, they go through it, line by line, and dismantle it from stem to stern. Unfortunately, it does make for some rather long posts, that are time consuming to compose, or proofread, or respond to later on.
I posted absolutely NO 'misinformation' whatsoever. I gave direct links to sources, and believe I annotated fairly well the points where I was giving my own opinion. Plus, I pointed out some of the text I included might not flow with this discussion here very well, due to being excerpts from other discussions I've had elsewhere. Some of the points I made in that post I have probably made in this very same thread, but it has been months since I perused it, and I just wanted to make my position known to anyone who may have missed them.
In case you missed it? I am on Tesla's side, not in favor of either shade tree mechanics nor aftermarket tuners. They absolutely cannot afford at this point in their development as a company to let people do whatever they want with the cars they build. Maybe, in fifteen or twenty years, you can consider doing some hotrodding to Model S vehicles built from 2012 through 2017. That should not be too long to wait. The Ford Model T was built from 1908 through 1927 and people didn't start to earnestly modify them into Custom T-Bucket rides until the 1950s. And only criminals modified them much before that, in order to do booze runs as bootleggers during Prohibition. Famously, NASCAR was begun by people who had come up by running moonshine, avoiding revenuers throughout the South, even after Prohibition ended.
The primary context of my post was quite clear: Tesla doesn't want anyone [FOULING] about with their cars. Tesla has very good reasons for not allowing that. You obviously do not like those reasons, but you have provided no reasonable explanation or alternative.
I gave one link to one WIRED article to support the notion that Tesla does indeed have to worry about people attempting to hack a vehicle remotely, as do all companies that may use the CAN BUS system. That was in response to someone in this discussion and elsewhere claiming that there was 'no way' that anyone could gain access to 'do anything bad' through the OBD II port. The article proves that is complete [BOLSHEVIK]. Never trust the client. If you are among those that think the OBD II port is entirely benign, a means of sending read only data alone, you are sadly mistaken. Tesla may be required to include the port on their vehicles by default, but they do not in any way have any obligation whatsoever to support making life 'easy' for third parties, whether mechanics or aftermarket tuners.
You are welcome to your opinion. The 'RIGHT' you speak of is probably not granted by Tesla to anyone at any point. If you own one, I would urge you to look more closely at your purchasing agreement with them.
However, Tesla knows full well there are people that are out to make them look bad all the time, every day, any chance they get. So yeah, it is prudent that they engage in 'CYA'.
That is not 'rubbish' -- it is an absolute necessity of modern litigious society. Perhaps you would prefer that Tesla's [BEHIND] was not covered, so that you could be among those who would gladly [MOLEST] them...?
People can do whatever they want to their own car. And they can also take responsibility when they [FOUL] up too. But you know what they do instead? They blame the manufacturer, and in this case, it would be Tesla. And Tesla has the right to protect themselves from such antics and to warn their shareholders that may be the case from time-to-time.
I went to school for Engineering, but spent most of my professional life engaged in Architecture. I have an I.Q. substantially above my sneaker size. Because of this I am fully aware you have made no valid points whatsoever throughout your entire pained tirade.
Dude. Get real. If you really know more about the cars than the technicians that Tesla hires, then this entire conversation is moot. That means you don't need anything from them. Not service manuals. Not diagnostic equipment. Probably not even spare parts. You can fabricate your own, and do a BETTER job that Tesla engineers managed the first time around. If that is the case? Kudos! Have a good life.
Tesla has to protect their reputation. There are news organizations that specifically go well out of their way to only post BAD NEWS relative to Tesla. If people get their vehicles and decide to 'fix' them by turning off traction control, defeating stabilization control, cranking up the power so that they can make the cars 'better, faster, stronger than they were before' -- and end up doing something bad that goes way wrong? When the car is displayed on Channel 7 I'mWitlessNews showing the flaming pieces and carnage all over the place up and down the boulevard, the newscasters will only say how 'dangerous' a Tesla may be. And saying in that faux undertone of concern, "Can we really allow such vehicles on our roads? Do you feel safe around them?" Followed naturally by a commercial for Billy Bob Bleuhardt's Big Blue World of Cars where he has a brand new Mustang for sale with $1,500 Factory Cash Back!
Idunno. What would you like it to be?
Nope. I am never 'facetious' -- at least not without including a winky smiley face or something in a post. I am most often honest, straightforward, direct, and to the point regarding my posts. You don't have to agree. You don't have to like them. And you are more than a little bit welcome to simply [IGNORE] them.
Red Sage
The Cybernetic Samurai
I presume that 'they' is Tesla, in your opinion? Tesla has a lot of toys to play with. So they prioritize. You may consider it 'tunnel vision', but I think Tesla has a wide, grand vision of the future of transportation, and that Autopilot will keep their company relevant for a very long time. Far more so than having the world's most perfect versions of Pandora, Slacker, Tune In, WAZE Integration, Apple CarPlay, or Android Auto functionality ever have a hope of managing.
And... why would you be afraid of speed? The planet Earth moves through space at 30 kph, and apparently rotates about its axis at around 460m per second... You must always be terrified.
Mmm... Yummy! Hey, Kool-Aid!
