Out of warranty concerns about Tesla

[Red Sage]

The fact of the matter is, people like @wk057 and @Ingineer have shown that there is no mystical black magic that powers these cars. Furthermore there are people like @Btr_ftw who are actively documenting their tear down and rebuild projects.

I fail to see how releasing instructions on how to replace a coolant pump or door handle will cause irreparable damage to Teslas core business.

The actual instructions, followed properly, by fully trained personnel, in a controlled environment, will certainly cause no damage whatsoever.

Modified instructions, employed incorrectly, by shade tree mechanics, literally underneath a shade tree, who decide they can 'make it better' by 'doing it their own way' can absolutely cause damage when -- not 'if' -- something goes wrong, causing major injury or death.

And when that happens, to just about anyone, they will 'fail to see' how it is their own responsibility for [FOULING] things up, and they will happily blame Tesla, or allow the blame to fall upon Tesla, instead of shouldering it themselves.

Elon Musk has been clear in that he does not believe servicing Tesla cars would be profitable for third parties. If you dispute that notion, you are welcome to survey some repair shops on your own, and convince them that covering Tesla cars is in their best interest. Then those businesses, in unison, can approach Tesla to express that interest in becoming authorized repair/maintenance shops for Tesla's vehicles. That might be a more fruitful strategy than claiming Tesla is 'doing it all wrong' or whatever.

[ ASIDE: I have Spanish version of Monopoly here, it was left behind by my Dad when he passed six years ago. In it, your name is 'Plaza San Carlos' and in the color group of properties is joined by 'Avenida de los Estados', and 'Avenida Virginia'. ]

 

[Red Sage]

I just want to be able to change my coolant, or swap out a <sarcasm> light bulb </sarcasm> without paying someone else because the firmware needs to be flashed. I'm not going to reprogram it to go over 100 mph in reverse. (Although 17 is a bit lethargic.)

Sarcasm is my primary form of communication. Allow me to demonstrate... There are plenty of pre-EPA vehicles on the market, good old fashioned Detroit Iron, that you can wrench on to your heart's content. Go ahead. No one at Tesla will stop you. Enjoy!

 

[Mattzilla]

I have concerns as well. I'm currently at 46k on a May 2016 70D and here is my service log. As you will see, I still have an unresolved issue with Supercharging which I give a case example of here: Supercharger getting mostly Chademo speeds

Service (6 Tesla Service visits total - 3 in Seattle, 2 in Portland, and 1 in Santa Barbara)

1. 07-02-2016 - 9.5k miles - Alignment (Tesla charged me $125), rattles (Tesla addressed), Supercharging errors during road trip (Tesla said the fault was with the chargers and not my car), and tech found that the front made creaking noise when wheel was turned to extremes (Tesla installed nylon washers).
   
   
2. 08-19-2016 - 16k miles - LED headlamp failed (Tesla replaced), mobile charger failed (Tesla replaced), rattles (Tesla addressed).
   
   
3. 10-31-2016 - 24.5k miles - Rattles (Tesla addressed), purchased 25k mile service ($700), and purchased 75D OTA upgrade ($3200 - Tesla installed new badge).
   
   
4. 11-14-2016 - 26k miles - Rattles (Tesla addressed) and rear driver door handle was squeaking when extended/retracted (Tesla realigned handle).
   
   
5. 01-02-2017 - 32k miles - Rear passenger tire blew out (was still using OEM Goodyear Eagle Touring tires) while on a mountain outside of Ventura, CA with no cell reception (Had to hitchhike down the mountain and call Tesla service when service was available again… Tesla gave me a loaner tire to make it back to WA [approximately 1k miles away] - Had 4 new Michelins installed at a local Costco upon returning home).
   
   
6. 05-26-2017 - 44.5k miles - Charge port error (Tesla replaced charge port), bluetooth error (Tesla determined this to be a bug and so they didn’t need to take action), and consistently slow Supercharger speeds that are never able to top 87kW regardless of location or conditions (Tesla escalated issue to engineering - still waiting to hear back).
   
   
7. 06-21-2017 - 46k miles - Having sent a few case example e-mails to Tesla regarding my slow Supercharging speeds and having heard nothing from them in nearly a month since my last service visit, I called Tesla Service Seattle and spoke with Brandon who said he would escalate my case again and make sure the case example e-mail with pictures was forwarded to engineering. He thanked me for my patience and said that I should hear something “soon."
   
   
8. 06-21-2017 - 46k miles - Had a routine free tire rotation at a local Costco and was told by the tech that my tires were showing minor wear indicative of an alignment issue. Since the nearest Tesla Service Center is 3 hours away and they charged me $125 for an alignment last time anyway, I decided to hire a local shop to do the alignment. They scheduled me for Monday, 06-26-2017.

 

[KidDoc]

I thought Tesla was big on not withholding IP?

All Our Patent Are Belong To You

 

[St Charles]

That 90+ years of public experience helps quite a bit.

What exactly is a 'repair' anyway...? It seems to me that people have been trained over the past century to expect they should have to remove and replace parts on cars with regularity in order to keep them running. It is rare that anyone gets their car repaired, that is, someone taking the time to make sure the components that are on your car stay there, and are made to work somehow, when they didn't before.

Red herring...

Collision repair, body work, is another thing entirely. That is bending and shaping metal back into its original position. Replacing those components that are beyond repair. Tesla already has independent shops to do that, and the network is expanding, with more and more authorized shops.

Who is talking about Collision repair?

Oh, but the 'risk' is still there for traditional automobile manufacturers. Just, perhaps, not to the great extent it exists for a relative fledgling such as Tesla. Difference is, when someone does something foolish to their Mustang, Camaro, or Hellcat, no one goes on the news blaming Ford, Chevrolet, or Dodge. They point the finger at the idiot that modified their car to be something the manufacturer did not (?) intend. The term 'personal responsibility' is thrown around, same thing with alcohol, tobacco, and firearms. The media protects those industries because it is lucrative to do so. But Tesla doesn't even buy advertising, so they are fair game to be targeted and eliminated, blamed for every crash, every injury, every fatality.

Look up the book Unsafe at any speed. The media blaming Automobile manufacturers for vehicle injury is nowhere near unique to Tesla or the current era of automobiles.

I find it interesting that members of NADA proclaim that 'independent franchised dealerships' and their on-site shops can help 'protect' the public at large from traditional automobile manufacturers, by spotting warranty issues early on. They claim to be a safety buffer to spot recurring issues with cars and repair them when those manufacturers would not. Yet for over a decade, people were being killed in GM cars with faulty ignitions and not one 'independent franchised dealership' raised an alarm, protested the faulty part or requested it be replaced/redesigned, or stopped selling the cars.

Who is talking about dealerships?

Every manufacturer withholds knowledge of what they presume is their own intellectual property -- unless they are stupid.

The Tesla Model S appeared on the market in 2012. The most recent Haynes Buick Repair Manual is from 2013, for the LaCrosse. The Buick LaCrosse sold over 57,000 units in 2012, while the Tesla Model S sold only 2,558 units. Now, the script has flipped somewhat since then, as the LaCrosse was outsold 29,156 to 27,582 by the Model S in 2016. It was one of several GM Sedans that were each outsold by Model S that year. In fact, the Model S outsold all Buick passenger cars except the Verano, which moved 30,277 units -- and every single Cadillac passenger car.

Hmmm... Maybe that's why there is no more recent edition of a LaCrosse repair manual from Haynes? Maybe Haynes Publishing only covers cars that sell reasonably well, and are expected to be darkening the bay door openings at independent automotive service centers at a regular pace. Maybe that's why they don't seem to cover Porsche, Volvo, and Volkswagen cars from 2012 either.

Hmmm... As a publisher, they can choose which vehicles they cover. Amazing this thing called 'choice' for a business. Nice to know they cannot be forced to do something they might find isn't in their best interest, ain't it...?

All of this is a strawman argument.

The actual instructions, followed properly, by fully trained personnel, in a controlled environment, will certainly cause no damage whatsoever.

Agreed.

Modified instructions, employed incorrectly, by shade tree mechanics, literally underneath a shade tree, who decide they can 'make it better' by 'doing it their own way' can absolutely cause damage when -- not 'if' -- something goes wrong, causing major injury or death.

And when that happens, to just about anyone, they will 'fail to see' how it is their own responsibility for [FOULING] things up, and they will happily blame Tesla, or allow the blame to fall upon Tesla, instead of shouldering it themselves.

This will happen regardless of what Tesla does or does not do.

Elon Musk has been clear in that he does not believe servicing Tesla cars would be profitable for third parties. If you dispute that notion, you are welcome to survey some repair shops on your own, and convince them that covering Tesla cars is in their best interest. Then those businesses, in unison, can approach Tesla to express that interest in becoming authorized repair/maintenance shops for Tesla's vehicles. That might be a more fruitful strategy than claiming Tesla is 'doing it all wrong' or whatever.

Because Elon Musk said so is an appeal to authority. Who said anything about wanting to be profitable? I simply want Tesla to facilitate owners in performing basic repairs that do not require special tooling or expertise.

[ ASIDE: I have Spanish version of Monopoly here, it was left behind by my Dad when he passed six years ago. In it, your name is 'Plaza San Carlos' and in the color group of properties is joined by 'Avenida de los Estados', and 'Avenida Virginia'. ]

Muchas gracias, senor.

 

[demundus]

1. 06-21-2017 - 46k miles - Had a routine free tire rotation at a local Costco and was told by the tech that my tires were showing minor wear indicative of an alignment issue. Since the nearest Tesla Service Center is 3 hours away and they charged me $125 for an alignment last time anyway, I decided to hire a local shop to do the alignment. They scheduled me for Monday, 06-26-2017.

I also went to a highly trusted custom alignment shop when I had my tires replaced and the tech pointed out highly abnormal inside wear. I brought the tire and my car to the shop. They spent over an hour trying to align it, and couldn't get the toe in on it. Basically theres no way to adjust the rear camber without an aftermarket part that @lolachampcar has worked with a machine shop for.

My shop called Tesla and got ahold of the air suspension engineers a couple of days later, who told them that Tesla has a special "tune" for the airbags to fix the toe issue, and that I'd have to bring it in and schedule an appt with them to come down and do it. I never did that, but I might be forced to after this next round of tires.

TLDR: custom shop probably wont be able to do anything due to lack of rear adjustability.

 

[Mattzilla]

I also went to a highly trusted custom alignment shop when I had my tires replaced and the tech pointed out highly abnormal inside wear. I brought the tire and my car to the shop. They spent over an hour trying to align it, and couldn't get the toe in on it. Basically theres no way to adjust the rear camber without an aftermarket part that @lolachampcar has worked with a machine shop for.

My shop called Tesla and got ahold of the air suspension engineers a couple of days later, who told them that Tesla has a special "tune" for the airbags to fix the toe issue, and that I'd have to bring it in and schedule an appt with them to come down and do it. I never did that, but I might be forced to after this next round of tires.

TLDR: custom shop probably wont be able to do anything due to lack of rear adjustability.

I've got coil suspension so we'll see...

 

[D.E.]

8 years isn't really that long to keep a car. I had my Lexus for 15 years and my F-150 for 10 (and still going). Some people are inclined to trade every few years. But that's not everyone.

You are right about that. We have two 1996 cars so they'd be old enough to drink. And one 2004 car, so that one is still young, probably about an 8th grader. Then there's the Tesla, just a couple of weeks old.

 

[Red Sage]

I thought Tesla was big on not withholding IP?

All Our Patent Are Belong To You

Patents are public knowledge anyway. The original purpose of patents was to share knowledge so that technology could move forward without everyone out there having to reinvent the wheel. Tesla applied for patents to keep 'the big guys' from stealing their work, but once they realized those guys didn't care about electric vehicles at all, they released their patents to assist anyone else who actually was interested.

Tesla does still have intellectual property that has not been patented however. That is tricks and tips they use as internal knowledge only, specific to their own implementation of technology. This is typically called 'proprietary information'.

The most cynical of Tesla's detractors claim the patents they have released are 'useless'... That they outline the systems Tesla tried, then decided would not work for their purposes. And thus, they are all a 'dead end' anyway. I think it more likely their patents can work just fine, just to take someone in a different direction that Tesla has chosen in terms of product offerings.

 

[Red Sage]

This will happen regardless of what Tesla does or does not do.

And Tesla is under no obligation whatsoever to make that process easier.

Because Elon Musk said so is an appeal to authority. Who said anything about wanting to be profitable?

I'm certain that Pep-Boys, AAMCO, MiDAS, Sears, and Walmart service centers would very much like to be profitable when working on any brand of car.

I simply want Tesla to facilitate owners in performing basic repairs that do not require special tooling or expertise.

To my knowledge, those basic items would require not much more than a pamphlet, not a full technical manual. Once again, contact Haynes or Chilton and let them plead your case to Tesla. Maybe they would be interested in charging you $19.95 for such a pamphlet.

Muchas gracias, senor.

De nada.

 

[St Charles]

And Tesla is under no obligation whatsoever to make that process easier.


I'm certain that Pep-Boys, AAMCO, MiDAS, Sears, and Walmart service centers would very much like to be profitable when working on any brand of car.


To my knowledge, those basic items would require not much more than a pamphlet, not a full technical manual. Once again, contact Haynes or Chilton and let them plead your case to Tesla. Maybe they would be interested in charging you $19.95 for such a pamphlet.


De nada.

Did I mention profitability somewhere in my argument that I am unaware of? If I did, please point me to it so I can properly address it.

 

[Red Sage]

Did I mention profitability somewhere in my argument that I am unaware of? If I did, please point me to it so I can properly address it.

Elon Musk noted profitability, or the lack of such, as being a reason for third party repair/maintenance shops to not be interested in becoming certified to work on Tesla vehicles. Effectively, that it would not be fair to, or reasonable of them to be forced to adopt Tesla's principle of Service, where it was not run as a profit center, but that charges would only be applied to keep the lights on. He saw no advantage of their doing so independently, while quite a few in the course of this discussion have demanded the ability to go to shops that are not company owned for service in maintenance in addition to the 'right' to work on their own cars.

 

[St Charles]

Elon Musk noted profitability, or the lack of such, as being a reason for third party repair/maintenance shops to not be interested in becoming certified to work on Tesla vehicles. Effectively, that it would not be fair to, or reasonable of them to be forced to adopt Tesla's principle of Service, where it was not run as a profit center, but that charges would only be applied to keep the lights on. He saw no advantage of their doing so independently, while quite a few in the course of this discussion have demanded the ability to go to shops that are not company owned for service in maintenance in addition to the 'right' to work on their own cars.

Because Elon said so....

Again, there is nothing magical about these cars such that they could not be repaired independently. The very concept that every time something goes wrong we should take the car to Tesla is ridiculous. This company is planning to put orders of magnitude more vehicles in service in the next few years. There isn't enough capacity to handle the number of Tesla vehicles on the road today, to say nothing of the number of Teslas we might see in the future. Anyone thinking that this business model will actually work has either no understanding of vehicle repair or refuses to believe reality applies to Tesla.

If my car is dead in a parking lot because my 12v battery kicked the bucket, why should my only option be to call Tesla for a tow and hope that they have the time and parts availability to get me moving again. Every other car in a developed country can have this problem solved with a trip to [insert local Auto Parts store here]. 12v battery is but one in a very long list of simple repair jobs that could be accomplished with a minimum amount of technical knowledge and without Tesla approved training.

Releasing the specs on these parts along with even the most basic instructions on what/how to replace them should have happened years ago. It's no secret that Tesla sources many of their components from known designs and suppliers. Very little of the car was actually engineered from the ground up. As an example, the brake system is the same OEM Brembo system off the Camaro/Corvette. Many of the trim pieces are bought from Daimler and are almost exactly the same as what is found in a Mercedes. Do you really think that the suspension system ball joints, steering rack, shocks, dampers, bushings, bolts, and nuts are so unique? What about battery coolant? What about alignment specs? If your answer to any of this is yes then my name is George C. Parker and I have a bridge to sell you.

Other manufacturers do release this information, because they know they cannot handle the sheer volume of simple repair jobs that would need to be handled on a regular basis. They also know that if they didn't do so, their cars would quickly garner a massively negative public image. As you said, Tesla is already at risk simply by entering into the market space. Why add additional risk by restricting owners ability to make and/or get repairs done quickly?

You know what is a really bad headline? "Tesla, the car that can't be repaired"

 

[wk057]

Tesla's attitude towards owner-performed or any third-party performed repairs or modifications has been absolutely ridiculous, IMO.

Right now I have a customer who wanted an upgraded drive unit for his Model X. I had the drive unit on hand (from a salvage vehicle), and it was installed properly along with the upgraded wiring required for the job. However, with the Model X, Tesla decided that the drive unit should be cryptographically paired with the body control module. So, with the new drive unit the car will not drive. It refuses to go into "gear" even though the car starts, firmware is correct, etc. The procedure for fixing this issue is quite simple: Pair the replacement drive unit with the body control module. Oh, but you can't do that without a car-specific certificate signing request made to one of Tesla's internal servers.

OK, so, we towed the car to Tesla service. This is an in-warranty car (minus the upgraded drive unit, obviously, which the owner was aware). Not a salvage or anything. Figured, Tesla can just perform the pairing operation as a paid service. Should literally take 5 minutes. After several days of back and forth with Tesla, they refused to perform this simple procedure on the car. They refused to provide the customer with the ability to do so himself. They literally told the owner that he's not allowed to change the drive unit himself.

Now, I find this entirely unacceptable. This type of practice should be illegal, if it is not already.

I've come up with a clever way to get the car driveable so the customer to drive his car with the replacement drive unit in the mean time, although it's not an elegant solution.

They've been in touch with the local automobile dealer association about this, who has been fighting Tesla tooth-and-nail over their presence in the state. They're quite thrilled to have ammunition against Tesla's service model to use in their battles, and they're considering sponsoring a class action lawsuit for my customer against Tesla over the inability for owners to service their own vehicles and Tesla's outright refusal to service a modified vehicle, and their refusal to sell any major parts for the vehicles directly to a customer.

Either way, if Tesla doesn't come up with a solution for him, my customer is going to be filing a lawsuit against Tesla over this.

Tesla's attitude towards customers in this regard is entirely unacceptable, and honestly just pisses me off. I wouldn't be saddened in the slightest if they lose big time in court over this, as they should, and whatever negative publicity comes with this stance they've decided to take. Their company-owned-and-operated service centers sound great in theory, until you realize how shady that actually is of them when it comes to out-of-warranty and other things they can just flat out refuse to do for owners with no where else to go for such service.

 

[tga]

However, with the Model X, Tesla decided that the drive unit should be cryptographically paired with the body control module.

Wow. Seriously uncool. Sadly, it'll probably take a lawsuit to stop this silliness. The downside is it will give the anti-Tesla folks lots of ammunition, and potentially cause more reputational harm to Tesla in the end than if they hadn't done this crap.

Although Tesla is not alone in trying stunts like this. IIRC, Mercedes was sued in MA at one point because many repairs on late model cars could not be performed without Mercedes test equipment that they refused to sell to independent shops. Before it was reverse engineered, there was a ton of repairs you couldn't do on Porsches without a Porsche PST2 (stupid stuff, like clearing an airbag light). Last I heard they would sell them to private shops, but for $20k or more. Only the biggest independent shops could afford them (the guys building $200k custom race cars, etc), so many used it as a selling point - "We have a PST2".

 

[Red Sage]

Because Elon said so....

And these days, that's all that matters.

There isn't enough capacity to handle the number of Tesla vehicles on the road today, to say nothing of the number of Teslas we might see in the future.

That isn't Tesla's fault. They would have gladly expanded their presence throughout the U.S. at a rate to rival that of Starbucks and Krispy Kreme locations had they been allowed to do so. In a country that is supposedly the bastion of 'free enterprise' it is rather telling that Tesla's expansion in China is much more readily accepted that it has been in places like Utah, Texas, Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, New Jersey, Connecticut, Missouri, North Carolina, Virginia, or North Dakota. AFTER that is done, and Tesla's own Sales/Service locations are thriving -- THEN it might be a good idea to use evidence of that success as a means to convince third parties to join in -- NOT BEFORE.

Do you really think that the suspension system ball joints, steering rack, shocks, dampers, bushings, bolts, and nuts are so unique? What about battery coolant? What about alignment specs? If your answer to any of this is yes then my name is George C. Parker and I have a bridge to sell you.

This seems like a series of leading, rhetorical questions, to which you don't actually expect an answer. But no, I don't particularly need a bridge right now. And I'm sure his has been sold at least six dozen times already.

Why add additional risk by restricting owners ability to make and/or get repairs done quickly?

Once again, the 'restriction' has NOT been put in place by TESLA. Repairs of any sort could and would be performed very quickly if Tesla were allowed to build and operate Service Centers as they see fit in all locations. They are not.

You know what is a really bad headline? "Tesla, the car that can't be repaired"

You know what is a WORSE headline? "Our governor won't allow a Tesla to be repaired here!" Unfortunately, it seems that the Federal case against officials of the Great State of Michigan is going to be on hold for several more months while discovery is handled. I had hoped this would be over and done with by now, so that Tesla could prove to all detractors that they are fully capable of handling their Customers' needs on their own, when not barred from doing so.

Having third parties in the mix did nothing to preserve the position of Fisker, Coda, Saturn, Mercury, Merkur, Sterling, Yugo, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Suzuki, Plymouth, Eagle, AMC, or anyone else in the automotive marketplace. Third parties do not deserve to benefit from Tesla's hard work. Think of Tesla as being 'The Little Red Hen' and you may be able to understand their perspective of Do-It-Yourself.

 

[Red Sage]

Tesla's attitude towards customers in this regard is entirely unacceptable, and honestly just pisses me off. I wouldn't be saddened in the slightest if they lose big time in court over this, as they should, and whatever negative publicity comes with this stance they've decided to take. Their company-owned-and-operated service centers sound great in theory, until you realize how shady that actually is of them when it comes to out-of-warranty and other things they can just flat out refuse to do for owners with no where else to go for such service.

Is there an automobile manufacturer, anywhere at all, that actively encourages transplants by third parties of components from salvaged cars into a different vehicle to be serviced under warranty by authorized service centers? How happy would Ferrari be with someone who wanted to drop a Ford GT500 engine into a LaFerrari? Would Ford be happy to assist someone who wanted to transplant a Cosworth Escort engine into the more modern frame of a Ford Focus? I seriously doubt those projects would be sanctioned by the original manufacturer in any case.

 

[Red Sage]

Wow. Seriously uncool. Sadly, it'll probably take a lawsuit to stop this silliness. The downside is it will give the anti-Tesla folks lots of ammunition, and potentially cause more reputational harm to Tesla in the end than if they hadn't done this crap.

Although Tesla is not alone in trying stunts like this. IIRC, Mercedes was sued in MA at one point because many repairs on late model cars could not be performed without Mercedes test equipment that they refused to sell to independent shops. Before it was reverse engineered, there was a ton of repairs you couldn't do on Porsches without a Porsche PST2 (stupid stuff, like clearing an airbag light). Last I heard they would sell them to private shops, but for $20k or more. Only the biggest independent shops could afford them (the guys building $200k custom race cars, etc), so many used it as a selling point - "We have a PST2".

Why is it 'silly' to make sure it is less likely someone will drop a Tesla drivetrain from a wrecked vehicle into the chassis of an El Camino? You pays your money, you takes your chances. There should be no harm to Tesla's reputation for NOT allowing something that is so very obviously contrary to normal service. There is NOTHING normal about asking a company to re-certify salvaged parts for use on a warrantied vehicle. It is the very request that is 'crap' -- not the denial.

 

[St Charles]

And these days, that's all that matters.

Then we are at an impasse.

 

[KidDoc]

That isn't Tesla's fault. They would have gladly expanded their presence throughout the U.S. at a rate to rival that of Starbucks and Krispy Kreme locations had they been allowed to do so. In a country that is supposedly the bastion of 'free enterprise' it is rather telling that Tesla's expansion in China is much more readily accepted that it has been in places like Utah, Texas, Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, New Jersey, Connecticut, Missouri, North Carolina, Virginia, or North Dakota. AFTER that is done, and Tesla's own Sales/Service locations are thriving -- THEN it might be a good idea to use evidence of that success as a means to convince third parties to join in -- NOT BEFORE.

I agree the state restrictions are insane and clearly the product of dealership SIGs buying off state legislators. I cannot speak for all of them but specifically for Texas I had no issues buying a car here or test driving one or getting one serviced. There is no law in Texas against opening service centers or education centers they just cannot talk price when you are learning about the car. It is a dumb law and it is frustrating that it has not been changed by supposedly small government politicians but that is how special interest groups work.

I did replace my own windshield wipers last night and there was even instructions in the owner's manual- go me!