Anyone who'dathunk it would be possible to pass off "equating" the level of warranty risk of swapping a stock air filter for an aftermarket one or FIPK, etc. in an ancient Nissan, with making the software changes in a Tesla which were discussed earlier.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits
- Thread starter Ingineer
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Tesla Inc.
Anyone who'dathunk it would be possible to pass off "equating" the level of warranty risk of swapping a stock air filter for an aftermarket one or FIPK, etc. in an ancient Nissan, with making the software changes in a Tesla which were discussed earlier.
Ya think?My point is that if you modify your car in a way the manufacturer doesn't like, they still have to prove you that your modification resulted in the damage that the manufacturer doesn't want to repair. The Better Business Burau of Automative Repair and California provides resources to assist consumers in getting repairs affected when the manufacturer refuses to.
My air filter was a modification. I removed the stock intake and airbox and replaced it with an aftermarket K&N air filter.
I've noticed since you joined the forum that you tend to like arguing for the sake of arguing
And this is why Class Action lawsuits exist . . . it solves the "cost effective" problem for the aggrieved consumer.
BUT there is absolutely NO reason to make lawyers rich at Tesla's expense.
It is absurd, frankly, that this has gone on this long. No one expects perfection from Tesla, but Tesla KNOWS they screwed up--see "get out of jail free" disclaimer added to the order page a week or two ago.
When all of us purchased our P90DL's, we had no idea. Instead, we purchased based on "advertising" like this--cars provided BY TESLA to the magazines. But no one expected these cars would be ringers:
2015 Tesla Model S P90D w/Ludicrous Upgrade First Test
2015 Tesla Model S P90D - Instrumented Test
These were, apparently, cooked up "specials," just for the magazines, with who knows what version of battery (or perhaps "one off" batteries), cars that NO ONE WOULD OR COULD ACTUALLY BUY? And then to pour more salt in the wound, Tesla sends an update that permanently emasculates all of our cars once a some magic "counter" number is reached.
THIS IS WRONG. It is wrong ethically and legally. Tesla will lose a class action lawsuit, should it come to that, while also gaining immeasurably bad press along the way. That would be stupid.
Elon, please, do the following:
1. Make us whole. You know well that the GM is pretty massive on the P90DL's. We paid it. We didn't get what we thought (and Tesla alluded) we would get. Buy back our cars via trade-ins, strip the "L" underline off of them, and turn them into Service Loaners/CPO cars. Of course, there will be "extra credit" on trade ins, and I'm thinking ~$25k per car, towards a new Tesla because of Tesla's mistake.
2. For those that keep their cars, a check for $15k to $20k is probably about right.
3. Get rid of the damn order page disclaimer; it's petty, it's embarrassing, and it's wrong. If you're worried about warranty claims on "P" cars, fine, just increase the cost of the Pxxx going forward by another $5k and call it good. Or, even better, durability test a bit longer before you release P cars for sale (side benefit: less Beta testing on paying customers).
Let's get this problem in the rearview mirror, and do so soon.
We ALL look forward to your reply.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
One STRONG TESLA SUPPORTER, and also one REALLY pissed off P90DL owner
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
There is an effective remedy for that. The thread became much better after I sequestered 2 specific posters.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
TSLA Pilot,
I think a more enjoyable solution would be for Tesla to quietly swap out the battery for a P100 unit leaving the 90 badging on the car and politely asking the owner not to make a big deal of it. In this way the customer is thrilled (gets the performance they bought on day one and a bit of a kicker down the road) and Tesla deals with the issue in dribs and drabs while adding 90s to their fleet of swap batteries. These 90s could be software limited to anything needed for a temporary swap in Tesla's normal maintenance/warranty work for other owners. Heck, Tesla could even limit the 100 to 90 and just give the owner 1750 amps
Win - Win
Cheapest solution short of throwing the whole burden on the owner (in secret).
Only applies to people actually experiencing the issue so numbers are lower and can be buried and normal warranty reserves (thus not pointed out as a Tesla fail for the street).
Tesla improves rock star status, trust goes up that they will eventually do what they say and all are happy.
One of the things I learned on the service side of our business was that we often did much better when we had an issue and rocked the solution then when there was no issue at all. I can not tell you the number of times that the fleet management guys on the customer end refused to accept any other equipment when it came time to replace the existing fleet BECAUSE we had problems and fixed them the way we did. Our mission was to make their life easier. It lowered cost of ownership on their side but, more importantly, made their life better.
These are really stupid simple concepts but they actually work.
I think a more enjoyable solution would be for Tesla to quietly swap out the battery for a P100 unit leaving the 90 badging on the car and politely asking the owner not to make a big deal of it. In this way the customer is thrilled (gets the performance they bought on day one and a bit of a kicker down the road) and Tesla deals with the issue in dribs and drabs while adding 90s to their fleet of swap batteries. These 90s could be software limited to anything needed for a temporary swap in Tesla's normal maintenance/warranty work for other owners. Heck, Tesla could even limit the 100 to 90 and just give the owner 1750 amps
Win - Win
Cheapest solution short of throwing the whole burden on the owner (in secret).
Only applies to people actually experiencing the issue so numbers are lower and can be buried and normal warranty reserves (thus not pointed out as a Tesla fail for the street).
Tesla improves rock star status, trust goes up that they will eventually do what they say and all are happy.
One of the things I learned on the service side of our business was that we often did much better when we had an issue and rocked the solution then when there was no issue at all. I can not tell you the number of times that the fleet management guys on the customer end refused to accept any other equipment when it came time to replace the existing fleet BECAUSE we had problems and fixed them the way we did. Our mission was to make their life easier. It lowered cost of ownership on their side but, more importantly, made their life better.
These are really stupid simple concepts but they actually work.
Last edited:
And this is a HUGE issue.
Should Tesla let this continue to fester, it's going to much bigger, and much more expensive.
It's really all in Tesla's hands: they can spend a little now by proactively stepping up to the plate and making us whole, or they can spend one hell of a lot more (trust me, I know: legal fees make my eyes water) in both really BIG money losses and public goodwill, by letting it sit until it explodes.
They lost in Norway, but got off relatively cheap.
The "relatively cheap" part won't be happening here . . . .
He didn't just replace one consumable maintenance item with another.
He modified the construction of the car with a part not supplied my the manufacturer.
He was certainly at risk.
The prospect of most owners to remain quiet about their cars having been made more powerful, is on par with expecting most owners to remain silent about their cars having been made less powerful.
I'd direct you to the link I posted up from K&N themselves under "Vehicle Warranty".
But the important point to take away from any of this, is that any risk that he may have assumed, and that's not even established nor conceded, would pale in comparison to the risk one would assume by doing to a Tesla what was suggested in here a few posts back.
And trying to equate the two, is more than a stretch.
But again, at the end of the day, anyone taking his POV on this matter, is of course free to do with their Tesla what was suggested earlier, should the opportunity arise, and "hope" that they don't run into warranty issues in behind it.
However if they should, well then they can always have Sorka go to bat for them.
Last edited:
TSLA Pilot,
I think a more enjoyable solution would be for Tesla to quietly swap out the battery for a P100 unit leaving the 90 badging on the car and politely asking the owner not to make a big deal of it. In this way the customer is thrilled (gets the performance they bought on day one and a bit of a kicker down the road) and Tesla deals with the issue in dribs and drabs while adding 90s to their fleet of swap batteries. These 90s could be software limited to anything needed for a temporary swap in Tesla's normal maintenance/warranty work for other owners. Heck, Tesla could even limit the 100 to 90 and just give the owner 1750 amps
Win - Win
Cheapest solution short of throwing the whole burden on the owner (in secret).
Only applies to people actually experiencing the issue so numbers are lower and can be buried and normal warranty reserves (thus not pointed out as a Tesla fail for the street).
Tesla improves rock star status, trust goes up that they will eventually do what they say and all are happy.
One of the things I learned on the service side of our business was that we often did much better when we had an issue and rocked the solution then when there was no issue at all. I can not tell you the number of times that the fleet management guys on the customer end refused to accept any other equipment when it came time to replace the existing fleet BECAUSE we had problems and fixed them the way we did. Our mission was to make their life easier. It lowered cost of ownership on their side but, more importantly, made their life better.
These are really stupid simple concepts but they actually work.
Agree 100% with the general idea of making "customers for life" by going above and beyond when there's a problem, BUT can't accept this as a solution for one key reason: the "low key/secret" aspect of it all smacks of unequal treatment. It's about making everyone whole, not just those that spend too much time on the TMC Forums . . . .
Furthermore, and of greater concern, we have a "P90D" w/Lud--not a "100." At some point I'd be trading in, but there's no increase in my trade-in value as the "100" aspect of my car doesn't exist to a buyer. None of the car's history, on the internet databases or anywhere else, will support this upgrade. Anytime there's "a story" with a car, trade in value suffers, and it suffers a lot more on a high-end car.
I really want the clean and fresh "Start over" aspect. I, and many others likely, want to simply trade in our P90DL's to finish their lives as Service Loaner or CPO's cars, now rebadged as a NO-UNDERLINE, non-Ludicrous cars. It's a software re-code and a few seconds with some floss at the back of the car.
In a nutshell: Our expensive-as-all-get-out, October, 2015-build P90DL is currently named, "The Rocket." It was never really felt as fast as the car magazine test cars, and, given how I use it, at some point it's going to get much slower.
I'm changing its name today to "The Cheater."
That and it would probably not be practical to expect all who were given this deal to remain low key about it.
Furthermore, what of those who have already paid a premium for a P100DL?
How fair is it to have them pay, and then attempt to "secretly" and in a "hush hush" manner, make the move that was suggested earlier?
"We'll make your cars ringers, if you'll shut up about this matter" is probably not an offer to expect anyway.
That your car was a "100" would only be "rumor". And because everyone, customers and Tesla, was hush hush about it, unsubstantiated rumor.
And yes, you're right. That wouldn't do you an ounce of good in terms of your car's value.
Last edited:
Which is a K&N statement about their FilterCharger product.
An exercise for the reader: What is a FilterCharger, and is it the product @sorka is speaking of?
Bonus points: What's the FTC's stance on warranty liability for incorrectly installed aftermarket parts?
(with that, I apologize for contributing to the veering off-topic, and will move on...)
I won't continue to sidetrack the thread. I'll send you a PM.
For others, suffice it to say, if Nissan could have dinged his warranty and had an avenue to do so without violating Mag Moss doing it, well then it's a safe bet that they would have.
As to your bonus points, he doesn't say that Nissan attacked him for an incorrect installation, but rather for it's presence.
Last edited:
There's no doubt in my mind now that the motortrend cars had special firmware to allow 1600+ Amps. Those numbers are not possible otherwise.
SDRick
Active Member
Pilot and lola, thanks for bringing this thread back on topic. Your suggestions for remedy certainly have merit and at least in spirit, should be a win-win. It is difficult though, to come up with a remedy fair to all when we do not fully understand the extent of the problem and Tesla is clearly in a CYA mode,
I believe Tesla's exposure legally, and in public relations\goodwill revolves primarily around the ludicrous upgrade. Customers paid $10,000 for increased performance for something that cost Tesla little or nothing. Tesla could and should offer several remedies that whether through trade incentives, component upgrade or refund customers come out whole.
I believe Tesla's exposure legally, and in public relations\goodwill revolves primarily around the ludicrous upgrade. Customers paid $10,000 for increased performance for something that cost Tesla little or nothing. Tesla could and should offer several remedies that whether through trade incentives, component upgrade or refund customers come out whole.
Concur almost 100%. However . . .
Yes, while Ludicrous was $10k BUT to get that we all had to step up to a "P" Model. I doubt red brake calipers and shiny brake/accelerator pedals cost Tesla anywhere near the cost of that upgrade . . . .
The big question: why does Tesla insist on dragging this out? Does Tesla really think in the post-VW "Dieselgate" era they would have a snowball's chance in hades of winning a class action? WHY MAKE THE ATTORNEYS RICH when there is NO need for what will become the inevitable class action in the first place?
Tesla effectively admitted wrongdoing with the addition of the new (pathetic) disclaimer on the order page (and even that is way too small and hard to find and may be missed by buyers). Look, it is OKAY to occasionally screw up--reaching for the stars means you sometimes fall short. But when that happens, smart companies make it right, and fast.
Doesn't Elon see these posts? If not, someone at Tesla HQ is surely tasked to do so. What is the friggin' problem here?
I find it amazing that Tesla's strongest supporters, those of us purchased the "P" versions, are being left out in the cold while they, apparently, hope this blows over?
Just stunning.
Are they out of their collective minds?
The longer Tesla waitw, the more pissed off several of us are becoming . . . pissing off your best, most lucrative customers, your strongest supporters, and waiting for a huge, class action lawsuit, is NOT good for business. It is stupid.
Note to Tesla: Don't be stupid.
SDRick
Active Member
Pilot
Fully agree, but for those who did not opt for ludicrous, I believe they did get what they paid for as the car does achieve specs and they are not limited? I could be wrong on this though as I'm not as well versed on the non-ludicrous version.
Fully agree, but for those who did not opt for ludicrous, I believe they did get what they paid for as the car does achieve specs and they are not limited? I could be wrong on this though as I'm not as well versed on the non-ludicrous version.
Apparently because they can. Because we're just sitting here in this thread with our ***** in our hands.
n2mb_racing
Active Member
I just emailed an automotive reporter. I encourage you to do the same. Try this guy:
Rhett Jones
[email protected]
or
Ryan Felton
or
Oversteer | More Than Just Automotive News and Car Reviews - Autotrader.com
Similar threads
