My thought on the defects going to the Service Center has changed at bit. It does help the SC with training. It does allow the customer to choose how important each defect is to get fixed. (If I need the car today, I can put up with a seat error until tomorrow.)
The other benefit is that the factory no longer is dealing with old problems. If the assembly line has solved 80% of past issues, then they move forward with production and get to ignore the past errors and concentrate on better product.
I am just trying to put a brighter spin on a punch list that now has 34 items for when the Model X goes into service soon. The one benefit of my posting the list after the service TBD is to highlight the remaining items TBD and how many would be unnecessary with new production. I don't want to waste new buyers time with old issues that have been solved at the factory.
OTOH, there is one serious flaw with using the Service Centers to repair known defects of finished product. The customer who is the final inspector is also the one who creates the list for repair. That could make it easier for the customer when Consumer Reports sends out their requests for repair history. Perhaps CU will have to ignore the initial repair data and ask users to list those items that fail after the initial delivery service repairs. If these repairs were being done at Fremont, the customer wouldn't have repairs to report to CU.
UPDATE: I have one question for those recently taking delivery. Does your Model X frunk lid backside look like this, or has Tesla installed a decorative cover to hide the holes shown in this photo? You can see the "body in white" paint inside the lower vertical holes when viewing the backside in person.
View attachment 107387