Resolved: second row crash test doubts

[Cutwolf]

The advantage of GCR is that minor or not, their stories go out on AP wires and often are picked up by other organizations. If nothing else it alerts news orgs to a story so they can write their own.

- - - Updated - - -



OMG. The car was a test article which was modified and inspected for purposes of the test. Just because someone forgets to bolt the seat back into place is not a reason to get upset.

If that's what happened, that's what happened. But I'd like to hear it from someone who actually knows rather than speculation from fellow (biased) enthusiasts.

Right now, all we know for certain is that the back seat detached and flew forward.

You are misunderstanding what I said. The interior of the car has large pieces of equipment installed for testing, including sensors and other materials (like crash dummies). Cables need to be run and other changes are made. Technicians spend a LOT of time inside of the car preparing them, and I've witnessed them removing seats from mini-van they were testing so they would have room to crawl around inside of the car.

This is concern trolling, pure and simple.

Here is a quick video showing some prep work that does not show seat removal, but note the large pieces of equipment being installed, and keep in mind that they needed to properly secure the test rig they put in the trunk and run cables to the front. So even in the video they are skipping a lot of the work they are doing inside.

Preparing Cars for a Small Overlap Crash Test - AOL On

Bottom line, it takes 2 or 3 minutes to remove seats and give yourself room to be comfortable while spending hours crawling around the interior. The idea that an nhtsa technician would forget to bolt the seat back in is about 10,000 times more likely than the idea that the armchair engineers in this forum have discovered a fundamental safety flaw.

And again, of all the car tests I've ever seen on the site (you can check yourself), none had this happen.

It's not about "discovering" a flaw. It's about seeing pretty clearly with our own eyes what happened: the seat detached and flew forward.

Why that happened? I don't know. I never claimed to know. But it's something that seems to be serious enough to warrant some explanation (whether it's oops, forgot to bolt it down, or oops, recall).

I could not agree with you more. NHSTA would not miss that problem. NHSTA is not populated by a bunch of fools. To think that "we" can out guess and out perform NHSTA makes some look foolish. TESLA is not "gaming" the system. To think otherwise is without merit.

My friend, I'd ask that you read what has been said. No one is saying that the NHTSA missed the problem, just that this problem, if it is indeed a problem, is not something that is tested by the NHTSA in the front crash test.

For the purposes of the front crash test, the back seat could explode, call down hellfire, make a mushroom cloud, disintegrate into ashes, and unleash demons, but as long as the front two passengers were not injured, it would get 5 star front safety ratings, because rear safety is not looked at in front crash safety ratings.

 

[capt601]

Cut wolf, hate to say it, but only starting to post in this forum after 5 star safety tests have been put out and earnings release , but sure seems right in line with a short trying to work their magic. No other posts in any other areas except to try to put doubt into tesla. That seems a bit strange to me. If you had an actual interest you would have posted before. I'm guessing you will be writing an article in jalopnik soon enough.
And yes this needs to be looked at but not by a short, if it is even an issue. Don't you think nhtsa would be looking into it? But then if they did your short interest wouldn't be worth as much.

 

[jammerdjc]

Based on real world experiences that are documented elsewhere in these forums, I'd say there is NO issue with the seats coming loose. I believe that NHTSA would have looked into and noted any issues. Additionally, there have been some pretty significant crashes documented elsewhere and none of them indicate any of their rear seats coming loose. I believe this is a non-issue.

 

[Gear]

Cut wolf, hate to say it, but only starting to post in this forum after 5 star safety tests have been put out and earnings release , but sure seems right in line with a short trying to work their magic. No other posts in any other areas except to try to put doubt into tesla. That seems a bit strange to me. If you had an actual interest you would have posted before. I'm guessing you will be writing an article in jalopnik soon enough.
And yes this needs to be looked at but not by a short, if it is even an issue. Don't you think nhtsa would be looking into it? But then if they did your short interest wouldn't be worth as much.

Let's not be ridiculously paranoid. I think you give this forum too much credit in terms of outside exposure. I've never heard of this place until I started looking to place my order. I doubt any post here is going to have any significant impact on the stock price.

 

[Cutwolf]

Cut wolf, hate to say it, but only starting to post in this forum after 5 star safety tests have been put out and earnings release , but sure seems right in line with a short trying to work their magic. No other posts in any other areas except to try to put doubt into tesla. That seems a bit strange to me. If you had an actual interest you would have posted before. I'm guessing you will be writing an article in jalopnik soon enough.
And yes this needs to be looked at but not by a short, if it is even an issue. Don't you think nhtsa would be looking into it? But then if they did your short interest wouldn't be worth as much.

I own a grand total of 3 shares of Tesla, and I didn't get in until $120. Spare me.

The safety issue is important to me because it's especially important to my SO, who, because I'm a good husband, needs to be convinced of all things Tesla before we lay down $100k on a car. And thus, it's important enough for me to make a new account when there are developments on that front.

 

[montgom626]

And thus, it's important enough for me to make a new account when there are developments on that front.

What does this mean?

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

If that's what happened, that's what happened. But I'd like to hear it from someone who actually knows rather than speculation from fellow (biased) enthusiasts.

Right now, all we know for certain is that the back seat detached and flew forward.



And again, of all the car tests I've ever seen on the site (you can check yourself), none had this happen.

It's not about "discovering" a flaw. It's about seeing pretty clearly with our own eyes what happened: the seat detached and flew forward.

Why that happened? I don't know. I never claimed to know. But it's something that seems to be serious enough to warrant some explanation (whether it's oops, forgot to bolt it down, or oops, recall).



My friend, I'd ask that you read what has been said. No one is saying that the NHTSA missed the problem, just that this problem, if it is indeed a problem, is not something that is tested by the NHTSA in the front crash test.

For the purposes of the front crash test, the back seat could explode, call down hellfire, make a mushroom cloud, disintegrate into ashes, and unleash demons, but as long as the front two passengers were not injured, it would get 5 star front safety ratings, because rear safety is not looked at in front crash safety ratings.

This comment just demonstrates profound ignorance of what the NHTSA is. In case you are not aware (as you seem not to be) NHTSA stands for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and among other things they are the lead U.S. agency for developing and enforcing the "Laws and Regulations" that govern automobile construction in the U.S.

Among the "Laws and Regulations" that they develop and enforce is Standard No. 207 which specifies that any seat in a vehicle like the Model S must meet the following standards -

Each occupant seat, other than a side facing seat, or a passenger seat on a bus, shall withstand the following forces.
A. In any position to which it can be adjusted - 20 times the weight of the seat applied in a forward longitudinal direction
B. In any position to which it can be adjusted - 20 times the weight of the seat applied in a rearward longitudinal direction
C. For a seat belt assembly attached to the seat the force specified in paragraph (a) above, if it is a forward facing seat, or paragraph (b), if it is a rearward facing seat, in each case applied simultaneously with the forces imposed on the seat by the seat belt assembly when it is loaded in accordance with S4.2 of S210
D. In its rearmost position - a force that produces a 3,300 in-lb moment about the seating reference point for each designated seating position that the seat provides, applied to the upper crossmember of the seat back or the upper seat back in a rearward longitudinal direction for forward-facing seats and in a forward longitudinal direction for rearward-facing seats

You would be correct to say that this particular test is not the one used by the NHTSA to pass the Model S (and yes, the Model S was tested and did pass), but you are wildly incorrect to state that they would ignore a clear violation of the law just because it wasn't something they were testing for. The NHTSA spends a substantial amount of time investigating real life crashes specifically to find violations like this so that they can institute a recall.

The idea that they would ignore data from a crash that they themselves staged is beyond ludicrous, and your utter lack of credibility demonstrated in your comments does nothing to change the clear text of the law or the legal and ethical responsibilities of the NHTSA personnel involved in this test. You might be comfortable claiming that they are collectively utter morons who would casually commit a fireable offense, but it doesn't make it true.

 

[AMPd]

Let's not be ridiculously paranoid. I think you give this forum too much credit in terms of outside exposure. I've never heard of this place until I started looking to place my order. I doubt any post here is going to have any significant impact on the stock price.

Actually I believe posts from this forum have been taken out of context and used in articles on news sites

thats why you see so many users with the sigs prohibiting using their posts outside of TMC

 

[evme]

If that's what happened, that's what happened. But I'd like to hear it from someone who actually knows rather than speculation from fellow (biased) enthusiasts.

Right now, all we know for certain is that the back seat detached and flew forward.



And again, of all the car tests I've ever seen on the site (you can check yourself), none had this happen.

It's not about "discovering" a flaw. It's about seeing pretty clearly with our own eyes what happened: the seat detached and flew forward.

Why that happened? I don't know. I never claimed to know. But it's something that seems to be serious enough to warrant some explanation (whether it's oops, forgot to bolt it down, or oops, recall).



My friend, I'd ask that you read what has been said. No one is saying that the NHTSA missed the problem, just that this problem, if it is indeed a problem, is not something that is tested by the NHTSA in the front crash test.

For the purposes of the front crash test, the back seat could explode, call down hellfire, make a mushroom cloud, disintegrate into ashes, and unleash demons, but as long as the front two passengers were not injured, it would get 5 star front safety ratings, because rear safety is not looked at in front crash safety ratings.

I have a simple way to looking at it. The NHTSA is not only just doing tests but also handles recalls. If there was an issue or safety concerns during the test, regardless of what they are testing, they would issue a recall.


---

On an unrelated note, I see 5.7% on rollover. I wonder how that compares.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Actually I believe posts from this forum have been taken out of context and used in articles on news sites

thats why you see so many users with the sigs prohibiting using their posts outside of TMC

This +1000000. News organizations and Wall Street Analysts (including shorts) are all over these forums like white on rice.

 

[Cutwolf]

You would be correct to say that this particular test is not the one used by the NHTSA to pass the Model S (and yes, the Model S was tested and did pass), but you are wildly incorrect to state that they would ignore a clear violation of the law just because it wasn't something they were testing for. The NHTSA spends a substantial amount of time investigating real life crashes specifically to find violations like this so that they can institute a recall.

The idea that they would ignore data from a crash that they themselves staged is beyond ludicrous, and your utter lack of credibility demonstrated in your comments does nothing to change the clear text of the law or the legal and ethical responsibilities of the NHTSA personnel involved in this test. You might be comfortable claiming that they are collectively utter morons who would casually commit a fireable offense, but it doesn't make it true.

Recalls take a long time to investigate and issue. It's a drastic measure. They wouldn't issue a recall as part of one test. If something appears on their radar, they'd investigate it. It's been two weeks since the test. It's also much harder for the NHTSA to issue a mandatory recall. They can strongly suggest "voluntary" recalls, however.

There are myriad reasons why they wouldn't announce publicly if they're investigating a safety flaw before they ready to announce whether it was an actual safety flaw (or, as suggested, error on their part in bolting things down).

That data wouldn't, however, be reflected in the safety ratings released today.

Source: I am required to be good with the law and logic as part of my job.

 

[twinklejet]

Guys, I think we can cut Cutwolf some slack - he/she has already indicated that he/she has emailed Tesla and will email the NHTSA and report back once they reply.
I find any further back and forth here to be going nowhere productive.

 

[dsm363]

I own a grand total of 3 shares of Tesla, and I didn't get in until $120. Spare me.

The safety issue is important to me because it's especially important to my SO, who, because I'm a good husband, needs to be convinced of all things Tesla before we lay down $100k on a car. And thus, it's important enough for me to make a new account when there are developments on that front.

I think it is fine to look into this but you are basing everything off of just the video when it still achieved a 5 star rating. There are millions of possible crash scenarios and no car can be perfect in every situation. I would rather have a 5 star car with the possibility of a soft cushion coming loose than a 4 or 3 star car. No car is perfect so I hope you take that into consideration. If it is a real issue, I have to believe Tesla is addressing it unless it either isn't a real safety issue or an entire redesign of the car would be needed (or something major).

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Recalls take a long time to investigate and issue. It's a drastic measure. They wouldn't issue a recall as part of one test. If something appears on their radar, they'd investigate it. It's been two weeks since the test. It's also much harder for the NHTSA to issue a mandatory recall. They can strongly suggest "voluntary" recalls, however.

There are myriad reasons why they wouldn't announce publicly if they're investigating a safety flaw before they ready to announce whether it was an actual safety flaw (or, as suggested, error on their part in bolting things down).

That data wouldn't, however, be reflected in the safety ratings released today.

Source: I am required to be good with the law and logic as part of my job.

Yes, and Tesla issued a voluntary recall within days of finding a similar issue on their own. Tesla engineers are onsite to observe the tests and would be fully aware if there was a problem. You are grasping at straws in an attempt to elevate a non-issue into a major safety defect. Even given the tiny probability that there was a problem it WILL be dealt with in all current and future Model S's regardless of your efforts, as you yourself just admitted (which is a change of position from your repeated contention that the NHTSA would ignore it, despite your supposed capacity with applying logic to the law).

This is non-issue until the NHTSA or Tesla announces otherwise, and nothing said here will change that.

It's far likelier that the crash technicians just failed to properly secure the rear seat after removing it in order to get proper access to the interior. They would have needed to do this in order to characterize (with detailed measurements) the engine compartment area of the vehicle (which just happens to be located behind/under the rear seat, and which the investigators took special care to take video of from underneath the car during the test). They need those measurements in order to be able to understand the nature and magnitude of intrusion/deformation into the passenger capsule by the vehicle's engine and other mechanical parts (which tends to be a major issue addressed during front impact testing). This is completely aside from their likely desire to not have a sore back after spending hours and days crawling around the interior of the vehicle.

 

[Doug_G]

I doubt any post here is going to have any significant impact on the stock price.

Please observe my message footer. I've had a bad experience with the press quoting me out of context.

 

[neroden]

I could not agree with you more. NHSTA would not miss that problem.

Worth noting: there are a number of cars with good star ratings... and little warning triangles next to the ratings, which mean "NHSTA has spotted some other safety problem which is not represented within the star ratings".

Be assured that if NHSTA thought that there was a problem based on the behavior of the back seat, there would be one of those little warning triangles.

 

[AustinPowers]

EDIT: last video, the entire rear bench blew up!!! is that what the recall was about?

That's what struck me too. Perhaps it was just due to all the testing equipment though.

What I found fascinating was the second video, the one with the side impact. Did you notice what the roof did at about 1:02 minutes? It wobbled like waves on the impact, then seemed to completely smooth itself out again!
I wonder if they also tested a Model S with pano roof.


Edit: forget my post, I have now read through all 13 pages and found out that this has more or less been answered.
I'm still fascinated with that wave ripple effect of the roof though.

 

[Cutwolf]

Worth noting: there are a number of cars with good star ratings... and little warning triangles next to the ratings, which mean "NHSTA has spotted some other safety problem which is not represented within the star ratings".

Be assured that if NHSTA thought that there was a problem based on the behavior of the back seat, there would be one of those little warning triangles.

I actually just came to post this!

I was going through other cars to see if I could find anything similar. Came across one of those warning triangles. They denote safety concerns not involved with the star ratings. The text reads:

Safety Concern : These are safety issues that occur during NCAP tests and that are not reflected in the measurements used to calculate star ratings. Safety concerns are placed in the appropriate rating category positioned as a superscript to the right of the right-most star in the rating category. Examples of a safety concern may include (but are not limited to) structural failure or non-intended performance of vehicle components. They can include such things as fuel leakages and door openings.

So, that actually pretty much alleviates my concern.

Back to good times, guys!

 

[Newscutter]

I think that is actually in the manual. Doors unlock and handles extend at impact. I am referring to the latest EU
spec manual version .11

Excellent! Thanks. I'm not an owner (yet) so I was just spitballing suggestions.

Re: THE BIG BACKSEAT CONTROVERSY

When my kids "graduated" from child seats to booster seats, the booster seat was required for the express purpose of ensuring the seatbelt was properly positioned to restrain them. The booster seat (like all booster seats) was NOT fastened to the vehicle in any way. Even *IF* the backseat became dislodged (which I'm sure there is a good explanation for) it would not be any less safe or relevant than an unsecured booster seat.

 

[stevezzzz]

Dear all,

Tesla asked that I post the following statement on their behalf:


Tesla and NHTSA confirm that significant lifting of the second row seat pan upon impact as seen in the video of NCAP frontal crash testing is not a normal occurrence on Model S. Instead, this anomaly is due to the placement and installation of sensors, cables, cameras and other test equipment used to document the NCAP testing. During this process, the test facility partially removed the second row seat pan and did not fully reinstall it. This partial removal had no effect whatsoever on NHTSA’s NCAP test results. Normally, under non-testing conditions, the Model S second row seat is locked into place with a series of clips and fasteners. The second row seat pan will not lift in the event of a crash.

Great news, if this is legit. What's your source?