Last edited by a moderator:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Roadster Future - Time for a Wake Up Call?
- Thread starter Onepointfive
- Start date
I think you mean "negligible", but yes. Keeping our cars running is cheap marketing to assure future customers that they can depend on Tesla to support them for the long term. There's a lot of good that can be done here, for not a lot of money.
Obviously self serving on my part, given my roadster, however, it does have an effect on my confidence in Tesla to support their products. I have a Model 3 and pending solar/powerwalls and will be more cautious about further acquisitions. I don't have a twitter account but does it make sense to at least bring up the issue with Elon
da2ny
2010 Roadster Sport Twilight Blue #913
I agree. It's easier for me to get parts and service for my 1976 Jaguar than for my 2010 Roadster Sport. But then again, I can't get parts or service for my iPhone 4. Maybe this is the "new normal'. Caveat Emptor.
Mark77a
Member
A key to solve this bad situation is to keep up pressure in terms of general PR, and discussions with Tesla - to keep the 'Roadster issues' in the consciousness of Elon and his team.
This has to be done in a non-aggressive way (more effective, and we'd loose in a fight anyway) . And bearing in mind that Tesla have a massive pile of actions they are focused on, model 3 and onwards, where numbers simply dwarf our ~2500 roadsters.
A 'lever' is for people who own roadster AND other current models, S, X, 3 and onward - as current customers, to keep pressure and PR up on Tesla. This customer base is naturally more important to a customer focused company like Tesla, and are part of what is keeping Tesla going NOW.
Many Roadster owners dont actually have any skin in the game as, like me, they did not buy their Roadster new, avoiding the massive initial depreciation, which was also the 'kickstarter' funding for Tesla themselves. A such, I dont think we as a sub set of Roadster owners should 'demand' attention and fixes, but rather as above, keep up gentle, but persistent, and empathetic pressure on Tesla.
This has to be done in a non-aggressive way (more effective, and we'd loose in a fight anyway) . And bearing in mind that Tesla have a massive pile of actions they are focused on, model 3 and onwards, where numbers simply dwarf our ~2500 roadsters.
A 'lever' is for people who own roadster AND other current models, S, X, 3 and onward - as current customers, to keep pressure and PR up on Tesla. This customer base is naturally more important to a customer focused company like Tesla, and are part of what is keeping Tesla going NOW.
Many Roadster owners dont actually have any skin in the game as, like me, they did not buy their Roadster new, avoiding the massive initial depreciation, which was also the 'kickstarter' funding for Tesla themselves. A such, I dont think we as a sub set of Roadster owners should 'demand' attention and fixes, but rather as above, keep up gentle, but persistent, and empathetic pressure on Tesla.
Way back in 2012 at the first TMC conference near Fremont, Elon came in with family and took questions for over an hour.
I asked if it might be possible for some Supercharging locations to also have one high current Roadster charger, to make it more possible for Roadster owners to travel longer distances. He didn't respond with a yes or no, but spoke about how he and Tesla recognized that Roadster owners buying their cars had made it possible for the company to reach the next rung of the Secret Plan. He then said that they were working on something interesting for the Roadster for the next year. As all know, that was the Roadster 3.0 pack with much longer range.
It's 6 - 7 years later, but I believe Musk is not the type to forget the steps and contributions that have brought Tesla this far.
Now that M3 Production Hell is past, Elon has slowed down to a normal 80 hours per week, and the company is profitable, it's a good time to make the case for them committing the very small amounts needed to ensure Roadsters can be repaired and continue to be a part of the company's legacy of EV innovation. Proving in the bargain that they remain committed to doing the right thing for customers.
My belief is that our push should be for complete transparency on all aspects of the Roadster so that as the years go by, anyone who works on it has needed information on the parts, electronics (down to the schematics, software and individual electronic components used) and assembly manuals. While over time there will be people who will reverse engineer much of the Roadster, it would be so much better if Tesla would simply make it all available on the web, thus solidifying the life of the Roadster for decades. After ten years, I am assuming that there is not much that is still proprietary or a trade secret inside the Roadster but as far as I know, the electronics and software pretty much remain black boxes.
I may have bought my Roadster as a CPO, but rest assured, they made plenty of profit from me as well, especially since I bought mine a very short time before they lowered prices by $20K across the board. My Roadster came with the 37 month CPO warranty, plus I purchased an additional 3 years of ESA, which has 6 months left now.I personally feel Tesla owes all Roadster owners the same amount of support, regardless of what they may have paid, or how many previous owners came before. I am concerned about the future. So far my experience has been fine, though there have been two parts replaced where I was told that that my part was "the last one". That's really worrying. It's sad that not everyone has had good experiences. I love my Roadster, and really hope Tesla will support us into the future. I believe it is essential to Tesla's reputation.
Last edited:
The service manuals and parts manuals are different than those published. I’m not sure why, maybe to reflect what’s actually available
Mark77a
Member
Yes there are Roadster service manuals, and wiring diagrams floating about the internet
, as well as the recently released part numbers and diagrams.But, what we really need, to be truly independent of Tesla would be: circuit diagrams, software, firmware, and the diagnostic tools that go with these.
I'm guessing that, like Jaguar would never release full drawings (and 3D CAD data), of their classic cars like e-types etc.,
Tesla would never release the core information about their classic, Roadster
There again, Tesla are NOT a typical car company - here's hoping
smorgasbord
Active Member
Having previously owned a 1966 E-Type, I feel pretty confident in saying that Jaguar itself doesn't have 3D CAD data for it.
da2ny
2010 Roadster Sport Twilight Blue #913
josh-io
Member
Open sourcing the Roadster isn’t a bad idea. But I didn’t buy the Roadster because I wanted a DIY car.
What we need is for Tesla to support a car that it sold as recently as six years ago. I’m sorry that Tesla feels they have more important priorities now. They sold the Roadster. Support it!
What we need is for Tesla to support a car that it sold as recently as six years ago. I’m sorry that Tesla feels they have more important priorities now. They sold the Roadster. Support it!
What I think might be a winning strategy is to leverage the Right to Repair theme into more of a partnership between Tesla Service and the Owners. When I go in for the annual service, for example, Service shouldn't categorically ignore my brakes just because they are the carbotech aftermarket. Likewise, they should acknowledge that the PEM Fan connector on the 2.x models is a weak point, and accept the Owners' knowledge that a good dose of DeOxit is a good thing, even though it's not in the "approved" procedure book.
I really think we need each other to keep these cars running, and that Tesla needs to be reminded that this is in everyone's best interest.
I really think we need each other to keep these cars running, and that Tesla needs to be reminded that this is in everyone's best interest.
Similar threads
