TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Second Fire cause by impact with a metal object. Recall necessary?

Discussion in 'TSLA Investor Discussions' started by ZenMan, Nov 7, 2013.

?

Does Tesla need to Recall the Model S for a battery armor fix?

  1. No, the Tesla is the safest car ever tested!

    136 vote(s)
    75.6%
  2. Yes, a redesign is needed because there is a design flaw.

    29 vote(s)
    16.1%
  3. Yes, but only to change the narrative.

    15 vote(s)
    8.3%
  1. ZenMan

    ZenMan Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    168
    Location:
    Littleton, CO
    I believe having one battery fire after caused by running over a metal object could have been considered a fluke. A second fire within a month will lead many to believe that there is a flaw in the design. What happens to the Tesla narrative if you have late night comedians cracking jokes about the Tesla battery fires?

    I believe the only way to put these battery fire concerns to rest is to introduce a retrofittable redesign. A recall. Change the 1/4" aluminum plate to titanium or kevlar....or some other design fix.

    The battery pack is designed for a quick changeout, so I'd like to see a recall that drops the battery and changes or adds something to the armor plating.
     
  2. Clemsons2k

    Clemsons2k Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Messages:
    190
    Location:
    Upstate, SC
    The increased cost of switching an aluminum panel to titanium or kevlar would be rediculous.
     
  3. Johan

    Johan Took a TSLA bear test. Came back negative.

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,890
    Location:
    Drammen, Norway
    What is your engineering background?
     
  4. yngwie_2012

    yngwie_2012 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    Messages:
    329
    Location:
    Germany
    you dont need titan. Its too expensive. You just need something like 6-8mm st52 or some E500TM steel. Its heavier than alu, but that will do it. IT MUST BE RETORFITABLE, a redesign is too costy
     
  5. electrictorque

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Messages:
    98
    Location:
    Millington, NJ
    Maybe just raise the ground clearance? did 1st and 3nd cars have air suspension?
     
  6. ZenMan

    ZenMan Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    168
    Location:
    Littleton, CO
    I just looked at the underside of my Model S. There are four U channel supports that run the length of the battery. There U channels protrude down approx 1/4" from the main aluminum armor. A retrofit could easily be made to fit three panels between these four channels.
    20131107_150956[1].jpg
     
  7. Right_Said_Fred

    Right_Said_Fred Model S - Sig. 283 EU

    Joined:
    May 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,283
    Location:
    Gorinchem, Netherlands
    Two identical incidents don't prove anything. Ten years could go by without a similar incident. Who knows? No need for such heavy measures yet. If Tesla concludes something needs to be done, a simple software upgrade could suffice: raising the car's suspension from low to normal during highway driving, will probably already make a big difference.
     
  8. Cameron

    Cameron Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2013
    Messages:
    177
    Location:
    Bellevue, WA
    I see nothing wrong with the car. Obviously if you run over/hit a large metal object at highway speeds you are going to do some serious damage. In both of these scenarios it seems the driver was able to safely pull over and get out unharmed. It wasn't until a little while after did the fire start (at least that was the case with the incident in Washington, and I would assume its the case in Tennessee as well). Im sure if we looked up what happens to ICE cars after hitting large metal objects, the results are much more catastrophic. If Tesla needs to retro fit something to put everyones mind at ease then sure, go for it. Otherwise we can't really do anything about driver error + physics.
     
  9. SFOTurtle

    SFOTurtle Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2013
    Messages:
    1,039
    Location:
    Los Altos, CA
    #9 SFOTurtle, Nov 7, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2013
    Did the car explode on impact? Were any of the passengers seriously injured in any of these accidents with large metal objects at freeway speeds? is the car fundamentally unsafe? Shouldn't the answers to these questions be yes before Tesla undertakes a major recall and retrofit of the MS?
     
  10. Norse

    Norse Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2013
    Messages:
    1,128
    Location:
    Bergen, Norway
    Seriously? Let Tesla Motors and NHTSA take care of this.
     
  11. Raffy.Roma

    Raffy.Roma Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Messages:
    3,209
    Location:
    Rome (Italy)
    IMO a battery pack redesign is needed because it's not acceptable that the battery pack catch fire after having hit a debris.
     
  12. bonnie

    bonnie Oil is for sissies.

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    14,241
    Location:
    Columbia River Gorge
    So how many months and how many miles went by without a single incident? Two in one month would mean something if it were the first month the cars were on the road.

    It's not.
     
  13. ZenMan

    ZenMan Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    168
    Location:
    Littleton, CO
    Possibly. But the time to do something is before it becomes the prevailing narrative.
     
  14. bonaire

    bonaire Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,505
    Location:
    USA
    For peace of mind, someone should consider looking into the true strength of the bottom of the battery casing. Musk called it armor in the first fire situational interview and press release. However, that is a word that should perhaps not be used unless the material is armor-grade. If it is not ballistics or armor grade, what level of protection is the patent-based bottom sheet below the battery?

    There are numerous Teslas that have been wrecked and totalled and the battery case should be made available for an independent research party to review. Not because of a federal investigation but perhaps even a Tesla owner could put something together with a salvage-car.
     
  15. SFOTurtle

    SFOTurtle Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2013
    Messages:
    1,039
    Location:
    Los Altos, CA
    Oh boy, here we go again. Re-design the entire car because of two (and only two, in all of the months the thousands of MS have been on the roads) accidents with significant size metal objects at freeway speed, neither of which resulted in any injury to the passengers? Really? What should Tesla do, double the width and weight of the protective steel on the underside and give the car the range of a Leaf, just so the car can be protected against large metal objects on freeways? Put the battery pack on top of the Pano? "Battery pack redesign" is basically saying, let's shut down the company and throw years of engineering and design out the window.
     
  16. Raffy.Roma

    Raffy.Roma Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Messages:
    3,209
    Location:
    Rome (Italy)
    #16 Raffy.Roma, Nov 7, 2013
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2013
    @SFOTurtle

    IMO re-design the battery pack is different from re-design the entire car. I am not a battery expert but maybe that some slight changes to the battery pack would work out the situation with respect to the danger of debris hitting it.

    To this purpose I am reporting a post took from another thread:

     
  17. apacheguy

    apacheguy Sig 255, VIN 320

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    3,704
    Location:
    So Cal
    IMHO, the ability to lower the car at highway speeds is a critical feature of the air suspension that improves efficiency. Removing this feature as a workaround to address another issue is not acceptable. Not saying we should sacrifice safety, but I highly doubt Tesla would consider doing this at any rate.
     
  18. ZenMan

    ZenMan Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Messages:
    168
    Location:
    Littleton, CO
  19. epley

    epley P85 VIN 693

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    128
    Location:
    Woodinville, WA
    http://www.car-accidents.com/car-fire-crash-burn.html

    Lots of regular cars catch on fire after hitting metal objects, trees, other cars, sitting still, and for many other various and sundry reasons. Of the number of Tesla crashes, several have caught fire. It would be interesting to know if this rate is any higher than for ICE cars.

    They wouldn't have to make this pdf (http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/Files/Safety%20information/Safety%20tip%20sheets/car_fire_safety.pdf) if it didn't happen a lot.
     
  20. tslafan123

    tslafan123 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2013
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    USA
    It's not about just catching fire. It's about vulnerability to debris on road. Is Tesla more vulnerable? I don't know the answer to it. If it is Yes, hell yeah, they better make it safer.
     

Share This Page