Tesla adds Titanium Underbody Shield to Model S

[wycolo]

> it needs to put it to the test. [Mayhemm]

This IS the test in case anyone missed it. The video(s) are contained in the document - let it load:

Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S — Medium
--

 

[mnx]

Here is what the aluminum extrusions and the titanium plate look like. They are installed in the front of the battery to protect the 90° angle in front of the battery and deflect or crush anything that impacts it. These do not stick out from the bottom of the car when they are installed.
View attachment 46339

So any educated guesses on what the weight of all 3 components is?

 

[JRP3]

@zdre, the titanium shield piece is that small dark piece on the right side of your photo? It seems too small to be effective.

It's small because the vulnerable area was small. When the first accident happened a number of us suspected that the object came up through the plastic shield and hit the front raised module section. This fix would seem to confirm that.

 

[J1mbo]

"We have tried every worst case debris impact we can think of, including hardened steel structures set in the ideal position for a piking event, essentially equivalent to driving a car at highway speed into a steel spear braced on the tarmac."

This is the video I would like to see! How could these shields protect against a 65mph "piking event"?

Guessing that the shield at the front would catch the pike, causing the car to nosedive into the road before flipping over, Hollywood-style? No battery puncture, no fire!

Seriously- I can see how these changes could protect the battery, but it seems that in the case mentioned in Elon's blog, either the shield breaks, slowing momentum and causing the car to nosedive then bounce up to impale on the pike; or it does not break, causing the rest of the car to deform around it (like hitting a tree).

 

[scaesare]

These pictures of the pieces are great... it answers one of the questions I posed earlier:

I do wonder, however, if the titanium shield plate then extends all the way from the front of the battery back (where we have seen it in the previous pictures) all the way under the frunk to that first aluminum bar? From the description, it sounds as if the expectation is that the underside of the trunk/liner can be considered sacrificial in that it could "capture" an incompressible object away form any susceptible underbody components. I'm wondering if the Ti plate only extends to the back edge of the trunkwell area?

So the size of that Ti plate and where we've seen it mounted, along with Elon's post, makes it pretty clear that it's designed to primarily protect against foreign object intrusion in to the region adjacent to the frontal face of the battery pack.

The space under the frunk-liner (with the other more "mundane" components) is a "sacrificial area" that would capture/contain road debris as a secondary defense in case the initial aluminum bar was not able to decimate it first...

I'd like to see how/where that front bar is mounted. I'm getting my armor today, so if no pictures show up, I'll try and take some...

 

[brianman]

Retrofit can be done on essentially all S on the road (including most early Sigs and Founders cars).

Hm. I'd like to hear more about the underlined.

- - - Updated - - -

I expect at some point the fire replacement warranty will end if you refuse the free retrofit.

They wouldn't be using words like "optional" if that was the case. For something that affects warranty, "optional" is definitely not the word to use.

 

[liuping]

They wouldn't be using words like "optional" if that was the case. For something that affects warranty, "optional" is definitely not the word to use.

It think it might be along the lines of "optional if you want to keep the fire warranty".

 

[brianman]

It think it might be along the lines of "optional if you want to keep the fire warranty".

If the legal department allows a company to make official statements like this regarding warranty will either (a) be part of the demise of said company or (b) be very quickly replaced and perhaps sued for malpractice or somesuch.

Better language would be "with the availability of __ the XYZ warranty now has an additional requirement of ___ for all cars built after ___; existing vehicles will be grandfathered with the existing warranty unless ___".

Unless of course you think it's a good idea to be in court often because you choose poor language.

 

[liuping]

If the legal department allows a company to make official statements like this regarding warranty will either (a) be part of the demise of said company or (b) be very quickly replaced and perhaps sued for malpractice or somesuch.

Better language would be "with the availability of __ the XYZ warranty now has an additional requirement of ___ for all cars built after ___; existing vehicles will be grandfathered with the existing warranty unless ___".

Actually, you are correct, they will not be able to easily remove the fire replacement warranty.

I just looked it up in the official warranty doc (https://www.teslamotors.com/sites/d...roadside_assistance_safety_and_warranty_0.pdf, page 34):

"To provide you with even more assurance, this Battery Limited Warranty will also cover damage to your vehicle from a Battery fire even if it is the result of driver error."

IMHO, not installing the improvements is "driver error", but I guess the warranty will still be valid.

 

[JPP]

Hm. I'd like to hear more about the underlined.

- - - Updated - - -


They wouldn't be using words like "optional" if that was the case. For something that affects warranty, "optional" is definitely not the word to use.

The senior service tech I spoke to who showed me the parts and the multi-page service bulletin had a very long list of VINs to refer to and told me exactly what I posted...that most Model S could be retrofitted. Only way to know is to have your local SC cross check your VIN against the list.

 

[JRP3]

I think the interest lies in what cars cannot be retrofitted, and why.

 

[Vger]

Just as one data point. Mine is S02001 and I have an appointment (April 28), so at least the first few Canadian cars are good to go...

 

[TEG]

Elon Musk Turns To Medium And GIFs To Reveal New Model S Fire Safety Feature | TechCrunch

 

[brianman]

I think the interest lies in what cars cannot be retrofitted, and why.

Bingo. This.

 

[jerry33]

The titanium plate is much smaller than I expected. This definitely will not be much of a cost for Tesla, regardless of what John Petersen thinks.

And if Tesla is using small spare (read scrap) pieces from SpaceX, the cost is probably less than that.

 

[brianman]

And if Tesla is using small spare (read scrap) pieces from SpaceX, the cost is probably less than that.

You mean my spaceship would have honest to goodness SpaceX materials? I might have to consider getting this retrofit after all....

 

[slipdrive]

So any educated guesses on what the weight of all 3 components is?

16 pounds, or about .4% added.

 

[Kraken]

16 pounds, or about .4% added.

You actually weighed it? If so, did you just weigh the parts, or the car with and without parts...

 

[cgiGuy]

You actually weighed it? If so, did you just weigh the parts, or the car with and without parts...

..and did you make sure the gas tank was filled to the same level for the before and after weights?

 

[SamGarber]

Getting it done at Norristown SC now. Tank mode - activated!