Tesla Announces Recall Of Almost 2,800 Vehicles
The issue is that a part of the front suspension can come loose and separate from the vehicle's subframe.
insideevs.com
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla Announces Recall Of Almost 2,800 Model 3s Built between 2019 - 2021 & Model Ys built between 2020-2021
- Thread starter RSpanner
- Start date
insideevs.com
PianoAl
Active Member
You would want to start with seeing if your vehicle is impacted. Its "only" 2800 vehicles" across almost a year + of manufacturing of model 3s and Ys where they make like 500,000 vehicles a year.
If your vehicle is impacted, then you can see if mobile service would be able to do it by submitting a service request in the app for it. With the relatively small number currently mentioned, unless this number changes drastically, most people are likely going to find that their vin is not impacted.
check if your is recalled here:
Gauss Guzzler
Safety Score = 42
Apparently there's a bolt that sometimes takes a few attempts to tighten, and retrying can cause another bolt to come loose. The torque wrench logs all these retries so that's why it's such a small number of affected cars.
I think it must be the ball joint which requires a torx in the center while the nut is tightened. I'm not sure why this requires multiple attempts but perhaps the torx driver is difficult to position and can sometimes end up getting torqued the wrong way? It sounds like they've since switched to a single tool that holds the torx while tightening the nut to eliminate errors.
I think it must be the ball joint which requires a torx in the center while the nut is tightened. I'm not sure why this requires multiple attempts but perhaps the torx driver is difficult to position and can sometimes end up getting torqued the wrong way? It sounds like they've since switched to a single tool that holds the torx while tightening the nut to eliminate errors.
That's very informative, thank you!
How did you hear / come across that info? I'm not asking to doubt you, I'm asking if I can follow the same sources for future stuff like this.
It's not the ball joint that's the subject of this recall, it's the two bolts attaching the left end of that arm to the chassis.
Gauss Guzzler
Safety Score = 42
Ah, yeah, after re-reading the NHTSA filing I think I know what's going on now and why it requires "several attempts" to tighten this bolt.
@Dangerous Fish is correct that it's the pair of bolts at the subframe end.
"During assembly, the operator is tasked with securing both fasteners to the correct specification, which are registered in the torque record for the vehicle. In rare circumstances, if the operator made several unsuccessful attempts to torque a fastener to specification, the operator may have subsequently loosened a properly secured fastener. The torque record may not have accounted for the loosening of the fastener."
@Dangerous Fish is correct that it's the pair of bolts at the subframe end.
- The operator installs/torques one of those bolts and then can't get the other bolt inserted because the hole is misaligned.
- So the first bolt is loosened, second bolt is installed/torqued, then the first is forgotten about and left loose.
- The equipment logs the torque reversal/re-attempt but does not know if the operator then fully torqued both bolts or mistakenly torqued the same one twice in all the confusion.
"During assembly, the operator is tasked with securing both fasteners to the correct specification, which are registered in the torque record for the vehicle. In rare circumstances, if the operator made several unsuccessful attempts to torque a fastener to specification, the operator may have subsequently loosened a properly secured fastener. The torque record may not have accounted for the loosening of the fastener."
finman100
Member
ok, first of all...this amount of detail is EXACTLY why i read this forum! Had no idea a torque wrench application for the line worker would be logged and then examined?? wow.
2nd of all...wait, I don't have a 2nd of all...i am still pretty amazed at this info.
Thanks so much to all who share these things with the Tesla world.
2nd of all...wait, I don't have a 2nd of all...i am still pretty amazed at this info.
Thanks so much to all who share these things with the Tesla world.
Clivew
Member
That’s just bad engineering practice. When fitting a part which is secured by more than one bolt, all bolts should be engaged loosely into their relevant threads, before torquing them all evenly. Fitting and torquing one bolt first is a schoolboy error!
Very good point, even a mechanical klutz like me knows this and I follow this automatically.
Somehow this isn't surprising though...all the QC issues have to start somewhere!
Gauss Guzzler
Safety Score = 42
Well they're not exactly putting bolts in with their fingers like a mechanic. They might not even touch the bolts at all - the torque wrench could have an automatic bolt feeder that supplies, installs, torques, and logs these 4 bolts in just a few seconds. Remember, they're building 1 car per minute at Fremont.
They likely designed the part with the intent of using a double-headed wrench to install the bolts simultaneously but found that a regular wrench worked fine 99.9% of the time (2791 retries out of 2 million suspension arms) and the logging function ensured that they could be reliably reworked, or so they thought...
They likely designed the part with the intent of using a double-headed wrench to install the bolts simultaneously but found that a regular wrench worked fine 99.9% of the time (2791 retries out of 2 million suspension arms) and the logging function ensured that they could be reliably reworked, or so they thought...
Similar threads
