Tesla ranks 2nd worst in Consumer reports reliability survey

[DrGriz]

Like I said, EVs are a new paradigm. Including items such as 'exhaust system' for EVs seems ridiculous at first blush, but then, how do you take it out? If you have fewer categories for EVs than ICE vehicles then the problem rate would go up. If you separate out all EVs you're only comparing them to like vehicles, but then that precludes any comparison with any other vehicle. One of the benefits of an EV is there isn't an exhaust system to fail, so I think keeping it in the ratings is the proper choice. Yes, all EVs will do well in this category, but that's part of their advantage.

Of course, it also begs the question, how do you classify battery issues? ICE cars don't have a Li battery to fail so they'd do better here. I would include the battery as part of the 'drive train' in an EV, but I don't know what, if any changes CR made in this area.

As far as adjusting for age goes, that is part of statistical analysis. Any good study will try to identify and account for confounding variables. That is what CR is doing here. Part of their data set is age, so they can tell if someone is 55 or 85. Is it possible that a 60 year old Tesla owner is more likely to report problems than your average 60 year old, making the correction unnecessary? Yes. Of course, given the average Tesla owner's loyalty, it's also possible that they will be more likely to underreport problems.

Tesla Owner Demographics: Age, Gender, Ethnicity, Income, Children — EV UNITE

The demographics of an average Tesla Owner in the United States. Including Age, Ethnicity, Gender, Income, Children, Home Ownership.

www.evunite.com

Yes - pretty much every problem in a one year old car would be an initial quality problem, but CR is comparing 1 year old cars to 1 year old cars so it doesn't matter. What their data shows is Teslas have a higher rate of these issues than other cars.

Basically we agree on the facts of the situation. We all know Tesla's IQ weaknesses. But it really IS impossible to compare ICE vehicles and EVs using the old surveys designed for only ICE vehicles and do it accurately. There may be similar degrees of overlap between my Samsung Galaxy and a Tesla. It's just that, how do you do it and communicate? To me, and it's just my opinion, EVs and ICE Vehicles are just too different for the same survey to be meaningful and informative. Not that the individual questions are not useful (except where they don't apply) it's just the final rating that I feel is misleading, since they are so different.

Effectively, the age of the driver issue is the same. Age can be a meaningful modifier across ICE vehicles, because pretty much everyone who can drive one can drive them all. It really isn't so for EVs, especially Tesla with it's touch screens. Just to different for many people to even consider driving them. It requires a skill set that older people did not grow up with. So to use age as a weighting factor might be helpful but not with the same formula you would use with ICE.

 

[DrGriz]

I agree. But here's the bigger issue I see in a nutshell: Joe User looks at the Consumer Reports freebee results shown on the web, see's Tesla's reliability rating close to the bottom and think the car is unreliable in the traditional sense. He's less likely to investigate further or subscribe for more "details". If he's adamant about getting one though, he would hopefully turn to Google for more info and find this or another forum where more useful information resides.

How many would actually investigate further? I'm guessing a much lower percentage than those who would take that result at face value.

Many questions/categories in the survey cover Tesla's problems. Others are just extra padding. And we don't know if their traditional weighting modifiers are accurate for EVs, since they were developed looking at a different category of machine. The bottom line "score" is disingenuous. I'd be happy if they just gave us the frequency of the issues they discovered in the surveys and didn't publish a final rating because I don't want to know how one brand of dishwasher compares to a different brand of chainsaw. Even though, hey, they both have motors.

 

[john5520]

Many questions/categories in the survey cover Tesla's problems. Others are just extra padding. And we don't know if their traditional weighting modifiers are accurate for EVs, since they were developed looking at a different category of machine. The bottom line "score" is disingenuous. I'd be happy if they just gave us the frequency of the issues they discovered in the surveys and didn't publish a final rating because I don't want to know how one brand of dishwasher compares to a different brand of chainsaw. Even though, hey, they both have motors.

I would go a step further and argue that their weighting modifiers are questionable regardless of ICE or EV.

 

[Az_Rael]

I do have one question regarding the results per vehicle. I understand each category has a list of parts that could apply. However, do they say per vehicle which part in the list of possibilities was faulty?

If you look at my prior posts in this thread, I posted screenshots from the subscriber section for individual cars. The answer to your question is no, they do not let you know which portion of the drivetrain section for example was problematic.

So, on the Model X under Drive System when you click the “i“
“Driveshaft or axle, CV joint, differential, transfer case, 4WD/AWD components, driveline vibration, traction control, electronic stability control (ESC), electrical failure.“.

It won’t tell you if the reliability ding was for CV joints, or the ESC for example. That is where you have to take the CR section and then do forum searches to find out the details from owners. At which point you would probably find the issues with “driveline vibration” or I think they refer to it as the “shudder“ on the X forums.

 

[Bouba]

Basically we agree on the facts of the situation. We all know Tesla's IQ weaknesses. But it really IS impossible to compare ICE vehicles and EVs using the old surveys designed for only ICE vehicles and do it accurately. There may be similar degrees of overlap between my Samsung Galaxy and a Tesla. It's just that, how do you do it and communicate? To me, and it's just my opinion, EVs and ICE Vehicles are just too different for the same survey to be meaningful and informative. Not that the individual questions are not useful (except where they don't apply) it's just the final rating that I feel is misleading, since they are so different.

Effectively, the age of the driver issue is the same. Age can be a meaningful modifier across ICE vehicles, because pretty much everyone who can drive one can drive them all. It really isn't so for EVs, especially Tesla with it's touch screens. Just to different for many people to even consider driving them. It requires a skill set that older people did not grow up with. So to use age as a weighting factor might be helpful but not with the same formula you would use with ICE.

That’s probably as good a system as any. Compare ice cars to other ice cars. Compare ev to other ev. Then make some generalized comparison of all ice to ev (which class of vehicle is more likely not to get you to work in the morning and whether they have the same longevity etc)

 

[john5520]

If you look at my prior posts in this thread, I posted screenshots from the subscriber section for individual cars. The answer to your question is no, they do not let you know which portion of the drivetrain section for example was problematic.

View attachment 741521

So, on the Model X under Drive System when you click the “i“
“Driveshaft or axle, CV joint, differential, transfer case, 4WD/AWD components, driveline vibration, traction control, electronic stability control (ESC), electrical failure.“.

It won’t tell you if the reliability ding was for CV joints, or the ESC for example. That is where you have to take the CR section and then do forum searches to find out the details from owners. At which point you would probably find the issues with “driveline vibration” or I think they refer to it as the “shudder“ on the X forums.

Thanks for this. I did see your previous posts but wasn't sure after another member claimed they tell you what part or alluded to it. Anyway, it would have been more useful for them to identify the particular part(s) and state whether applicable TSB exists, which is the case. I read they do identify TSBs but can't say how organized they are.

The other issue here is the fact that they scored the 2017 and 2018 models as having good drive system scores when the shudder issue was known since 2018 and affected the 2017s as well. This is an example of the inconsistency that gives me pause with regard to their data.

 

[DrGriz]

I would go a step further and argue that their weighting modifiers are questionable regardless of ICE or EV.

I want to give them the benefit of the doubt that at least they made a good faith effort to develop them. Their assumptions might be debatable, but we can't debate what we don't know. It would be far easier to accept if they actually shared their methodology and how they choose to weight certain factors.

 

[daniel]

Like I said, EVs are a new paradigm. Including items such as 'exhaust system' for EVs seems ridiculous at first blush, but then, how do you take it out? If you have fewer categories for EVs than ICE vehicles then the problem rate would go up. If you separate out all EVs you're only comparing them to like vehicles, but then that precludes any comparison with any other vehicle. One of the benefits of an EV is there isn't an exhaust system to fail, so I think keeping it in the ratings is the proper choice. Yes, all EVs will do well in this category, but that's part of their advantage.

Of course, it also begs the question, how do you classify battery issues? ICE cars don't have a Li battery to fail so they'd do better here. I would include the battery as part of the 'drive train' in an EV, but I don't know what, if any changes CR made in this area.

<...snip...>

This is why I would not rate cars based on "systems" but rather on the severity of problems. When I'm considering a car, I want to know how safe it is and if it will get me where I want to go when I want to go there. I don't care whether the thing that causes the car to fail is the drive train or the engine. I don't care whether it's the fuel injection of an ICE car or the battery cooling system of an EV.

What I want to know, in order of importance, are:

1. How likely is the car to kill or injure me?
2. How likely is the car to become non-operational and how much will that cost?
3. How likely am I to have to take the car in for a non-critical repair and how much will that cost?
4. How often does the car need routine maintenance and what does that cost?
5. How comfortable is the car and how does it handle?

Which sub-systems are responsible for each of the above is irrelevant and I just don't care. Listing sub-systems in the ratings just muddies the waters.

 

[sleepydoc]

This is why I would not rate cars based on "systems" but rather on the severity of problems. When I'm considering a car, I want to know how safe it is and if it will get me where I want to go when I want to go there. I don't care whether the thing that causes the car to fail is the drive train or the engine. I don't care whether it's the fuel injection of an ICE car or the battery cooling system of an EV.

What I want to know, in order of importance, are:

1. How likely is the car to kill or injure me?

Virtually zero chance. Life-threatening safety defects are managed with recalls from the NHTSA. Any car will satisfy this requirement. Well, except a Ford Pinto. If you're interested in crash test results go to NHTSA or IIHS.

2. How likely is the car to become non-operational and how much will that cost?

In the first 3 years, this is also incredibly rare and covered by a warranty. Beyond 3 years, CR is the only source I've seen with any reasonable data but for a model that's been in production for only a couple of years the best you can do is estimate from other cars by the same company.

As far as costs go, that can be anywhere from a few hundred dollars to several thousand - it all depends on what's broken. I haven't seen anything that will give that kind of detail.

3. How likely am I to have to take the car in for a non-critical repair and how much will that cost?

In the first 3 years, repairs should be covered by the warranty.
The only reasonable sources I've seen for this are JD Power's 3 year survey and CR. Unfortunately, JD Power doesn't make it easy to research or compare brands. CR is the only place I've seen any data for cars over 3 years old.

4. How often does the car need routine maintenance and what does that cost?

Some sites have 'cost to own' estimates, but the best source is the owner's manual and manufacturer's recommended maintenance schedule.

5. How comfortable is the car and how does it handle?

That's a personal decision - Take a test drive.

Which sub-systems are responsible for each of the above is irrelevant and I just don't care. Listing sub-systems in the ratings just muddies the waters.

 

[gfunkdave]

I'd like to share my thoughts here because this ranking from CR has given me pause. I have been wanting a Tesla for a while now but held off because there was nothing wrong with my car (a 2015 CR-V). Now it has about 83k miles on it (still nothing for a CR-V) but I'd like to get a new car that I enjoy vs one that is simply transportation. CR has always been a trusted source for me on general reliability and major issues when car shopping. Until now I'd been 100% sure I wanted a Tesla Y (in blue!) and had been more or less planning to get one in 2022 (as soon as I can get the condo board to install car chargers or let me put one in).

But in light of CR's review, watching the price steadily creep up, and hearing the complaints of people comparing the $60k Y with other cars costing similar amounts makes me wonder if I shouldn't just wait another year or two for other options to become available. And I can't shake the feeling that Teslas are not in the same league as other cars that cost the same. A coworker has a Model X and she says she loves it now - after two years of service visits to fix all manner of little things that went wrong with it. It just feels like Tesla is still really ironing out the bugs in its processes.

And yet...look at their bulging order books. Clearly there's a pent up demand for EVs. I think as more options come on the market Tesla will lose share if they can't fix these issues.

 

[daniel]

@sleepydoc: I don't disagree with anything in your post above. I'm saying those are the items of in formation that I'm interested in when shopping for a car. (No opportunity to test drive the Model 3 before I bought, but no other car was even in the running. And it remains the best car I've ever owned. Otherwise I've always test-driven before buying.) And I'm saying that I don't care about the break-down of reliability by sub-systems. And even warranty repairs are a nuisance, so non-critical repairs are an item of interest.

I still think CR is the best source of consumer information. I've been a subscriber for longer than I can remember. But I think the items I listed would be more useful to a prospective car buyer than the way it's typically presented nowadays.

 

[Xenoilphobe]

Weird. I just checked and was able to book an appointment by Dec 7 in Fairfax county VA at sterling service center. Maybe they just expanded the times.

Why do you keep it? It seems you have extremely bad luck with them and causes you grief.

I love the car, but hate the service... Porsche is overpriced and has lower specs, what other electric options do I have, Ford... also lower specs and ridiculous markup for a less capable car...

 

[SO16]

I love the car, but hate the service... Porsche is overpriced and has lower specs, what other electric options do I have, Ford... also lower specs and ridiculous markup for a less capable car...

Sorry to hear that. Well so far for 5 years I’ve had “sufficient” service with Tesla. And seeing as how service only accounts for about 0.001% of the time of total ownership, I could live with poorer service. But of course I want Tesla to have the best service. Not sure it will ever get back to pampering like they did initially.

 

[Xenoilphobe]

I'll try and schedule the fix (front louvers are stuck closed) after the end of year push... its so cold out now they don't need to open anyway.

If they cook this battery its on them, I have made 3 attempts to get it fixed, once summer rolls around its like being on a flight deck with F-14's taking off as the cooling fans runs maxed out at the Supercharger and sometimes on the HPWC (100 Amp) here at the house. It rapidly tapers the charge rate down and is extremely annoying on road trips.

This is my 3rd Model S, and I swear my 2014 has been much more reliable, caveat that with once they changed out all four door handles, the MCU and and one air shock. I have only had to do one door handle on the 2016 and both headlights, due to failed "eyebrow LED" DRL, and the MCU (7 trips to the SC), and the windshield pump (did myself), and the aft control arm (did myself), if I could do the fans I would just go and get them. They still haven't addressed the interment failure of the air suspension pump, which randomly pops up, I may check the ground wire and the tubing, but with a $110K I paid for this car I expect a lot more from the SC. I may end up trading this in for the Lexus LX570, which my wife has now loves after riding in our neighbors this weekend. I know it's just a Toyota, but my FJ has been bulletproof.

 

[sleepydoc]

@sleepydoc: I don't disagree with anything in your post above. I'm saying those are the items of in formation that I'm interested in when shopping for a car. (No opportunity to test drive the Model 3 before I bought, but no other car was even in the running. And it remains the best car I've ever owned. Otherwise I've always test-driven before buying.) And I'm saying that I don't care about the break-down of reliability by sub-systems. And even warranty repairs are a nuisance, so non-critical repairs are an item of interest.

I still think CR is the best source of consumer information. I've been a subscriber for longer than I can remember. But I think the items I listed would be more useful to a prospective car buyer than the way it's typically presented nowadays.

Yeah - all of the questions you ask were reasonable and relevant.

Some of it depends on your plans and buying habits. If you’re one to get a new car every 3 years then long term reliability and costs really don’t matter and initial quality is much more important. Getting a new car every 3 years i about the most expensive way to own/drive a car, but at least it has the advantage of lower repair costs and the convenience associated with fewer repairs. If the car has a lot of quality issues that convenience is lost, and you still pay with your time, even if you don’t pay financially.

On the other hand, If you like to keep your car for 10-15 years then having some initial quality issues is not as big a deal compared to long term reliability and repair costs.

Tesla’s should win out in long term costs - no oil changes, no brake changes, no water pumps, etc. There are other things that can break, though, like the power control module and the heat pump, so if those systems prove to be problematic they may negate the other savings. There’s really no way to predict with the Model Y, or even the model 3. The designs have been evolving and changing consistently. On top of that Tesla has been changing as a company and the manufacturing has been changing so you can’t even extrapolate from past products like you can with an older company.

As a consumer, it’s frustrating to essentially be flying blind on a $50-100k purchase.

 

[David29]

I do have one question regarding the results per vehicle. I understand each category has a list of parts that could apply. However, do they say per vehicle which part in the list of possibilities was faulty? I was very tempted today to purchase a month's subscription for $10 to see for myself.

No, so far as I can recall, the data are in chart form, with no details for what specific issues arose in each category. With hundreds of car make/model combinations, and data shown for 5 or so years, it would be impractical to describe the specifics of each of the thousands of entries for each of the 17 categories.
Sometimes they do mention specific areas of concern when they review cars and use the data for predicted reliability.

 

[DrGriz]

No, so far as I can recall, the data are in chart form, with no details for what specific issues arose in each category. With hundreds of car make/model combinations, and data shown for 5 or so years, it would be impractical to describe the specifics of each of the thousands of entries for each of the 17 categories.
Sometimes they do mention specific areas of concern when they review cars and use the data for predicted reliability.

You are correct that they don't break down the details. Of course, they could, if they so chose, list the details for each car. Computers are good for that.

 

[Dman22]

I think Consumers reports anti-Tesla bias is showing. Tesla is so terrible that they have sold every vehicle they can make at least thru the spring. They are so terrible that they have the highest owner satisfacion rating of any car. Tesla must have a lot of people fooled.

As a vehicle yes they are #1 in my eyes but when you start getting into service and parts they are dead last.

 

[john5520]

I'll try and schedule the fix (front louvers are stuck closed) after the end of year push... it's so cold out now they don't need to open anyway.

If they cook this battery its on them, I have made 3 attempts to get it fixed, once summer rolls around it's like being on a flight deck with F-14's taking off as the cooling fans runs maxed out at the Supercharger and sometimes on the HPWC (100 Amp) here at the house. It rapidly tapers the charge rate down and is extremely annoying on road trips.

This is my 3rd Model S, and I swear my 2014 has been much more reliable, caveat that with once they changed out all four door handles, the MCU and and one air shock. I have only had to do one door handle on the 2016 and both headlights, due to failed "eyebrow LED" DRL, and the MCU (7 trips to the SC), and the windshield pump (did myself), and the aft control arm (did myself), if I could do the fans I would just go and get them. They still haven't addressed the interment failure of the air suspension pump, which randomly pops up, I may check the ground wire and the tubing, but with a $110K I paid for this car I expect a lot more from the SC. I may end up trading this in for the Lexus LX570, which my wife has now loves after riding in our neighbors this weekend. I know it's just a Toyota, but my FJ has been bulletproof.

After being in existence for 70 + years, Toyota should be making bulletproof cars. It's really not an apples-to-apples comparison. They play it safe with their designs and stick to what worked for them, a big reason for their above average reliability. But they've quit pushing the envelope resulting in cars with little soul. When they talked about bringing back the iconic Supra, eyebrows raised, until everyone realized it was really a BMW z4.

Don't take this as me making excuses for Tesla. They've had their share of problematic cars, yours being one of them, but every company has, and they are still very young. Their first car was only 13 years ago. When all things are considered, they've done quite well so far.

 

[30seconds]

What are the reliability results for the Model 3?

We should be seeing relatively high mileage cars now and 4-5 years post launch should be enough time to see what the major mechanical flaws are.

Looking through the Model 3 threads on this site there doesn't seem to be anything that sticks out. As a former BMW and Audi owner (and forums member) it would be really clear by now on what the mid-term problems are. And usually by now you can take a guess on what the longer term issues would be.

For all of my German cars it would be a long and expensive list by now. The type of list where you think, maybe I should sell my 4 year old car before it gets really expensive on a regular basis.