You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think your best bet is taking the repair bill to the city or university (or property owner of the road) and make a claim for reimbursement of damages caused by obstacles they chose to install on the roadway.
Are there any posted warning signs leading up to these bumps cautioning drivers their cars will receive severe damage if they don't stay in their lane? Collect more evidence.. You're on the right track collecting the broken bits of dots, etc.
I would totally be taking this to small claims court if they don't offer to pay the actual bill. But in court I'd raise the price to double for the inconvenience you've had to go through getting repairs ... rental car bill, if you have one, etc.
Make a case with the judge that you had a car malfunction and reason to pull over and did so and this is what happened. Find the article about driving on roadways and what you're supposed to do if your car has a breakdown ... does it say something like "if you can, pull over safely to the side (which side - nearest or right side) of road?"
Could you safely do that here? Turns out "no". This is road safety issue.
They may be ordered to remove all the dots - save all our cars please.
Easy to push the issue with insurance so you don't get hit with it. The subrogation can be requested.Now that your insurance has covered it, you can breathe a sign of relief. However, insurance payments are on the backs of everyone who buys insurance as rates go up. Since the insurance paid for the damage they would have to be going to court / approaching the city or college for reimbursement. Which I bet, they won't. It's not your issue anymore it theirs.
Personally, I'd have used an I-beam forging instead of a cutout billet. It would have been stronger at the same weight. But that is not defect, just a less than optimum decision.
The fracture shape is interesting. If I were going to do fault analysis, I'd look at grain direction. The grain should have been horizontal. The fracture looks suspiciously like a "with the grain" crack, ie - grain direction is 90° out of phase. This occurs when companies use part clustering CNC software to maximumize the number of components that can be made from a single sheet of stock, if you forget about grain direction, some will have the wrong direction.
Aluminum is like wood. It has a grain direction. Single sharp cracks with no deformation from bending is normally how 'with the grain' failures look. Against the grain usually shows significant bending before the crack becomes visible to the naked eye.
This is supercritical on flight hardware.
This is an Update on the control arm cracked issue
I finally were able to get the vehicle back about week and a half ago but never had a chance to get a chance to sit down to examine the switch out part
here are some pictures of the 2 upper control arm
Not sure how this would justify but with such a crack on the control arm I think the car would sustain tremendous damage
but no body work require to fix the issue only the suspension part replaced, also 2 damage wheels
I still believe that it is a part integraty issue. Although the part of the wheel were bend the wheel itself still hold up air and cause no vibration when driving. I have not driven the car at a high speed yet. I am waiting for my replacementView attachment 249199 View attachment 249200 View attachment 249201 wheel to arrive before we will take the car on the road again.
Which way are you suspecting grain might run on this part, and which way are you suggesting the grain should run?
Which way are you suspecting grain might run on this part, and which way are you suggesting the grain should run?
Refer to diagram below, and the blue and green lines as being "with the grain" in the direction shown, per line.
Which is which?View attachment 249203
There may be other factors at play here for the design. There could have been some mandate for that part to become a sacrificial part to protect other much more difficult to replace parts in the even of a minor impact. It could also have been designed that way for proper crash worthiness aspects.Personally, I'd have used an I-beam forging instead of a cutout billet. It would have been stronger at the same weight. But that is not defect, just a less than optimum decision.
The fracture shape is interesting. If I were going to do fault analysis, I'd look at grain direction. The grain should have been horizontal. The fracture looks suspiciously like a "with the grain" crack, ie - grain direction is 90° out of phase. This occurs when companies use part clustering CNC software to maximumize the number of components that can be made from a single sheet of stock, if you forget about grain direction, some will have the wrong direction.
Aluminum is like wood. It has a grain direction. Single sharp cracks with no deformation from bending is normally how 'with the grain' failures look. Against the grain usually shows significant bending before the crack becomes visible to the naked eye.
This is supercritical on flight hardware.
The service Adviser Vince is not only conceited and were completely not courteous at all. I am not sure how Tesla's Hiring process work but this adviser need to be gone.
What was his offense? That he pointed out, what was almost certainly true, and supported by evidence and reason and experience, that the failure was caused by a pothole or other obstacle type hit? Which, by the way, would have to be the case for your insurance to cover it -- your own auto ins doesn't cover mfr defects.
grain goes in the wrong direction and that it's weaker than a forging.