True Story or Not?: "Frunk opened at 115mph and caused $20k damage on brand new P85"

[mgboyes]

Clearly this is BS. But just for the fun here's my 2p...

It is clearly possible to open the frunk, then get in the car, get in D, and drive away. The car warns you (very visibly, and audibly, as per the video above) but it doesn't stop you doing it, because it treats you like an adult (since driving is something that we only allow responsible grown up people to do, at least in my country).

If you fail to notice the frunk being open, or the prominent warnings in the dash that it's open, then you should not have a driver's license.

This is really no different than saying "Earlier my kids were messing around and one of them decided to leave their bike behind my car. When I set off I ran the bike over, causing significant damage to the rear and underside of my car. This is a very dangerous fault with the car."

 

[scottm]

The car actively tries to prevent it from happening while driving.. greyed out button, fob non-responsive... proven.

The car permits open lid driving but tries to very hard to warn you about it. Driver beware!

The car has a physical release in cabin, that is not easily reached by the driver, while driving. Smart move putting it over there. So it is possible maybe to open while driving, with a little cooperation from your passenger.

The car has an emergency release in frunk, and if pulled, should release right now! out of respect for human life inside... Lid blows off at speed because of that... Sure, the price you pay for not knowing kids were playing in your frunk.

The car has primary and secondary latches on frunk. Pop the frunk button, and you can lift it. But if you then drop the lid but not completely shutting it, the secondary latch re-engages... it grabs the lid and you cannot lift it again. Smart. You must press the lid down fully shut before the frunk buttons will do anything again.

In general, I agree that warnings are good enough. Sometimes, you might NEED to drive with a door or lid ajar. Having the car "over-rule" you from providing its most basic service (transportation) is encroachment (nanny feature) that I would not want. ...If you needed to get out of an emergency situation and car won't drive you because TPMS says you're down 10 lbs on a wheel... unacceptable !! I need to get off the road even if riding on metal rims if I have to in order to avoid getting rear ended by a semi in thick fog... for example. Hypothetical example to make a point.

Anything that is mechanical can fail. Lid can fly open for sure. Any car this can happen.

Anything in software can fail. Bad code, glitch, whatever... lid could fly open.

My personal preference for model S would have been an old fashioned secondary release that required you to get your arss out of the car and go pull it to lift the lid.

I do like the primary release being button driven / electrical. That way you can use frunk conveniently for storage upon returning to the car with an armful of goods. You can at least access the frunk without going into the car.

I find it "a little too easy" to complete the job just by lifting the deck. I realize the trade-off here is one of convenience. But, personally, I would not be bothered too much if I had to drop my parcel to pull a mechanical release to finish the opening job. Make me do that on rear hatch, and I'll cry murder!! It's just because it's the front and wind direction.

You see where this is going.

Phase 0. Electrical release and one-action lift.

Phase 1. Electrical release and one-action action lift, and electrical pull down and re-latching. No more frunk dents.

Phase 2. Electrical release and controlled raising of the lid. And full electric closure. Like the rear.


Final point.. I guess if I was worried enough about lids flying off... could always add a couple of those pins we seen on race cars protruding through the lid, that must have cotter pins pulled to allow raising the lid. There's a reason race cars have those, they are the most reliable way of preventing fly ups.

But I'm not that worried.

 

[sunilsf]

Isn't the biggest difference here that no other car (that I'm aware of) lets one "pop the hood" from the fob? Consequently, we haven't seen this before. Not saying it happened or that its excusable, but this is a new behavior given the design of the car (i.e., frunk).

It does seem odd that one would have to check the frunk closure everytime they went for a drive.... so the warnings (as highlighted in Evan's video) are key and should prevent drivers from ending up in these situations.

 

[scottm]

I think it's pretty new territory.


Re-read your DMV material for passing road tests and all the laws enforcement rules about driving regulations and behaviours you must follow... how much of this has become "not applicable" now that you drive a Tesla? Would be interesting to start a thread on that. "Put car into gear..." Gone. No gears. "Don't coast down hills in neutral..." Gone.
Even signs we see "No cell phone use while refueling." Really? "No idling zone." Duh. Like, never idling!

Like the territory that Tesla is pushing into about having no side mirrors. Cameras instead. Paradigm shifting takes time.

One day, "shoulder check" will not be as good as "glance in rear monitor". Like sticking your hand out the window to make a signal... relics of the past.

 

[randompersonx]

Isn't the biggest difference here that no other car (that I'm aware of) lets one "pop the hood" from the fob? Consequently, we haven't seen this before. Not saying it happened or that its excusable, but this is a new behavior given the design of the car (i.e., frunk).

It does seem odd that one would have to check the frunk closure everytime they went for a drive.... so the warnings (as highlighted in Evan's video) are key and should prevent drivers from ending up in these situations.

Porsche 911, cayman and boxster all let you pop the frunk from the key fob.

 

[eco5280]

eco5280, nothing personal is intended when I dissected your post here.

No offense taken. Whatsoever. I enjoy a good dissection from time to time. :biggrin:

- - - Updated - - -

Which warnings did you choose to ignore?

Thanks for posting that. Proves the common sense theory that the combination of "the frunk is open" and "my car just happens to have this unknown defect that the car doesn't report an open frunk" is likely baloney. I'm not saying one can't happen. I'm saying both happening to the same person at the exact right time to cause this damage. Baloney.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

It is raining reaally hard so I wont try it - but I was wondering

if you pop the frunk and then, with a screwdriver or something similar, push the latch into the locked position
does the car 'think' the frunk is closed?

 

[tga]

This must have been discussed already at some point -

Why isn't there a secondary latch on the frunk? Doesn't the DOT require one? Every car I've driven has one on the front hood, regardless if it covers an engine or a frunk.

My 911 has one. Hit the button on the key or door sill, and you still need to manually release the under-hood latch to open. The 911 won't fire the solenoid if the car is moving, BTW.

 

[markb1]

This must have been discussed already at some point -

Why isn't there a secondary latch on the frunk? Doesn't the DOT require one? Every car I've driven has one on the front hood, regardless if it covers an engine or a frunk.

My 911 has one. Hit the button on the key or door sill, and you still need to manually release the under-hood latch to open. The 911 won't fire the solenoid if the car is moving, BTW.

There is a secondary latch, but both latches are released when opening the frunk from the fob or the touch screen. Only one latch is released when using the lever below the glove box. The is presumably because the lever is the only way to open the frunk that cannot be locked out electronically.

 

[ecarfan]

The reality here is that there is a defect with the frunk.

When someone posts an unqualified, categorical statement like that, I see nothing wrong with others pointing out all the ways that the design of the car clearly makes it extremely difficult for the driver to get to a high enough speed for the frunk lid to fly open, and for mentioning that this issue came up previously on this forum and multiple people tested and confirmed that the fob will not open the frunk when the car is in Drive and that the visual and audible warnings do in fact work as designed.

 

[ecarfan]

There is a secondary latch, but both latches are released when opening the frunk from the fob or the touch screen.

That is correct, and the U.S. DOT approved that design. And that design makes sense. And of course the fob or the touchscreen will not open the frunk when the car is in Drive.

 

[MrClown]

Just to play a little devil's advocate, what if the frunk latches (both) were released but the frunk lid did not lift up at all. Maybe it was stuck a bit from road gunk build up or something. If the sensor is on the frunk and not the latch, the perfectly good sensor might not trigger any alerts. I don't have mine yet so I have no idea how this sensor works or where it lives or if the frunk lid could stay in the closed position with both latches open. Could that be possible though?

- - - Updated - - -

It should be easy enough for someone to test that scenario. Have someone hold the frunk lid closed with their hands while you unlatch it with the fob. Then put the car in drive and see if any alerts come up. Don't actually let the car move so you don't run over the person holding the frunk please (maybe Reverse is better in this case).

 

[tga]

And that design makes sense.

If you say so... But since you have to go to the front of the car, reach down, and raise the hood, it's not that much more difficult to have to manually release the secondary latch. I'm not sure I see the point to having both latches release electronically, together.

One software bug and everyone's hood is flying up when the hit 88mph! :wink:

 

[Electroman]

Possible? Sure. Anything's possible. The car could turn into a sewing machine if I enter the correct sequence on the key fob. Why not.

But probable? I've had cars with key fobs for 20 years. Not one has ever let me do something it wasn't designed to do - like popping the trunk if the car's in motion. Not one time, not one car, never. I've tried it on every vehicle I've ever owned. Never a failure like that. Possible? Sure. But probable? What's more likely - user error or a defect in code that magically only affects one person in 50,000 even though everyone has the same code and the same vehicle?

Remember the 'unintended acceleration from Toyota'?

"User error, they were all idiots trying to cover up their mistakes, lock them up in jail, yada yada.." And then the rest is history.

 

[eco5280]

Remember the 'unintended acceleration from Toyota'?

"User error, they were all idiots trying to cover up their mistakes, lock them up in jail, yada yada.." And then the rest is history.

Uh huh. It was ruled user error. Toyota was fined because they delayed telling the authorities, not because the cars were at fault.

 

[Electroman]

Toyota to Pay $1.2B for Hiding Deadly ‘Unintended Acceleration’ - ABC News
Car manufacturer Toyota has agreed to pay a staggering $1.2 billion to avoid prosecution for covering up severe safety problems with “unintended acceleration,” according to court documents, and continuing to make cars with parts the FBI said Toyota “knew were deadly.”

Tomohiro Ohsumi/Bloomberg/Getty Images
A deferred prosecution agreement, filed today, forced Toyota to “admit” that it “misled U.S. consumers by concealing and making deceptive statements about two safety related issues affecting its vehicles, each of which caused a type of unintended acceleration.”

Toyota “put sales over safety and profit over principle,” according to FBI Assistant Director George Venizelos.

“The disregard Toyota had for the safety of the public is outrageous,” Venizelos said. “Not only did Toyota fail to recall cars with problem parts, they continued to manufacture new cars with the same parts they already knew were deadly. When media reports arose of Toyota hiding defects, they emphatically denied what they knew was true, assuring consumers that their cars were safe and reliable… More than speeding cars or a major fine, the ultimate tragedy has been the unwitting consumers who died behind the wheel of Toyota vehicles.”

 

[eco5280]

It's All Your Fault: The DOT Renders Its Verdict on Toyota's Unintended-Acceleration Scare
The final word on the Toyota unintended-acceleration mess.

"The DOT concluded that, other than a number of incidents caused by accelerators hanging up on incorrectly fitted floor mats, the accidents were caused by drivers depressing their accelerators when they intended to apply their brakes. “Pedal misapplication” was the DOT’s delicate terminology  for this phenomenon."

 

[ecarfan]

Okay, back to the thread topic...

@cwoodrowe has not yet followed up his first post, made yesterday, with any comment regarding whether or not he noticed the visual and audible warnings the Model S provides when the frunk is unlatched and the car is put in Drive.

The reality here is that there is a defect with the frunk. I own a Model S and it happened to me last week. Driving at 5:30 in the morning to the gym without realizing that one of the kids had mistakingly pushed the button on the FOB. Result: hood popped open at 40 MPH and I am staring at a $8,000 repair. Luckily no one was on the road however what happens if you are on the freeway and the hood pops open.

 

[CliffG]

I wonder if the designers ever looked into having the frunk hood open forward, similar to the Spitfire's bonnet. They could have put the latch(es) in/under the side badges. The whole issue would be replaced with completely different problems (like, where would you put the hinges?). And arguably the frunk dents wouldn't be an issue either (well, maybe they'd wind up somewhere else).

 

[eco5280]

I wonder if the designers ever looked into having the frunk hood open forward

I think that would create a much less usable space. You'd have to load from the side of the car. Rear-hinged hoods are pretty well established for the last 80 years or so. They made the right choice