Ugh. Another Model S fire - 2013-11-06

[RobotGrease]

Lets stay on topic...

Tow hitch?

or

?????

 

[SteveG3]

Aviators, are you referring to Ed? No, of course, not. I meant it when I said I respect his opinion.

if you are referring to the reporter on FOX... I do believe that if she is a car expert, she could not have sincerely believed that one fire = congressional hearings for any other manufacturer other than Tesla. I'm not interested in labeling anything "criminal" or not, I'm simply saying that I look at that piece (and others before today) and see that people will take a swipe at Tesla to take a swipe at Tesla.

 

[JST]

Morgan Stanley sent out an alert commenting on the fire. Pretty standard and fair observations, but one of the points stood out (not sure if this has been mentioned here):

I've seen a lot of stupid things in my time, but that's right up near the top. "Driver behavior?" In two of the three crashes under discussion, the driver ran over something in the road. In the third, the driver appears to have crashed at high speed, but I haven't seen any suggestion that this was because the performance envelope of the vehicle exceeded what he was used to.

I haven't seen any indication that Teslas are crashing with any more frequency than any other similarly priced vehicle. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't, but I haven't seen it--and these three accidents CERTAINLY don't show it. If this is the quality of the analysis on "the Street," I fear not only for Tesla but for the health of the economy in general.

One other thought on all of this--focusing on whether a "normal" car would have caught fire strikes me as the wrong question. Would running over a trailer hitch cause a fire in a "normal" car? Maybe. Probably not. But would it cause serious and debilitating damage to the car? I'm going to say yes. So, even if Teslas catch fire more easily from road debris than other cars (and I'm not saying they do), who cares? As long as the resulting fire is contained, controlled, and slow enough that the passengers can get out of the vehicle without injury, does it matter? From a driver's standpoint, the difference between a debilitating accident that causes a fire and a debilitating accident that rips out your oil pan is mostly that the former is more photogenic than the latter.

 

[sullitf]

So, even if Teslas catch fire more easily from road debris than other cars (and I'm not saying they do), who cares? As long as the resulting fire is contained, controlled, and slow enough that the passengers can get out of the vehicle without injury, does it matter? From a driver's standpoint, the difference between a debilitating accident that causes a fire and a debilitating accident that rips out your oil pan is mostly that the former is more photogenic than the latter.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say my insurance company would care. If a $100,000 car is more likely to be burned out and totaled due to road debris (again, NOT saying it is more likely in a Tesla) it will be more expensive to repair/replace than replacing an oil pan on a Ford Focus.

If that falls outside the coverage of insurance than lenders would care as the risk for them would be higher.

 

[Ames]

Here is the tow hitch from my FJ Cruiser. It's very heavy - about 3.9 kg or 8.6 lbs. It's nearly 10 inches tall.

 

[nikwest]

I'm wondering if the cooling liquid also plays a significant role in this fires. As far as I know Tesla uses R1234yf cooling liquid which is highly inflammable. Carbondioxid based cooling system would seem like a much better choice for a car like the Model S. At least it would be one thing less which can burn.
I know that Daimler is refusing to use R1234yf as cooling liquid in their cars due to their concerns about causing fires.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

Let's recap:

20,000 to 30,000 Models S's produced thus far.

3 Model S's burn.

ALL 3 burn as a result of high speed impact(s) with debris.

Hundreds or thousands of Dodge vehicles burn, of which only a small portion get publicity (3 noted here):

http://www.dallasnews.com/business/...e-they-used-to.ece?ssimg=938280#ssStory938281

2013 Ram Pickup ($54k!)

http://jalopnik.com/5790753/new-dodge-durango-catches-fire-while-pulling-parade-float

2011 Durango (new)

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...ott-fawell-prosecutors-rev-duane-scott-willis

1994 Minivan (new)

Yet Fox News remained silent as there wasn't a political angle they could insert?

Wish I had the funds to buy more TSLA shares . . . .

 

[spacexfan]

Owning a tesla is great! This way i dont have to carry matches around anymore. Fire comes always with me when i drive my car! :smile:

this is a joke for the record.

 

[jomo25]

When the Volt caught fire post-crash test, GM reinforced the supposed weak point in the battery cage voluntarily, in the highly likely event it ever factored in real life. I'd be all for Tesla adding an additional protective layer of shielding (perhaps carbon fiber as someone upthread suggested) on the underbody. If the hitch pierced the casing as happened in the first incident. Not sure if its necessary. but would do lots to ease perception. And on the whole, may not require significant re-engineering and add'l cost.

GM's change was completely voluntary. Could be the same here (unless it becomes mandated).

 

[aviators99]

Aviators, are you referring to Ed? No, of course, not. I meant it when I said I respect his opinion.

if you are referring to the reporter on FOX... I do believe that if she is a car expert, she could not have sincerely believed that one fire = congressional hearings for any other manufacturer other than Tesla. I'm not interested in labeling anything "criminal" or not, I'm simply saying that I look at that piece (and others before today) and see that people will take a swipe at Tesla to take a swipe at Tesla.

I am referring to the Fox reporter. Of course she could have believed that. I believe it was her legitimate opinion, whether or not I agree with it (and truthfully, I'm not sure). But what you suggested was something criminal. If someone did set something like that up, it would be a crime. Even if you don't believe it was her opinion and that she was spewing FUD, it's a pretty big leap to assume she would commit a crime or whoever hired her would commit a crime.

 

[JST]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say my insurance company would care. If a $100,000 car is more likely to be burned out and totaled due to road debris (again, NOT saying it is more likely in a Tesla) it will be more expensive to repair/replace than replacing an oil pan on a Ford Focus.

If that falls outside the coverage of insurance than lenders would care as the risk for them would be higher.

Well, yeah. But let's compare apples to apples. Have you priced the engine on a Panamera S recently? Or an Audi S7? Neither have I, but I'm going to guess that it rivals the cost of a Model S battery.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

I'm wondering if the cooling liquid also plays a significant role in this fires. As far as I know Tesla uses R1234yf cooling liquid which is highly inflammable. Carbondioxid based cooling system would seem like a much better choice for a car like the Model S. At least it would be one thing less which can burn.
I know that Daimler is refusing to use R1234yf as cooling liquid in their cars due to their concerns about causing fires.

You may be confused.

I believe the Model S uses R134a for cooling, a gas that has been in use for decades in tens (or hundreds) of millions of cars and trucks.

I'm sure someone can check the tag under the frunk lid to confirm as my wife is currently out with our Model S, risking her life as I type (extreme sarcasm!).

 

[eepic]

I've seen a lot of stupid things in my time, but that's right up near the top. "Driver behavior?" In two of the three crashes under discussion, the driver ran over something in the road. In the third, the driver appears to have crashed at high speed, but I haven't seen any suggestion that this was because the performance envelope of the vehicle exceeded what he was used to.

I haven't seen any indication that Teslas are crashing with any more frequency than any other similarly priced vehicle. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't, but I haven't seen it--and these three accidents CERTAINLY don't show it. If this is the quality of the analysis on "the Street," I fear not only for Tesla but for the health of the economy in general.

One other thought on all of this--focusing on whether a "normal" car would have caught fire strikes me as the wrong question. Would running over a trailer hitch cause a fire in a "normal" car? Maybe. Probably not. But would it cause serious and debilitating damage to the car? I'm going to say yes. So, even if Teslas catch fire more easily from road debris than other cars (and I'm not saying they do), who cares? As long as the resulting fire is contained, controlled, and slow enough that the passengers can get out of the vehicle without injury, does it matter? From a driver's standpoint, the difference between a debilitating accident that causes a fire and a debilitating accident that rips out your oil pan is mostly that the former is more photogenic than the latter.

+1 to this. If the car is going to be severely damaged regardless, the occupants being unharmed is the key priority and so far the Model S has been exemplary.

One could argue for the driver it would be advantageous in some ways for the car to total itself so that in the end you have a brand new one vs a repaired car involved in an accident. In this particular case, he can get power folding mirrors now

 

[ckessel]

Does NHTSA test road debris and/or undercarriage collisions? All the videos I've ever seen are front/side/rear impacts.

 

[nikwest]

You may be confused.

I believe the Model S uses R134a for cooling, a gas that has been in use for decades in tens (or hundreds) of millions of cars and trucks.

I'm sure someone can check the tag under the frunk lid to confirm as my wife is currently out with our Model S, risking her life as I type (extreme sarcasm!).

R134a is used in the Roadster. And to my albeit limited knowledge the Model S uses R1234yf. At least in Europe. Does anybody know?
R134a is contributing to global warming while R1234yf is highly inflammable and pretty toxic.

 

[sub]

R134a is used in the Roadster. And to my albeit limited knowledge the Model S uses R1234yf. At least in Europe. Does anybody know?
R134a is contributing to global warming while R1234yf is highly inflammable and pretty toxic.

I'm pretty sure those are for the AC, not the cooling of the battery but I don't own a tesla yet so I don't know how the battery is cooled.

 

[FluxCap]

I am a husband, father and investor. I sold some stock today to take a defensive position and buy back in later because the shorts and media FUD are in control of the momentum for the time being, but, and this is important folks:

I will be ordering my Model S very soon and nothing about this latest accident in the normal course of driving cars on public roads changes my mind. This is the safest and best car I could buy to protect my family, flat out.

 

[Jason_T]

hi all - i've been reading this forum for about a week now. 1st and foremost thank you for insightful knowledge on these cars! you had helped me with my almost certain decision to order the model s in coming months. this, however, incident is putting a little doubt in my mind. for 100k car i think that it's a bit "fragile" to be burned like that, which was caused by a roadway debris. i hope that this is an anomaly.

 

[sub]

Lets stay on topic...

Tow hitch?

or

?????

The top photo is what is referred to as the "slide". The bottom is the "hitch". However, that doesn't mean someone wouldn't call the slide a hitch.

 

[nikwest]

I'm pretty sure those are for the AC, not the cooling of the battery but I don't own a tesla yet so I don't know how the battery is cooled.

Also R134a is banned in Europe for new cars since this year. So it's unlikely that Model S is using it.

Here is some background
R1234yf | The Truth About Cars