Slashdot Mirror
NHTSA Tells Tesla To Stop Exaggerating Model S Safety Rating
cartechboy writes "There's always that kid in the class that ruins it for everyone when being graded on a curve. At the moment, that kid is Tesla and Elon Musk. Tesla's been proudly claiming the Model S is one of the safest cars in the word despite the recent fire controversy. And while it may be just that, claiming it earned 5.4 stars from NHTSA isn't pleasing the safety agency as there is no such thing as a rating higher than five. While NHTSA already released a statement indirectly to Tesla saying it doesn't release ratings higher than 5, Tesla continued to promote this fictitious rating. Now NHTSA has updated its guidelines explicitly stating safety ratings are whole numbers only and that 5 stars is the maximum advertisers can claim. If advertisers and automakers decide to disregard these rules NHTSA is threatening removal from the program or referral to state authorities for appropriate action. Basically, hey Tesla, stop making false claims."
My car's rating is higher than the maximum rating allowed by the NHTSA.
No sig today...
Stay tuned for Elon Musk's critique of the NHTSA and long blog post detailing why the NHTSA is a bunch of corrupt scumbags and how Tesla is so awesome that it is able to get ratings above a perfect score.
I can't hear your complaints over my cranked-up-to-11 sound system.
-Elon
I'm so glad that Slashdot and its mysterious oily benefactors are here to protect me from the evil lies of Elon Musk!
I guess casting the nhtsarating is not allowed.
It got a 5.4 rating, but the NHTSA guidelines only allow them to advertise a whole number.
Liar liar car on fire!
Say, "to hell with your slow ineffective bureaucratic government way of doing things, I'm going to snort a few lines and make up my OWN *better* rating system!" Then, bang a super model.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
I'm starting to think that the secret to Tesla's energy efficiency isn't electricity, as advertised, but Elon Musk's unlimited hot air.
Does a week go by without this guy blowing up about someone or exaggerating something?
If you like your Tesla safety rating, you can keep your Tesla safety rating.
Table-ized A.I.
Have they at any point said the claims were false or just not allowed to be made?
The Tesla advocates are not going to be happy about this one. No sir.
I can just feel the rage radiating through the story. All those fanbios, quivering with hate, turning red in the face and TYPING SO FAST!
LOL
"Since we are marketing to nerds, we are using a base 12 numbering system".
Table-ized A.I.
This Slashdot post has been brought to you by a collaboration between NHTSA and GM.
Just to clarify, the NHTSA hasn't said anything to Tesla like the summary states. It has clarified its rating system. That is all.
That article is written like a high schooler's blog.
See how an electric car manufacturer pisses off big oil.....
If there's a fire all oil-controlled media report on it immediately.
If the range issues scare people, they build charging stations (big oil is fighting the legality of these currently)
If they have too good of a crash score, the score rating system is changed.
They are banned from selling in Texas because that's big oil's home turf....
Is it not obvious how they are just going against the status quo and being singled out because of it.....
Any thing Tesla does good will be re-regulated, changed, or banned from advertisement by law. They will NOT be able to win even if they are!
I think we've seen this before...
Elon Musk would never have accomplished what he has if it wasn't for his rabid passion and forceful, egotistical personality. He is trying to change the status quo in an industry where many have tried and failed, and where many want Tesla to fail as well. He had best try to temper himself, though; lest he become our generation's Nikola Tesla/Howard Hughes in more ways than one.....
If safety is a good thing, and it's a good thing for consumers to prefer safer cars, why not add a decimal point or two?
If two cars are equally qualified in the minds a specific customer - and one car is 0.1 stars higher, why let that car get more sales?
Dude, let the free market drive safety higher! Just like EPA window stickers. Give the customer information. If Tesla really did rank 5.4, then let the other manufactures get some public shaming. Maybe they can respond to purchasing competition & catch up and make their cars safer.
if your funeral plans contain cremation.
Apparently people aren't reading what's been said. Tesla's press release says: "National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has awarded the Tesla Model S a 5-star safety rating", and "NHTSA does not publish a star rating above 5". Thus Tesla is not claiming that they were assigned a 5.4 since they outright acknowledge that NHTSA doesn't publish a rating above 5. What Tesla did say is that if one were to take the individual scores that were provided by the NHTSA (which apparently includes ratings above 5, and possibly decimal as well) and average those, the resultant number would be a 5.4.
Now what is probably getting the other manufacturers upset is that the clipping of the results at 5 means that the vehicles that just squeaked into the 5 look the same as vehicles which may have blown past the 5. If they didn't like that, why aren't the individual scores also integral and clipped at 5? Then one could not possibly claim (or even appear to claim) a number higher than 5.
So, this whole release is trying to beat up Tesla for something they didn't say. They didn't say that the NHTSA awarded them a 5.4 rating (see the first quote). They did say: "achieved a new combined record of 5.4 stars.".
Here in the USA, the grid is 68% fossil fuels. So unless Tesla is including a free ZPM with every purchase, "Zero Emissions" is a crock of shit, just like a 5.4 star safety rating.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Yeah, Musk is self-righteous and crazy intense about the PR for his companies. However, this seems like a warning that was justified, and at the same time might not have been foreseen by those making the claims, because it's kind of a technical quibble.
A 5* (or 5 Star) has to be better than 5 and definitely better than 5.4.
Plus they can claim it was a footnote that was mistakenly left off.
This post brought to you by GOP Astroturfing, Inc.
Anyone have any explanation on how he got a 5.4? I don't think Musk would just arbitrarily post a number.
Sometimes you have to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, and know when to walk away.
But maybe they ARE the safest cars in the word. I mean, the summary doesn't say that they claim to be the safest cars in the world , just the safest in the word. Maybe words do get 5.4 ratings from the National Hard To Spell Authority (NHTSA).
Yep. The NHTSA apparently gives the manufacturers the individual ratings in each category, which presumably go above 5 and may be decimal. They may have some sort of agreement that they aren't allowed to publish the individual ratings.
"Our amps go up to 11"
combustion based desperados providing gangsterious decimation by the decimal & we pay for that too
So, what they're saying is "Yeah, his car really did get a 5.4, but we don't want him to SAY so"?
explosive disruption was the madison ave. terror touts' claim
The Tesla volume control on the radio goes to 11.
The Tesla safety scale goes to 5.5.
5.4 is less than perfect.
134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
The next Tesla ad will claim a safety rating of 11.0 stars from the NHTSA (small print: National Highway Tesla Sales Association).
No, that's not actually true.
But I do note that you do not even attempt to dispute the fact that the Democrats lied like rugs - and continue to this day, to prop up and otherwise support this monstrosity of a bill that is destroying the fabric of our society.
All you can come up wiht is silly little soundbytes that mean nothing at all.
Pathetic.
To be fair, Musk would be completely correct in doing so on decrying the NHTSA. Like most government agencies today, they are usually so busy defending policies regardless of whether they are still of value or not.
On the Tesla evangelizing, I fully expect it of him and find it hilariously unconvincing when he does it.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Musk must have used the wrong formula when publicizing the Tesla rating.
What do oil companies have to do with clarifying the safety ratings?
But-but-but...regulations are good! They protect society! Regulations are never used to suppress competition, youve been watching FOX news! You fucking Tea-Bagger!
His behaviour reminds me of Clive Palmer.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
"If you like your plan, you can keep your plan"
About 80% of the comments already seem to be talk about how the NHTSA actually did give them a 5.4, but only allows them to advertise whole numbers and nothing above 5. So... it's a technical dispute over bureaucratic assholery.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
You know what? We did vote for it. Let's see how it turns out rather than making wild predictions. If it fails, we own it. If it doesn't fail, we own it. The people paying you seem to be willing to pay any price in blood or money to make sure the Democrats fail. Why are they trying so hard to get rid of the law before it has a chance to work? Why not let it do its thing, and then when fire and brimstone rain from the sky, they can blame the Democrats and re-elect George Bush.
"She'll make .5 past light."
"She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts."
Musk might even be correct, but one must always be careful around government types, they'll use your own tax dollars to smack you down and have nothing better to do.
Sometimes you have to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, and know when to walk away.
And know when to make snarky passive-aggressive comments, apparently.
No, no, no.
If there's a fire all oil-controlled media report on it immediately.
"Oil-controlled media?" Geez, paranoid much?
Any paranoid with a lick of sense will tell you, the media is owned by Jewish bankers, not oil companies.
If the range issues scare people, they build charging stations (big oil is fighting the legality of these currently)
Uh, citation needed. Desperately.
If they have too good of a crash score, the score rating system is changed.
The system is the same as it's always been, there is no victim here (except consumers who don't know that the NHTSA rating system has always been a whole-numbers type that ranges from 0 - 5. OH, and people who don't realize that pretty much every new car on the road has a 4-5 star crash rating).
They are banned from selling in Texas because that's big oil's home turf....
Mythic hyperbole - they can sell all the cars in Texas that they want, provided Tesla plays by the same rules as every other auto manufacturer. I think what you meant to say here is, "Waaa, mean ol' TX wouldn't give Elon a special pass to do something that's illegal for everyone else!"
Because that's what actually happened.
But hey, don't let a little thing like facts or reality get in the way of a good 'woe is me, I've been victimized' rant. Otherwise I'd have to find a new hobby.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
No, for a lot of reasons.
Look, it's already failed, the prices for the plans are unbelievable high - and that doesn't count the sy high deductables. Doctors that we all have relationships with and are in many cases needed to maintain continuity of care won't be covered. Employers are cutting back on hours and not hiring because of this law. The fail is epic and it's only beginning.
AND there is also the fact that these government programs, once they become entrenched, are nearly impossible to get rid of. No, no and hell no.
AND the fact that the whole thing is unconstititional. Screw John Roberts, that ruling was lawless - repeal is what has to happen.
Oh and fuck you with this "lets see how it turns out" crap. We are talking about healthcare for our children, our families, our enture economy and society, This law was passed by a one party majority of radical Democrats and was furthermore passed by trickery and bribery. We the people do not want it and it the impact to our society is intolerable.
Does that answer your question?
Oh and by the way it's already failed, did I mention that?
(1) The website is broken.
(2) The payment and accounting and administration back-end is unwritten, untested, and out of time.
(3) They are seriously out of time to do something about those 3.5 to 5 million people whose insurance has been cancelled. To be covered by Jan 1, they have to get a new plan by Dec 15, which means 140,000 to 200,000 of them need to be enrolling every day between now and then, including weekends and the Thangsfrickingiving holiday, which ain't gonna happen ya'll.
(4) Adverse selection a.k.a. the death spiral a.k.a. the shit spiral is coming.
(5) Next year we get to do this same song and dance with the group plans as the employer mandate kicks in.
(6) Lawsuits. There are some nontrivial lawsuits pending including the contraception mandate challenges and the suits based on the fact that the statute doesn't actually allow HHS to offer subsidies on the federal exchange or impose the employer mandate on states that didn't implement their own exchanges.
(7) There are still 40 million uninsured Americans according to President Obama. Which seems to me to be just a bit of a failure of the aims of Obamacare.
[8] The plans on the exchanges likely will not let people keep the provider networks of doctors, hospitals and specialists they currently use, making continuity of care impossible.
[9] Obamacare appears to be nothing more that an enormous expansion of Medicaid, the worst-performing health program in the country.
In what way is competition being supressed by the NHTSA clarifying their rating system? Only an idiot could come up with such shitty logic.
http://wot.wikia.com/wiki/Daes_Dae'mar
It's just a big fucking game to them. All of them.
Now, all of you please stop with the OT political bullshit, thanks.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
It is unbelievable what a cult like atmosphere happens on /. every time the subject of that "car company" and it's "glorious leader" comes up. It's like the iApple "revolution" of early 2000 .. .except back them the dumb masses were the ones adulating iJobs and "his" creations.
What the heck is going on with the nerds today? In my day we had no problem seeing evil for what it is and Tesla, the car company, is no bueno.
And , just a question, how many of you actually owns that hateful thing .. or at least how many of you have driven it?
As for the article at hand, Musk is banking on the same principles iApple and others have done it before him : people are vain, people are stupid, and if you lie beautifully and show them shinny lights and smooth surfaces, people will believe anything you tell them ..
Case in point: the comments on here.
Maybe in some tests the car of doom fared better than some of the markers NHTSA has, but so did other vehicles before. Yet I never saw VW claiming “5.2 stars” for their Jetta or any other nonsense.
Y'all needs to relax .. none of this is under any of your control ... sit back , relax.. and think a little before wetting your undies trying to defend filthy rich douches who couldn't care lee of your existence .. if they were aware of it.
There's no such thing as a "big oil" company any more - the big guys are all "energy" companies and care as much about natural gas. In places where electricity comes from natural gas, the energy companies may make more per mile from the Tesla than a gas-burner (maybe not this year, since natural gas is so cheap right now, but the logistics from oil drill to gas pump are complex and expensive, compared to selling natural gas to power companies).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
50% of ridiculous is still out of reach, even if the car is on fire..
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Mark Liven, is that you?
You mean the Romney Bill? Yeah it was cool when he was pushing for it but now that a Demo has put it to use, it's the most vile thing since anal rape by Satan. I already posted this to an actual on-topic thread in here but it equally applies to you too. You're just a sore-assed loser who is all kinds of butt hurt now that you've been shown up. If this is so damned bad, then what is your solution? Doing nothing or the same is already known to be bad so how are gonna solve our problems AC?
See also "Tucker Torpedo".
Except that Tucker didn't have the money that Musk did going into this.
What Romney Bill? There is no Romney bill, and I don't remember there ever being a Romney bill. So what the fuck are you even talking about?
I'm so glad that Slashdot and its mysterious oily benefactors are here to protect me from the evil lies of Elon Musk!
Most Tesla charging is done via fossil fuel fired power generation plants. As EVs increase demand for electricity on the U.S.'s already strained electrical grid more fossil fuel plants will be built. Regrettably solar and other renewables just aren't to the point where they can scale up to the necessary levels. Decades of R&D and engineering need to be done.
No matter how badly we need it to be otherwise, not matter how much we wish it were otherwise, this is the short term reality. EV's powered via renewable sources will only work on a small scale.
Why is this Mike Hunt?
To play devil's advocate for a second, measurements like the safety ratings inherently have error to them. For something like car safety, is a 5.4 really better than a 5.3, or was that just a quirk of the particular tests they did, and the 5.3 would be safer on the road?
Look at it from the NHTSA's perspective: if you think that Tesla's advertising is making claims that aren't particularly supportable because of margins of error like that and they're using your data to do it (and in the process saying essentially "NHTSA says we're the safest car on the road" when you don't want to make that claim), I think you'd be well within the realm of reasonableness to make them stop it.
And inherits his RDF.
Musk doesnt need a rebuttal, since (if Im reading this right) NHTSA didnt contradict his claim that the internally provided NHTSA data showed a 5.4 rating; their objection appears to be that, for advertising / marketing purposes, the "official" NHTSA numbers end at 5 and you arent supposed to quote NHTSA as assessing a higher number than that.
Maybe Im mis-reading this, but the Tesla press release from August even said as much-- that the "public" rating was 5 stars, but the "eyes only" manufacturer assessment was higher. Certainly NHTSA doesnt seem to contradict that the Tesla scored quite high, or even the claim that it was a record.
See how an electric car manufacturer pisses off big oil.....
Teslas are largely charged via fossil fuel fired power generation plants. Why would "big oil" be complaining?
No, the guy spouting that, and the other guy who spouts "wah, we can't afford this, we owe China too much, we need to be on Cruz control" when anything from NASA is posted. are (IMHO) likely shills.
I wonder if it would be good money. This work seems easy. Mash F5 until a new /. article pops up, copy, paste, type in a subject, submit.
One of the most important factors correlated with injury is Head Injury Criterion (HIC), and that is treated as propritary information as well. How are consumers supposed to buy the safest cars? Not all 5 star cars are equal.
If anything he's a modern Henry Ford only without the revolutionary construction process. Now Tesla gave us the modern world with Alternating current, particle beam weapons, remote control devices, radio, and wireless power. Musk on the other hand has only given us an electric car that most people can't even use.
Furthermore, while Musk uses Tesla's name for his company and cars he doesn't live up to it. He's only merely invented a high end luxury electric car that the majority of the populace can't afford. What he hasn't done is revolutionized any industry with a fundamentally new technology, the way Tesla did in multiple ones.
So while people are eager to find a replacement for Jobs, he's not it.
This is like me claiming to have a grade of 100.5 percent on one of my courses.
While technically correct, the system limits it to 100 percent, so even though I had bonus points that put me above 100 percent, I can't claim to have 100.5 percent, even though that is my technical measurement.
Otherwise my GPA would be 4.025 ...
In short, they're both right. Consumer Reports says (source: CNN Money) that Tesla S owners have the highest ratings for their cars, and a certain sedan has the lowest. So, if you were wondering what to buy for Xmas, I'd say a Tesla should still be on your short list ...
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Not really.
What happens is cars are rated to the current safety rating - the reason you can score above 5 is because the number is based on the raw figures and the current weightings.
The NHTSA records down in its database the raw numbers, then uses those numbers to calculate the safety rating based on the current weightings (from empirical data). This lets them recalculate the safety rating as need be - yesteryear's 5 stars may be this year's 3 stars, for example. Or, depending on how cars individually perform, it's possible two 5 star cars with the old rating may become a 3-star and a 4-star car.
So you cannot compare "stars" between model years, but you can compare them with historical vehicles recalculated to new standards. After all, many old 5 star vehicles may lack the safety features present on today's modern vehicles, so they won't be 5 stars anymore in the current rating.
The rating will go down as new model years and new tests are introduced - after all, we'd have hit 5 stars 50 years ago if the tests didn't change. The NHTSA updates its tests and ratings when too many cars are pegged - and there's a new test that apparently reflect the more common crashes that many "5 star" cars now fare poorly on.
Next year, the 2013 Tesla Model S may drop from 5.4 to 4.3. But the 2014 Tesla Model S may still get a full 5 stars because Tesla anticipated the new tests and built the cars to withstand them appropriately.
I think the problem also is that since this is an eyes-only verdict we don't know what it was for the competition. Perhaps some one else got 5.5, Tesla then claiming their 5.4 beeing higher than that competitors "5" would be misleading.
That's even worse, but not really what I was getting at.
What I was saying through rhetorical questions was that even if you test two cars back-to-back and the first gets a 5.3 and the second gets a 5.4, it's still almost certainly a huge stretch for the manufacturer of the 5.4 to start running about telling everyone that they're the safest car on the road, because .1 difference is probably well within the margin of error for the overall test. And that's probably what has the NHTSA in a tizzy, and rightly so.
Thats possible, but Tesla indicates that 5.4 is a new record, and it does seem that 5-star ratings in every category is unusual.
They also provide this handy graphic, but being a complete failure at statistics I cant confirm that it supports their claim.
http://www.teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/blog_images/model-s-five-star-safety-rating.jpg
"A new record" is false because while the unpublished raw score for the Tesla was 5.4, the same unpublished raw score for the Ford Mustang was 6.2.
Or maybe not. Since it's unpublished, I, you and Elon Must don't know if it's a record high or an A-.
If the car were only 50% on fire, I'd probably still buy one...
... These ratings are for impacts. They say nothing about the ability of cars to spontaneously combust when sitting innocently on the side of the road :-)
"Sometimes you have to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, and know when to walk away."
Kenny? Is that you?
Sometimes you have to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, and know when to walk away.
And when to run.
Tesla is better then any other ev!
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-21/musk-claim-of-fewer-tesla-fires-questioned-in-mit-report.html
Think level playing fields. Ford can't advertise a rating of 5.4. GM can't. Tesla can because... why?
After that whole "My new supermegatube will do everything your high speed railway does, only cheaper - restrictions apply, supermegatube does not, actually, go to any of the locations served by high speed rail, and actually isn't going to be built anywhere near 50% of the stops" crap from Musk, I do feel the guy isn't always speaking with his honesty valve sealed properly.
I admire what he's doing, I hope he's successful at popularizing the electric car, and building the infrastructure needed to make it a transportation alternative, but the guy needs to knock it off with the exaggerated claims.
Hey, question: Which has sold more, the Chevy Volt, or the Tesla Model S?
That's right. The Volt. (50,000 vs less than 30,000 (forecast.)
Now, given that, the six million dollar question: how many Chevy Volts have caught fire so far?
Disclaimer: I'm a TSLA shareholder. I'm thinking this was a bad investment, but I'll see what happens over the next month.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
No, he's not correct. If he wants to go into more detail about safety than the NHTSA does, or make claims on his own, that's fine. He might (possibly) even know more about car safety than they do. What he's doing though, it pointing to the NHTSA as an authority that's made a specific claim. The NHTSA isn't willing to stand by that claim, however, so he's being misleading at best, and lying at worst.
Just because the pollutant isn't literally generated onboard the vehicle doesn't mean *no* pollution was involved. Giving an actual value of "zero" in your claim for emissions is deceptive when 2/3 of the available electrons in America were produced with carbon fuels. Why is Tesla allowed to make weird claims that fully externalize/ignore certain costs when we at Slashdot would bitchslap the US government or a gasoline car company for doing that? How is it a failure of someone's intelligence or a problem reading "natural language" to look a single step up the supply chains and point out this vehicle depends presently on the same types of environmental cost as any other common vehicle?
And know when to run.
Regardless if he is correct or not, poking the bear is not usually a wise course of action.
Tesla can because... why?
Because they earned it? Maybe if Ford could make a Pinto that burst into flame without killing the occupants or melting the pen in the glovebox, they could get a 5.4 rating too?
Because it takes a lot less oil to run a Tesla than it does to run an IC engine the equivalent number of miles. IC engines (internal combustion) are very inefficient. Electric motors are not, and neither are generators. Nor do electric motor systems require swimming in 8 or so quarts of oil which must be replaced every few months if you want your vehicle to stay out of the junkyard. Nor do electrics participate in consuming the hugely marked up gasoline or diesel fuels offered to the consumer, they use highly discounted, bought in bulk, less refined oil the power stations consume. So the turbine at the electric plant makes electricity efficiently, the lines bring it to the charge station efficiently, and the Tesla then charges and utilizes that energy efficiently. Overall, less fuel is used than with an IC engine, and gas stations, a significant income stream for the oil companies, don't get to participate as middlemen in the fueling chain. And, in the interim, you get amazing torque, silence, less pollution.
Of course, the Tesla doesn't know or care that it's getting power from fossil fuel. It runs just fine on power obtained from hydro, pumped storage, solar, tidal, and so forth. So as the energy infrastucture builds towards less dependence upon fossil fuels, the Tesla and its brethren are a factor that encourages less and less fossil fuel use.
That is why big oil might object.
--fyngyrz
anon due to mod points
No, he's not correct. If he wants to go into more detail about safety than the NHTSA does, or make claims on his own, that's fine.
They are correct, you are wrong.
"NHTSA does not publish a star rating above 5, however safety levels better than 5 stars are captured in the overall Vehicle Safety Score (VSS) provided to manufacturers, where the Model S achieved a new combined record of 5.4 stars."
The NHTSA is pissed because you're not supposed to TELL people what the ACTUAL safety rating is.
For example, the Tesla's VSS works out to 5.4 stars prior to rounding, another car has 4.5 stars prior to rounding. Despite being almost an entire "star" apart, both these vehicles get "5 stars" and appear to be just as safe to the consumer. The NHTSA is pissed because they don't want the public to be aware of it, because people will rightfully ignore the star ratings and demand the raw VSS instead. And that would show many cars are a lot worse in comparison than the Star System reveals... and the people who are invested in those companies pend a LOT of money on political donations.
It's ALSO important to note that even the NHTSA admits they don't even consider many of the more advanced safety systems in their calculations at all.
Push this "controversy" as far as they can without actually getting themselves kicked out of the program because they only come off looking really good and cool and the government agency looks like its splitting hairs and being a baby. Of course Tesla is proud of how safe they've made their cars, and they want people to know how safe their cars are, and now people will know that they scored so high they got in trouble for saying how high they scored.
> critique of the NHTSA
He hates all government because he is one of those CONservatives. Just look at how he decided he wants to destroy the automobile dealer system in Texas because Democrats own car dealerships in Texas more than 2 to 1 more than CONservatives. He wants to hurt his own kind in order to punish a few Democrats. He is typical of their kind.
Disclaimer: Tesla stock is up 240% this year after dropping 30% recently.
Calling your bs
I challenge Elon Musk to a Russian roulette duel. I will be driving my Ford Excursion and he will be driving his best in the world Tesla S to a head on crash. Let's the best survive.
Think level playing fields. Ford can't advertise a rating of 5.4. GM can't. Tesla can because... why?
Because Tesla actually has a 5.4 rating, while Ford and GM do not?
(is it supposed to be a trick question?)
Quite the strawman you've got there.
In short: So what? Large-scale fossil fuel plants are still vastly more efficient (and cleaner-burning, and easier to monitor, repair, replace and upgrade) than tiny-scale (inside-each-vehicle) fossil fuel plants.
NHTSA: Why don't you just make five safer and make five be the top number and make that a little safer?
Elon Musk: [pause] These cars go to 5.4.
-1 flame. Lobby or ignorant but a fantasy nonetheless.
Now, given that, the six million dollar question: how many Chevy Volts have caught fire so far?
Good question... I don't know, but apparently enough that it was investigated:
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/21/business/la-fi-autos-volt-20120121
I more or less expect them to reach the same conclusion with tesla btw.
You never count your money when you're sittin' at the table.
1) the grid is just fine. It does not have the issues that you seem to think.
2) EVs with larger batteries, charge in the nighttime with cheap energy, but will lower the price of electricity for all of us.
3) US's electricy is 37% coal; 27% natural gas; 20% Nuclear; 7% hydro; 1% oil/gas/etc; with the rest coming from AE.
4) numerous studies have shown that our grid and power situation is good enough to provide more than 90% of our transportion energy, provided that about 70% of that is during night-time charging. In fact, by having true EVs with about 150 MPC, it will LOWER our electricity costs since the bill for the grid and all the rest is spread over to EVs AND utilities can drop expensive on-demand systems for daytime, and instead go with more base-load systems since they will be used in the night as well.
But hey, do not let us interfere with your wet dream.
When a feedback system is going towards hysteresis, it is necessary to employ negative feedback, to shove a signal's voltage back on itself, to regain stability.
The Big Three have learned a lot from the Koch brothers about funding massive astroturf campaigns against their enemies.
Trick question! GM recalled several thousand chevy volts due to fire risk~
http://www.thedetroitbureau.com/2013/06/chevy-volt-recall-may-set-new-record/
Joking aside: http://www.hybridcars.com/young-woman-in-chevy-volt-survives-severe-drunk-driver-crash/
No fire.
I too am a TSLA shareholder, but can't complain. Bought ~6000 shares at $17/share, sold most of it at ~$190, bought it all back at $130.
Bad investment? Hardly.
Elon, what does the scouter say about the model S' safety rating?
Elon : Its over 9000!!!!!
actually, this is like saying why do democrats feel the need to call for injunctions on duly passed restrictions on abortion before the court actually hears arguments and makes a ruling.
Their argument, as the republican argument line could reasonably follow, is that it would take 10 years to realize how big of a failure obamacare is, and at that point the damage to our already dysfunctional healthcare system will be extreme, making putting in place a real solution hard.
btw, the argument on abortion is that the several year shutdown of the clinics made illegal by new abortion restrictions will cause these areas to be permanently unserved, as it is difficult for such a business to turn back on after years of being turned off.
I'm not saying I agree at all with either argument (doctors love money, especially cash business that abortion clinics represent, so doctors will stream back in; and on obamacare, as nothing as done to address why we pay our medical practitioners from doctors to drug companies multiples what they earn for the same services anywhere else in the world it will fail to do what actually is required, curb costs in a market that is effectively dictated by suppliers).
in their private reports to retail they give scores higher than 5 and they stand by that: it's a common case.
Indeed the reason for it is quite reasonable: if you get a lot of cars at 5.8+ then you know that you need to recalibrate your 5 to the new setting for car safety.
Yes, all that slowing down generally uses up nearly as much energy (to be dissipated by heat in the brakes) as driving forward.
They got a score of 5.4 which corresponds to a rating for 5 stars.
They didn't get 5.4 stars, because such a thing does not exist. You can argue all you want, but the organization that gives out the stars only gave them 5, despite some claiming they did better.
no, he just wants Tesla to be bought directly by customers so that it seems cheaper since in other cars at least 10% (maybe even 20%) of price you pay goes to dealership, this way by removing dealership "expense" he saves customer money, and price of Tesla looks closer to gasoline cars
I fully support that because i dont think dealerships bring enough value to car buyers for money they cost customers, too bad all car manufacturers don't do same
Just because the pollutant isn't literally generated onboard the vehicle doesn't mean *no* pollution was involved. Giving an actual value of "zero" in your claim for emissions is deceptive when 2/3 of the available electrons in America were produced with carbon fuels.
When you describe emissions from an internal combustion engine, do you count just what comes out of the tailpipe? Or do you include the electricity used to pump the gasoline out of underground storage tanks and into your vehicle? How about the emissions associated with refining it from crude oil? Emissions produced during extraction of the crude and delivery to the refiner? Failed test wells drilled before the actual production well?
It is obviously true that, looked at in fine enough detail, everything pollutes. Even the tomatoes I grow organically in my back yard: seeds were transported to my house by car, they were packaged in paper produced in a high-pollution factory, and I suppose you could even count the marginal CO2 I produced as a result of digging the little hole. Honestly accounting for the whole carbon/pollution history of a consumer product, from the point of nuclear fusion in the heart of some long-dead star to the point of return to landfill, is ridiculous and impossible. Manage the emissions and pollution under your direct control, and set standards that improve the upstream production. It is not effective to manage the upstream production by placing constraints on the end user.
And yet look at teslas balance sheet and income statments. The company is not making money and is not doing well. maybe you think increasing losses see quarterly balance sheets is good....Most rational people do not.
Highly recommended by the folks who brought us PayPal.
A Russian roulette duel? You both have one bullet and fire at the same time? While driving towards one another? Do you shoot at each other, or in the traditional fashion (at yourself)?
Let us the best survive?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
So you're claiming you put up $100k early on, sat back and let it run well past a million without taking profits, then miraculously sold at the very top.
Maybe that's what happened but it's difficult to believe. How about posting a transaction statement or two?
Think level playing fields. Ford can't advertise a rating of 5.4. GM can't. Tesla can because... why?
Perhaps their cars didn't earn it?
Now, given that, the six million dollar question: how many Chevy Volts have caught fire so far?
Enough that GM had to do a recall to fix it.
http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/gm-recalling-chevy-volts-prevent-battery-fires-164320241.html
Oooh, burned.
Instead of using a relative rating scale to encourage new technologies that make vehicles safer, we will establish an arbitrary threshold for perfect safety and enforce it vigorously so that nobody looks bad. -- Automakers via NHTSA, apparently.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
thank you - only rational statement i've seen in this morass
"There's always that kid in the class that ruins it for everyone when being graded on a curve. You should tell the truth. Any "teacher" who grades on a curve needs to have the license revoked, and should never be allowed to teach, anywhere. Only the mental unstable would grade on a curve.
I would buy a Tesla if they did that
Found one!
Yes. It is to raise more angst.
And I bet the cars do perform that well. Which they seem to by the most recent calculations of car fires: a gasoline to electric comparison.
There have been battery fires with the Volt but they don't make prime time news because it's not an interesting story - nobody cares if a Chevy catches fire because it's not a "new" thing like Tesla. There have been fires after crash tests somewhat analogous to Tesla's fires after high-speed accidents, but I also remember reading one news story about a Volt spontaneously catching fire and burning down the owner's house.
Tucker: Former auto industry employee - Harassment and entrapment by the industry. Marred as a crook and a nut case for life. (Snicker. That was easy.)
Nader: Former auto industry employee - In court, as his own lawyer, proved harassment and entrapment by the industry - Won the court case that made him independently wealthy. Marred as nut case for life. (Snicker. Sniff. He took our money. But still ... Hehe.)
DeLorean: Former auto industry employee - In court, as his own lawyer, proved harassment and entrapment by the industry - won the court case. Marred as a crook and a nut case for life. (Snicker. Practice makes perfect. Still, it would have been better if he lost.)
Musk: (Damn this one's too hard to get at - screw it, will just kill him. Sheeat. He was supposed to be in the private plane crash in Palo Alto and die along with the others. Well, we'll just have to think of something else.)