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 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!
If you like your Tesla safety rating, you can keep your Tesla safety rating.
Table-ized A.I.
"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.
The claim is false: The NHTSA rates cars on a 5-point scale, and gave the Tesla S a 5-point rating, the highest they could get. This rating is based on several sub-ratings, where the Tesla also got 5-point ratings, in all categories.
Tesla is basically trying to claim for marketing purposes the fact that they got 5-point ratings in all of the subcategories (which isn't necessary for a 5-point overall rating, and in fact is extremely unusual, if not unique) means that they got 'better than a normal 5-point rating'. Which, ok, they did, but the rating only goes to five points. They can't create a new rating scale just for themselves.
'Sensible' is a curse word.
Indirectly.
They've said that their highest rating is a 5. Musk said that it got a rating of 5.4.
They're not saying the claim is false. Just that 5.4 is higher than 5. And 5 is the highest rating it can get.
So it can't be right.
CAPTCHA: Details
I'm so glad that Slashdot and its mysterious oily benefactors are here to protect me from the evil lies of Elon Musk!
Musk created the PayPal scumbags - so, FUCK YOU!
Elon will always be a liar to me.
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.
That is part of running a business that's based on hype and perfect future outcomes.
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.
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.
So, what they're saying is "Yeah, his car really did get a 5.4, but we don't want him to SAY so"?
As far as I can tell, Tesla claims - as do several news outlets - that the NHTSA also releases some other raw numbers to the manufacturers which Tesla then decided to 'combine' (whether that's adding or averaging or whatever - who knows.) to give a 5.4 .
Really, the issue is lack of transparency - since we, the public, don't get to see those numbers. Thus we can't really give a good opinion other than "NHTSA says 5 is the maximum. THE MAXIMUM!" and all nod in agreement at the overlord's words apparently for fear of getting booted out.
This in turn leads to gems like this:
"No matter what, you can't say it's the safest car ever tested, just that it had the best overall test score of any vehicle tested by NHTSA." - NHTSA ( http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/tesla-crash-test-rating-high-maker-claimed/story?id=20024779 )
So it had the best overall test score .. but is not necessarily the safest. But the test is on safety. So it's the best in safety.. but not necessarily the best in safety.
Maybe while they're quibbling they could come up with a system that makes sense to themselves, the manufacturers and, most importantly, the public. If in the end that means Tesla does get a 5.4 and they want to hang on to 5 stars - well I guess they'll just have to lower the rating on a bunch of other cars.
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).
Oh come on, it doesn't matter what Slashdot think, Musk is still just a side-show scammer who got lucky.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Musk must have used the wrong formula when publicizing the Tesla rating.
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
This would be a lot more poignant if you had the balls to sign in before flaming.
Like me, since I agree with your post 100%.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
What do oil companies have to do with clarifying the safety ratings?
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.
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.
oily benefactors
Hey, now! Dice.com is a lot of things but that's a low blow!
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.
Now you're bragging FOR him?
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
"She'll make .5 past light."
"She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts."
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
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
still better than the safest car in the powerpoint
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.
How many supplies have _you_ delivered to the ISS?
And getting buried IN your car..
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
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.
And of course, tests perfectly reflect reality, and as such the Tesla's 5.4 score means it's definitely safer than some car that got a 5.35 or something. Uh huh.
The Tesla is pretty damn safe, but saying "it's the safest car ever tested" can't be supported, and if I were the NHTSA, I wouldn't want people implying that I said it was (even though Tesla chose their words carefully).
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.
.... several times.
How many successful multi-billion-dollar businesses has Musk been behind again?
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.
No, thats NOT what tesla claimed, their actual claim was exactly this:
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.
They said the highest rating you can advertise is 5. Tesla is saying that they were provided an internal, manufacturer-only rating that is higher than the publicly available "5 star" rating. NHTSA does not seem to contradict that.
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.
While California does use some geothermal energy, much of their electricity comes from BC, WA, ID, and OR hydropower, wind power, and solar power.
We're green in the West. It's why jobs are being created here - green is cheaper than non-green.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
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-.
During Tesla's initial work on AC power, electricity was a luxury for the rich rather than the common man's utility. And the "particle beam weapons, remote control devices, and wireless power" didn't exactly get to "majority of the populace" status, either. Giving Tesla credit for every engineering advancement in those fields over half a century since his death is a bit excessive hero-worship. Tesla did a lot of great stuff, but a lot wasn't particularly useful at the time (or even later, for the more wildly speculative projects based on handwaving more than practical engineering). Your glorification of Tesla is like someone looking back fifty years from now and saying that Musk single-handedly put an electric car and a rocket ship in every middle-class garage --- a hint of fact under a heap of exaggeration.
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?
Regardless if he is correct or not, poking the bear is not usually a wise course of action.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
they got 5-point ratings in all of the subcategories (which isn't necessary for a 5-point overall rating, and in fact is extremely unusual, if not unique
Volvo S60 also maxed all the individual tests, but I think the Model S got there first.
Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
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.
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?
Just because there is a safety test doesn't mean it's definitive on how safe a car is. It may incorrectly test some safety aspects or miss other aspects completely. Some of the tests may need to be weighted differently or may not even be able to be weighted in a rational manner. It's an approximation, an educated guess at how safe a vehicle is and as such, you can't really claim that one car is safer than another based on the score, particularly if the scores are close.
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?
Which is why the data should be made publicly available, so the weighting can be checked. I'm fine with them saying that Score X on head-on colission at 60mph is worth less than Score X on rear-end colission at 15mph simply because the first probably leaves you in a world of hurt anyway and isn't nearly as likely to happen as some jackass rear-ending you at the lights.
But then...
The whole point of testing isn't to make guesses. You can't just go around running a bunch of tests, getting measurable data from it, knowing with some certainty what the error in the test methodology is, and then check the alignment of the planets before factoring the test score into what a bunch of tea leaves say.
Essentially...
I do get the psychological, PR and industry flak aspect that the NHTSA is trying to address - but that would be a lot easier by dropping the scores and only issuing stars.. or by keeping the scores and dropping the stars.
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
"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.