Tesla Model S Caught Fire While Parked and Unplugged

cartechboy writes "The safety headlines involving the Tesla Model S were a mixed bag last year. The good news was the Model S received a top safety rating, but the bad news came with three of those electric cars catching fire after receiving damage to the battery packs. (Though coverage of the latter was disproportionate to the coverage of fires in other types of vehicle.) Now another Tesla Model S has caught fire, but this time the car was parked and unplugged. The fire happened earlier this morning in the owner's garage in Toronto, Ontario. At this time no one knows what sparked the fire, but we do know the vehicle was only about four months old. Again, it wasn't plugged into a charging station, and it wasn't turned on. With no one near it. Interestingly, the battery on this particular Model S was unscathed by the fire. In fact, the Toronto fire department says the fire didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle since all of those components weren't touched by the fire. So, how did this Tesla fire happen, and will this blow up into a larger issue for the new automaker?"

Comments

Flame on

[Anonymous Coward]

Flame on

Re:Flame on

[Anonymous Coward]

Not really. Spontaneous combustion is a pretty shitty feature in a car if you ask me.

Re:Flame on

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe the car just started a small fire just to keep warm (it's been pretty freaking cold up here, lately) and things got a little out of hand. If I was stuck in an un-heated garage at these temperatures, I'd probably do the same...

Re:Flame on

[doccus]

Well, if he had been sympathetic to "S" and provided a blanket . Seriously, if you have a supercar you MUST have a heated garage. Plus he should have extinguished his stogie in the car ashtray ;-) (they do have ashtrays inb the Model S) ..

Not from the car?

[Dthief]

Why are they assuming it was started by the car?

"In fact, the Toronto fire department says the fire didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle since all of those components weren't touched by the fire"

maybe the fire was cause by something in the garage adjacent to the car?

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Arson?

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are they assuming it was started by the car?

"In fact, the Toronto fire department says the fire didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle since all of those components weren't touched by the fire"

maybe the fire was cause by something in the garage adjacent to the car?

A short circuit in the radio for instance can cause a fire that's independent of the battery or charger.

Re:Not from the car?

[interkin3tic]

Clearly GM set the fire intentionally and then paid off the fire department to say it was the Tesla, but the fire department failed to make it convincing! WAKE UP SHEEPLE! There's a vast incompetent conspiracy going on!

Re:Not from the car?

[Samantha Wright]

From TFA:

Shortly after the fire, seven Tesla employees visited the owner of the vehicle. The company also offered to take care of the damages and inconvenience caused by the fire, but the owner declined.

This sounds comically similar to a villain trying to conceal the remains of a failed plan to frame someone.

Re:Not from the car?

[Dthief]

yes, i guess other things could cause it besides what was ruled out. but there seems to be no supporting evidence (i didnt RTFA to be fair, just the summary) that it WAS from the car is my point.

And I would assume the car would need to be on for the radio to short circuit?

Re:Not from the car?

[AK Marc]

Or the fire was caused by a cigarette left burning on the seat, or some other owner-caused action that would have happened in any car.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm inclined to agree with your conclusion, but really, "seven Tesla employees"? (emphasis added).

Maybe their offer to "take care" of the damages was a little intimidating. ;)

Re:Not from the car?

[tompaulco]

It happened in a PRIVATE garage, shortly after the owner had come back from a drive. It points pretty strongly to SOMETHING to do with the car, but they were unable to pinpoint the cause, other than it was not the charging system, battery and electric receptacle. It could have been a short in the radio for all we know, but that is still an issue with the car.

Re: Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently not. A friend's VW went in a for a service and the dash caught fire.

Re:Not from the car?

[TWX]

A friend of mine had a house fire whose origin could not be reliably determined. It's not all that uncommon for the source of a fire to be unresolved. That's almost worse for Tesla as it plants the seed of doubt in a way that can't be readily defended against. Even a citing of some feature of the car could be better as that feature or aspect could be changed, but if the cause isn't determined then there's nothing to do to fix it.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think pretty much everyone knows Musk's ego by now, and how childishly he tries to taint the image of those who criticise his products. If this sort of thing had happened to me, I would definitely want the fire department to inspect the vehicle, as well as my insurer, but I'd be mighty suspicious about the manufacturer immediately offering to "take care of" things - the sort of offer which almost always comes with strings attached.

Note in particular that the "fire's not cause by the battery etc." lines are from TESLA, not the fire dept. - the summary is misleading. They have been carelessly quick ("it didn't look like that bit was on fire, so that didn't cause it...") to dismissively rule out a list of causes which might make them look bad.

Re:Not from the car?

[icebike]

Why are they assuming it was started by the car?

"In fact, the Toronto fire department says the fire didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle since all of those components weren't touched by the fire"

maybe the fire was cause by something in the garage adjacent to the car?

Looking at the pictures, you see that from all appearances, the car itself wasn't even involved. It simply happened to be there.

The fire department has torn down large amounts of sheet rock, trying to get at the fire, which says they thought it it was in the walls, or
the ceiling. This sounds like an electrical fire, or something hot enough to possibly have ignited the studs behind the sheet rock, so they
have to tear it down to make sure.
The firemen are paying no attention to the car, they are looking as something on the wall or floor in front of the car.

I'm thinking arson or a can of lawn mower gas leaked.

Another instance of there being a fire on the same city block as a Tesla and the press rushing to report it.

Re:Not from the car?

[BasilBrush]

Odd that the owner refused. Presumably he was covered by insurance. But it's going to cost him in excess and/or higher premiums.

Re:Not from the car?

[icebike]

A short circuit in the radio for instance can cause a fire that's independent of the battery or charger.

No evidence the car was actually involved at all. The car roof isn't even burned. They haven't even bothered to open the car door.
They yanked down a ton of sheet rock looking for fire. The firemen are looking at the wall and floor.

If anything, its probably the home handyman wiring installed (unprofessionally) to handle the Tesla charging.

Re:Not from the car?

[icebike]

Sounds more likely the home owner knows exactly what caused the fire.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Carson

Re:Not from the car?

[icebike]

Or the fire was caused by a cigarette left burning on the seat, or some other owner-caused action that would have happened in any car.

The fire didn't engulf the car. The top of the car is unburned. If the fire started inside the car the roof would be devoid of paint, and all windows
would be gone.

The wall in front of the car and the overhead ceiling of the garage was extensively damaged. Just look at the pictures in the linked article.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

A car like a Tesla can never be turned off. Everything is still powered. My point even without a fire starting in battery or charging systems, doesn't rule out an electrical fire.

Re:Not from the car?

[BasilBrush]

And it could have been a short in the garage lighting circuit or electric garage door. Fires from those causes would also be likely to happen when the car and owner arrives or leaves.

Re:Not from the car?

[JustNiz]

>> No evidence the car was actually involved at all.

You obviously didn't bother to read the original article.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

The best speculation I've read is that it could have been some loose/faulty wiring in the house. We won't know until the findings are released, but that would be my guess.

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/27472-Another-Tesla-fire-in-a-garage-this-time-in-Toronto/page17

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla offered to pay for damages...

could be that's just good PR - or could be that's accepting responsibility...

looking at the pics, you can't rule out the fire being caused by the car - it seems to have started around the front wheels (motors?) and a short in the electrical system somewhere in the front of the car is not inconsistent with it having nothing to do with "the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle" - while still being an electrical fire caused by the car...

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you follow the trail to original article which has photos, you can see the car isn't even burned at all (or not visibly anyway). So I think Tesla's claims are appropriate.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

how about Tesla's own statement:
“Dealing with occasional fires is something that every car company has to do, as no vehicle is completely fireproof under all circumstances."

-and the fact they offered to pay damages?

Re:Not from the car?

[Obfuscant]

They yanked down a ton of sheet rock looking for fire. The firemen are looking at the wall and floor.

That's because when a structure becomes involved in a fire, even if it didn't start there, they need to make sure the fire isn't still active in the walls of the structure. It's really embarrassing for firemen to pack up after thinking they've put a fire out, only to get called back a couple of hours later because some two-by-four in the wall wasn't fully extinguished. Also dangerous for the structure owner.

Re:Not from the car?

[Mr D from 63]

We shouldn't assume it was or wasn't from the car without even knowing the source point. But if one were to guess, the most likely answer would be an electrical short somewhere in the circuitry. Even when "off", there are still hot circuits through the vehicle. Could be something as simple as a faulty contact or connector near a source of flammable lubricant or other material. Then again, it could have been something left in the car by a passenger. Less likely, IMO, but we just won't know till we are told.

Re:Not from the car?

[icebike]

Actually I did, And I traced it to the source.

The first link http://www.thecarconnection.co... got all its information from the second link.

The first link states "another Tesla Model S has burst into flames -- this time, while parked".
However his cited source makes no such statement. He added that part all by himself.

Just looking at the pictures you can tell it wasn't the car that was burning. It was something else in the garage.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is the big deal with Coal powered cars?

Re:Not from the car?

[nobuddy]

Gonna be funny when it turns out to be a dropped cigarette.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just looking at the pictures you can not tell it wasn't the car that was burning.

Re:Not from the car?

[icebike]

Yes, but this is a rear drive car, with batteries amidship. There is no damage to the rear or the battery areas. All the glass is intact.

There is nothing in the front of the tesla that could start that fire other than the power steering assist motor. If that got hot enough to ignite
what ever was in the boot (front trunk) you could have a small fire, but not one this big.

   

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, this is Glen Beck level of reporting.

Re:Not from the car?

[geoskd]

I'm inclined to agree with your conclusion, but really, "seven Tesla employees"? (emphasis added).

Absolutely, I'm surprised it wasnt more. Tesla is still a relatively small car company, and every employee there has alot of "skin in the game" so to speak. Most likely, the Tesla group consisted of: Two engineers, Probably a battery specialist, and someone familier with the high power electronics. You're going to get the individual who is responsible for the entire engineering team who designed the model. Probably a VP and a product manager as well. Thats five without batting an eye. Thats just the technical team. Now you're going to have someone who is Teslas equivalent of an insurance adjuster, and probably the company lawyer. Given the high profile potential of these cases, probably the companies lead counsel. Thats seven. They could have brought any number of other specialists with them as well.

Tesla will want two questions answered *very* quickly: First, What caused the fire? Second, can / will it happen again.

Re:Not from the car?

[LifesABeach]

How was the fire started? I'm thinking pissed of neighbor.

Re:Not from the car?

[Immerman]

Say what? Why would they do such a thing? Perhaps the charging system needs to be always-on so that it can seamlessly detect being plugged in and regulate the charging process (not uncommon in electronics - many battery chemistry are... violently enthusiastic about unsupervised charging), but what else needs to be powered that isn't always-on in any modern car? (power locks, security system, possibly cooling control system, etc)

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

There is nothing in the front of the tesla that could start that fire other than anything electrical.

Re:Not from the car?

[JustNiz]

Wow you can't even quote the first article correctly.

>> The first link states "another Tesla Model S has burst into flames -- this time, while parked".

No it actually says:
Another Tesla Model S Catches Fire -- This Time, While Parked & Unplugged

It also still seems you didn't read the article. It clearly cites the reference it used: http://www.businessinsider.com...

Which says completely unambiguously:

"Earlier this month, a Tesla Model S sitting in a Toronto garage ignited and caught on fire."

>> Just looking at the pictures you can tell it wasn't the car that was burning

I don't see that at all. Unfortunately the pictures dont clearly show the front of the car but look at the ceiling. The burn pattern is clearly right over the hood of the car.

Re:Not from the car?

[Immerman]

Actually it looked like the front end was probably involved somehow, they just don't show it directly. Otherwise they would have presumably removed the Tesla along with the Lexus that was parked next to it when the fire broke out.

direct link to the article with photo:
http://www.businessinsider.com...

Re:Not from the car?

[WindBourne]

got news for you. That is true of all modern cars. All of them have always on electrical systems. How do you think that you open those electric locks, or start cars remotely, or have a security system?

Re:Not from the car?

[turkeyfish]

Perhaps they should talk to the oil company CEO who lives next door.

Re:Not from the car?

[keltor]

The only electronics in the front are the lights, some sensors and the power steering stuff. Everything else is in the back. The front wheels seem undamaged, so nothing there. I'd think most likely it was either something on the floor (they have a Lexus, which could have leaked and tada oil fire.)

Re:Not from the car?

[sexconker]

Why are they assuming it was started by the car?

"In fact, the Toronto fire department says the fire didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle since all of those components weren't touched by the fire"

maybe the fire was cause by something in the garage adjacent to the car?

Looking at the pictures, you see that from all appearances, the car itself wasn't even involved. It simply happened to be there.

The fire department has torn down large amounts of sheet rock, trying to get at the fire, which says they thought it it was in the walls, or
the ceiling. This sounds like an electrical fire, or something hot enough to possibly have ignited the studs behind the sheet rock, so they
have to tear it down to make sure.
The firemen are paying no attention to the car, they are looking as something on the wall or floor in front of the car.

I'm thinking arson or a can of lawn mower gas leaked.

Another instance of there being a fire on the same city block as a Tesla and the press rushing to report it.

Pictures here: http://www.businessinsider.com...

You can clearly see that the car was pulled in close to the rear wall of the garage and the majority of the interior of that wall is fucked, as is the ceiling.
In the first picture, they've torn down the left side of the wall and are looking for shit (such as fucked wiring), but not finding anything.
You can clearly see in all 3 pictures that the interior of the wall is fine - the wood isn't even blackened.
The fire did not start within the wall, it started in the garage near the wall. The only thing nearby is the front of the car.

Re:Not from the car?

[jacekm]

The darling of the left is untouchable.

Re:Not from the car?

[LordLimecat]

How the heck can a parked electric car even start a fire without involving its electric system?

Re:Not from the car?

[LordLimecat]

I still dont understand why the media hates the tesla.

I would think conservatives (like me) are a fan because Musk is an incredibly successful businessman, free market yadda yadda. He sells a good product, he makes successful companies, he shows how the private market is supposed to work.

I would think liberals would love tesla because its the environmentalist dream-- its a desirable product that is environmentally friendly AND viable in the real world.

What grinches are looking at tesla and grinding their teeth, and when did they get such influence in the media? And dont even say "big petro", we saw how much the media loved them during the BP spill and with all the fracking coverage.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you thought maybe to put down the fanboy kool-aid and consider the criticisms repeatedly levelled at Tesla?

Maybe it's not that people on all sides make irrational whines, but that people on all sides see legitimate problems? I see Tesla as one part technology and four parts marketing: an arrogant, niche car manufacturer and retailer which happens to have a less-than-stellar safety record, but on such a small sample size that it really isn't that big of a deal.

Re:Not from the car?

[icebike]

less-than-stellar safety record

Nobody has ever died it a Tesla.

Re:Not from the car?

[Kaenneth]

A friend of mine had a house fire whose origin could not be reliably determined. It's not all that uncommon for the source of a fire to be unresolved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...

Re:Not from the car?

[Guspaz]

There's a bunch of electrical stuff in the extreme front of the car. The 12V battery jumper terminals are right behind the plastic nose on the very front, not to mention the headlights on either side. There's also a bunch of electrical cabling around there. The 12V battery itself is located beside the frunk near the rear, not dissimilar to where you'd find a 12v battery in a normal car (still "under the hood" as it were).

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

The only electronics in the front are the lights, some sensors and the power steering stuff.

All of which can cause a fire if there is an electrical short.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

FALSE

The fires doesn't need to engulf the car for it to have started there.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

It did involve it's electrical system. There is more to an electric cars electrical system than just the battery and charger.

Re:Not from the car?

[icebike]

It turns out there is also a DC to DC converter behind the passenger side front wheel.
That should be de-energized when the car is off.

They also have a regenerative brake unit up there, but unless you came flying down the "Toronto Mountain", I can't see that getting that hot.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is you.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds more likely the home owner knows exactly what caused the fire.

Yep it was that piece of shit tesla he bought.

Re:Not from the car?

[deadweight]

A friend had a Pontiac burn up for unknown reasons in the driveway. This happens to cars in general every now and then.

Re:Not from the car?

[Bing Tsher E]

Yes. It's 'Big Oil' as always. The guys bought the rights to that carburetor that got 100 mpg in a V8, and the additive that lets you run your car on water. They are in their lair right now, rolling around in the gold coin vault.

Re:Not from the car?

[Bing Tsher E]

My car is a 2006, and it has electric windshield wipers. Also the headlights, radio, and the heater fan. Not much more.

Re: Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

And this is you.

Re:Not from the car?

[Bing Tsher E]

Likely Tesla wanted him to sign a wavier promising not to sue or engage in any public comments. They don't send a PR team out like that out of benevolence.

Re:Not from the car?

[SternisheFan]

People connected with 'big oil' have suppressed the development of the battery powered car, during the '90s. It took this long for someone to come along and restart the technology. Shame, that.

Re:Not from the car?

[SternisheFan]

Since there isn't enough information to determine the true cause of the fire yet, it's all speculation. Therefore it might also be an act of purposeful sabotage to discredit the Tesla. Right now we just don't know.

Re:Not from the car?

[Duhavid]

If there is a clock, that draws power
Your radio will draw power to maintain it's preset stations.
The ECU/DME in anything that new will draw some power to maintain the map tables for how to run ( how much to inject at such and such conditions ).
The cigarette lighter port, if equipped ( and some cars have multiple ), can be powered when the ignition is off.

If there are any electrical problems, something that is nominally un-powered when the ignition is off can draw power. Possibly too much....

I had a 1992 BMW 525 that would run down it's battery. In investigating why, I found and was surprised at how many items and how much power flows when "off".

Re:Not from the car?

[Duhavid]

It could have been the Tesla because of a problem with the Tesla
It could have been the Tesla because of something stored in the Tesla not involving it's fundamentals ( i.e., smoldering cigarette )
It could have been the Tesla's charging system in the garage
There was a Lexus in the garage also, from what I have read
It could have been the Lexus because of a problem with the Lexus
It could have been the Lexus because of something stored in the Lexus not involving it's fundamentals ( i.e., smoldering cigarette )
It could have been something unrelated to either vehicle, rag fire, garage electrical fire, etc
It could have been arson ( alien or otherwise )
There could be other causes ( he said, watching sliders... )
Wait for the investigation, then you will know instead of assume.

Re: Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or maybe the driver didn't put his Cuban cigar completely out.

Re: Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

So he dropped his lit cigar as he got out and it rolled under the front of the car, where it caught some old oil or something on fire.
Ya it's a stretch. Point is there's just as much evidence to support my theory as yours.
Maybe you clowns should just STFU until we have some solid data.

Re:Not from the car?

[davester666]

how dare you suggest a slashdot poster hasn't read both the summary, and clicked through the links to read the related articles.

for shame!

Re:Not from the car?

[AK Marc]

How can the fire start inside the car and do more damage to a nearby wall than the car?

Re:Not from the car?

[LordLimecat]

The last umpteen media potshots at Tesla have been over fires that were either not started by the roadster, or were caused by colissions. One was caused by the roadster running over a trailer hitch at highway speeds, and there were zero injuries, but the headline conveniently implied that the fires were spontaneous.

As I read these articles I dont get the impression that theres a problem with anything Tesla makes, other than Musk being really poor at interacting with journalists in a non-inflamatory way. The impression i get is that the media is determined to find a reason to drive everyone into a hysteria over phantom fires caused by the tesla.

Even in this story, there is absolutely no reason to assume that the Tesla caused the fire-- particularly as it seems to be the only thing in the garage that isnt touched. But apparently that doesnt stop the headline writers from claiming that the tesla "caught fire" (look at those pics and tell me that it was on fire?)

Re:Not from the car?

[LordLimecat]

They want a success case for environmentalism, and Tesla is about the only "green initiative" that is remotely successful right now.

The good is not the enemy of the perfect.

Re:Not from the car?

[mikelieman]

PROTIP: Never empty an ashtray into a garbage can.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

They aren't. The media backed by those that want to see the continuous dependence of our nation in oil, the slave of our people forced to spend 30% in their income on fuel and heath treatments (provoked by the pollution of our cities) and the perpetuation of war provoked by our government with half other friendly nations around the world that are telling the fire was started on the car. Now that we have a local company trying to address the big issue of our nation, our dependence on foreign oil, and investing to bring the latest technology to the market, they will hit them the same way they did with others, with Tucker for sample.

I hope this time will be different as I see in Elon Musk a guy with the courage to push things forward.

Re:Not from the car?

[WindBourne]

do you have electric locks on your car? On current cars, when you lock/unlock, it is not a mechanical linkage. It is electrically driving. Likewise, most cars have electric windows. The exceptions are the cars that costs under say $30K.

Re:Not from the car?

[lsatenstein]

Why are they assuming it was started by the car?

"In fact, the Toronto fire department says the fire didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle since all of those components weren't touched by the fire"

maybe the fire was cause by something in the garage adjacent to the car?

If it is a Toronto garage, in a resident's home, the garages are not part of the home and have no locks on their front and back doors. So...
If in a condo, there is another possibility.
But sabotage is always a possibility.

Re:Not from the car?

[doccus]

If there had been a Honda Civic in the garage they would never have mentioned the car at all. "Burning Tesla" makes good press though..

Re:Not from the car?

[BasilBrush]

Trouble with your argument is that the posters who criticise Tesla on here are mostly from the right. Just as Jeremy Clarkson, the TV presenter of Top Gear, who criticises Tesla to the point of lying, is a right wing twat.

Re:Not from the car?

[BasilBrush]

I still dont understand why the media hates the tesla.

Mostly the media just want eyeballs.
Dog bites man is not a story. Man bites dog is a story.

These new fangled cars are dangerous is a story.
These new fangled cars are safe is not a story.

Re:Not from the car?

[icebike]

You know this how? Do those critical of Tesla have little "I'm from the Right" tags?

Clarkson hasn't said a single thing bad about Tesla since he was caught lying in his first hatchet job,
and I have no idea of his political standings.

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Clarkson hasn't said a single thing good about Tesla since he was caught telling the truth in his first review, and I have no idea of his political standings.

Re:Not from the car?

[JustNiz]

It burnt a Lexus too? at least some good came of it then.

Re:Not from the car?

[aminorex]

Nice reputation for extreme safety you've got there, Mr. Musk. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it.

Re:Not from the car?

[aminorex]

Who ignited it?

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

"I didn't read TFA" == "I'm an idiot who makes things up"

Re:Not from the car?

[aminorex]

You see, the Tesla is not only a dangerous incindiary monster, but it is a stealthy and vindictive one. It waits until you go to bed, and if you forgot to plug it in, it gets really peeved, combines all the little laser projectors into one beam, bounces it off the driving mirrors, and spews a beam of flaming destruction out the front window, to start your house on fire!

Re:Not from the car?

[BasilBrush]

I have no idea of his political standings.

Then you're not British. He writes right wing articles for The Times and The Sun. He criticises Labour Party politicians, and was a Thatcher fan. No one British is in any doubt of his politics.

Clarkson hasn't said a single thing bad about Tesla since he was caught lying in his first hatchet job

And so why doesn't his lies in the first "hatchet job" not count?

As to how I know about other right wingers criticising Tesla, I'm talking about posters here, of which there are a fair number with well known politics, expounded at length over the years.

Re:Not from the car?

[icebike]

I have no idea of his political standings.

Then you're not British. He writes right wing articles for The Times and The Sun. He criticises Labour Party politicians, and was a Thatcher fan. No one British is in any doubt of his politics.

Clarkson hasn't said a single thing bad about Tesla since he was caught lying in his first hatchet job

And so why doesn't his lies in the first "hatchet job" not count?

As to how I know about other right wingers criticising Tesla,

Because you assume he has editorial control of his TV show. Which is nonsense. Further, when he reviewed the Tesla, it made no sense to own one in Britain, where is principal audience is. There were no charging stations in Britain at that time. The show was made for British consumption, and the guy is an avowed petrol head. Its not the first hatched job Top Gear has done on cars. If anything he denigrated it because he doesn't like anything build in America or by Americans.

I'm talking about posters here, of which there are a fair number with well known politics, expounded at length over the years.

I hardly see any one posting here on slashdot railing against Tesla Motors. There is a virtual love affair.

You see the odd sniping, but most of those posting derogatory remarks are posting as ACs where there is no way to tie them to any point of view. Yet its obvious most of those are posting out of class envy, because they can't afford the cars, and Musk built it all on his own money without government help. Success is not allowed in this country unless you got government help in a lot of liberal eyes.

But by and large Tesla Motors is admired, by conservatives, and you sound more butthurt than rational in your claims to the contrary.

Oh, and FYI. have you noticed how fast the Liberal Press buried THIS Story?

Re:Not from the car?

[BasilBrush]

Because you assume he has editorial control of his TV show. Which is nonsense.

The current format of Top Gear was pitched to the BBC by a production company co-owned by Clarkson and a producer. Clearly whilst they split their responsibilities into presenter and producer, Clarkson had the power to get his own way on pretty much anything. And certainly wrote his own material, rather than simply presenting what was given to him. (He has a motoring journalist background - he was a writer before he was a presenter.)

Some years later they sold the production company to the BBC, but there doesn't appear to have been any change in the day to day control of programme making.

The Clarkson bias against EVs presented on Top Gear is Clarkson's own.

I hardly see any one posting here on slashdot railing against Tesla Motors.

Sure the majority on here are pro Tesla and EVs. As one would expect given it's a tech site. I never said that the Tesla critics are in the majority here, I said they are mostly right wingers.

You're a right winger and you like Tesla. And you're overestimating the extent to which other right wingers are like you. The more general case is that right wingers value their right to squander fossil fuels and object to anything they see as a threat to that. They see both green energy and green vehicles as paving the way to restrictive legislation. That and conservatives just don't cope well with change of any sort.

Re:Not from the car?

[X0563511]

Sure, if by "on" you mean has any current flow in any part of the car whatsoever.

Newsflash: 99% of the stuff you plug in at home is no different.

Re:Not from the car?

[JamieIanMacgregor]

radios typically have a battery backup wire which is always live to keep presets and stations stored in memory. well older ones anyway, I haven't dealt with any new stuff for some time.

Re:Not from the car?

[JamieIanMacgregor]

after market laser headlights left on and shining on the wall?

Re:Not from the car?

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple, Tesla doesn't pay them millions to run ads like the other auto makers do.

Its the samething with not reporting the faults of companies like Boeing, Dow or the fossile fuel industry.

When is the last time you bought something from Boeing? Products from Dow aren't sold as the Dow brand, they are sold uder their marketing name, so why run ads for Dow the company with no specific products being peddeled?

As to when it started? It happened after the Fairness Doctorine was killed, it required all broadcast licensees to run news casts covering both sides of the story even if at a financial loss as a public service for having access to the public airwaves.

Within a year of it'd being repealed the news divisions of these companies started being folded into the marketing department, which resulted in infotainment shows that would rather cut off a former congresman speaking up for net neutrality to cover Justin Beiber's arrest...

Don't belive me? Just watch them and note the ads and the constant harping on single issues for weeks or even years.

Let me be the first to blame:

[Anonymous Coward]

aliens

Re:Let me be the first to blame:

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, Chuck Testa

Arson?

[idontgno]

Maybe by someone looking to short the stock?

Maybe a "hit" taken out by disgruntled Ohio auto dealers?

As others have pointed out, garages are full of flammable stuff. Fire could have originated anywhere.

Re:Arson?

[OhSoLaMeow]

Maybe a "hit" taken out by disgruntled Ohio auto dealers?

Oh no. The Ohio dealers are fully gruntled.

Re:Arson?

[tompaulco]

As others have pointed out, garages are full of flammable stuff. Fire could have originated anywhere.

The picture in TFA sure does make it look like it originated somewhere in the front hood area of the Tesla. If it was a regular car, I could believe that he might have parked a hot engine above an oily rag, but i don't think Teslas are supposed to get hot under the hood.

Re:Arson?

[wiredlogic]

Oh no. The Ohio dealers are fully gruntled.

Never go full gruntle.

Re:Arson?

[smack.addict]

There's nothing under the hood other than what you put there. It's a trunk.

Funny point of driving a Tesla covered in a light layer of snow is that the snow on the hood doesn't melt like it does with a gas car.

Re:Arson?

[LazyBoot]

I would think the same could be said of quite a few mid-engined gas-powered sports cars as well.

Disgruntled Neighbor

[HaeMaker]

Oh wait, Canada... Disgruntled Neighbour.

Re:Disgruntled Neighbor

[Snufu]

Oh wait, Canada... Disgruntled Neighbour.

Do you mean: "Oh Canada, Disgruntled Neighbor wait..."

I'm expecting the following...

[Mashiki]

That it'll be attributed to a improper maintenance/improper sealing of some kind against corrosion. It's that's the second on the list with cars up here when gasoline leaks aren't the cause. The first is of course gasoline leak related, the third is usually modifications to the exhaust system which cause body frame fires. We use *a lot* of salt on the roads here in the winter, and I mean a lot. It's just so damn cheap since we have mines for it all over the place between Ottawa and Windsor(Windsor Salt for example), and man places are in a locked in 100 year contract.

Re:I'm expecting the following...

[Anonymous Coward]

That it'll be attributed to a improper maintenance/improper sealing of some kind against corrosion.

Except people on slashdot have cried to high heaven that electric cars require no maintenance what so ever.

Re:I'm expecting the following...

[cheesybagel]

Its electric. It has no exhaust.

Re:I'm expecting the following...

[NapalmV]

Of course it has. Where would all the spent electrons go?

Re:I'm expecting the following...

[BasilBrush]

He didn't say it did. He was going through the top 3 causes of automobile fires. Not EV fires.

Re:I'm expecting the following...

[Anonymous Coward]

boogie woogie woogie woogie woogie....

Re:I'm expecting the following...

[Ralph Wiggam]

That it'll be attributed to a improper maintenance/improper sealing of some kind against corrosion.

A great thing about electric cars is that their maintenance schedule is very light. On my Leaf, for the first 10 years it's pretty much just cabin air filters and brake fluid. No way that a Model S requires any kind of service in the first 4 months.

Re:I'm expecting the following...

[Bing Tsher E]

Then, at the ten year point, it's $8,000 for a new battery.

-_-

[O('_')O_Bush]

"Though coverage of the latter was disproportionate to the coverage of fires in other types of vehicle.)"

Because the number of fires was disproportionate to the number of accidents and vehicle miles driven, and last I checked, by over an order of magnitude.

But don't let that stop fanbois from spinning irrelevant statistics to try to show otherwise.

Re:-_-

[Reilaos]

A entire car line was recalled for catching fire for no reason earlier last year. People got in hi-speed wrecks and caused fires, happening to be in a Tesla. The latter gets coverage, the former gets hardly any. No spin from what I can see here, just a disproportionate coverage on a car that's already in the spotlight.

Re:-_-

[CanHasDIY]

A entire car line was recalled for catching fire for no reason earlier last year.

Not quite - Ford recalled a large number of Focus models because of the potential for fires, not because an inordinate amount of them actually caught fire.

VW did the same thing with their diesel models a few years ago, again not because of actual events but because of the potential for them.

And, for the record, there are hundreds of thousands of Ford Focus' on the roads today, compared to... how many Tesla Model S?

Re:-_-

[AK Marc]

They were not disproportionate.

Re:-_-

[BasilBrush]

Because the number of fires was disproportionate to the number of accidents and vehicle miles driven, and last I checked, by over an order of magnitude.

You didn't ever check.

But don't let that stop fanbois from spinning irrelevant statistics to try to show otherwise.

I think you've set your own bias out quite clearly there.

Re:-_-

[boristdog]

My Ford truck burst into flames after sitting for 3 days in my driveway a couple years ago. Fortunately my wife was working from home and called the fire dept. Saved my house.

I talked to several lawyers after this and what they told me was scary:

1) ALL car models can burst into flames while not running.
2) Many lawyers have their entire practice base on car fires like this.
3) If no one died or was seriously injured, they won't even take the case. There are too many lucrative death cases from this sort of thing for them to bother.
4) EVERY one of these lawyers said they would NEVER park any car inside a garage attached to their house. One even said he fought his fancy HOA for the right to park in his driveway instead of his garage. He won, because he had the evidence.

I am taking that advice.

Re:-_-

[CanHasDIY]

Aside the fact that anecdotes are not the plural of evidence, I'd like to point out that anything with a battery and "constant-hot" circuit is a continual fire risk, even when "turned off."

Hell, I remember having a Walkman start smoldering on my desk once, way back in the 90's.

Re:-_-

[afidel]

Someone did the math the last time this came up on slashdot and the fires per vehicle produced were about 1/3rd of average for Tesla vs the general pool of vehicles, but the counterargument was that Teslas were much newer than the average vehicle and so it wasn't necessarily a good comparison. I doubt anyone outside of an insurance company's actuary department has enough data on similar vehicle rates to know for sure. All I know is that a Tesla went through a brick wall at a high rate of speed and the driver got out and watched a fire consume the vehicle some minutes later, having crashed a normal car into something much less substantial at a fraction of the speed that tells me everything I need to know about the Teslas safety design.

Re:-_-

[CanHasDIY]

Someone did the math

Did they show their work?

If so, where is it?

If not, how do you know they aren't full of it?

If it makes you feel any better, I don't buy the media hype, either. Just looking for straight answers from someone who doesn't have a vested interest and/or agenda.

Re:-_-

[O('_')O_Bush]

Sorry to hurt your feelings, but at the time of the 6th car fire from an accident, there had been a total of 56 total documented accidents with the Tesla Model S, or 1/9 chance in an accident, the car would burst into flames. Compared to the average vehicle, which is about a 1/21 chance.

And, at that same time, the Tesla Model S's, on average, were being driven about 1/4 as much as normal petrol powered cars.

That's about 9x more frequently per vehicle mile, and about 2.3x more frequently per accident.

Not quite an order of magnitude, but pretty darn significant for a $70k car.

Re:-_-

[O('_')O_Bush]

At the time of the 6th car fire from an accident, there had been a total of 56 total documented accidents with the Tesla Model S, or 1/9 chance in an accident, the car would burst into flames. Compared to the average vehicle, which is about a 1/21 chance.

And, at that same time, the Tesla Model S's, on average, were being driven about 1/4 as much as normal petrol powered cars.

That's about 9x more frequently per vehicle mile, and about 2.3x more frequently per accident.

Re:-_-

[floodo1]

It is absolutely ridiculous to avoid parking your car in the garage for fear of it catching on fire while in the garage. The odds of that happening are tiny.

Re:-_-

[AK Marc]

"and it is worth noting that gasoline car companies experience an average of five to ten times more fires per car than Tesla." Is Tesla's official stance on the fires. You are asserting the Tesla is lying about the rates of fires?

Re:-_-

[BasilBrush]

there had been a total of 56 total documented accidents with the Tesla Model S

What do you mean by "documented"? Where can I find the list of all accidents for all makes and types of car? Because if you don't have one, you can't possibly make the statistical claims you are trying to.

Re:-_-

[BasilBrush]

My feelings aren't hurt by bogus statistics.

What do you mean by "documented"? Where can I find the list of all accidents for all makes and types of car? Because if you don't have one, you can't possibly make the statistical claims you are trying to.

Re:-_-

[toddestan]

And even if you were worried about it, I would think that disconnecting the battery after parking it would reduce that risk to just about zero.

Didn't like the Lexus?

[Anonymous Coward]

Reading the article: "They also had to remove the other car in the garage, a Lexus, which was parked next to the Tesla." ...

KING OF THE GARAGE, MUAHAHAHA. My kingdom's on fire you say? Minor Detail.

In other news...

[Waffle Iron]

One of the most common causes of house fires has always been parked cars, regardless of propulsion technology.

Re:In other news...

[CanHasDIY]

One of the most common causes of house fires has always been parked cars, regardless of propulsion technology.

Never heard that one before; I always heard it was a mix between irresponsible smokers and improperly used space heaters (with the majority).

Re:In other news...

[Waffle Iron]

Those are probably more common (and I said one of the most common), but modern building codes require fire-resistant construction (like thicker drywall and heavy doors) between the garage and the main house for a good reason.

seriously?

[circletimessquare]

let's obsess over the cause of a fire that has nothing to do with the battery... and only happened once and probably has absolutely nothing to do with the car's engineering?

and let's ignore the thousands of accidents with gasoline every year that kill or maim?

you're doing exxon mobile proud, slashdot editors. thanks for featuring this "story" so prominently

Re:seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

let's obsess over the cause of a fire that has nothing to do with the battery.

There are more things that can start a fire in that car than just the battery.

Re:seriously?

[chispito]

If it was an electrical fire, it's still big news.

Re:seriously?

[CanHasDIY]

let's obsess over the cause of a fire that has nothing to do with the battery... and only happened once and probably has absolutely nothing to do with the car's engineering?

It's worth looking into, especially because the cause is non-obvious.

But to say it "probably" had nothing to do with the engineering? Yea, I'll trust the determination of that one to the professional fire investigators, rather than some random internet user.

Re:seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, it's a new technology and it's going to be under a microscope for sometime to come. If you can't accept that maybe you should avoid the news because all kinds of stuff is reported on that aren't the biggest problems in the world.
 
I'm willing to bet that more people are injured/die from electric accidents than gasoline accidents per year.
 
As for the "just happened once." Um, no, there have been other fires around Tesla cars and given the smallish sample size it's worth taking a look into.
 
And you know it has "nothing to do with the car's engineering"? I call bullshit on your claim.
 
As for the rest of your post? Why don't you just take off the tinfoil hat. Slashdot covers more stories in a day that have less to do with anything than the total number of negative Tesla stories combined.
 
Oh, and maybe you can make a movie about electric zombies. That would be great.

Re:seriously?

[icebike]

Why?
Electrical fires are rather common. Especially when homeowner decides to put in his own tesla charging circuit and couldn't tell an electrical code from a line of python.

Re:seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing is CTS didn't say "probably", he said it had nothing to do with the engineering, period. That's the problem with CTS... he runs his bitch ass mouth like he knows what he's talking about when most of it is knee jerk assumptions. He also makes up shit that 10 seconds on google searches can dismiss as lies.
 
And he also doesn't finish the movies he starts.

Any witnesses?

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps the guy in the hoodie with the GM logo seen running away from the site could have some information...

I could not find your quote

[Anonymous Coward]

"In fact, the Toronto fire department says the fire didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle since all of those components weren't touched by the fire"

in the BI article, the only one that was similar

"In this particular case, we don’t yet know the precise cause, but have definitively determined that it did not originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or the electrical receptacle, as these components were untouched by the fire."

was a statement from Tesla to BI.

Same way as other cars

[Michalson]

Normal gas cars catch fire every day just sitting in peoples driveways or driving along. It's usually a short in the 12V (regular car battery) system related to one of the electronic accessories. It can happen because water gets in and corrodes a contact (like the electric windows) or heat from a nearby item like a headlamp wears down the insulation or other wear and tear that cars are subjected too. In some cases it is identified as an engineering fault rather then a unique occurance in which case a recall occurs. If you go back 3 years you can probably find at least one recall for each of the major manufacturers to fix an electrical fault that 'could lead to a fire'.

Having some basic knowledge about car fires makes it clear just how much Tesla fires are about media hype.

Re:Same way as other cars

[CanHasDIY]

Having some basic knowledge about car fires makes it clear just how much Tesla fires are about media hype.

Having some basic knowledge of probability is also quite handy.

How many gasoline cars are there on the road today, and what percentage of them catch fire?

Ask the same question again, but replace "gasoline cars" with "Tesla Model S"

If, say, a GM model that's only existed for 3-4 years had the percentage of models catch fire that the Model S has, do you think GM would/should issue a recall, or would/should they bandy about accusations of 'media hype?'

Re:Same way as other cars

[jo_ham]

Are you basing this percentage on the number of sensational reports in the media, or from actual stats?

This "story" already screams click bait. "Tesla catches fire and zomg it wasn't plugged and and no one was near it! - Ignore the fact that the fire department has said that there is no fire damage anywhere on the electrical components or battery, just keep clicking on 'tesla' 'fire' 'zomg!' links guys".

If this turns out to be something related to the Model S then *maybe* it is news, but right now it looks like a fire in a garage (that was also housing a Lexus) that didn't originate from the supposedly pyrophoric Model S battery/charge system, which was completely untouched.

The story seems to be "Tesla Model S near a fire". If you're going to lump fires that are nearby to the Tesla into the stats about them catching fire then the stats are going to be really skewed by that professional fire eater who just bought one.

Re:Same way as other cars

[Todd Knarr]

Well, if I look at the number of cars in the US (254 million or so) vs. number of car fires per year (152 thousand or so on average), and then look at the number of Telsas sold vs. number of Teslas involved in car fires, the rate for Teslas is a third to a quarter that of gasoline-powered cars. So yes, if a gasoline-powered model had the same fire rates as Teslas and there was detailed coverage of every single fire it was involved in I'd make an accusation of media hype, how else would you explain that focus accompanied by a lack of coverage of models that catch fire 3-4x as often?

Re:Same way as other cars

[WindBourne]

No, in point of fact, the car would be assumed to be a commercial success if the gas car caught on fire as few times as the Tesla has. Those stats have already been shown over and over. You can now go collect your paycheck at BMW.

Re:Same way as other cars

[CanHasDIY]

No, in point of fact, the car would be assumed to be a commercial success if the gas car caught on fire as few times as the Tesla has. Those stats have already been shown over and over.

So, what percentage of gasoline cars have caught fire, vs the percentage of electric cars that have caught fire?

You can now go collect your paycheck at BMW.

Shit, I wish, those cats make fat bank.

You know what? Fuck you and your ad hominems, hack.

Re:Same way as other cars

[jo_ham]

Well, I'm not in the former camp or the latter camp - I work on hydrogen research. ;)

Re:Same way as other cars

[CanHasDIY]

Well, I'm not in the former camp or the latter camp - I work on hydrogen research. ;)

Same here.

Well, save the hydrogen research; I'm more of a craftsman/hacker type.

Maybe we could collaborate someday on a hydrogen-powered cigar box guitar.

Re:Same way as other cars

[Anonymous Coward]

Got any statistics to back that claim, or am I supposed to take your word for it?

You do know about that new google thingy, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_United_States#Total_number_of_vehicles

https://www.nfpa.org/safety-information/for-consumers/vehicles

Took about 15 seconds to verify GP's stats.

Re:Same way as other cars

[fnj]

Well, I'd like to base it on actual numbers, but turns out that's pretty hard to do, thanks to all the goddamn spin and hype.

Agreed. In other words, your assertion wasn't based on anything of substance. Just your impression with no data to support it.

Re:Same way as other cars

[Anonymous Coward]

Posting as AC.
I designed an automotive product that once caused a fire. We had to refit devices with thermal fuses to make them safer.
The cause. Faulty MOSFETs driving a fan motor. The problem with these devices, is they are made of of thousandss of smaller mosfets in parrallel. If one fails, it can cause a cascading effect. It just so happened that a partially failed MOSFET had the right resistance to be a worst case resistor in series with the motor. From then on any similar product had a thermal fuse next to the fet.

So it's not related to the other fires.

[egoebelbecker]

If it didn't originate in the battery, charging system, or outlet, that it's not related to the other threee fires, right? For all we know it was a cigarette....

Re:So it's not related to the other fires.

[Anonymous Coward]

If it didn't originate in the battery, charging system, or outlet, that it's not related to the other threee fires, right? For all we know it was a cigarette....

It's probably a short circuit in the electrical system.

Re:So it's not related to the other fires.

[AK Marc]

Yes, the headline should have read "Telsa damaged in garage fire", but that's not sensational enough. Both linked articles state the car "caused" the fire (one more indirectly regarding what "ignited"), but neither indicate that any official or anyone but a reporter's guess confirms it. For all we know, the meth lab in the basement caught fire and burned a garage with a Tesla in it.

Re:So it's not related to the other fires.

[tompaulco]

Yes, the headline should have read "Telsa damaged in garage fire", but that's not sensational enough. Both linked articles state the car "caused" the fire (one more indirectly regarding what "ignited"), but neither indicate that any official or anyone but a reporter's guess confirms it. For all we know, the meth lab in the basement caught fire and burned a garage with a Tesla in it.

Anyone who looks at the picture would have chosen the title "garage damaged in Tesla fire", as it is pretty clear that the front hood area of the vehicle is where the fire started.

Re:So it's not related to the other fires.

[JustNiz]

>> the headline should have read "Telsa damaged in garage fire",

Not at all. It wasn't the garage that ignited first, it was the car. Read the original article:
Earlier this month, a Tesla Model S sitting in a Toronto garage ignited and caught on fire.

Re:So it's not related to the other fires.

[fnj]

Horse shit. You don't have a single shred of evidence that the fire originated in the car, because neither article has a shred of such evidence. The pictures make it obvious that quite the converse was almost certainly the case.

Re:So it's not related to the other fires.

[AK Marc]

Yes, the reporter asserted the Tesla ignited and burned the garage, but where's the fire department's report or statement? It's been nearly a month, why is there no "official" report?

Re:So it's not related to the other fires.

[AK Marc]

It didn't seem so "obvious" to me, or the fire department, who haven't substantiated your opinion, at least according to any of the reports I can find.

Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Geoffrey.landis]

If the fire "didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle," then the fact that the car was a Tesla is pretty much irrelevant, since those are the things that make a Tesla distinct from any other kind of car. So, this seems to have been a fire in which the car parked in the garage happened to be a Tesla, rather than something specifically Tesla related.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[tompaulco]

If the fire "didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle," then the fact that the car was a Tesla is pretty much irrelevant, since those are the things that make a Tesla distinct from any other kind of car.

Well, that is not the only thing that makes Tesla different. There are a lot more electrical components only present in electric vehicles but which are not related to the charging, battery and electrical receptacle. There is the propulsion system, electrical convertors, motors at (I assume) all four wheels, then there is all kinds of geeky, energy wasting electronic gadgetry to display to the user how much energy they are saving.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[93 Escort Wagon]

It seems silly for you to draw this conclusion when the source of the fire hasn't yet been identified.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[BasilBrush]

The rush to draw conclusions seems to be from those who are pointing the finger at the Tesla. They are the ones not waiting for the investigation. The GP was only responding to those original assumptions.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[almitydave]

Exactly, it was probably a loose oil line seeping into Mr. Fusion...

Seriously, there could be a short in any one of the many electrical things downstream from the battery. The things are always "on" so there are many wires that have live current at all times.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

The tesla has one electric motor. It is between the rear wheels.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[bluefoxlucid]

There's one motor, a direct drive linkage (no transmission), and differentials. Hub motors require all kinds of computer control, with associated high chances of fault that could much more easily lead to loss of control or efficiency. Hub motor efficiency is kind of like video poker: perfect play for 3 years straight will net you a profit, absolutely, no question you will beat the casino; the profit is small, and a single small mistake will set you back about 85 years. It only makes sense in a motorcycle, where you have one rear wheel hub motor.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

WRONG. The tesla has way more than one electric motor.

There are electric motors to operate the fans in the climate control systems, power steering, power brakes and ABS, for locks, side view mirrors, etc...

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

Ironically, those are all gas-powered in a Tesla.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Jane Q. Public]

"the fact that the car was a Tesla is pretty much irrelevant"

Agreed. I know of a fire that happened in a pickup truck because the head of a small screw broke off and got caught between two wires behind the dash.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[geoskd]

Hub motors require all kinds of computer control, with associated high chances of fault that could much more easily lead to loss of control or efficiency. Hub motor efficiency is kind of like video poker: perfect play for 3 years straight will net you a profit, absolutely, no question you will beat the casino; the profit is small, and a single small mistake will set you back about 85 years. It only makes sense in a motorcycle, where you have one rear wheel hub motor.

I'm curious what leads you to those statements. What kind of extra computer control do hub wheels require beyond the obvious need for 4x the raw power transistors? What kind of problems would lead to reduced efficiency vs a single drive motor? Do hub motors have a different efficiency profile? something specific to the geometry of a hub wheel?

I would have thought that having 4 hub wheels would provide an opportunity for more efficient traction control, and better regenerative braking efficiency than a single differentially connected drivetrain.

What am I missing?

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[mythosaz]

Is the hub powered?

....and USB 3.0 compliant?

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Xicor]

well... all gasoline cars have electrical components as well...in fact, the number one weight in a car is the wiring for all the electric stuff.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Xicor]

by all gasoline cars, i mean all newer ones.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[nblender]

It was the lawn mower's Gerry can. :)

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Immerman]

I suspect it's mostly synchronization issues. Trying to get two independent motors turning at exactly the same speed is likely a major challenge, and if the speeds are even slightly different then the car will pull toward the slower one. A differential meanwhile is a relatively simple and well-understood piece of technology that does the same job (uniform wheel power with slippage compensation) more simply.

Plus the cooling system is no doubt much simpler with only a single motor that's not surrounded by a big spinning wheel.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

One thing you're missing is that placing the motors in the wheel hubs increases the unsprung weight of the vehicle, which is generally bad for handling, ride quality, and so on.

Another issue: direct drive with no gearing isn't always a great idea, particularly for a high performance vehicle like the Model S. Electric motors have a torque curve function similar in shape to f(x) = 1/x. They develop max torque at 0 RPM, and torque falls off quite dramatically with increasing RPMs. The Model S has a 9.something to 1 ratio between its drive motor and the wheels, which ensures there's good torque available even at high speed. Hub motors are usually direct drive, no gearing at all.

Basically, hub motors are good in some applications, but they have a lot of deficiencies for a car like the Model S, which is designed to perform and handle like high end sports cars in its price range.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

well... all gasoline cars have electrical components as well...in fact, the number one weight in a car is the wiring for all the electric stuff.

Calling bullshit on that one. Yeah, there's lots of weight in wiring harnesses, and usually the fancier the car the more wiring there is. But it's not as heavy as, say, the engine block. Or the frame.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[WindBourne]

so does most ICE cars these days. What is your point?
As to the conversation, the previous poster claim that there was a motor at each wheel, which is inefficient.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[ebno-10db]

I suspect it's mostly synchronization issues. Trying to get two independent motors turning at exactly the same speed is likely a major challenge

So how do they do it w/ diesel-electric locomotives? They may have only one motor per axle (not sure), but they have many driven axles. It's the only way for them to get enough traction.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[ebno-10db]

the number one weight in a car is the wiring for all the electric stuff.

You mean the wiring weighs more than the engine? I doubt that.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[bluefoxlucid]

In a mechanical system, you can have things like viscous couplers or torsion differentials. The wheels will spin at the same speed, but if one encounters less resistance then more power will move to the others. A single power unit supplies power input, which is then distributed based on the laws of physics as applied to a complex mechanical system. Gears and metal poles are lossy due to heat from flexing, compressing metal; viscous couplings are obviously more lossy because they're non-solid and thus the working fluid is experiencing far more deformation than metal.

In a hub layout, all those inefficiencies go away. Computers perfectly apply the correct amount of torque at the correct rotational speed directly to each wheel. For a given RPM, the motor will simply spin at no torque unless there is resistance, at which point it will draw more power to retain spin speed.

Unless... your calculations are slightly wrong. And the motors have loss by heat--which they do. And the computer has to calculate when to back off power to one free-spinning motor which is now heating up and spinning the wheel too god damn fast, but only after taking a sample.

Hub motor efficiency gains aren't ungodly massive; they're small, and they require perfect operation. They also require additional (powered) sensors and computer number crunching, rather than passive mechanical systems which simply cannot function in any manner besides "distribute power correctly" or "fail completely because the system is broken". Drifting sensors, poor sampling, and just the need to get enough of a sample to make a statistically significant analysis and adjust power output per wheel all rob hub motor systems of their theoretical maximum efficiency. The first of these is of particular practical importance: it's extremely easy for this system to be out of spec and inefficient without the end user knowing or caring. The rest are engineering challenges.

All of these potential failures are multiplied by the number of hub-powered wheels. An entire drive train system--a hub motor, its connection to the wheel, sensors, power connectors, regenerative braking mechanisms, and so on--must be duplicated four times to get all-wheel drive. With a single power unit in a mechanical system, you only need to build one drive train, which is simpler and only needs to be incrementally improved in very direct and simple ways. No improving computer code for the average case while trading off the better case; no attempting to get sensors to get more precise data, then trying to factor that improvement into the rest of the control system. You use better alloys, better machined gears, you use what you learn from further research to tweak the design so that it couples and transfers power more effectively and reacts more quickly and immediately to slippage.

The big driver for hub motor vehicles is all the things you can do in theory. Modern traction control and ESC applies braking force to individual wheels, whereas you could just back off the hub motor... or apply braking force by the regenerative brake. But that begs the question: aren't you using the same computer control programs for regenerative brake applied traction control as you are for hub motor regenerative brake traction control? And then of course those benefits essentially come down to the corner case of driving in terrible conditions, which is inefficient as hell anyway--and your efficiency gains are minimal.

Lots of funny theory, lots of "with X we can Y", as it has always been. One of the big pushes with Firewire was that we were going to have revolutionized home entertainment: you would have abstract equipment with IEEE1394 ports, plug a speaker into the VCR, plug another into the TV, subwoofer into a receiver deck at the back of the room daisy chained to the DVD player, and daisy chain rear room speakers off that, and all these devices would find each other through these arbitrary connections and unify themselves as your home theater. That was being heavily advertised in home theater shops for a while, but it never happened. All these things you should be able to do with your iPad never materialized. The XO Laptop hasn't met its potential yet--it has revolutionized nothing. Same with hub motors.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

They have one motor per axle, which eliminates the need for perfect synchronization (if the axles run at slightly different speeds, that's just a loss of power, not control).
They also run on rails, so smaller de-synch issues that would cause a car not to go straight or have difficulties cornering result in nothing more than slightly more noise for a locomotive.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Nethemas the Great]

The part that I find a little funny is that:

Shortly after the fire, seven Tesla employees visited the owner of the vehicle. The company also offered to take care of the damages and inconvenience caused by the fire, but the owner declined.

Why would anyone decline restitution unless there's a bit more to the story of how the fire started?

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

One per bogie, actually, with each bogie having two axles, at least on the trains I've worked on. Not sure about the synchro, though, because I work in high level control, and that's done independently by the traction subsystem.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[deadweight]

One motor going whacky will steer your car right off the road. BTW - I think Porsche used a hub motor design back in 1899 or something like that.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Immerman]

First AC got it almost perfect - as long as you have a powered axle the wheels on both sides spin at the same speed and there is no tendency to "pull" unless they're improperly aligned or your wheels are different diameters. As multiple powered axles still all push straight forward. The only part AC got wrong was that barring slippage and assuming your wheels are all the same size, every single axle must will turn the same speed.

It's like a team of horses pulling a load - so long as all the horses are in one line you can mix hard workers and slackers however you like. Some will pull harder than others, but they all move together at the same speed. If you have two rows though, then you need to be careful to balance your horses - put all your slackers on one side and you'll start going in circles.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Immerman]

Note to self: when repeatedly rephrasing parts of your post be sure to proofread the final result *before* submitting.

I think most of the content survived at least.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Bing Tsher E]

Perhaps there was a wavier that the owner would be required to sign, and it might be a better deal to lawyer up. We don't know. There's a bit more to the story, as you said.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Duhavid]

What you missed is that you have to decide how much power to apply at each wheel.
If the wheels can get different amounts of power, it will impart some degree of sideways thrust.
Also, if you lock the wheels on each side fo the vehicle together, you will scrub the tires going around corners.
Look at what a differential does and why the front steering geometry on a car is designed the way it is.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Duhavid]

reasons why

there's a bit more to the story of how the fire started
the owner believes he has hit his payday due to
    being able to sue Tesla
    holding off for a better "offer" from Tesla ( preventing bad publicity )
the waiver that bing.* mentions in his/her/it's post either scaring the owner or limiting his future recourse
being a plant from another auto maker
&c.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

be careful to balance your horses - put all your slackers on one side and you'll start going in circles

My horse is ADD, you insensitive clod!

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

But that begs the question

How many times have we raised the question of the improper use of this informal fallacy?

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[catmistake]

the number one weight in a car is the wiring for all the electric stuff.

You mean the wiring weighs more than the engine? I doubt that.

It depends on where you park.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[EETech1]

Then how do all of the millions of CD and DVD players out there manage to properly play the discs, or VCRs play tapes without the TV losing sync?

Matching motor speeds is easy, even without encoder feedback. If a motor is turned at a different speed than it is driven it distorts the waveform going to the motor. Modern drive electronics can sense that, and adjust accordingly.

I've worked on machines that produce fabrics at 10 - 15 feet per second, and they contain multiple motors that are perfectly synchronized. If not, you would quickly have piles of fabric on the floor, or huge gobs of fabric getting wound up in the various stages of the machine. Getting them all tuned so they change speed at the same time takes a little bit of know how, but once they are properly set, they run trouble free.

Modern control systems are that good.

I've seen systems demoed with motors that have large triangular, square, and pentagon shaped metal plates mounted on them with slots cut in them barely wider than the plates. They start and stop so the plates can pass through the slots in perfect synchronization. You watch hypnotized as the different sided plates ratchet through each other at about 10 RPM, then the thing ramps up to a blur, and you watch in amazement as the other half of your brain tells you to run like hell in case one of those plates misses the slot, and the whole thing goes BAM, and comes flying apart.

Mitsubishi had a multi-master synchronized motor demo with some small servo motors mounted facing shaft to shaft about 3 inches apart driving parallel metal discs with pieces of lead from a mechanical pencil stuck through tiny holes in both of them. They had little levers mounted above the discs so you could push down on them to slow down or stop the discs. The goal was to try and get them out of synch enough to get the pencil lead to break while they went through a little cycle of ramping from about 50 to 1000 RPM. If you broke the lead, you got a real nice Mitsubishi mechanical pencil. I didn't see anyone manage to get one though.

Trade show demos are the coolest:)

I'd imagine you would have to allow them to NOT be in synch enough to go over bumps without creating additional jerkyness in the ride.

Cheers!

(&BuckFeta)

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Immerman]

And I think you just went and defended the opposing thesis - as you say we *can* do such incredible things, but doing so requires sophisticated control systems with more potential points of failure than a simple mechanical differential. That's fine in the controlled environment of a production line that gets ongoing professional supervision and maintenance, but quite another in a technology designed for usage by the mass-market. I mean have you *seen* how some people treat their cars?

I believe that's much the same reason they don't allow hydraulic transmissions in most private vehicles - they're more efficient with some impressive power characteristics, but safe operation requires a degree of regular maintenance that can't be reasonably expected of the broader car-owning population.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[EETech1]

My ramblings were only about the synchronization of motors.

I'd agree on the differential being simpler (although not the modern computer controlled torque splitting design) but I'd also expect Tesla to have some top notch motor controls.

It's funny, I've been sent in to fix problems with our control systems to find the only problem to be a multi million dollar machine running for 2+ years without maintenance. I've often asked the plant managers if they'd treat their cars like that:) Production lines are there to make money, and shutting them down for maintenance (for some people) doesn't seem to make sense. They just run them, till they won't run anymore, then blame the electronics because the drive has a fault, but the drive is only faulted because it is trying to turn a gearbox that has gear teeth floating around in (what's left of) the gear lube.

When I was 17 I built a go-kart with a snowmobile engine, and a hydraulic (swash plate) transmission, ooohhh how I wish I could get one in my car... Lots of maintenance, if you consider twisted axles maintenance, which I soon did;)

I've seen lots of people struggle with their hydrostatic lawn mowers though, and we had a forklift with a hydrostatic transmission that has claimed it's fair share of walls too:) although Case should never have put the shifter pedal where the creeper pedal is on every other fork lift in the world...

Cheers!

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Firethorn]

There are a lot more electrical components only present in electric vehicles but which are not related to the charging, battery and electrical receptacle. There is the propulsion system, electrical convertors, motors at (I assume) all four wheels, then there is all kinds of geeky, energy wasting electronic gadgetry to display to the user how much energy they are saving.

You assume wrong. The Tesla has ONE motor that is connected to the wheels by a more or less normal transfer system. It's a 310kW 3 phase induction motor., rear motor rear wheel drive. I've even read that the motor only weighs 70 pounds.

As for the rest, the motor would presumably be unpowered at rest, and the electrical convertors would be, at first glance, part of the charging system. Thus unlikely to be the source of the fire.

Which is presumably why the Tesla engineers are so interested - they want to know what caused the fire more than anybody. They DO NOT want their cars to have any negative reputation.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Firethorn]

Do hub motors have a different efficiency profile?

They're generally slightly less efficient than the 3 phase induction motor in a Telsa, plus it also screws with the unsprung weight for the vehicle, which negatively affects handling and riding comfort. You also run into that 2 of them will weigh more than the Tesla's single motor(it's a RWD car, not AWD), much less 4.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Firethorn]

Generally speaking if they make a reasonable offer, in this case fixing/replacing the car AND the garage, trying to extract more money out of them via the legal process is likely to backfire as judges frown upon people refusing reasonable restitution. What this translates into is that because the judge considers the court case unnecessary(you should have taken the offer), you don't get lawyer's fees. Tesla is still out the repair costs, but no more than their own lawyers on top of that. Which means you get very little money to fix your stuff after the lawyers take their share.

Now, as you say any waiver of responsibility(you agree that it wasn't Tesla's fault even if it was) might change that determination, but the idea makes me curious.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Firethorn]

the owner believes he has hit his payday due to
          being able to sue Tesla
          holding off for a better "offer" from Tesla ( preventing bad publicity )

Perhaps, but it's a risky strategy. Judges tend to frown upon you refusing reasonable settlements ahead of time. Fixing the car&garage would count as a reasonable offer in most courts

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[CaptQuark]

You probably haven't worked with horses before. You don't just tie all the horses in one line and allow the hard workers and slackers to pull as they want. This is a problem that has had a solution for thousands of years. Anytime you connect a horse or horses to a load you use a wippletree (sometimes called a doubletree) to balance the load. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...

You see similar arrangements when applying force to uneven points. Your windshield wiper has a whippletree arrangement to balance the force as the contour of the glass changes. Also look at singletree for more information about how horses are connected to pulling loads.

~~

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[michelcolman]

As to the conversation, the previous poster claim that there was a motor at each wheel, which is inefficient.

Inefficient? The Mercedes SLS AMG electric has four engines, which simplifies construction quite a bit and offers new possibilities for traction and stability control (torque vectoring) that apparently work quite well.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[TarpaKungs]

Nope - they only need to provide roughly the same torque per wheel.

Th e road surface deals with keeping the speed matched - or not, if you corner...

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[LWATCDR]

hub motors also mean unsprung weight and other issues. For example if you have a car with four hub motors driving all the wheels and three of the wheels loose traction you then only have 1/4 power available even if your one wheel with good traction could take more power.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[LWATCDR]

You also have a problem with the unsprung weight.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[LWATCDR]

It can be made to work but it is probably not worth doing.
1. One large motor is cheaper than four small motors.
2. More points of failure and if one motor on a side fails it may not be safe to drive the car so you get nothing from the redundancy.
3. The added unsprung weight of the motors will cause the car to handle and ride less well.
4. Just plan added weight. Again four small motors will weigh more than one larger motor.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[LWATCDR]

I have seen wiring harnesses and they do not weigh as much as an engine in most cases. I have not seen an engine that weighs less than 100lbs or a wiring harness that weighs as much.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Technician]

I;ll feed this offtopic thread with the answer to the question. The author assumes a hard clocked stepper motor type drive. This is the fault of the question. The answer is the motor is not clocked for speed control,but intead is driven as a Traction motor, where speed is largely ignored, and current is regulated to control torque. With all wheels on the ground, they all turn close to the same speed. Applying equal torque to acellerate positive or negative is simply a matter of regulating current. Controlling current can be handled by the accellerator or cruise control. I anticipate the next question.. AC motor.. Google Communtation. Any PC cooling fan of DC brushless design has this. They are not dependant on a fixed speed, but a fixed torque. They don't massivly torque up if slightly slowed.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[LWATCDR]

The fire does seem to have started in the car. Cars should not burst into flame the the Tesla is breaking a lot of new ground so it is to be expected for it to have some brand new issues that we really have not seen before.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

The car isn't different than a smartphone or a blender and I never see a smartphone or a blender catch fire on its electric parts without be connected in the main plug...

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[WindBourne]

it is inefficient. Just because MB decides to do a $.5M car with 4 mores (not engines) to gain speed, does not mean that it is efficient. Interestingly, it is using tesla's batteries, and only gets 160 MPC, while Tesla gets around 200 MPC in a $80K car that performs close to it.

BTW, with their 4 motors, they have 4 separate transmissions so have added around 100 KG at each corner of the car. The only reason why that car performs OK (and not that great) is because of Tesla's skateboard battery.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Xicor]

the combined weight of all the electronics and wires in most modern cars is roughly 3/5 of the car's weight.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

the combined weight of all the electronics and wires in most modern cars is roughly 3/5 of the car's weight.

As GP said, that all depends on where you park.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[lsatenstein]

I suspect it's mostly synchronization issues. Trying to get two independent motors turning at exactly the same speed is likely a major challenge, and if the speeds are even slightly different then the car will pull toward the slower one. A differential meanwhile is a relatively simple and well-understood piece of technology that does the same job (uniform wheel power with slippage compensation) more simply.

Plus the cooling system is no doubt much simpler with only a single motor that's not surrounded by a big spinning wheel.

=== the car was not running. It was powered off.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[EETech1]

The cheap brushless motors used in fans are switched by the magnetic field of the commutator, so putting more current to them will cause them to reach a higher peak voltage in the windings, and spin faster. They are very much like a DC brushed motor in that respect.

The larger higher powered motors are synchronous to the field applied to the windings, and putting more current to them will produce more torque, but the RPM is dependent on the frequency being sent by the drive electronics. If the frequency does not change, the RPM will not change either (besides perhaps 1-2% less slip).

If the motor has position feedback, you can use the encoder to tell the drive when to switch the field based on the position of the armature. In this mode, the large motor, will behave much like the small fan, or a DC motor, and vary the frequency, and resulting torque according to the power being sent to the armature, and the load on the output shaft. The RPM is simply the result.

There are also hybrid modes that allow for keeping very tight control on RPM, while allowing you to adjust the torque output for applications such as tension control, where you want one motor to pull something at the same speed as another motor, but want to keep a certain amount of slack or tension between them.

Example: unwinding a roll of paper, cutting it to width, and rewinding it. The drives keep the outer surface speeds of the two rolls matched as they change diameter, and keep perfect tension on the paper through the change in torque due to the changing diameters so the slitting operation works properly.

There are so many ways to make a motor turn, you can get exactly the properties you want from it.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[doccus]

All these arguments about syncing 4 different hub motors. Er.. you don't *need* to sync them. At all!. If one electric motor pulls harder, the others just "freewheel". That's the nature of electric motors. They have, in fact, a natural differential. THat's useful for avoiding wear on the tires, but leads to power loss in turns as only the hardest working wheel is supplying full power. In a straight line you may have full power though, but really, that configuration is very poor for GT racing events, or rallying, as there's no engine braking effect. ABS could , theoretically , be fitted, which would help.. Even in a 2 wheel vehicle, such as a bike, dual motors are somewhat inefficient.. iun that if you tried pedaling it instead of leting the motor do the work, it would take much more effort. Alternatively, the increased grip is worth the effort, if that's what you want..

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[catprog]

Electric motors though are lighter then fuel engines.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[catprog]

What about laptops?

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Immerman]

Try this, in a FWD for simplicity : Put a 10kW hub motor in the left wheel, and a 40kW (at the same voltage) motor in the right wheel, then try to drive straight using a control system that assumes both motors react the same way to the same voltage. Good luck.

You'll have the same problem, though less dramatic, in most any two motors - You don't manufacture a 100kW motor, you manufacture a 100±0.7kW motor. And the exact power will continue to vary with temperature, load, and age for as long as it's in operation. You can tighten the tolerances, but that makes for a more expensive motor that isn't actually any more powerful or efficient.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[aminorex]

Not if the deal came with speech restrictions.

The scam goes like this: Start your Tesla on fire. Hold out for 5x the price of the car. If they decline, take it to the press and sue.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[EETech1]

Many front wheel drive vehicles already have a torque imbalance going to the front wheels because the CV axles are different lengths, and therefore are at different angles. This causes torque steer under acceleration. I'd venture to guess that it must not be that big of a deal because cars continue to be built that way.

Most front wheel drive "performance" cars have equal length CV axles to eliminate the issue.

If you had a failure of a wheel motor, you could just reduce the max power you allowed the other wheels to make so the car was drivable, and not too unwieldy during acceleration.

I agree that wheel motors are too much unsprung weight, and impractical for a number of other reasons though too. I worked on a diesel hybrid project that had large rare earth magnets mounted behind the flywheel, and that thing was downright dangerous to work on. Pulling tools right off the bench, and out of your hands. If you held on to them, you learned very quickly that it was a bad idea! Blood blisters galore! The amount of force in a large ring of rare earth magnets is incredible. We had to be very careful assembling it because if it got away from you, someone was getting hurt! You could stand them on edge, and feel them trying to jump off the wood cart and smash your tool box 4 feet away. Walk by an I beam in the shop, and it would leap right off the cart. It then took a small army with non-metallic pry tools to get it off the beam.

Not something you want to work on in the driveway! You don't just put it back together like installing a brake drum.

Cheers!

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[rpstrong]

Interestingly, it is using tesla's batteries, and only gets 160 MPC, while Tesla gets around 200 MPC in a $80K car that performs close to it.

Have you got a cite on that?

Car and Driver said that, "The 60-kWh lithium-ion battery pack and the software that manages it were developed by the Formula 1 experts at Mercedes AMG High Performance Powertrains. The 1208-pound pack contains 864 South Korean battery cells" (http://tinyurl.com/pt7wds6).

In comparison, a Tesla battery contains over 7,000 cells.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[X0563511]

1. It's "Jerrycan"
2. It's offensive (Jerry being a slur for Germans)

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Immerman]

Yes, whippletrees are wonderfully useful things that I completely ignored because they detract from the analogy - they are in many ways the linear-force inverse of the rotational differential.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[JamieIanMacgregor]

I suspect it's mostly synchronization issues. Trying to get two independent motors turning at exactly the same speed is likely a major challenge, and if the speeds are even slightly different then the car will pull toward the slower one. A differential meanwhile is a relatively simple and well-understood piece of technology that does the same job (uniform wheel power with slippage compensation) more simply.

Plus the cooling system is no doubt much simpler with only a single motor that's not surrounded by a big spinning wheel.

3 phase brushless DC motors are likely what is in use, they have very precise speed control as the rotor location is known at all times unlike a brushed DC motor, your problem would be apparent if different sized tires were used. I doubt there is any problem cooling hub motors as brakes have been air cooled for ever and sit inside your 'big spinning wheel'

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[JamieIanMacgregor]

Doesn't CV stand for Constant Velocity? I was under the impression only universal joints had a problem where up and down movement of the rear diff would surge or relax the amount of power being transferred?

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[JamieIanMacgregor]

You need to remember that you're also removing CV joints and axles with hub motors so the unsprung weight effect is lessened if not nulled depending on the weight of your hub motors. that and lighter wheels.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[JamieIanMacgregor]

I know a guy who used to run a secondary battery inside the cab of his truck with jumperleads running out the door, I'm surprised that never caught fire what with the leads being pinched between door and frame. funny how something as small as a screw head can cause a fire and blatant cable insulation crushing on high current source was fine for years.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Immerman]

> I doubt there is any problem cooling hub motors as brakes have been air cooled for ever and sit inside your 'big spinning wheel'

Look into it. Brakes are easy - they generate a fair amount of heat, but usually only for brief periods. Drive downhill for an hour without engine braking though and you'll be in a world of hurt. Same deal with hub motors, they're putting out heat continuously for prolonged periods. It's not that they can't be cooled adequately, just that the cooling system for a single central motor is liable to be significantly cheaper.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[JamieIanMacgregor]

I wouldn't expect the same level of heat from a hub motor than from a brake calliper and disk, but I do see your point. I do forget about brake fade, I'm a serial engine braker, only use my actual brakes when I absolutely have to. even got pulled over once and accused of having failed brake lights, that was an interesting discussion... no officer, I just wasn't using my brakes.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Technician]

You lost me at the slip on synchronous motors. They may lag in phase, but not speed. Once 180 out they no longer function as a motor. The drive electronics does drive them in a torque mode, not PLL speed locked mode. They are traction motors in cars. Drive electronics does vary the frequency to match the wheel speed to maintain commutation. Phase angle and current are regulated to provide torque in either direction as needed. Electrical phase is kept in a narrow range of the armature magnet to operate it as a traction motor.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[EETech1]

You are correct, with a CV joint the rotational angle in = rotational angle out, this is not the case with a traditional U joint. If you've ever been in a 4wd truck, and taken a tight turn, you can feel the lurching as the U joints change the wheel speeds. This is not what is at play in this case.

The issue is due to the geometry of the front wheels, and the fact that they want to "flop" outwards when torque is applied. Normally one wheel would counteract the other, but the uneven angles in the drivetrain cause an additional imbalance that can be felt in the steering wheel.

Wikipedia to the rescue again...
  The main component of torque steer occurs when the torques in the driveshaft and the hub are summed vectorially, giving a resultant torque vector around the steering pivot axis (kingpin). These torques can be substantial, and in the case of shafts making equal angles to the hub shafts, will oppose one another at the steering rack, and so will cancel. These torques are strongly influenced by the position of the driveshaft universal joint (CV joint) in relation to the steering axis, however due to other requirements such as achieving a small or negative scrub radius an optimum solution is not generally possible with simple suspension configurations such as Macpherson strut.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...

Cheers!

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[JamieIanMacgregor]

Thank you, feels good to learn something from a slashdot post... not enough of that happening recently :) and yes, I used to 4wd a lot and always wondered about the lurching on hard surfaces, the ol' hilux tended to sink in the sand with standard tires and a bit of steering lock. 35" mudders fixed the sand sinking on my second hilux.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[EETech1]

Ahhh the fun I've had in a Chinook...

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

The other big problems with hub motors are unsprung weight (heavier wheels relative to the weight of the vehicle mean worse handling and ride comfort) and vibration (a motor has a couple of bearings that will wear much more quickly if they're shaken around as much as a wheel is). The vibration issue can be mitigated by making the wheel rim the rotor but that brings a fascinating collection of manufacturing issues to make an airtight squirrel cage that can hold a tire and not overheat.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Anonymous Coward]

Expanding on efficiency, electric traction motors (induction or switched reluctance) are 80-95% efficient, gearboxes likewise so you have at most 10%, more likely 5% efficiency to gain by moving the motors to the hubs. Subtract the efficiency losses from having to design a motor that fits neatly in a wheel, subtract even more if you have to fit a brake disc in with it and the potential efficiency gain is a wash.

Re:Tesla not involved [Re:Not from the car?]

[Immerman]

I'll grant you the unsprung weight, but I don't think the bearings are actually a problem - they'll be on the wheel regardless of where the motor is, and will be relatively easy to replace unless the engineer is a F'ing ass. Having the motor separate just adds a bunch *more* bearings to the system.

As for rim rotors, why would they need to be airtight? Dust-tight sure. And how would it address the unsprung weight issue? A wheel motor would seem to be unsprung weight regardless of where on the wheel the motor is. The spinny part of the motor by necessity must be attached to the tire, and the not-spinny part must remain within certain tight tolerances of the spinny part, so the springs must fall someplace between the complete motor/wheel and the rest of the car.

Someone

[Anonymous Coward]

set it on fire. Seems a likely explanation.

Re:g0at pen1s

[easyTree]

My brain is melting trying to read what you wrote - stop sniffing gas/petrol - start licking electricity, it's the vehicle-fuel of the future :P

Unextinguished Doobie

[ClayDowling]

I'm guessing somebody didn't put their doobie out before going in the house.

How come?

[Anonymous Coward]

How come you guys are so emotional about the Tesla?

Spontaneous Human Combustion

[Anonymous Coward]

It was the body in the trunk

Beta fucking sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

FUCK BETA, that's all I can say.

Was it the car at all?

[carlhaagen]

With the fire not originating in anything connected to its electrical system, why are they assuming that the fire originated in/from the car at all? It sounds highly unlikely, and more like vacuous sensationalism.

Re:Was it the car at all?

[JustNiz]

Read the original article:
Earlier this month, a Tesla Model S sitting in a Toronto garage ignited and caught on fire.

Re:Was it the car at all?

[tompaulco]

With the fire not originating in anything connected to its electrical system, why are they assuming that the fire originated in/from the car at all? It sounds highly unlikely, and more like vacuous sensationalism.

Look at the picture in TFA. It is pretty clear that the front trunk area was the most damaged area.

Re:Was it the car at all?

[BasilBrush]

The front trunk area is mostly storage. Under that there is an AC unit, electric power steering, and an air fan (for cooling the batteries I guess). Presumably at most, the air fan was in operation as the car had recently returned and was parked.

Tesla may have to update that "0 emissions" claim

[Powercntrl]

So, it's an "external combustion" car? I see what you did there, Mr. Musk.

The gist of what I get from Slashdot lately is that if you made a fortune on Bitcoin before MtGox crashed, don't spend it on a Model S because your earnings will burn like your eyes when you look at the beta.

Interesting

[NapalmV]

I find it interesting that the owner of the car had a smoke alarm installed in his garage, especially since he also had a gasoline car parked there. That would lead to a pretty high number of nuisance alarms. In fact, even the fire depts themselves suggest that you should not install one:

http://www.windsorfire.com/eco...

(search for the word "garage" in the page).

So, what else was the owner doing in that garage that required the installation of the smoke detector, nuisance alarms be damned?
.

Re:Interesting

[tompaulco]

Does the article say he had a smoke alarm in the garage? I assumed it was the smoke alarm in house house going off due to smoke from the garage getting into the house.

Re:Interesting

[NapalmV]

Yes it does say so, quote: "A few minutes later, fire alarms in the garage went off, and firemen arrived to put out the blaze, which was described as "intense"."

Re:Interesting

[jandrese]

That's strange. I installed a smoke alarm in my garage years ago and it has never given me a false positive.

Re:Interesting

[WindBourne]

Oh, it gets better. He turned down financial assistence from Tesla including covering the car, and the costs of the garage burning.
Also, it supposedly started with the Tesla, BUT, it was not the drive train, the motor, the batteries, the super charger, the computer, or any part of the electric system.
So, where did it start?

As I said earlier, this sounds like the guy that committed suicide by shooting himself in the back of the head 3x with a 45.

Re:Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a fire (heat) detector in my garage. I do not have a smoke (particle) detector.

Re:Interesting

[cryptoluddite]

Oh, it gets better. He turned down financial assistence from Tesla including covering the car, and the costs of the garage burning.

Maybe he didn't feel like writing the required fanboy letter to Elon Musk about how grateful he was that the car spontaneously caught fire after he parked it instead of while he was driving, like we all know gasoline cars are wont to do.

Re:Interesting

[WindBourne]

LOL. Interesting theory.
However, one that is equally plausible is that a green alien took on a human skin and does not want the attention that this will bring.

Re:Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

However, one that is equally plausible

Your American education is showing.

Re:Interesting

[WindBourne]

Not mine. The original poster came up with total fiction, so did I.

Ford, GM and Chrysler put out a bounty.

[gurps_npc]

$100 if you pour gasoline on a Tesla, light it and run away.

But be warned, if you ask for the bounty, they just give your name to the police.

Re:Ford, GM and Chrysler put out a bounty.

[Anonymous Coward]

>But be warned, if you ask for the bounty, they just give your name to the police.

In Canada, that's actually required by law. It's an offense to offer a reward to a criminal if you also offer immunity. ccc 143. Although it is geared towards lost property, LOL.

voidwhereprohibitedbylaw

[Anonymous Coward]

Canyonero anyone? Or skip fictional vehicles and look at any north american suv series...

My Advice to Tesla

[CanHasDIY]

Do a thorough investigation; hire independent, third-party investigators to double-check the results. Do the whole thing again, just to double-double-check. If it turns out that your car had absolutely nothing to do with the fire, publish the shit out of the results. otherwise, try and sweep it under the rug and quietly issue a recall*.

And for the love of all that's holy, keep that loudmouth investor out of the media; fanboys might love him, but he doesn't do you any favors regarding your image with the public-at-large.

* Hey, if it works for the other manufacturers....

Re:My Advice to Tesla

[BasilBrush]

"Loudmouth investor"? Do you mean the Tesla CEO, Elon Musk? CEOs are supposed to speak for their company.

You seem to have an axe to grind.

Re:My Advice to Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, wrapped in bacon and cheese

You're an idiot. Posting anon so I get to call you an idiot and mod you down at the same time. Idiot.

Re:My Advice to Tesla

[CanHasDIY]

"Loudmouth investor"? Do you mean the Tesla CEO, Elon Musk? CEOs are supposed to speak for their company.

You seem to have an axe to grind.

Yes, and yes - the guy is a narcissistic douche who does more harm than good when the goes and whines to the media every single time anyone says anything negative about Tesla, regardless of how true the negative press may be. Personally, I want to like Tesla, but his loud, whinging mouth makes it rather difficult for me to appreciate the engineering.

As for the statement, "CEO's are supposed to speak for their company," I'd respond, "Not if it hurts the company in the long run." Responding to the media is what professional publicists are for.

Re:My Advice to Tesla

[BasilBrush]

It hurting the company seems to be a personal view of yours, not a truth. Most people are happy to hear Teslas side. Only people with ann axe to grind are annoyed.

regardless of how true the negative press may be.

As I say, it appears you have an axe to grind.

Re:My Advice to Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

You may have a gripe with Musk, but without him, there IS no Tesla.

"Loudmouth investor"? Do you mean the Tesla CEO, Elon Musk? CEOs are supposed to speak for their company.

You seem to have an axe to grind.

Yes, and yes - the guy is a narcissistic douche who does more harm than good when the goes and whines to the media every single time anyone says anything negative about Tesla, regardless of how true the negative press may be. Personally, I want to like Tesla, but his loud, whinging mouth makes it rather difficult for me to appreciate the engineering.

As for the statement, "CEO's are supposed to speak for their company," I'd respond, "Not if it hurts the company in the long run." Responding to the media is what professional publicists are for.

Re:My Advice to Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people are happy to hear Teslas side.

Most people couldn't give a flying fuck one way or another.

You seem to be confused and think "bunch of musk-guzzling fanboys on Slashdot" is "most people".

Re:My Advice to Tesla

[CanHasDIY]

It hurting the company seems to be a personal view of yours, not a truth. Most people are happy to hear Teslas side.

Maybe if you live in an echo chamber.

regardless of how true the negative press may be.

As I say, it appears you have an axe to grind.

Which I already admitted to and explained. Not gonna be any horse left to bury if you keep beating it like that.

Re:My Advice to Tesla

[brambus]

[Elon Musk] is a narcissistic douche

You mean the guy who spent all of his $150 mil goldmine out of the PayPal acquisition on starting two very risky businesses with high probability of failure - a revolutionary rocket and car business - that actually advanced the state of the art in both fields and influenced the way the public views technological advancement for the better. You call *that* guy a "narcissistic douche"? My response.

Re:My Advice to Tesla

[fnj]

Elon Musk is a highly effective and successful CEO. And, forgive me, you have a derangement syndrome.

Re:My Advice to Tesla

[Twinbee]

I'm not sure you know him very well. He's the most honest, non-greedy, upfront, CEO I know. I'll post you a link to my reply to someone else who wasn't keen on him:

http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

More Important than the Fire

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla sent a team right away and offered to cover all of the costs associated. Future iterations of the Model S will likely be safer, and just how many car companies will cover all of the expenses of a car fire?

Home owner declines Tesla assitance?

[Identita]

http://business.financialpost.... When Tesla offers to pay the owner of the car for the damages to his home, the guy declines. Now, call me stupid, but that's a little weird no?

Re:Home owner declines Tesla assitance?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is strange... my guess is that the money came with a requirement to keep it out of the news. Maybe the owner has enough money, or maybe they are motivated to get it on the news for some reason?

Re:Home owner declines Tesla assitance?

[WindBourne]

VERY WEIRD.
I am guessing that there is a lot more to this than meets the eye. Like smoking something in the car.

Re:Home owner declines Tesla assitance?

[qparadox]

http://business.financialpost.... When Tesla offers to pay the owner of the car for the damages to his home, the guy declines. Now, call me stupid, but that's a little weird no?

Its not really that unusual. He likely has fire insurance that will cover the damage to his house and would rather deal with the insurance company than directly with Tesla. The insurance company can send the bill to Tesla and deal with the hassle, administrative details and lawyers, rather than the car owner.

Re:Home owner declines Tesla assitance?

[Anonymous Coward]

He may also be choosing to keep the door open for a potential lawsuit - usually when a company offers to pay for damage their product (may have) caused, they do so under an agreement where they do not admit guilt and you waive your right to sue them for the same thing later.

Important question

[Andy Dodd]

Was the driver a smoker?

Be careful!

[Anonymous Coward]

When 3D printing a fully functional full-size car, I always 3D print the battery separately just in case it catches fire while printing. It takes a bit longer, but it's safer.

Confused...

[sharky611aol.com]

I'm confused. Can someone translate this into a car analogy for me?

Re:Confused...

[SleazyRidr]

So, it's like if you park your car in your garage, but then something else in your garage catches fire. The fire spreads and burns down your car.

LOL; I seriously doubt it

[WindBourne]

Ok, it started in the tesla. It is not the battery, not the drive train, not the charger, not the computer, etc, BUT, it started in the tesla. Okkkkaaayyyy.
This sounds like the guy that committed suicide by shooting himself directly in the back of his head 3x with a 45.

Re:LOL; I seriously doubt it

[Anonymous Coward]

Now every arsonists dream is to set fire to a tesla, to make headlines in press.

Re:LOL; I seriously doubt it

[YoungManKlaus]

is making a camp fire in the driver seat also considered as "fire started in the car"? :D

Spontaneous Vehicular Combustion?

[Arancaytar]

In fact, the Toronto fire department says the fire didn't originate in the battery, the charging system, the adapter or electrical receptacle since all of those components weren't touched by the fire.

Or maybe insurance fraud, who knows.

Cars are involved in less than 1% of fires.

[Valdrax]

There are about 13,900 vehicle fires per year without structural involvement and 366,000 home structure fires of which only 8,9000 started in a garage or vehicle storage area, according to the NFPA. Cars don't even make the 1% cut-off for inclusion in their table of sources of ignition. Your washer and drier are a far bigger risk (15,200 house fires).

By far the most common causes of house fires are cooking accidents (43%), heating equipment (16%), arson (8%), faulty wiring or other electrical (6%), and smoking accidents (5%).

Re:Cars are involved in less than 1% of fires.

[Waffle Iron]

Alright... let's skip the distraction of tying car fires to house fires. Your report states that there were almost 14,000 car fires on residential properties that didn't start the house on fire. Presumably, many additional car fires started in cars parked in places other than peoples' homes. That adds up to tens of thousands of annual car fires that we should be worrying about in addition to this single Tesla. There ought to be dozens of car fire articles per day here on /. so that we can hash out each one.

Re:Cars are involved in less than 1% of fires.

[sexconker]

Alright... let's skip the distraction of tying car fires to house fires. Your report states that there were almost 14,000 car fires on residential properties that didn't start the house on fire. Presumably, many additional car fires started in cars parked in places other than peoples' homes. That adds up to tens of thousands of annual car fires that we should be worrying about in addition to this single Tesla. There ought to be dozens of car fire articles per day here on /. so that we can hash out each one.

You posted horse shit and got called out. Just give up. I'm so glad Slashdot doesn't allow editing because it preserves shit like this so we can all know to ignore you in the future.

Car fires aren't a major cause of fires that cause structural fire - home or otherwise.
Cars catching fire when parked and the engine is off isn't a common occurrence. It isn't rare in general, but it is extremely rare for a car only a couple of years old. The main causes - leaky fuel lines and corroded battery contacts - are present almost exclusive in old (10+ years) cars that haven't been maintained for shit.

The percentage of Teslas involved in fires far exceeds that of conventional cars of similar age and repair. Get over it.

Re:Cars are involved in less than 1% of fires.

[Waffle Iron]

I'm so glad Slashdot doesn't allow editing because it preserves shit like this so we can all know to ignore you in the future.

Yeah, isn't that a great feature. It means that your undoubtedly scintillating personality is being immortalized by your long track record of congenial comments.

Re:Cars are involved in less than 1% of fires.

[Duhavid]

"By far the most common causes of house fires are cooking accidents (43%), heating equipment (16%), arson (8%), faulty wiring or other electrical (6%), and smoking accidents (5%)."

I could see Edward G. Robinson delivering that line...

Re:Cars are involved in less than 1% of fires.

[sexconker]

I'm so glad Slashdot doesn't allow editing because it preserves shit like this so we can all know to ignore you in the future.

Yeah, isn't that a great feature. It means that your undoubtedly scintillating personality is being immortalized by your long track record of congenial comments.

Thanks!

Speaking of disproportionate coverage...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you, Slashdot, for the "inflammatory" (heh) headline and putting the key bit of information at the end of the summary, ensuring a fair and unbiased interpretation of the event particularly given the aforementioned prior disproportionate coverage.

Exxon and BP Executives Are Mystified

[Anonymous Coward]

For some inexplicable reason, Tesla cars are burning up in gigantic orange fireballs from coast to coast. Executives from major oil companies are completely perplexed, shrugging their shoulders with comical exaggeration while looking around the room and declaring that they have no idea how it could possibly happen and declaring that they have never even personally witnessed a real fire, just read about them in the news.

BEWARE THE PUMP AND DUMP

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla closed at $200 today so now guys who took short positions on Friday are looking to push rumors over the long weekend so Tuesday they can make a big profit!

Paying damages as PR

[mr_zorg]

> and the fact they offered to pay damages?

Given the huge amount of bad press Tesla got from the three earlier debris fires, I can totally understand why they would bend over backwards to make this guy (and hopefully the press) happy. It doesn't necessarily mean they're trying to cover something up.

If Tesla was Toyota

[Anonymous Coward]

If Tesla was
Toyota
the NTSB
would be suing
them to bankruptcy.

Crony capitalism.

Shut up and stop trying to spread FUD

[cbhacking]

User "Todd Knarr" posted numbers above. Apparently you're no only too lazy to do your own research, you're also too biased to believe numbers given to you...

To expand on those numbers (there's a bit of a fudge factor because the timelines don't line up. Deal with it):
Tesla Model S cars in the USA and Canada: about 17200, as of Sep 2013 (source: http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2...)
Tesla Model S fires in the USA and Canada: 4, ever (new enough model that we'll say "per year" if you want).
Tesla Model S fires per year (percentage): about 0.023%

Personal cars in the USA in 2007: about 254,400,000 (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P... citing http://www.bts.gov/publication...)
Vehicle fires in the USA in 2007: about 258,000 (sources: http://www.chandlerlawgroup.co..., http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downl...)
Total car fires per year (percentage): about 0.101%

Ratio of Tesla Model S fires per Model S to all car fires per total cars: about 4.4 to 1

Have yourself a nice big helping of crow, you intellectually dishonest piece of shit.

Re:Shut up and stop trying to spread FUD

[WindBourne]

nice work. Sadly, facts and logic will not matter to him. The truth is, that we did this same math on the last go around on this, and he saw it and still lies about it and everything connected with Tesla.

Car fires happen all the time

[pfignaux]

Just the other day, my neighbor was driving to work when her engine exploded in front of my house. She got out OK, but her car (a Jeep SUV) was totaled. She said she felt like she drove over a large rock, but it was likely a fuel line issue. I originally thought it was battery related, but the fire department said it was the engine. The explosion shook the windows at my house and there was lots of smoke and fire. Do I think Jeep is at fault? Probably not. The feeling I got was that she was having issues with the vehicle and probably shouldn't have been driving it. The point is, we don't know all the details of these stories, yet we're so quick to pass judgement. The number of Tesla fires is a little worrying, but it seems acceptable compared to gas-powered vehicles.

If it was related to the car...

[Dastardly]

Some rare, but possible causes if it has anything to do with the car.

FOD... (Foreign Object Debris) - shorting power to ground anywhere. Doesn't take much especially on a circuit board somewhere, rapidly heats up and melts solder creating and even bigger short and more heat until fire.

Dendrite formation - Very rare and probably requires more than 4 months to happen, but certain components on a high density BGA array the solder can form tendrils towards other solder balls. As the dendrites get close to each other they will short and break kind of like a fuse, but eventually it can become big enough to hold and sustain current generating enough heat to start the solder balls melting driving more current and heat until fire.

Re:If it was related to the car...

[SydShamino]

Given that Tesla knows the cars can be sold into highly corrosive environments, I would hope that they used solder finishes capable of resisting dendrite formation.

I've seen boards from high sulfur environments with extensive silver sulfide growth. The entire area around the BGA was a solid sheet of metal. We found a solder preservative that protects the immersion silver finish from sulfur corrosion and it seems to have stopped the effect entirely, at least in the accelerated equivalent of several years' exposure.

In totally unrelated news...

[tlambert]

In totally unrelated news... the Ohio and Texas automobile dealers associations are hosting their annual meeting this week in lovely Toronto, Ontario.

Confused Driver?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe someone tried to fill up the "gas tank".

GM recalls 778,000 cars for faulty ignition

[Anonymous Coward]

http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/13/autos/gm-recall/

Re:g0at pen1s

[garyebickford]

Excellent. This is the ideal response to all political opinions and news, and is guaranteed to end every argument instantly.

Tesla Model S Battery Miraculously Survives Fire

[n2hightech]

This is the headline that should have been used. Not the misleading "Tesla Model S Caught Fire While Parked and Unplugged"

Paging Ralph Nader

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's a new book idea:

Unsafe At No Speed

Not going to happen here...

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you expecting people here on /. to actually not judge anything until the facts are available to come to a sound and reasoned decision?

That would require something called "intelligence". Something as is lacking in abundance here.

obviously

[Anonymous Coward]

The Tesla S is strictly for creepers. Why else would they name it that? Sssssss.....

Is the owner a smoker?

[dfenstrate]

The fire department ruled out everything that makes a Tesla a Tesla,so I propose:

1) cigarette embers on a napkin

2) a bad 12V accessory

And so what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I really do not understand the sensationalism behind the fires on Tesla Model S. Just to remind the audience, cars catching fire are more common than anyone may think. Ferrari 458? A hundred catched fire and no one dismissed the brand. If I'm not wrong, the Chevrolet Volt had some fire cases too and wasn't in the media - maybe because the government was selling the brand that was saved with OUR money?

I see on Elon Musk an entrepreneur that is trying to address the big issue in our country that no one had the courage or capacity to do it. We are very dependent on oil and mostly from abroad and to fill our demand we certainly were responsible and provoked wars with the half of world in the recent years - instead of promoting the peace as a leader nation in the actual world context. If the Tesla Model S has some issue, I'm pretty damn sure that are competent people at Tesla to address the problem and they will. I'm just waiting for a more affordable model to buy one. This in my concept to be a patriotic, buying a product from a local brand that is investing in technology to address the big issue that affect our country and by consequence others, promoting Eco-friendly transportation and promoting environmental awareness. Those that think that patriotism is invade friendly nations to stole their resources need to check on the dictionary what be a patriotic means... The same for those journalist that only criticize the best innovative car product in the last century - they need to understand more about cars to talk about - without recognize the hard work and game changing that the team at Tesla is trying to push.

Time for people start to think in which side they are, our side or the side of those that want to destroy our nation promoting our deeply dependency on oil and foreign resources?

Humm Weenie roast

[Virtucon]

I have a neighbor who has a Tesla. I guess I'll keep a package of hot dogs and marshmallows on hand just in case.

"Campfire at Dougs!"

Re:g0at pen1s

[easyTree]

(Now) knowing that it comes from 4chan reinforces my comment :D

Re:g0at pen1s

[doccus]

I would just love to see a repoter field that question/comment to some arrogant politico. Reading it now it's brilliant!

Re:Why I hate Tesla cars.

[aminorex]

jealous much?

Clickbait bullshit

[metaforest]

.... and Dice, et al, are laughing all the way to the bank, at Tesla's expense... fuck these clowns.

we all know it,s true

[Anonymous Coward]

the same industries that wanted to kill elecric cars is rigging fires to produce headlines and bleed cash out of Tesla. You know it,s true, deep in your heart. You know this is how the big boys get down to it, when they have to.

So the Lexus started the fire.

[Anonymous Coward]

If not, why not?