Slashdot Mirror


Tesla Suspension Breakage: It's Not The Crime, It's The Coverup (dailykanban.com)

schwit1 quotes a report from Daily Kanban: For several months now, reports have circulated in comment sections and forum threads about a possible defect in Tesla's vehicles that may cause suspension control arms to break. Many of those reports appeared to come from a single, highly-motivated and potentially unreliable source, a fact which led many to dismiss them as crankery. But as more reports of suspension failure in Teslas have come in, Daily Kanban has investigated the matter and can now report on this deeply troubling issue. Our investigation began in earnest upon reading a thread titled "Suspension Problem on Model S" in the Tesla Motors Club forum. The original poster (OP) in that thread described the suspension in his 2013 Model S (with 70,000 miles) failing at relatively low speed, saying the "left front hub assembly separated from the upper control arm." Images of the broken suspension components showed high levels of rust in the steel ball joint and the OP reported being told by Tesla service center employees that the "ball joint bolt was loose and caused the wear," which was "not normal." Because his Tesla was out of warranty, the repair was reportedly sent to Tesla management for consideration. According to a subsequent post by the OP, Tesla management refused to repair the broken suspension under warranty despite the "not normal" levels of wear reported by the service techs. Then, just days later, the OP reported that Tesla had offered to pay 50% of the $3,100 repair bill in exchange for his signature on a "Goodwill Agreement" which he subsequently posted here (a scan of the stock agreement can be found here). That agreement included the following passage:

"The Goodwill is being provided to you without any admission of liability or wrongdoing or acceptance of any facts by Tesla, and shall not be treated as or considered evidence of Tesla's liability with respect to any claim or incidents. You agree to keep confidential our provision of the Goodwill, the terms of this agreement and the incidents or claims leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill. In accepting the Goodwill, you hereby release and discharge Tesla and related persons or entities from any and all claims or damages arising out of or in any way connected with any claims or incidents leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill. You further agree that you will not commence, participate or voluntarily aid in any action at law or in equity or any legal proceeding against Tesla or related persons or entities based upon facts related to the claims or incidents leading to or related to this Goodwill." [Emphasis added]

This offer, to repair a defective part in exchange for a non-disclosure agreement, is unheard of in the auto industry. More troublingly, it represents a potential assault by Tesla Motors on the right of vehicle owners to report defects to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's complaint database, the auto safety regulators sole means of discovering defects independent of the automakers they regulate.
Reuters also reports today that U.S. auto safety investigators are reviewing reports of suspension problems in Tesla Motors Inc's Model S cars.

271 comments

  1. Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why should it matter, it was out of warranty. They don't owe him squat, they were even nice enough to help pay for the repairs. I don't see how this is a story, except "Tesla!"

    1. Re:Warranty by retchdog · · Score: 1

      it's still under warranty, unless it's 2017 and i just haven't noticed.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    2. Re:Warranty by bloodhawk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It matters because it appears to be a manufacturing defect. It wasn't noticed till after warranty expired but due to rust etc it was obviously not something that just happened. Refusing to fix out of warranty for such an issue is not unheard of and while an arsehole act could at least be justifiable under the warranty conditions, trying to cover it up though is most definitely NOT justifiable.

    3. Re: Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He had 70,000 miles on the car

    4. Re:Warranty by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Interesting

      no, I see a MAJOR story. This is NOT how Tesla has operated. This is how companies like GM, Audi, VW, Mercedes, Toyota, Ford, Honda, etc operate. Tesla has stood behind their work and it has made them who they are today. They need to rethink this CAREFULLY.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    5. Re:Warranty by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Informative

      Tesla has stood behind their work.

      FALSE

      Tesla lies and blames the drivers when their piece of shit cars are at fault.

      Well, there is a good reason why you are AC, because you are a liar.
      Up to this point, there has been no lemons from tesla.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    6. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Up to this point, there has been no lemons from tesla.

      Facts say otherwise.

    7. Re:Warranty by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      Yes there have. There are plenty of complaints with Teslas, especially the model X. Doors not working, rust found under the rear seat brackets, faulty hinges.

    8. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do you know why birds shit in your GM car? because they know that's what GM cars are for

    9. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's funny. I didn't know my FR-S was made by GM. That might come as a surprise to Toyota and Subaru.

    10. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I've had numerous issues with my Tesla where I've been told "tough luck". Stuff that should never happen like the windhsield wipers failing so violently they smashed the windshield. And incredibly mature technologies like rubber seals and gas struts failing after 2 years.

      No help from Tesla. I could have bought a used car for the cost of repairing a windshield, wipers, 1 rubber seal and 2 gas struts.

    11. Re:Warranty by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Because his Tesla was out of warranty,

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    12. Re:Warranty by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Right. Early version of S ALSO had issues. It was known that there would be issues with X as well since it is probably the most complex car ever made.
      That is why they sold Founders and Signature series and told the owners to expect issues.
      That is also why the INITIAL sales of model 3 will be to employees, and then to current owners. We know that there have been issues. BUT, Tesla has always backed them, which is why they are loved. So, if they do not back, then it makes them the same as all others.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    13. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Yellow_lemons.jpg

    14. Re: Warranty by Computershack · · Score: 2

      He had 70,000 miles on the car

      My current car has 108,000 miles on and hasn't had a ball joint fail. My last car had 165,000 miles on the clock and didn't have a ball joint fail and when I sold it it was still passing annual safety inspections in the UK (MOT test). A catastrophic failure of that kind is extremely rare.

      --
      I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
    15. Re: Warranty by Type44Q · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I dig Musk and his companies but I do believe liability due to "defects in materials and workmanship" doesn't cease when the warranty does.

    16. Re: Warranty by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My 2007 honda civic has has TWO fail. I have had to replace them 3 times in the life of my 1999 Jeep grand cherokee.

      So there is data about failure rates all over the road.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    17. Re:Warranty by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      GM will tell you to pound sand outside the warranty on ALL OF it's cars unless there is a full recall in place.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    18. Re:Warranty by sunking2 · · Score: 2

      Control arm failure is a safety issue. "Real" car companies deal with recalls all the time that are well out of warranty. For example, my 11 year old jeep failed Mass inspection due to a control arm question. Low and behold there was a recall on it that started 8 years after the fact. So for free they replaced both control arms on a car with 185k miles. I'm not surprised this guy had an issue being in the north east with the new spray road prep they put down for icing.

    19. Re:Warranty by sunking2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The point is it appears Tesla was trying to hush this guy so that there was no inquiry that may cause a recall. That's the real story.

    20. Re: Warranty by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Says... who, exactly??

    21. Re:Warranty by stabiesoft · · Score: 1

      Odd, I have a CTS-V, that got an extended 120K mile/10 year warranty extension on the supercharger in case the bearings fail. I had a vette with 2 recalls, one for a headlight fuse thing or some such minor thing, again out of warranty. No one made me sign an NDA to get it fixed. You can call them recalls, but how is the tesla thing any different? And wanting people to sign an NDA, really? NHTSA should fry them for this. It is completely illegal AND immoral to not report problems to NHTSA. Do musk want people to die?

    22. Re:Warranty by EEPROMS · · Score: 1

      This offer, to repair a defective part in exchange for a non-disclosure agreement, is unheard of in the auto industry.

      This is actually false as it is common for many (insert car maker here) to have a non disclosure agreement on major failures even if the car "is in warranty". Car manufacturer dealers forcing customers to sign NDA's for fixing obvious lemons is now part of the course with owning a car in many parts of the world (especially in Australia where car manufacturers are trying to stop the introduction of lemon laws).

    23. Re:Warranty by stabiesoft · · Score: 1

      So you were wrong, there have been lemon cases, at least 2, the one the AC posted about the S, and I saw another about one on an X somewhere else, and the X guy had previously owned a Roadster and an S, so this guy was a Tesla believer. He basically said in the article I read that he just was done. Everything was breaking repeatedly, and he just wanted his money back. it was in mediation if I remember correctly.

    24. Re:Warranty by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      the guy in wisc was a joke. He was found cheating to make it look like a lemon. This was all about the lawyer and his friend making off like bandits like they did with volvo, audi, and MB.
      As to the X, well, yeah, the guy has issues with the car. IIRC, it was a founders, which was in the first 1000, so not surprising that he had issues. Still, I am amazed that he just did not ask for a trade and let Tesla have this one. Issue would have been solved. BUT, I heard enough to agree that it WAS a real lemon.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    25. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The guy is Wisconsin was compensated $160,000 in damages for the piece of shit tesla he had the miss fortunate of owning.

    26. Re: Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's not how I read it. The non-disclosure is about the Goodwill, only. This is lawyers doing what they do best: trying to keep the guy from turning a gesture (a silly one, at $50) into an admission of guilt. The agreement says nothing about the problem itself.

      Tesla is struggling with having to be a car company in a sea of bad car companies. They started a car manufacturing business basically from the ground up, so they aren't going to be making perfect cars. And they started a company at a time when business practice is to have lawyers deal with customer issues instead of rude dealers. (When you took your out-of-warranty car to the dealer to get an obvious manufacturing problem fixed, say, 25 years ago, you would get squat, without a non-disclosure agreement. Better? No, only different.) So I don't find this action at all surprising. Compared to the antics of other car companies, this is tame. It's news because it lets people say "See, Tesla messed up."

      Frankly I thing it's astonishing they've made it as far as they have. But then again they could have made an electric car only 1/10th as good as they have and it would still be 10 times better than most cars, of any kind. Seems like an ok deal.

    27. Re:Warranty by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      117K, and Tesla did it to keep from wasting money.
      Personally, I wish that Musk had made the choice instead and countersued. It was proven that the guy was a liar, through and through.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    28. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why so con man musk could lose again in court and owe this poor man that had the misfortune of owning one of the worse cars ever made in existence even more money?

      Musk is a con man. Everything he does is shady. The sooner he's thrown in prison the better.

    29. Re:Warranty by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Oops, not 117K, but 127K. Still a great deal less than 160K.
      Here is a short explanation of why the doc/lawyer did NOT get what they really wanted, which was a great deal more.
      And had they gotten what those 2 wanted, there would be lots of lemon vehicles with plenty of sharks like you out there.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    30. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like was tesla.com has done with their website.

    31. Re: Warranty by geoskd · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My current car has 108,000 miles on and hasn't had a ball joint fail.

      I had an '01 Suzuki Areo that had 5 ball joints fail while it was still under warranty. When it failed the last time, Suzuki offered to buy the car back for the amount of my outstanding loan (far more than the blue book value of the car). Naturally I accepted and was happy to be rid of the problem. Even though it hadn't cost me any money, it was a pain to have to deal with it again every couple of months. The dealer said it was likely an alignment tolerances problem when the car was originally manufactured, and the only way to fix it permanently would be to replace the entire front differential which would cost even more than what Suzuki gave me for it.

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    32. Re: Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      paper nda is unheard of.

      and illegal in consumer products.

    33. Re: Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I too had fictional vehicle with fictional problems.

    34. Re:Warranty by Guspaz · · Score: 2

      > Your Tesla vehicle is protected by a 4 year, 50,000 miles (whichever comes first) new vehicle limited warranty

      70,000 miles is out of warranty. They do offer an extended warranty to double both those (for, it appears, $4,000), but obviously that wasn't purchased in this case.

    35. Re: Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are all dumber for reading your idiotic comment.

    36. Re: Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look out, we got an original idiot here. Oh...wait... LOL...

    37. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is that if it is an isolated incident the cost for Tesla to fix it is fairly low and generates a lot of goodwill.
      The real problem for Tesla would be if it is a design problem and they expect a lot of these to pop up, then it would not just be a marginal cost for repairs and it would be more convenient (But a bit dickish) to have the customers take the cost.

      Is it a big deal? I don't know. A couple of years ago we bought a bunch of UPSs for the office computers, it sucks to have work lost to a power outage even if it is just half an hour or so. The main problem is that you might not remember since you last saved and then your mind might be a bit off on the work done and what still needs to be fixed.
      Anyway, they started to fail a couple of month after the warranty expired.

      Shit like that happens, we bought the cheapest crap and they delivered as one should expect.
      The main problem here seems to be that Tesla is a new brand so the customer doesn't really know if it is a good brand or not.
      Just going by the price doesn't tell you much since polished turd tends to be more expensive than non-polished turd.

      Five years from know we might have a better idea of how much one should be willing to pay for a Tesla.
      A car that breaks down every now and then can still be sold. It just limits the market and price-range to those who are willing to put up with it.

    38. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I worked at a Ford dealership and I find this hard to believe.

      We routinely worked on stuff at cut rates, or with free parts for vehicles that were just outside of warranty. Especially if you were nice to the service writer and the service manager. You come in with a chip on your shoulder and no one at the dealership will go to bat for you with corp. They key was not to be a douche when its brought into the shop, and not to be a douche when you ask to talk to the service manager about getting a discount.

      I was an apprentice and I remember how much it would piss off the mechanic I worked with, because he got paid book time, and they would almost always reduce the costs by cutting the number of hours he would get paid for a job.

      My guess is you had problems because you were a douche.

    39. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's interesting, given the fact that it is illegal even in the USA. I had never heard of this before.

    40. Re:Warranty by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      That's not entirely true either. Take a look at this guy: https://youtu.be/anlYz3Mwamc

      The problems he has experienced are not that uncommon for owners of early models. The only reason the cars were not written off as lemons was that Tesla was willing to spend ridiculous amounts of money fixing the problems and learning from them. Normally if a car needed the whole drive train and many major parts replacing, it would be scrapped for spares by the manufacturer. Aside from the cost, it's the hassle to the customer.

      Maybe it's different in the US, but in Europe a car like that with endless on-going problems would be replaced.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    41. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they are recalls initiated by the Fed Gov't then no, they cannot have a gag order/clause.

      But this is a private agreement. So yes, you want the fix, shut yer trap. Its just good business. Why pay to fix a common problem only to have the owner (who in the past has shot off his mouth) shoot off his mouth?

      You must not run a business.

    42. Re: Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They weren't nice enough, they had to be threatened, that's cya, that's protect bad product design, rather useful safe product. So is the government going to step in now? And say experimental, no longer for sale on american roads? No. Insurance agency? No, it's even worse, it's back to buyer beware. Tesla said no problem, but, automotive, there have been ball joint problems since day one. The second day, they put a bag over the joint to protect the ball. It will wear down, rust and slip out of the socket, if not protected, that's even known now, Tesla should have sent an mechanic, to retrieve the suspension package, and seen what the problem was. 50 sounds like a dry ball joint, 70 sounds as a missed appointment for a lube job. Where the problem could have been identified and rectified. Sounds as if they should have gotten a new car instead.

    43. Re: Warranty by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      You have had 5 catastrophic ball-joint failures in your life? I call BS. Replacing 5 worn out ones is believable, but having 5 of them come apart on you? Not a chance.

    44. Re:Warranty by bjb_admin · · Score: 1

      I have been there and can confirm, even if it is a well known issue. My wife is now terrified of all GM vehicles.

    45. Re:Warranty by stabiesoft · · Score: 1

      Actually, I DO run a biz. And it is good biz to just do the right thing and fix things in the open. Musk of all people should realize the streisand effect of this NDA thing could be a PR nightmare that could actually end his company. Tesla is based on goodwill, they do not make money. If perception changes, Tesla is toast almost overnight.

    46. Re: Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You keep having to backpedal and explain your absolutist assertion.

      There HAVE been Tesla issues. Deal with it. If you're not a paid Tesla astroturfer, quit your fanboying.

    47. Re:Warranty by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Recall sure, but these parts aren't recalled.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    48. Re: Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like the car that spawned this article, people drive on different roads.

      Sounds like Lumpy drives on some shit roads (or hits lots of curbs). or both.

      Sounds like the driver of the car in question lives down a really long shitty road. Surprise surprise; more wear and tear on his car.

    49. Re: Warranty by dasgoober · · Score: 1

      Frequently, there's a fitting that goes over the ball joint to retain the lubricant. If the fitting fails, is cut/compromised, falls out of place, etc, the lubricant leaks out/dries up. THen without lubrication the ball joint wears and then needs replacing.

    50. Re:Warranty by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

      I know GM did a free replacement of catalytic converters for many 2001 & 2002 cars that became plugged because a piece of insulation broke off. They offered this for cars within 10 years 120,000 miles which is way outside their warranty.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    51. Re: Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Definitively untrue. I could tell you more but I had to sign a paper nda.

    52. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Bullshit. And if it's not bullshit, then you have no customers, because you have clearly never dealt with one.

      Actually, I DO run a biz. And it is good biz to just do the right thing and fix things in the open. Musk of all people should realize the streisand effect of this NDA thing could be a PR nightmare that could actually end his company. Tesla is based on goodwill, they do not make money. If perception changes, Tesla is toast almost overnight.

    53. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Warranty is irrelevant for manufacturing defects. Moreover, the issue is not with the actual defect, but with the fact that Tesla tried to cover it up.

    54. Re:Warranty by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      Lol @ most complex car ever made. You really have no idea what you are talking about huh. Tesla owners are like Apple owners, oblivious to reality and blindly fanatic.

    55. Re: Warranty by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      there have been issues. BUT at this time, there has probably only been one real lemon and that was the model X. The Dentists in Wist was caught red-handed pulling stunts. Basically, he was a nice piece of GOP trash.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    56. Re: Warranty by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Clearly you haven't owned anything made by GM in the 1970's.

  2. Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This "deeply troubling" issue is what? A control arm issue?

    1) I've had the control arms go out on cars, including an Audi A4. Is this some other kind of failure that is more hazardous?

    2) At least on normal sedans this doesn't doesn't generally result in death or major injury the way a car fire may, gas tank explosion etc.

    3) Where are the other reports from other users about this deeply troubling issue? They've got 100K+ cars on the road, and actually even though this random website is deeply troubled about this issue, these guys have one of the best safety records going.

    4) Any chance this is an astro-turfing campaign or something - the write-up is insanely long.

    1. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      This "deeply troubling" issue is what? A control arm issue?

      No! Many cars have mechanical faults. The deeply troubling issue is the use of gag restrictions. This is something new to the automobile industry, the creeping-in of the kind of software-industry agreements we have seen from Microsoft and others.

    2. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1. Just like the title of the submission said, it isn't the fault that's at issue, or even the refusal to foot the repair bill, it's the attempt to NDA away the existence of the fault.

    3. Re:Uh? by quantaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I was just reading a related article on Tesla and the underlying claim is it may be a symptom of a bigger problem.

      The thrust of the argument is that cars in general are shockingly reliable, this isn't an easy thing to do which is why car companies have been working at it a very long time and still have trouble.

      Tesla is very new to making cars and their cars haven't been around a long time. The chances are really good that their cars will have huge reliability problems as they age.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    4. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They weren't gagging him. They offered him money for fixing the issue in return for not then turning around and suing / generating bad PR for the company. He wasn't forced to take the money, he could have quite easily ignored the offer which he did. No one is being silenced.

    5. Re:Uh? by Zxern · · Score: 2

      It's a bribe to keep his mouth shut. If its found to be a manufacturing defect they could be made to issue a recall or extend the warranty to cover the issue which would be quite expensive.

    6. Re:Uh? by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is unheard of to gag someone in the industry because it's unheard of to offer out of warranty "good will" something which the car industry simply doesn't have. That's the only thing the gag order covers, and that is standard practice to stop word spreading and prevent vultures lining up.

      Also it's not unheard of. I've seen several reports of lemons over the years where car companies have agreed to do something in exchange for silence. To claim this is a first is just stupid.

    7. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get real, Mr. Shill. Tesla are doing an Apple, and always have done. There are no problems with their products, it's the user. Now they've been caught, others will come out of the woodwork with similar evidence.

      Tesla is all about PR, not the vehicle. Wake up, fool.

    8. Re:Uh? by Mashiki · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ask yourself if you'd be saying the same thing in the case of the defective Takata airbag recall.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    9. Re:Uh? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2

      I worked 9 years at a car fleet management company, and we got individual deals out of manufacturers where they would cover part or full cost of replacing failured parts out of warranty all the time - its not unheard of, its quite freaking normal, the problem is most people do not ask.

      We were never asked to sign a confidentiality agreement however - it was pretty much always an agreement made with a warranty services rep over the phone, followed by submitting the invoice to them with the reference number written on it.

    10. Re:Uh? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The early cars have had some pretty severe issues. Replacement drive trains are not uncommon, as well as a long list of other quality issues like leaks, premature wear, seat leather stretching, all kinds of stuff. Tesla guarantees to buy cars back at a good price, so that has kept used prices high, but once beyond the end of warranty...

      Well, I asked for advice on buying a used one, and the advice from owners was "don't". Too many problems, not enough discount compared to new with warranty. Maybe get one referbed and warrantied by Tesla, but don't buy private. Kind of a stark warning.

      Then again this is all anecdotal, and despite the number of anecdotes they still don't add up to data. That data is a Tesla trade secret.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many cars did your company manage? Companies are more likely to go out of there way to keep more important customers happy.

    12. Re:Uh? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      Your question should be more orientated around "how many cars did our company buy or own" - the answer to which is "none". We managed other companies car fleets, never did any buying, never made recommendations, and the manufacturers knew this.

    13. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ball joint failing at 70000, hah this is not something to write home about, Just had my passenger side ball joint replaced at 42000 miles on my 2010 f150, ball joints fail, mechanical parts fail, 70000 miles is quite a few. These parts are serviceable and should be replaced form time to time. (they check them every oil change where I go.), parts wear and fail, parts have a service life, this is just bullshit to gain clicks.

    14. Re: Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My $15K Ford Ranger has now gone 175000 miles with very little maintenance cost. A radiator hose clamp came loose early on, and the headgasket developed a leak and had to be replaced at about 160K.

      Not all inexpensive cars have maintanance issues.

    15. Re:Uh? by Straif · · Score: 1

      I know several people who have had out of warranty service covered by their respective car dealers. At least one for a drive belt issue, one for a suspension issue (both GM) and another for something to do with his electric windows (Ford).

      Personally, my Kia Optima had the wheel bearings wear out in one wheel and the dealership looked at them and told me outright that while they aren't covered under warranty (since like brake pads they are considered a normal wear and tear component) they thought the wear was premature and that they would push for Kia Canada to cover the replacement. Total cost of repair to me = $0

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
    16. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean your customers chose which dealers you would take the cars you managed to?

      Or did your customers say: "Pick whichever dealer you want to manage our cars, but please maintain our cars".

    17. Re:Uh? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      We didn't use dealers, we used independent garages - much cheaper.

    18. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boy, are you a rube.

      As a suggestion, the only time a vendor offers you money to fix a problem is if THEY FUCKED IT UP THEMSELVES.

      They're in the business to make money. Giving it to people when something breaks is PR spin and bribery. It's to avoid people making bad PR for a company when they've seriously (as in lawsuit territory) fucked up something. They don't do it out of the kindness of their hearts and stay in business for very long.

      You...are...a...'tard. Oh, but that's right...I shouldn't expect any better, this is /. after all.

    19. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a multi prong attack in the media on Elon Musk.

      America doesn't fully have a free press.

      But who pulls the strings?

      It pretty obvious if you look at bad press about Elon personally and Tesla and SpaceX

      Who's interests is he hurting who has this kind of power?

    20. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's biztream, the autism-hating Slashdot troll!

    21. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually you're wrong - I know for instance Toyota have done quite a few Good Will repairs outside of warranty.

      One that I know of that has affected people I know is to replace an ENTIRE ENGINE in some of their older AD-series engined diesel cars, as there was a design flaw that caused them to over heat due to insufficient oil flow, causing oil to cake up the oilways and eventually cause head gasket failure.

      They were replacing these engines FREE OF CHARGE on affected vehicles up to 7 years old!

      And this was off their own back; It wasn't forced on them by government regulators!

      They certainly didn't try this kind of shit with legal crap to restrict your rights! There were a lot of hoops to jump through to make sure your car was one of the affected ones, but once that was verified it was off to the dealer for a new engine, no fuss!

      This is just shitty behaviour and a blemish on Tesla's current record of great customer service.

    22. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tesla fanboys = the new Apple fanboys

    23. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This "deeply troubling" issue is what? A control arm issue?

      1) I've had the control arms go out on cars, including an Audi A4. Is this some other kind of failure that is more hazardous?

      2) At least on normal sedans this doesn't doesn't generally result in death or major injury the way a car fire may, gas tank explosion etc.

      3) Where are the other reports from other users about this deeply troubling issue? They've got 100K+ cars on the road, and actually even though this random website is deeply troubled about this issue, these guys have one of the best safety records going.

      4) Any chance this is an astro-turfing campaign or something - the write-up is insanely long.

      Fan boy quibbles around the issue at hand.

    24. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call bullshit, I had a $3500 automatic gearbox replaced 2 years after my warranty expired on a 1995 Ford, no gag bribe, no paying 50% they replaced the whole gearbox for nothing.

  3. Re:Cue up Elon's fanbois by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not a fan boy, I dont even want a Tesla. But I dont understand how this a story, but if my Honda broke after 70,000 fucking miles nobody bats an eye.

  4. Look people by rahvin112 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No legal agreement can override the law. You might be able to sign away your rights, but you can't sign away the governments or ones guaranteed by government. I do not believe any contract provision that bared you from participating with a government inquiry would be legal and depending on whether the terms are severable could invalidate the entire agreement.

    This is why you can't sign a legal agreement to be someones slave. You can sign it, but it's not legal, it can't be enforced and any attempt to enforce it is likely to get someone in serious trouble. Just as in that case Tesla can't bar you from talking to NHTSA, the laws about vehicle safety would specifically preclude such a clause. Any attempt by Tesla to enforce such a clause would be dangerous beyond measure to the company. And as I mentioned previously the fact that such a clause exists could invalidate the rest of the agreement.

    The person that posted that agreement should have a long and frank talk with a lawyer experienced in vehicle and NHSTA law.

    1. Re:Look people by rahvin112 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I should have Googled before posting. It seems NHTSA has already been to visit Tesla and remind that that such clauses that say you can't talk to NHTSA are not legal and if they don't remove them immediately Tesla is going to get a rectal exam from NHTSA.

      http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

      You might laugh, but that clause is what got NHTSA involved, a joint falling apart in a single car is not cause for them to get involved but that clause drew their involvement and it's going to result in a full investigation of this issue. It would have taken dozens of people having the same issue and some of them getting hurt of this type of issue to normally get in front of NHTSA but Tesla's illegal agreement put them right at the front of the pack. This will hurt Tesla, and their own lawyers did it to them.

    2. Re:Look people by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Seems to me like the agreement was only for the exchange of money.

      Like a "We'll help pay for your out-of-warranty repair, if you don't take it to the media and imply we're accepting liability and admitting to a defect"

    3. Re:Look people by rahvin112 · · Score: 2

      The agreement includes the sentence:

      " You further agree that you will not commence, participate or voluntarily aid in any action at law or in equity or any legal proceeding against Tesla...."

      This agreement on it's face bars any participation with or notice to NHTSA of anything related to the repair. That may not have been the intent, but that is what it says.

    4. Re:Look people by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe I'm missing something in that agreement, but I don't see where there's a prohibition on talking to NHTSA or anyone else about the problem. The gag is on telling people that Tesla offer remedy out of warranty and that in accepting that "goodwill" they could neither join party nor testify in any legal action taken by other parties against Tesla related to this. Further, that in offering this "goodwill" they are not admitting fault, nor acknowledging any inherent defect.

      Yes, its written in legalsleaze, but presumably they paid the lawyers to make sure being "nice" didn't have any blowback. The dealers of other car brands would simply tell you to "get bent," and make you pay for the out of warranty work since the factory won't compensate them. This is a benefit of NOT having independent dealers in the loop. It's a shame this legal CYB is being contorted to attack Tesla rather than acknowledging the unheard of in the industry kindness you'd never see elsewhere unless NHTSA forced them to fix.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    5. Re:Look people by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how reporting an issue to the NHTSA equates to participation in legal action against Tesla. Besides, contracts, are inferior to law so obviously it cannot mean that.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    6. Re:Look people by maugle · · Score: 1

      I know SpaceX rockets are much more interesting, but Elon Musk really needs to pay more attention to Tesla. A disgusting NDA attempt like this never originates from engineers; it could only have come from corporate businessweasels that have infiltrated his engineering company.

    7. Re:Look people by kwbauer · · Score: 2

      If talking with the NHTSA aids the NHTSA in an investigation that causes the government to take action against Tesla (a legal action) then the clause would have been an attempt to prohibit that. And just because contracts are inferior to law does not mean that lawyers aren't putting in provisions that violate the law hoping people follow the contract anyway.

      Saying that things don't happen because they are against the law is saying that there is no crime because crime is against the law.

    8. Re:Look people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No legal agreement can override the law. You might be able to sign away your rights, but you can't sign away the governments or ones guaranteed by government. I do not believe any contract provision that bared you from participating with a government inquiry would be legal and depending on whether the terms are severable could invalidate the entire agreement.

      How is the average person supposed to know what is legal in a contract and what isn't? Can't we have some sort of fine or other recourse when companies put illegal s*** in consumer contracts and many other contracts (like employment agreements)?

    9. Re:Look people by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      I'm sure somewhere else it says if any clause of the agreement is not enforceable, the others stand.
      You can't enforce a contact clause that contradicts law.

    10. Re:Look people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why you can't sign a legal agreement to be someones slave.

      Sure you can. It's called a "student loan".

    11. Re:Look people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      You agree to keep confidential our provision of the Goodwill, the terms of this agreement _and the incidents or claims leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill_.

      Which would include the part failure...and includes everyone...

    12. Re:Look people by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      If you are prevented from telling people that Tesla paid 50% and testifying, you could be prevented from helping the NHTSA in an investigation or suit against Tesla.

      In most of Europe it's normal for car manufacturers to contribute to the repair of faults like this out of warranty. Exact legislation varies from country to country, but in the UK goods must last "a reasonable length of time" and be free from manufacturing defects. In this case it's clearly a manufacturing defect, so a court would calculate the manufacturer contribution as (cost of fix / expect lifetime of car) * age of car. In other words, if the car would be expected to last 15 years and some really expensive part broke after just 5 because of manufacturing defects, the manufacturer would be on the hook for 66% of the repair bill. In practice most will make you an offer to avoid court.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    13. Re:Look people by ausekilis · · Score: 2

      This is interesting to me and very enlightening to know the NHTSA would bend an auto maker over. I have a BMW E46 which had a subframe tear issue. There was a safety class action, but not recall. When my car exhibited the issue, BMW Corporate fought me on it. Eventually they agreed to pay a portion of it, but I had to sign one of these Goodwill docs too, saying I wouldn't share details (ooops....).

      These sorts of documents aren't nearly as rare as you might think. They are there to save public face for the car manufacturers. In my case it was worth it to BMW to cough up a few grand instead of face a lawsuit and a slew of bad publicity.

    14. Re:Look people by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Am I the only one who finds it strange Tesla mailed this agreement, pre-filled with the make and model of the car, to the customer, yet didn't pre-fill the customer's information? I'm not saying it's a forgery--they could have a stock document for each model, with just the "Model S" part changed (they have Model S, Model X, and Roadster, come on; the default is probably Model S and you just hit print)--just that there's a minor scuff on the armor of this bullet-proof case.

      I'd like to see if this plays out to another potato user trying to scam and discredit Tesla or if it's legitimate. The story says that Tesla's ball joint issue came from one user complaining loudly, and then another user doing his own investigation and discovering a *lot* of Tesla users have been complaining loudly about this issue and nobody else in the world noticed. We've had the whole world blink and miss something right in our faces before; we've also had idiots try to fabricate evidence to extract money from someone or slander a business. Which one is it this time?

    15. Re:Look people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe I'm missing something in that agreement, but I don't see where there's a prohibition on talking to NHTSA or anyone else about the problem. The gag is on telling people that Tesla offer remedy out of warranty and that in accepting that "goodwill" they could neither join party nor testify in any legal action taken by other parties against Tesla related to this. Further, that in offering this "goodwill" they are not admitting fault, nor acknowledging any inherent defect.

      Yes, its written in legalsleaze, but presumably they paid the lawyers to make sure being "nice" didn't have any blowback. The dealers of other car brands would simply tell you to "get bent," and make you pay for the out of warranty work since the factory won't compensate them. This is a benefit of NOT having independent dealers in the loop. It's a shame this legal CYB is being contorted to attack Tesla rather than acknowledging the unheard of in the industry kindness you'd never see elsewhere unless NHTSA forced them to fix.

      You're really working to make Tesla come out nicely. Read the article; it's apparent the failure was due to wear and tear that was not normal and yet Tesla refused to make the repair, then offered a 50% of cost deal in exchange for keeping quiet about it. It suggests there is a systemic problem in the drive train, which is being reported not just by one guy, and Tesla not only refused to pay for the problem that was likely caused while under warranty but was not discovered until outside of warranty and then tried to bribe the guy into keeping quiet.

      If you have a fault that is discovered outside of warranty with a Honda or a Toyota, but that fault can be determined to be cause by abnormal wear and tear then it implies the root cause was still within warranty and they fix it. Warranties typically cover all problems when they happen regardless of when they are discovered; if they can be traced back to the warranty period it's still covered. So actually Tesla is being a total a-hole about this situation and then doubling down with an illegal gag order.

    16. Re:Look people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tesla disagrees with the claim about the NHTSA investigating them... https://www.teslamotors.com/bl...

      Oh, of course that is "just Tesla's word" and we shouldn't believe it. Right, got it.

      By the way, the article you linked in no way contradicts the Tesla blog -- you just have to pay attention to what is actually being said. The Tesla "agreement" did not attempt to gag the failure, but the replacement. Of course, this is being widely misrepresented so the USA Today report that says NHTSA told Tesla that restrictions on reporting failures would be unacceptable? Sure, they were being misdirected by the misrepresentations. Tesla will of course agree that it will not put any such restrictions in agreements -- and in fact can leave the present one in place. Because the NHTSA is utterly unconcerned about this complete non-event do not expect to hear anything more about it from the NHTSA.

      (wouldn't post anonymously, but I'd rather not undo moderation)

    17. Re:Look people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just a fyi:

      "in accepting that "goodwill" they could neither join party nor testify in any legal action taken by other parties against Tesla related to this"

      a NHTSA investigation is considered a legal action, taken by the government on behalf of the people it represents.

    18. Re:Look people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Careful there. There are rights guaranteed by the government, but if you waive those guarantees- unless the law *EXPLICITLY* says you can't, or it's something deep down in the Constitutional level (and even then as we'll see here in a moment...) you CAN waive at least part of those rights.

      For example. If your contract/agreement has a Choice of Venue clause in the document, you waive certain rights with regard to the Fourteenth Amendment that prohibit a litigant from haling you into their jurisdiction if you fully reside in one foreign to the jurisdiction in question. Generally, for Civil matters, if you didn't have a major business presence in the State in question at the time of the tort, you didn't get served in the forum State, it's held that you can have the proceeding dismissed without prejudice (and sometimes WITH...) because you're not IN the Forum in the first place and the Fourteenth Amendment places bars to action on the part of the Plaintiff to pursue the matter in their forum state because of this. But...only if you didn't agree to the Venue being a specific or a general jurisdiction within the forum in a Contract- at which point many (but not all) of the bars disappear. You agreed to that condition in the contract- so you're going to be held to it.

    19. Re:Look people by Tailhook · · Score: 1

      It seems NHTSA has already been to visit Tesla and remind that that such clauses that say you can't talk to NHTSA are not legal

      Like that matters to Tesla. They shit all over franchise laws and win most of the time. Why shouldn't they shit all over whatever laws or regulations make an NDA illegal? Golden boy Elon has bought all the D's he needs to insure that whatever some NHTSA functionary might be concerned about will get slow-walked and negotiated. If the NHTSA gets too enthusiastic about troubling Telsa et al. Harry Reid will have one of his fixers make a few calls get them back in line.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    20. Re:Look people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fucking marketing. I guarantee it. The wiser marketers have figured out people hate them and started calling themselves things like "risk management." If I ran a company like Tesla I would hold round the clock interviews for marketing positions just to compile a blacklist of people that would never be allowed to work for my company in any capacity.

    21. Re:Look people by AlexSasha · · Score: 1

      Are you stupid or something? You need many said "corporate businessweasels" to successfully sell $90k cars to single males with micropenises.

    22. Re:Look people by JustSomeProgrammer · · Score: 1

      Yeah this is probably the last time Tesla offers Goodwill since it bit them back so badly.

    23. Re:Look people by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Nope. The word "voluntarily" was in there. When the NHTSA comes knocking, you tell them you are not free to talk without a court action. 'Please subpoena me' and done. It's quite common to subpoena willing witnesses. I've seen it happen hundreds of times, and with a subpoena, you are no longer "voluntarily" testifying.

      The wording has nothing in it that would impede an investigation in any way, other than requiring a few seconds of paperwork.

    24. Re:Look people by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You can't notify the NHTSA, but if the NHTSA launches an actual investigation, you can tell them you have something to say, but can only say it if formally subpoenaed and deposed, which complies with the contract 100%, while aiding an investigation. So this doesn't impede an investigation by the NHTSA.

    25. Re:Look people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are several things Tesla (and any other automaker who uses NDAs) can do if someone breaks such an NDA...

      1. Attempt to get the money they paid for the repair back from the customer.
      2. Attempt to sue customer for libel/slander (whatever it's called when someone spreads falsehoods about a corporation... if the customer was in fact lying)
      3. Sue for any penalty they might have mentioned in the contract. In this case, nothing.

      None of these are likely to help Tesla in the case of a customer talking to the NHTSA, except maybe the first.

  5. A Boutique car for a Boutique crowd by Puls4r · · Score: 1, Informative

    Ford had a problem in the early 2000's with their suspension springs. They scrimped on the rust protection and the springs (out of warranty) would snap and the car would drop down onto the tires.

    There was no "I'm sorry" or "My bad". They did do a quiet recall to replace the springs. But that was pretty much the extent of it.

    Tesla helped paid for this. Then they STILL end up being villified for fixing something out of warranty. And contrary to the hack-job write up, this wasn't a non-disclosure agreement. It was an agreement that Tesla needs in this day and age so the owner understands they aren't admitting wrongdoing just by helping with the bill.

    But Tesla sells cars to the Boutique crowd. Mainly the I-have-more-money-than-sense crowd, and the I-am-right-no-matter-what crowd. You know who I'm talking about. Tesla understands that so they went out of their way to help. Any other auto maker would have told the customer to "it's out of warranty". The only story here is that it's got the word "Tesla" in it.

    1. Re:A Boutique car for a Boutique crowd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was an agreement that Tesla needs in this day and age so the owner understands they aren't admitting wrongdoing just by helping with the bill.

      That's quite a lot of spin... do you work in PR? No car company foots expensive repair bills for out-of-warranty cars, unless they themselves are responsible for the problem. Oh, and they refused to pay anything initially towards the repair, according to TFS.

    2. Re: A Boutique car for a Boutique crowd by Balthisar · · Score: 1

      Actually, all manufacturers have post warranty goodwill programs. It's not an automatic entitlement, but they do exist.

      --
      --Jim (me)
    3. Re:A Boutique car for a Boutique crowd by 0ld_d0g · · Score: 1

      Yeah, also, how is this a cover up? You have to first prove that it was negligence on their part.

  6. Re:You don't understand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He possibly was driving the wrong car. Its like the people that bought KIA the first year it came out. Unproven. As long as it lasts past the warranty period, its not Teslas responsibility. Are you mad when you buy a new phone, or laptop and the next years model comes out and is better? Yeah it happens, get over it. You bought it, you buy it, you accepted the warranty.

  7. Humm. THis may be Tesla's first major mistake by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Tesla is considered one of, if not the, best car makers going. Not because they are error free, but because they were backing their vehicles. That is also why we own a 2013 Tesla Model S.
    BUT, if Tesla is NOT backing these vehicles, and is trying to hide this like regular car makers, then, it will lead many, including us, to rethink ownership.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Humm. THis may be Tesla's first major mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How in the same post do you say "they were backing their vehicles" and "Tesla is NOT backing these vehicles". Make up your fucking mind. Are they backing the vehicles or not? You need to rethink your life, not just your ownership.

    2. Re:Humm. THis may be Tesla's first major mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This moron overpaid for a lemon.

    3. Re:Humm. THis may be Tesla's first major mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to read all of the words in the post, it says:
      "BUT, if Tesla is NOT backing these vehicles".

      The first two words, "BUT, if" make a very big difference in the meaning of the sentence.

    4. Re:Humm. THis may be Tesla's first major mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to have been confused by the terms "were" and "is not". Allow me to elucidate.

      "Were" means that, historically in the past, Tesla was in fact backing their vehicles.

      "Is not" implies that this state (of backing their vehicles) has changed, and that because this condition has changed, the cost-benefit analysis of owning the vehicle has also changed.

      To put it in simpler terms, if you set the ratio of Tesla's likelihood to back their vehicle as a variable (let's call it X), then we can measure the rate of change of x over time as being generally negative, and the instantaneous velocity of X is downwards.

      I know it's hard to grasp "X was 3, but now it's 2." You are a special snowflake, just like everyone else, and everyone cares deeply about you and likes you.

    5. Re:Humm. THis may be Tesla's first major mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple. They were originally perceived to be backing their vehicles. This turned out to be false.

    6. Re:Humm. THis may be Tesla's first major mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love it when twits like you are spectacularly wrong. The world would be a better place with you muted.

    7. Re:Humm. THis may be Tesla's first major mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WindBourne post times (so far):
      2009
      2011
      2013
      2016
      2044

      You posted 4x within 6 minutes.
      If I didn't know any better, I'd say you post with the zeal of a poorly paid shill.

      BTW, aren't you that moron that claimed Tesla Engineers are so incompetent that they swapped out $15k drive units from Model S, just because customers were hallucinating about hearing noises?

      moronic post by WindBourne

    8. Re:Humm. THis may be Tesla's first major mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, amightywind. Are you still around blowing the kock bros? And you are still getting your head pounded by them. You really have to stop. It is bad enough that you were sub-120 IQ prior to starting work at ULA, but now, you show all the signs of being below 100, if not 90.

    9. Re: Humm. THis may be Tesla's first major mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, what does Elon's cock taste like?

  8. Reminds me of this car I sold. by trout007 · · Score: 1

    I had a POS 92 Sunbird with 60k miles that ran like crap. I sold it to a guy for about $500 telling him honestly there is something wrong and he drove it and said he could fix it. 2 weeks later he calls bitching because he blew up the engine. I told him sorry but it was sold as is. Threatened to sue me but never did.

    Old cars breaks. If you want something that lasts forever too bad.

    --
    I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    1. Re:Reminds me of this car I sold. by starblazer · · Score: 1

      Whenever I sell a car, a bog standard bill of sale comes with it. Don't want to sign? You're not getting it.

      It just basically states my name, their name, make/model/year/vin, AS-IS, no warranty, buyer beware, date, and signatures. Not to be a douche, but to protect my rear in case they don't register it and then do something bad (crash/tickets/etc).

    2. Re:Reminds me of this car I sold. by trout007 · · Score: 1

      Good idea. This was pre internet so we just wrote AS-IS on the Title near the sales price.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    3. Re:Reminds me of this car I sold. by Computershack · · Score: 1

      I had a POS 92 Sunbird with 60k miles that ran like crap. I sold it to a guy for about $500 telling him honestly there is something wrong and he drove it and said he could fix it. 2 weeks later he calls bitching because he blew up the engine. I told him sorry but it was sold as is. Threatened to sue me but never did.

      Old cars breaks. If you want something that lasts forever too bad.

      I don't know how shit cars are made in the USA but over here in the UK they're expected to do at least 100,000 miles without any major faults, every manufacturer has a body corrosion warranty of at least a decade and even Kia offer a 100,000 mile warranty.

      --
      I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
    4. Re:Reminds me of this car I sold. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      In most states a personal car sale is AS-IS and you have no recourse even if the car explodes the second you hand over the cash.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    5. Re:Reminds me of this car I sold. by Lumpy · · Score: 0

      If it's a GM, it's 100% shit. they cant make a car that lasts 50,000 miles without trouble.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    6. Re:Reminds me of this car I sold. by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Guy is talking about a rebadged Chevy Cavalier from 24 years ago. Cavalier was never a very good car... built as cheaply as possible using the cheapest materials and processes available. Back then, the big U.S. manufacturers believed the typical economy car should be trouble free for 3 years and have an average life expectancy of about 7 years. Hell, if you had the V-6 you had to unbolt the engine from the chassis and tilt it forward to change the rear spark plugs. Quality and fuel economy are what allowed the Japanese manufacturers to grab a substantial share of the market. It caused everyone to step up their game. Your now benefiting from this, and from efforts to meet continuously improving fuel economy and safety targets. Now get off my lawn.

    7. Re:Reminds me of this car I sold. by kwbauer · · Score: 1

      SHHH. Don't tell my 180k Yukon and 130k Impala. They've had some issues recently but well beyond the 100k mark.

    8. Re: Reminds me of this car I sold. by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      American FWD's tend to be dogshit. RWD/4WD's with proper chassis (as opposed to unit body construction) are a different story; in particular, the 2007 to 2014 Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon are notoriously reliable and thus a favorite of the limo industry. On the other hand, my 2015 Suburban (with all its new tech under the hood) is an unknown variable, to say the least... however, I've put over 80k miles on mine and I've only needed to replace the shocks and do oil changes (hell, I'm still on the original front brake pads but then again, I know how to drive).

    9. Re:Reminds me of this car I sold. by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      Same for my poor abused 2002 GMC Sierra pickup with 135K miles. Coincidentally, I replaced the ball joints last November at about 125K miles (all four control arms, actually, because why not if you're already going to be in there), and the front wheel hubs in February (which took all of 15 minutes per side). It's been a remarkably trouble-free vehicle, all things considered.

      I'm also wondering how you drive a car long enough for a ball joint to break without noticing handling problems long before.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    10. Re:Reminds me of this car I sold. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      I don't know how shit cars are made in the USA but over here in the UK they're expected to do at least 100,000 miles without any major faults, every manufacturer has a body corrosion warranty of at least a decade and even Kia offer a 100,000 mile warranty.

      1. Vehicles in the USA today are regularly expected to last 100k unless abused.
      2. Corrosion wise, how fond of salt are your road departments? Some states in the USA don't use salt, and cars last a lot longer in them than those that use the stuff heavily.

      I was kind of shocked at how short the Tesla warranty is, my only supposition is that as a new car company they couldn't afford to offer a longer one without the data to support it. The other companies have decades of experience that they can use to estimate the costs of longer warranty periods. Tesla just doesn't have that yet. Give them another ~10 years, and they'll have it. I say 10 years because while 15k miles is the annual average for cars, so they should have most of the first year's models hitting 100k at around 7 years, the extra 3 provides additional data - the first few years of fixed production, a good selection of heavily driven cars, as well as 'babied' cars. Then they can consider extending it to a 8-10 year, 100k mile warranty.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    11. Re:Reminds me of this car I sold. by starblazer · · Score: 1

      You're right but we're talking about the general public here. You have to spell things out right in front of their noses. It also protects you against the ticket traceback.

      Easier to point out that their going to lose because they agreed to it on a piece of paper vs agreeing verbally, and then arguging it in court. People on the dole (around here, at least) can get small claims fees waived. So they got nothing better to do than to collect SSDI and sue people, even if they will lose.

  9. Nornal Maintance by fred911 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So the guy had a ball-joint failure at 70,000 miles. Ball-joints are replaceable maintenance items on suspensions of most cars. Vehicles with loose ball-joints have noisy front ends, unusual tire wear and steering anomalies.

      The real question one has to ask is when was the last time you had your vehicle inspected and had normal maintenance performed on it?

      If recently, you need to be looking at your technician and thanking the manufacturer for the good will repair.

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:Nornal Maintance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Stand down cowboy. Because failure of this component could cause catastrophic steering failure and an accident this automatically falls under a potential government required recall. I had the knuckle of my galant replaced at over warranty mileage for this very reason. This type of failure is also well documented as a recall is other vehicles. The problem also being loss of lubrication and seal resulting in failure, if this is in fact a maintenance item then Tesla will need to specify it as such and require inspection.

    2. Re:Nornal Maintance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Replacing a ball joint is just as much "normal maintenance" as replacing a CPU is normal maintenance.

    3. Re:Nornal Maintance by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      Any one-off failure can be considered an anomaly, but you can't summarily dismiss ball joint failures at 70,000 miles as acceptable because that is unusual even for cheap cars. We can't conclude anything without knowledge of more failures if they are happening.

    4. Re:Nornal Maintance by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Replacing a ball joint is just as much "normal maintenance" as replacing a CPU is normal maintenance.

      70k is a little early, but it's not uncommon for ball joints to fail. Most older Audi A8s are on their second set of front suspension links.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Nornal Maintance by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      How about the fact that he has been driving it ignoring the "thunk Thunk" noises for 5,000-10,000 miles? If a ball joint is failing it thunks. They guy ignored it for months.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    6. Re:Nornal Maintance by ishmaelflood · · Score: 1

      Nope. Failure of a spherical ball joint that works in compression does not necessarily cause anything other than a clunking noise, and bad static geometry (lots of camber in this case).

      These joints fail soon after the boots split, boots typically split because of overtravel, wrong material choice, or occasionally a moulding fault.

    7. Re:Nornal Maintance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I drive a 20 year old pickup with 230k that is still running on originals. There is nothing maintenance about replacing broken parts.

    8. Re:Nornal Maintance by fred911 · · Score: 1

      without knowledge of more failures if they are happening.

      Case in point is GMs s10 Blazers of the 90's. Most failed state inspection minimal play spec, GM stated it was normal. They all made noise.

        This specific case is of a Western PA driver who specifically mentions driving on a marginal road. Salt, snow and shitty roads require significantly more maintenance than driving 405 every day. This guy was gifted the repair.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    9. Re:Nornal Maintance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Always quick to victim blame. Were you the attending technician? Did you see the part in question? Got a pic at least? They can just snap, ya know. Old ass Ford trucks say "Hi".

    10. Re:Nornal Maintance by NormalVisual · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How about the fact that he has been driving it ignoring the "thunk Thunk" noises for 5,000-10,000 miles? If a ball joint is failing it thunks. They guy ignored it for months.

      I'm wondering about this as well. Short of a truly random catastrophic failure, ball joints (and most suspension components in general) give plenty of warning when there are problems. I'm no Tesla fanboy by any means, but any marginally attentive driver should have noticed handling issues well in advance of the failure. Rusty ball joints would have been making all kinds of noise and grinding sensations long before then.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    11. Re:Nornal Maintance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "wrong material choice" -> a.k.a. accountants making engineering decisions.

    12. Re:Nornal Maintance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have driven a car with broken rear suspension for months. The problem emerged only when a regular check-up revealed that some parts had snapped right through and the wheel was basically only kept in place because of the weight of the vehicle pushing it against the ground. Thinking back, the ride might have been a bit bumpier, but on today's roads it's hard to tell.
      Cars make all kinds of weird noises all the time. But unless you're a real car lover, or the sound is particularly loud, you aren't going to notice. For most of us a car is just an appliance to get us from A to B. To use a computer analogy, most people use their computers to browse the web, write a letter, play a game, that kind of thing. It's an appliance to help them get stuff done. They don't care in the slightest how it works and virtual memory and instruction cache are meaningless words.

    13. Re:Nornal Maintance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't Tesla being too nice to the guy? They could call him out on neglecting normal care and maintenance.

    14. Re:Nornal Maintance by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      How about the fact that he has been driving it ignoring the "thunk Thunk" noises for 5,000-10,000 miles? If a ball joint is failing it thunks. They guy ignored it for months.

      Its still a failure once it gets to the thunk noise. Regardless of any neglect by the owner afterward, you would not expect it at under 70K miles.

    15. Re:Nornal Maintance by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

      So the guy had a ball-joint failure at 70,000 miles.

      1996 Camry with 334,000 miles on it - and the original ball joints.

      Anyone defending such an early failure of a massively expensive car is either being an apologist or is stunningly clueless about modern automobiles.

    16. Re:Nornal Maintance by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I drive a 20 year old pickup with 230k that is still running on originals.

      And I would like to drive but cannot drive a 20 year old pickup with about the same because the engine has gone (block cavitation) and it is on at least its second set of ball joints, and they did not break. They just wore out, as ball joints do. Replacing them is a maintenance operation.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    17. Re:Nornal Maintance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like I posted above, I had one fail at 42000 on my f150, they can and do fail, especially on the god forsaken potthole ridden roads of the midwest.

    18. Re:Nornal Maintance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, so we're setting Tesla's 'wear and tear' for shit that shouldn't fail bar for "Audi"?

      Seems a little low. You wanna mark the depreciation against Chevy Cobalts too?

    19. Re:Nornal Maintance by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter how expensive the car is, if you drive it on rocky dirt roads that shit is gonna wear out, period.

      You don't know as much about vehicles as you think you do if you've never had to replace ball joints at or before 80k.

    20. Re:Nornal Maintance by fred911 · · Score: 1

      "1996 Camry with 334,000 miles on it - and the original ball joints."

      Bet you can't say the same for the strut bearings;-)

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    21. Re:Nornal Maintance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More lying won't help Tesla.

    22. Re:Nornal Maintance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whit a total of around three A8s sold, that hardly says anything. Ball joint failures are not common. It happens, but most cars still have their first set when they are recycled.

    23. Re:Nornal Maintance by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Whit a total of around three A8s sold, that hardly says anything.

      What? It was hardly a popular car, but they did manage to bang out thousands of them, and many of them are still running today. They tend to have electronics issues, but the engines are rock solid, especially the really really original ones (ABZ) - they have forged rods and pistons that later models lack for cost reasons and are good up to over 700HP on stock internals. People use them to build dragsters and whatnot now. And all the D2 A8s which are left are either on new links or need them.

      It's not unusual for a second or third owner to have to replace some ball joints. I've done it on several cars now.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  10. Re:Cue up Elon's fanbois by WindBourne · · Score: 2

    Right. And that is why Honda has the reputation that they have. Tesla has had some initial quality issues, BUT, they have stood behind the vehicle and their work. Otherwise, they will gain the same reputation as Honda, Toyota, MB, Audi, BMW, Ford, GM, etc.
    Oh, and trying to hide this, is exactly what the others do.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  11. Propaganda wars by axewolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Which rich asshole's agenda should I fall in line with?

    1. Re: Propaganda wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who cares?! They are ruining America! They took 'r jerbs! Revolt! Rebel! Disobey your corporate masters! What about the children?!

      Did I miss one?

    2. Re:Propaganda wars by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      1) Assholes are assholes, regardless of money. I've known plenty of poor assholes. In fact, most of the assholes I know are entitlement Pricks who think the world owes them a living .

      2) Why the Jealousy? Go out and get rich or die trying.

      3) Why do you have to pick a side in a battle that isn't yours and has nothing to do with you? Unless there is some fundamental "right" that needs defending, in which case, pick that side regardless of how rich or assholish the person is, or how nice/poor the other person is.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    3. Re:Propaganda wars by firewrought · · Score: 1
      Hmmm - which artificially constructed reality do you want?
      • Elon Musk - sci-fi tommorrowland (spaceships, flying cars, hypertubes, oh my!)
      • Donald Trump - glorious restoration of nationalist white American yesteryear (lock down our borders, jobs, bathrooms, women)
      • Bernie Sanders - socialist safespace for millennials (door prizes for everyone!!)
      • Hillary Clinton - corrupt corporate plutocracy [e.g., status quo] (push that middle class down below the poverty line boys!)
      • Zombie Steve Jobs - glitterland (my gadget looks better than her gadget)
      --
      -1, Too Many Layers Of Abstraction
  12. 3 year old car with 70,000 miles? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Either this guy is a seriously hardcore commuter or the "excessive wear" remark is entirely warranted.

  13. DON'T DO THE CRIME IF YOU CAN"T DO THE TIME !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't Do It !!

  14. Nissian is beter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Had Maxima with 160K miles, had two injectors fail, then a month later 4 more. Expected for 160k miles. 13 months and 13kM later the 4 secondary faiil, 1 moth and 1kM later than warranty. Parts were serialized (ie 1,2,3,4) so it was bad batch. Nissan paid the whole bill for 6 new injectors and labor. Basically the engine had to pulled and torn down, since 3 injectors are against the firewall. They even repaid for rental car. Total about $4k.

    No vontrXTS, no agreement, They just did it, Did talk to them for two day at corporate - I think it was serial\l numbers WAS THE KEY. All from same lot.

    Hated LOSING it In a car crash at 260kM. Person turned left in front of me, ceossing my path on "blind" hill in the rain. Got $4k in the settlement.

    1. Re:Nissian is beter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that can't be right. Somebody above just said a car company would never do that, and surely they weren't talking out of their ass!

    2. Re:Nissian is beter by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      My mother had an engine fail in an Audi at about 10% over warranty age and miles. Audi paid 0%. Known issue. Not technically recalled, but TSB on it. Sold for scrap.

    3. Re:Nissian is beter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why didn't she just replace the engine?

    4. Re:Nissian is beter by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The cost of the engine replacement was close enough to the value of the ar that it was better to sell for scrap than repair and sell for market price.

    5. Re:Nissian is beter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a two-year old Audi? Which model?

  15. Maybe this is bad...but I'll never know by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

    Maybe Tesla a did a bad thing, but the post is way too long to read. Can we get an editor please?

    1. Re:Maybe this is bad...but I'll never know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tl;dr = man has problem with 70K mile Tesla. Car is out of warranty. Tesla offers to foot half repair bill in exchange for man's silence. NHTSA steps in to remind Tesla that is not a legal request and any such request is not legally binding upon man.

    2. Re:Maybe this is bad...but I'll never know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe Tesla a did a bad thing, but the post is way too long to read. Can we get an editor please?

      Shuddup!

      They might bring back Timmay!

    3. Re:Maybe this is bad...but I'll never know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh Tesla did a bad thing you can be sure of that!
      Why do you think the other car manufacturers hate them?
      Why do you think the car dealers hate them too?, and the oil companies?..and the list goes on
      Do you really believe that so many good people would hate them if they weren't un-American evil commies?
      I bet you didn't know Tesla made illegal to wear arm in their cars, did you? and that their best customer is crocked Hillary?
      Cmoon, every body knows that the Tesla guy is a Russian muslin..where do you thing the sales profits are going too?
      Ask yourself How may innocent children must die before Tesla is stopped

  16. TREAD Act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully Tesla is aware of this:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Recall_Enhancement,_Accountability_and_Documentation_Act

  17. Re:Cue up Elon's fanbois by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not a fan boy, I dont even want a Tesla. But I dont understand how this a story, but if my Honda broke after 70,000 fucking miles nobody bats an eye.

    "Wheel fell off at highway speed when the suspension failed" is a bit more serious than a simple "broke".

    Your lame strawman is lame.

    If true, NHTSA is going to shit all over Tesla.

    Because if this is true, it's worse than the exploding airbags - those were only a danger to the driver sitting right behind it.

  18. What's next? EULAs for Cars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck you Tesla!

  19. I bet the cheap bastard... by AmazingRuss · · Score: 2

    ... that only offered to pay half is cleaning out his desk right now.

    1. Re:I bet the cheap bastard... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Why? Because some crappy journalism with an agenda write an article that skirted the main issue which was that Tesla paid for an out of warranty maintenance related item?

    2. Re:I bet the cheap bastard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, because he violated the law by trying to cover up a safety issue.

    3. Re:I bet the cheap bastard... by AmazingRuss · · Score: 1

      ...and it's on slashdot. Definitely worth more than $1500 in bad PR. The motivation of the journalist is irrelevant, and only neckbeards say 'agenda'.

    4. Re:I bet the cheap bastard... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Really? I wish I could grow a beard.

      The fact that it's on Slashdot shows two things: 1. Slashdot posts any story with a Tesla angle regardless of the credibility of the source, and 2. We only read it for the comments, comments which show the real issue quite clearly. This is more a form of free damage control.

      As for firing a person over a PR non-issue, remind me to never consider working for you. Your reactions show you're incapable of dealing with humans. You should only ever employ machines, preferably maintenance free ones with no moving parts.

  20. substandard parts by siamesevodka · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The ball joints were probably sourced from china. I have collector cars and this has been going on in this area as well. If Tesla would use Moog ball joints instead of lowest bidder they might have better results. That is what we found to cure early failure. Ball joints should last 100,000 miles easily if they are quality and your not hitting every pot hole in town every day. Recent conversion to the chinese market for this item has magnified issues of ball joints not lasting as long. I have been told by the local big box appliance store not to expect anymore than 8 years out of any major appliance you buy. That way we can squeeze more buying into your life span. After all we are the carcass everybody else feeds on. On any major purchase source the forum for that particular item.It might cut down on the jackals feeding on your money for a few years. It will alert you to the issues with that particular item.

    1. Re:substandard parts by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Informative

      The ball joints were probably sourced from china. I have collector cars and this has been going on in this area as well. If Tesla would use Moog ball joints instead of lowest bidder they might have better results.

      Read the box next time you buy a Moog ball joint... MADE IN CHINA. Moog quality has reportedly gone into the toilet like everyone else. Sadly, it really is everyone. Super-expensive TRW and Lemfoerder suspension links are also shit now. It looks like literally the only non-shit option is to buy adjustable links with replaceable ball joints, where that is even possible. I think I can get two of my four links like that...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:substandard parts by ishmaelflood · · Score: 1

      Plus one on the first part of that post.

    3. Re:substandard parts by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      The Moog parts I've used have been pretty good, but I usually prefer Timken if they're available. I've had to work on machines in a few Timken factories, and they really do seem to give a damn about quality.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    4. Re:substandard parts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moog ball joints are made in China, bro.

    5. Re:substandard parts by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The Moog parts I've used have been pretty good, but I usually prefer Timken if they're available.

      I agree, especially their bearings. Most other bearings are garbage now. Timken or SKF all the way. I used to prefer Moog myself...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:substandard parts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is that there are good Chinese parts and there are really bad Chinese parts with pretty much nothing in between quality wise.

    7. Re:substandard parts by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      People looking for lowest price, usually get what they deserve. Quality still counts in some places, and a jump in quality usually doesn't cost nearly as much as replacing crappy products four times as often.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    8. Re:substandard parts by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      People looking for lowest price, usually get what they deserve.

      Brands that were formerly good have gone to crap, even ones which have not lowered their prices like Moog.

      There's no mystery about making a decent suspension arm... Yet the big names are failing.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:substandard parts by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I suspect that 3D printing and CNC laser Mills will be changing all sorts of industries. Including AutoParts.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    10. Re:substandard parts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ball joints were probably sourced from china. I have collector cars and this has been going on in this area as well. If Tesla would use Moog ball joints instead of lowest bidder they might have better results.

      American crap is rarely better than Chinese crap.

  21. The travesty! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TLDR; Millions of airbags defects, but Tesla bad, Bad, BAD!!

  22. Not so "maintenance free" as you'd heard... by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 1

    People: Just because there are fewer parts to break doesn't mean there are no parts that need maintenance due to wear. A chassis lube should have been performed (to include suspension parts) at leas 5-7 times in that 70,000 miles, at any one of which the technician would have noted the rust. It was good of them to split the cost on repairs given that the owner of the car made the damage vastly worse because he failed to maintain it.

    But, I don't know that I've ever heard of any other car dealer or manufacturer requiring some sort of omerta in any of the many bajillions of previous analogous situations where a dealership just decided to eat part of the cost of a repair for customer goodwill. It seems like they'd want just the opposite: For you to brag to your friends how awesome it was that Tesla bailed your negligent ass out to the tune of nearly $1600.

    --
    Who did what now?
    1. Re:Not so "maintenance free" as you'd heard... by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Informative

      A chassis lube should have been performed (to include suspension parts) at leas 5-7 times in that 70,000 miles,

      No. No modern vehicle ships with greaseable joints. They all have sealed "lifetime" joints which last roughly 50-150k.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Not so "maintenance free" as you'd heard... by fnj · · Score: 1

      A chassis lube should have been performed (to include suspension parts) at leas 5-7 times in that 70,000 miles

      Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk. I am an old guy who remembers the advertising sign "Mobilubrication" at the gas stations in the 1950s, so you tickled my funny bone with your reference to antiquated, long-outdated requirements. "Chassis lube" hasn't been a thing for a LONG, LONG time now. Valve jobs and/or ring jobs are not an expected thing every 50,000 or so miles any more, either. Heck, there aren't even any service stations left as part of gas stations. Hell of a job finding buggy whips, too.

    3. Re:Not so "maintenance free" as you'd heard... by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      Which is part of the reason I replaced the suspension arms with aftermarket parts when it came time to replace the ball joints in my truck. Now everything is greaseable. :-D

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    4. Re:Not so "maintenance free" as you'd heard... by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 1

      Ahem.... Not universally true: Some of us aren't running stock suspension, and do need to lubricate.

      --
      Who did what now?
    5. Re:Not so "maintenance free" as you'd heard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A chassis lube should have been performed (to include suspension parts) at leas 5-7 times in that 70,000 miles

      Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk. I am an old guy who remembers the advertising sign "Mobilubrication" at the gas stations in the 1950s, so you tickled my funny bone with your reference to antiquated, long-outdated requirements. "Chassis lube" hasn't been a thing for a LONG, LONG time now. Valve jobs and/or ring jobs are not an expected thing every 50,000 or so miles any more, either. Heck, there aren't even any service stations left as part of gas stations. Hell of a job finding buggy whips, too.

      This guy probably also still changes his oil every 3,000 miles as well despite that most cars made since 2000 have service intervals of 5,000 to 10,000 miles. There was one "car guy" on YouTube that once he started insisting that it still needs to be done at 3,000 no matter what I looked for different DIY channels as who knows what other outdated advice he was giving.

    6. Re:Not so "maintenance free" as you'd heard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most cars from the last 15 years have oil change intervals at 30 000-50 000km, generally longer for diesel engines than for petrol engines. A few, mainly French and Japanese brands, have 15 000km intervals. Anything less than that only applies to classic cars, which often use mineral oils instead of synthetics.

  23. Re:Cue up Elon's fanbois by Computershack · · Score: 1

    But I dont understand how this a story, but if my Honda broke after 70,000 fucking miles nobody bats an eye.

    Kia offer 100,000 mile 7 year warranties. Ball joint failures like this are extremely uncommon especially at 70,000 miles. Thats the kind of failure you get at double that mileage on a vehicle that gets driven down dirt tracks and never ever sees a mechanic.

    --
    I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
  24. Rustbelt... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guaranty the owner lives near the East coast, or somewhere where they salt the roads during snow/ice conditions. Or the guy drove it in the ocean. That's typical for rustbelt cars, I've seen worse with less mileage.

  25. Unheard of? by guruevi · · Score: 2

    - GM had 5 confidential settlements and engineers knowing about their ignition switch problems for 10 years before they even changed anything or did a recall.
    - Nissan had confidential settlements regarding airbags deploying too violently before issuing a recall

    There are law firms specializing in confidential settlements with car manufacturers after accidents. People died in car accidents and these manufacturers were allowed to settle with an NDA attached. This poor Tesla just had some suspension breaking, something that you see quite a bit if you live near a street with lots of potholes, a relatively high concentration of GM vehicles.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  26. Re:Cue up Elon's fanbois by confused+one · · Score: 1

    Kia and Hyundai offers 100,000 mile 7 year warranties because their early products were SO bad that they typically were scrap by 100,000 miles. Catastrophic CV joint failures between 70-90k miles were a common problem in first generation Hyundai cars. They had to offer this warranty to attract people back to the brand, to convince them they might have fixed their problems and would stand behind their product. Once they offered the 100,000 mile warranty, it was impossible to reduce it for risk of a perception that their quality had dropped. Having had to diagnose and repair a number of them in the '90s, I still won't go near the brand.

  27. The car industry is tough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The car industry is quite ruthless. The big car companies compete intensely on price. The public expects the vehicle to last for 2 decades, and over 150,000 miles.

    Elon benefited a lot in being in the right place at the right time for Tesla. Electric cars, and batteries were worked on in the 70s. In the late 80s, GM was curious to see if a solar car could work. They financed the Sunraycer, and it was a usable car. Inspired, GM then designed the GM Impact. Later, the California government would extort the car companies into making some electric cars. The EV-1 was developed, and customer tested... and correctly found to be too expensive, and limited in functionality with 90s technology. In order to convince the California government, it did PR, and shredded the cars, or rendered them inoperable: a wise decision for those government bureaucrats.

    The electric car engineering expertise funded by GM lived on! An engineer on the Impact founded AC Propulsion in 92, whom developed electric car drivetrains. They later took a Piontek Sportech kit car, and put in electric drivetrain into it, and called it the tZero. It used lead acid batteries, just like the GM EV-1. In the early 00s, Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning found out about, and paid for a custom tZero, with lithium ion batteries instead. It turns out, it made for a decent electric sports car. Inspired, they drew up a business plan, and cofounded Tesla Motors, and went looking for venture capital. An Elon Musk became an early investor. Feature creep occurred, partly due to Elon's insistence, and costs went up. Tesla grew too big for Eberhard to be comfortable managing, and Elon Musk eventually took over.

    Lithium ion batteries first reached the market in 1991. I guess they became long lived enough for electric cars in the mid 00s... a few years before the release of the Tesla Roadster. I will be impressed if Tesla will be able to compete on the low end in cost and reliability against Nissan and GM.

  28. Re:Rustbelt... is steel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The rustbelt has to do with dead and dying manufacturing areas. Coastal regions have nothing to do with that. Stop smoking pot and study.

  29. Assault on his rights, give me a break by dumky2 · · Score: 1

    "it represents a potential assault by Tesla Motors on the right of vehicle owners to report defects to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's complaint database"

    I have a right to drive a car. Which means I have the right not to drive a car, or not to drive one conditionally on some contract.
    In other words, a right is not a right if I don't get to decide whether to exercise it. If a person agrees based on some conditions not to exercise a right, there is no "assault on his rights".

    --
    These comments are mine; I do not speak for my employer.
    1. Re:Assault on his rights, give me a break by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You actually do not have a right to drive a car. Driving is a privilege, not a right. (in the US, anyway)

  30. Re:Nornal Maintance (I *AM* A Mechanic) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Been working on cars for decades.
    I inspected this guy's pictures (4 uniques in total)...

    His sway bar link rubbers look fine, link ball condition undeterminable by the picture, the white chalky substance may be road salt, which he needs to underbody car wash off at least once after the rains clean the road for the spring, preferably a few times during winter.
    The damaged shock spring assembly is almost assuredly caused by the arm and knuckle banging around during the event, however bellows clamps do come loose often on cars which is harmless other than early shock wear.

    On to the ball joint... it's completely dry and rusted the fuck out! This only happens when the boot rips / deteriorates opening up letting water in and grease out. Boots take a lot of road grit / hazards. There also does not appear to be any grease fitting, it either fell or was knocked out, or the design did not include one (don't be a cheapass, buy replacement joints with grease fittings and grease them regularly). The pin of the ball shows rotational marring / scarring, this ball is a clamp and bolt type, without seeing the entire surface of the pin, I'll say that's normal rotation of the rubber boot, perhaps further scarred by unusual bitethrough of the retaining spring through the rubber. More importantly, the neck of the ball shows what looks like substantial hammer flaring into a thin sharp ridge, caused by development of severe axial or lateral play.

    FACT... His vehicle had 70,000 miles. It is normal for ball joints to fail around this time, especially "maintenance free" ones, or unmaintained ones.
    FURTHERMORE, THE BOTTOM LINE... cheapo factory joint or not... this owner is a *COMPLETE IDIOT* for not noticing and repairing the OBVIOUS THUNKING and VIBRATION FEELING, and sound, and steering drift, that would have been coming from his frontend through the steering wheel, pedals, and floorboards for a MONTH or more, before the wear reached separation and thus safety limits. Even passengers can notice wear that bad.

    People, please, parts wear out and fail, so when your car is doing weird stuff, or passengers or other drivers tell you stuff, GET YOUR RIDE CHECKED OUT before shit like this happens!!! And if you're dumb as rocks about cars, have someone competant check your ride every 15k.
    Unfortunately electrics don't need oil changes every 3-5k, which is where my courtesy check comes in while waiting for the drainout. So a mech isn't going to be seeing Teslas up in the air till it's time for pads, potentially at tens of thousands of miles.
    If I was his mechanic and saw this, he'd know about it immediately, be chastised, and I'd make him order me to allow him to drive it off the lot.

  31. Because internet unicorns. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    You don't have to follow the rules if you're disruptive.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:Because internet unicorns. by michelcolman · · Score: 5, Informative

      Tesla has a slightly different take on this story which is worth reading. I\m not saying they are necessarily right and the customer is necessarily wrong, just that it could be useful to hear both sides of the story:

      - They haven't seen this problem on any other cars (and they would know as they own all service centers).
      - The car in question experienced a very unusual use case, it was regularly used on a long dirt road and was caked in dirt (it took two tow trucks to retrieve it, one to get it to the highway and another to get it to the service center)
      - The NHTSA has not actually opened even a preliminary evaluation
      - Their document would not prevent the customer from talking to the NHTSA.
      - Tesla regularly meets with the NHTSA and has often issued recalls for defects before they ever became anything close to an actual safety issue
      - The blogger who fabricated this issue (sic) is the same person who previously wrote a blog titled "Tesla Death Watch", starting on May 19 2008.

      (Those are just a few highlights, read the to make up your own mind)

    2. Re:Because internet unicorns. by Nehmo · · Score: 1

      - The blogger who fabricated this issue (sic) is the same person who previously wrote a blog titled "Tesla Death Watch"

      What's the "sic" for? I don't see the error.

      --
      (||) Nehmo (||)
    3. Re:Because internet unicorns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reality distortion field.

    4. Re:Because internet unicorns. by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      The word "sic" does not necessarily point out an error, it just clarifies that that was the way Tesla wrote it ("fabricated").

      "Sic" is just latin for "like that".

    5. Re:Because internet unicorns. by Nehmo · · Score: 2

      The word "sic" does not necessarily point out an error, it just clarifies that that was the way Tesla wrote it ("fabricated").

      "Sic" is just latin for "like that".

      The Latin adverb sic means "thus"; in full: sic erat scriptum, "thus was it written".

      Simple quoting doesn't require a sic. If I were highlighting the source of the word "fabricated", I would have perhaps used [Tesla's characterization] after the word.

      --
      (||) Nehmo (||)
    6. Re:Because internet unicorns. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Bollocks. It means "I spotted the grammatical/spelling error in the original, but I'm reproducing it as-is in the interests of accuracy".

      Hipsters use it to mean "I don't agree with this", but they're wrong, as usual.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    7. Re:Because internet unicorns. by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      Doesn't have to be a grammatical or spelling error, it could be any kind of error.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  32. Re:You dumb bastard! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank you for validating the entirety of the post to which you responded. If you can't attack the message, attack the messenger.

    Idiot.

  33. Re:Cue up Elon's fanbois by Zxern · · Score: 1

    It's not the defect itself that's the story here. It's the bribe/gag order that's the story. They won't cover the defect, fine. But to offer him money to keep quiet about it, that's a big deal!

  34. Tesla responded to this issue in a blog post by whh3 · · Score: 5, Informative

    They just responded to this issue on their blog:

    https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/grain-of-salt

    Interesting how they call out the author for his previous "death watch" on the company.

    As usual, there are three sides to every story: yours, mine and the truth.

    Will

    --
    remove nospam. to email!
    1. Re:Tesla responded to this issue in a blog post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What an utterly disgusting blog entry. They outright lie about many of the facts of this incident, they frame things every car manufacturer does as somehow unique to Tesla and they attack the messenger who happens to be one of the few car industry reporters who actually does his job regarding Tesla, rather than drinking the Kool-Aid and spreading the word.

      I don't mind that Tesla makes crap cars, but I do mind their lying and their coverup attempts. Lying about a coverup attempt is a new low.

    2. Re:Tesla responded to this issue in a blog post by eumoria · · Score: 1

      "Recently, a Model S was in a very high speed accident in Germany that caused it to fly 82 feet through the air, an event that would likely be fatal in vehicles not designed to the level of safety of a Tesla."

      Where's the dashcam footage for that lol. Holy moly

    3. Re:Tesla responded to this issue in a blog post by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      As usual, there are three sides to every story: yours, mine and the truth.

      Tesla's story appears to be much closer to the truth. This guy's ball joint failed after years of driving down a very long dirt road. The dirt will be abrasive to any ball joint. I used to live down a very long gravel road (3.5 miles) for many years, and a few parts on my car had to be replaced due to the damage done by dirt grinding.

      That being said, Tesla's statement that they never mentioned NHTSA is disingenuous. They know full well how that contract reads when it says, "...and the incidents or claims leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill." The gag agreement is the only Tesla behavior that rubs me the wrong way.

    4. Re:Tesla responded to this issue in a blog post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They outright lie about many of the facts of this incident

      Which facts are they lying about?

      they frame things every car manufacturer does as somehow unique to Tesla

      That is neither new nor particular to Tesla or the automotive industry in general. I did cringe a bit when reading some of it though.

      and they attack the messenger who happens to be one of the few car industry reporters who actually does his job regarding Tesla

      I agree it seemed unnecessary, given the rest of their rebuttal seems pretty sound. However I do wonder that the guy is a "car industry reporter" as you say, apparently thought Tesla was going to fail, yet still bought a Tesla. It might be a pretty rationale assumption that the dude would have made a giant fuss about absolutely anything that happened, and figured he could twist the good will gesture into more page views.

    5. Re:Tesla responded to this issue in a blog post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They just responded to this issue on their blog:

      https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/grain-of-salt

      Interesting how they call out the author for his previous "death watch" on the company.

      As usual, there are three sides to every story: yours, mine and the truth.

      Will

      Yeah, disparaging the guy complaining and attacking his credibility while threatening legal action and gag orders. That makes Tesla look like a bunch of total saints compared to this guy.

      This is in the Silicon Valley playbook: publicly condemn and personally malign any individual who tarnishes your image, and it works really well when you're covering up how bad your tech is and how little substance is to your hype claims. It worked really well for Theranos too.

    6. Re:Tesla responded to this issue in a blog post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tesla was lying about the dirt road. The guy lives in the middle of a town. (source)

  35. Re:Lemons by vtcodger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yeah, I'm mildly surprised. Tesla doesn't MAKE ball joints. It BUYS them from someone and they probably are not custom engineered for the unique needs of Tesla's vehicle. Tesla does design the suspension, but this sounds like a defective part rather than an overstressed part. Overall, Ball joint failure in modern cars is uncommon. Which is a very good thing as it often causes complete steering failure and can kill you if the ball joint fails at speed or at the wrong time and place.

    BTW, I'm not a big fan of Tesla or Elon Musk. I think electric cars (as opposed to hybrids) are a poor choice for cold climates or long distance driving, and I think Musk is a con artist who will tell us anything he thinks we're dumb enough to believe if it is to his advantage. But his companies do seem to do decent engineering.

    As for the agreement. The no admission of fault part seems reasonable. The confidentiality clause seems to me to be unconscionable and if this crap is enforcable, laws need to be changed to make it unenforcable.

    --
    You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
  36. Tesla response: Niedermayer.in action by Framboise · · Score: 1

    Tesla responded today:

      "It's worth noting that the blogger who fabricated this issue... is Edward Niedermayer. This is the same gentle soul who previously wrote a blog titled 'Tesla Death Watch,' which starting on May 19, 2008 was counting the days until Tesla's death."

    1. Re:Tesla response: Niedermayer.in action by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A very childish response, as we have grown to expect from Tesla.

  37. Yes, welcome to automotive liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tesla seems to be a poster child for everyone who thinks they are the greatest thing for automotive since the combustion engine. But you cannot have issues and tell customers not to say anything or report the issues to the NHTSA. Especially when it is a safety concern that may affect not only owners but others in the motoring public. Remember GM and the ignition switch? Just because Tesla is the Golden child of the environmentalists, does not give it a pass for bad behavior in treating safety defects. If it wants to sell cars in a large volume, it needs to be a real automotive company and face the good and the bad. Sadly, the more I hear and read about Tesla the less I think they can handle being a car company. If they cannot handle things now, I question how they can handle a higher volume auto production?

  38. Cheap by Apostalypse · · Score: 1

    I'm less surprised that they want to keep it quiet, than that they thought they could buy someone who can afford a $100,000 car for $1500. Why be so cheap? instead, they just pissed him off and now it's all over the internet. Also, calling it "goodwill" is perverse, coupled with the gagging threats. If it truly was goodwill, and they were confident they weren't liable, they why bother silencing the owner, shouldn't it be heralded as excellent customer service? They can't have it both ways. Either they truly believe they are in the clear, and are being super generous so all the passive aggressive legalese is unnecessary , or they realise there is a high likelihood of liability on their behalf, in which case, don't offer a settlement that still leaves the owner substantially out of pocket. it's a dick move, however you view it.

  39. Propaganda by alibatur · · Score: 1

    Which rich asshole's agenda should I fall in line with?

  40. Re:Cue up Elon's fanbois by tkrotchko · · Score: 1

    "And that is why Honda has the reputation that they have."

    As one of the most reliable cars on the market?

    Tesla is not considered a reliable car as shown Consumer Reports owner surveys.

    --
    You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
  41. Wow, What a Flame War by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    Let's look at the facts:

    The ball joint and control arm failed. It was found that the ball joint had an excessive amount of rust, which means that there was moisture incursion.

    The ball joints used on the Tesla are sealed and do not have a grease fitting. They are not meant to be serviceable.

    This leads to the logical conclusion that the ball joint was somehow defective, or was made defective at some point (i.e.the seal was broken).

    Either moisture got in at the factory, or it got in post-production as if something tore the rubber seal.

    In any case, this guy's car broke out of warranty and Tesla begrudgingly offered to pay half of the repair cost, and was a huge cock-gobbler about it.

    So, what do we know?

    1) The owner of this car is a bit of a dick for expecting warranty service out of warranty on a wearout item

    2) Tesla is a bit of a dick for attaching a rather insane legal agreement for what amounts to an at-cost repair of the car

    3) A bunch of Internet Commandos are taking sides in an all out war from Mom's Basement over who is "right" or "wrong" in this disagreement between two assholes.

    What's the lesson to be learned here? If you don't do regular maintenance on your car, it will break. Duh.

  42. "Regular maintenance" by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1

    And what is "regular" maintenance on a grease fitting-free sealed and not serviceable component?

    Is it anything like the "tuneup" the President of the U.S. was recommending for owners of cars with 100,000 mile spark plugs controlled from a sensor buried in the flywheel housing?

    And criticizing car owners "for expecting warranty service out of warranty" is not "taking sides in an all out war from Mom's Basement" when in response to regulatory pressure and market competition, there is ample precedent for automakers offering outright repair/replacement for items out of warranty that fail well below expectations given the current state of technology?

    The "vibe" I am getting about Tesla is that they are a startup automotive company in a field of alternatives with decades of experience with how things break and how long they last and how to engineer things to tolerate hard use and go the distance? That in being an "early adopter" of a high battery-capacity high-performance all-electric car, owners are taking the risk associated with a not-very-high-volume-production not-on-the-market-for-very-long car?

    And that for the price of one of those babies (the car, not the owner), you could get a Camry for each of Mom, Pop, Junior, and Sis? And that this huge financial outlay may make an owner, don't know, feel "entitled"? And "dudes on Slashdot" are rallying to Tesla's defense because they regard this story as ammunition for right-wing green-energy haters?

    And that 3100 dollars is a bit "stiff" to replace one failed control arm and ball joint?

    1. Re:"Regular maintenance" by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      >> And what is "regular" maintenance on a grease fitting-free sealed and not serviceable component?

      I can't tell if you are asking that seriously or not. But, assuming you honestly don't know, "regular maintenance" on ball joints is to replace them when they wear out, which is evidenced by improper motion of the joint when the suspension is unloaded.

      There are many wear-out-and-replace parts on a car, even one without an internal combustion engine. Shocks, struts, strut spring seats, strut steering bearings, control arm bushings, ball joints, steering bushings, sway bar and sway bar end link bushings, motor mount bushings (I honestly don't know if Tesla's electric motors ride on bushing mounts, though), and in recent times, brake rotors and even whole transmissions (Ford 6F35 and Aisin Warner AW55 as examples) have made it onto the "wear out and replace" list of maintenance items.

      A long time ago, most joints on a vehicle were not sealed and had grease fittings so that the joints could be cleaned out and relubricated. These types of joints lasted forever with regular maintenance. Everything started to go sealed/maintenance free when people got tired of constantly having to have this maintenance done, and demanded cars you could drive 50,000 miles without having to lay a wrench on except for oil changes. That figure today is more like 150,000 miles, and some car companies even warrant their drivetrains for 100k miles or 10 years.

      $3,100 is actually insane for a control arm and ball joint. $310 would still be insane for a single side. I think I paid about $300 for a set of both front LCAs and ball joints on my Volvo, and that's a Volvo so it's already expensive compared to, say, a Chevy Cobalt.

      None of this or your response is relevant to the fact that all parties involved are being dicks to each other about it, and to the fact that the Mom's Basement Commando crowd is all too willing to go to war over it.

    2. Re:"Regular maintenance" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm also surprised owners freak out when repairing a part on their $100,000+ car costs several thousand dollars. A friend of mine who had a Mercedes AMG car... I forget what model 63 or 64'ish, had all break pad & rotors replaced. I recall he said the job cost over $7000.

  43. Re: Lemons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Not really a lemon issue, but a maintance issue. There is usually a cover as part of a ball joint, to protect the ball joint, and a zero fitting, to lubricate. In the 80's the zerks were only on factory, not replacement ball joints, but 3500 credit to fix the problem? That's highway robbery. It's closer to a thousand, and usually even much less to have it done in any fly by night BMW or Mercedes joint. Shucks even Saab was less then that.

  44. Tesla has issued a statement by b0bby · · Score: 4, Informative

    I noticed this article this morning:
    http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/10...

    Seems Tesla disagrees with the Daily Kanban's report:

    "With respect to the car that is discussed in the blog post that led to yesterday's newsthe suspension ball joint experienced very abnormal rust. We haven't seen this on any other car, suggesting a very unusual use case. The car had over 70,000 miles on it and its owner lives down such a long dirt road that it required two tow trucks to retrieve the car. (One to get the car to the highway and one to get it from the highway to the service center.) When we got the car, it was caked in dirt."

    Secondly, Tesla said that the NHTSA had not opened any investigation and hadn't even started a so-called "preliminary evaluation", which is the "lowest form of formal investigatory work it does". The car maker said on April 20 the regulator asked about its suspension as part of a "routine screening" and on April 30, Tesla complied.

    "NHTSA has since told us that we have cooperated fully and that no further information is needed. Neither before nor after this information was provided has NHTSA identified any safety issue with Tesla's suspensions. This can be confirmed with NHTSA," Tesla said.

  45. Re:Lemons by s122604 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I'm mildly surprised. Tesla doesn't MAKE ball joints.

    You shouldn't be. Car manufactures are in large part system integrators. It's been this way since the 80's, and the trend has only increased recently. Especially ancillary things like brakes, ball joints, alternators, whathaveyou; they are generally bought, not made..

    That is why when you have something like a defective Takata airbag, you see it showing up in Japanese makes, domestics, etc...

  46. Re: Lemons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    little more info that may justify the repair cost, from the Tesla Motor Club forum OP:

    "The total cost is 3100 dollars. The need to replace three of the four front control arms, EG upper and lower a-arm on the left side and the upper a-arm on the right side. It was the left side that failed. The control arm ball joint is an integral part of the a-arm or as Tesla refer Control arm."

  47. Re:Lemons by Nehmo · · Score: 1

    BTW, I'm not a big fan of Tesla or Elon Musk. I think electric cars (as opposed to hybrids) are a poor choice for cold climates or long distance driving..

    Why would an e-vehicle be at a disadvantage in a cold climate?

    Starting an electric motor is same for a wide range of temperature. There's no need for oil to circulate, and there's no complicated combustion chamber chemistry. In terms of starting, an e-vehicle is much more reliable than an internal combustion engine vehicle.

    True, battery performance reduces with temperature. But the effect is not sufficient to require special attention in most climates. Moreover, as the vehicle uses the battery, it heats.

    Heating the cabin *is* more difficult in an e-vehicle. ICEs have plenty of "waste" heat that can be used to heat the cabin, but electric motors don't have that. Thus, getting comfortable in an e-car is going to cost something on the range.

    --
    (||) Nehmo (||)
  48. Re:Lemons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live in Canada, and my Model-S has been perfectly fine. I do have the dual-motor version, since driving a RWD car with a crap-tonne of torque on snowy roads is challenging. Also not having a combustion engine in the car lets me warm up the car (without gassing everyone around the car) to the point where all the ice and slow fall off the car by the time I get to it. Yes, they are less efficient in the winter, from what I've observed instead of a max of 390km (240 miles) it goes down to about 370km (195 miles). I don't do a lot of long distance driving, so that was never a consideration when I was looking for a new car. Even with my weekend commutes, I can always get back home and plug the car in to charge. I haven't been to a gas station in almost 3 years.

  49. Re:Cue up Elon's fanbois by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This guy lived down dirt tracks and probably never saw a mechanic. And to top it off he missed all the noise his car was making with a ball joint rusting away to failure.

  50. Lame Tesla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    About the worst thing a car maker (or any business) can do is cover stuff up and jerk customers around over it, it eventually comes out in the end.

  51. Re:Lemons by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

    You answered your own question. E-vehicles run at reduced efficiency due to impaired battery performance at low temps. Cabin heating can consume well over half the battery in stop-and-go traffic. These make E-vehicles trickier in some areas by unpredictably reducing the range significantly.

    --
    Man, you really need that seminar!
  52. bah. the Big Three do the same thing. by swschrad · · Score: 1

    whatever you call it... goodwill, excess warranty availiable, etc... a genteel purchaser with substantial history with a dealer will get a little lagniappe. it's how business is done.

    now, whether the automaker's QC process picks up on "hmmm, looks like 45 dealer repairs for 'engine fell out, ran over it, flames and deaths," and pushes that to the regulators as it is supposed to, that's a whole 'nother discussion.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  53. Car Non Disclosures by ffejie · · Score: 1

    Non Disclosures which release the car company from fault can't be that uncommon. My father had to sign one around 2000. He purchased a mid tier luxury car, and heard some weird knocking in the wheel well after less than a year. He took it in for maintenance, and the techs said there was no issue and while they could reproduce the knocking when turning, it wasn't an issue. A day later, he was driving down the street and the entire wheel, brake, etc fell off the car, the axle cracked (unclear if this happened first, or if it hit the road and snapped) and the car obviously had to be towed... right to the dealer. Their first offer was 50% off to fix it. When he said no to that offer, they gave him the next model year up that they had been using for test drives, with about 700 miles on it. He had to sign a document promising to not disclose the incident, and release the company from any future lawsuits regarding the accident.

    --
    Disagreeing with me does not mean you get to mod me troll.
    1. Re:Car Non Disclosures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Commercial contract doesn't trump criminal law.

  54. Re:Cue up Elon's fanbois by pahles · · Score: 1

    Having had to diagnose and repair a number of them in the '90s, I still won't go near the brand.

    Guess what, it's 2016! The world has moved on some 20 odd years...

    --
    Sig?
  55. Re:Lemons by s122604 · · Score: 1

    I've always thought the solution to the heat problem could be solved with the addition of a propane catalytic heater, or even ofvery small, like 350cc or so, water cooled ICE. The engine would throw out more than enough waste heat to keep the cabin warm, and it could even be used to light charge the battery.

  56. Re:Cue up Elon's fanbois by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    honda's reputation is good for initial build, BUT, they do not stand behind their car. If issues show up, tough shit.
    https://www.warrantydirect.com...

    Tesla's warranty is not only better than most, including Honda, but they are known for standing behind the vehicle for any issues that show up as their fault.
    And in light of what turned up with this ball joint, they still do.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  57. Re:Lemons by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

    Those are interesting ideas. I could see options for cold climates that would mitigate the low temp issues. A small propane tank and catalytic heater wouldn't add much mass. The engine would be tricker but could make the car less reliant on recharging. I think part of the appeal of electirc cars is avoiding fossil fuels, but it is important to be practical.

    --
    Man, you really need that seminar!
  58. Re:Cue up Elon's fanbois by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so like Tesla you're saying?

  59. Re:Lemons by jeremyp · · Score: 1

    What about the air con in hot climates?

    --
    All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  60. Re:Lemons by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

    AC is less of an issue since there is less energy required, lower temperature differentials, and the battery is running at top efficiency. Plus you can open a window or use the fan and be comfortable in many hot areas.

    --
    Man, you really need that seminar!