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.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
it's still under warranty, unless it's 2017 and i just haven't noticed.
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
Which rich asshole's agenda should I fall in line with?
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.
Maybe Tesla a did a bad thing, but the post is way too long to read. Can we get an editor please?
Up to this point, there has been no lemons from tesla.
Facts say otherwise.
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.
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.
... that only offered to pay half is cleaning out his desk right now.
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.
Because his Tesla was out of warranty,
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
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.
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
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?
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
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.
- 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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Says... who, exactly??
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?
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
paper nda is unheard of.
and illegal in consumer products.
"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.
> 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.
You don't have to follow the rules if you're disruptive.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
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!
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!
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
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
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."
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.
Which rich asshole's agenda should I fall in line with?
"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
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
I have been there and can confirm, even if it is a well known issue. My wife is now terrified of all GM vehicles.
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.
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...
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."
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 (||)
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?
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.
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.
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
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!
Definitively untrue. I could tell you more but I had to sign a paper nda.
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?
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.
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?
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.
Learn to love Alaska
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Learn to love Alaska
Clearly you haven't owned anything made by GM in the 1970's.
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!
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
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!